marxist view on education gcse

Marxist Perspective on Education

Charlotte Nickerson

Research Assistant at Harvard University

Undergraduate at Harvard University

Charlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

Key Takeaways

• Marx and Engels themselves wrote little about education. Nonetheless, there is a long history of Marxists who have argued that education can both enforce and undermine capitalism.
• Sociologists Bowes and Gintis argue that education serves three main purposes: the reproduction of class inequality, its legitimization, and the creation of a compliant capitalist workforce.
• Althusser and his successor, Bordieu, believed that education served to benefit the ruling class both by spreading capitalist ideology and transmitting cultural capital, giving more legitimacy to those in the know.
• Critics have pointed out that those “exploited” by the education system are aware of their status, and do not blindly accept the values of educational institutions.

Marxist Views on Education

Although Marx and Engels wrote little on education, Marxism has educational implications that have been dissected by many. In essence, Marxists believe that education can both reproduce capitalism and have the potential to undermine it.

However, in the current system, education works mainly to maintain capitalism and reproduce social inequality (Cole, 2019).

According to Marx and Engels, the transformation of society will come about through class struggle and actions — such as the actions that the working-class proletariat can take to disempower the ruling bourgeoisie.

Marx and Engels emphasize the role of the spread of “enlightened” opinion throughout society as a way of creating class change.

Nonetheless, Marx and Engels both believed that fostering a full knowledge of what conditions under and what it would mean to overthrow capitalism was necessary to enact basic structural change.

Marx believed that the bourgeoisie failed to offer a real education; instead, education is used to spread bourgeois morals (Marx, 1847). Marx and Engles also, however, believed that workers are educated by doing labor and that education in schools should even be combined with labor.

The theorists felt that this combination of education with labor would increase awareness of the exploitative nature of capitalism.

Marxists were interested in two related issues regarding education under capitalism: firstly, how and to what extent education reproduces capitalism, and, secondly, the ways in which education in capitalist societies could undermine capitalism.

Bowes and Gintes (1976)

Bowes and Gintes (1976) were the two sociologists most associated with the Traditional Marxist perspective in education.

In the view of Marxist, educational systems in capitalist systems perform three functions of the elite, or bourgeoisie class: reproducing class inequality, legitimizing class inequality, and working in the interests of capitalist employers.

The Reproduction of Class Inequality

The process of reproducing class inequality works like this: Middle-class parents use their cultural and material capital to ensure that their children get into the best schools and then go on to achieve highly in those schools.

This can happen through giving children one-on-one instruction with tutors, paying for private school tuition, or, in extreme cases, making donations directly to elite schools that they want their children to attend.

All of this capital meandering means wealthier students tend to get the best education and then go on to get jobs in the middle class.

Meanwhile, working-class children, who are more likely to get a poor education, are funneled into working-class jobs.

The Legitimization of Class Inequality

Marxists argue that, while in reality money determines the quality of one”s education, schools spread a “myth of meritocracy” to convince students that they all have an equal chance of success and that one”s grade simply depends on their effort and ability.

Thus, if a student fails, it is their fault.

This has the net effect of controlling the working classes. Believing that they had a fair chance, the proletariat became less likely to rebel and attempt to change society through a Marxist revolutionary movement (Thompson, 2016).

Bowes and Gintis explain this concept through the idea that students in the capitalist education system are alienated by their labor. Students have a lack of control over their education and their course content.

School motivates, instead, by creating a system of grades and other external rewards. This creates often destructive competition among students who compete to achieve the best grades in what is seen, at least superficially, as a meritocratic system.

Reproduction and legitimization of social inequality – Althusser

Althusser saw himself as building on the conditions that Marx theorized necessary for capitalist production through emphasizing the role of ideology in the social relationships that permeate people’s lives.

He believed that all institutions, schools included, drilled the values of capitalism into pupils, perpetuating the economic system. In this way, he considered education to be part of the “ideological state apparatus.”

Althusser says this influence perpetrates education in multiple ways. This ideological state apparatus, according to Althusser, worked by injecting students with ideas that keep people unaware of their exploitation and make them easy to control.

Secondly, he believed that this injection of ideas produces complaints and an unquestioning workforce, passively accepting their roles (Ferguson, 2018).

Althusser’s successor, Pierre Bordieu (1971) also believed that the education system and other cultural institutions and practices indirectly benefited the bourgeoisie — the capital class — through passing down “cultural capital.”

Cultural capital is the accumulation of knowledge, behaviors, and skills that someone can use to demonstrate their competence and social status, allowing them to wield influence.

