EDM 6210 Education Policy and Society Topic 3 Education Policy and Social Differentiation: Modern Education as Balance Wheel of Social Origins?

EDM 6210 Education Policy and Society Topic 3 (iii) Education Policy for Equality & Justice

Horace Mann ( )

Horace Mann’s promise: “Surely nothing but universal education can counterwork this tendency to the domination of capital and servility of labor. If one class possesses all the wealth and the education, while the residue of society is ignorant and poor, it matters not by what name the relation between them may be called: the latter, in fact and in truth, will be the servile dependents and subjects of the former. But, if education be equally diffused, it will draw property after it by the strongest of all attractions. ... Education, then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equalizer of the conditions of men, the balance-wheel of the social machinery.” (Horace Mann, 1848) Downloaded from:

Education as Reproduction Mechanism of Class Relation: The Marxian Perspective
Louis Athusser (1971) Ideology and Ideological State Apparatus Repressive state apparatus Ideological state apparatus School as an essential ideological state apparatus in reproduction of labor power

“Unlike social formations characterized by slavery or serfdom, this reproduction of the skills of labour power tends decreasingly to be provided for ‘on the spot’, but is achieved more and more outside production: by the capitalist education system, and by other instances and institutions. What do children learn at school? …They learn to read, to write and to add – i.e. a number of techniques, and a number of other things as well, including elements of ‘scientific’ or ‘literary culture’, which are directly useful in the different jobs in production. Thus they learn ‘know-how’. But besides these …children at school also learn the 'rules' of good behaviour, i.e. the attitude that should be observed by every agent in the division of labour, according to the job he is ‘destined’ for: rule of morality, civic and professional conscience, which actually means rules of respect for socio-technical division of labour and ultimately the rule of the order established by class domination.” (Authusser, 1971, p. 132)

Bowles and Gintis' thesis of the rise of mass education in the US In pre-capitalist and colonial American Elite education was restricted to a selected few and it serves as "the aristocratic penchant for conspicuous intellectual consumption." (1976, p. 156) Education for the fortunate few was "narrowly vocational, restricted to preparation of children for a career in the church, the 'learned professionals', or the still inconsequential state bureaucracy." (1976, p. 156)

Bowles and Gintis' thesis of the rise of mass education in the US In early capitalist economy Mass education as means of to resolve institutional crisis of US early capitalist economy and migrant society Mass education as means of assimilation, integration and control of transient, even foreign, elements came to constitute a major segment of the population in US Urban areas in the 19th century Apparent visibility of inequality of wealth in urban areas Erosion of traditional simple legitimizing ideologies, i.e. the divine right of king and the divine origin of social rank Universal franchise in election

Bowles and Gintis' thesis of the rise of mass education in the US In early capitalist economy Contributions of mass schooling to social assimilation and control Schooling inculcates work attitude necessary for oppressive factory in primitive capital accumulation in US capitalism Mass schooling as representation of ostensible openness of the US society State-sponsored education as means to inculcate acceptance of public authority of the Federal and state Government

Bowles and Gintis' thesis … Schooling in corporate capitalism for differentiated labor force Class politics in Urban School Reform in the early 20th century The education-stratification effect of progressive education movement Progressive education principle  "Needs of the child" replaced common school ideal The rise of vocational education The invention of objective educational testing and the institutionalization of educational tracking by "scientific" design

Bowles and Gintis' thesis … Schooling in corporate capitalism for differentiated labor force ….. The expansion and stratification of higher education in the mid 20th century and the proletarianization of white-collar workers

Bowles & Gintis’ thesis… Education stratification reproduce class stratification Stratified schooling system reproduced the stratified the technical and cognitive skill of labor Stratified schooling system reproduced differentiated personalities necessary for the modes of control in capitalist labor process Legitimizing the economic inequality of capitalism and inculcating the value of possessive individualism Constituting and reinforcing the fragmented and stratified consciousness of the subordinate economic classes

Bowles & Gintis’thesis… The correspondence principle in capitalist schooling The structure correspondence between the social relations of the schooling system and those of capitalist workplace “The structure of the social relations on education…inures the students to the discipline of the workplace” It “develops the types of personal demeanor, modes of self-presentation, self-image, and social-class identifications which are the crucial ingredients of job adequacy”.

Bowles & Gintis’thesis… The Correspondence principle … The hierarchical relations between administrators and teachers, teachers and students, and among students replicate the hierarchical division of labor and vertical authority lines in the workplace. The alienating features in schooling learning prepare students for the alienating features in the Fordist labor process The “destructive competition among students through continual and ostensibly meritocratic ranking and evaluation” nurtures the fragmented and stratified consciousness in the workplace and legitimatize the economic inequality in capitalism

Bowles & Gintis’ theisi Differentiation of correspondence principles in the education stratification and the occupational hierarchy

Patient, compliant, obedient, docile Rule Following
Independent, Creative, Aggressive Goal Setting Rule Setting Dependable, Self-disciplined, Self-sufficient Rule Implementing Patient, compliant, obedient, docile Rule Following Educational Hierarchy Occupational Hierarchy

Differentiation of correspondence principles between the education stratification and the occupational hierarchy The correspondence principles between the social relations in family and those in schools

