THE ROLE OF EDUCATION: MARXISM

Althusser: The Ideological State Apparatus 

Althusser focuses his work on the way that the working class learn to become passive and obedient. Althusser argues that the state exercises power over the working class. This can be achieved through two means:

Repressive State Apparatus (RSA)- Physical control of the W/C through the Police, Military, Judicial system etc.

Ideological State Apparatus (ISA)- A form of 'brain washing through socialisation'. This is the control over mind rather than by physical means.

The R/C's dominant ideology gets filtered through I.S.A (Media, education etc.) down to the W/C. Althusser argues that the education system performs two functions in the ISA:

Education reproduces class inequality by transmitting it from generation to generation. in

Education legitimates class inequality by producing ideologies that disguise its true cause.

Althusser: The Ideological State ApparatusBowles and Gintis: schooling in capitalist AmericaBowles and Gintis build on Althusser's point that the main purpose of education is to 'Reproduce Class Inequalities' I.e. Obedient workers. They believe that the school creates workers through two main ways; Hidden Curriculum and the Myth of Meritocracy.

The correspondence principle and the hidden curriculum

Bowles and Gintis argue that there are close parallels between schools and work e.g. Both are hierarchies with head teacher and bosses. Bowles and Gintis argue that this principle operates through the hidden curriculum which are 'lessons' learnt without them being directly taught. In this way, schooling prepares working class pupils for their roles as exploited workers of the future.

The myth of Meritocracy

• Because there is inequality in a capitalist society, the poor may feel that it is undeserved and unfair. Bowles and Gintis argue that meritocracy doesn't exist. Evidence from this shows that the main factor in determining whether or not someone has a high income is their family and class not their ability.• The myth of meritocracy justifies the privileges of higher classes, making it seem that they gain them through open and fair competition. • This helps persuade the working class to accept inequality as legitimate, making it less like to overthrow capitalism.

Willis: learning to labour

• Paul Willis looks at how working class pupils resist the attempts to indoctrinate them into this myth of meritocracy. Using qualitative methods (unstructured interview), Willis studied the counter-school culture of 'the lads', a group of 12 working class boys as they made a transition from school to work.

• The lads opposed the school and 'took the piss' out of the (conformist boys) and girls.

• The lads find school boring so they flout its rules e.g. Smoking. These lads see such acts of defiance of ways of resisting the school.

• Willis notes the similarity between anti-school counter-culture and shop floor culture as both cultures see manual work as superior and the lads were strongly identified by this which explains why they see themselves as superior to the ear'oles and girls.

Evaluation of Marxist Approach

•However, Postmodernists criticise Bowles and Gintis’ correspondence principle on the belief that schools now produce a different labour force than the one described by Marxists. They argue that education now reproduces diversity not inequality.• By contrast, Willis rejects the view that school simply ‘brainwashes’ pupils into passively accepting their fate.•However, critics argue that Willis’ account of the lads’ romanticises them, portraying them as working class heroes despite their antic-social behaviour and sexists attitudes.

Evaluation of Marxist Approach

•Marxists disagree with one another as to how reproduction and legitimating takes place. Bowles and Gintis take a deterministic view. This approach fails to explain why pupils ever reject the school’s values.

•Critical modernists such as Morrow and Torres (1988) criticise Marxists for taking a ‘class first approach that sees class as the key inequality and ignores all other kinds. They argue that sociologists must explain how education reproduces and legitimises all forms of equality, not just class, and how the different forms of inequality are inter-related.