1. Politics of Education
1.1. 1. Purposes of Education
1.1.1. The intellectual purposes are to teach basic cognitive skills (such as reading, writing, and mathematics), to transmit specific knowledge, and to help students acquire higher-order thinking skills (analysis, evaluation, and synthesis)
1.1.2. The political purposes of school are to inculcate allegiance to the existing political order, to prepare citizens who will participate in this political order, to help assimilate diverse cultural groups into common political order, and to teach students the basic laws of the society.
1.1.3. The social purposes are to help solve social problems, to work as one of many institutions, such as family and the church to ensure social cohesion, and to socialize children into various roles, behaviors, and values of the society.
1.1.4. The economic purposes of schooling is to prepare students for their later occupational roles and to select , train, and allocate individuals into the division of labor. How schools directly prepare students to work varies from society to society.
1.2. 2. Perspectives
1.2.1. The role of the school is a central focus of each of the perspectives and is at heart of their differing analysis. The liberal perspective in the role of the school stresses the training and socializing function of the school, and it also stresses the schools role in providing the materials and education in making sure each student has equal opportunity. In liberal perspectives, students are put into social roles, but also children are taught to respect cultural diversity. They see the schools role as enabling the individual to develop his or her talents, creativity, and sense of self. In liberal perspective, citizens participate in decision making and receive a fair and equal opportunity for economic wealth, political power, and social status.
1.2.2. If, as radicals and many liberals suggest, schooling has not sufficiently provided a reduction in inequality of results, and as educational achievement is closely related to student socioeconomic backgrounds, then the explanation of why certain groups, particularly from lower social backgrounds, perform less well in school performance. Conservatives argue that individuals or groups of students rise and fall on their own intelligence, hard work, and initiative, and that achievement is based on hard work and sacrifice. The school system can give the individuals the supplies and opportunities to succeed on their own desire. They may or may not succeed because they are deficient or because they are members of a group that is deficient.
1.2.3. The radical perspective, under the definition of educational problems, states that the educational system has failed the poor, minorities,and women through classiest, racist, sexist, and homophobic policies. The schools have stifled critical understanding of the problems of American society through a curriculum and teaching practices that promote conformity. The traditional curriculum leaves out cultures, histories, and voices of the oppressed. The educational system promotes inequality and results,
2. History of U.S. Education
2.1. 1. Reform Movement
2.1.1. The Rise of the Common School: Period from 1820-1860, Industrial Revolution began in the textile industry in England, crossed the Atlantic Ocean and brought factory system (mostly in the north), immigrants from Europe came over looking for work, most were Roman Catholic who were escaping starvation in Ireland. 1828, Andrew Jackson was elected president and all men, except slaves and emotionally disturbed persons, could vote. By 1820, it had become evident to those interested in education that the schools that had been established by the pre-war generation were not functioning effectively. The vast majority of Americans were illiterate. Charity schools provided the only opportunities for disadvantaged children to obtain an education. Horace Mann led the struggle for free public education. He left his job as a lawyer, to lobby for a state board of education. Due to Mann's efforts the first state normal school, or teacher training school, was opened in Lexington, Massachusetts, in 1839. Free public education reflected the concern for stability and the concern for social mobility. Mann could not have been immune to the goals of his audiences, often the wealthy factory owners, who had to be convinced to support public education. Many historians viewed Mann's as one of America's greatest educational reformers, the only problem was his schools taught hygiene, punctuality, and rudimentary skills that would create docile, willing workers. Of course people opposed Mann's vision of public schools. Roman Catholics started their own schools and universities were established. Education for women was viewed as biologically harmful and too stressful. Few females achieved an education other than rudimentary literacy and numeracy. 1821, Emma Hart Willard opened the Troy Female Seminary in Troy, New York, subjects taught at this seminary were mathematics, science, history, and geography. In 1833, Oberlin Collegiate Institute in Ohio opened its doors to females and African Americans. Education for African Americans was still limited, after the court case, Roberts v. City of Boston, the court ruled that local school committee had the right to establish separate educational facilities for whites and blacks. 1868, the Freedman's Bureau helped to establish historically Black Colleges including Harvard University in Washington, D.C.
2.2. 2. Historical Interpretation
2.2.1. The Democratic-Liberals believed that the history of U.S. education involves the progressive evolution, albeit flawed, of a school system committed to providing equality of opportunity for all. Democratic-Liberal historians suggest that each period of educational expansion involved the attempts of liberal reformers to expand educational opportunities to larger segments of the population and to reject the conservative view of schools as elite institutions for the meritorious. Democratic-Liberals tend to interpret U.S. educational history optimistically, the evolution of the nation's schools has been a flawed, often conflictual march toward increased opportunities. They believe that the U.S. educational system must continue to move closer to each, without sacrificing one or the other too dramatically.
3. Sociological Perspectives
3.1. 1. Theoretical Perspectives
3.1.1. Functionalism: Functional sociologists begin with a picture of society that stresses the independence of the social system. Functionalists view society as a kind of machine, where one part articulates with another to produce the dynamic energy required to make society work. The earliest sociologist embraced a functional point of view about the relation of school and society. Emile Durkheim recognized that education had taken different forms at different times and places, he believed that education, in virtually all societies, was of critical importance in creating the moral unity necessary for social cohesion and harmony. Durkheim's emphasis on values and cohesion set the tone for how present day functionalist approach the study of education. Functionalist tend to assume that consensus is the normal state in society and that conflict represents a breakdown of shared values. In a highly integrated society school socialize students into appropriate values, and sort and select students according to their abilities.
3.1.2. Conflict Theory: Not all sociologist of education believe that society is held together by shared values alone. Some sociologists argue that the social order is not based on some collective agreement, but on the ability of dominant groups to impose their will on subordinate groups through force, cooptation, and manipulation. The glue of society is economic, political, cultural, and military power. Conflict sociologists do not see the relation between school and society as unproblematic or straightforward. where as functionalists emphasize cohesion in explaining social order, conflict sociologists emphasize struggle. From a conflict point of view, schools are similar to social battlefields, where students struggle against teachers, teachers against administrators, and so on. Karl Marx did not write a great deal about education specifically, he is the intellectual founder of the conflict school in the sociology of education. Marx believed that class system separated owners from workers and workers from the benefits of their own work. Max Weber was also convinced that power relations between dominant and subordinate groups structured societies, but unlike Marx, Weber believed that class difference alone could not capture the complex ways human beings from hierarchies and belief systems that make these hierarchies seem just and inevitable. The conflict perspectives offer important insights about the relation between school and society.
3.1.3. Interactionalism: Interactional theories about the relation of school and society are primarily critiques and extensions of the functional and conflict perspectives. The critique arises from the observation that functional and conflict theories are very abstract, and emphasize structure and process at a very general level of analysis. Interactional theories attempt to make the commonplace strange by turning on their heads everyday taken for granted behaviors and interactions between students and students, and between students and teachers. The processes by which students are labeled gifted or learning disabled are, from an interactional point of view, important to analyze, because such processes carry with them many implicit assumptions about learning and children. Basil Bernstein has argued that the structural aspects of the educational system and the interactional aspects of the system reflect each other and must be viewed wholistically. He has examined how speech patterns reflect students' social class backgrounds and how students from working-class backgrounds are at a disadvantage in the school setting because schools ate essentially middle-class organizations.
3.2. 2. Effects of schooling
3.2.1. Inside the Schools: Size and curriculum are both important factors in school structure. Larger schools can offer students more in ways of facilities, but large schools are also more bureaucratic and may restrain initiative. Smaller schools may allow more student and teacher freedom, but small schools also lack resources. Smaller school teachers have a better chance of one-on-one time with students. Curriculum expresses culture. Sociologists of education have pointed out that curricula are not value free; they are expressions of certain groups' ideas, beliefs, and prejudices. Not all students study the same curriculum.
3.2.2. Teacher Behavior: Teachers are very busy people, they wear many different occupational hats: instructors, disinclination, bureaucrat, employer, friend, confidant, educator, and so on. These roles can either work together or apart of each other this is called strain role. Teachers are models for students and, as instructional leaders, teachers set standards for students and influence student self-esteem and sense of efficacy. The labels teachers give students apply to children and can influence their performance. This self-fulfilling prophecy indicates that teacher's expectations play a major role in encouraging or discouraging students to work to their full potential. When teachers encourage and praise students more, students learn and feel better about themselves. Research shows,that teachers have lower expectations for lower class students, but we cannot blame teachers for failures of these students. Attitudes towards students have a significant impact on students achievement and perceptions of self.
3.2.3. Student Peer Groups and Alienation: Students in vocational programs and headed towards low-status jobs were the students most likely to join a rebellious subculture. Student violence continues to be a problem, Students are not only attacking each other in increasing numbers but they are also assaulting teachers. The danger for teachers in minimal. Some argue that school violence is increasing because teachers are underpaid and classes are too large. Violence is also rising due to social media. It has been estimated that by the time students are 12 years old they have seen 18,000 murders on TV. Student culture also plays an important role in shaping educational experiences. Schools are far more than mere collections of individuals, they develop cultures, traditions, and restraints that influence those who work and study within them. They socialize, sort, and select students and reproduce society.
3.2.4. Tracking: Tracking refers to the placement of students in curricular programs based on students abilities and inclinations. The tracking decisions are often based on other criteria, such as student's race or class. Working-class students end up in vocational tracks and middle-class students in academic tracks. Students in "high-ability" tracks spend more time on actual teaching and learning activities, are able to use more interesting materials, and receive better teachers and better facilities, and more extracurricular activities. Students in lower tracks experience more alienation than high-track students.
3.2.5. Gender: Schools reproduce inequalities through gender discrimination. Men and women do not share equally in U.S, society. Men are frequently paid more than women for the same work, and women have fewer occupational opportunities. Although girls usually start school cognitively and socially ahead of boys, by the end of high school, girls have lower self-esteem and lower aspirations than do boys. During high school years, girls show signs of not living up to their potential. Most teachers are females, but most administrators are males. Textbooks are biased against females by ignoring their accomplishments. Women do go to college more than men, but they attend mostly two year colleges. Schools alone should not be held accountable for gender discrimination. Schools reflect the values and organizations of society. Schools are really open doors to equal opportunity.