School's Role in Socialization by Durkheim and Parsons - Essay Example

? EMILE DURKHEIM AND TALCOTT PARSONS- EDUCATION AND INEQUALITY By Location Emile Durkheim and Talcott Parsonsbelong to the functionalist school of thought regarding sociology. Emile Durkheim (1858 - 1917) is known as one of the founding fathers of sociology and most of his ideas lie within structural functionalism. He holds that education has several functions in society. Talcott Parsons (1902 - 1979) on the other hand was more of a development of Emile’s ideas. This essay analyses the similarities and differences between their ideas on education and inequality (Segre 2012, p. 12). Both Durkheim and parsons believe that the school plays the central role in socialization. French sociologist Emile Durkheim believed that it was a means of transmission of societal norms and values. Talcott Parsons on the other hand, argues that the family provides primary socialization while the school is the basic socializing agency in society preparing the children for future roles. Therefore, all of them agree on the important role the school plays in the social system. Both Durkheim and Parsons believe that education inspires social solidarity. He posits that society survives best with a degree of homogeneity and education enforces such homogeneity by teaching the child the demands of life and “essential similarities” at an early age. He continues that without such “essential similarities” and social solidarity, social life becomes impossible (Saha 1997, p. 3). Parsons also believes that education inspires social solidarity but in the end when it comes to the work setting. He holds that employers require a variety of skilled employees and when these personnel come together to achieve a specific goal, social solidarity is inspired. As such, for Parsons, the aspect of social solidarity through education is more indirect as compared to Durkheim. Both of them recognize the role of education to provide a link between an individual and society though through different angles. Durkheim argued that for a child to be attached to society the child must feel something real and powerful that dominates them and to which they attribute the better part of themselves. He believes that education provides this all-important link between the individual and society. He says that children should learn the history of their society so that they feel that they are part something greater them hence they develop a sense of commitment to society (Saha & Zubrzycki 1997, p. 8). Parsons however does not put forth the idea of education as to attach individuals in society but he sees education as the bridge between the universalistic and particularistic judgment of individuals in society. Therefore, education fills the gap between primitive and informed judgment. Both Parsons and Durkheim contend that education fosters equality. Durkheim views this equality through similar school rules that guide the behavior of children. Parsons on the other hand holds that education ensures equality through providing equal opportunities and rating students according to their performance (Haralambos & Holborn 2008, p. 109). By putting them in the same classroom setting and setting the same examinations, schools teach the value of equality. This value later helps them have proper judgments especially when faced with differential reward for differential accomplishments in the work setting. It ensures that both the high and low achievers perceive the system as just because status is achieved through equal chance. Both parsons and Durkheim acknowledge that education provides individuals with skills for future roles. Durkheim acknowledged that education provides skills for future occupations and that in industrial society’s social solidarity depends on specialized skills. For instance, the manufacturer of a product requires cooperation from a collection of specialists (Cladis 1999, pg 96). This necessity facilitates social solidarity. Parsons on the other hand, sees education as a mechanism to select individuals for future roles. That by testing and matching individual talents and skills, the school prepares children for role allocation. Therefore, both of them recognize the great role that education plays in industrialized societies and the economy. Both of them believe that a school helps establish the conduct of children and assess it. Both believe that school rules are the best way to assess such behavior. Durkheim believes that the school should punish errant individuals and the punishments should reflect the seriousness of the mistake to the social group as a whole (Saha & Zubrzycki 1997, p. 11). He stresses that the transgressors should know why they are being punished and that the reasons should be fair and tangible. This way the transgressors learn that it is against the interests in society to act in a certain manner. This means that there is a standard way that society expects them to behave and that administration of punishment to those who do not follow such ways ensures equality. This way they learn to apply self-discipline. Parsons on the other hand believes that the conduct of the children is assessed through school rules and their achievement through academic performance. He points out that the same standards apply to all children regardless of sex, family background, or race. Both of them see education as the yardstick for meritocracy and social status. Parsons believes that schools function on meritocratic principles therefore status is achieved on merit. Parsons sees education as a mechanism to select individuals for future roles. That by testing and matching individual talents and skills, the school prepares children for role allocation. Durkheim does not quite tackle the question of social status but indirectly hints at the role of the school in social differentiation as being just (Haralambos & Holborn 2008, p. 431). According to Durkheim, the ultimate function of education works for a lot people according to their ability. A role otherwise referred to as a meritocracy. He continues that the most able will learn the skills that will stimulate their thinking while the lower ability children will learn the basics they need in life. He believes that the school provides a fair social basis for social differentiation. Both of them believe that competition is necessary and unavoidable. Parsons also postulates that there is competition within the school system and that the best students get the best jobs (Saha 1997, p. 5). In this sense, children learn from the early days that they will receive different rewards according to their hard work fostering healthy competition. Durkheim also contends that competition is necessary and that those who put much effort definitely excel than the rest and this is because of differential abilities. Parsons presents two dimensions of judgment of individuals within society, particularistic and universalistic. He believes that within the family children are treated with particularity (Segre 2012, p. 54). Parents do not judge their children by the standards that society judges individuals. Within the family, the status of a child is fixed but in society, people acquire status depending on their education and occupational status. Therefore, the child graduates from particularistic standards of the family to universalistic standards of society. The school prepares the young for this transition. Parsons and Durkheim view the importance of education in industrialized societies from divergent perspectives. Durkheim recognizes the role education plays in complex industrialized societies where life is impersonal. He argues that in complex societies, neither peer groups nor families can provide education (Haralambos & Holborn 2008, p. 553). As such, individuals should learn to cooperate with those who are neither their friends nor family. Education provides a context within which such skills are learnt. Therefore, Durkheim recognizes that school is the only place where children from different families learn how to cooperate and interact in the modern days where different modes of parenting apply. Parsons does not analyze the role of education in industrialized societies from these aspects. He sees education in industrial societies as the way to measure achievement and foster cooperation only within the work setting rather than the social setting as a whole. Durkheim leans more towards the socialization role of education while Parsons bases on achievement and social differentiation (Cladis 1999, p. 135). He considers the social status acquisition through education to be more just and fair than any other yardstick for measuring social status. Durkheim on the other hand, holds that children should interact with other school members within the set rules and that such experience will ensure they interact comfortably with members of society as well. He believes that social sciences help children understand the rational basis in which society is established. Both Parsons and Durkheim suggest that education necessitates certain inequalities, inequalities that serve a purpose. They argue that inequality is not only necessary but also universal since they exist in all societies. However, both of them tend to glorify the inequality that results from education. They believe that such inequality is beneficial in society first because of division of labor as Durkheim posits then specialization of roles. Bibliography Cladis MS 1999, Durkheim and Foucault: perspectives on education and punishment, Durkheim Press, Oxford. Haralambos M, & Holborn M, 2008, Sociology: themes and perspectives, Collins, London. 954pgs Saha LJ, Ed, 1997, International encyclopedia of the sociology of education, Vol. 8, Pergamon Pr. Saha LJ, & Zubrazycki J, 1997, Classical Sociological Theories of Education. International encyclopedia of the sociology of education, 8, 11. Segre, S, 2012, Talcott Parsons: an introduction, Md, University Press of America, Lanham. Read More