Republic of the Philippines

SORSOGON STATE UNIVERSITY

GRADUATE SCHOOL (GS)
Magsaysay Avenue, 4700 SORSOGON CITY

ASSIGNMENT NO.7 RICABLANCA, CarlaKim R.

Date Due: April 27, 2024 2023-2024 MAED- ENGLISH

EDUC 502: PHILOSOPHICAL, SOCIOLOGICAL AND

PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF EDUCATION

Stephen Henry S. Totanes, Ph.D

Associate Professor V

“An Overview of Modern-Day Sociologist and Psychologist

and their Educational Theories”

Sociology and Psychology are two disciplines that have

contributed greatly to our understanding of education.
Sociologists have focused on the social and cultural factors that
influence education, while psychologists have studied the
cognitive and emotional processes involved in learning. In this
paper, we will provide an overview of modern-day sociologist and
psychologist and their educational theories
When you are learning about sociological theories, you may run
across numerous words that you have not encountered before.
Various theories are peppered with strange terminology. Theorists
have adopted the use of specialized words to capture concepts that
often have very complex meanings. Below, many such instances of
these terms are discussed: cultural capital, habitus,racialization, and
primary effects, just to name a few. Many of these terms are specific
to one particular body of theories or a particular theorist.
Some terms, however, are used throughout the discussion of theory
rather frequently. These terms are macrosocial theory, microsocial
theory, mesosocial theory, middle-range theory, agency, and structure

Agency and Structure

What is more important in explaining social life—individuals or the

social structures around them? This is the question at the heart of the
debate between agency and structure. Agency refers to the
individual’s ability to act and make independent choices, while
structure refers to aspects of the social landscape that appear to limit
or influence the choices made by individuals. So, which one takes
primacy—individual autonomy or socialization? Of course, this
question is not easily resolved and it is central to theoretical
approaches in sociology. Some theorists emphasize the importance of
individual experience, therefore favouring agency. Those theorists
who favour agency are associated with microsociological explanations
of social phenomena. Other theorists view society as a large
functional organism. These are macrosociologists, who see the social
world as a series of structures with varying degrees of harmony.

The agency–structure debate in social theory isn’t simply about

which is more important; it also considers what it is that ties the
individual to society. Society is more than a collection of individuals—
there is something larger at work that makes those individuals a
“society.” The structural functionalists and Marxists (i.e., macro
theorists) emphasize how social structures determine social life and
maintain that individual actions can be reinterpreted as the outcomes
of structural forces. In other words, it may seem that individuals made
decisions to act in certain ways (e.g., get a specific job or take a
specific course) and these theorists would argue that the larger forces
of society and structure constrain an individual’s choices in such a
way that these are the only decisions that can be made. Symbolic
interactionists and phenomenologists are microsociological theorists
who focus on the subjective meanings of social life and how these
meanings are responsible for creating individuals’ social worlds. Much
research in social theory has focused on how to reconcile the
structure and agency debate by exploring how individuals are
connected to society. Some reconciliatons are offered by Berger and
Luckmann (1969), Giddens (1984), Ritzer (2000), and Bourdieu
(1986). Bourdieu’s concept of the habitus as a bridge between
structure and agency will be discussed later in this chapter. Similarly,
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) discussion of the various ways and levels at
which the child interacts with the environment will also be considered
as a way of bridging the gap between agency and structure.

Ontology and Epistemology

Also underlying theoretical perspectives are other assumptions

about the social world. There are two very important assumptions to
consider when thinking about theories in the sociology of education—
ontology and epistemology

The theoretical perspectives considered in this text all have “taken-

for-granted” ontological and epistemological orientations in their
worldviews. Figure 2.2 graphically illustrates how ontology,
epistemology, agency, structure, and the levels of social theory tend to
correspond to each other on a spectrum. Microsocial theorists, for
example, tend to emphasize agency over structure, point to the
importance of understanding subjective reality, and use interpretive
methods (in-depth qualitative interviews) when undertaking their
studies. On the opposite end of the spectrum are macrosocial
theorists, who focus on structure and believe in an objective reality
that is to be learned about through positivist methods.

