UNIT ONE

INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATION

Introduction

This unit introduces you to the field of Sociology of Education. Since Sociology of Education is a
branch of general Sociology, you first need to understand general Sociology in order to understand
Sociology of Education. This unit will first introduce you to the origins of Sociology and give you
information about classical sociologists who are founding fathers and contemporary sociologists who
came after the founding fathers. You will also learn about the development of Sociology of education as
a field of study and the relevance of this course to practicing and future teachers.

Aim
To equip you with knowledge on sociological concepts and development of Sociology of Education as a
field of study

Objectives
By the end of this unit, you should be able to:

● Define sociology and sociology of education.

● Trace the development of Sociology and Sociology of Education

● Examine the relevance of sociology of education to the Zambian education system

Content
This unit is divided into the following two lessons:

● Origin of Sociology as field of study

● Development of Sociology of Education

Time Frame
1
You are expected to spend at least 6 hours on this unit.
Lesson One
Origin of Sociology as a Field of study
Introduction to the lesson
In this lesson, you will learn about what led to the development of Sociology as a field of study as we
know it today. You will also learn about the contributions of classical sociologists to the development of
Sociology.

Objectives of the Lesson

By the end of the lesson, you should be able to:
1. Trace the development of Sociology as a field of study
2. Discuss some of the works of the early sociological thinkers and founding fathers of
sociology/sociology of education.

Reflection
What do you think is the relevance of this course to you as a practicing/future
teacher?

1.6 What is Sociology?

Sociology is regarded as a social science just as the following disciplines; economics, political science,
philosophy of education, educational psychology, social psychology, theory and practice of education.
The term ‘sociology’ is said to have been coined by Auguste Comte. The term ‘sociology’ is derived
from two Greek words ‘socio’ meaning ‘society’ and ‘logos’ meaning ‘knowledge’. Thus, sociology is
generally defined as the ‘study of human society and human social behaviour’.

Other scholars like Giddens (2009) define sociology as the scientific study of human life, social groups
and whole societies. Musgrave (1966) states that sociology is a social science which attempts to build up
a set of logical and consistent theories about society in which we find ourselves whose subject matter
includes institutions such as family, education, health, religion, etc which make up society. Margret Peil

2
(1974) in her book “conflict in African societies” states that sociology is a social science which studies
social relations among people in groups and the influence of social conditions on the relationships.
Conglaton (1976), states that sociology is the study of the behaviour of man, nature of such behavior and
its consequences for continuing society. Kellerman (1977), states that sociology is the science of the
evolution, structure and functioning of human society; the systematic study of human institutions and
the social relations and the principles underlying their functioning.

From the above definitions we can state that sociologists are interested in
(1) How people interact and relate with each other and the environment;
(2) How people organize themselves in groups and places of work;
(3) Studying causes of various forms of social behaviour and
(4) Studying social institutions.

The basic premise in sociology is that people’s actions are largely influenced by the group to which they
belong as well as by the interaction that takes place within whose groups e.g. family, neighborhood, peer
groups etc. Sociology acknowledges that man is a social animal, and as such sociologists are interested
in any behaviour of man that is social in nature and its consequences (reciprocal relationships). It is
hence said that people are affected by the society in which they live and in turn affect the life of others.
This raises the matter of cause and effect. Sociologists believe in group dynamics, they do this by
examining social phenomena which is an observable fact or event e.g. a marriage ceremony, individuals
playing soccer, people drinking, school children in a classroom, etc. Simply put, Sociologists investigate
the structure of groups, organizations, and societies and how people interact within these contexts. So
how did this sociology develop as a field of study?

Historical development of Sociology

As a distinct discipline, sociology emerged about the middle of the 19th century. Certain developments
in Europe paved the way for the emergence of sociology as a discipline. The most important of these
events were the Industrial Revolution, the French Revolution and the Age of Enlightenment among
others.

3
The Industrial Revolution
The industrial revolution changed the European economy from agriculture based to more on
manufacturing, trading and money based. It also provided greater social, cultural and political changes.
It also led to the emergent of factories, growth of cities resulting in urbanization etc. people left the
country side in search of paid employment in cities. Urbanization on the other hand produced among a
multitude of social problems. The job seekers were outpaced by available jobs, there was shelter
shortage, crime rate went on the increase, factory fumes polluted the atmosphere, traditional order was
challenged by the industrial revolution, this then meant that interactions among the settlers became more
impersonal, as a result of all this; individuals began to feel the society’s impact quite deeply.

French Revolution
The French Revolution, which began in 1978, was another factor that led to the development of
Sociology. People in these industrial cities developed new ideas about democracy and political rights.
They did not want to remain tied to their rulers. Therefore the ideas about individual liberty, individual
rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness emerged, which actually laid the foundation to future
political revolution. The French Revolution brought end to feudal society, tradition, power of church,
absolute monarchy and also to other exploitative elements in society. Thus, the social changes and new
social thought which are associated with French Revolution provided rich material to the infant study of
sociology at that time.

Age of Enlightenment
The third impetus for the development of sociology was the success of the natural sciences. People
moved to question fundamental aspects of their social world. They started using the scientific method
(systematic observation, objectivity) to the study of human behaviour. Before the age of enlightenment,
people believed that social structure was divinely created. Anything from inequality to social disorder
was believed to be due to God’s interference in human affairs. Eenlightenment also emphasized on
scientific approach for understanding society. It shifted “source of evil” from our evil nature to the evil
forces of the society. In other words it helped in studying cause & effect of the evil in the society and

4
bring for the facts, by eliminating the past myths. Through scientific approach these evil forces in
society could easily be understood, isolated and altered for the well-being of society. Thus,
Enlightenment Sociology took many believes and ideas; studied them, refined them and changed them.
It also began the study of Society as a phenomenon.

All this des-equilibrium in the 19 th century in France, Germany and England disorganized the social
order (which is the underlying regularity of human social behaviour). Sociology emerged during this
period in those nations that felt the impact of the industrial revolution quite profoundly. Europeans
successfully acquired colonies around the world. These colonies exposed the Europeans to different
cultures that raised questions that needed to be answered. The three factors that led to the development
of sociology can hence be summarized as follows: (i) Industrial Revolution (ii) French Revolution (iii)
Age of Enlightenment (discovery of Laws underlying social phenomena.

As a result of these factors, scholars began to make attempts to understand both the social and natural
worlds. There are a number of well-known scholars whose ideas have formed what has become one of
the most important social sciences in the modern society. Most influential among the early scholars
were: Auguste Comte 1798 – 1859 (59 yrs); Karl Marx 1818 – 1883 (65 yrs); Herbert Spencer 1820 –
1903 (83yrs); Emile Durkheim 1858 – 1917 (59yrs) and Max Weber 1864 – 1920 (56yrs). The next
subheading discusses the views of these great scholars in detail.

ACTIVITY: What impact did the Industrial Revolution have on the common people?

Do this activity in four minutes.

Ideas of Sociological Thinkers

The ideas of the early thinkers have influenced the thoughts of men and women who have made
sociology as a field of their study. (Lewis Coser) discussed in detail the works of classic sociologists in
his book “Master of Sociological Thoughts” ideas in historical and social context. Second edition (1971)
Mills quoted by Horowitz (1964:253) in Kunkhuli (2006) states that:
5
 The important thing about the classic sociologists is that even when they have turned out
to be quiet wrong and inadequate…even then by their work and by the way in which
they did it they reveal much about the nature of society and their ideas remain directly
relevant to our work today….In general our immediate generation of social scientists is
still living off their ideas.

Auguste Comte (1798-1854)

Auguste Comte is known as the father of sociology. This is because he coined the term sociology in
1830. Auguste Comte was born in 1798-1854. Comte regarded sociology as the last science to develop
following physics, chemistry and biology. Comte was concerned with finding solutions to the confusion
caused by the French revolution. He argued that sociology would contribute to the welfare of humanity
by using science to predict and control human behavior. He desired to see the understanding of man or
of society through scientific methods of observation, experimentation and comparison. He was of the
view that scientific and not religious methods would be used to recognize the development of society
and the study of sociology mainly through reconstruction and progress of social reforms and structures.
This science was meant to explain the past development of the human being and predict its future
course.

Comte believed that all societies moved through certain fixed stages of development from primitive to
perfection. The three stages were theological, metaphysics and positive stage and in each of these stages
there was an element of intellectual development.
1. Theological stage/fictitious: This is the stage that believed in super-naturalism, in this stage it
was believed that society was an expression of God’s will.

2. Metaphysical Stage/Abstract: in this stage the society was seen in a natural and not in
supernatural way. In this stage rationalism was used to analyze social happenings, the rule of
law prevailed.

3. Positive/Scientific stage: In this stage people rejected explanations based on supernatural and
metaphysical that could not be supported by facts. Comte believed that all knowledge was

6
 human knowledge and based on human thought. Comte further believed that human reason was
capable of creating and maintaining social order.

Auguste Comte studied sociology from all these three stages through two angles called the twin pillars
of society, social static (order and stability) and social dynamics (progress, development and change)
(Coser, 1971). Comte believed that as societies grew they changed from simple to complex societies.
By social static he looked at the interdependence of all the social systems and how they interrelate for
order and stability to prevail. As far as Comte was concerned with the coming of Industrialization,
inequalities also surfaced, and the threat that these inequalities posed to humanity. Comte dreamt of a
new social order that would regulate society and hold it together. His dream for construction was never
realized, but it began the process of unification.

In summary the writers of this module believes that sociology is the study of human interaction and the
effects of those behaviours upon the society. Comte, the founding father of sociology contended that
society was governed by social laws. The task of sociology he believed was to discover these laws so as
to be able to predict and eventually control social events. His ideas concerning the scientific value of
sociology influenced many scholars’ lives. Almost One hundred and seventy (170) years later we are
still concerned with his ideas of order and change. This can be seen in works of others e.g. Herbert
Spencer, Emile Durkheim etc. The major works of Comte include the following: methods of inquiry; the
law of human progress; hierarchy of the sciences; social static’s and dynamic and the normative
doctrine. Below is a diagram depicting what Comte considered to be social statics; the independence of
social of social institutions (education, religion, family, economy, political)

EDUCATION

POLITICAL RELIGION

ECONOMICAL FAMILY

Fig 1: Showing Interdependence of Social Institutions

7
Karl Marx (1818 - 1883)
Karl Marx was born in Germany to middle class parents. He had a doctorate degree from the University
of Berlin; he never held a regular job, worked as an editor for a radical paper. However the paper was
closed down by the government for its political views. He move to Paris but expelled by the French
government on the request of the German government, he travelled to Brussels and ended up in London.
He earned a scanty living from his writings, and died in poverty following the death of his wife and only
child. His works have influenced many scholars and social critics worldwide.

Karl Marx believed in the overall structure of society which according to him was influenced by how the
economy was organized. Marx believed that society is divided into those who have the means of
production (materials, methods to produce goods and services) and those who own only the labour, the
people who owned the means of production controlled society. Marx believed that after the revolution,
communism would emerge (classless society e.g. Russia had this system though things are slowly
changing) communism is said to be a political and economic system in which property is communally
owned. In this type of system social classes cease to exist, the role of the government declines as
individuals learn to work together peacefully and willingly for the good of all. According to Karl Marx
and other early sociologists the sharp class divisions and social inequality were characteristics of early
capitalism.

Karl Marx did not believe in the structural functionalism theory but believed in love and hate. Marx was
utopian he believed that change was inevitable despite the ruling class ideology. Karl Marx believed
that strife was the father of all things and social conflict was the core of historical process. Some of the
ideals of Karl Marx found their way into what is today known as Socialism. What is pure socialism as
we know it today? In a pure socialist system, economic activity is controlled by the social need rather
by self-interest and by the government in the form of central planning rather than by market forces.

The major works of Karl Marx include the following: Class theory, Sociology of knowledge, Alienation,
Dynamics of social change and Conflict theory.

Herbert Spencer (1820-1903)

An English contemporary of Comte started his life as a civil engineer, for a railway company. He
received a large inheritance in his thirties (30’s) which freed him from working for a living and pursuing

8
his interests in the workings of society. He later adopted the word ‘sociology’ in the title of his work,
influenced by the works of Charles Darwin (the 19 th century evolutionist). Spencer adopted the biology
model for society. The theory of evolution was reformed by Spencer, into a theory of society. For
Spencer, the origin of societies was the same as the origin of species, both were subject to the laws of
evolution. In living organisms the biological system works together to maintain the welfare of the
organism. According to Herbert Spencer social change and interest in society were considered to be the
result of natural occurrences towards stability and perfection. He believe that social ills should not be
corrected by force but be allowed to adjust slowly through what he termed as natural healing due to the
strong evolution origination of Spencer’s brand of sociology it came to be known as social Darwinism
Herbert Spencer was labeled as a functionalist. Spencer’s conception of society did not favour assisting
disadvantaged groups in society, as far as he was concerned assisting them would convert to what he
termed as “social engineering”. Herbert Spencer believed that sociology was the study of
interrelatedness between various units in the society such as family, morality, economy etc. Spencer
contended that weak societies just like weak species would perish while strong ones would survive.

Emile Durkheim
Whereas scholars like Herbert Spencer made unproven pronouncements about sociology, Durkheim had
his proven. Durkheim saw sociology as a new science that gave explanations to traditional
philosophical questions. Durkheim placed a lot of emphasis on social facts which he considered to be
aspects of social life that shaped our actions as individuals. Social facts were also considered to be ways
of acting, thinking or feeling that were external to individuals.

Durkheim was the first to systematically apply the methods of science to the study of society. Why did
Durkheim use scientific means to study society and social life? Lawton (1977) states that Plato and
Aristotle over 2000 years ago expounded theories about individuals, though their ideas were interesting,
they were not concerned about putting these ideas to the test in a scientific way. Durkheim however,
tested his ideas scientifically, Durkheim offered the first University social science course in France. He
was concerned with the problem of social order like Herbert Spencer. Durkheim viewed the set of inter-
dependence parts as functions, his ideas were very influential in the modern American sociology, he
believed that shared beliefs and values were a binding force that held society together. Durkheim

9
carried on with Spencer’s work and at the same time criticized and made improvements to his theory of
increasing specialization by analyzing the part played by division of labour. Durkheim saw the
sociologist as the analyst of continuing human behaviour.

Max Weber (1864-1920)

Max was a German sociologist and economics, who wrote many scholarly and brilliant volumes on a
variety of sociological topics, such as religion, bureaucracy, class, status, power, law and research
methods. His writings covered the fields of economics, law, philosophy and comparative history as well
as sociology. Though influenced by karl Marx’s work, he was strongly critical of some of Marx’s
views. Weber’s ill health prevented him from teaching most of the time. Max’s writings were
inspiring, he stressed on the differences and similarities between the natural and social sciences. He
believed that our understanding of social behaviour places us inside the minds and emotions of those
people whose behaviour we try to understand, since we are the same. Weber believed in
bureaucratization of all phases of public activity. He also believed in group dynamics which he said
formed societies. Weber became a professor of economics and later introduced the method of
Verstehen which is the understanding of the subjective meaning which actors attach to their actions.
Weber hoped to end legacies; he talked about the legitimization of the supremacy of laws. He saw class
conflict as less significant than did his contemporary Karl Marx. Weber stated that laws can be enacted
or exchanged at will by formal organizations. Weber’s famous works included: Development of modern
capitalism, social change, and sociology of education, Bureaucracy and status group relations. In
Weber’s view Industrial Revolution and the rise of capitalism were inclined towards rationalization. One
of Weber’s argument was that dominant groups or outsiders in society shape the schools. Outsiders
such as minority group members often face barriers in educational systems because they lack power. He
believed that schools educate the young into status cultures based on student’s wealth, power and
prestige. Weber developed a typology of authority styles. Some of Weber’s works will be dealt with in
in later units.

Activity:

1. Discuss the contributions of the classical sociologists to the field of sociology, and explain
why sociology became prominent in the nineteenth century.
10
 2. One of Weber’s argument was that dominant groups or outsiders in society shape schools,
is this what is happening in our schools today?

Scope of Sociology
Sociology covers every aspect of human life such as: politics, morals, ethics, religion, prostitution,
crime, nursing, family, language, occupation, knowledge, education, law. Sociology of education
cannot be studied, without first knowing a little about general sociology. There is a reciprocal
relationship between sociology and sociology of education.

Summary
The lesson has defined sociology as the scientific study of human behaviour and its consequences. It
also traced the origin and development of sociology in the 19 th century. The French and American
revolutions saw the rise of industrial revolutions. The discipline of sociology saw the re-establishing of
the social order and change as envisaged by Auguste Comte and some classical sociologists.

11
 Lesson Two
Development of Sociology of Education and Its Concerns

Introduction to the lesson

In lesson two, you will learn about the development of Sociology of Education and the contributions of
Emile Durkheim’s contributions to the field of Sociology of Education.

Objectives of the Lesson

By the end of the lesson, you should be able to:
3. Define Sociology of Education
4. Social context of Durkheim’s creation of Sociology of Education

Reflection

Are you in pursuit of knowledge, Is Sociology of Education going to help you? Consider your answer
carefully and your colleagues will learn from you.

Definitions of Sociology of Education

What is Sociology of Education and how are variables in this discipline examined? Kibera and
Kimokoti (2007) state that:
Sociology of Education applies sociological methods of investigation such as measurement,
observation, experimentation and sociological theoretical frameworks like functionalist, conflict
and symbolic interaction perspectives among others, in examining variable that affect education
and its structure.

Ballatine and Hammack (2009) state that Sociology of Education as a field is devoted to understanding
educational systems; whose subject matter include questions ranging from teacher and student
interactions to large educational systems of countries. Sociology of Education is relatively a new
12
discipline and was founded by Emile Durkheim at the end of the 19 th century. However, the beginning
of the 20th century saw tremendous changes in this field, more research has emerged, theories have been
developed which are specifically for this discipline, which are more empirical and analytical.

It is encouraging to note that the number of students majoring in Sociology of Education at masters level
at the University of Zambia is growing. The last University of Zambia Graduation ceremony (2010)
saw about twenty-three students graduating with Masters in Sociology of Education unlike in 2006 when
only one student graduated in this same field of study. Who was the master mind behind Sociology of
Education.

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917)

Emile Durkheim was a Frenchman and a distinguished scholar who defined sociology as the science of
society. The great Emile Durkheim (son of a rabbi) was born in France in 1858 and died in 1917.
Durkheim attended the famous Ecole Normale Superieure Institute in Paris. Although deeply interested
in science of society, he taught in the Philosophy Department because there were no departments for
sociology in France. He later became the first Professor of Sociology in France In 1887. After
studying for a year in Germany, he returned to Paris where he was awarded a professorship in Sociology
and Education at Bordeaux University. In the following six years he wrote three books titled Division
of Labour (1893); The Rules of Sociological Material (1895) and Suicide (1897). In 1902 he was
awarded another professorship at Sorbonne University, and in the same year he was made Chair for
Education at University of Sorbonne. He was the first man to introduce Sociology of Education into
teaching of teachers. Durkheim like his contemporaries believed that a thorough understanding of
society would make it a more reasonable happier, and saner place in which to live. Durkheim also
integrated his theories into his research methods, more effectively than any other scholar before him.

Durkheim was particularly interested in social and moral solidarity (Giddens and Sutton, 2010 The
founding father of sociology of education was a French scholar, Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) he was a
lecturer of educational theory (pedagogy) and sociology. He was the first to apply sociological approach
to the study of education. He stated that the nature, origin and functions of education were social in
characteristics. Durkheim believed that Educational theory was more related to sociology than any other
discipline. Thus it should be studied from a sociological perspective.
13
Social context of Durkheim’s creation of Sociology of Education
Durkheim’s interest in the study of education from a sociological perspective was his concern for
upholding moral order. France was undergoing industrialization which brought about social anarchy.

● Influx of immigrants from different parts of the world; hence problems of cultural

integration

● Employment became a problem due to mechanization

● Moral disintegration led to breakdown of norms and values of the people. Norms define

what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in terms of conduct. Values are things that
we cherish as people e.g. extended family is cherished. Values broke down as society
became complex and urbanized.

● Political uprisings, poverty, destitution, spiritual frustration

● Moral decay comes in when there is no value in terms of consensus. No society can exist

minus consensus.

Amidst all these problems, Durkheim saw education as the only social institution that would promote
social integration.

Durkheim’s ideas on education

He was interested in social and moral solidarity- what keeps society together and prevents it from
disintegrating. Solidarity is maintained when individuals are successfully integrated into social groups
and regulated by a set of shared values and customs. Education would promote social solidarity as it
instils from childhood the essential similarities/homogeneity which collective life demands.

Education provides a shared language and a common identity for immigrants from different
backgrounds. In school children interact with other members of the community this gives the child

14
experience to interact with members of the society as a whole. It is by respecting the school rules that
children learn to respect rules in the wider society.

Education is the transmission of knowledge and skills. It is an ameliorative agent helps to solve
problems of society. Education was provided according to the needs of society. Provision of education
has benefits whether formal or informal. Education is an instrument of human emancipation. According
to Durkheim “Education is the influence exercised by the adult generations on those that are not yet
ready for social life. Its objective is to arouse and to develop in the child a certain number of physical,
intellectual and moral states which are demanded of him by both the political society as a whole and the
special milieu for which one is specifically destined” (Durkheim, 1956:28)

Education takes different forms at different times and spaces we cannot separate the educational system
from the society for they reflect each other.

His aim was Social integration through value consensus and social solidarity

Value consensus

● Durkheim saw society as a social system made up of interconnected and interrelated parts

(functionalist perspective). Thus each part will in some way affect every other part and the
system as a whole. Integration was mainly based on or common values because value consensus
integrates the various parts of value consensus society and forms basis for social unity or
solidarity. Common values produce common goals. This can best be done through education
because the school curriculum helps instil shared norms and values in a population with diverse
backgrounds.

Social solidarity

● Mechanical solidarity-traditional cultures with a low division of labour, because most members

of society are bound together by common experience and shared beliefs. The ties and relations in
terms of social consensus is the same, people believe in the same things, help each other. There
is consensus and similarity of beliefs.

15
But industrial revolution contributed to the breakdown of this mechanical solidarity due to growing
division of labour.

● Organic solidarity-specialization and division of labour people are held together by economic

interdependence and their recognition of the importance of other people’s contributions. People
no longer agree in the same things. Since norms and values govern society. Every activity is
regulated by norms but a complex society allows people to fight on their own. In a complex
society norms and values are not done together. Due to complexity of society it brought moral
decay and de-culturalization.

You can only bring social solidarity through education. The main aim of Durkheim was to create a
homogenous society.When a society has a moral breakdown it is related to anomie or anarchy that is
normlessness.

Norms and values are the building blocks of society. Education should fit into the social cultural
context. According to Durkheim, education is a prerequisite for society to continue living in harmony.
Education is defined as a condition for human survival.

