Education plays a major function in any society. But the particulars involved in this function are still capable to debate. That is. the methods of learning. the schemes of managing pupils. the manner of pull offing schools. and the ends and criterions of the educational system have been the topic of deliberation and contemplation among pedagogues. psychologists and societal theoreticians. Educational systems have besides changed legion times throughout history and such alterations are frequently the consequences of the outgrowth of societal theories that influence the determinations of policy shapers.
In this research paper. four societal theories will be examined: functionalism. Marxism. interpretivism. and post-modernism. These four societal theories will be compared and their strengths and failings will be discussed. In making so. this paper will to what extent do these societal theories explain the map of instruction in American society and how make these theories compare with the realist theory. What is functionalism?
Functionalism is believed to hold been developed by several philosophers in the 19th century but it was merely during the early portion of the 20th century. the 1930s. did this societal theory take official signifier in the United States through the work of Talcott Parsons. Unlike the earlier societal theories that treat society as one mistily defined system. functionalism self-praises of concentrating on the parts of the system and how these parts interact and influence each other. The parts have demands that the other parts can run into and this is why the parts exist in a province of cooperation.
The system is so considered to be in equilibrium. However. the functionalists besides recognize the altering nature of this system and that the parts adjust to these alterations towards a new equilibrium ( Parsons. 1951 ) . Strengths and failings. In the field of instruction. the major strengths of functionalism lies on the accent of mutuality and a way of evolutionary alteration that is non dramatic or helter-skelter. This is because the functionalists shun struggle and believed that any struggle can be avoided because each person is influenced by the society’s norms.
If an single contempts these norms. there would be effects such as societal disapproval or even imprisonment. Unfortunately. despite the detering presence of these effects. and based on the history of the universe. the history of the American society. and of American instruction. struggle seemed to be significantly present. This made the dogmas of functionalism naif and uncomplete. Within the schoolroom. a functionalist instructor may bring on the pupils to act in an equilibrium-producing mode by stressing the schoolroom norms and the effects that are given if such norms are ignored.
Some of the effects might be time-out. lower classs. suspension. and other countenances. Again. similar to the greater society. the schoolroom society may hold a few pupils who are non deterred by the effects. This is non because the pupil intends to make struggle but because there might be some demands of the pupils that were non met. In the same manner. there would be dissent and revolutions if societal jobs. such as poorness and dictatorship. persist and come to a point when they become intolerable ( Ballantine. 1997 ) .
Functionalism and instruction in an American society. Within the American society. functionalism might suggest that the whole instruction system is entrusted with the duty of run intoing one peculiar demand of the society – to bring forth responsible and productive citizens. From one position. this functionalist function of the educational system may explicate the map of instruction in America. This is because one of the intents of the current NCLB or No Child Left Behind Act is to bring forth extremely skilled citizens. who will be competitory in the planetary market ( U. S. Department of Education. 2004 ) .
Another position of functionalist that can depict the alterations in the educational system in America is the construct of equilibrium. For illustration. the American society realizes that it needed to hold better instructors and better pupils. The educational system responds by set uping criterions and a more extended rating process for school public presentation. Unfortunately. these two positions seem to be the lone obvious connexion between functionalism and instruction in a modern American society. Functionalism and pragmatism.
In the same mode. the purposes of functionalist instruction Department of Energy non hold with the educational purposes of pragmatism. which is to bring forth flawlessness in an person. Despite this difference in declared ends. functionalism and pragmatism indirectly agree on some facets of pedagogical methodological analysis. such as the usage of positive wagess. Functionalists espouse negative effects for misbehaviour while realists applaud positive wagess for admirable behaviour ( Merton. 1968 ) . What is Marxism? Marxism is basically a critical theory. which means that it seeks to uncover the negative and damaging features of an bing system.
In this instance. Marxism critiques capitalist economy. The major unfavorable judgment is the manner capitalist societies prey on the people who are stricken by poorness or possess exposures ( Kellner. 1989 ) . For illustration. capitalists praise the industrial revolution. which brought about rapid economic advancement. The Marxists reveal the other side of industrial revolution that is unpleasant. which is the development of kids. Children. who may be every bit immature as three old ages old. are allowed to work in mills ( Cody. 2002 ) . Strengths and failings.
In the field of instruction. the major strength of Marxism is the accent on learning methods that encourage critical thought. Marxists teacher engage in learning attacks that develop coaction and independency. Marxists instructors are critical of methods that merely demand emulation and inactive hearing. Thus. some of the preferable methods of the Marxist attack to instruction are hands-on activities. concerted acquisition. and constructivist methods ( Kellner. 1989 ) . However the societal theory developed by Karl Marx frequently deludes clear apprehension among philosophers. psychologists. and pedagogues.
This is because the footings used by Marxists are interpreted in a different manner by the mostly dominant capitalist society. And here lies the major failing of Marxism. It can non be wholly understood and its dogmas are viewed negatively by the society. Marxism and instruction in an American society. Politically. the American society is chiefly against Marxism. It might be because America is a capitalist state or because Marxism is mistily understood. In the country of instruction. nevertheless. the purpose of Marxism to hold pupils who are capable of believing independently and critically agrees with the purpose of many American instructors.
There is a run towards the creative activity of inquiries that encourage critical and originative thought. There is besides an accent towards the creative activity of activities that encourage coaction. But. the other Marxist educational purpose. which is to bring forth persons who will take extremist alterations in the society. does non hold with the map of instruction in the modern American society. The American society may welcome critical-thinking persons but these persons must conform to well-established norms. Marxism and pragmatism. Some facets of Marxism agree with pragmatism – particularly about the position on cognition.