When learning about theories, it is important to think about what the

theorist is assuming about social life. Theorists approach their subject
with specific orientations to the primacy of agency or structure,
micro/macro/meso sociological concerns, and specific beliefs about
the nature of reality and how it should be studied. There are stark
distinctions among theoretical approaches and recognizing the
assumptions made by theorists in this way can help you understand
the major differences in the “schools of thought” explored in the rest of
the chapter.

Structural Functionalism Structural functionalism is a body of

theories that understand the world as a large system of interrelated
parts that all work together. Emile Durkheim and Talcott Parsons are
two major theorists in this area. Émile Durkheim French sociologist
Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) is best known for his theory of moral
regulation. He was also the first sociologist of education. Durkheim
was interested in explaining why the rise of individualism in society did
not result in widespread social breakdown. Durkheim wrote during a
time when individualism was replacing the authority of the Catholic
church in France and the collectivist social bond built on religious
homogeneity. Societies no longer had singular dominant religions that
bonded them together, or even dominant ethnicities. How was society
being held together? Durkheim’s answer was that social life was
possible because of the trust that existed among members of society.
For society to function, there must exist an unwritten moral code that
people follow. This moral framework is at the core of Durkheim’s
theory of society.

Because of this belief in the importance of a shared moral code,

Durkheim considered it the role of education in society to instill
society’s morals in the minds (and actions) of young people. His
writings on the subject stress this point very much, as reflected in such
titles as Moral Education (1925).1 He argued that it is only through
education that a given society can forge a commitment to an
underlying set of common beliefs and values, as well as create a
strong sense of community or nationhood. This moral education
prepares us to be productive members of society by socializing and
integrating us, whereby we not only understand but also value
common morals. We become autonomous adults but we are guided in
our acts by the moral codes that have become firmly ingrained in our
beings.

Durkheim’s belief that society is held together by a common set of

values and morals is at the heart of structural functionalism because it
emphasizes how the various parts of a social system work together.
Society functions because shared norms and morals create a sense of
trust that leads to general social cohesion. Schools are integral to this
process because they instill the correct moral codes into children so
that they can develop into productive adults that contribute to society.

Talcott Parsons

Durkheim died in 1917 and structural functionalism, particularly as it

related to the sociology of education, was largely ignored until Talcott
Parsons invigorated the discussion in the late 1950s with his widely
cited article “The School Class as a Social System: Some of Its
Functions in American Society.” Like Durkheim, Parsons argued that
schools existed to socialize students. Up to school age, children are
primarily socialized at home by their families, but the values instilled in
the child at home are particular to the family. The child is judged in a
particular way—as a member of his or her family. There is no way of
judging his or her character relative to other children. The school plays
a central role in bridging individuals to society. It is within schools that
children are assessed in a standardized universalistic way that does
not take their social background characteristics into account.
According to Parsons, schools level the playing field so that children
are assessed on the basis of merit—how they are judged is based
only on how they perform on a standardized set of goals regardless of
social background.

In this way, school prepares young people for their roles as adults.
Parsons argued that American schools emphasized the values of
achievement and equality of opportunity. Adults’ later placement in the
workforce is a reflection of how much they achieved and how
successful they were in their schooling. The school is functionally
related to the workforce because it assigns people to their roles based
on achievement, skills, and capability. It needs to be emphasized that
structural functionalists do not believe that inequality is non-existent.
On the contrary, they believe it is inherent to the functional system.
Social inequality, in other words, exists because it is functional in
society. People who are at the lower ends of the educational and
socioeconomic spectrum are there because they fill necessary places
there—and because they did not meet the qualifications for higher
placement.

As you may imagine, structural functionalism is not without its critics,

and many criticisms are well-founded. In particular, the approach fails
to account for how many ascribed traits, like socioeconomic
background, gender, and race, appear to be so important in
determining life outcomes. A plethora of research has provided
compelling evidence that the education system does not operate on a
purely meritocratic basis. However, despite its shortcomings,
structural functionalism has been a useful framework for
understanding how morality and norms are spread across society and
the school’s role in this process. See Box 2.1 for a recent analysis of
education in Canada using a Durkheimian perspective.