The effects of the industrial and French revolutions led to people losing their culture, especially the
minority groups. Deculturalization is a process of stripping off a people’s culture. This was through
enslavement, segregation, displacement, the school curriculum even the English-only laws. There was
also an aspect of people highly valuing other cultures over their own. This is known as Xenocentrism. It
is a cultural tendency to value other cultures more than one’s own culture or a belief in which one's
culture is inferior to the other culture. Valuing the European culture over your African/Zambian culture
is an example of xenocentrisim. Ethnocentrism is the belief in the superiority of one's own race and a
marked preference for one's own culture and its products. This means that you value your culture and
race over other cultures.

Durkheim’s four explicit areas of Sociology of Education

Durkheim had four explicit themes of what sociology of education was;
1. A cross cultural and comparative study of different types of educational systems. Durkheim’s
view of education was that every society had its own education system which was shaped by the

16
 society’s socio-cultural needs, and that in every society, education was the influence exerted on
the young generation by the old generation. Education differs according to the socio-cultural
settings of communities or societies in which it is found.
2. An analysis of the relationship between education and other social institutions and social cultural
change.
3. A study of social facts/phenomena (issues of education) such as curriculum and financing and
their social functions

4. A study of the school and classroom as social systems-the structure and processes of these
systems.

On the basis of these themes you can clearly see that Durkheim was both an educator and a sociologist.
He also made a distinction between a sociologist and an educator. An educator is a social reformer who
solves problems or brings about change in the educational system, while a sociologist is an analyst of
social behaviour. His function is to explain social facts and phenomena.

Max Weber (1864-1920) also contributed to the growth of sociology of education through his works on
conflict theory in education, bureaucracy and authority styles. These will be considered at later stages.

Empirical perspective –ideas of contemporary Sociologists of Education

Sociology of education can also be understood from the views of some of the contemporary scholars,
that is, scholars who came after Durkheim, from 1920s-1980s. Even though Durkheim’s ideas were
explicit, those who came after him departed from his ideas, especially in the USA were the discipline
grew faster than it did in Europe at the beginning of the 20 th century. Although there were varied views,
the major concern of sociologists of education is the analysis of the institution of education in various
societies-its structure, processes and the interactions within it. Some of the views of sociology of
education (educational sociology) at that time were; (ideas not limited to the ones listed)

● Social reform-some scholars such as Lister Ward, Ellowood and Kinneman considered the

discipline for social reform or progress, a study that could solve the social evils of society by
successfully teaching people how to exercise social control.

17
 ● An applied science- scholars such as Brown, Smith took a narrow perspective of the field. The

discipline was seen as an application of sociology to the problems in education. The discipline
was seen as a technology/tool not as a science, which society could use to solve problems.

● Description of the goals or objectives of education-some scholars saw it as an analysis of the

goals or purposes of education. It was seen as a social philosophy of education based on an

analysis of society and human needs as related to the educational institution.

● Analysis of socialization process- to scholars like Ellwood, Smith, Brown, Robbins et al, it was

limited to the analysis of the process of socialization-how the society/community affected the
individual.

● Training for educational workers- Payne and Zeleny saw it as a discipline that would make

teachers and other workers in the education system understand education and become better
workers.

● For Brookover and Gottielib, the discipline embraces three major areas, i) relationship of

educational system to other institutions/systems in the society, ii) the school as a social system
and iii) the school and the community.

Analytical perspective –what reason or our experiences tell us Sociology of Education is

What should be the themes of sociology of education in Zambia? We may not depart much from the
ideas and views of both the historical and empirical perspectives. Their ideas form the basis of what we
know as sociology of education. Their major issues are the same issues which concern our school
system or our educational system in Zambia. However there may be some differences because their
times and societies were different from ours. The nature and extent of their problems in the educational
system during their times and in their societies may not be the same as those in our Zambian education
system (in our time and society). Examples of issues affecting our educational system; girl child
education, teacher militancy, school uniforms, free education, bursaries, early childhood education,
community schools etc. these issues may only be confined to Zambia or take up a Zambian
characteristic, if other countries have these issues they may have different characteristics.

18
Open systems approach
This further helps us understand what sociology of education is. The focus is on the institution of
education-its structure, processes and interactions within it and other institutions and society. We have to
bear in mind that when we are studying the educational institution that this institution is not in a
vacuum, it is found in the community and is a product of the community. This approach is not a solution
for all problems in our educational institution, but it may help fit everything into a working unit. This
approach provides a useful way of visualising the many elements in the education system as a whole or
one unit. It helps order observations and data, and represents a generalised picture of complex
interacting elements and sets of relationships. Refer to the model below to understand the open systems
approach.

Open Systems Approach Model

Educational organization

Input Structure: formal vs. Output

informal, role relationships
1. Students 1. Graduates
Demographic variables Goals (function) 2. New knowledge
Subculture, Peer groups Programme: content, 3. Useless knowledge
Class, Family curriculum, testing 4. Emerging culture
2. Staff; teachers,
Processes within system:
administrators,
discipline, decision making,
support staff
socialization, teaching &
Training
learning, change and
Classroom background evaluation
Affiliations
Informal Structure

ENVIRONMENT
Immediate Secondary

School board Technology

19
 PTA Political-economic
Teacher’s Union Religious
Community Pressure groups Cultural values and ideology
Government regulations Social movements and facts
Bonds Levies population changes
Feedback loop
Figure 1.2 Source : Ballatine, J H and Hammarck, F.M (2009)

Summary of the Historical Development of Sociology of Education

● Emile Durkheim is regarded as the founding father of Sociology of education, he taught Educational

Theory and Sociology at the universities of Bordeaux and Paris. He stated that the nature, origin and
functions of education were social in their characteristics and that the Educational Theory was
related more to Sociology than to any other discipline. Thus educational ought to be studied from a
sociological perspective.

● Thus the conclusion that Sociology of Education is the study of education from a sociological

perspective. Sociologists are interested in problems of education from a sociological perspective.

● Durkheim’s interest in the study of education from a sociological perspective was his concern for

upholding the moral order. During Durkheim’s time, France was undergoing industrialization, which
brought about moral disintegration due to the breakdown of morals and values. This greatly
disrupted the traditional ways of life of as there were family break ups. The age of enlightenment
contributed to religion losing its influence over people’s ideas about themselves and their destinies.

● As a result of industrialization there was an influx of immigrants from other parts of the world;

unemployment due to mechanization; political regimes and uprisings; Poor working conditions,
poverty, destitution; discontentment and spiritual frustration. In view of these social problems,
Durkheim saw education as the only social institution that would promote integration.

● Durkheim saw the function of education as the transmission of society’s norms and values.

Society can only survive if there is homogeneity that is similarity among its members.
Durkheim’s main focus was the creation of value consensus and social solidarity through
education.

20
 ● Durkheim argued from a functionalist perspective that society was a social system. A system is

an entity made up of interrelated parts. Meaning that each part will in some way affect every
other part and the system as a whole. Integration is based largely on value consensus and social
solidarity.

Activity (1hour)

● Explain in the simplest term why sociology of education became prominent in the19th
century?

References
Durkheim, E, (1956) Education and sociology: (Translated by S. Fox) Glencoe: The Free Press.

Comte, Auguste (2005) A Dictionary of Sociology (3rd Ed), John Scott & Gordon Marshall (eds),
Oxford University Press.

Giddens, A., (2009) Sociology. New Delhi: Wiley India.

Snelson, P. (1974). Education Development in Northern Rhodesia: 1883-1945. Lusaka: Kenneth

Kaunda Foundation.

21
 UNIT TWO
THEORIES IN SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATION
Introduction
In this Unit you learn about the macro and micro theories of society. The theories in this unit have been
simplified and condensed to provide a basic introduction. Macro theories explain how the society is
organized and structured as a whole while. They take a holistic perspective of the society. On the other
hand, micro theories focus on specific structures or units of society such as interaction of pupils in class,
interaction of people in homes and at places of work.

Aim of the unit

The aim of this unit is to expose you to different macro and micro theories in education of sociology of
education

Objectives
By the end of this unit you should be able to;
1. Define the term theory.
2. State the meaning of macro theory.
3. Describe the following macro theories: Structural-functionalist theory, Conflict theory and the
Human Capital theory.
4. Describe the interactionalist theories: Labelling and New Sociology of Education.
5. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each theory
6. Relate theories to education and society

Content
This lesson is divided in the following two lessons:

● Macro theories in Sociology of Education

● Micro theories in Sociology of Education

22
 Time Frame
You are expected to spend 5 hour on this unit.
Lesson One
Macro Theories in Sociology of Education
Introduction
In this lesson, you will learn about what a theory is and three macro theories. Macro theories explain
how the society is organized and structured as a whole.

Objectives of the Lesson

By the end of this unit you should be able to:
1. Define the term theory.
2. State the meaning of macro theory.
3. Describe the Structural-functionalist theory, Conflict theory and Human Capital theory
4. Compare and contrast functionalist and conflict perspectives.

Reflection

The founding fathers of Sociology and Sociology of Education borrowed a lot from the Biological
sciences. Society is likened to a living organism with different organs (structures) performing different
functions to support life of the organism. Have you ever thought about the roles of social institutions
such as the family, religion, education, economy, government and health?

Definition of a theory
The first thing we need to note is that everyone of us has a theory, that is, every one of us has a way of
looking at the world, or how social issues are related, or how we think things occur. For example, some
people believe that there is a relationship between kwashiorkor and pregnancy or between marasmus and
witchcraft. They believe that kwashiorkor is caused by the milk of a pregnant mother or by witchcraft.
This is a theory, that is, this is the way they look at how these issues are related.

Just as each one of us is constantly interpreting our world, sociologists are also interpreting the social
world, using theoretical perspectives. For instance, a sociologist (of education) might ask why some
people succeed in academic work, while others do not. We might say it is because some are smarter

23
than others, some try harder than others, or some have more chances than others. In attempting to
understand such issues, sociologists look at the society in which people live and the structure of that
society, and try to understand how things are related or how things occur.

Note that various people look at the way things are related differently or have different theories, because
of a number of factors. Some of these factors are: experiences, education background, social and cultural
background, age, sex, race etc. People of different experiences see the world differently, just as people
of different sexes look at the world differently - females may look at the world as oppressing them or
being unfair, while males may see the world as being fair or competitive.

What is, therefore, a theory? Simply, a theory is the way we look at how things or variables are related.
In other words, a theory is a generalisation based on observation and analysis, intended to explain the
relationship between or among events (variables). If we speak of a sociological theory, it is a
generalisation based on observation and analysis, intended to explain the relationships between or
among the events occurring within the human interactions. To bring it to a school situation, it is a
generalisation explaining the relationship between or among variables, for example, between teacher's
qualification or teacher militancy and student performance; content of education and student
performance; social background of students, attitudes toward education and academic performance on
one hand, and absenteeism on the other.

Activity 1. Within your cultural background, can you consider as many theories as you come up with
a number of theories about various issues in the community.

24
Why do we need theories?
We need theories for a number of reasons: (i) to help us understand how events or issues are related; (ii)
to help us understand the human interaction as they attempt to formulate the principles of behaviour or
how actions repeat themselves; (iii) to help us focus our attention on important issues, the issues which
are crucial in explaining the occurrence of or determining other issues or events. For example, prestige
may be determined by a number of things some of which may be too trivial to worry about, and some of
which we may not know about. But a theory which is well thought out can help us focus on issues which
are important, and it can help us look for other things which may not be in it, but can make sense in our
immediate environment. In this way a theory can be improved upon, rejected or modified to suit the
situation. (iv) We need a theory to help us in the collection and (v) in analysing the collected data, as it
guides us in our focus on variables - giving us the ideas of the kind of questions we can ask to find out
the relationships between or among variables, and make us think of how to interpret the information
collected.

Structural Functionalist Theory

The most widely used theoretical approach to the sociological study of education has been the structural
–functionalist perspective. Its intellectual roots are in the works of Emile Durkheim, Hebert Spencer and
to some extent Max Weber. The contemporary theorists of this perspective also include Robert Merton
and Talcott Parsons. The structural – functionalist theory is also known as the consensus or equilibrium
theory. The starting point of this theory is the notion that society is a system, a combination of things or
parts that form a larger whole.

Functionalists attempt to do two things (1) relate the parts of the society to the whole (2) relate one part
to another. They see the social structure of society as organized in specific social institutions
specializing in specific roles that they perform for the society. Social institutions such as the family,
religion, education, economy, health are among the crucial parts of any society.

25
Having established the existence of a social structure, functionalist analysis turns to a consideration of
how that structure functions. This involves an examination of the relationship between the different parts
of the structure and their relationship to society as a whole. In practice the term function is usually used
to indicate the contribution an institution makes to the maintenance and survival of the social system.
Thus a major function of the family is the procreation and socialization of new members of society. This
represents an important contribution to the maintenance of society since order, stability and cooperation
largely depend on learned, shared norms and values. The function of religion is the transmission of
moral values, while the function of the economic institution is the production of goods and services.

The key points of the functionalist perspective may be summarized by a comparison drawn
from Biology. If a biologist wanted to know how an organism such as the human body worked, they
might begin by examining the various parts such as the brain, lungs, heart and liver. They examine the
parts in relation to each other since they work together to maintain the organism. Sociologists have
adopted this Biological view when they analyse how society is structured. The various parts of society
are seen to be interrelated and taken, they form a complete system.

According to functionalists, behaviour in society is structured. This means that relationships between
members of society are organized in terms of rules. Norms and values provide general guidelines for
behaviour and are translated into specific directives in terms of roles.
Functionalists contend that if society is to exist, its members should share the same norms, values and
beliefs in order to promote social integration or social solidarity.

Durkheim compares the mechanical solidarity that characterizes life in simple societies and organic
solidarity in industrialized complex societies in terms of normative and value systems. In the production
of goods and services there is specialization and division of labour in every historic society. However, it
is the complexity that differs from one society to another. Social consensus and solidarity needs to be
met, otherwise the society becomes pathological or anomie sets in. (Breakdown of norms and values
that hold the society). Social control is achieved through the socialization process of members of the
society.

26
From the functionalist perspective, sociologists believe education serves a preservative function of the
society through the transmission of norms and values. In addition, it serves innovative functions by
preparing people for social change that may come as a result of technological advancements. Thus,
education is one aspect of the many sided process by which people acquire knowledge, skills, attitudes,
norms and values essential for effective participation in the society.

Functionalists contend that most existing social arrangements in society are necessary, e.g. social
stratification (class system). Functionalists believe that its functional for society to have the poor; its
functional to have rulers and the ruled; servants and masters; the skilled and the unskilled.

One of the main concerns of structural-functionalist theory is to explain how social life is possible. The
theory assumes that a certain degree of order and stability are essential for the survival of social systems.
Functionalism is therefore concerned with explaining the origin and maintenance of order and stability
in society. It forms the basis of social unity or social solidarity since individuals will tend to identify and
feel kinship with those who share the same values as themselves. Value consensus provides the
foundation for cooperation since common values produce common goals. Members of society will tend
to cooperate in pursuit of goals which they share. Having attributed such importance to value consensus,
many functionalists then focus on the question of how this consensus is maintained. Emphasis is placed
on the process of socialization whereby values are internalized and transmitted from one generation to
the next.

Talcott Parsons – The School Class As A Social System

Talcott Parsons (1902-1979), a Harvard University sociologist, was a key figure in the development of
functionalist theory. Parsons had been greatly influenced by the work of Emile Durkheim, Max Weber,
and other European sociologists. Parsons saw any society as a vast network of connected parts, each of
which helps to maintain the system as a whole. The functionalist approach holds that if an aspect of
social life does not contribute to a society’s stability or survival or if it does not serve some identifiably
useful function or promote value consensus among members of a society then it will not be passed on
from one generation to the next.

27
Talcott Parsons carried out a study of the school class as a social system. In this study Parsons applied
the consensus mode of analysis to the classroom. Parsons looked at two social functions of education,
i.e. socialization and social selection using a classroom setting.

Parsons points out that in modern society, the sorting out of pupils in terms of future roles (occupations)
begins from the school system. From elementary grades through college/university, the sorting of pupils
according to their aptitude to learn or achievement (in terms of their performance continue). The school
system operates on meritocratic principles. While in school pupils think about future careers. Those who
enter university are likely to have prestigious occupations and may rise to higher socio-economic levels
in society.
The norm of achievement is internalized in the school system. One of the first socialization tasks of the
school is to teach children that they will be evaluated on the basis of achievement. Children come to
believe that they all have an equal chance of doing well and that the only differences lie in their ability
and motivation. In order to strengthen this view, the school puts certain mechanisms in place, e.g.,
children are generally age segregated in classes; children tend to be sent to neighborhood schools, which
results in some degree of homogeneity of such other ascribed characteristics as socio-economic status,
race and ethnicity. Also within the classroom, students are given common tasks and systematically
evaluated one by one by the teacher.

In their own families, each child is valued as an individual and loved regardless of how well they
compare to the other children. In the school, the teacher is expected to be affectively neutral and to treat
all children alike according to universalistic criteria.

There are other alternative sources of rewards given on merit in the school system. Friendship groups
that emerge among students and non-academic activities such as co-curricular activities
(Sporting activities, clubs and societies) are important opportunities for socialization. Those who do not
do well academically can receive approval or get rewards through participation in sports and other
activities. These are also given on merit. Schools promote value consensus and depend on it for their
smooth operation.

28
Robert Merton
Robert Merton one of the contemporary exponents of the consensus theory emphasizes that not all
existing social structures of society are functional for the society. Some are dysfunctional. Merton
distinguishes between Manifest functions which are intended and recognized by the participants in the
system and the Latent functions which are neither intended nor recognized (these are the unintended
consequences of a system which are not recognized). The dysfunctions are the unplanned, unwanted or
unanticipated or undesired consequences of a social system.

Summary -Theoretical Outline of the Functionalist Theory

● Society is a system, a combination of things or parts that form a larger whole. Society is viewed

as analogous to a living organism with different parts, each part having specific functions
contributing to the maintenance of the life of the organism.

● Functionalists attempt to do two things: (i) relate the parts of society to the whole (ii) relate one

part to another. Social institutions such as the family, religion, education are among the crucial
parts of any society.

● The various parts of society are seen to be interrelated and taken together, they form a complete

system.

● Thus to understand any part of society, such as the family or education, the part must be seen in

relation to society as a whole.

● Functionalists pay particular attention to the functions performed by a system’s parts, including

its values, norms, institutions and groups.

● The function of any part of society is its contribution to the maintenance of society.

● Since society is a system, there must be some degree of integration between its parts.

● Functionalists conceive of conflict in society as an indication of breakdown.

29
 ● Functionalists argue that most existing social arrangements in society are necessary e.g. social

stratification (class system), its functional to have the poor in society.

● Social consensus and solidarity is emphasized in this theory.

● Education from a functionalist view plays important functions for the society such as the

transmission of knowledge, skills, norms and values (conservative function); Innovative

function- source of new ideas and prepares people for social change; selects and prepares
children according to their abilities and personalities; trains young people to take up leadership
roles in society; instills a sense of duty and responsibility in the young people.

Criticism of functionalism

● Criticized for being too conservative.

● The theory does not appear to address processes of social change.

● Theory appears to overlook the problem of conflict in society.

● Over emphasis on harmony in the society.

● Inadequate explanation on the social dynamics of society.

Conflict Theory
The Conflict or Marxian perspective is a macro theory that looks at the structural arrangements that
characterize social life. Like the functionalist theory, the conflict theorists see society as a system
comprising different parts. The conflict perspective is at odds on many issues with the functionalist
theory. The intellectual roots of the conflict perspective on education are found in the works of Karl
Marx, Max Weber, Willard Waller, Randall Collins, Ivan Illich, Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis.

30
Karl Marx viewed struggle between social classes as inevitable given the exploitation of workers under
capitalism. Expanding on Marx’s work, sociologists and other social scientists have come to see conflict
not merely as a class phenomenon but as a part of everyday life in all societies. In studying any culture,
organization, or social group, sociologists want to know who benefits, who suffers, and who dominates
at the expense of others. They are concerned with the conflicts between women and men, parents and
children, cities and suburbs, whites and blacks, to name only a few. Conflict theorists are interested in
how society’s institutions such as the family, government, religion, education and the media may help to
maintain the privileges of some groups and keep others in a subservient position.

A Marxian view or Conflict view of the role of education in modern society is guided by questions such
as: How is the educational system shaped by the economic system? Conflict theorists believe that the
education system is ultimately shaped by the economic base and serves the interests of the ruling class
(capitalists). For the ruling class to survive and prosper, the reproduction of labour power is essential.
Generations of workers must be reproduced to create the profits on which capitalism depends.

Conflict theorists argue that the reproduction of labour power involves two processes (i) The
reproduction of the skills necessary for an efficient labour force (ii) The reproduction of ruling class
ideology and the socialization of workers according to the ruling class ideology. These processes
combine to reproduce a technically efficient, submissive and obedient workforce. Thus, the role of
education in modern society is the reproduction of such a workforce.

Marx contends that no class can hold power for any length of time simply by the use of force.
Ideological control provides a far more effective means of maintaining class rule. If members of the
subject class accept their position as normal, natural and inevitable, and fail to realize the true nature of
their situation, then they will be unlikely to challenge ruling class dominance. Physical force is an
inefficient means of control compared to winning over hearts and minds. The maintenance of class rule
largely depends on the reproduction of ruling class ideology. Therefore, the reproduction of labour
power requires not only a reproduction of its skills, but also, at the same time a reproduction of its
submission to the ruling class ideology. This submission is reproduced by a number of Ideological State
Apparatuses which include the Mass media, Religion, Law and Education. Ideological state apparatuses

31
transmit ruling class ideology thereby creating false consciousness which largely maintains the subject
class in its subordinate position. In pre-capitalist societies, Marx sees religion as the dominant
ideological state apparatus. In capitalist society, it has largely been replaced by the education system.

Education according to Marx does not only transmit a general ruling class ideology which justifies and
legitimates the capitalist system; it also reproduces the attitudes and behaviour required by the major
groups in the division of labour; it teaches workers to accept and submit to their exploitation; it teaches
the agents of exploitation and repression (managers, administrators and politicians) how to practice their
crafts and rule the work force as agents of the ruling class.

Max Weber – Status Groups

Max Weber argued that the interests of the dominant groups in society shape the schools while the less
dominant groups often face barriers in the educational systems because they lack power. The dominant
groups prevent the less dominant groups from acquiring prestigious education by placing obstacles in
the education system.

Weber further believed that schools educated the young into status cultures based on their wealth, power
and prestige of their status group in the society. According to Max Weber, there are three distinct
dimensions of social stratification, i.e., economic inequality which he termed class position. The second
one is status which measures social prestige and, thirdly power which is the ability to have others do
something even against their will.

Summary - Theoretical outline of the conflict perspective

● Conflict theorists scrutinize social life and find disorder and instability.

● Conflict theorists insist that many of the societal arrangements are neither necessary nor justified

but meant to oppress the weaker members of society.

● Conflict theorists argue that society contains social forces that make conflict inevitable.

32
● Conflict theorists contend that the unequal distribution of scarce resources such as wealth

generates a struggle over their distribution. Conflict theorists ask how some groups acquire
power, dominate other groups, apportion scarce resources to their advantage and achieve their
will in human affairs.

● Conflict theorists argue that society contains social forces that make conflict inevitable in

society. The existence of scarce resources in every society especially wealth generates a struggle
over their distribution. Power differences ensure that some groups dominate and even exploit
others.

● Social arrangements such as social stratification are meant to legitimize the owners of the means

of production or the propertied at the expense of the property less.

● The education system socializes pupils into the values dictated by the ruling class.

● Conflict theorists argue that most pupils who climb the educational ladder are from the affluent

families.

● Children from low income families have difficulties even before they enter school.

● Education institutions are regarded as repressive institutions which indoctrinate pupils, stifle

creativity and imagination, induce conformity and stupefy students into accepting the interests of
the powerful.

● The education system creates mindless and easily manipulated citizens. The pupil is trained to

accept that those in authority know what is best for him, the individual becomes dependent on
the directives of governments, bureaucratic organizations and professional bodies.

Criticism of Conflict theory

● Criticized for being too radical

33
 ● The theory ignores changes that occur in the absence of conflict such as technological

changes, diseases and natural calamities.

● The theory ignores elements in society that serve to maintain social order.

● The theory is rather too narrow as it over emphasizes conflict.

Activity

Attempt to answer the question below to test your understanding on Unit 1 topic:
1. Compare and contrast the Structural-functionalist theory and conflict theory.

Human Capital Theory

The Human Capital Theory is associated with the work of Theodore Schultz in the 1950’s. In his
presidential address to the American Economic Association on the “Investment in the Human Capital,”
Schultz (1961) stated that education was not to be viewed simply as a form of consumption but rather as
a productive investment.

Schultz noted that education improves the individual choices available to man, and that an educated
population provides the type of labour force (human resource) necessary for industrial development and
economic growth. This theory recognizes that the most important resource a nation can ever have is its
people. Even if infrastructure and capital is provided, without the development of human resource no
meaningful development can take place. The Human Capital Theory states that development resides in
people. Human attributes such as knowledge, skills and attitudes are vital in economic development.
Educational institutions are viewed as institutions that inculcate discipline, attitudes and motivations that
enhance development.

The Human Capital Theory view human beings as having economic value. Human Capital Theory was
based upon the presumed economic return of investment in education both at macro and micro levels

34
(The social and private returns of education to the society and individuals). Economic growth or
development is viewed by economists in terms of Land, Labour and Capital.

Case studies conducted by economists have shown that countries endowed with good natural resources
were not doing fine as compared to countries not endowed with abundant natural resources. A case in
point, is Japan, a small mountainous country without adequate natural resources at its disposal has made
tremendous advances in technology resulting in the improvement of the standards of living of its people.
The economic development in this country is associated with the quality of human resource in the
nation.

The Human Capital Theory states that education contributes significantly to economic development.
Thus, the quality of economic growth in the nation depends on education. Factors contributing to
economic growth according to the human capital theory are (i) Knowledge (2) Skills (3) Attitudes of the
people.
Human Capital Theory contends that economic productivity is influenced by the acquisition of skills,
knowledge and attitudes. These three factors have a significant economic value in human capabilities.

Economic development is a factor of Land, Labour and Capital [ Ec=f (LLC) ]. The quality of labour
(human resource) is critical to development. Hence, Ec=f (LLC ) where [k] stands for capability. This
entails that human potential needs to be developed. Investment in Human Capital has economic and
social benefits. Most of the social and economic problems of Zambia are sometimes blamed on the
undeveloped education system. Some of the cross-cutting themes and issues such as population issues;
environmental, HIV / AIDS, Democracy and governance, nutrition and poverty are off shoots of the
undeveloped education system in Zambia.

There are direct and indirect costs in education. Direct costs include fees, uniforms, all the costs incurred
in education. Indirect costs (Income foregone) include lost labour (children make contributions to the
wellbeing of the family through household chores, e.g. cattle herding and selling. This is also referred to
as opportunity costs.

35
Social Benefits of Education

● Education produces the neighbourhood effect. As more people get educated their life style

influences the neighbours and eventually there is change in the neighbourhood. New styles of
life begin.

● Education improves civic awareness of the people.

● Other notable non-market effects of investment in Human Capital include improvements in

literacy, nutrition, health, low fertility levels, low mortality levels, good governance.

● Investment in education leads to discovery of talent and better citizenry.

● The Human Capital Theory provides a basic justification for large public expenditure on

education both in developed and developing nations.

References

Hughes, M. and Kroehler, C.J. Sociology: the core. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill

Macionis, J.J. (2002) Sociology. 9th ed. London: Prentice Hall.

Karabel, J. and Halsey, H.H. (1979) Power and Ideology in Education. New York: Oxford

Schaefer, R.T. (2004) Sociology: a brief introduction. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill

Parelius, A.N., and Parelius, R.J. (1978) The Sociology of Education. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Coser, L.A. (1983). Introduction to Sociology. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Haralambos, M. (2002). Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London: Unwin Hyman.

Ballantine, J.H. (2002). The Sociology of Education: A systematic analysis. London: Prentice Hall

36
37
 Lesson Two
Micro Theories of Sociology of Education

Introduction
In this lesson, we would like you to understand what happens in the classroom between a pupil and a
teacher. We would like you to understand why some pupils behave the way they behave and why they
perform in their class work the way they do. We shall do this by using a theory called ‘the labelling
theory”.

Objectives
By the end of the lesson, you should be able to:
1. Outline the main concerns of the Labelling and the New Sociology of Education theory
2. Apply the two micro theories to the classroom

Reflection

● Why do some pupils fail and why do others pass?

● Why do you think some pupils behave well and others badly?

● What is your answer?

● Supposing I asked this same question to the parents of your

pupils, what answer do you think they can give?

If the pupils have failed, you as a teacher may say they are dull, and parents may say it is because of
“these” teachers who have failed to teach them. If, on the other hand the pupils will have done well, the
parents may say it is because their children are naturally bright, and teachers may claim success – they

38
are good teachers. Is it not true that success has many parents while failure is always an orphan as the
saying goes?

Surely those statements would not be the only responses you may get from teachers and parents. There
are many more explanations which are simple and obvious, among which may be students’ natural
abilities, teachers' levels of performance, discipline, availability or non-availability of educational
materials and teaching aids. In short, biological, cultural and environmental determinant explanations
have been advanced for student failures or successes as illustrated by the Opinion of the Times of
Zambia of March 13, 1979:

It has been accepted that, even in the old countries with centuries of formal education
systems, access to the fifth and sixth forms is still elitist. It is so for the simple reason
that only ten per cent of a secondary school intake is capable of passing a tough school
certificate examination. All the juggling of syllabuses and watering down of
examinations will not change the harsh fact that only a few people are born lever and
gifted . . . .

It is true biological, cultural, social and other factors may, of course, contribute to failure or success of
students in their schoolwork. But there are other factors, which may determine pupils’ performance and
behaviour which are not considered to be important. These other factors may be found in the classroom,
which, to many people in our society, is a dark box where what goes on in it is not known. They only
make speculations on why students fail or succeed, behave or misbehave. Many people do not know
that what happens in the classroom, more specifically, the interaction between teachers and students is a
major determinant in the differential academic performance and behaviour of pupils in the school
system, and beyond the school.

The matter of concern in this lesson is that the interaction between you the teacher and your pupils in a
teaching/learning process during which you the teacher form expectations of your pupils' performance
and behaviour, is an important determinant in the performance and behaviour of your pupils. In other
words we are attempting to analyse how a teacher like yourself may come to hold certain expectations
about the performance or behaviour of your pupils; and how those expectations may evoke or give rise
to certain actions which eventually come to fulfil a teacher’s initial expectations of pupils' performance

39
and behaviour. We are looking for the factors from within the classroom, not from the home, not from
the society and not those connected with the pupils’ biological makeup. We shall try to explore this by
looking the Labelling and the New Sociology of Education theories

The Labelling Theory and the Classroom Situation

What is the origin of the Labelling Theory?

The 1960s and 1970s witnessed the emergence of the labelling theory in sociology as a framework or a
theoretical perspective of understanding social delinquency or deviance. Becker (1963 and 1964), Matza
(1964 and 1969), Scott and Douglas (1972) and Broadhead (1974) have tried to explain deviance in
terms of the process of how some one becomes to be a deviant, instead of looking at the offence or act
and the offender or actor.

The major concern of the labelling theory is the process by which individuals in the society are labelled
as deviants, not the individuals themselves or the act per se. It "sees deviance . . . as a process and
interaction between two kinds of people - those who are said to have committed an act of deviance and
the rest of the society . . .” (Becker, 1964:2). In other words, the labelling theory is concerned with the
way one is treated, rather than with one's character.

● Let us illustrate the point by considering a wedding. In a wedding there is a lady of honour and

there is a flower girl or the best man and a peg boy.. Supposing the flower girl was as old as the
lady of honour and the peg boy was as old as the best man (which does not happen). Do you
think they would be considered in the same way? The answer is no. There will be a difference
between them. But this difference is not because of the different titles per se, but it is in the way
they are treated..

Activity 1.

1. What is the major concern of the labelling theory which makes it different from
40
 other theories which deal with interactions among the human beings?

2. What is central argument of the labelling theory?

A number of important questions are raised, in connection with this theoretical perspective, among
which are: Who labels whom? Will the label be permanent or not? What kind of behaviour do people
think is abnormal behaviour, and what are the consequences of their interpretation of such behaviour?

The central argument of the labelling theory [in light of all the questions above] is that, society creates
deviants. It is the society which gives labels to certain individuals, and which makes these labels
permanent, making those individuals deviants. One is not a thief until someone blows the whistle, as the
saying goes. Explaining this point, Becker (1963:9) argues that:

The central fact of deviance is that it is created by society. . . . I mean . . . that social
groups create deviants by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by
applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders, . . . The deviant
is the one to whom the label has been successfully applied. Deviant behaviour is
behaviour that people so label.

Stop for a while here and consider the argument above. Can you think of a situation in this country
which can explain Becker’s argument above?

It is important to note here that there is no clear consensus among those who label others as they do so,
or about the kind of behaviour or act which is deviant. One individual or one kind of behaviour may be
considered deviant by one person, but not so by another. One person may be considered good by one,
but not by another person. It may depend on the kind of relationship between the one who labels and the
one who is labelled. A lady once complained to a professor that Professor X treated her like a girl and
she felt she was a girl, but the professor to whom she was speaking treated her like a lady and she felt
like a lady, and she would always feel so before him.

By placing emphasis on the process, the labelling theoretical perspective or theory sees a deviant as a
product of a process of being (i) caught, (ii)defined (as such), (iii) segregated against and (iv) given a
label. The reaction of the society to one who has committed a crime reinforces criminal behaviour, or
41
makes a person a die-hard deviant. It is the process of transition from primary deviance to secondary
deviance - from a person who commits only one deviant act, to a person who habitually commits acts of
deviance and sees himself/herself as a habitual criminal, a person who comes to accept himself/herself
as others think of him/her.

Lermet (1951) describes the sequences of reactions or actions leading from primary to secondary
deviation as follows:

1. First act of deviance (primary deviation). 2. Society punishes the person for the first
act. 3. The punished reacts to the punishment by committing another act, (further primary
deviation). 4. Society applies stronger punishment and shows rejection. 5. The punished
commits another act - further deviation which may be accompanied with hatred to those
who are punishing him/her. 6. The society shows no tolerance of such an individual now.
7. Such individual now shows stronger deviant behaviour because of the penalties or
punishments. 8. Finally the person accepts the status, agrees that he/she is a deviant
(criminal). This is now secondary deviation.

Lermet (1972:62) describes secondary deviation as follows:

Secondary deviation refers to a special class of socially defined responses which people
make to problems created by the societal reaction to their deviance. These problems
become central facts of existence for those experiencing them. . . . Actions, which have
these roles and self-attitudes as their referents make up secondary deviance. The
secondary deviant . . . is a person whose life and identity are organised around the facts of
deviance.

It is hoped that the process briefly described in this section will help us understand what teachers do to
their students or pupils in our secondary or primary schools and the consequences of the labels placed
upon students or pupils as we apply this theoretical perspective or theory to a classroom situation.

Labelling theory: Its application to the classroom

It will be remembered that in chapter three, we argued that sociology of education is poor at theories
though rich in empirical studies, and, at the same time, argued that the fact that there are no theories in
sociology of education does not necessarily mean that we cannot apply sociological theories to a study
42
in sociology of education or to an understanding of school situation. The labelling theory which is a
small-scale sociological theory has been applied to the understanding of the interactions which take
place in the classroom and how these interactions affect the performance and behaviour of students or
pupils.

Let us now turn to the issue of great concern to the teachers - the application of the theory to a
classroom situation. Four major questions or concerns will be dealt with here - who labels whom, what
are the sources of information used in the labelling process, what are the outcomes of labelling, and
what are the strengths and weaknesses of the labelling theory?

We should, at the beginning of this section, stress that it really matters what kind of interaction the
teacher has with his/her student or pupil or what kind of label the teacher gives to the student or pupil. It
is a weighty matter, worthy of consideration, for a teacher to label a student/pupil, because; the label
given to a student/pupil may have a telling effect on the performance and behaviour of the student/pupil,
not only during his/her school career, but even after his/her school career. It is possible for a teacher to
wrongly label a student/pupil, and that wrong label may adversely affect the student's/pupil’s life. Some
of you in this course and programme are in the university may be because of the label the teachers gave
you - that is the sort of interactions which took place between you and the teachers during your school
days. Some of your former classmates may have failed to enter the university because of the labels they
were given, or because of the kind of interaction they had with their teachers. Some of the people in this
country have "big heads" while others feel inadequate in the community and in their working places
because of how teachers treated them when they were at school.

(i) Who labels whom?

It is generally accepted that it is the teachers who label their students/pupils. It is teachers who call their
students/pupils dull, stupid, clever, teachers' helpers, troublesome or troublemakers. [You may
remember the label your teacher gave you]. It is teachers who, to a certain extent, determine whether a
student/pupil will pass or fail, or is a bad student/pupil or a good student/pupil. Teachers sometimes act
as judges; they judge the students/pupils and try by all means to convict them during the process of
interaction.

43
During this process of interaction, the student/pupil usually comes to know what the teacher expects of
him or her, or knows the label, and he/she performs and behaves according to the label the teacher has
placed on him or her. In all likelihood and practice, it is the teacher who decides the fate or who holds
the future of the student/pupil in his/her hand. Jackson (1968:6) describes the fate of a student in this
way:

He must learn how the reward system of the classroom operates and then use that
knowledge to increase the flow of rewards to himself. . . . Most students soon learn that
rewards are granted to those who lead a good life. And in school the good life consists
principally, of doing what the teacher says.

Teachers always have some form of ideas of the kind of students/pupils they are dealing with in terms of
their behaviour and performance. It does not take long for a teacher to form the ideas or opinions about
his or her students/pupils in the classroom. It may take only a few days or weeks for teachers to label
their students. Sometimes teachers form certain views about students even before they meet them in the
classroom. They might have heard a story about a school or a classroom, before they stepped in a
classroom or in a school. These ideas are taken to class or school, and this is how they perceive the
students. They will not be surprised if this comes to be true, but if anything, they will be happy to see it
happen as they prophesied.

However, I have many times heard students in the sociology of education courses arguing that it is not
only teachers who label their students/pupils, but students/pupils label their teachers also. Their
arguments are based on their own experiences in the school system, when they gave labels or names to
their teachers. For a new teacher in a classroom, it is an intimidating experience to hear students
shouting "this is not Grade 8 sir or madam; this is Grade 12." This kind of comment may make the
teacher lose his/her confidence and composure, and it may disturb the teacher's flow of thought. If a
teacher, at this time panics, it will be very difficult to convince the students that he/she is a capable
teacher who deserves to be in that class. They may label him/her as a useless teacher who knows
nothing. They may even make it difficult for the teacher to teach for they could boycott his/her classes
or boycott to answer the questions. There is nothing worse, for a teacher, than having students/pupils
refuse to be taught or answer the teacher's questions.

44
We should comment briefly on why students/pupils label their teachers. Students/pupils give labels to
their teachers in form of names for a number of reasons. A teacher may be brilliant, dull or boring, or
may have certain mannerisms or because of the nature of the subject or topic he/she is teaching. Some
teachers react badly to these names, and create problems for themselves. Teachers should remember
that some of these names are given to them as a way of remembering the material they have taught. It is
easy for a student/pupil to remember a geography topic on Saskatchewan by calling the teacher
“Saskatchewan”. I wonder how it would be or how students/pupils would behave towards a teacher
whom they have given a name or two, but has told them, he/she, in fact, needs more names!

We should also note that students/pupils label fellow students/pupils, and make them behave the way
they think of them. Some students/pupils insist on calling other students/pupils dull or weak, and tell
them, even teachers know that, or that is how teachers know them. These students’/pupils’ comments
about fellow students may have telling effect on the performance and behaviour of other students/pupils
just as they may have a telling effect upon the behaviour and performance of teachers.

But, always remember that teacher's attitudes towards their students/pupils are more crucial in
determining the performance of a student than are students/pupils’ attitudes toward a teacher or a fellow
student/pupil. The label a teacher gives to a student/pupil may be very critical, very critical in the sense
that in this and other modern societies what teachers label as being so or not being so is usually abiding
upon the student/pupil. In this society, it is the teacher who determines whether or not student/pupil X
has attained acceptable standards to let him/her go to another level of the education system, or has
mastered acceptable body of knowledge or information to enable him/her get a job and live on his/her
own. Teachers are like judges and labellers. They have the authority to provide proof or evidence for
their students'/pupils’ qualifications, and to determine the future of their students/pupils.

(ii) Sources and types of information used in labelling students/pupils

When teachers label their students/pupils, they make use of certain information, and this information is
obtained from various sources. But, even though teachers may have many sources of information which
they use to label their students/pupils, one can put these sources in two main categories. These are: first
hand and second hand sources of information.

First hand source and types of information

45
The first hand source of information is the teacher's face-to-face interaction with the students/pupils in
the classroom. Through this day-to-day, face-to-face interaction or contact, the teacher gets information
which he/she uses to label his or her students/pupils. This is one source, which the teacher cannot avoid
having and which the student/pupil cannot escape. It is the most natural and normal source of
information, because by nature of teaching, especially classroom teaching, the teacher has to have
contacts with the students/pupils. The question is what sort of information does the teacher get through
this source?

There are types of information which the teacher can get, and does usually, get through this source.
Some of these are: students' handwriting, students' accent, students' physical appearances, current
academic performance in the classroom, the way a student/pupil’ dresses, and the sex of the
students/pupils.

A teacher for example may be impressed with the accent of a certain student/pupil, or may be irritated
by the “chongololo accent”. (I do remember vividly how our lecturer in the School of Education in my
university days was not impressed with the accent of students who came from convent schools because
they were speaking like English girls.) Supposing you had in your class some Radio and TV
personalities such as Maureen Nkandu, Doris Mulenga, Faith Kandaba, Dawson Mwendafilumba,
Doreen Mkanzo, what grade would you give to each of these based on their accents? What grades
would you give to your different course lecturers based on their accents?

Some teachers are not impressed with the handwritings of some students/pupils, and this can affect the
way teachers treat these students/pupils. There are some students/pupils who are labelled dull because
their handwriting is like "foot-writing" - that the teacher guesses every single word in a sentence. A
teacher may not take time to read the work and make informed judgement even if the student/pupil
might have presented good material.

It is not the accent or the handwriting of the student/pupil alone that can make teachers label their
students/pupils. Research has shown that physical appearance of students/pupils also influences teachers'
expectations of their students'/pupils’ behaviour and performance. The more attractive the student/pupil
is the more biased teachers are in favour of the student/pupil. In their study in which they attempted to
determine the effect student's physical attractiveness had on a teacher's expectations of the student's

46
intellectual and social behaviour, Clifford and Waster gave photos of students to teachers and asked
them to show which students would be bright and would behave well. They concluded that:

There is little question but that the physical appearance of a student affected the
expectations of the teachers . . . . Regardless of whether the pupil is a boy or girl, the
child's physical attractiveness has an equally strong association with his teacher's
reactions to him (1973:255).

One of the major determinants of teachers' expectations of their students'/pupils’ performance and
behaviour is the current performance in their schoolwork. Teachers may form opinion about their
students as they mark the work of their students and see their performances. Those who impress the
teachers in the first few assignments are likely to be treated that way, while those whose first work is
bad and react in a certain manner may be labelled dull and troublesome for the rest of the programme.
The students/pupils’ first work and reaction tend to leave a lingering impression on the mind of the
teacher of the kind of a student/pupil one is.

Other researchers have considered sex as a factor in the way teachers treat their students/pupils. They
have shown that female students do well in education settings where the majority of teachers are
females, but do not usually do well where the majority of teachers are males. Girls do better than boys in
primary schools because they are favoured by female teachers who are in the majority, while boys are
favoured by male teachers in secondary schools where there are more male than female teachers. Of
course this may go beyond just the question of favouritism; a question of role model may be crucial in
these cases.

Dressing is also another form of information which teachers use to label their students/pupils. It is
common among teachers to treat students/pupils who are well dressed with favours as compared to those
whose clothes are shabby or not pressed or who may appear untidy with unpolished shoes and
uncombed hair.

Second-hand source and types of information

Some other information is obtained through the second-hand source. This is the source other than the
face to-face interaction. Gossip or comments by teachers on pupils' past performance or work records,
47
reports from welfare agencies, psychological reports and meetings with parents, are some of the second-
hand types of information received through the second hand source of information. What would you
think if you went to a new school and you heard an old teacher telling a new teacher that X was very
bright student/pupil but Y was a troublemaker? The old teacher is trying to influence the attitude of the
new teacher towards those students whom he/she has so labelled. He/she wants to make the new teacher
accept the label he/she has given to those students/pupils.

I sometimes wonder how some children, especially in nursery schools, are arranged in their positions.
Why and how do teachers put A, B, C and D in one corner and E, F, G and H in another corner? Is the
sitting arrangement based upon these pupils' ability to learn or upon other things such as the way they
appear or dress or according to their parents' social economic status? Children who come from the
working class may be placed in one group and those from the upper class (apamwambas) in another.
This labelling is based on the teachers' meetings with the parents of the children.

From the observations above, we can agree that the performance or behaviour of a student may not be
just a matter of his/her ability or nature to perform or behave that way, but that it may be, and usually, is
a product of the interaction between the student/pupil and the teacher. The fact that John is a
troublemaker or a dull student is not necessarily that he is like that by nature, but that the teacher may
have contributed to his/her being so.

All that we are trying to put across in this section is that teachers make their judgements about the
students/pupils. These judgements are based on a number of factors - things they see and hear about the
students/pupils. These things make them label students/pupils as either bright or dull, troublemakers or
teachers' helpers.

Activity
Think of your school days, what do you think made your teacher treat you the way he/she treated
you?

We have seen in the previous section that teachers use various sources or various forms of information
in order to label their pupils. Now what is important for you as teacher to know that, labels which are

48
given to students/pupils may have consequences? This point brings us to another important issue or
concept in the labelling theory, the concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy (of the teacher).

Outcome of labelling: The self-fulfilling prophecy of the teacher

It has been generally accepted in social sciences that when men and women define situations as real;
they are real in their consequences or results. Merton (1968:477), defining the concept of self-fulfilling
prophecy states that:
'The self-fulfilling prophecy is, in the beginning, a false definition of the situation,
evoking a new behaviour, which makes the originally false conception come true.

An individual can define another individual as being troublesome the first time they interact, and surely
at the end of the day, because of the new behaviour evoked by such expectations, this individual's
judgement of another, which may have not been true in the first place, proves to be true in the end.

In 1968, Rosenthal and Jacobson raised great interest in the concept of self-fulfilling prophecy as it was
applied in a classroom situation. They found that, the labels which teachers put on some students made
those students perform according to the teachers' labels (expectations) in the end.

What happens is that a student/pupil who has been given a certain label becomes aware of the label or
the new "name" which has been placed upon him/her by the teacher. This student/pupil takes into
account this new label whenever he/she is dealing with the teacher. When this happens, a new student
has been created - academically reconstructed. He/she is no longer John or Mary but a lazy or bad John
or Mary. He/she is a “peg boy” or “best man”, “flower girl” or “lady of honour”, depending on how the
teacher treats him/her.

As stated earlier, a teacher usually makes judgements the very week he/she enters a classroom. He/she
may predict that ten students/pupils in a certain class will pass very well, fifteen will barely pass and the
remaining ten will fail. This sort of prediction may come true at the end of the term or programme; and
if this comes to be so, the teacher will not feel bad about it because that was what he/she "prophesied"

49
and was eagerly looking forward to it in every action and word made and said during the process of
interaction with the students/pupils.

Bloom (1968:1) describes self-fulfilling prophecy in this way:

Each teacher begins a new term (or course) with the expectation that about a third of his students
will adequately learn what he has to teach. He expects about a third of his students to fail or to
just "get by" . . . This set of expectations, supported by school policies and practices in grading,
becomes transmitted to the students through the grading procedures and through the methods and
materials of instruction. This system creates a self-fulfilling prophecy such that the final sorting
of students through the grading process becomes approximately equivalent to the original
expectations.

It should be noted that the self-fulfilling prophecy is a long and complex process, involving negotiations
between the teacher and the individual student/pupil or the whole class. These negotiations involve
rejection or acceptance of the label by the student/pupil or class and the teacher's confirmation or change
of mind about the label given to the student/pupil or class. It is not a short, simple and automatic process
whereby the teacher arrives at the judgement, and the result or verdict is arrived at.

Good and Brophy (1973) have given five stages of the self-fulfilling prophecy as explained below.

1. The teacher expects specific behaviour and achievement from particular students. These
expectations can take place immediately or soon after the teacher has come into contact with the
students/pupils. This formation of expectations is made possible by the information collected
through either first-hand or second-hand source of information.
2. Because of these different expectations, the teacher behaves differently toward different
students/pupils. He/she may frown, for example, at one student/pupil, but smile at another. In
the classroom, the teacher may ask students a question. One student may give him/her a wrong
answer, and the teacher's response may be that the student has tried, because the teacher has
formed expectations that this particular student is a bright student and that this wrong answer has
been given after much thought. If student B, whom the teacher thinks is dull, gives an equally
wrong answer, the teacher may tell the student that the answer is utter rubbish. This is because
he/she thinks this is a dull student/pupil whose answer is a clear indication of his/her failure to
50
 think or of how dull the student/pupil is. There are sometimes unbelievable situations in
classrooms where a two plus two question whose answer is four may be marked right for
student/pupil A, but wrong for student/pupil B. In some cases, the whole class may fail or pass a
test if the teacher's bright student/pupil has failed the test, a thing which the teacher was not
expecting. A teacher may manipulate the marks so that this bright student/pupil still remains
"bright" even if he/she has proved to be "dull" at that time. When a teacher gives homework, the
bright student's "good" work will always remain the bright student's/pupil’s work, but the dull
student's/pupils’ "good" work will not be the dull student's/pupil’s work. Someone might have
done the good work for the dull student/pupil. If the teacher is impressed with the work of a dull
student/pupil, he/she will ask whether this is the student's/pupil’s work.
3. This kind of treatment (in stage 2) will tell the student/pupil what kind of achievement and
behaviour the teacher expects from him/her. It will eventually affect the way the student/pupil
sees him/herself, his/her motivation and his/her level of aspiration. At this point, the
student/pupil may come to accept that he/she is a "B" student/pupil or a troublemaker because
this is how the teacher thinks of him/her. The student/pupil may continue to perform or behave
accordingly, and may make or not make any effort to perform or behave differently. The student
may hate the subject and decide to drop it or keep away from class. This decision comes about
usually due to unchanging (persistent) grades and demeaning comments students/pupils receive
from their teachers.
4. If this treatment by the teacher persists over a long time, and if the student/pupil does not reject
this treatment or label, it will tend to shape his/her achievement or behaviour. At this stage, it
should be noted, however, that the teacher's expectations are not automatically self-fulfilling.
The student/pupil may say no to the label and convince the teacher that the label given to him/her
is a wrong one - he/she is not a dull student/pupil. He/she can do that by producing quality work
or by behaving differently. This can, and usually does, work if the teacher does not have a clear-
cut expectation of the student/pupil or because the teacher's expectations may change from time
to time.

However, it should be remembered that the teacher has the ultimate means and power to convince the
student/pupil that the label is true. The teacher can go as far as informing the school administration and
other teachers that the student/pupil is dull or troublesome. Fellow teachers and school administrators
51
usually help the teacher to convince the student/pupil that he/she is exactly how the teacher thinks of
him/her. When the student/pupil tries to reject or resist the label, this rejection or resistance on the part
of the student/pupil can be interpreted as rudeness or unruliness, hostility to authority, insolence,
truancy, or interpreted as passiveness, withdrawal or lack of motivation. This process may be repeated,
and may make it difficult for the student/pupil to have options to escape such labels from teachers
without having an additional label such as a lazy and arrogant student/pupil.

5. With the passing of time, the students/pupil’s achievement and behaviour will be very much like that
which the teacher expected of him/her at the beginning of the programme or interaction. Therefore, what
the teacher defined as real at the beginning of the programme becomes real at the end of the programme,
because the first definition evoked certain behaviour which eventually made the first definition come
true.

Activity

What is your understanding of the self-fulfilling of prophecy and how does it come about?

Assessment of the Labelling theory

There is very little doubt that this theory has helped the teacher in understanding real life in the
classroom, and in assessing his/her interactions with his/her students/pupils. But, in spite of the
contribution the theory has made to our understanding of life in the classroom, it has some problems or
weaknesses.

One of the major weaknesses is its narrow view about the way a student/pupil performs and behaves in
the classroom. It has explained the students/pupils’ performance and behaviour only in terms of the
interactions between the teacher and the student/pupil in the classroom. This is a narrow view of looking
at a complex situation. How students/pupils come to perform or to behave cannot only be determined by
the relationship between the teacher and the student/pupil. There are a lot of things involved in the
performance and behaviour of students/pupils. For example, the home background, the cultural values,
and personal characteristics of students/pupils, social and physical surroundings of the school and the
type of the school administration are just as important, if not more important, in determining the
performance and behaviour of students/pupils than the relationship between the teacher and
52
student/pupil on the classroom. Students/pupils come from homes with their own ideas, values and
beliefs which determine their perception of the school and school work, including all those who are in
the teaching /learning process. It is not always the case that students/pupils behave or perform the way
they do because of the interaction between them and their teachers.

There is also an element of exaggeration in the theory in relation to teacher's tendency to label
students/pupils. It is not always that teachers label their students/pupils. They have a number of things to
consider in their interactions with their students/pupils. Firstly, these teachers come from the same
communities with their students/pupils, and have connections with the parents of the students/pupils.
Some of these students/pupils are related to teachers, so teachers may find it difficult to label them,
ignoring all the connections they have with them.

Secondly, teachers are conscious of how they are perceived in the community in relation to the
performance of their students/pupils. They know the community's perception of a good teacher, and the
kind of treatment the community gives to a good teacher. A good teacher is the one whose
students/pupils do well in class, especially in examinations. His/her status in the school and community
may be a function of the students’/pupils’ performance and behaviour. So it would be difficult for a
teacher to go in a classroom with the idea that “half of the class would fail, and only a few would pass”,
because their failure would be his/her failure. The failure of students/pupils would also have unpleasant
consequences. In private schools the failure of students/pupils to pass Grade Seven or other grades
would invite teacher's dismissal from work. In rural areas it would mean the teacher being beaten up by
parents. So teachers cannot afford to be careless about their work. Their desire to maintain status, to be
honoured, to keep their jobs and to be safe may make them work hard. It is for the same reasons that
even those teachers, who may spend the whole year doing nothing, will, on the day of examination,
come in the examination room to help their students pass examinations. They might have taught their
pupils various signs standing for various letters. A pointed middle finger may stand for A or two coughs
may mean D, for example.

Thirdly, teachers are usually controlled by education regulations and their professional values, so that it
would be not possible for them to indiscriminately label their students/pupils. There are things which
teachers are not required to do by regulations, and one of those is to treat their students/pupils as out
right failures. As a matter of fact the pride of a teacher is in the good and successful performance of
53
his/her students/pupils. In short, students/pupils are protected by regulations and professional values
from abuse (indiscriminate labelling) by their teachers.

This is however not to say that what this theory explains is not true. Surely, the interaction between the
teacher and the student/pupil is one of the important determinants in the student's/pupil’s performance
and behaviour, that it demands a close analysis. For this reason, this theory is important and relevant to
the teacher and teacher's career.

Apart from the 'new" sociology of education theory which is a classroom theory or a theory for teachers,
and the ethno-methodology, which at least tries to explain the structure of the schools by actions which
take place in them, the labelling theory is the most relevant of all the theories in sociology when it
comes to studying a classroom situation. It has "entered" the classroom, and analysed all the actions
taking place therein. It has helped us understand one of the factors involved in the differential academic
performance of students - why some students fail and others pass, some behave and others misbehave.
This is a theory which has no black box of education problem, it does not speculate about the
relationship between education and other events in the society as the structural, conflict and human
capital theories do.

By exposing what happens in the classroom, the theory has reminded teachers of what they should avoid
if they have to make more students/pupils succeed in their academic performance. Teachers aught to
know that they are dealing with students/pupils who come to school to develop their potentials (or to
pass), and that teachers are there to help them develop their potentials. Teachers need to know that the
labels they give to students/pupils do affect their (teachers') attitudes towards students/pupils, and also
affect their level of performance and their aspiration and desire to teach the labelled students/pupils.
Does it not happen in many cases that when teachers have made up their mind about one class, they will
behave accordingly in such a class? In a class which they call bad, they will go there unprepared and
tell stories, but the same teachers will go in another class very prepared and teach very well.

May we note that a good teacher does not go in a class with a predetermined mind that this class is good
or is bad, or that the subject (mathematics) is very difficult, it will “separate men from boys”, or that the
teacher is the only genius in the school. A teacher who has such attitudes will produce more failures than
passers. A teacher who is boastful about his/her achievement is just as bad as a teacher who always

54
moans or complains about his/her lessons. He/she will make learning quite difficult for his/her
students/pupils. Note that students/pupils hate boastful, incompetent, lazy and non-caring teachers, and
equally hate such teachers' subjects.

Summary of the Labelling Theory

The labelling theory is concerned with the process by which individuals become to be known or labelled
as either troublemakers or good, not with the individual or the act itself. In sociology, its preoccupation
is with the understanding of how individuals came to be known as deviants. It is the society which
creates deviants through the process of interaction.

In a classroom situation, the theory looks at the interaction between the student/pupil and the teacher, the
process during which the student/pupil comes to be labelled by the teacher. Teachers expect certain
behaviour and performance from various students/pupils, based on the first and second-hand sources and
types of information, and because of these expectations, teachers behave differently toward different
students/pupils. These expectations have their own consequences. Teachers' expectations of their
students'/pupils’ performance or behaviour do tend to shape the performance and behaviour of their
students/pupils - what is defined as real at the beginning of the programme comes to be true at the end of
it, though it is not always so.

This theory may help teachers avoid labelling their students as they interact with them in the classroom.
Avoiding labelling students/pupils would reduce the number of failures or troublemakers in schools.
When students/pupils are given tags or labels, teachers' behaviour toward students/pupils is shaped
according to those labels. Let it be noted that teachers usually avoid teaching 'dull" and "bright'
students/pupils or trouble makers. So, if a teacher labels a student/pupil as dull, he/she will not teach
that student/pupil because of the label. Let teachers be teachers, not judges, not labellers, boasters,
demoralisers or discouragers, so that every student/pupil in the class will be taught, and there will be
more of the students/pupils in schools passing or doing better than it may be the case when they are
labelled.

55
In conclusion, let me make this point that the labelling theory does not label students, as has been the
thinking of some students/pupils. The theory explains what happens in the classroom, what teachers do
in the classroom. It does not tell teachers to label their students, but it explains what they do.

The “New” Sociology of Education Theory

At the start of this lesson, you were introduced to the labelling theory. You will remember that although
the labelling theory is originally from the discipline of sociology, it has been applied in the discipline of
sociology of education, and has proved to be relevant and useful in our understanding of what happens
in the classroom between teachers and pupils – why pupils perform and behave differently.

You will now be introduced to another theory – the “new” sociology of education theory - which has
tried to do what the labelling theory has done; to explain why students perform differently. In other
words, the “new” sociology of education theory tries to show the pupils’ differential academic
performance as it is related to what happens in the classroom. It has tried to refute the environmental,
social, cultural and biological (genetic) determinist theories (or explanations) of why pupils perform
differently –why some pass and others fail. The theory has tried to show that, although cultural, social,
genetic, environmental and other factors outside the classroom are important in determining the
academic performance of pupils, what happens between the teacher and the pupil in the classroom is
equally important, if not more important than all the other factors. Note that this theory is specifically
concerned with the academic performance, not the behaviour of the pupil as is the case with the labelling
theory which is concerned with both the behaviour and performance of the pupil.

Origin:

● The “new” sociology of education theory originated from Europe (more especially in Britain and

France) in the 1970s. By the early 1970s, a school of thought stressing the significance of the

56
 content of education had come into existence, and one of its members (Gorbutt, 1972) was
describing it as “the new sociology of education”- an emergent “alternative paradigm.”

● The political and ideological events, more especially the "new" thinking in sociology, leading to

what was known as “new sociology”, leftist movements, struggles for freedom and human rights,
plus the intensification of educational reforms, coupled with inadequacies of racially motivated
genetic theories of intelligence in the 1960s, added urgency to the problem of explaining the
differences of academic achievement among various racial, social and gender groups. (Note that
as is the case with other theories, this theory was born out of what was happening in the society
at that time – so, theories are products of social contexts).

Before the sixties, the explanation of academic achievement was based on racial, cultural, social,
environmental and genetic or biological determinant theories. An opportune time came at the
beginning of the 1970s to come up with an analytical view which was different from the old
speculative view of explaining students’ differential academic achievement. At the time the
labelling theory or interactionalist theory was gaining ground in the USA in the sixties, in
explaining deviance, the “New” Sociology of Education theory was emerging in Britain, trying
to look at the issue of academic achievement at a micro sociological level, and gained its grounds
in the seventies.

● It was developed in the discipline of sociology of education at London Institute of Education.

This is the only theory in the discipline of sociology of education, and it is some times called
“the teachers’ theory”.

● The men who are closely associated with this theory are Basil Bernstein in Britain and Pierre

Bourdieu in France. There were other researchers who were interested in this theory, such as
Young, Gorbutt, Davies and Esland, to mention, but a few.

Areas of Concern:
57
The “New” Sociology of Education theory was concerned with two major issues. These are:

1. Content of the Curriculum:

The content of the curriculum or organisation of knowledge was the most important issue among the
expounders of the ‘new’ sociology of education theory. For Davis, the central concern of sociology
of education should be how to manage knowledge. The organisation of the curriculum content or
organisation of knowledge and the nature of the curriculum content per se are crucial in pupils’
performance in the classroom. It matters how the teacher organises his/her content, for example, the
content of a lesson plan, and what kind of material the teacher brings in his/her test or examination
when it comes to the performance of the student.

2. Internal Operations of the School: Under this, are:

(a) The concepts which teachers use to categorise or define or describe their students in the
classroom; such concepts as “slow learner, higher achiever, dull, bright etc. (You will remember
that in the labelling theory, these concepts were called labels). The argument here is similar to
that in the labelling theory, that the concepts you use to define your students will have a bearing
on their performance. I do remember dropping Technical Drawing because the report form
categorised me as “poor” in Technical Drawing. I wonder how many students have dropped or
hated your subject because of how you have defined or categorised them!

(b) The relationship or interaction between the teacher and the student. The relationship or
interaction that exists between the teacher and the student is a determining factor in the academic
performance or achievement of the student. Students who have good relationships with teachers
perform better than those who have bad relationships with their teachers. Let me take you to
your primary or secondary or high school days, and ask you these questions? How was your
attitude towards the subject whose teacher you hated? Was it not that you first hated the teacher
or developed sour relationship with the teacher and then you hated his/her subject? (Make an
effort to have good relationships with all your students so that many will do well in your
subjects.)

58
Let me note here that sometimes the “New” Sociology of Education theory is said to have three major
concerns or issues. This is when the two sub-headings under the “internal operations of the school” are
discussed as separate issues. In this case the issues or concerns would be listed as (a) content of the
curriculum, (b) concepts which teachers use to define or categorise their students and (c) the interactions
between the teacher and the students. This view is also acceptable in your discussion of the concerns of
the “new” sociology of education theory.

Activity: What are the three major concerns of the “New” Sociology of Education theory?

Assessment of the New Sociology of Education theory

● This theory is a credit in itself in the sense that this is the only theory in the discipline of

sociology of education which tries to explain the processes in the school and classroom which
contribute to the pupils’ differential academic achievement. It was a great attempt in this
discipline to come up with a theory within the discipline, a teacher’s theory.

● Like the labelling theory, it has reminded us (teachers) of the things we do in the classroom to

our pupils which we should not do. If we stop categorising our pupils, and we develop good
relationships with them, we shall have more of them doing better than they may be doing when
they are categorised and do not have good relationships with teachers.

● This theory has gone a step further than the labelling theory by discussing the major aspect of

our work – delivering the curriculum content or delivering knowledge to pupils as one of the
determinants of pupils’ performance. No wonder it is called a “teacher’s theory”.

● In general this theory is very relevant to our classroom work. The preoccupations of the new

sociology of education (classroom interaction and the content of the curriculum) are in line with
the interests of students in institutions, which are devoted to training school teachers. Esland
(197) and Gorbutt (1972:9-10) have pointed out the relevance of this theory to the teacher
59
 training as one of its virtues; and the effort of the new sociology of education to throw light on
what goes on in the classroom is one of its attractions to students in schools of education and to
sociologists of education.

However, the theory has its own weaknesses or problems. Some of these are:

● Its perspective on how pupils fail or pass is very narrow. It has confined a complex phenomenon

of pupils’ academic achievement to the classroom situation only. It is not only the interactions
which teachers and pupils have; it is not only the categorisation of pupils by teachers, neither is it
only the content and the way the content is delivered which do determine how pupils perform.
There are many factors outside the classroom which may affect the pupil’s academic
achievement.

● This theory has raised very little interest among the sociologists and sociologists of education,

especially in the United States. It has not been as popular as the labelling theory. May be it is
because it is related to sociology of knowledge, which was considered marginal in the USA; and
that it originated from the area and institute of education instead of the area of sociology and
department of sociology. Any thing that comes from or deals with education attracts very little
interest and lacks prestige.

● Although the expounders of this theory argued that they had come up with a new theory, there

was nothing new about the ideas they came up with. They were all connected with existing ideas
of social stratification and of pedagogue. They had dismissed all the ideas in what they called
“old” sociology and yet they had not come up with any thing substantially different from the
ideas of the “old” sociology. (In trying to justify this new sociology as being different from the
old sociology, Davies, for example, had dismissed the importance of old sociology of education,
wondering whether it had done much more than improving our knowledge of social stratification
and raising uncomfortable questions about the public policy.) But, what new things or
knowledge which the theory brought out which did not exist before it came on the scene?

60
We should once again end this reading with a reminder that this theory does not categorise the pupils or
tell teachers to define their pupils or to have bad relationships with their pupils; what it does is to explain
what happens in the classroom, what you do in the classroom, to be specific, with a view to making you
teachers aware of these things, and do that which will help your pupils do well in their school work.

Activity:

1. Discuss the relevance of the “New” Sociology of Education theory to a classroom situation.
2. What are the differences and similarities between the “New” Sociology of Education theory and
the Labelling theory?
3. What are the weaknesses and the strengths of the “New” Sociology of Education theory?

References

Ballantine, Jeanne (ed.) (1985) Schools and Society: A Reader in Education and

Sociology. Palo Alto, California: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Bourdieu, P and Passeron, J.C. (1977) Reproduction: In Education, Society and Culture. Beverly

Hills, California: Sage.

Duncan, O.D., Featherman, D.C. and Duncan, B. (1972) Socio-economic Background and

Achievement. New York: Seminar Press.

Karabel, Jerome and Halsey, A. H (1985) “The 'New' Sociology of Education."

Schools and Society: A Reader in Education and Sociology. Edited by Jeane Ballantine. Palo Alto,
California: Mayfield Publishing Company, pp. 125 - 140.

Karabel, Jerome and Halsey, A. H (1977) “The 'New' Sociology of Education."Power and

Ideology in Education Edited by J. Karabel and A.H. Halsey. New York: Oxford University Press.

61
Keddie, Nell (1971). "Classroom Knowledge." In Knowledge and Control. Edited by M.F.D.

Young. London:Collier-Macmillan.

Becker, H. S. (1963) Outsiders. New York: The Free Press.

Becker, H.S. (1964) The Other Side. New York: The Free Press.

Brophy, J and Good, T. (1970) Teachers' Communications of Different Expectations for

Children's Classroom Performance: Some Behavioural Data," Journal of Educational Psychology,

61(1970): 365-374.

Clifford, M.M. and Walster, E (1973) "The Effect of Physical Attractiveness on teacher

Expectations." Sociology of Education, 46: 248 - 258.

Collins, Randall (1971)"Functional and Conflict Theories of Educational Stratification."

American Sociological Review, 36: 1002 - 1019.

Douglas, J. (1964) The Home and the School. London: MacGibbon and Kee.

Good, T. L. (1975) "Which Pupils Do teachers Call On?" The Sociology of Education: A

Sourcebook. Edited by H.R. Stub. New York: The Dorsey Press, pp. 261 - 268.

Good T. and Brophy J. (1973) Looking in Classrooms. New York: Harper and Row.

Karabel, Jerome and Halsey, A. H (1985) "The 'New' Sociology of Education." Schools

and Society: A Reader in Education and Sociology. Edited by Jeane Ballantine. Palo Alto,
California:

Mayfield Publishing Company, pp. 125 - 140.

Matza, D. (1969) becoming Deviant. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Mehan, Hugh (1978) "Structuring School Structure, " Harvard Educational Review, 48:1

62
 (February): 32 - 63).

Rist, Ray C. (1970) "Student Social Class and Teachers' Expectations: The Self-fulfilling Prophecy in
Ghetto Education." Harvard Educational Review, 40: 411-450.

63
 UNIT THREE
SOCIALISATION
Introduction
In this Unit you learn about how people become functioning members of society. The unit opens with a
discussion of personality development and the effects of isolation on social behavior. Sociologists have
observed that at birth human beings cannot talk, walk, feed themselves or protect themselves from harm.
They know nothing about the norms of society. However, through interaction with their social and
cultural environments, individuals are transformed into participating members of society. This
interactive process through which individuals learn the basic skills, values, beliefs and behavioural
patterns of the society is called socialization.

In this unit, you will also be oriented to the theoretical perspectives on socialization. The theories on
socialization explain how individuals develop a sense of self during the process of socialization. A sub
unit on gender socialization has been included to show how gender learning occurs. The unit closes with
a look at the major agents of socialization.

Objectives
By the end of this unit, you should be able to:

● Define concepts such as socialization, primary socialization, secondary socialization, significant

others, self, generalized other and other such concepts used by sociologists.

● Describe at least three theoretical perspectives on socialization

● Identify stages of socialization.

● Evaluate the agents of socialization

● Discuss the difference between education and socialization

64
In this unit, you will examine the process of socialization. You will consider the foundation of
socialization, its relationship to the development of the self, and its changing nature over the life course.

Reflection

How much of your behavior can you trace to your upbringing? How different do you think you would be
if you had had minimum contact with other human beings during your childhood?

In comparison with other creatures, human beings enter the world as amazingly “unfinished creatures”,
we are not born as social beings, able to participate in society, but become so only in the course of
socialization.
At birth, human beings cannot talk, walk, feed themselves, or even protect themselves from danger. At
birth, human beings know nothing about the norms of society. Human beings come to know about
norms, values and belief systems through interaction with their social and cultural environments. During
this life long process, individuals are transformed into participating members of the society. This
interactive process through which individuals learn the basic skills, values, beliefs, norms, attitudes and
behavioural patterns of the society is called socialisation.
The process of socialization is from the cradle to the grave, i.e. from the womb to death. This process
occurs through human interaction, e.g. interaction with our family members, neighbours, church
members, school mates etc.
Primary socialization which is the most important aspect of the socialization process takes place during
infancy through adolescence. This usually happens within the family.
Socialization is essentially the learning of one’s culture. By responding to the approval and disapproval
of its parents and imitating their behavioural patterns, a child learns the language and many basic
patterns of the society.

65
Nature versus Nurture

Social scientists have debated on whether it is heredity (the transmission of genetic characteristics from
parents to children or environment that gives rise to personality and social behaviour. This debate was
framed in terms of nature (heredity or inherited genetic characteristics) versus nurture (environment and
social learning). Those who supported the nature viewpoint held that much of human behavour is driven
by instincts. An instinct is an unchanging, biologically inherited behavior pattern. We normally think of
animal behavior in terms of instincts. Birds, for example, possess the instinct to build certain types of
nests and to migrate at particular times of the year. Nature supporters extended this idea of the biological
basis of behavior to humans. They claimed that everything from behavior to intelligence is attributed to
heredity.

On the other hand, Nurture supporters attributed human behavior and personality to environmental
factors and social learning. The American psychologist John B. Watson claimed that he could train
infants to become anything he wanted through social learning.

Today, social scientists believe that personality and social behaviour result from a blending of heredity
and environmental influences, with environmental factors having the most influence. Among the
principal factors they see influencing personality and behavior are parental characteristics, the cultural
environment and heredity.

Isolation in childhood
It has been observed that without relationships with others, human beings do not become fully human.
Kingsley Davis’ famous studies of isolated children show that isolated children have a lot of deficiencies
in basic skills such as language development and expected behavioural patterns of the society. Several
cases have been reported where children have been raised without the influence of a cultural
environment. In some instances, children were found living with animals. In other cases, the children
were isolated in their homes by parents o family members so that people in the outside world would not
know about their existence. The consequences of the isolation was that the child had few human
characteristics other than appearance. These children had acquired no reasoning ability , no manners, no
ability even to control their bodily functions or to move about like human beings. Three of the most
famous examples of child isolation are the cases of Anna, Isabelle and Gennie. You could have learnt a
66
lot by now about the connection between environment and human development from studies of children
living in institutions such as hospitals and orphanages.

Case Studies of children in isolation

Anna
One of the famous cases of child isolation is the case of Anna. Anna was born out of wedlock (born to
unmarried woman). This situation was regarded shameful those days. Baby Anna was not wanted in the
house by the mother’s father (Anna’s grandfather). When the child was born, Anna was not allowed in
the home by the grandfather. Anna was taken to a series of foster homes. Anna was only brought to her
grandfather’s house at the age of six months. Due to the hostility of her grandfather, Anna was confined
to a small room where she received little care. She was fed only enough milk to keep her alive and was
never cuddled enough. She was rarely spoken to, or bathed. Anna is reported to have been discovered by
a social worker in 1938. At the age of six, Anna appeared like skeleton. She could not walk, talk or feed
herself. Her face was expressionless, and she showed no interest in other people. Over time, Anna
learned how to walk, feed herself, brush her teeth, use the toilet and follow simple instructions.
Unfortunately, Anna died at the age of ten, she had just started showing the first signs of using language.

Isabelle
Isabelle, whose mother was unmarried, was found at about the same time as Anna. The child’s
grandfather kept her and her deaf-mute mother confined to a dark room. Although deprieved of a normal
cultural environment, Isabelle did have the advantage of her mother’s company. However, the mother
and child communicated only through gestures. Consequently, Isabelle did not learn to speak. When she
was found at the age of six, she crawled around on her hands and knees making grunting, animal-like
sounds. She ate with her hands and behaved like an infant. After several months of intensive training,
she began to speak. After about two years of training, Isabelle reached a level of social and mental
development consistent with her age group. Kingsley Davis, who studied both Anna and Isabelle,
concluded that Isabelle’s constant cobtact with her mother and her training by specialists allowed her to
overcome her early social deprivation.

67
Genie
It is difficult to undo the effects of prolonged isolation even with the help of medical experts. Genie was
discovered at 13 years of age. She had been confined to a small room when she was born by her father, a
man who hated children. Genie spent her days tied to an infant’s potty chair and her nights wrapped in a
sleeping bag. She was beaten when she made noise. Whenever, Genie’s father interacted with her, he
acted like a wild dog, barking and growling. Consequently, Genie did not learn to speak. When Genie
was found, she could not stand straight and had the social and psychological skills of a one-year old
child. Even after eight years of training, Genie had not progressed past the level of a four year-old child.

Institutionalisation
Children who are raised in institutions such as orphanages or hospitals may show some of the
characteristics of isolated children. Rene Spitz, a psychologist studied the effects of institutionalization
on a group of infants living in an orphanage. Even though they were given proper food and medical care,
more than a third of the children died within a two year period. They seemed simply to have wasted
away from a lack of cuddling and love. The nurses, although well trained and efficient, had little time
for such things. Some of the children who survived could not walk by themselves, dress themselves, or
use a spoon, even though they ranged in age from two to four years.

The cases of children in isolation such as Anna, Genie and the institutionalized infants illustrate how
important human interaction is for social and psychological development. Infants and children who lack
a caring environment generally develop their mental, physical and emotional skills at a much slower
pace.

Activity

How does culture affect the process of socialization?

Some Theoretical Perspectives on Socialization

68
A number of theories exist to explain how human beings are socialized and develop a sense of self. Our
self is our conscious awareness of possessing a distinct identity that separates us from other members of
the society.

John Locke: Tabula Rasa.

A theory presented by the English philosopher John Locke holds that a child is born with the mind as a
blank tablet, blank slate or a tabula rasa. As the child has life experiences (socialization) that tablet or
the mind is filled. According to this theory, any child can succeed in any profession if provided with the
appropriate experiences. It is believed that children are malleable and can be trained to do anything.
Under this theory emphasis is placed on education (life experience). The same view is shared by
Behaviourists such as Watson and Skinner. Through the socialization process, we develop our sense of
being a distinct member of society.

Activity

To what extent do you agree or disagree with John Locke’s theory on socialisation?

Charles H. Cooley: The Looking Glass Self

Charles Cooley was an American social psychologist and one of the founders of the interactionist
perspective in sociology. Cooley is also noted for his theory explaining how individuals develop a sense
of self. Central to his theory is the concept of Looking Glass Self. The Looking Glass self refers to the
interactive process by which we develop an image of ourselves based on how we imagine or think we
appear to others. Other people act as a mirror, reflecting back the image we project through their
reactions to our behaviour. Based on this individuals develop or form self-concepts. According to
Cooley, the development of the Looking Glass Self is a three step process.
1. We imagine how we appear to others.
2. Based on people’s reactions to us, we attempt to determine whether others view us as we view
ourselves.
3. We use our perceptions of how we think others judge us to develop feelings about ourselves.
This process of identity development begins very early in childhood. According to Cooley a new born
baby has no sense of person or place. The entire world appears as one mass. The members of the child’s

69
primary group, i.e. parents, brothers, sisters and others interact with the growing infant. They pick up the
child, talk to him /her. They reward or punish the child’s behaviuor. They provide the child with a
mirror that reflects his or her image. From this interactive process the child develops a sense of self.
This theory puts a great deal of responsibility on parents and other primary group members who have
contact with children. Parents who think little of a child’s ability and let their feelings be known will
likely give rise to feelings of inferiority in the child. On the other hand, parents who treat their children
as capable and competent are likely to produce capable and competent children.
Cooley has noted that while this process starts early in childhood, it continues throughout our lives. We
continually refine our self images as we alter our interpretations of the way we think others view us.

Activity

1. What is the looking glass self?

2. List and describe the three steps involved in the development of the looking glass self.
3. According to Cooley, how does a sense of self develop in early childhood? Does this
process end with childhood?

George H. Mead: Role Taking

The American sociologist George Herbert Mead, another proponent of the interactionist perspective
added to Cooley’s theory of socialization and the emergency of the self. According to Mead, seeing
ourselves as others see us is only the beginning. Eventually, we come not only to see ourselves as others
see us, but actually to take the role of others. This act of role taking forms the basis of the socialization
process by allowing us to anticipate what others expect of us. We thus learn to see ourselves through the
eyes of others.
According to Mead, we first internalize the expectations of those closest to us – our parents, brothers
and sisters, relatives and other specific people who have a direct influence on our socialization, i.e., the
significant others.
As we grow older, the expectations and attitudes of society take on an added importance in guiding our
behaviour and reinforcing our sense of self. Mead called the internalized attitudes and expectations of

70
society the generalized other. We come to internalize the generalized other through the process of role-
taking. Children are not automatically capable of role taking. They must develop the necessary skills
through social interaction. Mead visualized role taking as a three step process involving the following;
1. Imitation.
2. Play.
3. Organised games
Under about three years of age, children lack a sense of self. Consequently, they can only imitate the
action of others. Young children most often imitate the gestures and actions of family members and
others in their immediate environment.

At about the age of three, children begin to play and act out the roles of specific people. They may dress
up in their parent’s clothes; they may play ‘house’ or pretend to be doctors and nurses. The children are
attempting to see the world through someone’s eyes. By the time children reach school age, they begin
to take part in organized games. Organized games require children not only to take on roles of their own
but also to anticipate the actions and expectations of others. This stage requires internalizing the
generalized other, the game stage of role-taking most closely resembles real life. Through role-taking,
individuals develop a sense of self. According to Mead, the self consists of two related parts – the “ I”
and “Me.” The “I” is the unsocialised, spontaneous and self-centred component of our personality and
self identity. The “me” is that part of our identity that is aware of the expectations and attitudes of
society – our socialized self. The views of Locke, Cooley and Mead are theoretical explanations of the
socialization process.

There are specific forces and situations that shape socialization experiences. The specific individuals,
groups and institutions that provide the situations in which socialization can occur are called Agents of
Socialisation. The primary agents of socialization include the family, peer group, the school, religion
and Mass media.

The internalization of values takes place through identification with adult models. Identification is a
process in socialization where the child learns by imitation, play and organized games. The child adopts

71
the attitudes of his parents, brothers, sisters and family members (the significant others). The
internalization of norms , values and attitudes is an aspect of social learning called Identification.

Activity

1. What is role taking?

2. What three stages do children go through in developing the skills needed for role taking?
3. According to Mead, what are the two components of the self and how are they related?

Types of Socialisation
There are four types of socialization namely;

● Anticipatory socialization

● Resocialisation

● Voluntary socialization

● Involuntary socialisation

Anticipatory socialization begins from childhood and continues throughout one’s life. It is the informal
learning of future roles that eases the transition from stage to stage.
Resocialisation is the discarding of former behavioural patterns and assuming new ones. Certain roles
demand that we discard or unlearn what we learn’t in childhood and this process is called
Resocialisation.
Voluntary socialization is where an individual decides on his own to follow certain norms and values,
for example, a person who decides to join the army or one who decides to become a priest / nun.
Involuntary socialization is a process of socialization where one is resocialised unwillingly, for example,
a prisoner.

Total Institution

72
A Total Institution is a setting in which people are isolated from the rest of society for a set period of
time and are subject to the control of officials, for example, prisons, military camps, monasteries,
psychiatric hospitals and convents. These are primarily concerned with resocialisation.

Stages in Socialisation
Stage 1: Infant stage – This begins shortly after one’s birth. The child is helpless when it is born. It
depends on the family for survival. Thus the family plays a major role in socializing children. The
parents perform everything for the child and depending on the treatment by the parents or those around
the infant; it will develop social attachment or rejection.
Stage 2: Childhood – The family is no longer the only agent of socialization. Children interact with
other children in the neighbourhood and the media such as Television. The influence of the family is still
vital on the child. The parents normally choose what is good for their child.

Stage 3: Adolescent – The peer group becomes very important in socialization at this stage. Most
adolescents seek counsel from peers and dislike the company of adults. The peer group becomes the
information bureau. Adolescents want freedom from the controls of adult and they want to discover their
identity. Adolescents are usually full of vigour and want to do things on their own. Puberty and
biological changes causes a lot of anxiety in most adolescents.

Stage 4: Adult socialization – Adult socialization is divided into two, the socialization for work and
socialization for marriage or parenthood. Sometimes the experiences in childhood and adolescent
influence our careers. Occupational socialization is mostly intense after one has left school, it continues
throughout one’s life, because one may decide to change careers.
Socialisation for marriage or parenthood also starts in childhood. A child observes parents in domestic
issues, how they care for each other and their children. The transition into marriage is a gradual process.

Another aspect of adult socialization is known as the Midlife Crisis. The Midlife Crisis is a stressful
period of self evaluation, where an individual realizes that he / she has not achieved the basic needs of
life and one has very little time to do so. Men may experience it between 40-50 years. Most women may

73
experience it between 35-40 years. People caught up in such a crisis do things in a hurry and would like
to do things quickly. The age of midlife crisis varies from society to society.

Agents of Socialisation
In every society, there are certain groups and institutions with which children interact most often. They
are the agents of socialization.
1. The Family
Parents and other family members are the most important agents of socialization in childhood, and
they often exert a significant influence over the children. The way children learn is similar but what
they learn differ from family to family.
Parenting styles differ , some parents may be strict while others may be permissive. This would have
an influence on the growth and development of the child.

The family is the most important agent of socialization in almost every society. The importance of
the family rests primarily on its role as the principal socializer of the young children. It is within the
family that most children first learn how to behave in socially acceptable ways, to develop close
emotional ties and to internalize the values and norms of society.

Experiences within the family help determine the type of person an individual becomes.
Socialisation in a family setting can be both deliberate and unconscious. A father may teach his
children about the importance of telling the truth or being considerate to others. A mother may
instruct her children on how to spend and save money. These are deliberate or intended socialization
activities. A mother may tell bed time stories to her children. They are also unintended socialization
activities. Many of these activities have an even greater effect on children than do deliberate
attempts at socialization. For instance, a father carefully explains to his child about the importance of
being polite. Then a situation occurs in which the father is impolite himself. Is the child likely to
follow what the father says or what he does? Quite often parents send unintended messages that push
their children in opposite directions by behaving in ways that are contrary to what they preach.

2. Peer Group

74
 As children grow up, they are influenced by forces outside the family. In particular they begin to
relate more and more with their peer group. A peer group is a primary composed of individuals of
roughly equal age and social characteristics. Members of peer group tend to become friends because
of the equal status and mutual interests. Friendship leads to shared opinions and values. Peers
influence each other. The emphasis or focus is on group interests and acquiring the skills needed to
fit into a subculture.

Socialisation also tends to be much more unstructured in a peer group setting, because the focus
within peer groups is on the subculture. Group goals sometimes are at odds with the goals of the
larger society. Parents in particular become concerned if they believe that the norms and values of
the group are becoming more important to their children than family norms and values.

3. The School
The educational system is specifically given the responsibility for socializing the younger
generation. Schools are charged with teaching younger people the skills and knowledge they will
need to be useful citizens. The school introduces the children also to impersonal rules and
regulations of the formal organizations.

Schools are also a means of social selection, sorting pupils according to their ability. Co-curricular
activities in school such as clubs, sports are intended to train pupils for life in the society. Schools
also attempt to transmit norms and values such as the norm of independence, norm of universalism,
norm of individual achievement and norm of equality of opportunity. Patriotism, responsibility and
good citizenship is also instilled in the learning.

4. Mass Media
The mass media is another influential agent of socialization. Mass media includes T.V., radio, news
papers, magazines and other forms of communication that reach large audiences without personal
contact between the individuals sending the information and those receiving it. It is impossible to
assess what T.V. and other mass media do to us and for us.

75
 The available evidence indicates that they can affect social behaviour and attitudes. The print and
non-print media are the primary sources of information or entertainment in many countries today.

The effects of T.V. on children are a topic of ongoing debate. On the negative side, research has
indicated that most children spend more time watching T.V than they spend in school. By the age
of 18, these children will have witnessed countless fictional acts of murder, rape, robbery and other
forms of crime and violence. Studies have found a relationship between violence on T.V and
aggression among viewers particularly children. On the positive side, T.V. expands our world. It can
be a powerful educational tool, e.g. T.V brings far-off places into our homes, makes world events
immediate and introduces us to subjects we might never experience on our own.

5. Religion
Religion is another important agent of socialization especially in the area of values transmission.
Religion plays a vital role in the shaping of individuals in terms of norms, values, beliefs and
attitudes. Some people may not indulge in certain activities on religious conviction, for example beer
drinking and smoking. Others may not eat certain foods on religious grounds. Some religious
institutions have established institutions of learning such as schools, colleges or universities in order
to propagate their own values.

Activity

1. List and describe the main agents of socialization in the Zambian society.
2. In what ways are total institutions different from other agents of socialization?

Distinction between socialization and education

Education embraces socialization. It is an organized part of process through which succeeding
generations learn the accumulated knowledge. Education is a systematic and formalized transmission
of knowledge and skills through established institutions. Education involves both learning and
teaching. The organized instruction they provide is called formal education. Learning that results
from unorganized instruction are called informal education.
76
 Socialization is essentially the learning of one’s culture and way of life. Socialization is the impact
of social institutions on individuals. It calls for conformity of group’s expectations, norms, values
and attitudes. Socialization aims at social control through the impartation of norms, values, attitudes,
beliefs, etc.

Activity

1. What is the self?

2. In what ways are total institutions different from other agents of socialization?
3. What does research on children reared in isolation indicate about the effects of the cultural
environment on social and psychological development?
4. In what ways does the mass media, particularly television reinforce and counteract the
effects of the other agents of socialization.
5. What is the difference between education and socialization?

Gender socialization
The starting point in the sociology of gender is the idea that behavioural and experiential differences
between women and men are culturally constructed, and not biologically determined.
Sociologists have made use of a distinction between sex and gender coined in the 1960’s by American
psychoanalyst Robert Stoller. Stoller suggested that the anatomical features which are associated with
men and women might be labeled ‘sex’ while the behaviour or the cultural practices of men and women
should be referred to as ‘gender’. In other words sex is a biological characteristic, while gender is
culturally constructed. Following this argument, Stoller stated that there was no correlation between sex
and gender. It did not always follow, for example that a boy must behave in a masculine way or a girl in
a feminine way. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that women took the bulk of domestic
responsibilities in any given household because that was seen as culturally appropriate feminine
behaviour and not because they were biologically inclined to do so.

77
Gender socialization begins as soon as one is born. Gender learning by infants is almost unconscious.
Before children can accurately label themselves as either a boy or a girl, they receive a range of pre-
verbal cues. For example, male and female adults usually handle infants differently. The cosmetics
women use contains scents different from those the baby might learn to associate with males.
Differences in dress, hair styles, and voices and so on provide visual cues for the infant in the learning
process.
By the age of two, children have a partial understanding of sex differences. They know whether they are
a boy or a girl, and they can categorize others accurately. At about 5 or 6 years, the child knows that a
person’s gender does not change, and that sex differences between girls and boys are anatomically
based.The toys, pictures books and television programmes with which young children come into contact
all tend to emphasize differences between male and female attributes.

Activity

1. What is gender learning? How is gender learning influenced by culture?

References
Giddens, A. (2006) Sociology. 5th Ed. Cambridge. Polity Press.
Hughes, M. and Kroehler, C.J. (2008) Sociology the core. 8th Ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Neubeck, K.J. and Glasberg, D.S. (2005) Sociology: Diversity, Conflict and Change. Boston:
McGraw-Hill.
Laverne, T. (1995) Sociology. 5th Ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Kornblum, W. (2008) Sociology in a changing world. New York: Thomson

78
 UNIT FOUR
SOCIAL FUNCTIONS OF EDUCATION AND DEMAND FOR FORMAL EDUCATION
Introduction
In this unit, you will focus on the social functions of education. Among the most important of these
functions are the transmission of culture, social integration, the creation of knowledge and occupation.
You will also learn about the demand and trust for formal education.