One of the pillars of pragmatism. Francis Bacon. cautioned people to be cognizant of factors that prevent the acquisition of truth. such as limited experience. popularity. faith. and bias. Being cautious about these conditions equates to believing critically. Another dogma of pragmatism. which is espoused by Russell. provinces that instruction must take towards the solutions of the ailments that the society has. This can be translated into the extremist alterations that Marxists wanted. Unfortunately. Marxism is excessively extremist for many realists and these two schools of ideas are hard to unify ( Grabb. 1990 ) .
What is interpretivism? Interpretivism is one of the lesser-known societal theories that emphasize the convergence of truth and perceptual experience. That is. the truth is similar to what is perceived. Since there might be different perceptual experiences among persons. these persons must hold to one degree of perceptual experience that is nem con accepted. Once accepted. the common perceptual experience becomes a world. Basically. the world that interpretivists create is based on the perceptual experiences of the persons. Due to this nature of world. interpretivism can be perceived as a procedure instead than a theory.
That is. in the field of societal research. a society’s world is obtained through interpretivism. And in the field of jurisprudence. persons must hold upon the reading of patterns. legislative acts. and legal responsibilities ( Brink. 2001 ) . These persons. therefore. must hold another footing for their understanding on readings. The footing is the set of norms and values of the society. Stated in this manner. interpretivism can be deemed similar to functionalism. in which persons or the parts of the society must conform to norms. And with respects to norms. both interpretivism and functionalism are opposed to Marxism.
Strengths and failings. In the field of instruction. the major strength of interpretivism is that it attempts to develop creativeness in the scholars. instructors. and instruction research workers. An object does non stay a simple object but takes on other signifiers. For illustration. a chair is no longer a simple chair but a topographic point of remainder. a symbol of sentimental minutes. or a private corner. All these and more can be the signifiers of the chair. In this mode. the pupils non merely develop creativeness but a grade of unfastened mindedness that will be utile in a planetary community ( Vrasidas. 2001 ) .
Unfortunately. interpretivism lacks the construction that many pedagogues wanted. This deficiency of construction is likely due to the history of interpretivism – which is a critical theory of positivism. Therefore. Marxism and interpretivism have one thing in common – both are critical theories that offer a contradiction to an bing and dominant theory. Interpretivism and instruction in an American society. In the modern American society. interpretivism has been limited to the country of research. Due to this. it can non be faithfully utilised to explicate the map of instruction in the American society.
Except for the end of bring forthing originative minds. the interpretivists do non offer much item or place sing the instruction and acquisition procedures. At the same clip. there are dogmas of interpretivism that contradicts the present educational system. For illustration. Interpretivists. due to their reading of world. may non hold to the presence of criterions and course of study. They may besides desire to alter the prevailing methods of rating. Interpretivism and pragmatism. The construct of world between interpretivism and pragmatism are conflicting.
The world of interpretivism is based on the perceptual experiences of people whereas the world of pragmatism exists even without the presence of any individual who can comprehend such world. Due to the opposing nature of world. there would besides be opposing perceptual experiences about the nature of cognition. which leads to differences in course of study ( Shinn. 2004 ) . What is post-modernism? Similar to Marxism and interpretivism. post-modernism rose at the heels of a dominant bing theory. In this instance. that theory was modernism.
But. unlike the two antecedently described societal theories. post-modernism adopts many of the dogmas of modernism. which are futuristic in nature. Both modernism and post-modernism see a universe that is non categorized by labels but fused. For illustration. in literature. there are no genres that separate verse forms and narratives. But. there is no bing and recognized integrity because both modernists and post-modernist realize the disconnected nature of the universe. The difference between modernism and post-modernism is the attitude that the advocates and followings have towards this atomization and ambiguity.
The modernists are saddened by it while the post-modernist embracing it. For illustration. post-modernist creative persons display their delectation and captivation with pandemonium and disorganisation ( Heartfield. 2002 ) . Strengths and failings. In the field of instruction. the major strength of post-modernism is its ability to encompass and use the quickly altering. chip-driven universe. The instructors who are influenced by post-modernism will hold the needed flexibleness and adaptability to keep and make way for the pupils.
For illustration. the meteorologic rise of computing machines and other electronic appliances might drag a instructor from his comfort zone and do him less effectual. The post-modernist instructor would encompass the alterations and will go computing machine understanding. along with his pupils. However. the post-modernist attack to instruction might jeopardize other facets of the instruction and acquisition procedure. This is because the acquisition procedure needed construction and order – a construct that is non respected by post-modernist ( Klages. 2007 ) . Post-modernism and instruction in an American society.
The theory of post-modernism might be used to explicate the map of instruction in a modern American society. which is to assist the scholars adapt to their changing universe. Obviously. the universe perceived by the scholar will alter invariably and continuously. But. many of the pedagogues and policy-makers in the American society will hold 2nd ideas sing this eager attitude towards alteration. Embracing the alteration might non be the best action to take. However. post-modernism wanted the pupils to believe less of topic but more of intent ( Sarup. 1993 ) .
For illustration. the pupil must first find his grounds why he must acquire a college grade. In this mode. post-modernism is aligned with the other societal theories. However. post-modernism. at this minute. could non be utilized to to the full explicate the map of instruction in American society. Post-modernism and pragmatism. Post-modernism. in the field of instruction. is non compatible with pragmatism. This is because pragmatism values the influence of scientific discipline whereas post-modernism shins the importance of scientific discipline. However. post-modernism embraces technological progresss.
These technological progresss will non be possible without scientific discipline. This attitude might take to some via media with the attitude of realists towards scientific discipline. Realists believe that scientific discipline will act upon doctrines and post-modernists recognize the influence of alterations. The map of instruction in the modern-day American society can non be described to the full by utilizing merely one societal theory. A complex of these societal theories must be used because the present American society has an eclectic position of the map of instruction.