Functionalists vs Marxists education

?

Functionlists vs marxists education

Similarities

  • They both argue that education serves a puporse for society
  • Both see education is a means to reproduce a new work force, however with different perspectives on it
  • Both are macro approches
  • They are both concerned about the structural relationship between education and different parts of the education system , such as the economy as well as social inequality
  • Both see education as a powerful influence on students ensuring that they follow the rules as well as conform to the existing norms and values.

Differences

  • Marxists would argue that the purpose of education is to reinforce inequality in a capitalist society, therefore it has a negative function
  • However functionlists would argue that  education has a positive function for society, through its benefits like social control
  • Sees education as teahcing the future workers the skills they need in order to help get the top jobs and contribute to the capitalist economy
  • Marxists would argue that this is only applied to the middle class who are taught these skills,but those from a working class background do not get this treatment, therefore they are less prepared for their role in society, or they will be put into a low paid job- Reserve army of labour.
  • Marxists would also point out the fact that education socialises children to accpet their lower position in society, and accept their hiearchy at school, which again would contrast to the functionlist view as they would view education as postive.
  • Marxists would also say that it socializes young people into the dominant ideology, which would lead to an obediant workforce .
  • In terms of the hidden curriculum, functionalists would argue that it helps prepare the future gen for their participation in society  which is based on the idea of value consensus.
  • However marxists would say that the hidden curriclum helps persuade societies future gen to accept the dominant ideology and their postion in socity based on inequality, exploitation and conflict.

Overall comparison

In conclusion, the functionalists perspective on education, solely focuses on the importance of it and how it comes to serve as a way to help develop individuals to become their better self, as they believe that everybody should work in order for society to breakdown, in fear of atrophy of happening. So therefore education serves as a positive function. However, marxists on the other hand would disagree and would say that education exploits the vulnerable in society i.e the working class, as they do not see them to serve a benefit in society ( davis and moore role allocation), thereofre their time in education is met by exploitation (labelling) and it also reinforces them to listen to their 'dominant' ideology, which is reflected through teachers and their perspectives on a child, as with the working class this tends to be more negative compared to the middle class. So with this unfair treatment, marxists would say that education reinforced inequality for most, and sets them up for a life of exploitation. However there are some things in which both sides agree on. For instance, they both perceive in through a macro approach, so looking at the bigger picture, which gives them both a proper insight to their findings rather than focusing on a small sample of society.  

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Sociology resources:

See all Sociology resources »See all Education resources »