Working in The Interests of Capitalist Employers

Finally, Bowes and Gintis (1976) suggested that there is a correspondence between the values taught by schools and the ways in which the workplace operates.

They suggest that these values are taught through a so-called hidden curriculum , which consists of the things that students learn through the experience of attending school rather than the main curriculum thoughts at the school.

Some parallels between the values taught at school and those used to exploit workers in the workplace include:

The passive subservience of pupils to teachers, which corresponds to the passive subservience of workers to managers;

An acceptance of hierarchy – the authority of teachers and administrators over students — corresponding to the authority of managers over employees;

Motivation by external rewards (such as grades over learning), which corresponds to workers being motivated by wages rather than the job of a job.

Correspondence Principle

The Key concept in Bowes and Gintis’ Schooling in Capitalist America (1976) is that the reproduction of the social relations of production is facilitated and illustrated by the similarities between how social relations in education and in production work.

In order to reproduce the social relations of production, the education system must try to teach people to be properly subordinate and render them sufficiently confused that they are unable to gather together and take control of their material existence — such as through seizing the means of production.

Specifically, Bowes and Gintis (1976) argued, the education system helps develop everything from a student”s personal demeanor to their modes of self-presentation, self-image, and social-class identifications which are crucial to being seen as competent and hirable to future employers.

In particular, the social relations of education — the relationships between administrators and teachers, teachers and students, students and students, and students and their work — replicate a hierarchical division of labor. This means that there is a clear hierarchy of power from administrators to teachers to students.

The Myth of Meritocracy

One such aspect of the capitalist education system, according to Bowes and Gintis, is the “myth of meritocracy “.

While Marxists argue that class background and money determine how good of an education people get, the myth of meritocracy posits that everyone has an equal chance at success. Grades depend on effort and ability, and people’s failures are wholly their fault.

This casts a perception of a fair education system when, in reality, the system — and who succeeds or fails in it — is deeply rooted in class (Thompson, 2016).

Criticisms of the Marxist Perspective on Education

The Marxist perspectives on education have been criticized for several reasons.

The traditional Marxist perspective on education has been evaluated both positively and negative. On the affirmative side, there is a wealth of evidence that schools reproduce class inequality.

In particular, evidence suggests that those from the middle and upper classes do much better in education because the working classes are more likely to suffer from material and cultural deprivation. Meanwhile, the middle classes have high material and cultural capital, along with laws that directly benefit them.

Another point in favor of the Marxist view of education is the existence of private schools. In these schools, the very wealthiest families can buy a better education for their families. This gives their children a substantially greater chance of attending an elite university.

There is also strong evidence for the reproduction of class inequality in elite jobs, such as medicine, law, and journalism. A disproportionately high number of people in these professions were educated in private institutions and come from families who are, in turn, highly educated (Thompson, 2016).

On the other hand, sociologists such as Henry Giroux (1983) have criticized the traditional Marxist view on education as being too deterministic. He argued that working classes are not entirely molded by the capitalist system and do not accept everything they are taught blindly. Paul Willis’ study of the working-class “lads” is one example of lower-class youths actively rejecting the values taught by education.

There is also less evidence that pupils believe school is fair than evidence that pupils believe school is unfair. The “Lads” that Paul Willis studied (2017) were well aware that the educational system was biased toward the middle classes, and many people in poorly-funded schools know that they are receiving a lesser quality of education than those in private schools.

• The Functionalist Perspective of Education

Bourdieu, P., & Bordieu, P. (1971). Formes et degrés de la conscience du chômage dans l”Algérie coloniale. Manpower and Unemployment Research in Africa , 36-44.

Bowes, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in Captalist America.

Cole, M. (2019). Theresa May, the hostile environment and public pedagogies of hate and threat: The case for a future without borders . Routledge.

Ferguson, S. (2018). Social reproduction: what’s the big idea? Giroux, H. (1983). Theories of reproduction and resistance in the new sociology of education: A critical analysis. Harvard Educational Review, 53 (3), 257-293.

Giroux, H. (1983). Theories of reproduction and resistance in the new sociology of education: A critical analysis.  Harvard Educational Review ,  53 (3), 257-293.

Marx, K., Engels, F. (1847). Manifesto of the communist party .

Thompson, M. (2016). Assess the Marxist View of the Role of Education in Society .

Willis, P. (2017). Learning to labour: How working class kids get working class jobs . Routledge.

GCSE and A Level Sociology: Key concepts in education 4: Marxist and Functionalist approaches

Posted by: Tracey Jones at 4:07 pm, August 3, 2011 | Tags: A level sociology , A2 Sociology , AS Level Sociology , distance learning , GCSE sociology , home education , home learning , Home Study

The 4th blog in our GCSE and A Level Sociology series on Key concepts in education looks at two diferent approaches to education.

