Influence of the Institute of Education on the Needs of Society - Research Paper Example

?When you view the of education the implications that it has on the political as well as economics needs is part of its key function. Sociologists as well as educators agree that education has a great impact on the formulation of various aspects of society however the debate lies on what its primary function is. The education institute is represented through three main sociological perspectives, functionalist, conflict and symbolic interactionist theories, which reflect upon the effect education has on the constitution and formulation of a society and its individuals. The aim of the functionalist theory is to analyze the ways in which the needs of a society at large are fulfilled by education. There are different angles from which the functionalist theory looks at the education industry. The first of these is through a basic fulfillment of its main role: the transference of knowledge and skill to the next generation. A definition expanded by Durkheim, who founded the functionalist theory, as a means for social mainstreaming for diverse individuals and serving as a “moral education” (Durkheim, 1961). Another way to look at the role education serves, as defined by functionalists, is the way in which it ensures a communication of core values as well as social control. These are instilled in the education systems to incorporate appropriate characteristics advocating political and economic systems. These in turn ensure that individuals grow up learning directions, following deadlines and comply with authority figures. Education instills in individuals the concept of individualism – the ideology that dictates an individuals liberty rights. The formulation of this ideology varies from culture to culture. Take the example of American students who from a young age learn that society picks out the best individual and hold only him in high regard, whether it is for academics or athletic ability. This idea constitutes to the development of identity and self-esteem of American students. Similarly the same ideology if applied to a high context culture like that of the Japanese, being singled out despite collaborative effort leads to feelings of shame as social esteem is strongly associated with appreciation being focused on group rather than individuals (Milton,1998). The element of competition in all aspects of the education system, academic and extra curricular also forms the bases of the fundamentalist perspective. It strives to link winning with the possession of a reward which serves as a key motivating factor. A contribution of education towards the political structure is mainly through teachings of patriotism, where students learn about national heroes and tales as well as the Pledge of Allegiance. A key example is that of instructors telling students of Washington’s integrity or Lincoln’s desirable qualities as a way to instill patriotic values. Other benefits of education as scoped out by functionalists are categorized by how it leads to sorting, that is the categorization of students based on their merit. It leads to the recognition of the capability of individuals at an early stage and then foster and encourage them by steering them towards the right direction. This process of social placement is greatly beneficial for the society (Covington, 2008). Furthermore the process of sorting also contributes to that of networking, the making of connections personal and professional. It brings people of related backgrounds, skills, academics and potential together. The emphasis of the functionalist approach is also to highlight the part education plays in preserving as well as contributing to cultural additions. Research shows that as an individual advances in his academics, their chances of becoming increasingly liberal and open minded exceed. Also the decision to pursue higher education increases their knowledge base and enriches their value system. (FIND STUDY) Hence the role of education is not limited to a preservation and transference of knowledge but also plays a vital role their transformation. Another sociological theory that views the education institution through a critical lens is the conflict theory. The aim of this theory is to analyze the rationale of education, which it believes is that of preserving social inequality and safeguard the supremacy of dominant individuals. The similarity between the functionalist and conflict theories is that they analyze the same functions. However where functionalists view education as a beneficial contributor to the society and a opportunity, conflict theories view it as a means of preserving power structures and responsible for the creation of a submissive work force for capitalism (Covington, pg. 154). While both these theories agree that sorting is an integral part of this institution, but their perspective as far as how this sorting is carried out is different. While functionalists believe that sorting is based on merit; conflict theories look at class and ethnic lines as key bases for this process. Conflict theories aim to highlight the fact that schools instill in the working classes an acceptance of their position. This specific role of education is addressed as the “hidden curriculum” by conflict theorists (Brinkerhoff, White & Ortega, 2008). There are many factors on the bases of which this notion of conflict theorists is formulated. The first of these is the fact that property taxes fund a majority of the schools; which automatically means that schools in well off districts would have more funds. A majority of these regions are primarily white; meaning they can afford better teachers, better teaching equipment, facilities and more technology. Individuals that are part of such institutes have better chances of attending the best colleges and hence advance professionally as well. Whereas students in less affluent districts would not benefit from such advantages and are more likely to be less progressive, academically as well as professionally. The symbolic interactionist theory sheds light onto the education institution by analyzing through observation the happening in the classroom. The primary focus being by matching the instructors expectations and seeing the effect they have on a child’s performance, insight and thoughts. Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968, conducted a research in which a number of students were subjected to IQ tests. Through the analysis of the results of these it was deduced that a few individuals in the tested group would show an increase in intellect over the period of one year. The instructors were informed of these results and asked to watch for improvements in these students. The researchers conducted IQ tests on these students after one year and it was found that their scores had increased. This study therefore goes to show that even though the researchers had picked a number of random average individuals, however when their instructors expected a particular growth in performance, it occurred. This phenomenon, where something occurs on the bases of an untrue assumption simply due to the fact that someone predicted it, is addressed as a ‘self-fulfilling prophesy’. There are many ways in which these theories go to explain the divergent views of individuals’ part of the education institution. According to the conflict theory, individuals’ part of the education system goes through a process which prepares them for their future roles in a system that is predominantly capitalist. It mentally prepares children belonging to the upper class to be part of a status which is equal to that of their forebears, whereas the lower class views are molded to fall in accordance with the system that makes exploitation acceptable to them. This can be seen in the way employment opportunities are based simply on education as a primary selection tool. The top jobs are exclusively kept for individuals from elite universities whereas white collar and mediocre jobs are seen fit for levels of educations which indicate the right amount of motivation and social experience. This matches and keeps in check the expectations and idea’s of individuals’ part of the education system (Collins, 1971). According to Bowles and Gentis, there are three ways in which the education system moulds the ideas of students from the middle and low class. The first of these is how to be an effective workforce; through constructing notions of obedience and dependence as associated with success and being independent with failure. The second of these is the meek acceptance of the set hierarchy. The third, is to shape their motivation as driven by external rewards. So basically these individuals are of the view that the sole reason to attend school is to pass exams, and then graduate. This limits their interest in the material that they learn and tunes their ideas into those of a workforce which is not expected to enjoy their work but simply to do it in order to earn a living (Sociology at Hewett, 2007). The functionalist approach towards education has individuals’ with different views regarding functions of everyday life and the purpose of education. These ideas are based on assigning equal importance to the acquisition of knowledge as well as socialization. And it is through socialization that an individuals’ forms their basic qualities and internalize ways of the society (Charon, 2007). Closely associated with these qualities is the aspect of social change within the education sector, as per the functionalist approach. The notions of students which then add on to the formulation of the social construct through social and moral norms are based on three areas. These are social cohesion, social rules, and division of labor (Durkheim, 2007). Idea’s regarding social solidarity are constructed by the education system by outlining the similarities between individuals and their society. These can be strengthened and formed by the use of daily rituals, say the recitation of the pledge of allegiance by students. Also, through learning about history an element of social continuity and the thoughts towards sharing of similar values and morals are instilled. It is this sharing of values and morals which formulates the base of our social rules. Education teaches one self discipline, punctuality, manners and cooperation. These traits are critical for a society and so an incorporation of these in the education system helps individuals internalize them through a learning process. Functionalism looks at the views of the society as a organization of parts that are interdependent. So in order for the society to work it is essential that a general consensus is formulated. For example, as far as the education institution is concerned there must be an agreement on the values that are focused on by the system which will in turn maximize the societal expectations of individuals. Another aspect regarding the views of the society that are affected is those that have to do with existence of common symbols. It is these which give individuals a similar footing when it comes to the development of communication. It is only when a general consensus exists in the education field, that there can be a state of equilibrium in terms of learning. Conflict theory, falls along the same lines as functional theory as far as any affect on the views of the society are concerned. Their views of the society as formulated through a system of sub structures remains the same however the purpose of these structures is debatable. While the functionalist approach looks at the society views as those that work together in order to benefit all, conflict theory looks at the formulated sub systems as means to benefit those who hold power. Hence the views of the society are affected in the way the rich are those who hold scarce resources, financial means, land or even political power. The three theories offer divergent views into the way education affects the society and its individuals; the functionalist approach which leans towards an optimistic view of education, as an equal opportunity for individuals who strive to grow, advance and progress. Then there are the conflict theories that believe there is a hidden curriculum when it comes to the education institution as a way to pave way for aspects of capitalism; and lastly the symbolic interactionist approach which takes a more neutral approach based on the formulation of an opinion of the principles suggested by observation and active research. . References Bennett, Milton, J. (1998). Intercultural communication: A current perspective. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Brinkerhoff, D., White, L & Ortega, L. (2008). Essentials of Sociology. Pg. 274. Thomson Learning, Inc. Collins, Randall. (1971, December). Functional and Conflict Theory of Educational Stratification. American Sociological Review. (36)6, 1002-1019. Retrieved 25 November, 2007, from JSTOR. Charon, Joel M. (2007). Ten questions: A Sociological Perspective (6th ed.). California. Thomson Higher Education. Covington, P. (2008). Success in Sociology. United Kingdom: Folen publishers. Durkheim, E. (1961). Moral Education. New York Free press of Glencoe. Rosenthal, R., and Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and pupils' intellectual development'. New York: Rinehart and Winston Sociology at Hewett.. Sociology Pages from the Hewett School, Norwich UK. Retrieved 23 November, 2007, from http://www.hewett.norfolk.sch.uk/CURRIC/soc/Theory1. htm Read More