Independent, Creative, Aggressive Goal Setting Rule Setting Dependable, Self-disciplined, Self-sufficient Rule Implementing Patient, compliant, obedient, docile Rule Following Educational Hierarchy Occupational Hierarchy

Debate on Reproduction Theory of Education
Resistance theorists’ critique on structuralist reproduction theory The rediscover of the knowledgeability of the agents The resistance capacity of both students and teachers

The rediscover of the knowledgeability of the agents
“Reproduction theorists have overemphasized the idea of domination in their analysis and have failed to provide any major insights into how teachers, students, and other human agents come together within specific historical and social contexts in order to both make and reproduce the conditions of their existence. … Human subjects generally “disappear” amidst a theory that leaves no room for moments of self-creation, mediation, and resistance. These accounts often leave us with a view of schooling and domination that appears to have been pressed out of an Orwellian fantasy; schools are often viewed as factories or prisons, teachers and students alike act merely as pawns and role bearers constrained by the logic and social practices of the capitalist system.” (Giroux, 1983, p.259)

Resistance theorists’ critique on structuralist reproduction theory The rediscover of the knowledgeability of the agents The resistance capacity of both students and teachers The incoherence in the structure capitalist system

The incoherence in the structure capitalist schooling system
“In resistance accounts, schools are relatively autonomous institutions that not only provide spaces for oppositional behavior and teaching but also represent a source of contradictions that sometimes make them dysfunctional to the material and ideological interests of the dominant society. Schools are not solely determined by the logic of the workplace or the dominant society; they are not merely economic institutions but are also political, cultural, and ideological sites that exist somewhat independently of the capitalist market economy. …Moreover, instead of being homogeneous institutions operating under the direct control of business groups, schools are characterized by diverse forms of school knowledge, ideologies, organizational styles, and classroom social relation.” (Giroux, 1983, p.259)

Resistance theorists’ critique on structuralist reproduction theory The rediscover of the knowledgeability of the agents The resistance capacity of both students and teachers The incoherence in the structure capitalist system The dialectic and contradictory nature of capitalist system

Revision of the reproduction theory: Structural contradictions thesis Bowles and Gintis’ conceptions of sites and practice Differentiating sites: Family, state, and capitalist production Differentiating Practices: cultural, political, appropriative, and distributive practices Structural delimitations of sites Transportation of practices across sites Carnoy and Levin’s conception of education in democratic-capitalist society

Revision of the reproduction theory: Carnoy and Levin’s conception of education in democratic-capitalist society: “Girous (1981) and Apple (1982) call on Gramsci’s dialectical concept of hegemony and counterhegemony in arguing that schools reproduce class but the practices of schooling…are resisted by counterhegemonic tendencies in working-class youth, young women, and minorities. However, counterhegemony as Gramsci defined it is necessarily rooted in social and political movements, as in 1968 in France and Mexico or in 1970 in the United States. The relation between movements and resistance to the hegemonic “hidden curriculum” in schools is not spelled out by Apple and Giroux.” (Carnoy & Levin, 1985, p.160)

Carnoy and Levin’s conception of education in democratic-capitalist society
“Our view is that resistance is embedded in social conflict, and social conflict outside the schools has historically shaped the class-structured schooling now being resisted by some subordinate groups. …The constant struggle to expand democratic rights, both political and economic, also takes place within education, expanding the role of schools in the process of social mobility and in the more equitable treatment of subordinate groups. Therefore, social conflict shapes educational change over time. Resistance to ideologically based curricula and other schooling practices has to be set in the context of this conflict. Such resistance is not independent of the struggle going on outside the school.” (Carnoy & Levin, 1985, p.160)

Carnoy and Levin’s conception of education in democratic-capitalist society
“The schools are an arena of conflict because they have the dual role of preparing workers and citizens. The preparation required for citizenship in a democratic society based on equal opportunity and human rights is often incompatible with the preparation needed for job performance in a corporate system of work. …One the one hand, schools must train citizens to know their rights under the law as well as their obligations to exercise these rights through political participation. …On the other, schools must train workers with the skills and personality characteristics that enable them to function in an authoritarian work regime. This requires a negation of the very political rights that make for good citizens.” (Carnoy & Levin, 1985, p.247)

Education as Cultural Market: The Weberian Theory
Weber’s thesis on The Typological Position of Confucian Education :

Collin’s theory of political economy of culture
Randall Colln in his book Credential Society makes a distinction between productive labor and political labor “Productive labor is responsible the material production of wealth.” “Political labor sets the conditions under which the wealth is appropriated. To the extent that one is paid for one’s productive contribution, this does not happen automatically but because political labor has shaped the organizational structure and the labor market to make this possible.” (Collins, 1979, p. 50)

Distinction between material property and positional property Material property refers to one’s possession of material and financial asserts which can generate wealth. Positional property refers to one’s possession of the capacity or authority to determine how wealth are distributed among productive positions in organization and in labor market at large, and more fundamentally among class positions in a class structure.

