Preview

Using Material from Item ‘a’ and Elsewhere Assess the Contribution of Marxism to Our Understanding of the Roles of Education in Society.

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
830 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Using Material from Item ‘a’ and Elsewhere Assess the Contribution of Marxism to Our Understanding of the Roles of Education in Society.
Using material from item ‘a’ and elsewhere assess the contribution of Marxism to our understanding of the roles of education in society.

Item A
Marxists take a critical view of the role of education. Capitalist society is essentially a two-class system, with a ruling class exploiting the working class. Marxist see education as being run in the interests if the ruling class. For example, Althusser argues that education is an important ideological state apparatus that helps to control people’s ideas and beliefs. He suggests education has to purposes. It reproduces class inequalities through the generations by ensuring that most working-class pupils experience education failure. Education also legitimates this inequality, persuading the working class to accept educational and social inequalities. Other Marxists have also pointed to the existence of a hidden curriculum in schools.

The Marxists helped contribute to our understanding of the role of education in society in many ways. They went against the functionalists and even opposed one of the functionalist’s theories.

Marxists take a class conflict approach they see education as serving the needs of capitalism. They therfore don’t agree with the functionalist’s view of consensus and theory of meritocracy. Meritocracy is an educational or social theory believing that everyone has an equal opportunity to do well and to succeed. Meaning that your individual efforts are what make you achieve rewards and status, rather than ascribed by their upbringing, background, ethnicity, class or gender. This means that everyone gets the same education and it’s up to them how well they do at school. Marxists believe that this isn’t true and meritocracy is a myth.

Whilst Marxists believe it is partially true, it is up to the student to do well and try however they can only do as well as the capitalist society allows them to. Willis is a Marxists sociologist and a interactionist, he also shows this by saying children

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Some sociologists; such as Marxist agree with the statement above that education benefits the ruling class. One reason for this is that they believe that education brings about social class reproduction, to benefit them. This means that rich can afford to go to big successful private schools, and then go onto having successful jobs, whereas the poor will continue being poor, as they cannot afford to go to private schools and therefore will not achieve the same grades as the ruling class and will not get as well paid jobs. They believe that the working class do not achieve in education because of their material deprivation and…

    • 832 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Marxist View

    • 342 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Marxist sees ‘all social institutions as serving the interests of capitalism’. This including the family, it suggests that they help to maintain and justify capitalism by reinforcing class inequality and exploitation from the rich. Another opinion on this is the functionalist approach in which they think the family performs the essential needs of the society. Both Marxist and functionalist ideas contrast as functionalists see society based on value consensus in which everyone agrees whereas Marxists believes that there is an unequal balance of classes.…

    • 342 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The object of individual attitudes is the individual himself – his experiences, his perception of other people, including his perception of their perception of him. The above quote illustrates that the individual cannot thrive in a capitalist nation, locally and globally, unless we continue to innovate the means of production. In this sense, universities are a structure put in place by the capitalist society in order to create ‘workers' which will continue to create new technology that increases production as a result of their conditioning inside the university. Marxist theory is sociological, Freud is psychological. The Marxist ideology conceptualises the factual and normative beliefs about society, where human beings have individual and collective material needs. Individual thought and social processes are not enough for one to interact successfully with the world after university. In order to satisfy their needs, human beings must labour together on the world, yet in doing so they evolve evermore complex forms of production and social interaction. The Marxist ideology speaks often in terms of ‘locally' and ‘globally'. I think in terms of how ideology plays a role in universities in Australia locally, we buy and sell ourselves to our local economy, and this creates the opportunity for global trading. Marx…

    • 2028 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Marxism is a useful conflict theory in helping us to understand why there was obedience, particularly in the past in society. Marx was seen as an economic determinist, as he believed that the functioning and running of society was based upon the economy. Because of this, Marx says that is why there was a divide between the proletariat (working class who have only their skills to sell) and the bourgeoisie (the ruling class who own the means of production). The bourgeoisie cannot operate without the proletariat, as they cannot produce products, and similarly the proletariat cannot operate without the bourgeoisie, as they need them so they can be paid a wage and feed their families. Therefore, even though the Bourgeoisie were exploiting the proletariat and the proletariat could have walked away to stop being exploited, they never walked away as they needed the money. On the other hand, this can be viewed from a different perspective. The reason why these people may have not left their jobs is because they could have been in a state of false consciousness, whereby they were unaware of their exploitation by the bourgeoisie. This helps us to understand society as the Marxism theory provides reasoning on how the bourgeoisie were able to exploit the proletariat, which in turn fuelled capitalism and allowed the ruling elite to maintain their profits. It is also relevant to today’s society, as it helps to explain why many people who are in a hard laboured, low paid job (e.g. Factory workers) do not leave, despite hating their job, and this is because they need the money to survive.…

    • 2098 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marxists Bowles and Gintis (1976) suggested that there is a correspondence between educational institutions and the workplace- the working class will stay working class, and characteristics such as self-image, social class identification, demeanour and presentation, will be paralleled within the workplace. Bowles and Gintis also maintained that whilst in school, the teachers were formed in a hierarchical system in which older students seem to be of a higher status than those who are younger; in the workplace, not all workers will be on the same salary in the same department. The overall belief is that the whole system has made it so that the ‘hidden curriculum’ enforces social order, and it marginalises worker, making them struggle for power, and this will create a subservient pool of workers. Durkheim, would disagree along with Davis and Moore, and Parsons, who collectively state that a skilled workforce is a product, and occupational allocation can be a defining outcome of vocational education. This really drives the core values of functionalism, as it seeks to work for the benefit of a consensus society, just trying to get the people back into work and off of welfare.…

