Sociology AS unit 2 MAY 2012!! (AQA)

i was just wondering i got a C in unit 1 and if i get a A is it possible to get an A overall?

no you would prob get a B

Oh damn!

i got a B in SCLY1 just there in jan tho it was 1 mark off and A and i just paid there for late repeat exam entrance just to try make sure to get it up. if u really need an A do late exam entry if u are doing the A2 next year then you could repeat your C then if not you would need to get very high A's in your other 3 modules which is possible. If it was me i would redo SCLY1 as it is the easiest

you can still get an A !

Is it possible, that would mean I would need to get a high A right?

i am doing the whole 4 modules plus other exams too (religion and spanish) just make good notes and dedicate plenty of time to each module. u can also just focuse on the other 3 i know what u mean u can still get an A from doing that. just scly1 is the easiest but if u know ur stuff for the other 3 u will be flying. good luck

sorry to be a bore i can't rem how to start a thread on this can someone help???

Done. Could someone mark it please? Sorry Ive posted it off my phone so I couldn't do an attachment.

Assess the view that educations main function is to maintain a value consensus.*

Functionalists argue that the main aim of education is to maintain a value consensus in society. They emphasise the positive aspect of education and they believe that educational institutions are a way of utilising different types of peoples skills and talents to help find a suitable place for them in society. This is known as the 'sifting and sorting' process. Which matches them to their future work roles that suits their different abilities.*

They see the learning of history as important for children to gain an insight into their heritage. This is particularly strong in American schools where alligence to the flag and recognition of heroic characters is encouraged in all schools. This helps the children in education feel a sense of belonging and can help develop role models. It can be argued that people from ethnic minorities in the USA may feel that paying alligence to a flag which is not their culture, can cause conflict and negative sub-cultures as they may feel their culture isn't recognised and they may feel singled out.*

Functionalists believer meritocracy is true and that if students work hard enough they can achieve high grades and work their way up the social ladder based on how well they work. This will allow different abilities to be 'sifted and sorted' into their appropriate role in society.*

However, not everybody agrees with this consensus opinion. Marxists provide a conflict theory on education. They gave the theory of 'the myth of meritocracy'. They believe education ensures that the working class remain the working class and the middle and upper class remain as that. Marxists believe education is a tool to help maintain social divisions. So the middle class could suppress the subject class. It can be argued that meritocracy does exist as people, such as Alan Sugar, have worked their way up the social ladder. Alan Sugar started off in a subject class family and worked, without education, his way up the social ladder. This provides evidence that meritocracy is not a myth.*

Feminists also provide a conflict theory. They believe education is a place to maintain a patriarchal society. They feel that young females are guided to do more feminine subjects as options in education such as child care, home economics, health and social care etc. However, not all feminists believe they are as targeted. Liberal feminists believe things are improving in society, and it is becoming less patriarchal.*

All the evidence I've seen does not support Marxism. I believe education helps us with values to help us in society. Meritocracy is genuine and is not a myth. Evidence such as Alan Sugar indicates so. Feminists 30-40 years ago shared a valid point on their patriarchal views but in recent years it had died down drastically and many females have become successful, such as Alan Sugars apprentices. Women are encouraged to be individuals.*

could someone mark mine aswell please? its the same essay title ^


Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the claim that “the main function of education is to maintain a value consensus in society”.

Many sociologists have given alternate views about the main function of education. Functionalists argue that the main function of education is to maintain a value consensus – agreed social values – whereas Marxists argue that education transmits values that benefit the ruling class.

Durkheim (1903), a functionalist, argues that society needs a sense of social solidarity because without it, social life and cooperation would be impossible as individuals would pursue their own selfish desires. The education system helps create social solidarity by transmitting society’s culture from one generation to the next so the main function of education is to maintain a value consensus in society. However, Marxists criticise this and argue that education in capitalist society only transmits the ideology of the ruling class and not the shared values of society.

Furthermore, Durkheim argues that modern industry has a complex division of labour where production of a single product involves cooperation from many different specialists. But for this to be successful, each person must have the necessary specialist knowledge and skills to perform their role. So education teaches individuals specialist skills and knowledge that individuals need to play their part in the social division of labour. So the main function of education is to maintain a value consensus in society.

Consequently Parsons (1961) sees schools as a bridge between family and wider society. This bridge is needed as they both operate on different principles. Within the family, the child is judged by particularistic standards and status is ascribed. Whereas in education and wider society, status is achieved and we are all judged by the same universalistic standards e.g. the same laws apply to everyone. Parsons sees the school and wider society based on meritocratic principles where everyone is given an equal opportunity. However Parsons has been criticised as there is evidence that equal opportunity in education does not exist e.g. achievement is greatly influenced by class background. So the main function of education is clearly not to maintain a value consensus in society.

Davis and Moore (1945) see education as a device for selecting and allocating pupils for their future work roles. Social inequality is necessary to ensure that the most important roles are filled by the most talented people. So higher rewards are offered to the most talented which encourages everyone to compete and allows society to select the most talented individuals to fill the most important roles. So the main function is not to maintain a value consensus in society. Conversely, the New Right criticise Davis and Moore and argue that state education fails to prepare young people adequately for work and this is because of the state control of education which discourages efficiency, competition and choice.

On the other hand, Marxists such as Bowles and Gintis (1954) argue that there are close parallels between schooling and work in capitalist society. This is used to describe the “correspondence principle” in which the relationships and structures found in education correspond to those of work, and this principle operates through the hidden curriculum e.g. through everyday working of the school, pupils become accustomed to accepting hierarchy. In this way schooling prepares working class pupils for their role as the exploited workers. So the main function of education is to maintain a value consensus in society. However postmodernists reject the Marxist theory and argue that today’s post-Fordist economy requires schools to produce a different kind of labour force from the one described by Marxists; society has become more diverse and class divisions are no longer important.

Furthermore, Bowles and Gintis argue that the education system prevents the poor from rebelling against inequality by the production of ideologies such as the myth of meritocracy. Evidence shows that the main factor determining whether someone has a high income or not is their class background. By disguising this fact, the myth of meritocracy makes it seem that higher classes gained privileges through open competition which helps to persuade the working class to accept inequality as legitimate. So the main function of education is not to maintain a value consensus.

Moreover, Willis’ study shows that some working class pupils can resist being indoctrinated into the myth of meritocracy as he studied the counter-culture of “the lads” and found out that these lads rejected school’s values and this helped them slot into the very jobs that capitalism needs someone to perform e.g. their acts of rebellion ensured that they did not get any qualifications and therefore end up in unskilled jobs. Conversely, this has been criticised as Torres (1998) argues that Marxists overemphasise class and ignore structural inequalities such as gender. Furthermore, many working class children do succeed in the education system.

In conclusion some sociologists such as functionalists have argued that the main function of education is to maintain a value consensus in society. However many others disagree with this and give alternate functions such as providing a workforce for capitalists, selecting and allocating young people for their future work roles and acting as a bridge between family and wider society. So therefore, a function of education is to maintain a value consensus, but it not one of the main ones.

its really good, cuz you've stated what functionalists, feminists and marxists have to say about it. but you need to give sociologists names, and put in a few studies

I was thinking through this thread via attachments! So others can have a look if they don't feel like participating. Yep, education with research methods!

its good that you've given loads of studies, but it just seems like your listing them. instead you should mention justa few but evaluate them with more detail.
its really good that you've included a conclusion though