Cultural market and cultural currency Cultural market refers to the field in which cleavage lines (i.e. distinctions) among positional groupings (e.g. status groups) are constituted, alliances among them are formed, and closures and barriers restricting inter-grouping mobility are set. In short, cultural market is where the definition of the positional property of a given society is institutionalized. Cultural currency refers to the most commonly accepted cultural goods in a given market. Collins asserts that educational qualifications in the form of credentials have risen to the position of universally accepted cultural currency in modern societies.

Professionalization and the constitution of monopoly of expertise Professionalization of supply Institutionalization of professional knowledge Institutionalization of professional practice Institutionalization of professional career Professionalization of demand Professionalization of work-organization

Bourdieu’s Reproduction Theory of Education
By applying the conceptual apparatuses found in Bourdieu’s theory of class practice, educational system, education policy and more specifically pedagogic action can be understood as “All pedagogic action is, objectively, symbolic violence insofar as it is the imposition of a cultural arbitrary by an arbitrary power.” (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977, p. 5)

“Insofar as it is a power of symbolic violence, exerted within a relation of pedagogic communication which can produce its own specifically symbolic effect only because the arbitrary power which makes imposition possible is never seen in its full truth; and insofar as it is the inculcation of a cultural arbitrary, carried on within a relation of pedagogic communication which can produce its own, specifically pedagogic effect only because the arbitrariness of the content inculcated is never seen in its full truth– pedagogic action necessarily implies, as a social condition of its exercise, pedagogic authority and the relative autonomy of the agency commissioned to exercise it.” (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977, p )

“Insofar as it is the arbitrary imposition of a cultural arbitrary presupposing pedagogic authority, i.e. a delegation of authority, which requires the pedagogic agency to reproduce the principles of the cultural arbitrary which a group or class imposes as worthy of reproduction both by its very existence and by the fact of delegating to an agency the authority needed in order to reproduce it, pedagogic action entails pedagogic work, a process of inculcation which must last long enough to produce a durable training, i.e. a habitus, the product of internalization of the principles of a cultural arbitrary capable of perpetuating itself after pedagogic action has ceased and thereby of perpetuating in practices the principles of the internalized arbitrary.” (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977, p. 31)

“Every institutionalized education system owes the specific characteristics of its structure and functioning to the fact that, by the means proper to the institution, it has to produce and reproduce the institutional conditions whose existence and persistence (self-reproduction of the system) are necessary both to the exercise of its essential function of inculcation and to the fulfillment of its function of reproducing a cultural arbitrary which it does not produce (cultural reproduction), the reproduction of which contributes to the reproduction of the relations between the groups or classes (social reproduction)” (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977, p.54)

Social Space/Space of Position
Cultural Arbitrary of the Dominant Class Social Space/Space of Position Field of Force Other Fields Pedagogic Action (imposition of cultural arbitrary) Capital Other Forms of Capitals Pedagogic Authority Time/History Social Reproduction Pedagogic Work Inculcate Habitus Institution Reactivate Education Institution Self (institutional) Reproduction Cultural Reproduction 42 Pierre Bourdieu’s Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture

Social Space/Space of Position
Cultural Arbitrary of the Dominant Class Social Space/Space of Position Field of Force Other Fields Pedagogic Action (imposition of cultural arbitrary) Capital Other Forms of Capitals Pedagogic Authority Time/History Social Reproduction Pedagogic Work Inculcate Habitus Institution Reactivate Education Institution Self (institutional) Reproduction Cultural Reproduction Pierre Bourdieu’s Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture

Debate on Cultural Resistance in Education
Paul Willis’ ethnographic study of working class kids’ resistance to school culture Paul Willis (1977) Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. From 1972 to 1975 Paul Willis studied 12 working class youths’ school life and the transmission to life on the shop floor. Willis revealed that a kind of school counter-culture prevailed among his subjects. This culture consisted of elements such as anti-authority, anti-intellectual, hard-tough masculine identity, sexism and racism. Willis argued that this school counter-culture had direct relationship with the main features of the shop-floor culture of the working class.

Debate on Cultural Resistance in Education
More importantly, the study poses a significant question to the resistance theory in education and to a larger extent to the theory of class-culture formation, that is, what is the real meaning of school counter-culture to working class kids in the context of class reproduction in class society? “For no matter what the larger pattern of working class culture and cycle of its continuous regeneration, no matter what the severity of disillusion amongst ‘the lads’ as they get older, their passage is to all intents and purposes irreversible. When the cultural apprenticeship of the shopfloor is fully worked out, and its main real activity of arduous production for others in unpleasant surroundings is seen more clearly, there is a double kind of entrapment in what might then be seen, as the school was seen before, as the prison of the workshop. Ironically, as the shopfloor becomes a prison, education is seen retrospectively, and hopelessly, as the only escape.” (Willis, 1977, 107)

Learning to Labor in Global-Informational Capitalism: Reproduction and Resistance Theories Revisited
Paul Willis' three waves of 'bottom-up' responses of foot soldiers of modernity Willis construes subordinate and working-class students' educational attainment paths in post-WWII England as helpless foot soldiers in the long front of modernity. Willis makes the distinction between 'top-down' practices and initiatives of planners and decision-makers in education policies and 'bottom-up' responses of working-class youths in schooling system Willis relates his ethnographic studies of youth cultures to three waves of bottom-up responses to educational changes in English society.