    • 1121 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Some would argue that the education system mainly exists to select and prepare students for their future work roles and careers. Marxists believe that the education system’s role is the ideological apparatus of the state; it spreads ruling-class ideology and favours the middle class. Marxists such as Althusser, Bowels & Gintus and Bourdieu disagree with this statement as they argue working class children get a second class education compared to middle class and are given an unrealistic expectation for the future.…

    • 856 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Sociology 24 marks

    • 481 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Marxists theory is a conflict theory; they believe that we live in a capitalist society and that the family is all about serving the interests of capitalism.…

    • 481 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    the Functionalist view that industrial capitalist societies are meritocracies and that every ones’ position in society is based on talent and hard work. Bowles and Gintis suggest ideas for why this is the case. They bases their theory around the idea of education being an ideological state apparatus. Bowles and Gintis’ theory is based on the ‘long shadow of work’ and the legitimating of inequality.
When speaking of the ‘long shadow of work’, Bowles and Gintis are referring to the strong relationship between social relationships at school and at work – they believe this helps education to play its major role in reproducing a labour force with hardworking, disciplined workers. Educations do this through the hidden curriculum and the correspondence theory. The hidden curriculum relates to many features of the workplace. An example of this would be that in school the hidden curriculum teaches students to abide by rules and accept punishment, this corresponds to the workplace where students would conform to rules and not argue with your boss. People believe that society and the education system is meritocratic. Bowles and Gintis believe this to be false, as in reality it is legitimating the inequalities that exist in society.
Althusser sees education as an ideological state apparatus. This is where the government issues ruling class ideas through different institutions, or apparatus, in this case education is the main apparatus. This is needed by capitalism to transmit the idea that the inequalities in society are justified as society is meritocratic. This helps capitalism by preparing students for their future jobs. The working class are taught to accept their future exploitation in the workplace. Where as the middle class are prepared for management roles supported by their qualifications.
However, these views from the Marxists are merely ideas and theories, as…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marxists believe that the education system’s role is the ideological apparatus of the state; it spreads ruling-class ideology and favours the middle class. Marxists such as Althusser, Bowels & Gintus and Bourdieu disagree with this statement as they argue working class children get a second class education compared to middle class and are given an unrealistic expectation for the future.…

    • 451 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As Item A states, Becker found that teaches judged pupils according to how well they fitted an image of the ‘ideal pupil’. For Marxists, the ‘ideal pupil’ would be the student who could perform and work the way the Capitalist society expects and wants us to work so that the Bourgeoisie can continue rule. Middle- class students were more likely to fit…

    • 768 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The neo-Marxist Althusser (1971) disagrees that the main function of the education is the transmission of common values. He thinks that education is an ideological state apparatus and its main function is to maintain, Legitimate and reproduce, generation by generation, class inequalities in wealth and power by transmitting capitalist values disguised as common values. Althusser also believes that ideology is done subconsciously through the hidden curriculum. He thinks that the way schools are organized and the way the curriculum is taught means that working-class people are encouraged to conform to the capitalist system and accept failure and inequality within their class.…

    • 927 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    M2: This table shows that people who live in most deprived areas are more likely to smoke, are less likely to have a good education, they more than likely lived in poverty as a child. This table also shows that the least deprived people are the people with the most education and then end up becoming a professional or a manager. The Marxist approach would suggest that the least deprived are the ruling class and the most deprived are the working class in the hierarchy Marxists believe the most deprived people shouldn’t have an education they think they should be working for the least deprived people (Middle class) in factories and other places like that, they know that the most deprived may get ill from the working conditions but they don’t have to pay very much for the labour.…

    • 694 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Best Essays

    Farahmandpur, R. (2004, March). A Marxist Critique of Michael Apple 's Neo-Marxist Approach to Educational Reform. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies,…

    • 3434 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    The statement also agrees with the functionalist view of education in the way that it suggest that education life and family life is highly effective in making everyone almost perfect members in society, as it suggests that the education perfectly prepares people with the ability which is needed in any chosen work role, and that the family prepares people to have the ideal number of social skills. However the Marxist perspective is largely different, especially in its disagreement with the role of education. They disagree with this because it they believe that education not only refuses people from getting any role that they have in the working world, but also that it doesn’t effectively prepare people for a role in work. Although, Item A also agrees with the functionalist view as it says that in modern society only the “education system” can give the individuals the skills they need to “join the workplace”. However this entire statement is quite old fashioned as it views the family life as being a nuclear family life, so is not culturally diverse as it fails to recognise other cultural families and single parent families etc.…

    • 435 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Marxism shares in common with functionalism the macro structural approach to society, looking at it as a whole, however a key difference between the two theories is that marxism is a conflict perspective, that is the conflict of class between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat also known as the ruling and working classes. The work of Karl Marx in the mid 1800s constitutes the main body of this conflict theory, he wrote that the central institution of capitalist society is private property, the system by which capital (money, machines, factories and other material objects) is controlled by a small minority of the population, leading to opposed classes i.e. the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (Cohen 1978). Marxists believe that society is based on ascribed status which is given by birth or family background, therefore the bourgeoisie pass down their land and properties to their children, keeping the wealth in the…

    • 2075 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays