Sociology of Education

1. How does the idea of cultural capital extend our understanding of education and social mobility?
Cultural capital is a concept that draws on the work of Bourdieu which claims cultural experiences in the home setting create a pool of resources that form an atmosphere that enhances academic achievement (210). Studies show students whose parents participate in their education were more likely to do well (209). The factors affecting parent participation were parents’ belief in their ability (and consequently their right) to interact with teachers and resources available to the family for expenses like transportation, childcare, and time lost from work. Other factors are the amount of information the parent has about school by virtue of community socialization and the parent’s view of the roles between home and school. These factors comprise cultural resources which strengthen family-school ties (218). Parents in the working class community defer to the teachers on matters of education, rarely interfering because of a belief in their own educational inferiority. Teachers are seen as the professionals, not to be questioned, and consequently the division of labor is established in lower class educational settings (216). Parents in the middle class community felt equal to teachers in education and thus capable of participating in their child’s instruction. Finally, there is community socialization in middle-class neighborhood which leads to more information being shared amongst parents. In working class families more emphasis is on family relationships. There is less interaction with different class levels and therefore less opportunity to transverse class levels (219). The better a child does in school, the better the child’s chances for success in the occupational setting because education is the legitimizing system of our country.
2. Discuss how schools as organizations are loosely coupled systems.
Schools are considered loosely coupled systems because the organization is comprised of independently run parts linked under the basic goal of education. Teachers develop curriculum, students learn and produce work, administrators tend budgets and staffing; while each has a role that intersects with the other, they also have the “separateness” indicative of loosely coupled systems.
Looking at the entire educational system we can note that there is no federal curriculum but there is federal funding of education and a Department of Education. One of the problems of loosely coupled system is the lack of oversight; in the educational system this can be seen when looking at federally funded education. The government provides the money but individual schools control the distribution of those funds, in some cases resulting in gross mismanagement that can go unnoticed because of the disconnection of the federal benefactor with the local disbursing agency. The problems with loosely coupled systems are further magnified when looking at educational systems. While the problems of a loosely coupled educational system include lack of communication between systems, failure to notice when a part of the system no longer operates properly or is in need of adjustment, and vulnerability to small changes, the loose coupling allows the system as a whole to flourish because of its lack of interdependence. If one school, program, or curriculum fails it does not cause a breakdown in the entire system.


3. What are the costs and benefits of education as an industry versus education as a social institution?
Education is seen as an industry because of its tendency to change with the economic needs of the community. One cost of this shift is a loss of legitimacy because schools are being seen not in the original context of education, to produce individuals who are civic minded and well rounded, but as organizations “subject to market pressure” (439). Academic programs like art and music are replaced with technological or vocational programs. One of the “goods” provided by the educational industry is the classroom experience. Classes are offer based on popularity and interest not for providing a well rounded education. The more students in a class the more money the school makes. This is true of lower grades as well; the more students attend the more money the school generates. Schools are profit generating organizations and must be run as such. Students are seen as customers as books and supplies are sold and meals are offered by fast food chains that often pay for their presence on campuses. These costs may seem high but the benefits are significant. Due to the presence of corporations on campuses, there is increased funding for programs that may not have existed previously. The ability to shift focus in curriculum helps the student stay viable in the local job market because the school will most likely offer classes that are occupationally promising for the local area.
Education as a social institution focus’ on the original intent of education to create civic minded individuals who would uphold freedom and civility in our nation. This approach unifies the people of the nation but does not meet today’s modern day need for flexibility.



4. Discuss education in terms of contest mobility and sponsored mobility.
Movement from one social class to another roughly defines the term upward mobility. Education in America is seen as a system of contest mobility. Contest mobility is a bootstrap system where the strong excel and all have an equal and fair shot to attain elite status in society. Sponsored mobility, which is dominant in English culture but also present in American society, is when one is selected to join the ranks of the elite by an elite agent. The English select their elite early through testing and social factors to perpetuate their value system. Both English and American systems have aspects of both contest and sponsored mobility.
In the educational setting the mode of mobility makes suggestions about the values of the society which employs it. Sponsored mobility appears to value its perpetuation of elite culture as opposed to contest mobility which values achievement and education is merely a vehicle for that end. In the sponsored mobility model only those who are candidates for elite status receive elite education while, the contest system allows everyone a chance to excel on their own merit. There is a suggestion of equality in the contest system.
There are other less altruistic elements of the contest system. The contest system creates a sense that anyone can rise to the top; this false sense of anything is possible is often disillusioning to students. In the sponsored system there is a sense of once not selected for the elite track that one does not deserve to challenge the status quo. Each system has positive aspects as well as negative. The fact that both systems exist within each society creates a balance within the void that would otherwise exist if only one model existed.



5. Discuss school reform in the United States.
The impetus for reform in the United States falls into four primary aims that are cyclical in nature (278). Reforms are aimed at increasing efficiency in administration, and excellence in the process of teaching and learning, to create equity or a social equalizer, to enhance the learning experience with activities, not necessarily academic. These reform projects seem to revolve around liberal and conservative politics. Some years are decidedly liberal and equity and enhancement projects prosper; some years are conservative run and programs of streamlining or improving education prosper. Excellency reforms are the cause of the “No Child Left Behind Act”. This bill was overwhelmingly passed in both the House and the Senate. This act calls for high testing standards and significant credentialing of teachers.
The problem is the administrations of these standards are left up to individual states. An example of the loosely coupled educational system, the lack of consistency is both a boon and the very reason for inefficiency. Another current reform which may work better is the Comprehensive School reform. It allots federal money to poorer school districts who agree to make significant changes.
School reform is most effective in middle class school systems because parents are more involved and commit time as a resource. Poor schools do not fair as well in reform models because the underlying social problems are not addressed and the resources are not available.