Learning to Labor in Global-Informational Capitalism:
First wave responses to "competitive modernization" and universal schooling: Willis' ethnographic studies of working-class 'lads' in the 1970s (1977) Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. Working-class students waged forceful resistance to school culture in form of anti-intellectual, anti-authority and hard-tough masculine counter-culture. However, Willis underlined that the lads were in fact faced with double entrapment of schooling and work, in which education achievement seemed to be the only way out.

Second wave responses to "deindustrialization" or postindustrial modernity: Willis and his collaborators published The Youth Review in It reported a studies of youth cultures in the in 1980s UK. Willis et al. reported that "In the early 1980s UK became the first industrialized country to experience massive losses of the manual industrial work that has previously available to the working classes. …Form the point of view of the working class, work opportunities have shifted away from well to reasonably paid skilled or semi-skilled industrial work to much lower-paid service and out-of-research white-collar work." (Willis, 2006, p. 511)

Second wave responses to "deindustrialization" or postindustrial modernity: Report on the waning culture of the working-class lads "The dominant experience of the young unemployed is one of very limited sociability. They are isolate and homebound, traversing acres of boredom by themselves or in conflict with parents for whom their enforced dependence is often wholly unwelcome. The young unemployed have more free time than any other social group but, ironically, they are excluded from leisure activities, which overwhelmingly now require consumption and commercial power." (Willis, 2006, p. 512)

Second wave responses to "deindustrialization" or postindustrial modernity: Report on the waning culture of the working-class lads "The pride, depth, and independence of a collective industrial cultural tradition, forged from below and neither reliant on patronage nor punished for its cultural impertinence, is giving way to the regulated indignities of becoming client to a reprimanding state." (Willis, 2006, p. 513)

Second wave responses to "deindustrialization" or postindustrial modernity: Report on the waning culture of the working-class lads "Forms of working-class masculinity are being thrown into crisis…, uprooted from their secured and central lodgings within proletarian relations of manualism, 'pride in the job', and breadwinner power. …The anti-mentalism of the counter-school culture cannot be securely cloaked in traditional proletarian masculinity. Antimentalism loses the counterpoint with a viable predictable future in manual work." (Willis, 2006, p. 514)

Third wave response to "commodity and electronic culture" In 1990, Willis and another group of collaborators published yet another ethnographic study entitled Common Culture: Symbolic Work at Play in the Everyday Cultures of the Young.

Third wave response to "commodity and electronic culture" The advent of the commodity and electronic culture: "New global electronic forms of communication are sideling old sensuous communities — face-to-face interactions with known others — with now literally hundreds of TV channels available through digitalization. …The postmodern cultural epoch is characterized by this qualitative expansion of commodity relations form the meeting of physical needs — food, warmth, and shelter — to the meeting and inflaming of mental, emotional, expressive, and spiritual needs and aspiration." (Willis, 2006, p. 515)

Third wave response to "commodity and electronic culture" Evaporating of working-class identity among youths in the face of the "Common Culture" of consumerism: "At the level of culture, young people are becoming less defined by neighborhood and class than they are by these new relations of commodity and electronic culture. …Most young working-class people in the UK would not thank you now for describing them as working class. They find more passion and acceptable self-identity through music on MTV, wearing baseball caps and designer shoes, and socializing in fast-food joints than they do through traditional class-based cultural forms." (Willis, 2006, p. 515)

Third wave response to "commodity and electronic culture" “Young and working-class people are caught up in the front line of engagement. They acculturate the materials of commodified culture almost as a matter of cultural life and death, not least because they find themselves with ever-diminishing inherited folk cultural resources and with little or no access to legitimate and bourgeois form of cultural capital.” (Willis, 2006, 536)

Third wave response to "commodity and electronic culture" “While the continuing educational question for first wave modernization concerns whether state education is a means of liberation or ideological confinement for the unprivileged majority, the late modernist question for the same social group concerns whether the commodification and electrification of culture constitute a new form of domination or a means for opening up new fields of semiotic possibility. Are the young becoming culturally literate and expressive in new ways, or are they merely victims of every turn in cultural marketing and mass media manipulation?” (Willis, 2006, p. 517)

Education in Global Auction
Phillip Brown, Hugh Lauder and David Ashton published a book entitled The Global Auction: Boken Promise of Education, Jobs, and Income in 2011 to analyze the consequences of globalization on education, especially on higher education.

Broken promise for knowledge workers of high-skill in knowledge economy: The authors begin their analysis by pointing to the promise advocated by policymakers in most of the developed countries at the turn of the century that in the informational-global economy of knowledge talents of innovation and “high-skill”, will be rewarded with “high-wage” job. And the starting point of this high-skill-and-high-wage path is to gain higher education. As a result, “higher education has been massively expanded, and it encourages individuals to take on personal debt to pay for college and university credentials in the belief that they will be well rewarded once they enter the job market.”(Brown, et al., 2011, P. 5)

However, as Brown and his colleagues shown, the wages of most of workers with higher education credentials have practically remained unchanged for the past three decades in most of the developed countries. They even claim that higher-education credential holders of high skill are normally receiving low wages. (Brown, et al., 2011, Ch. 8)

The constitution of the “global reverse auction” for high-skill workers: Brown et al. argue that the main reason for growth the high skills and low wages phenomena is the reverse auction mechanism that has proliferated in global job market since the second half of the 20th century.