Karl Marx and Neo-Marxism

Karl Marx (1818–1883) was a German intellectual and revolutionary

known for his creation and endorsement of socialism and communism.
Marx was a prolific writer, and among his many books were The
Communist Manifesto and three volumes of Das Kapital. Writing
during the industrial revolution in Europe (a point in history which
markedly changed how goods were produced and thereby how people
earned a living), Marx believed that all social relations were rooted in
economic relations, particularly the mode of production, which refers
to the way of producing goods and services. In capitalist systems, the
mode of production is such that it places workers and owners in direct
opposition to one another. Both groups have differing interests: the
workers, for example, want to command the highest wage, while the
owners, in order to drive the greatest profit, want to pay the lowest
possible wage. This relation of production under capitalism, or the
social relations that stem from capitalism, means that workers are
always subservient and dependent on owners.

Marx viewed society as divided into distinct classes. At the most

basic level, there were owners (the bourgeoisie) and workers (the
proletariat). He argued that the only way to achieve a just society was
for the proletariat to achieve class consciousness—to collectively
become self-aware of their class group and the possibilities for them
to act in their own rational self-interest.

The idea of class is at the very core of Marx and Marxist scholarship.
While Marx was a prolific writer, he wrote relatively little on education.
However, he did emphasize that class relations spilled into all aspects
of social life, therefore the role of education in society—capitalist
society—would be a topic of much relevance under a Marxist
framework. In particular, the educational system of a society exists to
maintain and reproduce the economic systems of society. Institutions
in society, including education, were the outcome of activities and
ideas that were created through the specific material conditions and
circumstances surrounding them.

4 Famous Psychologists And Their Theories

Discover 4 of the most famous psychologists of all-time,

including their ground-breaking theories which shaped the field
of psychology into what it is today.

By its very nature, Psychology, as a field of study, seeks to

understand the inner workings of human beings - those extremely
complex and distinctive neural networks that shape our every thought,
behaviour and personality.

Throughout history, many psychologists have experimented with and

presented various theories to understand the unknown, with some
leading to major breakthroughs and contributions to our knowledge of
Psychology.

In this article, we’ve presented a sample of 4 famous psychologists

who have had major influence in the world of psychology. Each of
them contributed hugely to our understanding of the human brain and
its behaviours, shaping the subject we know it as today.

4 Famous Psychologists and Their Theories

The list below captures just four of the very most famous
psychologists and their theories which have shaped their place in
history.

While each theorist may not be recognised for having contributed to

an overriding school of thought, and while many of their theories may
come with a few question marks over their validity, each brought a
unique perspective to the field of psychology and made a positive
contribution to its discussion.

Ivan Pavlov (1849 - 1936)

One of the earliest but still very famous psychologists on our list is
Ivan Petrovich Pavlov. Although officially trained as a Russian
physiologist, he is recognised today as a prominent psychologist of his
time, as a result of his work in discovering classical conditioning.

His work had a major impact on the school of thought of

behaviourism, developing the idea that we can be conditioned to
respond to things by pure association.
 Today, his classic dog experiment - which, if you study A-Level
Psychology, is probably quite familiar to you - remains one of the most
famous, with his work in this field so highly respected that he was
awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1904.

Ivan Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning Theory

During the 1890s, Pavlov (by accident) emerged with his theory of
classical conditioning after conducting a physiological experiment on
dogs.

His work began by researching the salivation response in these dogs

when being fed, where he predicted that dogs would salivate when
having food placed in front of them. However, he discovered that dogs
would start salivating whenever they heard the footsteps of his
assistant in the corridor who was bringing them the food.

Captivated by their physiological behaviours, Pavlov began

experimenting, looking to see if other events or objects could trigger
the same response when associated with food. Guess what - they did!
And so, the idea of classical conditioning was born.

In essence, Pavlov’s theory on classical conditioning identifies how a

learning process occurs through associations between an
environmental stimulus and a naturally occurring stimulus. It’s all
about forming associations between two separate stimuli, resulting in
a learned response or behaviour.