Marxist and functionalist approaches

We have already talked about some of the other key concepts in education in sociology, but now we will consider two of the important approaches to education – the Marxist Approach and the Functionalist Approach .

For GCSE Sociology, it is important to understand the following .

The Marxist Approach  argues that the education system has a critical role in a capitalist society.  It claims that the education system benefits privileged groups and reinforces social inequalities.  The Marxist approach argues that education:

• reproduces the class system;
• breeds competition;
• serves the interests of the ruling classes;
• fosters secondary socialisation.

In the Marxist approach, the education system is thought to socialise children to accept their lower position with the capitalist society – they learn to obey rules and accept the hierarchy at school and later at work.

However, the Functionalist Approach views education as having a positive function in society.  It argues that education has positive benefits such as:

• social control;
• encouraging social mobility;
• encouraging social cohesion;
• serving the needs of the community;
• secondary socialisation.

The Functionalist approach sees secondary socialisation in terms of education teaching future workers the knowledge and skills they need to work in a capitalist workforce within the global economy.

If you are studying AS or A2 level sociology, we will cover the Marxist and Functionalist Approaches to education in more detail in a later blog.

GCSE exams questions on the Marxist and Functionalist approach could be:

• Describe and explain the functions of education according to the Marxist Approach.
• Describe and explain the functions education is expected to fulfil in the modern day.

Tracey Jones

If your interested in studying  GCSE or A Level Sociology visit the Oxford Open Learning home page or contact a Student Adviser.

See more by Tracey Jones

Stay Connected

ED3 - Marxist view of Education

Louis Althusser, a French Marxist, argues that education plays a significant role in reproducing and maintaining social inequalities. He contends that the education system works in ways that engineer middle-class success and working-class failure. In this text, we will explore how Althusser explains the reproduction of social inequality through the structure of the education system and the hidden curriculum. Additionally, we will examine how the existence of public and private schools reinforces social inequality.

The Structure of the Education System

 According to Althusser, the education system is structured to engineer middle-class success and working-class failure. This is necessary to reproduce social inequality. The bourgeoisie, who hold the power, influence the education system. They ensure that the working class becomes an unqualified workforce, while the middle class takes on managerial and ruling class type roles. 

Althusser argues that this is achieved through the use of the hidden curriculum. The hidden curriculum refers to the rules, norms, and socialization processes in schools that are not part of the academic curriculum. The middle-class values are perpetuated in the hidden curriculum, and these values support the success of the middle class.

The Hidden Curriculum

The hidden curriculum plays a significant role in the reproduction of social inequality. Althusser argues that the norms and values perpetuated in schools are middle-class and ruling-class values. Working-class values are different, and the working class has a different set of foci. The ruling class assumes a value consensus, which is a way of ensuring that the middle class succeeds, and the working class fails in education. The hidden curriculum supports the middle classes and engineers their success.

Public and Private Schools

Althusser also argues that the existence of public and private schools reproduces social inequality. Private schooling prepares those who can afford it for positions of power. Private schools provide a higher level of education and opportunities to network with influential and wealthy people. These connections lead to higher paying jobs and intermarrying within influential circles, which creates a newer wealthy family. The working class, on the other hand, lacks the same opportunities to reach higher levels of education and employment because they lack the right connections. The existence of public and private schools separates people and allows the wealthy to remain wealthy, while the working class is not able to break into that world.

Althusser's argument suggests that one of the primary functions of education is to reproduce and maintain social inequalities. The education system works to engineer middle-class success and working-class failure, and the hidden curriculum supports the middle classes. The existence of public and private schools reinforces social inequality, as it separates people and allows the wealthy to remain wealthy while the working class lacks the same opportunities.

Social Inequality and the Education System

Louis Althusser also believed that the education system is a tool for legitimizing social inequality. In this system, social inequality is made to appear natural, which encourages people to accept it as the norm. Althusser emphasized the importance of cultural and economic capital in shaping students’ educational experiences. The middle classes have more cultural capital, which gives them an advantage in the education system, as they have already been exposed to topics that they will encounter in school. Additionally, they have economic capital, which allows them to access additional resources, such as uniforms, stationery, books, and internet access. These resources give them an advantage over working-class students, who do not have the same financial resources to supplement their education. Although the education system is free, hidden costs contribute to the disparity in resources, which gives the impression that the working class is not doing as well in education.

