Sociological Theories of Education

Functionalists reckon schools are brilliant for society. Durkheim argued that education creates social solidarity - basically making you feel part of your community through shared values and the hidden curriculum. Parsons saw school as a bridge between family life (where you're treated specially) and work life (where everyone's judged equally) - essentially preparing you for a meritocracy where hard work pays off.

Davis and Moore believed schools do role allocation - sorting students into future jobs based on talent. The idea is that unequal rewards motivate the brightest students to take on the most important roles in society.

Marxists completely disagree. Althusser saw schools as an Ideological State Apparatus that brainwashes working-class students into accepting inequality. Meanwhile, Bowles and Gintis studied 237 New York students and found schools reward obedience over creativity through the correspondence principle - essentially training docile workers.

Key Point: Willis studied "the lads" who rejected school values and mocked the "ear-oles" (hardworking students), ironically preparing themselves perfectly for low-skilled jobs.

New Right theorists like Chubb and Moe wanted more marketisation through voucher systems and private schools, claiming state education fails disadvantaged groups. Various government policies followed - from Educational Maintenance Allowance to academisation - though critics argue these create more problems than they solve.

Class and Educational Achievement

Your social class massively affects your educational success, and it happens both outside and inside school. External factors include things you can't control at home, while internal factors happen within schools themselves.

Cultural deprivation theory suggests working-class families don't value education enough. Douglas found working-class parents visit schools less often, while Bernstein identified two speech codes - working-class students use restricted code whilst middle-class students use elaborated code that schools prefer. However, Keddie argues this is just anti-working-class prejudice - these families aren't culturally deprived, just different.

Material deprivation creates real barriers. Poor housing means overcrowding and constant moving, whilst the hidden costs of "free" education (transport, books, uniforms) add up quickly. Even university tuition fees put off working-class students who are more debt-averse than middle-class ones.

Bourdieu's cultural capital explains how middle-class attitudes, values and tastes give students advantages. Middle-class parents know how to play the system - getting houses in good catchment areas and understanding what schools want.

Key Point: Inside schools, labelling creates self-fulfilling prophecies. Teachers often see middle-class students as "ideal pupils" whilst working-class students get stuck in lower streams through educational triage.

Streaming and setting often reinforce class inequalities. Schools focus on A-C grade students* for league tables, neglecting those deemed "hopeless causes." This creates different pupil subcultures - some pro-school, others anti-school.

Ethnicity and Educational Achievement

Ethnic minority students face unique challenges that affect their educational success. The picture's complicated though - some groups like Indian and Chinese students consistently outperform white students, whilst Black Caribbean and Pakistani students often underachieve.

External factors include language barriers - Bowker found lack of standard English creates problems, though Indian students succeed despite English as a Second Language. Cultural factors matter too - Asian families often have high educational expectations, whilst some argue Black Caribbean culture is less resistant to racism's effects.

Material deprivation hits ethnic minorities harder - Palmer found they're twice as likely to face unemployment and live in low-income households. Racism in wider society creates additional barriers, with Muslim men 76% less likely to be employed than white Christians.

Internal factors within schools create serious problems. Teacher racism and labelling mean ethnic minority students often don't fit the "ideal pupil" image. Black students get disciplined more harshly for the same behaviour through racialised expectations - teachers misinterpret their behaviour as challenging authority.

Key Point: The A-C economy* means black students get placed in lower streams based on negative stereotypes, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of underachievement.

Pupil responses vary massively. Fuller studied high-achieving black girls who appeared not to care but worked hard privately. Sewell identified four responses among black boys - rebels, conformists, retreatists and innovators. The key insight from Evans is that you need to examine ethnicity, class and gender together - they all interact to affect achievement.

Gender Identities and Education

How you perform gender at school affects your educational experience in ways you might not even notice. Your sexual and gender identities get shaped through daily interactions, peer pressure, and teacher expectations.

Working-class girls often gain symbolic capital from peers by performing hyper-heterosexual feminine identities - but this prevents them gaining educational capital. Archer found these girls face impossible choices between fitting in with friends and succeeding academically. Being "loud" gets them labelled as aggressive, whilst caring for family becomes central to their identity.

Sexual double standards create different expectations. Lees found boys can boast about sexual conquests whilst girls get labelled negatively for the same behaviour. This verbal abuse shapes how students see themselves and limits their choices.

Gender role socialisation starts early. You probably got different toys as kids - girls encouraged to be helpful and quiet, boys to be active and competitive. These differences carry into school subjects and career expectations.

Key Point: Gendered subject choices persist because of how subjects get taught and peer pressure. Girls in single-sex schools are more likely to take traditionally "male" subjects like physics.

Subject stereotypes remain strong. Kelly found science teaching uses examples that appeal more to boys, whilst Colley showed computer science gets taught in ways that put girls off. Sports often get seen as masculine, with girls who excel facing accusations of being "butch."

Career expectations still follow traditional patterns. Many girls still aspire to work in "pink industries" like childcare and healthcare, reflecting both personal interests and realistic assessments of available opportunities in their social class position.

Gender and Educational Achievement

The gender gap in education has completely flipped - girls now outperform boys at every level. Understanding why reveals how external social changes and internal school factors interact to shape achievement.

Girls' improved performance stems from massive social changes. Feminism raised expectations and self-esteem - magazines shifted from promoting marriage to celebrating independence. Changes in family structure and women's employment rights (Equal Pay Act 1970, Sex Discrimination Act 1975) gave girls real incentives to gain qualifications.

Girls' educational ambitions transformed completely. Sharpe's research comparing the 1970s and 1990s showed girls moved from prioritising "love and marriage" to wanting independence and careers. However, working-class girls still often choose "pink industry" jobs reflecting their realistic assessment of opportunities.

Internal school factors helped girls succeed. Equal opportunities policies, the National Curriculum, and GCSE coursework (which suited girls' organisational skills better) all contributed. More female teachers provided positive role models, whilst league tables made girls attractive recruits since they're less likely to cause behavioural problems.

Key Point: The shift from coursework to linear assessment in 2017 didn't change the gender gap much, suggesting girls' advantages go deeper than just assessment methods.

Boys' underachievement has multiple causes. Literacy problems start early when parents read less to boys, whilst globalisation destroyed traditional male jobs, creating an identity crisis. Anti-school laddish subcultures emerge as boys fear being seen as "sissies" - working hard becomes "unfeminine" in their peer groups.

Intersectionality matters - gender, class and ethnicity combine differently. Some black boys underachieve partly through defining masculinity in opposition to education, though responses vary enormously within all groups.