Early ideas in behaviourism were based on the assumption that all

learning happens through interacting with the environment, with the
environment itself shaping our behaviour. But the act of classical
conditioning takes this idea one step further. It involves placing a
neutral stimulus just before a naturally occurring reflex in order to
associate an environmental factor with a learned response.
 For example, in Pavlov’s famous experiment with dogs, he played a
metronome sound while dogs salivated in response to food. By
associating this neutral stimulus (the sound) with the environmental
stimulus (the food), he found that over time, the sound of the tone
alone could produce the salivation response.

Pavlov’s experiment showed that it was possible to form an

association between two stimuli, resulting in a learned response. But
he also learned that there are three separate stages of this process:

Phase 1: Before

The first stage of the classical conditioning process requires a

naturally occurring stimulus that will automatically elicit a physiological
response.

During this stage, the unconditioned stimulus (e.g. the food)

automatically triggers a response in an animal or human (e.g.
salvation). There is also a neutral stimulus (the sound) that produces
no response as of yet - not until it has been paired with the
unconditioned stimulus.

Phase 2: During

In the second phase of the classical conditioning process, the

previously ‘neutral stimulus’ (the sound) is repeatedly paired with the
unconditioned stimulus (the food). As a result, an association between
them both is formed.

At this point, the neutral stimulus now becomes known as a

conditioned stimulus, as the participant has now been conditioned
to respond to that stimulus. Now it has been associated with the
unconditioned stimulus, it will evoke a conditioned response.
Phase 3: After

Now that the unconditioned stimulus and conditioned stimulus have

formed an association, whenever the conditioned stimulus is
presented, a physiological response will occur even without an
unconditioned stimulus.

This resulting response is known as the conditioned response and

refers to the learned response to the previously neutral stimulus. For
example, in Pavlov’s experiment, the conditioned response would be
the dogs salivating automatically when hearing the sound of the
metronome.

Over the years, Pavlov’s experiments have been criticised for their
applicability to the real world. In reality, people do not evoke the same
responses as dogs, and so the idea of classical conditioning can only
be used to explain certain behaviours.

With that being said, his theory has helped in the development of
certain psychological treatments for those who suffer with generalised
mental health illnesses. For example, many CBT therapists pair
anxiety-provoking scenarios with relaxation techniques in order to
create an association between them - ultimately, with the aim of
reducing anxious feelings towards the environment or behaviour which
evokes that particular response.

Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1939)

Quite possibly one of the most famous clinical psychologists in

history, Sigmund Freud was a leading contributor to the development
of psychology, having developed ground-breaking theories about the
nature and workings of the human mind.

Most notably, he is recognised as the founding father of

‘psychoanalysis’ - a theory which both explains human behaviour and
is also used as a methodology for treating mental illness.
 Much of his work was dominated by a desire to seek an
understanding of the things we don’t say or often camouflage from
other people. That is, our unconscious mind - its structure and
obscurities, including how it cultivates our personalities from childhood
to adulthood.

As such a great influence in Psychology, much of Freud’s lexicon

has become embedded within the vocabulary of Western society.
Words he introduced through his theories are now part of our common
dialogue, including; repression, cathartic, and neurotic, to name a few.

Freud’s Psychoanalysis Theory

Although he had many, Freud’s theory on Psychoanalysis is possibly

one of his most famous.

The theory was based on the idea that events in our childhood have
a great influence on our adult lives, shaping our personality and
affecting our mental health. For example, if someone suffered from a
traumatic experience in their childhood but blocked it out of their
consciousness, this could lead to problems in the future (called
neuroses).

The ground-breaking case that led to the development of this theory

is recognised as ‘The Case of Anna O.’ Anna (not her real name)
came to Freud’s teacher (Josef Breuer) while suffering from hysteria -
a condition which affects the patient physically, with symptoms
including hallucinations, paralysis, and loss of speech, without having
developed from a physical condition.

Freud saw Anna successfully recover from her hysteria when Breuer
treated her by encouraging her to recall forgotten memories of
traumatic events. During these conversations, seemingly obvious
parallels were drawn between Anna’s fears and her previous
experiences. For example, she had a fear of drinking which had
developed after a dog she was scared of had drank from her own
glass.

Breuer discussed the case with Freud, which he then used as

inspiration for all future studies. He later published his book Studies in
Hysteria (1895), where he proposed that physical symptoms are often
manifestations of deeply repressed traumas.