The Hidden Curriculum and False Class Consciousness

The education system has a "hidden curriculum" that teaches capitalist values, such as materialism, profit, and greed. Students are encouraged to pursue success, which means getting a good job, making money, and buying things. Althusser believes that this perpetuates a false sense of class consciousness among the working classes that "if you work hard, you can become the ruling class." He argues that the education system is brainwashing working-class students into believing that this is the way things are, when in fact, social inequality is a social construction. The hidden curriculum, therefore, serves to reproduce and legitimize social inequality, creating the illusion that it is a natural occurrence.

Criticism of Althusser's Perspective

Critics have suggested that Althusser's perspective is too deterministic, arguing that students are not passive recipients of messages transmitted through the education system. Anti-school subcultures, for example, show that students can reject the messages of the hidden curriculum and the false class consciousness that it creates. However, Althusser believes that the negative label attached to anti-school subcultures is a way of legitimizing and reproducing social inequality.

Maintaining Capitalism

In this section, we will examine the role of education in maintaining capitalism. We will analyse the perspectives of Marxists who argue that education serves to perpetuate the capitalist system and the counterarguments from new right thinkers who believe that education is failing everyone.

The Correspondence Principal

Marxist thinkers, Bowles and Gintis argue that the education system help to maintain capitalist systems by following the correspondence principal, which explains the ways in which the education system mirrors the world of work. For example,   in school students are told the structure of their day, to obey the instructions of teachers and staff members and follow school procedures such as registration and lesson expectations. Similarly, in a workplace, employees are required to follow certain rules and procedures. Failure to comply with expectations can result in sanctions, job loss, or other consequences. In both environments, there are hierarchies that determine power dynamics, from immediate supervisors to company owners.

The Myth of Meritocracy

Functionalists argue that the education system is meritocratic, but Marxists believe this to be a myth. While hard work can lead to success, the education system favours the middle class in terms of language, cultural capital, and structure. This advantage perpetuates the belief that hard work is all that is required to achieve success. However, there are limits to what one can achieve based on their class, such as limited access to certain universities due to fees or location. This can perpetuate false class consciousness, where students are told they can achieve success despite these limitations. This also supports the capitalist system as it ensures that there are a steady flow of unqualified workers to provide labour whilst the owners continue t make profit.

New Right Criticism

New right thinkers, Chub and Moe, argue that the Marxist perspective is too limited in its focus on the working class. They believe that education is failing everyone and not preparing children to compete in a global job market. They argue that education should prepare students to work in a global environment rather than just a national one.

Determinism: Neo Marxist Criticism

Giroux rejects the view that the working class passively accept their position to become compliant workers. Evidence of anti-school subcultures suggest that thee hidden curriculum and correspondence principal have failed.

Social Democratic Criticism

Halsey, Floud and Martin challenge the Marxist view by suggesting that education policies and processes are in place to create a more equitable education system. Policies like comprehensive education, which abolished the 11 Plus and grammar schools, and the allocation of laptops and routers to disadvantaged students during the pandemic, are examples of steps taken to create a more equitable education system. These policies ensure that all students, regardless of their background, have access to the same quality of education.

Willis' Study on Agency of Students:

Paul Willis' study, Learning to Labour, challenges the Marxist view that working-class students are passive and accepting of the hidden curriculum. The study examined 12 working-class boys from the Midlands and found that they had agency in making decisions about their future. The boys actively chose to follow their family traditions and pursue manual labour. This shows that the family had a greater influence on educational achievement and expectations than the education system.

• Revision Resources
• Learning sociology starts here!!!
• Sociology revision books
• Answering Exam Questions

What’s the point of education? A Marxist perspective

Marxist perspective of education-revision notes.

In Marx’s view this ruling class ideology is far more effective in controlling the subject classes than physical force, as it is hidden from the consciousness of the subject class – this is known as ‘ false consciousness’ . One example Marxists might use is the role of meritocracy in education to control the working classes by getting the working classes used to being rewarded for being good and doing as you’re told.

Education and Ideology

Louis Althusser (a Marxist) (1971) argued that the main role of education in a capitalist society was the reproduction of an efficient and obedient work force. This is achieved through schools:

• transmitting the ideology that capitalism is just and reasonable (school teaches you to compete with your fellow pupils by trying to do better than them)
• train future workers to become submissive to authority (schools teachers you to accept as normal to do as you’re told, this way when your boss orders you what to do, it seems perfectly normal)

Althusser argues that ideology in capitalist society is fundamental to social control and education is instrumental in transmitting this ideology. He argues education is an ideological state apparatus which helps pass on ruling class ideology (for example ideology) in order to justify the capitalist system.

Bowles and Gintis’s (Marxists) research ‘Schooling in Capitalist America’ (1976) supported Althusser’s ideas that there is a close correspondence ( known as the correspondence principle ) between the social relationships in the classroom and those in the workplace. Through the hidden curriculum  (it is vital you follow the hidden curriculum link). Bowles and Ginitis argue schools introduce the ‘long shadow of work’ because schools create a hard-working disciplined workforce for capitalist societies. This process is essential for social reproduction – the reproduction of a new generation of workers schooled (disciplined) into accepting their role in society. This occurs through:

School and workplace – school mirrors the workplace through its hierarchical structures – teachers’ give orders and pupils obey. Pupils have little control over their work – a fact of life in the majority of jobs. Schools reward punctuality and obedience and are dismissive of independence, critical awareness and creativity – this mirrors the workplace expectations. The hidden curriculum is seen by Bowles and Gintis as instrumental in this process.

Social inequality – schools legitimate the myth of meritocracy that every person in life has an equal chance to reach the top. This myth justifies the belief that those people who have reached the ‘top’ deserve their rewards because they achieved them by their own had-work ( meritocracy ). In this way inequality becomes justified.

However Bowles and Gintis argue that rewards in education and occupation are based not on ability but on social background. The higher a person’s class or origin the more likely they are to attain top qualifications and a top job. For Bowles and Ginitis, schools are institutions which legitimize social inequality. See Bourdon (position theory); Bourdiau (cultural capital) ; and Bernstein ( language and class).

Assessing Marxist and functionalist perspectives of education.

To appreciate the subtle differences between Functionalist and Marxist perspectives on education please work through the following presentation then test your knowledge  Marxism test questions only   Click on this link for the 15 questions

Return to overview

Share this:

23 comments.

very insightful

i know its very early in the year, but ive recently starte AS Sociology and this is such a life saver when it comes to the 12 markers when it comes to revision, Thank you very much

My pleasure, direct your classmates to this site too and thanks for the feedback 🙂

This website has been so helpful in my education studies for university on the sociological perspectives of the purpose of education. Thank you so much. Is this a certified site that I could use as a reference for my essay? (England)

Yes you can use our address for your references. Thanks for the positive feedback 🙂

Althusser argues that ideology in capitalist society is fundamental to social control and education is instrumental in transmitting this ideology. He argues education is an ideological state apparatus which helps pass on ruling class ideology (for example ideology) in order to justify the capitalist system. Am I correct in thinking this basically mean the ruling class use education to justify a capitalist society and system, keeping everyone in their places, ie the bourgeoisie remain the bourgeoisie and the proletariat the proletariat? Thank you for this article, very helpful for my presentation 🙂

Yes you are correct in thinking ruling class use education to justify a capitalist society and system, keeping everyone in their places, the two-tier education system illustrates this. Hope that helps and thanks for the positive feedback too 🙂

Does this mean that marxists want to create an obediant work force? that functionalists want working class to progress?

No Marxists’ point is the school system is designed so it creates an obedient workforce – via hidden curriculum. While functionalists’ identify schooling as a process which helps establish a collective conscience – via hidden curriculum – such as establishing a consensus on the value of meritocracy which implies everyone can succeed if they put the effort in. Hope that helps 🙂

Very helpful page, thanks a lot for creating it 🙂

I don’t get the link between education & social roles and Marxists. I thought it was the feminist believing that education reinforces gender roles? Can you please explain that to me as I’m confused by the theories. Thanks in advance 🙂

Hi – thanks for the positive comment 🙂 Yes feminists do argue education reinforces gender roles, whereas Marxists’ argue education reinforces an individuals class position. In contrast functionalists’ argue education facilitates goal attainment via meritocracy. Hope that helps?

Thank you ,sorry for being off topic but i want to as is education an ideological state apparatus completely

powerful points thanks

I LOVE THIS WEB PAGE…..MUCH LOVE FROM ME TO YOU…NCOOH

Many thanks 🙂

Reblogged this on sexyparisienne.com .

thanks for reblog 🙂

Thank you a lot i hope this is going to help me in my exam tommorow

Hi- many thanks for this comment, I hope your exam went well 🙂

Thanks a lot for sharing this to clear many doubts about education. This website has been so helpful in my education studies for university on the sociological perspectives of the purpose of education.

Thanks for the feedback. Glad you find it so useful, be sure to let your friends know how helpful you find this website 🙂

• What is the point of education? « Sociology at Twynham School
• Open University |

Leave a comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.com

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address:

Follow me on Twitter

• pearsonhighered.com/educa…
• literacytrust.org.uk/data…
• sociologytwynham.wordpres…

Blog at WordPress.com.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar
• Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use. To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Our Cookie Policy

Bowles and Gintis: The Correspondence Principle

Table of Contents

Last Updated on February 6, 2023 by Karl Thompson

Marxists sociologists Bowles and Gintis (1976) argue that the main function of education in capitalist societies is the reproduction of labour power.