The constitution of the “global reverse auction” for high-skill workers: ….. Off-shored modes of production first appeared in manufacturing industries in the 1970s, which triggered the reverse auction mechanism of wages in low-skilled manual labor markets. As globally mobile-informational-technology spread at the turned of the century, the reverse auction mechanism of wages began to invade into both knowledge and managerial workers.

Brown et al. further argue that there are four major forces converging and contributing to the global reverse auction of wages for knowledge workers. Explosion of higher education in global scale at the turn of the century has contributed to the abundant supply of college graduates world-wide, especially for expertise on knowledge and informational technology, which has been popular subjects to attract substantial amount of talents to enroll.

Global quality-cost competition leads to quality-cost revolution: As enterprises gone global, “the new competition is no long based on quality or cost but on quality and cost.”(Brown, et al. 2011, P. 8). Subsequently, “Western companies are developing more sophisticated approaches to outsourcing and offshoring more of their highly skilled jobs to low-cost locations.”(ibid)

Digital Taylorism: By digital Taylorism it refers to those phenomena that “new technologies have increased the potential to translate knowledge work into working knowledge, leading to the standardization of an increasing proportion of technical, managerial, and professional jobs that raise fundamental questions about the future of knowledge work and occupational mobility.” (ibid, Pp. 8-9)

The global war for talent at the top: As knowledge and managerial workers at middle or even upper-middle are able to be outsourced or offshored through digital Taylorism to developing countries; the competitions among transnational enterprises become “focus on attracting, retaining, and developing top talent.” (ibid, P. 9) As a result, it leads to greater inequality of treatment, as companies seek to identify a cadre of high flyers across the globe. It also contributes to widening income inequality within middle-class occupations and differences in career prospects among people with the same credentials, experience, or level of expertise.”(ibid)

Paradox between opportunity bargain and opportunity trap: To conclude, the opportunity bargain promised by policymakers proposing expansion of higher education for high-skilled knowledge workers, who will then be promised to have high income and bright prospect; has turned into the opportunity trap. “The trap is that if everyone adopts the same tactics, such as getting a bachelor’s degree or working longer hours to impress the boss, no one secures and advantage.” (ibid, P. 12) This opportunity traps are especially valid for knowledge worker with high skill in developed countries.

What to be done?

Can Education be Democratic Equalizers of Social Inequality in Modern Society? An Analytical Framework Ontological principle in modern education system (Lerner, 1973) Principle of praise Principle of respect

Can Education be Democratic Equalizers of Social Inequality in Modern Society?
Selection Principle of modern education system… Criterion of selection Ascription orientation Achievement orientation

Selection Principle … When and how to select? The mobility system Contest mobility system Sponsor mobility system Attested mobility system

When and how to select? The mobility system Contest mobility system “Contest mobility is a system in which elite status is the prize in an open contest and is taken by the aspirants' own efforts.” (Turner, 1971, p. 72) “Contest mobility is like a sporting event in which many compete for a few prizes. The contest is judged to be fair only if all solely by one’s own efforts. The most satisfactory outcome is not necessarily a victory of the most able, but of the most deserving sportsman.” (Turner, 1971, p. 74)

When and how to select? The mobility system Sponsor mobility system “Under sponsor elite recruits are chosen by the established elite or their agents, and elite recruits are given on the basis of some criterion of supposed merit and cannot be taken by any amount of effort or strategy.” (Turner, 1971, p. 72) “Sponsored mobility …reject the pattern of the contest and favours a controlled selection process. In the process, the elite or their agents, deemed to be best qualified to judge merit, choose individuals for elite status who have the appropriate qualities. Individuals do not win or seize elite status; mobility is rather a process of sponsored induction into the elite.” (Turner, 1971, p. 74)

When and how to select? The mobility system Attested mobility system “The challenge in a pluralist system of education is to juggle the need to pay attention to the particularity of cultural identity and yet create rules of competition which are fair for all groups. The need for fairness across groups is necessary because at the end of the day educational credentials will still be a prime determinant of career opportunities. For this reason we believe a new concept, that of attested mobility should be introduced into the discussion. To attest is to affirm or bear witness. In this context it draws attention to the link between a person’s cultural identity and educational performance.” (Brown & Lauder, 2001, p. 247)

Selection Principle … Problem of meritocracy: John Goldthrope’s synthesis Models of meritocracy

E O D Increased Merit Selection (IMS) Hypothesis Strengthening effect
Weakening effect

E O D Halsey (1977) English & Wales, men Strengthening effect
Weakening effect

E O D Heath (1992) English & Wales, men & women Constant effect
Weakening effect Partial & uncertain Weakening effect

E O D Ganzeboom (1992) English & Wales, men Strengthening effect
Weakening effect Partial & uncertain Weakening effect

Problem of meritocracy: John Goldthrope’s synthesis Models of meritocracy Problems of interpretation of effect of education on destination: Meritocracy or credentialism

