Table of Contents School of Human and Health Sciences ................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Assessment Feedback Form ................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Module Code and Title: ............................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. HFC1005 Sociology for Health and Welfare. ........ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Knowledge and Understanding: ..................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

bility: .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

References ..................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined. Sociological Issue. ....................................................................................................... 2

Sociological Issue.

This assignment is to discuss the issue of Education using the theories of Marxism (Conflict Theory) and Symbolic Interactionism (Social Action Theory) from a range of different perspectives like social class, the individual, discrimination these perspectives may not be directly addressed but implied as with discrimination in Marxist education; as Marxism directly implies this, or interactionism and prejudice as it relies on the formation of assumptions through experience which can be distorted leading to the alienation of individuals. Starting with the individual theories take on education and how these differ followed by a discussion on the different perspectives and how these are seen within the context of education using the different theories. Firstly It must be said that Marxism indirectly addresses education and that the application of Marxism instead has given rise to Marxist interpretations of Education . Marx(1848)said We shall not draw attention to the trite contradiction which lies in the fact that modern industry replaces compound labour more and more with simple labour which requires no education; we shall not draw attention to the fact that it throws more and more children from the age of seven upwards behind the machine and turns them into a source of income not only for the bourgeois class but for their own proletarian parents; the factory system frustrates the school laws, example Prussia; nor shall we draw attention to the fact that the education of the mind, if the worker had such an education, has no direct effect at all on his wages, that education is altogether dependent on the conditions of life, and that by moral

education the bourgeois understands indoctrination with bourgeois principles, and that, finally, the bourgeois class neither has the means, nor if it had them would it use them, to offer the people a real education. So to recap the Marxist point of view on education is seen as the building block to provide specific labour for the bourgeoisie who exploit them to gain power ;be it goods land money or politically. They also dictate what the proletariat needs to learn through the bodies setup to run the education system, which in turn are controlled by the bourgeoisie, and that by educating individuals in the same skills an over abundant workforce is created forcing wages down and perpetuating the cycle between education and wages which has the effect of keeping people from achieving the bourgeoisie status. They begin by indoctrination through education using the hidden curriculum(Harolambos,2008), through the act of acquiring education, that is the ritual of attending school, which is designed to normalise the individual to the capitalist point of view and prepare them ready for work. For example going to school and returning home requires a particular start time, lunch time and home time, this is one of the conditions placed on them in order to reinforce the work ethic and produce a social norm with respect to that work. It also uses the structure of education to reinforce the concept of hierarchy preparing them for the subservient roles they will play in the working world again producing norms related to hierarchy, for example Teacher student and Manager worker roles. It also provides incentive conditioning through the use of exams( external rewards) mirroring the working worlds incentives to climb higher and to gain more money with which to purchase capitalist goods which again reinforces the use of external rewards. The curriculum

is also designed to fracture the educational environment so that each lesson does not connect with the previous one this fragmentation mirrors the real world work environment, where the roles are specifically tailored as to minimise the possibility of competition by making sure that the whole process is not easily derived (Bowles, S. Gintis, H.,1976). Engles(1948) said in a communist society free education would enabled young people to develop the skills needed to fill any position in society or follow their own inclinations with respect to their education irrespective of background and achieve their potential but when this happens class will not necessarily disappear. This approach becomes self sustaining and is a breeding ground for discrimination through its use of incentives, external rewards born of class and economy through education, it plays like against like, friend against foe and able against less able, old against new. Some may justify this as natural selection; the fittest survive and the weak perish in which case when did we ever become conscious human beings capable of empathic cohabitation. Gintis and Bowles(1976) argue that education legitimises inequality by making society appear fair and just, class consciousness does not develop and the stability of society is not threatened. Symbolic interactionism (micro sociology) on the other hand doesnt really deal with the social side of education but instead deals with the individual and the relationships created by them through the use of symbols. The focus is in the individuals concept of self built from interactions with others, the environment and experiences, formed individually or by groups. In order to understand interactionism within the context of education we will have to examine the relationships values

beliefs and norms with respect to the pupil and teacher, and apply some social, cultural environmental conditioning. Key to this is the understanding of self first presented by (Cooley,1922). Cooley(1922) said A self-idea of this sort seems to have three principal elements: the imagination of our appearance to the other person; the imagination of his judgment of that appearance, and some sort of self feeling, such as pride or mortification. The comparison with a looking-glass hardly suggests the second element, the imagined judgment, which is quite essential. The thing that moves us to pride or shame is not the mere mechanical reflection of ourselves, but an imputed sentiment, the imagined effect of this reflection upon another's mind. This is evident from the fact that the character and weight of that other, in whose mind we see ourselves, makes all the difference with our feeling. We are ashamed to seem evasive in the presence of a straightforward man, cowardly in the presence of a brave one, gross in the eyes of a refined one, and so on. We always imagine, and in imagining. In other words how we see ourselves is a direct reflection of how others perceive us and that this perception also changes our projected self. From an educational point of view this relevant in that the teacher has a direct influence on the pupil through typing, labelling, self fulfilling prophecy, and that a pupil will reflect the perception perceived by the teacher Harolombos (2008,citing Hargeaves et al 1975). In order to do this the teacher needs to make sense and respond to pupils Harolombos(2008,citing Hargeaves et al 1975) suggest that this is done in three stages firstly by typi ng. As the teacher has no experience of the new pupils at this school they need distinguish pupils according to seven main criteria these are, their appearance, how they conform to discipline, their ability and

enthusiasm for work, how likable they are, their relationships with other children, their personality and whether they are deviant. Secondly by elaboration over a period of time, where the teachers hypotheses of the child is confirmed or contradicted. It must be said that it is at this point that the teacher may unwittingly set of a chain of events that lead to the inclusion or exclusion of the pupil leading to alienation and discrimination, as the teachers individual positive or negative experiences may play a part in the elaboration process. Lastly is the stabilisation stage whereby the teacher now feels confident to deal with the pupil and believes that the image of the pupil he sees is the correct one, more importantly it is at this point that those pupil who perceive this as true will begin to respond to this projected self and respond in kind to the teachers perception of themselves and only the teachers interaction with other teachers with a contradictory perception of the said pupil may affect the current teachers perception via influence and change the opinion. It is by this measure that changes in perception are made. Studies carried out by Rist(1970, cited by Harolambos 2008) found that as early as the eighth day of school the children were categorised into three separate tables. One for fast learners and tables 2,3 for the less able. Rist(1970) noted that it was not, in reality, the Childs ability that determined their seat , but the degree to which the pupils fitted with the teachers social class. The teacher used appearance and knowledge about the education and employment with the family to identify their social class orientation, and note the abilities of the pupils. to conclude both Marxism and interactionism have implied similarities in that the perception of social class directly influences the education that is supplied and

although Marxism doesnt directly address this concept it impli es it throught the bouguarsies concept of power. This is in contrast to the interactionists interpretation of labelling which implies a marxist response with respect to the influence on pupils from labelling. The fairest thing to say is that each of the theories would be unable to exist without the other and more fundamentally it is the perpetuation of the single wrong that plagues our society and fundamentally an issue of our inbuilt drive to survive and reproduce. In order for humans to exits on an educational level playing field irrespective of academic, intellectual or physical ability all forms of education need to be free. What would that mean you may ask well without constraints of money or expectation within education people would be able to reach whichever potential they suited this is not to say that individual levels would not be exacted just that we would all have the opportunity to find out and explore it at our own pace. To hypothesise the affect to capitalism a happier more content people with the understanding that individuals have different abilities would not lead to capitalisms demise as it is within the very nature of our beings to conflict and multiply it would just might mean we would be happier.

References

Bowles, S. Gintis, H. (1976) Schooling in Capitalist America. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Cooley,C.(1922) Human Nature and the Social Order. Revised ed. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Engles,F. (1847) Principles of Communism [online] Available at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm [Accessed 17 Jun. 10] Giddens,A.(2009) Sociology.6th ed. Cambridge: Polity Press Hargreaves, D. Hester, S. Mellor, F.(1975) Deviance in Classrooms . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Cited in Haralambos,M.(2008) Sociology Themes and
Perspectives. 7th ed. London: HarperCollins Publisher Ltd.

Haralambos,M.(2008) Sociology Themes and Perspectives. 7th ed. London: HarperCollins Publisher Ltd. Herbert,B.(1969) Symbolic Interactionism Perspective and Method . London: University of California Press Ltd Marx,K.(1847) Wages [online] Available at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/12/31.htm [Accessed 17 Jun. 10] Sarup,M.(1978) Marxism and Education. London:Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. Rist, R. (1970) Student social class and teacher expectations: the self-fulfilling

prophecy in ghetto education , Harvard Educational

Review, vol. 40. Cited in Haralambos,M.(2008) Sociology Themes and

Perspectives. 7th ed. London: HarperCollins Publisher Ltd.