They see the education system as being subservient to and performing functions for the Bourgeoisie, the capitalist class who own the means of production: the Bourgeoisie require a workforce that is hardworking, accepts authority, and who won’t kick up a fuss if they are exploited, and the main function of school in capitalist societies is to indoctrinate children into these norms and values.

Bowles and Gintis: the correspondence principle

Bowles and Gintis say that ‘work casts a long shadow over school’.

Schools produce a subservient workforce

In a study based on 237 members of the senior year of a New York high school, Bowles and Gintis found that the grades awarded related more to personality traits rather than academic ability: low grades were related to creativity, aggressiveness and independence, while higher grades were related to perseverance, consistency and punctuality.

Schools encourage acceptance of hierarchy and authority

Motivation by external rewards.

This is where pupils are taught to be motivated by the qualifications they will receive at the end of school, rather than the ‘joy of learning’ itself, while at work, workers are motivated by the wage packet at the end of the month rather than ‘the joy of working’ itself.

However, work in capitalists societies becomes alienating and exploitative – Capitalists require workers to be like machines, working as part of a ‘production line’ for example, because this means production is more efficient and their profits are thus greater – so rather than individuals or small groups of individuals each setting up their own garages to make cars, or small scale farms growing food for a few dozen people, work becomes larger scale, organised into massive factories, and workers become part of the ‘machine’ of production, where the worker has no control, and work is repetitive and dull. In this industrial-capitalist system of work, workers have no intrinsic motivation to work, they need to be motivated externally, by wages.

The fragmentation of subjects at school

Learning at school is fragmented into different subjects, split up into maths, English, history, sciences, with lessons lasting only 45 minutes to an hour. Knowledge is thus fragmented into different academic subjects, rather than being holistic’.

Evaluations of Bowles and Gintis Correspondence Principle

The Correspondence Principle has been criticised for viewing students as passive sponges who just soak up the atmosphere of the school without thinking about it.

Having said that, Ken Robinson’s TED talk about schools killing creativity seems to offer broad support for the idea that schools still don’t reward creative thinking even today!

Signposting and relevance to sociology

Share this:, 9 thoughts on “bowles and gintis: the correspondence principle”, leave a reply cancel reply, discover more from revisesociology.

Skip to content

Get Revising

Join get revising, already a member.

marxist approach to education

• Created by: loupardoe
• Created on: 22-04-16 19:57

Report Fri 26th May, 2023 @ 15:20

Report Thu 8th June, 2023 @ 09:25

The Marxist approach emphasizes that education should not be simply the transfer of knowledge, but also a tool for realizing social and economic inequalities. He recognizes that education can be used by the authorities to maintain and strengthen the existing social order. In this context, the Marxist approach aims at liberation from ideological control and the formation of critical thinking among students. I recently read a free essay on lord of the flies on the link  that highlights how important a Marxist approach is for students to help them understand all the nuances of the world. My idea of such learning changed after reading.

Report Mon 9th October, 2023 @ 08:47

CKAD (Certified Kubernetes Application Developer) dumps are unauthorized and unethical materials that individuals may use to cheat on the  https://www.dumpsaway.com/CKAD-dumps  certification exam. These dumps typically contain real or simulated exam questions and answers that have been obtained through dishonest means, such as by violating the Kubernetes certification policies or by sharing confidential information.

Similar Sociology resources:

key sociologist approach to education 0.0 / 5

the marxist approach to education 0.0 / 5

key sociologist approach to family 3.0 / 5 based on 2 ratings

Sociologists approach and functions on education 4.0 / 5 based on 4 ratings

EDUCATION KEY TERMS 0.0 / 5

SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE FAMILY 0.0 / 5

key sociologist approach to education 1.0 / 5 based on 1 rating

Sociological Approaches to the Family 0.0 / 5

Education 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating Teacher recommended

Families 5.0 / 5 based on 9 ratings

Reference Library

Collections

• See what's new
• All Resources
• Student Resources
• Assessment Resources
• Teaching Resources
• CPD Courses
• Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Sociology news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

• All Sociology Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

• Study Notes

Feminist Views on the Role of Education

Last updated 26 Nov 2019

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Email

Feminist sociologists have large areas of agreement with functionalists and Marxists in so far as they see the education system as transmitting a particular set of norms and values into the pupils. However, instead of seeing these as either a neutral value consensus or the values of the ruling class and capitalism, feminists see the education system as transmitting patriarchal values.