E O D Interpretation of Effects of E on D Strengthening effect
Weakening effect

Problem of meritocracy: John Goldthrope’s synthesis Models of meritocracy Problems of interpretation of effect of education on destination: Meritocracy or credentialism Problem of interpretation of the mediating effect of education on the connection between origin and destination

E O D Halsey (1977) English & Wales, men Strengthening effect
Weakening effect

“We define meritocracy in terms of the distinction between ascription and achievement, using family background indicators for the former and educational qualifications for the latter, we can discern trends from the Nuffield evidence. Clearly there are both ascriptive and achievement forces at work in the passing of occupational status between generations. We live neither in a caste society nor in one in which the generations are severed from each other by random reallocation of status. …What has happened is the weighting of the dice of social opportunity according to class, and ‘the game’ is increasingly played through strategies of child rearing refereed by schools through their certifying arrangements. …Institutionally, education is the primary agent of achievement. But at the same time the intergeneration process over which it exercised increasing sway is just as importantly one in which ascriptive forces find ways of expressing themselves as ‘achievement’.” (Halsey, 1977, p. 184)

Problem of meritocracy: …. Problems of effect of origin on destination Goldthorpe suggests that one may approach the problem of meritocracy by suggesting that “educational institutions is not the only means …through which talent is found and merit gained.” (Goldthrope, 1997, p. 669) Hence by measurement strategies of attributing family background to ascription and education qualifications to achievement may not validly reflecting the reality of how the social attainment process operates in capitalist society. Accordingly, Goldthorpe suggests that aspects of cognitive abilities and social skills learnt in family may be as important as those learnt in schools in contributing to the merit-counting games in labour market, especially in post-industrial economy, where “emotional labour” are increasingly on demand. In his own words, “what is learnt in the family could be of greater consequence that what is learnt in school.” (Goldthorpe, 1997, p. 669)

Problem of meritocracy: …. Problems of effect of origin on destination… The problem of meritocracy and the various arguments it invoked “stem ultimately from the fact that within societies (industrial or post-industrial ) that possess a market economy and a pluralistic polity the concept of merit…is not one that can be specified on any consistent and objective manner, but has rather to be defined in large part situationally in ways which necessarily involve subjective judgements.” (Goldthorpe, 1997, p. 670)

Problem of meritocracy: …. Problems of effect of origin on destination Hayek’s thesis on libertarian market force and the replacement of “merit” by freedom Offe’s and Collins’ theses on managerial distortion and market failure

In Search of a Education Policy for Achieving Education Equality
Douglas Rae’s structural grammar of equality =

Douglas Rae’s structural grammar of equality Subject of equality: Equality for whom? Individual-regarding equality Simple subject Segmental subject (=) ≠ (=) Bloc-regarding equality: Bloc-equal subject (≠) = (≠) Domain of equality: Equality of what? Do X's domain of allocation (supply) cover Y's domain of account (demand) Straightforward equality Marginal equality Global equality

Objective of equality: Equality for what? Direct equality (of result) Equality of opportunity Means-regarding equal opportunity Prospect-regarding equal opportunity Value of equality Lot-regarding equality Person-regarding equality Utility-based equality End based equality Need-based equality Relativity of equality: To what extent? Absolute equality Relative equality

Application of Rae’s structural grammar equality on education Classification of students: For whom? Simple individual equality: Universal, free and compulsory education Segment-regarding equality: Special education Block-subject equality: Positive-discrimination education for racial minorities, the socioeconomic disadvantaged and female Distribution of educational resources: Of what? Marginal equality: 9-year compulsory education Global equality: Positive discrimination education

Application of Rae’s structural grammar equality on education Equality of educational opportunity rather result: For what Means-regarding equality of educational opportunity Equality of educational access Equality of education process Prospect-regarding equality of educational opportunity Equality of education output Equality of education outcome

Equality of educational value Lot-regarding equality of education: Principle of respect, compulsory education common-school and common-curriculum policies Personal-regarding equality of education: Utility-based personal-regarding equality of education End-based personal-regarding equality of education Need-based personal-regarding equality of education Principle of praise and fair educational sifting and selection Relativity of equality: To what extent Absolute educational equality Relative educational equality

James Coleman’s conception of equality of educational opportunity in the US Equality of educational access Equality of education process Equality educational output Equality of education outcome

From Policy of Educational Equality to Educational Justice
Aristotle's formal definition of justice Treating equal equally or treating unequal unequally is just. Treating equal unequally or treating unequal equally is unjust.

The basic contradiction of justice in education Universal education provision as one of the equal treatments for all citizens Meritocratic education output as unequal treatments by entitlement

John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice The first principle of justice “Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others.” (p.60) The principle applies to the basic liberties of citizens, which “are roughly speaking, political liberty (the right to vote and to be eligible for public office) together with freedom of speech and assembly; liberty of conscience and freedom of thought; freedom of person along with the right to hold personal property; and freedom from arbitrary arrest and seizure as defined by the concept of the rule of law.” (p.61) “These liberties are all required to be equal by the first principle, since citizens of a just society are to have the same basic rights.” (p.61)

John Rawls’ Theory of Justice The second principle of justice This principle applies to the distribution of income and wealth, and authority and responsibility, or chains of command This principle stipulates that “social and economic inequality are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all.” (p.60)

John Rawls’ Theory of Justice The second principle of justice “All social primary goods – liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self-respect – are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any or all of these goods is to the advantage of the least favored.” (p.303)

The ambiguity in the principles of justice in education Applicability of the first principle to education: Basic education as basic right of citizens in just society Applicability of the second principle to education: Unequal distribution of educational opportunities according to “equally open” and “everyone’s advantage”

Debates with Rawls conception of justice as fairness Robert Nozik’s conception of justice as entitlement

Debates with Rawls conception of justice as fairness Robert Nozik’s conception of justice as entitlement “If the world were wholly just, the following inductive definition would exhaustively cover the subject of justice in holdings. (1) A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the principle of justice in acquisition is entitled to that holding. (2) A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the principle of justice in transfer, from someone else entitled to the holding, is entitled to the holding. No one is entitled to a holding except by (repeated) application of (1) and (2).” (Nozik, 1974, P.151)

Alasdair MacIntyre’s conception of justice as desert

Alasdair MacIntyre’s conception of justice as desert Conception of meritocracy: Deserved rewards in terms of one’s own efforts Conception of common good: Deserved rewards in terms of contributions to the common good of a community Deserved punishment in connections to the harms and damages inflicted on the common good of a community Conception of historical legacy: Deserved compensation as rectifications of unjust treatments done to recognized groups within a community

Distinctive between distributional and relational justice Distributive justice “The subject matter of justice is the basic structure of society, or more exactly, the way in which the major social institutions … distribute fundamental rights and duties and determine the distribution of advantages from social co-operation.” (Rawls, 1972, p. 7)

Distinctive between distributional and relational justice Relational justice “Relational justice … is about nature and ordering of social relations, the formal rules which govern how members of society treat each other both on a macro-level and at a micro interpersonal social level.”

Distinction between distributional and relational justice Relational justice Communitarian mutuality (reciprocity): Relational justice as social trust, social solidarity and social capital Politics of recognition: Relational justice as social recognition “Politics of recognition demands a commitment to respond to others in a way which does not injure their positive conceptions of themselves, and to avoid practicing the power of surveillance, control and discipline upon others.” (Gewirtz, 2001, p.58)

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression “Under the conception of justice, injustice refers primarily to two forms of disabling constraints, oppression and domination. While these constraints include distributive patterns, they also involve matters which cannot easily be assimilated to the logic of distribution: decision making procedures, division of labor, and culture.” (Young, 1990, p. 39) Young, I.M. (1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference.

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression. "The values comprised in the good life can be reduced to two very general ones (1) developing and exercising one’s capacities and expressing one’s experience, and (2) participating in determining one’s action and conditions of one’s action. …To these two general values correspond two social conditions that define injustice: oppression, the institutional constraint on self-development, and domination, the institutional constraint on self-determination.” (Young, 1990, p. 37)

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Exploitation Marginalization Powerless Cultural imperialism Violence

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Exploitation “The injustice of exploitation consists in social processes that bring about a transfer of energies from one group to another to produce unequal distributions, and in the way in which social institutions enable a few to accumulate while they constraint many more.” (Young, 1990, p.53) These exploitation social institution may appears in class, gender and/or racial relation.

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Marginalization “Marginalization is perhaps the most dangerous form of oppression. A whole category of people is expelled from useful participation in social life and thus potentially subjected to severe material deprivation and even extermination.” (p. 53) “Even if marginals were provided a comfortable material life within institutions that respected their freedom and dignity, injustices of marginality would remain in the form of uselessness, boredom, and lack of self-respect.” (p.55)

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Powerless It is a status in which “the powerless lack the authority, status, and sense of self.” (p.57) As a result, they will experience “inhibition in the development of one’s capacities, lack of decision making power in one’s working life, and exposure to disrespectful treatment because of the status one occupies.” (p.58)

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Cultural imperialism “Cultural imperialism involves the universalization of a group’s experience and culture, and its establishment as the norm. Some groups have exclusive or primary access to … the means of interpretation and communication in a society. … This, then, is the injustice of cultural imperialism: that the oppressed group’s own experience and interpretation of social life finds little expression that touches the domanint culture, while that same culture imposes on the oppressed group its experience and interpretation of social life.” (p.59-60)

Justice, oppression and stratification: Iris Young’s five faces of oppression Violence “Members of some groups live with the knowledge that they must fear random, unprovoked attacks on their persons or property, which have no motive but to damage, humiliate, or destroy the person. (p.61)

In search of just education Education as equalizing project Education as accommodating project Education as empowering project Education as recognition of multiculturalism Education as a pacification project

The Third Wave of Education Reform: The Parentocracy and the Constitution of Quasi-Market in Education System Phillip Brown’s thesis of three wave of education reform The ‘first wave’’ of education reform can be characterized by the development of mass schooling in the nineteenth century. It “involved the development of elementary state education for the ‘lower orders’. This schooling of the working-class was primarily concerned with the inculcation of basic information and knowledge seen to be appropriate for their predetermined (ascribed) place in society.” (Brown 1996, 389) “Secondary education, which remained a preserve of the middle class until well into the twentieth century, existed primarily to provide an education perceived to be suitable for a ‘gentleman’, and in order to ensure the reproduction of social and economic elites.” (Brown, 1996, p. 395)

