What Is Meritocratic

Brittany LamberthProfessor Wells English 102June 15, 2018Paul Krugman, agrees that the country is becoming economically diverse bit by bit. The middle ground amongthe richest and poorest is vanishing, and inequality is`widespread. His essay, “Confronting inequality” revealsonly how inequalityaffects us, but, as McClelland opposes, how recurringinequality can be. He references a study performed by the National Center for Education informationfrom the 1988 to 2003, in which eighth grade students were arrangedboth by academic skilland the socioeconomic rankof their parents, and the college graduation percentage. If our educational system truly gave all students equivalentopportunities, then we would expect the graduation rates to depend onlyon

Meritocracy, the system where each person's progression is due to their achievements, is seen constantly throughout society and it is suggested to be in Australian higher education. This essay will argue that rural students who attend or plan on attending university challenge this suggestion of meritocracy in Australian universities, as rural students are unequal compared to urban students. This essay will show that universities are not based on merit alone, as rural students are disadvantaged in areas such as distance, family & community values, course availability and university availability.

Almost all the family incomes are over $100,000...The incomes in this school represent less than 1 percent of the families in the United States,” (256) compared to working-class families who earn incomes “at or below $12,000” (256). Anyon presents these examples to compare the backgrounds of each school and uses this as logos to persuasively reason her claim that quality of education is offered to people who can afford it. Public schools that working-class and middle-class families can afford do not offer the same education private schools that upper-class and capitalist families can afford. Wealthy children who are privileged get an advantage early on in their education career because they are able to afford better quality teachers and lessons. This varied quality of education found in curriculums is what creates the unequal divide between educated individuals in different social classes. An audience of scholars and teachers would be persuaded by this claim because Anyon’s data transparently shows the uneven distribution of resources and opportunity found in the social class schools.

The goal of social mobility has not been relevant until recently. For example, in the mid-twentieth century, democratic equality was sought after due to the need for equal opportunity in schooling, no matter the socioeconomic background, race, gender, or handicap a child may have been impaired by. Education soon became increasingly available to all social classes,

Expansion of education is closely related to idealistic views of democracy. In developing and wealthy nations, education is valued because it helps the individual mind to develop capabilities. In contrast, education has also been seen as a way to promote equality. Having access to public education, in theory, has the potential to reduce poverty and promote equality. If all are entitled to the same public education, not to mention they are required by law, why do school systems seem segregate their students? Researchers have searched for the answer and have theorized that economic background, tracking, and hidden curriculum are a few things that help contribute to the imaginary lines drawn between students in society.

Bowles and Gintis also argue that in order to prevent rebellion from those disadvantaged by the inequalities of capitalism, it is necessary to produce ideologies that explain and justify inequality as fair, natural and inevitable. If people think inequality is justified then they are less likely to challenge the capitalist system. According to Bowles and Gintis, the education system plays a key role in producing such ideologies. They describe the education system as a giant ‘myth making machine’ and focus on how education promotes the ‘myth of meritocracy’. Meritocracy refers to a system where everyone has an equal opportunity to achieve, where rewards are based on ability and effort. This means that those who gain the highest rewards and status deserve it because they are the most able and hardworking. Bowles and Gintis argue that meritocracy does not actually exist. Evidence showed that the main factor determining whether or not someone has a high income is their family and class background, not their ability or educational achievement. By

Comparing the Marxist and Functionalist Views on the Role of Education in Industrial Society The functionalists and the Marxists both believe that the education system benefits everyone, but both have different views on society. The Marxist views of the education system are that there are conflicts because there is an inequality between the working class and the higher classes. They believe that there are two different classes which education produces, and that is the working class and the ruling class.

The Education system of England and Wales underwent a number of important changes since 1944. This essay seeks to concentrate on these major changes describing the rationale and impact they had on the British education system.

The impact of the occupation and social class of an individual’s parent on their educational success has long been a focus of sociologists. Success in the educational system in the UK is measured by longevity and qualifications. Sociologists have for many years been concerned with why the attainment gap appears to be so large between working and middle class children. This is as relevant today as ever due to the recent Education Act 2011 where one aim was to ensure higher education was accessible to children of all social backgrounds.

Brown (1997) argues that middle class families impose values onto their children regarding education from a young age; they place high importance on educational qualifications as they are aware that the job market is becoming increasingly competitive (cited Ball and Vincent, 2001). This suggests that middle-class pupils value school and try to get as much as they can out of it, thus have higher levels of attainment than working-class pupils.

In this paper, I will be exploring the conflicting sociological ideologies of Marx and Durkheim in relation as to how useful they are at understanding the rise of compulsory education in Britain. Prior to the rise of compulsory education, schooling had a very small influence upon the masses. In general, only the wealthy could afford to send their children; mainly boys to school. This was primarily to study book knowledge and writing in the hope to become priests.

Bowles and Gintis felt it was important to write this article, because they believe that the politics of education are better understood in terms of the need for social control in an unequal and rapidly changing economic order. This point is illustrated on page 396 when the authors say, “The unequal

Inequalities exist an all aspects of life. The nature and result of such inequalities shapes our social as well as economic lives. As people progress through their educational life certain inequalities will result in different outcomes of schooling for different sets of people. “In post war Britain pupils from a working class background are constantly found to gain fewer academic qualifications, to be under represented in institutions of higher education and to end up in jobs offering little opportunity for social advancement'; (Brown 1987 p11). It is inequalities such as these that are present both in and out of school that will determine life chances of individuals. It is commonly accepted that education is the main

According to Nielsen (2013), in the United States, the government has been working hard in the due process of providing education to the children in the country. Despite the efforts that have been initiated by the United States education department, there is a problem of equity in education access around the nation. There are a good number of students who do not have the same opportunities as others when it comes to the education sector. For instance, in most cases, the quality of education that a student will get depends with their social class in the community. Those with a weak living condition are less likely to have the same quality of education as those who belong to the wealthy families. Therefore, the importance of equity, issues with sameness and the strategies suggested by Natalie (2013) and the report by the equity and excellence commission will form the basis of discussion for this paper.

     According to Bowles and Gintis, results have concluded that socioeconomic status determines greater education attainment