For example, Heaton and Lawson (1996) argued that the hidden curriculum taught patriarchal values in schools. They noted traditional family structures in textbooks (along with many other gender stereotypes, subjects aimed towards specific genders, gender divisions in PE and sport and the gender division of labour in schools (predominantly female teachers and male managers).

Liberal feminists would point out these remaining issues of patriarchy in education while also acknowledging significant strides towards equality in the education system. In the 1940s and 50s, under the tripartite system, boys had a lower pass rate for the 11+ than girls (essentially institutionally failing girls in order to ensure more boys can succeed) and some subjects being specifically for one gender or the other used to be institutional rather than based on apparent preference. Today, once subjects become optional, there are quite clear gender preferences for one subject or another, but all subjects are open to all pupils. Perhaps the biggest change, since the 1980s, is that girls now outperform boys in education so if the system is a patriarchal one, designed to favour boys, it is singularly failing. However, Michelle Stanworth (1983), for instance, noted that there will still higher expectations of boys and teachers would be more likely to recommend boys apply for higher education than girls at the same academic level.

Radical feminists argue that the education system is still fundamentally patriarchal and continues to marginalise and oppress women. It does this through some of the processes already noted (reinforcing patriarchal ideology through the formal and hidden curriculum and normalising the marginalisation and oppression of women so that by the time girls leave school they see it as normal and natural rather than as patriarchal oppression). Radical feminist research has also looked at sexual harassment in education and how it is not treated as seriously as other forms of bullying (e.g. Kat Banyard, 2011).

Black and difference feminists point out how not all girls have the same experience in education and that minority-ethnic girls are often victims of specific stereotyping and assumptions. For example, teachers might assume that Muslim girls have different aspirations in relation to career and family from their peers. There have been studies of the specific school experiences of black girls, which we will consider in more detail in future sections.

Where feminists acknowledge that there has been a great deal of improvement for girls in education, they would point to feminism itself as being one of the main reasons for this. Sue Sharpe (1996) found that London schoolgirls in the 1970s had completely different priorities and aspirations from similar girls in 1996. She found that while in the 1970s girls’ priorities were marriage and family, in the 1990s this had switched dramatically to career. While there are a number of potential reasons for this, legislative changes such as the 1970 Equal Pay Act and the 1976 Sex Discrimination Act are likely to have played their part, hence supporting a liberal feminist perspective).

What all feminists agree on is that the education system does work as an agent of secondary socialisation which teaches girls and boys what are seen as universal norms and values and gender scripts that are actually those of contemporary patriarchy and that girls and boys learning these values prevents social change and challenges to patriarchy.

Evaluating feminist views on the role of education

Two features of contemporary education, at least in the UK, which critics of feminist views on education often point out are: 1) education is an increasingly female-dominated sector (most teachers are women, an increasing number of managers are women because they are drawn from the available teachers) and 2) the education system is increasingly resulting in female success and male underperformance. If this is a system designed to ensure men are in the top positions in society and women are marginalised into a domestic role, then it would appear to be failing. The education system is sending more and more girls into higher education (Michelle Stanworth’s research on this is now out of date).

However, while there is clearly some truth in these criticisms, it is still clear that there is a glass ceiling and a gender pay gap so the education system might be creating lots of highly-qualified girls, they are still losing out to their male peers when it comes to top jobs and higher incomes. They are also still more likely to take time off for child-rearing, work part time and to carry out the majority of housework tasks. Feminists point out that the education system largely normalises this (alongside other agents of socialisation such as the family and the media) and so even highly-qualified women often accept this as inevitable or normal. At the same time men are socialised to also consider this normal.

• Hidden curriculum
• Radical Feminism

You might also like

​example answer for question 1 paper 1: a level sociology, june 2017 (aqa).

Exam Support

New research about child poverty

8th December 2017

A Home Education

16th April 2018

'Plastic brains'

16th January 2019

Bowles and Gintis on Education

Topic Videos

Early years education

3rd March 2020

After Covid, will digital learning be the new normal?

2nd February 2021

Anti-racism training in Wales to boost ethnically diverse teachers

18th October 2022

Our subjects

• › Criminology
• › Economics
• › Geography
• › Health & Social Care
• › Psychology
• › Sociology
• › Teaching & learning resources
• › Student revision workshops
• › Online student courses
• › CPD for teachers
• › Livestreams
• › Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

• › Contact us
• › Terms of use
• › Privacy & cookies

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.