The Parentocracy and the Constitution of Quasi-Market in Education System
Phillip Brown’s thesis of three wave of education reform The ‘second wave’ of education reform, which took initiation in post-WWII Britain, “involved an ideological shift in organizing principle, from an education determined by an accident of birth (ascription) to one based upon one’s age, aptitude and ability (achievement). In a meritocratic system of education, all must be given an equal opportunity of gaining access to job concomitant with their abilities.” (Brown, 1997, p. 395)

Phillip Brown’s thesis of three wave of education reform The ‘third wave’, which emerged in the 1980s, “can be characterized in the terms of the rise of the ideology of parentocracy. This involves a major programme of educational reform under the slogans of ‘parental choice’, ‘educational standards’ and ‘the ‘free market’.” (Brown, 1996, p. 394)

This ‘third wave’ of education reform can more generally be construed as the ‘quasi-market’ reform within the context of the informational-capitalism and the competition state.

The Policy Experiences of the Equality of Educational Opportunity of the US
The Common-school Movement in the late nineteen century: Free-universal education for all “Surely nothing but universal education can counterwork this tendency to the domination of capital and servility of labour. If one class possesses all the wealth and the education, while the residue of society is ignorant and poor, it matters not by what name the relation between them may be called: the latter, in fact and in truth, will be the servile dependents and subjects of the former. But, if education be equally diffused, it will draw property after it by the strongest of all attractions. ... Education, then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equalizer of the conditions of men, the balance-wheel of the social machinery.” (Horace Mann, 1888)

The debate on common-curriculum in secondary education in early twenty century: Academic vs. vocational education The Sputnik crisis and Chapter One Education Act in the 1950s Supreme Court’s decision on Brown v. Broad of Education of Topeka, 1955 (Plessy v. Fergusson, 1896) The Civil Right Movement and the 1st Coleman Report in the 1960s President Johnson’s Great Society Project Supreme Court’s decision on Bakke vs. University of California, Davis in 1978

Proliferation of private schools and the 3rd Coleman Report in mid-1980s A nation at Risk: The grand march of the neo-conservative education policy The coming of consumerism: The educational vouchers Dismantling the public school system: New American School and Charter Schools The No Child Left Behind Act in 2002 President Obama signed the All Student Succeeds Act into law in Dec.,

The Policy Experiences of the Equality of Educational Opportunity of the UK
The 1944 Education Act: The establishment of the tripartite schooling system The Powden Report (1967): Examination of the social influence on education attainment and the recommendation of the national policy of positive discrimination. A.H. Halsey’s EPA (Educational Priority Area) Study The comprehensive school movement in the 1960s The black papers: The prologue of the neo-conservative strike back The Great Education Debate in the 1970s

Conservative Party came to power in 1979 and stayed in power as majority government till 1997 The 1988 Education Reform Act The Establishment of the OFSTED (Office for Standards in Education) in 1992 The Publication of School-League Table for public examination results of secondary school in 1993 The publication of primary-school league table in 1996

OFSTED’s publications Key Characteristics of Effective Schools, 1996 World Appart? A Review of International Surveys of Educational Achievement Involving England, 1996 OFSTED (2002) Performance Management of Teachers, HMI 502. Website: OFSTED. OFSTED (2002) Continuing Professional Development of Teachers. HMI 410. Website: OFSTED. OFSTED (2002) Leadership and Management Training for Headteachers, HMI 457. Website: OFSTED.

New Labor Party came to power in 1997 New Labor Government’s 2002 Education Act, the main themes of the reform are “Excellence, Innovation, and Diversity.” As a result, New Labor had given the old labor’s half-a-century long educational ideal of comprehensive schooling Emphasis on standard and excellence, not structure (“one-size-fit-all comprehensive schooling structure”) Emphasis on opportunity not equality Emphasis on diversity not equity…

“Altogether then, I believe that the concept of ‘equality of educational opportunity’ is a mistaken and misleading concept’. It is mistaken because it locates the ‘equality of educational opportunity’ within the educational institutions, and thus focuses attention on education as an end in itself rather than as properly it is, a means to ends achieved in adulthood. It is misleading because it suggests that equal educational opportunity, defined in something other than a pure formal (input) way, is achievable, while it is not. A proper formulation would use the term ‘reduction in ìnequality…’ rather than ‘equality…’.” (Coleman, 1975, P )

Topic 2 (i) Education Policy for Equality & Justice END

EDM 6210 Education Policy and Society Topic 3 Education Policy and Social Differentiation: Modern Education as Balance Wheel of Social Origins?

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "EDM 6210 Education Policy and Society Topic 3 Education Policy and Social Differentiation: Modern Education as Balance Wheel of Social Origins?"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

EDM 6210 Education Policy and Society Topic 3 Education Policy and Social Differentiation: Modern Education as Balance Wheel of Social Origins?

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "EDM 6210 Education Policy and Society Topic 3 Education Policy and Social Differentiation: Modern Education as Balance Wheel of Social Origins?"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback