Education and Social Inequality - Essay Example

Education and Social Inequality     Introduction  This essay will be discussing Marxist and functionalist perspectives on education as a process system within the society contributing towards socialization. It will also be recognizing the various differences between Marxist and functionalist, as well as including the similarities between the two approaches.  Marxist and functionalities perspective on education position education as a powerful entity to influence students especially on social values and norms. As such, the functionalities believe that this will lead to social harmony, stability and social integration within society. According to Marxist it is believed that through education, students are equipped with skills that are directly in line with the kind of worker required by employers within the society (Browne, 2013). Therefore, education functions in providing skills and technological knowledge in accordance to the requirements of the changing technological requirement and employer, to provide social understanding so as to maintain solidarity and to humanize and socialize people by providing cognitive and normative frameworks needed.  Marxist views regarding education system believing that schools were constructed and built on the aspects of hierarchy. The structural perspective of such idealism sees teachers being in charge while the students follow instructions placed by teachers. The functionality, Emile Durkeim, differ on the above education perspective on its creation on hierarchy believing that education in schools is a miniature version of the society whereby the school has an accountability of teaching pupils how to have a working relationship with others in a social context (Kellner, 2014). Both think that education aids in legitimating social inequality. Marxist supported the idealism believing that if serious debate was involved in education inequality, it might have threatened the society social stability (Leite, 2014). As such, the scholars prefer justifying inequality by promoting its positivism and believing it is through education that offers everyone equal chance (Livesey, 2013). As such, the social inequality towards education empowers the children with knowledge and skills required in the job market thus high productivity (Leite, 2014).  Education social mobility and individual class of origin pose differences regarding education perspectives and social inequality (Parsons, 1961). The functionalities scholars believed that education process provides a means for upward social mobility for those having the ability. Marxist is against such ideologies implying that education confirms an individual class origin as personal class destination ( Parsons, 1961). As such, Marxist affirms that education contributes towards the reproduction of class inequalities between generations hence majority of people do not experience upward social mobility (Sociology Higher, 2015) Functionalist perspective remarks the importance of attacking customarily deep-rooted belief of a constrained group of educability and usefulness of potential talent. School is viewed as being a correct mirror of society because of its exclusivity of being the institution which teaches roles and skills as well as the vital agency of socialization (Knox, 2012). School is being seen as a neutral place restored with the responsibility of providing the students with the necessary knowledge and skills that they require to perform effectively in the larger community. Furthermore School is portrayed as central place which offers students equal opportunists which makes it easier for the students advancement in the standing of the social grouping (Mbengo, 2013). However there are some differences brought about by the equal opportunity of education attainment. The differences are thought to come from family background, ability and personal  argue of achieving in terms of education or motivation. Variations due to different educational achievement are recommendable because, despite the fact that student are raised and born into unequal maternal conditions or cultural, education erases the differences looking on the groupings of those who produce excellent results in studies get rewarded greatly. However, this natural result does not alter the truth that learning institutions are stationed to provide equal chance to all students.  The major link between education and social structure in modern days is the economy. As such, schools are required to accept the economic alterations by carrying out training of manpower and the function of section, as well as, facilitating research works to stimulate economic changes (Holsinger, 2015). As such the functionalists believe the skills imposed to their children by teachers were a very important stepping stock shaping them to adopt the workplace demands.   The Marxist perspective raised major concerns. This had to do with mainstreaming education equally be it to schools of high standards within society or schools of low standards. This was to be achieved through equal allocation of resources, distributing the teaching fraternity equally within the school and using similar curriculum across all schools. They began by defining inequalities in education work. Certain kinds of minority workers or working class have been settled in the center of dialogue because of upper class group or their white middle class counterparts and low performance in education (Harsant, 2012).   2009) argued that education was meant to help capitalist society. As a result Bourgeoisie, Proletariant, landlords, Petty bourgeoisie educated their children with a view that they later help the society. They believed that the students success in academic life which to them translates to good job opportunity hence raise the life standards of the capitalist as a society rather than an individual. They also argued that the skills and norms thought to students were of great importance as they were the major requirement for employment.  