On This Page:ToggleMarxist Views on EducationBowes and Gintes (1976)Correspondence PrincipleMyth of MeritocracyCritical Evaluation
On This Page:Toggle
On This Page:
Key Takeaways
interior of a traditional school classroom with wooden floor and furniture
Marxist Views on Education
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 theworking-class proletariatcan 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.
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 InequalityThe 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 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 aMarxist revolutionary movement(Thompson, 2016).
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.”
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
They suggest that these values are taught through a so-calledhidden 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;
Correspondence Principle
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 MeritocracyOne such aspect of the capitalist education system, according to Bowes and Gintis, is the “myth ofmeritocracy“.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).
The Myth of Meritocracy
One such aspect of the capitalist education system, according to Bowes and Gintis, is the “myth ofmeritocracy“.
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).
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.
Read More
References
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.
Saul McLeod, PhD
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
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.
Charlotte NickersonResearch Assistant at Harvard UniversityUndergraduate at Harvard UniversityCharlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.
Charlotte NickersonResearch Assistant at Harvard UniversityUndergraduate at Harvard University
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.