Freud’s Unconscious Mind Theory

In the early 20th century, Freud began to develop a topographical

model of the human mind, whereby he described the structure and
function of different parts of our thinking systems. And this is where
his second-most famous theory was born: his theory on the
unconscious mind.

Using the analogy of an iceberg to describe the three levels of the

mind; on the surface is our consciousness which consists of the
thoughts which are the focus of our attention now; then, there is the
preconscious which sits below, and consists of all thoughts which can
be retrieved from memory.

Finally, the third and most significant region is the unconscious,

which Freud claimed to hold all the things which cause most of our
behaviour. Just like an iceberg, he claimed the unconscious, deeply
rooted and hidden within our minds, was much bigger than any would
anticipate.

The unconscious mind, he proposed, acts as a repository for

primitive wishes and impulses which are kept at bay by the
preconscious area. And this area, he believed, governs behaviour to a
greater degree than people expect, shaping our personalities to
develop certain neuroses. Indeed, it is then through the method of
psychoanalysis that we can bring these thoughts and behavioural
desires to the surface.
Jean Piaget (1896 - 1980)

Third on our list of famous psychologists is Jean Piaget, a Swiss

psychologist known for his intuitive work on child development and
placing importance on the early education of children.

His interest in child development grew from his experience as an

assistant to psychologists Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon during
their developmental work to standardise their famous IQ test. During
his role here, he was captivated by understanding the different levels
of intelligence amongst individuals and how their motor and emotional
skills developed at varying rates.

Much of his work centred around observations of his own nephew

and daughter. Up until the early 20 century, children were largely
treated as smaller versions of adults. But Piaget led the case in
proving that the way children think and learn is far different to the way
that adults do.

His observations were so well-received that even world-leading

thinkers including Albert Einstein commented on his obvious yet
incredibly ground-breaking theory; "so simple only a genius could
have thought of it."

Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory

Jean Piaget is famed for his work on understanding the development

of brains amongst children during their earliest years. Mainly, he was
occupied with understanding how levels of intelligence vary between
students, as well as their ways of acquiring knowledge.

After many years of observation, theory, and experimentation, he

concluded that children are not necessarily less intelligent than adults,
but they simply think and obtain new information differently to them.
 He discovered that children take an active role in their learning
process, conducting their own experiments, asking questions, and
observing the world to draw their own understanding on things. The
more that children interact with the environment around them, the
more they build new understandings on top of their existing
knowledge, and adapt previous ideas to accommodate for new
information.

His theory of ‘Cognitive Development’ suggests that children move

through four stages of mental development. Rather than children all
thinking the same and learning at the same rate, he proposed that
there are both qualitative and quantitative differences between age
groups. These four stages are as follows:

Sensorimotor stage (0-2 years):

The sensorimotor stage is a period of immense growth and learning.

As infants begin to interact with their environment, they continually
make new discoveries about how the world works.

Major characteristics and developmental changes include:

Infant learns through movements and sensations: grasping,

looking, and listening
Object permanence - Infants learn that things exist even when they
cannot be seen
Learn that their actions can cause things to happen in the world
around them

Preoperational stage (2-7 years):

At this stage of their development, children learn through play, but

often struggle with logic and understanding other peoples’
perspectives. They become much more skilled at pretend play during
this stage of development, but still think about the world around them
very concretely.

Major characteristics and developmental changes include:

Children think symbolically - learning to use words and pictures to

represent objects
They are egocentric and struggle to understand others’
perspectives
Although their language is more developed, children continue to
think about things in very concrete terms

Concrete operational stage (7-11 years):

While at this age children are still very literal in their thinking, they
begin to be much more adept at using logic. As such, their
egocentrism begins to fade as children use their new-found skill at
becoming better at thinking about how other people may view a
situation.

Major characteristics and developmental changes include:

Children begin to think logically about concrete events

Thinking becomes more logical and organised, but still very
concrete
Children begin applying inductive reasoning to a general principle

Formal operational stage (12+ years):

The final stage of Piaget’s Cognitive Development theory involves a

rise in logical thinking, along with the introduction of being able to
consider abstract concepts. At this point, individuals become much
more capable of being able to consider multiple possibilities at once,
and think more scientifically about their world.

Major characteristics and developmental changes include:

 The adolescent/young adult begins to think abstractly
They can begin to think more about philosophical, moral, and social
issues that require more theoretical and sometimes hypothetical
reasoning
Begin to use deductive logic from a general principle to specific
information

One important point to note about Piaget’s theory is that he did not
view children’s intellectual development as a quantitative process; that
is, they don’t just keep adding it to a bank of existing information.
Instead, he proposed that there is a qualitative change, with children
changing the way they think and process information during the four
stages of development.

Albert Bandura (1925 - )

The late 1960s were a period of great development for cognitive

psychology. Canadian psychologist, Albert Bandura, and his social
learning theory were part of this great revolution, emphasising the
complexities of learning and behaviour in social settings.

His, along with many other social psychologist's ideas were a shift
beyond classic behavioural theories, which suggested that all
behaviour is a result of conditioning (Pavlov), reinforcement and
punishment. Instead, they proposed that all learning was instead a
result of direct experience with the world around them, through the
process of simply observing the actions of others.

As the old analogy goes, children are very much “like sponges,''
soaking up all the different interactions and experiences they have
each day. And it was much of Albert Bandura’s work that proposed
how observational learning and modelling play a critical role in how a
child shapes their own behaviour and decision making.

Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory

 Simply put, Bandura’s social learning theory proposes the idea that
social behaviours can be acquired through observation and imitation
of others. This is because quite often, children and adults can exhibit
certain actions or behaviours even when they’ve had no direct
experience.

For example, if you’ve never ridden a bicycle before, you would

probably know what to do if someone passed you a bicycle and asked
you to try and ride it. This is because you’ve probably seen others
perform this action before, either in-person or on television/in film.

This theory went beyond traditional ‘conditioning’ influences, instead

suggesting that pure observation is enough for someone to copy a
behaviour. Known as observational learning, this type of learning
can be used to explain how a variety of behaviours can occur in
people who have never been encouraged or conditioned to do them
before.

Central to the social learning theory are three core concepts, which
are as follows:

1. People can learn through observation

During the development of his theory, Bandura conducted the world-

famous ‘Bobo experiment’ to explain how children learn behaviours
they have observed from others.

In the study, children watched an adult act violently toward a Bobo

doll. When the children were then allowed to play in a room with the
Bobo doll, they began to imitate the aggressive behaviours they had
previously observed.

From these experiments, Bandura then identified three scenarios and

models where observational learning can take place:

A live model - where an actual individual demonstrates a behaviour

 A symbolic model - where real or fictional characters display
behaviours (in films, books, TV, etc.)
A verbal instruction model - involving descriptions and explanations
of behaviour

2. Our internal mental states impact our learning

Bandura argued that an essential component of observational

learning is determined by our mental states, and cannot be explained
by external, contextual reinforcement. That is, our own motivations
play a role in deciding whether to copy a behaviour or not.

He used the term ‘intrinsic reinforcement’ as a way to describe

internal regards, such as a sense of achievement. And it's these
internal forces, and our own judgements on morality which determine
whether we choose to imitate a behaviour.

3. Just because something has been learned, it doesn’t mean it

will always result in a change in behaviour

When you teach someone to swim, you can quickly determine if

they’ve learned the skill by being able to swim a short distance,
unassisted. Likewise, when you teach someone how to knit, you can
watch them perform the action independently to see if they’ve
understood all instructions.

But quite often, we can learn certain behaviours without it becoming

obvious to others. For example, we may learn how to change a tyre by
watching a demonstration video, but we may never choose to use that
behavior if we have someone in the car that can also change a tyre.

The final concept in Bandura’s social learning theory identifies that

even though learning may have taken place, it doesn’t mean it will
lead to a permanent change in behavior. In fact, we can
observationally learn something without then demonstrating it, ever.
SOURCES:

https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/sorsogon-state-college/
bachelor-of-science-in-secondary-education/assignment-no-7-i-
hope-this-will-help/62620108

https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/robsonsoced/chapter/
__unknown__-2/

https://www.melioeducation.com/blog/famous-psychologists-
and-their-theories/