• International
• Education Jobs
• Schools directory
• Resources Education Jobs Schools directory News Search

Marxist Views - Social Stratification - L5/20 [ WJEC EDUQAS GCSE Sociology]

Subject: Sociology

Age range: 14-16

Resource type: Lesson (complete)

Last updated

12 April 2024

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

This fully resourced lesson is professionally designed for the new WJEC/EDUQAS Sociology GCSE specification (9-1). This resource can now be downloaded as a part of a complete 20-lesson bundle.

This is lesson 5 of our 20 lesson course for the ‘Social Stratification’ section; it focuses on Marxist perspectives, Marxist researchers and theorists, and statistical data supporting/detracting from the Marxist perspective. It can be purchased as a part of a complete 20 x lesson bundle (from June, 2017)

The download includes: -A detailed lesson plan: highlighting differentiation, AfL, key-words, SMSC and a timeline of learning activities (.pdf) -A premium quality, editable, and fully-animated PowerPoint presentation that covers the entire lesson -A double-sided A3 worksheet (see cover image for preview) -A knowledge hunt file with information to be used with the worksheet -Homework

These lessons are designed around the new EDUQAS / WJEC specification, we take considerable time making the highest quality lessons. AQA equivalents are available on TES.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Get this resource as part of a bundle and save up to 58%

A bundle is a package of resources grouped together to teach a particular topic, or a series of lessons, in one place.

Social Stratification (20 Lessons) WJEC / EDUQAS [ GCSE Sociology ] POWER AUTHORITY

Professionally designed for the new EDUQAS / WJEC Sociology GCSE specification (9-1). This bundle was updated in March 2020 so that all of the PowerPoints are in the standard format and, consequently, more easy to edit than before. This 20 lesson unit is designed to be a self-contained, comprehensive and complete resource: everything a teacher/department need to teach the Sociology of Education section of the course. Each lesson comes in a .Zip file, This file contains: -A detailed lesson plan: highlighting differentiation, AfL, key-words, SMSC and a timeline of learning activities (.pdf) -A premium quality, editable, PowerPoint Presentation -Homework \[-Most of the lessons include a worksheet (double-sided A4 or A3)\] We take considerable time making the highest quality lessons and we believe these are the best GCSE Sociology resources money can buy, positive reviews are greatly appreciated. Our intention is to have the other units of the new GCSE Sociology course available by June. Feel free to contact us if you need additional resources creating: [email protected] PLEASE NOTE: Minimum system requirements: 512MB RAM, 1.5ghz processor. Microsoft Office. **Check-out some of our most popular resources on TES!** **GCSE Religious Studies** * [Buddhism (20 Lesson Unit)](https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/gcse-buddhism-ocr-b-aqa-20-lessons-very-high-quality-complete-resources-lesson-plans-worksheets-presentations-11410236) * [Buddhism (Thematic Studies Units)](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20%22gcse%20buddhism%22%20lessons&featured=bundles) * [Christianity (Thematic Studies Units)](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20Christianity%20lessons%20GCSE&featured=bundles) * [Hinduism (20 Lesson Unit)](https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/gcse-hinduism-ocr-b-aqa-20-lessons-very-high-quality-complete-resources-lesson-plans-worksheets-presentations-complete-course-whole-unit-new-specification-11518558) * [Hinduism (Thematic Studies Units)](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?authorId=2540411&q=hinduism%20lessons&shop=godwin86&featured=bundles) * [ Islam (Thematic Studies Units)](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20gcse%20islam%20lessons&featured=bundles) . .    **GCSE Sociology Resources** * [Complete Units (Whole Course)](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20gcse%20sociology%20lessons&featured=bundles)  .  **AS/A2 Revision Sessions** * [OCR Religious Studies](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20revision%20sessions%20ocr&featured=bundles) * [AQA Philosophy](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20revision%20sessions%20%22aqa%20philosophy%22&featured=bundles) * [AQA Sociology](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20revision%20sessions%20aqa%20sociology&featured=bundles)  .  **Philosophy for Children (P4C)** * [The Ultimate P4C Resource Pack](https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/the-ultimate-p4c-resource-pack-philosophy-for-children-11586087) * [The Debating Society Toolkit](https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/the-debating-society-toolkit-11591038) * [Philosophy Boxes](https://www.tes.com/resources/search/?q=godwin86%20philosophy%20boxes&featured=bundles) . **Other Tools** * [A3 DIRT Worksheet (15+ 5-star ratings!)](https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/dirt-worksheet-a3-double-sided-11606218) * [KS3 RE Units](https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/ks3-philosophy-and-religion-6-whole-learning-units-with-many-additional-tools-and-resources-11387020) Copyright Adam Godwin (2018)

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource: