Emile Durkheim's Theories on Education and Morality - Research Proposal Example

Emile Durkheim's Theories on Education and Morality of Submitted Introduction Emile Durkheim was one of the most influential American theorists in the history of sociology (Abbott 235). He had given attention to the role of education in society and developed a theory that justifies that role. People were unaware of his educational writings which came out late but evidently, his experience in teaching influenced his theories on sociology. Durkheim lived in the era where the French and American society had different philosophies and theories on education (Abbott 235). The French society intended to shape the students in order to meet society's needs while the American society used the laissez-faire approach to education. But as America became more populated and as problems became more social, the focus on education had shifted to the human being in relation to society. The people realized that the human being was affected by its environment and the role of education is to transmit present societal traditions and customs to the students by using teachers as social agents. Because of Durkheim's influence, the American society began to value individual freedom and self-determination that depicted the product of Protestant ethic and the impact of psychology on educational theory. The present society now corresponds to Durkheim's theory of education. Focusing on his educational beliefs and view points, this essay aims to acquire the significance of his theoires on the past and present day society. Theories on Education and Morality Durkheim's approach to education and morality was a structure-function analysis (Filloux 303). He believed that the organs that human being contains are structures that perform functions. According to Filloux, Durkheim emphasized the general needs of the individual in order to recognize the function of a social phenomenon (304). He asserted that every society has a system of education that is inflicted on individuals and has a concept of a "human ideal"-physically, intellectually and morally. He viewed it as a "methodical socialization" that ensures the "conditions of existence" of every individual in a society. For Durkheim, discipline is a factor of education and a means of averting culpable conduct (43). He viewed morality as a discipline that promotes regularity in people's actions and offers them "determinate goals" that also hinders their horizons (47). There are three elements of morality that determine the form and content of the purposes that educational sociology assigns to education at school: 1) teaching a sense of discipline, 2) group attachment, and 3) autonomy of will (308). In order to be called a moral person, Durkheim stated that the individual has to abide by a norm (23) and "act in terms of the collective interest" (xi). Thus, the function of morality is "to determine conduct, to fix it, and to eliminate the element of individual arbitrariness" (27). In the school institution, moral standards are imposed by the teacher to the pupils though they are given the freedom to learn in their own will. (Filloux 309). For Durkheim, the spirit of independence exists if there is intelligence or understanding and moral orders in certain incidents in life. Durkheim also discussed the school environment in his theory (310). He believed that the school environment promotes the habit of life in a school classroom form. He also stated that in ideal schools, it is not important to produce scientists among his pupils but fully rational beings. (311). Research Discussion Durkheim's structure-function analysis focuses on social facts (Filloux 303). He noted that in order to understand a fact, the causes and purposes must primarily be recognized. His analysis was original for he approached this from two similar viewpoints. One was that the society, made up of its organic components has a systematic entity responding to the societal needs. The other view was that "the social system lends itself to analysis in terms of superimposed stages," where the interactions and relations of its members should be apparent. One of the most fundamental parts of society is education. Durkheim viewed education as a "methodical socialization" that develops children's physical, intellectual and moral conditions (Filloux 304). Education teaches individuals to surrender themselves to the rules of society in a voluntary manner because the purposes of society rely on the individual's willingness to live together and submit to the norms. If the values of the society changes, the educational system also makes changes. For example, if social status were given importance upon birthright, then the educational system would be affected in a way that they would only admit those from the higher levels of the social strata. Durkheim believed that the child's socialization must involve the three elements of morality regarding his or her own autonomy and control over "selfish and anti-social drives and desires" in order for the child to be stimulated to community life. Morality is basically "made for society" (Durkheim 85). Applying a sense of discipline to children is a means to avoid a state of anomie or disorientation that would happen if they are forced by their uncontrolled desires (Filloux 308). Therefore, moral discipline goes beyond the act of living a moral life but plays a huge role in the maturity of character and personality that requires self-control over their passions and desires. It does not focus on the interest of the society alone but those of the individual as well. But only when the individual has grasped the meaning of communal interest and attached his or her self to members of a group, individual could achieve his or her sense of humanity and self-fulfilment (309). This is related to the third element of morality, the "autonomy of will," which means that children should feel the need to abide by the rules and regulations of the school institution. Moreover, the concept of morality has to be instilled in childhood (18). The foundations of morality or the "ground work" has to be laid as early as possible in order to for adaptation and improvement to be easier. Durkheim viewed the teacher as an individual while teachers are members of a profession belonging in a "group" "(Filloux 309). Any changes or reconstruction in the education system are promoted and decided upon by the teachers responding to the new social needs and specific needs of the social system. The role of teachers is to have a 'deep sense of mission,' 'make his authority felt,' and to 'command a specific form of respect from the pupils.' The teacher serves to be the advocate of 'great moral ideas of his time and of his country' that is transferred to the child's consciousness. Durkheim believed that "teaching is merely a shortened version of the intellectual culture of the adult" (Hoenisch 5). Moreover, the church is also serves as a channel in society that causes changes in the educational system. Durkheim believed that the school environment is the place where the students make use of their natural faculty of empathy, connect their experiences to those of others' and learn collective or group living. He envisioned a class that functions as a group where phenomena of contagion, demoralization, mutual excitement and healthy effervescence takes place (311). The teacher should train the class as a group-always "on the look-out for everything that may cause all the children in the same class to sense their unity in a common enterprise" that may succeed through the use of moral discipline (312). According to Durkheim, the knowledge that children acquire is mostly scientific knowledge, especially from Physics and Biology (Filloux 312). He deemed that this kind of knowledge must be seen as an "illustration of human reason in activity" and "an instrument of logical culture." He pointed out that children should be taught how to be sceptical and of "facile and hasty explanations." Therefore, they must be trained to be rational human beings-people who exercise their critical thinking skills. Analysis and Arguments Durkheim's definition of education: "Education is the action exercised by the adult generations over those that are not yet ready for social life" did not truly explain the universal nature of education as also argued by Filloux (p. 303). The needs of society and of the individual are changing and evolving in time and this definition is not consistent to the varying needs. Also, education is not only taught by the "adult generations" but of any individual whether young or adult. It does not only focus on "social life" of an individual but of his or her whole existence: teaching and learning of knowledge of basic skills, proper conduct, and technical competency. Hoenisch noted that Durkheim viewed education as a constraint (1). The society constructs the educational system in order to disseminate what a human being should be as a member of society and to be able to "express their needs." It is a "continuous effort to impose on the child ways of seeing, feeling, and acting at which he or she would not have arrived spontaneously." But a sense of discipline that education has imposed is actually a "means of anticipation and freedom" (Keiichi 23). According to Durkheim, discipline teaches people to restrain and master themselves. It forms character and personality through self-mastery and controls passions, desires, habits and subjects them to law. The idea that an individual would only achieve self-fulfilment when he or she becomes a member of a group is not always true. Self-fulfilment can be achieved through individualization where students are given enough freedom of thought and actions that they learn how to take control over themselves and develop their values. Both ways could work simultaneously if given a time to mature with a group and a time to mature individually. With both means, the harmony of the individual's relationship with his or her self and to others will be evenly balanced. Durkheim stated that a human being has two beings: individual being and social being (Keiichi 17). Once the social being has been attained, education ends in itself because it is through education that a man is created into a new man as a social being. Durkheim also stressed that the question is not always about what an "ideal education" should be (Keiichi 16). Using historical observation, he clearly develops understanding of the true nature of education. According to him, education has no reality in itself and thus influences individuals through time. Thus, education also changes and develops through time. Conclusion In conclusion, Durkheim believed that education is vital in society. It is only through moral education that children will have an understanding of social values and beliefs as stated by Keiichi (10). If all members of the society are committed to these social values and beliefs, then cooperation and unity would follow instantly. Therefore, Durkheim believed that schools are important in society because they are the institutions that have concern for the socialization of children and basically mould them to the moral human beings that they should become. The teachers serve as the representatives of society and the guides to these children in their growth and maturity, inculcating moral values, rules and discipline. The outcome of the process of education basically depends on the teacher's attitudes and relation to the pupils. Durkheim's theory of education is suitable for modern industrial societies and post-modern industrial societies. His contribution to the principle of human rights education is relevant today. Due to many selfish and anti-social drives and desires in the society, moral education is necessary for them. Abnormal forms of behaviour such as division of labour and suicide are some of the problems in modern Western societies today. Gearing the members of society towards a concern for the problems in community life is important for children's awareness of his fellow society members and environment. Also, Durkheim portrayed the view that the class, the school environment, and the teacher's attitudes are factors to be considered in the education process that according to Filloux, "a truth that is still worth repeating today." References Abbott, Ann A. "Durkheim's Theory of Education: A Case for Mainstreaming." Peabody Journal of Education (July 1981): 235-241. Durkheim, Emile. Moral Education: A study of the theory and application of the sociology of education. New York: Free Place of Glencoe, 1961. Filloux, Jean-Claude. "Emile Durkheim." PROSPECTS: The Quarterly Review of Comparative Education 23.1/2 (1993): 302-320. Keiichi, Ito. A Durkheimian Analysis and Synthesis of Four Contemporary Approaches to Moral Education. Diss. Oregon State University, 23 Aug. 1993. Hoenisch, Steve. Durkheim and Educational Systems. London, England, 1 November 2005. Read More