Marxist perspective argues that there is no equality in the industrial because the children of the powerful and wealthier individuals in the society will get high rewarding jobs despite of their less convincing academic performance while functionalists argue that the industrial society provides equality in job opportunities in accordance to the students’ performance (Cole,. Furthermore critics argue that though education is open and free to all, some children stand better chances of being educated than others.  Functionalist also say that those students which come out of school with excellent results stand a better chance of securing better job opportunities in the industries. However, the Marxists argue that the main factors accounting for job rewards are the students origin or class, sex and race are among the major determinants in the job market (Gillborn, 2008). According to them middle class students find it difficult to get job.  Marxists attacked functionalists over the idea of the liberal view of education arguing that the idea tends to ignore the inequalities in the society which makes liberal ideals impossible to attain without major changes in the social life. Also Marxists argue that functionalist. This implies that the functionalities ranked all schools within the society depending on performance without considering social inequalities stratification that inhibit school performance. A good example is that students from the bourgeoisie family attended to schools that are of high standards and with enough resources that contribute towards its best performance. Additionally, the students have enough time to engage on their studies hence performing well at school. Students from lumpenproletariat and peasantry family attend to low standard schools with limited resources hence contributing towards poor performance. The students tend be labor workers for bourgeoisie hence spending much of their time on manual work to raise revenue for their daily needs while less attention is put on personal studies. This advocates that not all students are equal in society due to social class and class structure inequality hence it is impossible to rank all schools equally. They said some schools have better records in terms of performance but are placed in the same category with low performing schools in the society.  Marxist belief that education serves the society of capitalists by grouping people into social classes as people get different levels of jobs as per their performance and other social factors like family while the  functionalist argue that education serves the requirement of the industrial society as it advances labor division (Hill, 2001).  Functionalist argue that education serves the social system needs by socializing pupils to beliefs and  shared values and shared values while Marxist argue that education capitalists needs are served by socializing children into more obedient workforce hence helping them.    Both think that education aids in legitimating social inequality as it empowers the children with knowledge and skills required in the job market thus high productivity.  Both look at the outcomes of education over the other aspects of life hence described as micro theories (Peters, 2010). Factors like social beliefs, skills and values are looked with less seriousness as much time is given to the education aspect. They both view education as the major factor in the workplace hence concentrating on how to nature it and pass it in a better way. This therefore minimizes the chances of the teacher giving the students other necessary skills required to survive in the society as they are tied to goal of education as a factor in workplace.  Both acknowledge education as the powerful way of empowering students; influence them on social values and norms (Cole, 2008. They put emphasis on education neglecting other aspects such as family, media and work which are equally important in children development. As a result children grow with a mentality and belief that education is the only way to a better life and appreciation in the society.                   Bibliography Browne, K. 2013. Introducing Sociology for AS Level. Polity. 2ND Edition  Cole, M 2008, Marxism and Educational Theory: origins and issues, London, Routledge. Cole, M 2009b Critical Race Theory and Education: a Marxist response, New York and London, Palgrave Macmillan Gillborn, D 2008, Racism and Education: Coincidence or Conspiracy? London, Routledge Harsant, J.2012. Educational Inequality and Social Class. Journal of Education  Hill, D. 2001, ‘State Theory and the Neoliberal Reconstruction of Schooling and Teacher Education: a structuralist neo-Marxist critique of postmodernist, quasi postmodernist, and culturalist neo-Marxist theory,’ British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol 22, No 1 , pp. 137-157. Holsinger, B. 2015. Inequality in Education. Comparative and International Perspectives. Kellner, D. 2014. Marxian Perspectives on Educational Philosophy: From Classical Marxism to Critical Pedagogy. Leite, S.2014. Equality And Inequality in Education of. Journal Education.  Livesey, C. 2013. Social Inequality Theories: Marxism Theoretical Perspectives. Mbengo, F. 2013. Marxist Theories of Class and Class Struggles. Guiga, H., & Rejeb, J. 2012. Poverty, Growth and Inequality in Developing Countries. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues.  Knox, M. 2012. The Three Main Sociological Perspectives. Understanding Social Problems, 5th Edition Reale, E., & Seeber, M. 2011. Drivers of Inequalities in Higher Education and Unexpected Consequences of Equality Policies.  Sever, M., 2012. A critical look at the theories of sociology of education. International Journal of Human Sciences, 9(1), pp.671-650.  Sociology Higher. 2015. Understanding Human Society 1 Parsons, T. (1961). The School Class as a Social System. In J. F. A.H. Halsey, and C.A. Anderson (Ed.), Education, Economy and Society. New York: Free Press.  Peters, M. (2010). Introduction. In L. C. Peters M., Olssen M. (Ed.), Critical Theory and the Human Condition: Founders and Praxis. New York.  Read More