What you'll learn

• What sociologists mean by the role and functions of education.
• How functionalists, Marxists and New Right thinkers explain education’s link to the economy.
• How education may either support social mobility or reproduce the class structure.
• How to turn this topic into AO1, AO2 and AO3 essay paragraphs.

1. Starting point: what is the education system?

In Sociology, you are not just studying “schools”. You are studying a whole set of institutions, rules and processes: nurseries, schools, colleges, universities, exams, qualifications, teachers, Ofsted, the National Curriculum, league tables, apprenticeships and government policy.

A key question runs through the whole topic: does education benefit everyone fairly, or does it mainly serve powerful groups? This is where the two AQA themes matter: socialisation, culture and identity and social differentiation, power and stratification.

The diagram below maps the main arguments about what education does and who benefits from it.

2. Functionalism: education helps society work smoothly

Functionalism is a consensus theory, meaning it assumes society is held together by shared values and cooperation. Functionalists ask: what useful jobs does education do for society?

Durkheim: social solidarity and specialist skills

Durkheim argued that education creates social solidarity, meaning a feeling of belonging to a wider society. Schools teach shared values through assemblies, rules, history, citizenship education and everyday routines.

Durkheim also argued that modern societies need specialist skills. In a simple society, many people may do similar work. In a complex industrial society, people need different training for different jobs: doctors, engineers, teachers, electricians, programmers and care workers.

So, for Durkheim, education links directly to the economy by preparing people for a specialised division of labour.

Parsons: education as a bridge

Parsons argued that school is a bridge between the family and wider society. In the family, children are judged by particularistic standards, meaning they are treated as special individuals. In school, they are judged by universalistic standards, meaning the same rules and exams apply to everyone.

This prepares young people for adult society, where jobs are usually allocated through qualifications, interviews and performance.

Davis and Moore argued that education identifies talent and allocates the most able people to the most important jobs. Higher rewards for difficult jobs motivate people to train hard.

Evaluating functionalism

Functionalism is strong because it explains why all modern societies invest heavily in education. It also fits everyday examples: schools do teach punctuality, literacy, numeracy, teamwork and qualifications.

However, it can be too optimistic. It often assumes that the values taught in school are shared by everyone. Marxists would ask: whose values are being taught? Feminists and anti-racist sociologists may also question whether the curriculum has historically privileged male, white and middle-class experiences.

3. Marxism: education reproduces class inequality

Marxism is a conflict theory, meaning it sees society as shaped by inequality and power. Marxists argue that capitalist society is divided between the ruling class, who own and control wealth, and the working class, who sell their labour for wages.

For Marxists, education does not simply create equal opportunity. It helps reproduce capitalism by training obedient workers and making inequality seem fair.

Althusser: education as an ideological state apparatus

Althusser argued that education is an ideological state apparatus. This means it spreads ruling-class ideas through beliefs, values and “common sense”, rather than through direct force.

For example, schools may teach students to accept hierarchy, competition, exams and authority as normal. If students later end up in unequal jobs, they may believe this is because of their own effort or ability, not because of class inequality.

Bowles and Gintis: the correspondence principle

Bowles and Gintis (1976) argued that school mirrors the workplace. This is called the correspondence principle.

According to Bowles and Gintis, students learn to follow instructions from teachers just as workers follow instructions from managers. They work for external rewards, such as grades, just as workers work for wages. This prepares them for capitalist employment.

They also criticised the myth of meritocracy: the belief that success is based purely on talent and effort. Marxists argue this myth hides the impact of class background.

Bourdieu: cultural capital

Bourdieu argued that schools reward cultural capital, meaning the knowledge, language, tastes and behaviour valued by the dominant class. Middle-class students may be more familiar with the language of exams, teacher expectations, museums, books, debating and university pathways.

This does not mean middle-class students are naturally “brighter”. It means their home culture may match school culture more closely. Bourdieu called this symbolic violence: the school treats middle-class culture as superior while presenting it as neutral.

Willis: resistance still leads to reproduction

Willis (1977) studied working-class “lads” who rejected school authority and created an anti-school culture. This shows students are not passive. They have agency, meaning the ability to act and make choices.

However, their resistance still led them into manual working-class jobs. So Willis supports Marxism, but adds a more complex picture: class reproduction can happen through resistance, not just obedience.

4. New Right and neoliberalism: education should be competitive

The New Right is a conservative and neoliberal perspective that supports competition, choice and limited state control. Neoliberalism means applying market principles, such as competition and consumer choice, to public services.

New Right thinkers argue that state schools can become inefficient because they do not face enough competition. Chubb and Moe (1990) argued that parents should have more choice, and schools should compete for pupils.

In the UK, New Right ideas influenced marketisation, meaning making education work more like a market. Examples include:

• league tables
• Ofsted reports
• parental choice
• formula funding, where money follows pupil numbers
• academies and free schools
• competition between schools for reputation and results

The link to the economy is clear: New Right thinkers argue that competition raises standards, and higher standards produce a more skilled and productive workforce.

Evaluating marketisation

Critics argue that marketisation can increase class inequality. Ball, Bowe and Gewirtz found that middle-class parents are often better at using choice because they have more time, confidence, knowledge and transport. Schools may also engage in cream-skimming, selecting easier-to-teach pupils, and silt-shifting, avoiding pupils seen as less likely to boost results.

5. Education, the economy and class structure

A strong essay needs to keep returning to two relationships.

Relationship to the economy

Functionalists argue education provides human capital, meaning the skills, knowledge and qualifications that make workers productive. This fits policies promoting STEM subjects, apprenticeships, T-levels and employability skills.

Marxists argue education produces workers who accept hierarchy, deadlines and external rewards. From this view, the hidden curriculum is just as important as the official curriculum.

A further concept is credentialism, where society relies increasingly on qualifications as proof of ability. This can help employers sort applicants, but it may also create qualification inflation, where more credentials are needed for jobs that previously required fewer.

Relationship to class structure

Education can support social mobility, meaning movement up or down the class structure. For example, a working-class student may gain high grades, attend university and enter a professional occupation.

But education can also reproduce class inequality. Material factors such as housing, income, devices, private tutoring and quiet study space affect achievement. Cultural factors such as parental knowledge of the system, confidence with teachers and familiarity with academic language also matter.

6. Overall comparison

Functionalism is useful for explaining why societies need education: shared values, skills, selection and qualifications. It is especially strong on the link between education and the economy.

Marxism is useful for explaining why class inequalities persist despite formal equality of opportunity. It is especially strong on power, ideology and class reproduction.

The New Right is useful for understanding recent UK education policy, especially marketisation and parental choice. However, critics argue it underestimates how class affects the ability to choose.

The best answers do not simply pick one theory. They compare them. Education can teach useful skills and still reproduce inequality. It can create opportunities for some individuals while maintaining advantages for privileged groups overall.