Aim
The aim of this unit is to equip you with knowledge on the functions of education and, attitudes and
skills with regards to the demand for and trust in formal education.

Objectives
By the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i) Discuss the functions of education
ii) Examine the functionalist and Conflict perspectives on the functions of education
iii) Discuss people’s trust in education in Zambia

Content

This unit is divided into two lessons:

● Social functions of education

● Demand and trust for education in Zambia

Time Frame

You are expected to spend 6 hours on this unit

79
 Lesson One
Social Functions of Education

Introduction
In this lesson, you will learn about the major functions of education as a social institution. Sociologists
from the functionalist perspective believe that the functions performed by education as a social
institution work to maintain the stability and smooth running of society.

Objectives
By the end of the lesson, you should be able to:
1. Describe the manifest functions of education.
2. State the latent functions of education.
3. Describe the dysfunctional tendencies of educational systems

Reflection
Imagine how society would be without education. Education like other social institutions arose in
response to basic human needs. Providing the young with knowledge and skills they need to take up
future roles is one of the critical roles of education in every society. Sociologists have observed that
societal survival depends in large part on the socialisation of new members into the ways of the society.
Societies must ensure that children, as well as immigrants acquire the knowledge, skills, behavioural
patterns and values necessary to become functioning members of their society. To accomplish these
goals, every society develops a system of roles and norms that ensures the transmission of knowledge,
values and patterns of behaviour from one generation to the next.

Sociologists have observed that society does not operate in a mass but through specific social structures.
This is exemplified by the structural functionalist perspective. Societal functions are many; these
functions are shared among the various social structures informally and formally established by society.
These social structures of society performing specific functions allocated to them by society are called
social institutions.

80
Education is one of the social institutions. The function of a social institution refers to the contribution it
makes to the maintenance and continuance of the total system of which it forms part, e.g. the social
function of religion is the maintenance of morals and that of the family is procreation and rearing of
children and thus making a contribution to the maintenance of the total society over generations.
In looking at the social functions of education, we should address the question: What is the role of
education in society?

Functions of a social institution can be manifest, latent and sometimes dysfunctional. Manifest functions
are the intended objectives or goals of the system which are recognized by the participants concerned.
Latent functions are the unintended consequences of a system which are not recognized. The unplanned,
unwanted, unanticipated or undesired consequences of a system are regarded as dysfunctional.

Manifest functions of education

1. Conservative function (Transmission of culture). The French Sociologist Emile Durkheim saw the
major function of education as the transmission of society’s norms and values. According to
Durkheim, society can only survive if there exists among its members a sufficient degree of
homogeneity. Education perpetuates and reinforces this homogeneity by fixing in the child from the
beginning the essential similarities which collective life demands (consensus). Without these
essential similarities which collective life demands, e.g. co-operation and social solidarity, social life
would be difficult.

Durkheim’s views can be illustrated by educational practices such as a common educational

curriculum that helps to instill shared norms and values into a population with diverse backgrounds.
It provides a shared language and a common history.

Education preserves the society’s dominant culture and transmits it from one generation to another
through two components of culture, i.e., ( i ) The instrumental component – comprising knowledge
and skills. (ii) The expressive component – consisting of values, norms and belief systems.

81
 In contributing to the stability of a society, the educational system transmits two aspects of the
culture of the total society in an integrated fashion.

Does the education system transmit only one culture? The school has to grapple with the problem of
selecting a set of values to be imparted in pupils. In western countries, the school and the teacher
symbolizes the values of the middle class.

In most African societies, the school values may differ from those of the traditional societies, this is
understandable because modern education was introduced by missionaries and our educational
systems are largely influenced by elements drawn from western educational systems. Some of the
conflicting values are about traditional practices such as Nkolola, Mkanda, Ichisungu and other
traditional rituals which may keep pupils away from school and instill different values.

2. Innovative function
The education system is expected to be a major source of new ideas and also to develop new
knowledge as knowledge is in a constant state of flux – knowledge is always changing. This function
is emphasized, especially in modern societies, as modern society cannot survive without education.
In traditional society the culture that is transmitted is largely unchanged.

Education institutions can contribute to social change. Colleges and universities are centres of
creative thought and discovery and all contemporary educational institutions disseminate new
knowledge and values to younger generations. Hence, educational institutions can be used to prepare
populations for modernization. Education is regarded as an ameliorative agent.

Education also helps people to adjust to change. This benefit has become increasingly important as
social changes today are occurring rapidly and affecting people’s lives. Some of the changes have
positive and negative consequences. Education can help a person understand these changes and
provide the skills for adjusting to them. Education, therefore, increases a person’s knowledge and
intellectual skills. It enhances one’s ability to think and reason effectively. For instance, in helping
pupils in schools to cope with challenges of modern living, the MoE has integrated life skills in the

82
 curriculum, the teaching of psycho-social life skills such as self awareness, assertiveness, decision
making, interpersonal relationships, problem solving, critical thinking, coping with emotions, stress
and empathy. School education is sometimes character education or citizenship training.

3. Economic function
The economic function of education is that every nation depends on the quality of its citizens for
development. The educational institution trains the human resource for the nation. Hence, schools,
colleges and universities are expected to impart knowledge and skills that prepare young people for
adult roles or the world of work.

Education teaches the individual specific skills necessary for future occupations. Attitudes, skills and
knowledge are imparted. This function is particularly vital in modern society with its increasingly
complex and specialized division of labour. In modern society social solidarity is based largely on
the interdependence of specialized skills, for example, in the manufacture of certain goods, they may
require a combination of a variety of specialists. This necessity for combination produces co-
operation and social solidarity.

From the Human Capital Theory stand point, it is believed that education does not only improve the
individual choices available to man, but that an educated population provides the type of labour
force necessary for industrial development and economic growth. The quality of economic growth in
the nation depends on education. Factors contributing to economic development are skills,
knowledge and attitudes of the people which are propagated by the education system.

The attitude of Zambians towards time, health, politics and environment is largely shaped by the
education system. The acquisition of skills has a significant economic value in human capabilities
and economic productivity is influenced by the same factors. Economic development is a factor of
Land, Labour and Capital (LLC). Hence, the quality of labour is dependent upon the quality of
education provided.

83
 Is the type of education being provided in Zambia today likely to contribute to national
development? Education is a tool for national development. Human beings are viewed as having
economic value. The education system should be responsive to the needs of the nation.

4. Social selection function

The social selection function of education is based on the understanding that children have different
abilities and personalities. A school is therefore a sorting mechanism, children are sorted out to
starting places for their adult lives most suited to their own particular qualities. A school is expected
to give full education to all the children of all social classes, and then sort them out on academic or
co-curricular performances as they progress. In modern society, status in adult life is largely
achieved. Schools operate on meritocratic principles. Status is achieved on the basis of merit. The
school prepares young people for adult roles.

The education system instills two major values, the value of Achievement and the value of Equality
of Opportunity. The norms propagated by education system are the norms of independence, norm of
universalism and the norm of achievement. By encouraging students to strive for high levels of
academic attainment and rewarding those who work hard, schools foster the value of achievement
itself.
By placing individuals in the same situation in the classroom and so allowing them to compete on
equal terms in examinations, schools foster the value of equality of opportunity. These values have
important functions in society as a whole. Modern society requires a highly motivated achievement
oriented work force. This necessitates differential rewards for different achievement, a principle
which has been established in schools. Both the high achievers and low achievers will see the system
as just and fair since status is achieved in a situation where all have an equal chance. The principles
which operate in the wider society are mirrored by those of the school.

5. Political function

84
 The political function of the education system is to effect the political socialization of the child. This
is a process through which the child assimilates the basic assumptions and values underlying the
political system of his / her country. Education is concerned with developing in children a sense of
belonging to the society with a commitment to its way of life. Education provides the country with
future leaders. Education is a tool for human emancipation. The liberation of Africa was spearheaded
by Africans who had received some education. When you give people education, you make them
critical thinkers.

The education system trains the young to take up leadership roles in society by instilling a sense of
duty and responsibility in the young. John Dewey argued that if democracy is to survive, the
education system must teach certain knowledge about the society and its traditions and inculcate
certain qualities so that citizens participate in the governance of their country. Sound education leads
to a greater tolerance of views of others and provides a basis for more rational political choice.

The uneducated or unschooled people have a simpler view of politics and are likely to be deceived
or fall under the power of extremist political leaders. There is a connection between length of
education and the degree of tolerance of opposing views. Sharing the same sense of the past, present
and future is a vital element in political continuity. In democratic societies, there is no deliberate
indoctrination but ideas are subconsciously instilled, e.g. in Social Studies, History or Civics. Pupils
learn about types of governments and leaders. It has been observed that there is a direct link between
length of education and political awareness. Political and bureaucratic leadership requires lengthy
formal education. In other countries you cannot vie for presidency if you do not possess a university
degree. The education system helps in the training of political leadership by allowing pupils to
participate in the affairs of their school. Democratization of the education system through the
Education Board system is a case in point. The teaching of cross-cutting issues such as democracy
and human rights is helping in the politicization of pupils-raising awareness of pupils on civic
matters.

Activity

85
 1. Discuss the manifest and latent functions of the Zambian education system.
2. With the aid of examples, justify the importance of education as a social institution of
society.

Goals of the Education System in Zambia

The Ministry of Education in its National Policy Document on Education, Educating our Future (1996)
has set for itself the following goals.

● Producing a learner capable of doing the following;

● Developing an analytical, innovative, creative and constructive mind.

● Demonstrating free expression of one’s own ideas and exercising tolerance for other people’s

views.

● Cherishing and safe guarding individual liberties and human rights.

● Appreciating Zambia’s ethnic cultures, customs and traditions and upholding national pride,

sovereignity, peace, freedom and independence.

● Participating in the preservation of the ecosystems in one’s immediate and distant environments.

● Maintaining and observing discipline and hard work as the cornerstones of personal and national

development.

● To help the learner develop a sense of personal dignity through upholding civic, moral and

spiritual values.

Latent Functions of Education

Latent functions are the unintended consequences of a system which are not recognized by the
participants concerned. In the modern world education separates children from their parents for regular
and reasonably long periods of the day and the year. This is particularly so in boarding schools. These
86
schools do not merely weaken parental responsibility and authority. They also provide greater
opportunities to pupils for more intensive interaction among themselves.
Schools also create an adolescent subculture which may differ in some respects from the dominant
culture of the society. A subculture is a set of norms, values, ways of speaking and behaving that
distinguishes a particular group of people from members of the larger society. An important element of
sub-culture is language, e.g., campus jargon such as Moma, Monk, Import, Export, Exile, Bungwe,
Mature, P.G., etc. The meanings of the terms are only known by the students and those who passed
through UNZA.

Education widens the child’s circle of acquaintances and friends. This opportunity of mixing creates
conditions for the establishment of friends. It is in the school that the child meets his / her counterparts
from different backgrounds. This does not merely widen the child’s mental horizon, it also provides the
child with the skill to organize social relationships in an environment of different or even conflicting
standards of behaviour. In tertiary institutions of learning such as colleges and universities, this
socialization may lead even to contracting marriages. Thus tertiary institutions are sometimes referred to
as marriage bureaus or marriage markets because of the socialization process. Young people may find
life partners in schools, colleges or universities. No wonder you see a lot of pairing on college and
university campuses, even in High Schools. What is characteristic about most young adults is that they
enjoy the company of the opposite sex. This process of socialization may have negative consequences
such as substance abuse (Tobacco, alcohol and drug consumption) and may lead to risk behaviour and
other vices such as violence, unprotected sex leading to contraction of STI’s, HIV, unwanted
pregnancies, emotional disturbances leading to suicide and other vices.

Education can affect the employment situation by withdrawing a large number of potential job seekers
from the labour market for as long as their education lasts. Thus education keeps the young people off
the streets. In the western world, education especially elementary or basic education is regarded as a free
babysitting service. Every child is supposed to attend school. Schooling is free and compulsory and
parents are prosecuted for not sending their children to school.

The Dysfunctional Tendencies of Educational Systems

87
The unwanted, undesired or unanticipated consequences of a system are regarded as dysfunctional.
Education becomes dysfunctional when the following happens:

● Over production of skilled human resources which cannot be absorbed by the society. The

expansion of general education has resulted in the production of a large number of school leavers,
college and university graduates who cannot be employed. This situation has contributed to high
unemployment levels leading to social and political unrest.

● If the education system fails to produce the calibre of human resources needed by the society.

● If the education system produces people that are not needed by the society, then the system is

dysfunctional.

● Since education promotes critical thinking, educational institutions may undermine traditional

institutions and become bases of rebellion or revolution.

● Education has led to credentialism. In the industrialized western world, it has been observed that the

degree has become the minimum educational requirement for employment. This has resulted into
credential escalation, i.e. people getting one degree after another. The poor are likely to suffer the
consequences of lack of university education due to lack of funds to educate themselves or their
children.

Activity

1. It has been observed that the Zambian education system is not adapted to the Zambian
situation. Enumerate some of these problems and suggest the ways and means of solving
them.
2. The teacher should always consider the aims of education in a broad context. What do you
consider to be the most important aims of education in Zambia today and how can the teacher
help to achieve these aims?

References and suggested readings

Datta, A. (1984) Education and Society. Sociology of African Education. London: Macmillan.

88
Ezewu, E. (1983) Sociology of Education. London: Longman.
Giddens, A. (2006) Sociology, 5th ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
GRZ / MoE (1996) Educating Our Future: National Policy on Education. Lusaka: ZEPH.
Hughes, M. (2008) Sociology: the core. New York: McGraw Hill.

Lesson Two
Demand for and trust in formal education

Introduction
A keen student of education is fully aware of the growing interest in formal education in this country
and in other countries of the world. The institution of education has emerged as one of the most
important social institutions in our modern societies. It matters little which government or country one
considers - Russia in the north or New Zealand in the south, Japan in the east or the USA in the west -
one finds both young and old, short and tall, poor and rich, men and women, all aspiring to go to school.
Even when we have entered the new millennium with mixed feelings about the performance of the
education institutions, with public misgivings about, and declining confidence in these things called
schools because of the growing armies of the unemployed and underemployed, as well as the armies of
the shy and half-baked products of these schools, many people world over still want their children to go
to school.

In many countries, some senior citizens (or the golden age) and the middle-aged are flocking to schools,
especially colleges and universities, to get diplomas and certificates, or even certificates of attendance,
while others go there to learn how to read and write. This is the time for colleges and universities to
make money, and indeed most of the universities in developed countries are meeting a substantial part of
their budgets from the fees paid by the old generation who are going to university for "the sake of going
there". Those who have not stepped foot in the classroom, wish they would go back to those days and
just sit in a classroom. Oh that they had a time machine, they would have gone back to those days and
set foot in the classroom!

89
In the fifties, sixties and seventies, we would have understood this great demand and trust in schools
because going to school in those days meant a great difference. There was a positive correlation between
academic qualifications and incomes, and between education and employment. Those who went to
school got more money than those who did not, and got jobs which were more prestigious than the jobs
got by those who had not gone to school.

When we speak of the "school" in this context, we mean the school as we know it with all its off-shoots
- ranging from Namununga or Rhodes Park Nursery School or Ngwerere Nursery and Pre-School on
Ben Bella Road in Lusaka; Magwero Basic School or Magwero School for the Deaf or for the Blind in
Chipata; Mwinilunga High School in Northwestern Province the private secondary schools such as
Lusaka High School or Leopard's Hill Secondary School in Lusaka; special schools for children with
disabilities; Trades Training Institute; Regent College for Typing, Open Secondary Schools, evening
classes, the Nursing School for Zambia Registered Nurses (ZRNs) at Kitwe Central Hospital; the Ndola
School of Midwifery; Chilonga Nursing School for Zambia Enrolled Nurses (ZEN) in Mpika; Dental
Training School in Thornpark, Lusaka; Teacher Training Colleges, to other higher institutions of
learning including The University of Zambia with its Schools and Directorates.

Objectives
At the end of this unit you should be able to;
i) Discuss the demand for and trust in the education institutions in the world in the seventies
ii) Discuss the demand for and trust in schools in Zambia
iii) Explain the tasks which schools have been given
iv) Discuss whether our schools have failed or succeeded in performing the tasks given to them.

Demand for and trust in schools in the world

The world experienced a great demand for education in the seventies. Many countries built more and
more schools, and spent a lot of money on education of their own citizens. Paradoxically, this was the
time when graduates from schools experienced the problems of underemployment and unemployment.
In England, for example, in spite of the fact that a young graduate of the "world university - Oxford
University - found that the only job available to him or her was that of a sales person in an electronics

90
firm, there was still a big demand for education in the seventies (O'Toole, 1975). One wonders what the
Oxford university graduate is doing in the new millennium - standing at the entrance of an electronics
shop as a security officer. But we would not be wrong to think that in England today, parents still want
their children to go to school.
The trend in the seventies was the same in other countries. In Sweden, a young lady with a bachelor's
degree in chemistry found that the prestigious job awaiting her was that of a secretary. A university
graduate in Poland became a clerk in a state industry, while a graduate of one of the best technical high
schools in Germany worked as a machinist, a job which in the sixties was held by a person with only
primary education (O'Toole, 1975). In spite of this development, none of these countries ever thought of
stopping children from going to school.

The United States of America was equally faced with the problems of unemployment and
underemployment of high school, college and university graduates in the seventies. A Stanford
University PhD holder took the best post available after graduation as a middle-level bureaucrat in a
regional office of the USA Department of Labour. This process of job displacement was very apparent
at the bottom of the occupational ladder where the lowly educated workers were knocked off the bottom
"step" of the ladder. Someone with a high school diploma in the State of California could only work in
a grocery shop (O'Toole, 1975). The seventies surely saw a growing number of graduates from the USA
colleges and universities finding it difficult, if not impossible, to find jobs in their areas of education
specialisation. An unemployed physicist, for example, becomes a police officer in the State of California
(Wicker, 1971). But even here, parents never thought, and still do not think of stopping their children
from going to school.
Commenting on the attitudes of the American society towards higher education in the seventies,
Gardiner states as follows:

When the college admissions season is at its highest, PTA meetings are alive
with charter about the relative merits of this and that college. At family dinner
tables there is the familiar tug-of-war between what junior wants and what his
parents want. Everyone applauds the boy or girl who wins a National
scholarship. Everyone comforts the young person who is turned by the

91
 college of his first choice and has to accept second or third choice. The one
who does not come in for much discussion is that boy or girl who is not going
to college at all.

Although Canadians were, in the seventies and eighties, troubled about specific aspects of school
performance including the relationship between schooling and employment, they still wanted to go to
schools, and supported increased funding for all levels of education (Livingstone and Hart, 1987).

Concerning the trust the people of the Province of Ontario had in schools, Livingstone and Hart (1987:
3) stated that:

Surveys indicate that the trust Ontarians and other Canadians place in schools
has not declined in the recent years; indeed the schools have received higher
confidence ratings . . . than . . . Supreme Court. Moreover, confidence in
public schools and school boards remained stable in the first half of the decade
(1980s) while confidence in large corporations, political parties and labour
unions declined.

In India, graduates from the universities were driving buses in the seventies. We wonder what they are
driving now - carts or it remains guesswork?

When we consider how much college or university education pays, one wonders why people would like
to go to university; when a non-university graduate gets more than what a university graduate gets. The
fifties and sixties had long gone when higher education meant higher rate of private returns or higher
incomes and status. In the USA, Wicker, (1975:190), expresses the situation in the seventies in this way:
It has been shocking to discover, . . . that many of these college graduates
were essentially glorified factory workers earning may be $12,000 a year;
their fathers on assembly lines were doing about the same . . .

Demand for and trust in schools in Zambia

92
We have exited the aching eighties and nagging nineties with confusion, mixed feelings, doubts,
irritations and scepticism about our education system, and with ignorance, uncertainties and indifference
to the government’s policies, commitment and ability to provide and fund education in this country. We
have welcomed the new century, to be exact, the new millennium, but still with a blurred vision of the
direction of the education system; and just as confused, if not frustrated, with the condition of education
in the country. We have now been bombarded with nice statements, slogans and concepts such as:
education for all by 2005, government is committed to providing quality education, government has put
up measures…, putting quality first, educating our future, cost-sharing, stakeholders, basic education,
high schools, basic schools, basic middle schools, cross-cutting issues, user fees, self-sponsored
students, science and technology, girl child education, inclusive education, community schools, Basic
Education Sub Sector Investment Programme (BESSIP), Programme for Advancement of Girl
Education (PAGE) Action to Improve English, Mathematics and Science (AIEMS),Zambia Teacher
Education Course (ZATEC), Professional Support Structure for Primary Education (PSSPE), Women
in Primary Education (WIPE), and the list goes on endlessly.

Unfortunately, nothing appears to have given us a renewed hope in the future of our education system,
even these statements, slogans and concepts, some of which have been coined to make a hopeless
situation look or sound a little promising. We have complained about, and bemoaned the declining
standards of our education system. We are still asking ourselves as to whether the government has any
interest in the provision of education, at least higher education; wondering whether sooner or later we
shall have any one entering our institutions of learning, and if they do, whether they will be able to
complete the programmes, and in case they do so, whether or not they will have a job; and if they have a
job, what kind of a job they will have, because the cost of education is getting out of reach of the
majority, there are many interruptions of programmes especially in the institutions of higher learning -
taking six years to complete a four year programme, and because of unemployment and
underemployment. There are, indeed, more questions than answers, as the saying goes.

It is interesting that, in spite of all these, those who have never stepped foot in the classroom, and have
lost hope of entering a classroom wish they had been to school or at least their children would go to
school. Alas, even those who have been to school wish they had either gone to college or university,

93
while some of them wish they, or at least their children, had gone, not just to any school, but, to Munali,
Canisius, Chipembi or to St.Monica's because these are the schools, and those of us who have not been
to these schools, have not been to school at all, as those who have been to these schools would like us to
believe. An inquisitive mind may ask if this is an indication of things to come for our universities - that
it matters which university one has been to - The University of Zambia (UNZA) or The Copperbelt
University (CBU). Note the emphasis on abbreviations.

Let us take a little more time to discuss this great demand for and trust in schools in this country. Since
the first school, in this country, was opened in 1883 by Fredrick Arnot, schools or institutions of
learning have become one of the major employers of our trained and untrained human resource.
Thousands of men and women have, at various times, found employment in schools and the education
system as teachers, administrators and support staff. Thousands of young Zambians have at one time or
the other found “shelter” under the roof of a school, especially boarding schools, making schools
dwelling places for the young people. Schools in this country have become very important and popular
and the Zambian people are prepared to pay a fortune on the education of their children. Millions of
Kwacha are being spent on uniforms, exercise books, pencils and other school requirements and on
exploitative fees in some private schools. Education has become one of the major industries which both
the legal and “bogus traders” are cashing on. Private schools have become commercial undertakings
making the school proprietors, instant “millionaires”.

Surely, without controversy, the recent years, especially, the past two decades have witnessed a growing
interest, trust and demand for formal education in this country. Zambians are asking for more and more
schools and are ready to build schools on self-help basis if the government would provide teachers. This
interest in education is seen not only in primary and secondary education, but in higher education as
well. Literally thousands of secondary school graduates are applying to teachers' colleges, trades
training institutes and other public and private colleges for training, while others are applying outside
Zambia. Thousands of Grade 12 school leavers and non-school leavers are each year applying for
university programmes as full-time or distance education students, though very few are being admitted
to The University of Zambia, not mentioning The Copperbelt University.

94
Who can forget the great interest shown in higher education last year (2000) when the university opened its
doors a little wider? There were long queues with hundreds of hours wasted by both parents and children
trying to get a place in the university. It took weeks for the university to register the number they were able
to take. In his graduation address of April 1988, the Vice-chancellor of the University of Zambia stated:

The demand for higher education has increased tremendously recently. The
number of applications received from school leavers for admission to the
University this year is of the order of 11,000 and 41% of these or about 4,500
seek admission to science-based programmes (p.3).

Time for Grade One registration is just as lively as, if not more lively than, it was in the sixties and
seventies, whereas the time for Grade 7 and 9 results is one of headaches and weeping for some, and of
heart burns and joy for others. Negotiations for places in Grades 8 and 10 for students who fail to make
it are quite passionate. At least, once in a year, teachers become very important, and some of them
become "naughty", if at all, Serenje Kalindula Band sings of realities - a bank manager loses a wife to
the headmaster for a place of a child in Grade Seven. At this time, who does not wish he/she had a
relative who was a teacher; and does not the teacher wish he/she had no relative because requests for
favours are just too numerous to entertain? One wonders whether or not going to Grade 8 or 10 is the
end of this world!

One cannot stop being amazed at the pomp, excitement, dance, joy and colours at those colourful
graduation ceremonies in our learning institutions. Think of those long processions of men and women
all clad in world universities' robes and hoods of different colours, shades and shapes, led by brave
warriors dressed in the leopards' skins, taking them into the battle field, as it were, of society's high
expectations, problems, attitudes, indifference, and sometimes, sheer ignorance. Which eye can ignore
those men and women clad in black, green, grey and red gowns, hugged and kissed by their beloved
ones after getting their papers? As if gowns are not enough, they are classified according to their
performance, and approved accordingly by their beloved ones and the invited guests; those with
distinction being given the loudest applause that shakes the ground, those with merit applauded with
vigour, those with credit given a moderate clap, while those with pass are silently approved. Listen to

95
the wonderful graduation speeches touching on issues ranging from the superb performance of the
graduating ones, problems of institutions such as erratic funding, staff shortage and run-down
infrastructure, the past and present performance, the future plans of the institutions, encouraging words
to the graduates; to the challenges of what they will find out there (if at all there is any there, there) for
which the institutions have prepared them! Those votes of thanks pleading for the welfare of the
remaining ones, mentioning the problems the leaving ones have just gone through, the hard work of
their teachers, and the promises before all the witnesses of how they would go and conquer the
problems with the sword of knowledge they have been given, and how they would be good ambassadors
of their institutions. These are great speeches that give great hope to the graduates, the staff, the invited
guests and the society as a whole; and great appetite for learning to the ones who are still in the
institutions of learning. Surely, there is education "fever" in this country.

This education “fever” which has gripped us has come up in the face of the problems in our education
system. We have seen the underemployment and unemployment of graduates; we have heard of the half-
baked graduates, shy pupils who cannot add 2 and 2 and those who cannot read even their names; the
public is complaining about the alleged declining standard of education, the rising cost of education in
both pubic and private schools; the highly educated asking whether it is a mistake or a crime to be
highly educated because they have become the scum of this earth while the lowly educated have
accumulated all the wealth there is to accumulate.

In the sixties and early seventies we would have shared similar sentiments with the singer of Form Five
song, that his son or daughter, a Form V graduate should go and get a job; it would not be difficult to get
one, because being a Form V, he/she was a kanabesa (an important person). But, today, we stand in
amazement with the same singer at what has become of our formal education. The only job of a Grade 7
graduate is that of a mishanga (cigarette) seller, while that of a Form II is that of an office orderly. This
being the case, we better start thinking seriously of preparing our children to become boxers or soccer
players for these are the "jobs", and not just "jobs" but "jobs" with money.

Where is the connection between education and prestigious jobs; if after graduating from the famous
schools of this country - Munali, Canisius, Chipembi, Hillcrest, DK and St. Monica's - one finds out that

96
one of the jobs available to him/her is that of a security guard (or security officer, to be polite) with
Anderson and Anderson Security, Zambia Coin, Armcour or Securicor (except that we are told
conditions have improved); or that of a tailor for a wealthy woman in a boutique or a worker in a textile
factory? But, in trying to make this development sound normal, singers tell us "Nchito ni nchito" (a job
is a job), "Ma office ya siana siana, kwacha ndi imodzi" (different jobs or offices, but the same Kwacha)
or "Bumulonda nayo ni ncito" (guarding is also a job). And who can forget the song "Muzake ngati
agwila nchito pa musebu, mupase ulemu (if your friend is a street sweeper respect him/her)? What about
the Air Power Band's song "That is the way we get by", all in an attempt to justify the situation?
Employers of menial jobs advertise that only those who have failed Grade 12 should apply; this they do
in their pursuit for justification for underemployment.

In spite of all these developments even the shocking revelation of great numbers of pupils failing to get
into Grades 8 and 10, Zambia’s desire for education and apparent faith in it have not been shaken.
Zambians have not sat down and asked themselves if it is worth sending their children to school. But,
they are crying for more schools. Men and women of this country who are making a lot of money by
selling salaula, beans or kapenta at Soweto market; those making a lot of money by playing soccer; by
doing plumbing, mechanics or carpentry, without formal education, are sending their children to school
and to college or university. They are using the money realised from salaula to send their children to
school. These are men and women who know very well that the sixties and early seventies are long gone
when (higher) education meant higher incomes, prestigious jobs and high social status in the
community.

Why are Zambians' hearts still won by the schools or education in spite of all these problems? Why it is
that Zambians have not dismissed the schools and stopped sending their children to schools, or why do
schools have popularity in this country? These questions bring us to the next section of this chapter. In
this section we shall discuss the tasks or responsibilities given to the schools which may have
contributed to the popularity of education in the society.

Tasks given to schools

97
Schools have a number of tasks, which they perform in and on behalf of the society. Among these tasks
or responsibilities are those of preparing the young for the world of work, creating social equality,
problem solving, socialisation of the young and nation- building, to mention, but a few.
(i) Preparing the young for the world of work
One of the most well-known and important tasks or responsibilities of schools is that of preparing
children for the world of work. If one asked a Grade 8 pupil or parents of pupils why their children are
in schools, the most likely answer one would get is that they are at school so that they can get
employment after leaving school. These ideas have been advanced by functionalists who argue that
schools have a capacity of preserving human resources, they impart skills and knowledge to the
students, the knowledge which would enable them to carry out the duties and jobs required of them (the
educated) in the society (Karabel & Halsey, 1970).

In carrying out this task, schools have taken upon themselves the sorting, selecting and certifying roles.
Upon the “successful”, schools bestow the approval and honour of the society, thereby giving them the
“key” to the gates of the labour-market, while they 'unkindly' close the doors to the labour-market to the
unsuccessful ones.

It may not be very difficult to see why schools are popular when we consider the relationship between
education and employment. In our society, education goes with employment (though not necessarily
money). It also determines the kind of work one does. Not long ago in this country, we usually
measured one’s social worth or social status by how much formal education one had, not necessarily by
one’s contribution to society. Anyone who failed to go to secondary school or to college thought that
he/she had lost part of his/her identity because; to have identity one needed to be employed. For one to
be employed, especially to be employed “decently” one needed college education. Attaining higher
education was a sure way of getting employed and getting away from manual work with all that is
associated with it - living in Chipulukusu, not Northrise; getting very little money and other things. We
had in mind that to be affluent and influential in the community, one was to be employed decently and
that could only be possible if one had higher education. Alas, these theories are now grumbling, as we
see the underemployment and the suffering of the highly educated.

98
Closely associated with this task is the aspect of preparing the new professionals and technical experts to
run various institutions in the society. This country has spent millions and millions of Kwacha to train
professionals and technical experts to run our economic and social institutions. We look at schools,
especially colleges and universities as training grounds for the required professional and technical
experts upon whom the running of our institutions depends.

One question, however, still comes to us: why do we still have this hope and trust in education when
even the professional and technical experts do not get a lot of money (and so leave the country) and
many graduates of our schools are not employed and are facing the prospects of going to Kanakantapa
or Kambilombilo or other resettlement areas? Do parents and students still think there is hope for
employment and decent living after 12 or 16 years of great sacrifice by nation and individuals in terms
of money and time spent on education? Of course, parents may have this hope in their minds. There is
this thinking that one cannot tell who or what one will be until he/she has gone on the other side of this
“bridge” of education. There is an aspect of gambling - it is a game of lucky chance. It is like being in a
marathon race; there is a hope of finishing and winning a prize. Every parent thinks his/her child will
make it and not another’s child. Every student thinks he/she will perhaps be one of those lucky ones.

Surely, we have great hope for what future holds. This is faith: we hope to succeed the dying who are
before us, or those who are leaving positions through promotions, retirements, and those leaving in
search of greener pastures. Today's tender tens and teachable twenties should not lose hope, for at the
rate we are going, there will be many openings created by those in the thrilling thirties who seem to exist
this earth in numbers, and by those in fiery forties as they join politics. More places will be created by
those in the forceful fifties, and by those in the serious sixties who are retiring with some strength to do
their own jobs before they either reach the solemn seventies and aching eighties when they cannot work,
or before they say "bye bye polio" and exit this earth. The only thing needed by the tender tens and
teachable twenties is to "take care of the neck, beads are not difficult to find", as the Bemba saying goes.

Furthermore, people tend to look at education as having an insurance function. A business person
selling beans and kapenta at Soweto, making millions of Kwacha a month might need to send his/her
son or daughter to school who may be his/her business right handy person to “insure” his/her future. If

99
for example, by bad luck his/her beans or kapenta go on fire, the child may start another business
because, we think, education would have given him/her a wider horizon and ability to adapt to various
environments. Education gives or at least is supposed to teach the norm of achievement - the ability to
achieve mastery and do things to the best of one’s ability; and to give ability to adjust accordingly.

For a lady, education may be regarded as insurance. In case she is not married or a spouse dies; she
would be able to cope with life by finding a job or continuing to work.

(ii) Creation of social equality

The task of creating social equality is one of the controversial tasks over which schools are assessed as
either being successful or unsuccessful. In our society and in other societies, schools are thought to be
anti-poverty agencies; they are supposed to take children from all walks of life and teach them so well
that in the end, they become affluent members of their communities. Almost all the developed nations,
for example, have tried to turn schools away from being the instruments of social stratification toward
being instruments for the creation of greater social equality. Governments with diverse ideologies are
trying to provide greater equality of occupational opportunity for all status groups through education
(Stub, 1975).

(iii) Problem solving

In this country we have the idea that problems, especially economic problems, underdevelopment, cases
of malnutrition, high mortality rate of children, low productivity in farming, shortage of water in the
cities and towns, and many other problems besetting us are indicative of our lack of education or right
education. If we could educate women and men we would have a healthy and productive nation. If we
had water engineers, the problem of water shortage would not have been with us. I vividly remember
the passion with which some of the students in one class argued over the issue of education and national
development or economic growth. Their argument was that, only if we had educated human resource,
we would exploit our resources and the foreign aid which is paid to the expatriates (who follow this aid)
would be given to Zambians instead of them.

100
Of course, it is not the scope of this chapter to go into the intricacies of foreign aid and development, or
those of education and development. The point here is that we, in this country, look to education for
solving our problems. We agree, in a way, with the expounders of the Human Capital and Structural
Functionalist Theories, that there is a relationship between education and economic or national
development, and that education trains and preserves human resource needed in the world of changing
technology (Karabel and Halsey, 1977).

To many Zambians, the survival of this society depends on formal education. New methods of farming,
including organic farming, for example, are seen to be the only means of feeding the growing
population. To use these new methods, literacy or formal education is needed. More and better education
is like a reflex response to most of the people concerned about various problems in this country.

(iv) Socialisation of the young

We are no longer living the “way we lived” in the days gone by, when the family was able to socialise
the young for the adult roles. In those days, we lived in small groups with very simple division of labour
which was mainly based on age and sex. It was therefore, easy for each family to train its young ones in
the social roles required of them in a small and simple society.

In a modern, complex society where there is a multiplicity and complexity of roles to play, the family
has been found too inadequate to socialise the children who will have to interact with others in various
institutions of the society. It is also too expensive for an individual family to train its members
adequately enough to play various roles they may be required to play in a large society. The society has,
therefore, removed this important role from the family and given it to the school which has to turn
young people into responsible citizens. Even when the society at large has failed to discipline the young,
we expect schools to do wonders, and we trust they will, or at least should do so. It is no wonder that all
the blame is placed on the teachers for the unruly children. This task is indeed very important to many
people.

This same task is controversial because the community, which wants the school to socialise its young
ones, may not always agree with the values and behaviour of the children which are associated with

101
schooling. Parents ask their children if what they are doing is what they learn at school, each time they
do not approve of a certain habit of their children. Schools have been accused of eroding the family
values and the culture of this country.

(v) Nation-building
Those in power use schools to transmit a common culture to the young generation thereby contributing
to national unity. Durkheim, for example, saw education as a means of making responsible and reliable
citizens out of school children. This in turn would create a society in which members shared common
goals and supported the moral standards of the culture. He argued that:

Society can survive only if there exists among its members a sufficient degree
of homogeneity. Education perpetuates and reinforces this homogeneity by
fixing in the child, from the beginning, the essential similarities that collective
life demands” (Ballantine, 1985:21).

Concerning the use of schools by the ancient kings in China, Confucius argues that:

When a ruler … wish to transform the people and to perfect their manners and
customs, must he not start from the lessons of the schools? The Jade Uncat
will not form a vessel for use; and if men do not learn, they do not know the
way in which they should go. On this account, the ancient kings, when
establishing states and governing the people, made instruction and schools a
primary object (Ulich, 1954:19).

While this may be true, it should also be noted that schools might not always contribute to nation-
building, for they equally perpetuate diverse values and interests of the various groups of people in the
society. They reinforce the inequalities existing in the society.

Now that we have looked at some of the tasks which the schools have been given, we should ask
ourselves if our schools have failed or succeeded in performing these tasks or responsibilities.

102
Have schools failed or succeeded?
We should at the onset of this section state that we are dealing with a difficult question. As we try to
answer this question, we should bear in mind that this is a question of "whether the glass is half full or
half empty". The failure or success of the education system depends on whether it has failed to perform
the tasks it has been given or it has performed or is performing them to the satisfaction of all or some of
the people for whom schools are said to have been established. If some people are satisfied with the
performance of the education system, to them, the system is a success. But to those who feel they are
not satisfied with the performance of the system, it is a failure.

In a number of countries, including Zambia, schools have come under fire from some quarters in the
recent years though they have not been dismissed as irrelevant and unwanted institutions. In the U.S.A.,
Canada, Britain and France, there has been a call to go back to the basics because schools in these
countries are said to have failed in their responsibilities, specifically in imparting skills and knowledge.
The American public want to go back to the basics because some American students may not know that
Canada is a sovereign country - not a part of the United States - or cannot distinguish between a country
and a continent - Africa and Asia are countries. Some Canadian students are said to be shy and cannot
write an essay in English, some British students may not know anything about the Crimean war, while
some French students may not tell who defeated whom at the Battle of Waterloo. We wonder what
Zambian students do not know - that Lusaka is the capital of Lusaka?

In Zambia, there is a 'debate' about the performance of our schools. There are those who argue that our
schools are doing well, and attribute what they are and what this country is to schools. There are, on the
other hand, those who argue that our schools are not doing a good job. They are producing half-baked
students who lack skills and knowledge and fail to contribute to social and economic development of
this country. Of course, there are those who have what could be called a balanced view about the
performance of schools.

Those who hold schools in high esteem argue that we are as we are, and that Zambia is the way it is
because of our schools. To them, our school system is a great success. It has provided the knowledge

103
and skills, which have helped Zambia to become a dynamic, modern society. They argue that, the
masses, the poor, the handicapped, the peasants and people of various ethnic groups have achieved
unprecedented upward social mobility through education. Where there is failure, they relate it to the
forces beyond the control of the schools. The opinion in the Times of Zambia of March 13, 1979:1,
makes a good summary of the views of those who argue that schools have succeeded.

Those castigating the Party and its Government for the so-called “failure” in
education must think back. . . . It is ludicrous to pick Grade VII and Form III
dropout rates and from them conclude that education in Zambia has failed. . . .
It has to be accepted that, even in old countries with centuries of formal
education and literacy behind them, secondary school education to fifth and
sixth forms is still elitist. It is so for the simple reason that only ten percent of
a secondary school intake is capable of passing tough school certificate
examinations. All the juggling of syllabuses and watering down of
examinations will not change the harsh fact that only a few people are born
clever and gifted. . . .

To this group, only a few individuals in this world are clever, while the majority of us are naturally dull.
To them it is not the school which should be blamed but the pupils themselves. There is a limit to which
schools can help pupils do well. They believe in the cultural and biological determinist theories.

On the other hand, those who argue that our schools or our present education system has failed, maintain
that schools have made no difference to many people and to national development. If schools have
succeeded, they ask, "why are there so many grade 7,Grade 9, Grade 12 graduates and even some
college graduates roaming the streets of our towns and cities without employment"?

Some in this camp have argued that schools have failed to socialise the young according to the values of
our society. They give examples of irresponsible behaviour among the pupils, such as drinking,
pregnancies, pupils’ indifference to the customs and values of their ethnic groups etc.

104
When it comes to upward social mobility, they argue that it is not because of schools that some people
hold responsible positions in the society, but it is due to other factors. They have further dismissed the
view that schools are agents of social equality. To them schools tend to select naturally, selecting out
individuals for opportunities according to hierarchical structure which runs closely parallel to existing
social class patterns. It is not what you know, but whom you know or whom you are in the society
which makes a difference.

Others in this group have even gone to the extent of comparing the present education standards with
those of colonial period, and concluded that the present education standards are inferior to the standards
of education during colonial period. They argue that a Grade 10 pupil of today is equivalent to a
Standard 4 pupil of old days.

This argument may need a comment. It may be unfair to compare these two groups, because in the past
those who went to school went after they had reached the abstract level of cognitive development, while
those of today start Grade One at concrete, if not, pre-concrete level of cognitive development. Some of
the pupils in the past started school at the age of 16, and so could do Algebra in Standard 6 or 4, because
they had reached the abstract level of thinking, and besides, at that age, they knew why they went to
school; education was life or death. Today's children start school without even a slight idea as to why
they are going to school and what they will get out of school.

With these arguments of the two opposing groups, one would say that whether schools are a success or a
failure depends on who looks at them. Each person or group of people expects something from schools.
Those whose expectations are fulfilled through schooling regard schools as being successful. But those,
whose expectations are not fulfilled by schools, look at schools as failures. A parent of a school leaver,
or a school leaver who fails to get a job will regard school as having failed. If a political leader finds
that the products of the schools are not conforming to the values of the nation, he/she will regard schools
as failures.

Let us give a few simplified examples, at risk of being simplistic, to illustrate the point. If employers of
a certain industry find that their Grade 12 employees are performing their duties well, they will think of

105
schools as a success. But, if a typist from Evelyn Hone College, employed in the Ministry of Home
Affairs fails to type 25 words per minute or puts “Dear Sir” on the envelope addressed to the Minister of
Education, and two other typists from the same place do the same, the employers will say the College
has failed to perform its task. How would you think of Nkrumah College, if a civics teacher from there
defines adult suffrage as “old people suffering from some kind of illness, or if an English teacher defines
ratify as “getting rid of rats”? What about a nurse from Lusaka School of Nursing who, when asked, by
a doctor to bring a stethoscope, brings a sphygmomanometer, or instead of a spatula, he/she brings a
mouth gag; or a nurse who gives cough mixture such as Good Morning or Lung Tonic for coryza, or a
tranquilliser such as chlorpromazine or valium to a patient of general malaise? Cannot the doctor ask
where the nurse did his/her training, implying that the nursing school had failed to perform its duties?
What about a nurse or a doctor who stands helplessly in the ward at the sight of a patient who is gasping
for breathe, can we not ask where they did their training, implying that their schools did not do a good
job, or their schools failed?

But, if there are three typists from Evelyn Hone College doing very well, five civic teachers from
Nkrumah explaining correctly "adult suffrage" or nurses or doctors from the same school doing correct
things, we could be right to say that the fault is not with the schools but with the individuals. But the
individuals may also blame teachers or schools for their failure. They may argue that teachers/lecturers
or tutors were always absent or were telling stories instead of teaching. So the failure may not be
inherent, but external.

It is, therefore, those who are impressed with the products of the schools and those whose expectations
have been met that are likely to attribute success to schools. On the other hand, those who are not
impressed with the performance of the products of schools, and whose expectations have not been
fulfilled are likely to argue that schools have failed.

106
 Summary
Schools have emerged as the most important social institutions in our modern societies. There has been
a growing demand for schools in many countries and in this country, despite the fact that graduates of
the schools are faced with the problems of unemployment and underemployment, and some could not
read or write, while others have come out of these schools without any knowledge they are supposed to
get from schools.

There are a number of tasks which have been given to schools. These tasks may partly explain why
schools are popular in our country. Some of these tasks are: preparing the young for the world of work,
creation of social equality, problem solving, socialisation of the young and nation-building.

There are two major opposing groups in this society when we consider the performance of our schools
in light of these and other tasks. There are those who speak highly of the schools, perhaps because the
products of schools have impressed them or they themselves have benefited from the schools. In the
other group are those who argue that schools have not made a difference. Men and women who are in
high and responsible positions are in those positions not necessarily because of schools, but because of
other factors. They remind us of those sayings - wake ni wake, or ubwikalo bwalelo bwachikaya bane
(it matters whom you know, not what you know or you need to be known in the community to get a
service). These are the people who have not been impressed with the performance of the products of
schools or who have not benefited much in society although they have been to school.

Let me conclude this chapter with a story of a boy and a wise old man. A boy came with a small bird in
his hand to the wise old man. The boy asked, the old man, “Sir, is this bird dead or alive?” Realising
that the question was tough; for if he said it was dead the boy could release the bird, or if he said it was
alive, the boy would squeeze it to death, and so the boy would prove the old man wrong; the old man
said, “Whether the bird is dead or alive, the answer lies in your hand.”

Therefore, whether schools have succeeded or failed, the answer may lie in your hands or may depend on
who looks at schools. It is a case of whether the glass is half full or half empty.

107
Activity
1. Discuss the tasks which society has given to schools to perform. Why has society given these tasks
to schools?
2. How has been the history of our schools in meeting the needs of various groups in Zambia? Is it a
case of whether the glass is half full or half empty?
3. Discuss the demand which people in Zambia and other countries have for schools.
4. The fact that everyone is urging the government to spend more money on education is an indication
that Zambians are satisfied with the performance of the learning institutions. Do you agree?

References
Ballantine, Jeane (ed) (1985) Schools and Society: A Reader in Education and Sociologyy. Palo Alto,
California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Chipimo, E. M. (1977) "Statement of Educational Reforms: An Irrational View." Zango,
2 (April): 49-71.
Karabel, J and Halsey, A.H. (eds) (1977) Power and Ideology in Education. New York:
Oxford University Press
Mwanakatwe, J. M. (1974) The Growth of Education in Zambia since Independence,
Revised Edition. Nairobi: Oxford University Press.
O'Toole, James (1975) "The Reserve Army of the Underemployed" Change Magazine.
(May)
Rugumayo, Edward. B. (1977) A Critique of Elias Chipimo's Statement on Educational
Reforms." Zango, 2 (April): 72-96.
Stub, Holger, R. (1975) The Sociology of Education: A Sourcebook. Homewood,
Illinois: Irwin-Dorsey Ltd.
Tiberondwa, A (1976) "Back-to-the-Land Campaign: Zambia's Goals and Problems."
Zango, 1 (June): 3- 26
Ulich, Robert (ed) (1954) Three Thousand Years of Educational Wisdom: Selections from
Great Documments. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press

108
 UNIT FIVE
EDUCATION AND SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
Introduction
This unit explores the concept of education and social stratification. The unit starts with a general
introduction on the concept of social stratification and dimensions of stratification. Systems of
stratification are discussed including theoretical perspectives explaining social stratification. The unit
ends by discussing the relationship between education and social stratification.

Objectives
By the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Define various concepts used by sociologists in discussing social stratification.
ii. Identify dimensions of stratification and types of social stratification
iii. Describe theoretical perspectives on social stratification
iv. Examine educational inequalities in the Zambian educational system
v. Evaluate measures put in place to promote equity and equality in education

Reflection

1) Is it possible to have a classless society?

What is Social stratification?

You should be aware that all societies distinguish between their members on the basis of certain
characteristics. The characteristics that are used to distinguish between people and the degree to which
the distinctions are made vary from society to society. For example, class distinctions may be based on
race, power, prestige or wealth. Although people are considered as equal under the law in many nations
of the world today, class distinctions are still a recognized feature of the social structure in all nations of
the world.

Social Stratification is the sociological term for the ranking of members of a society according to the
unequal distribution of whatever is considered valuable. The study of stratification is about inequality.

109
Individuals in a society can hardly be equal. Therefore, they occupy different positions or statuses.
Society is divided into specific layers into which individuals are fitted and categorized. Each of these
layers is called stratum or social class, and the process of categorization and the way in which members
of each stratum relate to one another is called social stratification.

Basic principles of social stratification

Social stratification revolves around four basic principles. The principles are as follows:
1. Social stratification is a characteristic of society and not simply a reflection of individual
differences. People rarely control their destinies but rather people’s lives are shaped by the
prevailing system of social stratification. For example, children born into wealthy families enjoy
better health, achieve academically, succeed in their life’s work and live well into old age than those
born into poverty. Thus, social stratification is rarely a reflection of personal talent and effort.

2. Social stratification persists over generations. In all societies parents confer their social positions
on their children, so that patterns of inequality stay much the same from generation to generation.
However, some individuals do experience social mobility, i.e. change in one’s position in a social
hierarchy either upward or downward. People move downward due to some set-back such as
business failure, unemployment or illness. Some people experience horizontal mobility when they
move from one occupation to another that is comparable.

3. Social stratification is universal and variable. Social stratification is a cultural universal, it is

found everywhere but what is unequal and how unequal it is, vary from one society to another. In
pre-industrial society, social differentiation is minimal and based mostly on age and sex.
Industrialization increases social mobility and reduces at least some kinds of social inequality.

4. Social stratification involves not just inequality but beliefs. Any system of inequality not only
gives some people more resources than others but defines certain arrangements as fair. Even
explanations of why people should be unequal also differ from society to society.

110
5. Those with greatest social privileges support existing system of social stratification while those with
fewer social resources or are underprivileged oppose the existing system.

Some of the most important interrelated determining factors that differentiate individuals as well as
families in society are the educational level, occupation / profession, income of the family and the power
they exercise over others. Consequently, some people might be enjoying a high status or prestige over
others in a society. Thus one can talk about the upper, middle and the lower class. There are sub-
divisions within these classes.

Dimensions of Stratification
It would be difficult to list all the ways humans are unequal. Some are tall, some short, some male or
female, others black/white or yellow. In western society the inherited differences in skin colour and
inequalities in education are important because they are the basis for social distinctions. Thus, education
level, occupation, income, power, prestige are important factors in social stratification.

Social Inequalities are differences among people that are considered important in society in which they
live. In western society most people seem to think that social inequality results from differences in
personal abilities. If some individuals are more powerful and successful than others, it must be because
they are just “naturally” smarter and more talented than other people. If one is a Director of an
organization and another is an unemployed welfare recipient, the tendency among Americans is to
explain such inequality by the differences in the ability, ambition and effort of the individuals. Max
Weber identified three major components as dimensions of social stratification i.e. class (economic),
status (prestige) and party (power). Each of these dimensions constitute a distinct aspect of social
ranking.

The economic dimension of stratification consists of wealth and income. Now wealth has to do with
what people own. Income refers to the amount of money people receive. Prestige refers to social
respect, admiration and recognition we associate with a social status. It involves the feeling that we are
admired and thought well of by others. However, prestige is intangible, something that we carry about in
our heads. Prestige can be based on any characteristics a society or group considers important. Income,

111
occupation, education, family background, area of residence, possessions, mannerisms, and club
members are among some of the most common determinants of prestige.

Power determines which people and groups will be able to translate their preferences into reality. Power
refers to the ability of individuals and groups to realize their will in human affairs even against the will
of others. As such it provides answers to the question of whose interest will be served and whose
values / ideas will be accepted or propagated. Power can be based on force, the possession of a special
skill or type of knowledge, a particular social status, personal characteristics, or custom and tradition.
Thus, some people have more influence than others. Even in simple matters like conversations, people in
power / authority tend to dominate, by interrupting people low in power.

Activity

1. List some of the social factors that determine a person’s socio- economic status.
2. What do sociologists mean when they use the term life chances?

Systems of Stratification
Some social positions are ascribed at birth according to sex, race or other characteristics over which the
individual has little or no control. Others are achieved through individual failure or accomplishment.
Depending on what kind of characteristics are considered most important, stratification systems fall into
three categories: Caste, Estate and Class.

Caste systems (closed system)

In caste stratification systems individuals are permanently assigned a social position purely on the basis
of race, religion or some other ascribed characteristic. Traditional India could be an example of the caste
system. Traditional Indian villages in which most people live, have four major categories: Brahamin,
Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shundra based on colour. Each of these categories is composed of hundreds of
sub-caste groups at local level. Your caste determines your status in relation to other castes. There are
roles assigned to each caste. Each caste has specific roles and sometimes it is even backed by the law.
There is no likelihood that one can move into another caste once born. For example, the Brahman is the

112
only higher caste that performs religious functions. There are castes of labour that perform secular duties
or odd jobs such as cleaning of toilets-these are referred to as the untouchables. If you belong to the
untouchables, no contact is allowed with other classes. You live separately and you are not allowed to
mingle with other groups. The basis of this rigid system is the Hindu religion which assigns its believers
to unalterable social positions. Hindus believe that they can hope to improve their caste in the next life
through reincarnation but they must accept their lot during the present life times. However, this
approach to life is changing in traditional Indian society as people from different castes meet because of
industrialization.

Some caste systems in other parts of the world are based on race and ethnicity. Examples of such
systems are former apartheid South Africa.

Feudal or estate system

In the feudal or estate system of stratification, social position depends on family membership. Each
major social stratum has certain rights and privileges that are passed on through inheritance. Estate
stratification is characteristic of feudal societies, in which land is the most important basis for social
rank.

Class system (open system)

In class systems social position is largely determined by achievement, especially the economic
achievement of individuals. Every industrial society has a class stratification system. Specialised
education and occupational skills are more important than family background in all industrial societies.
Intermarriages are more acceptable than in caste or estate system. For convenience social scientists
generally divide the social hierarchy into three classes based on occupation and income. (i) The upper
class whose large income comes mainly from property (ii) The middle class of non-propertied
professionals and white collar workers.(iii) The lower class of low income manual workers. These
categories are arbitrary, in America manual workers in construction industry earn more money than the
middle class teachers.

The following are some facts about a caste or closed system of stratification.

113
● Traditional caste groups are linked to occupation so that generations of a family perform the same

type of work e.g. priests, barbers, cleaners and so on.

● It is mandatory that people marry others of the same ranking (Endogamous) Thus parents select

their children’s marriage partners often before children reach their teens.

● Caste guides every day life so that people remain in the company of their own kind, fearing being

polluted by contacts with those of lower caste.

● Caste systems rests on powerful cultural beliefs. For example, Indian culture is built on Hindu

traditions that mandate accepting one’s life work whatever it may be as a moral duty.
Caste systems are typical of agrarian societies which depend on a rigid sense of duty or discipline.

Open “class” systems

Industrial societies depend on developing specialized talents, hence it fosters social stratification based
on individual achievement or class system. A class system is more ‘open’ such that those who gain
schooling and skill may experience some mobility in relation to their parents or siblings.

In both caste and class systems people remain unequal, but in the class system inequality rests on
personal talent, opportunity and effort rather than the accident of birth. Careers become an issue of
individual choice not moral duty. Similarly, individual freedom is allowed in the selection of marriage
partners.

In the Class System, some researchers have identified five major classes with many sub classes. (i)The
upper class-the rich who have inherited property.(ii) The upper middle class-professionals who earn
large salaries.(iii) The lower middle class-educated white collar workers and professionals with lower
salaries (iv) The working class-skilled blue collar workers who earn hourly wages.(v) The lower class-
unskilled workers and the poor.

Ascription and Social Stratification

To a considerable degree, the class system rewards individual talent and effort.

114
Ancestry- nothing affects social standing in some societies as much as our birth into a particular family,
an event over which we have no control. Ancestry determines one’s point of entry into the system of
social inequality. Being born to privilege or poverty sets the stage for our future schooling, occupation
and income. Many rich individuals derive their fortunes primarily from inheritance and by the same
token, the inheritance of poverty and the lack of opportunity shapes the future of those in need. The
family which transmits property, power and opportunities then accounts for the persistence of social
stratification.

Race and Ethnicity- race has a strong connection to social position in some societies. Discrimination of
people according to race or ethnicity has been practiced in many parts of the world. Former apartheid
South Africa is a case in point.

Activity

1. What are the characteristics of a caste system, feudal system and class system?
2. How has the caste system or feudal system changed in modern society? What factors
have brought about these changes?

Social Mobility
When assigning an individual to a social class, emphasis is put on what one has achieved rather than the
position to which he was ascribed by birth. The movement between social classes is termed social
mobility and can be either an upward or a downward direction. A movement from one social class to
another is called vertical mobility, whereas movement within the same social class is called horizontal
mobility. It is assumed that movement up the social class system is mainly achieved through education.

Functionalist perspective of Social Stratification

This perspective assumes that society is made up of interdependent parts that function together in order
to establish order or consensus in society. Davis and Moore believe inequality is functional in society.
They contend that society is able to meet its needs through economic inequality. Some occupations are
more demanding than others. Some jobs require longer and difficult training. Some jobs require greater
responsibilities than others. Functionalist theorists believe that people involved in demanding
occupations should get better conditions of service than other jobs.
115
Functionalists believe that poverty is functional in society. They believe that some people should be
poor. Poverty is functional because it provides jobs to the less able- to do odd jobs or unpleasant jobs
such as road sweeping, grave digging, cleaning toilets etc. They argue that society would not be in
harmony if there were no people to do unpleasant jobs.

Conflict perspective of Social Stratification

Conflict theorists argue that inequality exists because the wealthy and the powerful benefit from it and
have the power to make the social system work in their interest. The rich stand to benefit in economic
inequalities.

Conflict theorists argue that social stratification is not functional. They question whether some of the
better paying and prestigious jobs are more critical to society than others. For example, is a doctor more
important than a cleaner? Is a doctor more important than a garbage collector? A garbage collector could
be more critical than a doctor in certain instances.

Although high paying jobs require longer training, they are already in built rewards, they enjoy
considerable rewards like autonomy. They do not have close supervision. A lot of prestige is attached to
them. They have a sense of accomplishment, therefore, there is no need of paying them more when they
have autonomy and high social status.

Conflict theorists argue that individuals born in the lower strata may not have the same opportunities of
realizing their talents as those born into the higher strata. A person’s position in a stratification system
may have important effects on many areas of one’s life. It may enhance or reduce one’s “life chances”,
that is chances of obtaining those things defined as desirable and avoiding those things defined as
undesirable in society. Referring to western society, Gerth and Mills (1953) state that life chances
include, “Everything from the chance to stay alive during the first year after birth to the chance to view
fine arts, the chance to remain healthy and grow tall, and if sick to get well again quickly, the chance to
avoid becoming a juvenile delinquent and very crucially, the chance to complete an intermediary or
higher education” A comparison of blacks and whites in the United States provides an illustration of the

116
effect of the stratification system on one’s life chances. Blacks and other ethnic minority groups are at
the base of the stratification system. Compared to whites, most blacks are less likely to acquire high
educational qualifications. Sociologists see these differences in life chances as a direct consequence of
social stratification. Stratification systems are divisive rather than integrating as they weaken social
integration by giving members of the lower strata a feeling of being excluded from participation in the
larger society, for instance access to higher education. Research has indicated that even in the relatively
open systems of western industrial societies, there is considerable evidence to suggest that large
numbers of able and talented individuals remain in the lower strata. It has been observed that many
members of the upper strata owe their positions primarily to the fact that they have been born into those
strata and have capitalized on the advantages provided by their social background.

Educational inequalities
Inequalities of wealth and power are reflected in the education system.
1. Not all children have the same chance of going to school. This is referred to as unequal access to
schooling.
2. There are differences in performance between pupils. Some drop out before completing primary
school. Others have to repeat classes or grades while others fail examinations.
3. Schools which may be considered theoretically equal as they follow the same syllabus and leading to
the same qualifications vary widely in status and quality of education provided. Thus some schools
have higher status than others.

Schooling and Inequality

Four factors that most significantly affect disparities in schooling between subgroups are residence,
gender, poverty and minority status. The effects of these factors are difficult to disentangle and often
reinforce each other.

Residence- studies have shown that the single most important determinant of primary school enrollment
is the presence or absence of a school within easy reach of primary school-aged children. Given that
schools are more readily available and accessible in urban areas, it is not surprising that urban children
are more likely to attend school than rural children. Major impediments to education in rural areas

117
include (a) a general lack of resources, including teachers, materials, facilities and equipment; (b) a lack
of reinforcement for education in the local environment; (c) language problems when the curriculum is
in a national (and usually urban language while rural areas retain the use of other languages; (d) the
household and production chores of children in rural areas that compete with the school schedule and (e)
incomplete schools i.e. schools that offer lower basic only (ungraded schools)

Studies have also shown that distance from school is a critical factor in whether or not children,
especially girls, attend school.

In some cases when children have to travel long distances, parents have to pay transportation costs. But
even when children walk, there are indirect costs in terms of children’s time spent traveling and their
tiredness. Sometimes urban students in highly dense areas also suffer from overcrowded and often
dilapidated classrooms.

Gender - Girls’ enrolment continues to lag behind that of boys in many African countries. Obstacles to
female education stem from a number of factors. The most significant include: national educational
policies that affect boys and girls differently; uneven distribution of primary schools, especially in rural
areas; shortage of female teachers and general reluctance among certified female teachers to work in
isolated rural areas or in urban slums; perceived irrelevance of primary school curricula to women’s
employment possibilities; demand for girls’ household labour; increased restrictions placed upon
physical mobility of older girls and preparation for marriage.

Sometimes girls face discrimination in schools due to teaching methods that stem from teacher beliefs
about female incompetence. This is particularly true in some cultures, for example, a study of Islamic
schools in Nigeria noted that girls did not ask questions in class, were not asked questions by their
teachers and generally had to sit in the back of the class away from the boys. Moreover, there is ample
evidence that textbooks portray women in passive and powerless roles, thus reinforcing the negative
stereotypes of females in society. Such biases presumably affect girls’ aspirations and expectations for
their future.

118
 Poverty- in all countries, children of poorer families are less apt to enroll in schools and more apt to
drop out than children of better-off families. Families pay for the education of their children both
directly and indirectly. Direct costs include expenses such as school fees, activity fees, examination fees,
uniforms, transport and lunches.

Families also incur indirect costs or opportunity costs in the form of foregone household labour or
earned income of children in school. Parental decisions to bear the costs of educating their children are
generally based on their increased future income, increased overall household productivity or prestige.
In poor families children’s labour is often critical to household income or survival, especially in rural
areas. Studies from several African countries show that poor, rural girls in particular are seldom able to
participate in school, given their many duties- drawing water, preparing food, gathering wood, tending
younger children and helping with farm activities. Once children are involved in strenuous work, they
have less time to study and this adversely affects their academic performance.

Child labour is not confined to rural areas. Throughout the developing world, millions of urban children
are found working in industry and allied activities. Rural child labour is traditionally carried out within
the context of household production, whereas, urban child labour is realized within an employer-
employee structure. When children are incorporated in this structure, the parental protection that is
provided in domestic and agrarian activities is generally absent. Urban child labourers work long hours
at labour that is often strenuous and that poses significant risks to their safety and health. Their
schooling is adversely affected as those who do manage to attend school are found to be less able, less
industrious and less regular in school attendance and continually disadvantaged through out their school
years and even later. As for rural child workers, school attendance is simply not feasible for many of
these children due to the loss of income associated with schooling and their parents’ perception that the
benefits of education are outweighed by the costs.

Minority status: Religious, Ethnic, Disability

Particular groups of people may suffer inequalities in education system on the basis of religion, ethnicity or
disability. Discrimination is sometimes explicit, as when schools are designated along religious, ethnic or
racial lines. Sometimes discrimination is embedded in educational policies- for example, when the language

119
of instruction favours one group over another. Children who speak a language other than the language of
instruction confront a substantial barrier to learning. In the crucial early grades when children are trying to
acquire basic literacy, as well as adjust to the demands of the school setting, not speaking the language of
instruction can make the difference between school failure- and between remaining in school and dropping
out.

Other groups of children who remain on the fringe of the educational system are the mentally and
physically disabled. Research shows that this category of children is often excluded from schools.
Teachers trained to educate such children are inadequate and most schools are not equipped to deal with
their special needs. By and large, most schools lack the infrastructure, capacity and the resources needed
to provide them with basic education.

The Concept of Equity

Equity not only refers to the distribution or sharing of resources among individuals or groups, but it is
also tied up with the notion of justice. Any determination of equity must therefore be based on facts
about how resources are distributed (a positive issue) and on judgements about how society should
distribute resources ( a normative issue ) Judgements will differ in this regard because societies differ in
their moral or philosophical principles. Even the factual aspect of equity analysis will involve
judgements, however, about how groups to which resources will be distributed should be differentiated.

That is to say, the analysis of how goods are distributed cannot proceed unless the population is first
classified into mutually exclusive groups. The basis for classification may be age, sex, social class,
income level, occupation or any other relevant variable.

When it comes to normative judgements about fairness or justice, we can expect disagreement about
relevant criteria. Futhermore, at least three types of equity can be discerned: Horizontal equity, which is
usually taken to mean equal treatment of equals; vertical equity, which refers to unequal treatment of
unequals (and which raises the question of how equality or inequality is to be judged); and
intergenerational equity, which lies between the other two types of equity and is concerned with
ensuring that inequalities in one generation are not simply perpetuated.

120
Equity and Equality
The terms equity and equality are Not synonymous, although they are sometimes used interchangeably,
particularly in discussions about the distribution of educational opportunities. Many of the analytical
tools designed to measure dispersion and distribution compare an actual distribution with a theoretical
distribution of perfect equality. But this does not mean that a perfectly equal distribution is necessarily
the desired or favoured objective of government policy on education or income distribution. The desired
goal is unequal treatment of unequals. Thus when concepts of equity are being debated, the issue is
usually a philosophical one.

Equity refers to fairness, justice in distribution of resources; it is a normative concept, describing the
way things should be. It is not exactly the same as equality, which is a positive concept, dealing with the
way things are; Equality describes whether resources are distributed equally; equity says whether they
are distributed fairly, properly.
Equal distribution does not always bring about a fair distribution- to achieve equity, it may be necessary
for resources or opportunities to be distributed unequally (e.g. more to the poor, less to the rich)

One of the principle functions of any government is to promote equity, enabling all to have fair access to
necessary material and social goods, one of which is education. Equity’s concern is not merely to
promote school enrolment or attendance, but participation in all that goes on in school, continuation in a
school to the end of a given cycle, satisfactory performance in school, genuine learning and school
achievement, and adequate opportunity for a subsequent unrestricted range of education/ training or
employment activites. Disadvantaged groups need special attention and protection. Children’s junior
status and dependency make them particularly vulnerable; among children, specially disadvantaged
groups include girls, rural children, poor children and handicapped.

It has been observed that pupils from different backgrounds may perform differently in schools.

● Home environment (class differences)- Pupils from low income groups may suffer from

intellectual stimulation due to lack of basic facilities in the home such as radio, television,
books and other important requisites. Pupils from affluent families may have access to all
these important educational requisites.
121
 ● Children from the lower class are disadvantaged before they enter school.

● Unequal treatment in schools by teachers- Some teachers tend to look down on pupils from

the lower class. Some teachers expect little from pupils of the lower class in terms of
performance.

Dimensions of Educational Inequalities

● Socio-economic background factors such as parental education, parental occupation,

income and place of residence.

● Religion.

● Ethnicity and culture.

● Race.

● Sex.

● Type of school attended.

● Family size.

References and suggested readings

Coombs, P.H. (1985) The World Crisis in Education: View from the Eighties. New York: University
Press.
Datta, A. (1984) Education and Society: A Sociology of African Education. London: Macmillan.
Davis, K. and Moore, W.E. (1967) “ Some Principles of Stratification” in Bendix and Lipset (eds.)
(1967) Class, Status and Power 2n ed. London: Routledge.
Kalimaposo, K. (2000) The Relationship between Students’ Socio-economic Background and
University Entrance in Zambia. M. Ed Thesis. University of Zambia.
Karabel, J. and Halsey, H.H. (1979) Power and Ideology in Education. New York: Oxford.
122