Sociology · May / June 2020 · Paper 21 · Question 2

0495

As printed in the paper

The question as text

Experiences of schooling can be very diverse and this can affect educational achievement. For example the type of school attended and the student’s family background can be very important. 2 Some sociologists believe that every student has the chance to be successful in education, others think this is impossible due to educational inequality.

Read automatically from the paper; the printed page above is exact.

Show the answer and mark scheme

2(a)[2]
What is meant by the term ‘educational inequality’? One mark for partial definition, e.g. girls do better than boys Two marks for clear definition, e.g. when different social groups are treated differently or have different levels of educational achievement.
2(b)[4]
Describe two functions of education. Candidates will describe two different functions of education. Points from a functionalist or a Marxist or a feminist viewpoint are fine to credit. Possible answers:
socialisation – norms and shared values are transmitted through schools resulting in a sense of belonging;
education is a means of social control – functionalists see this positively, Marxists negatively;
learning the importance of individual achievement – where their status is achieved against a set of universal standards;
economic function – schools produce individuals with the skills and abilities needed for getting a job and for supporting the economy of that society;
selection role- schools ensure that the right people are in the right jobs, ‘sifting and sorting’;
Marxists believe that schools inculcate students with the ideology of the ruling class through the hidden curriculum – making them good workers for the capitalist system;
Marxists believe that the functions of education are different depending upon your social class – the children of the elite attend private schools and the top universities and so learn that they are superior to the rest. Marxists believe that the function is to ensure upper class children inherit and maintain their power, wealth and status;
feminists believe that education functions to reinforce and maintain the system of patriarchy e.g. through the gendered curriculum;
other reasonable response. One mark for each point correctly identified (up to maximum of two). One mark for each point that is developed (up to a maximum of two).
2(c)[6]
Explain how family background may impact upon educational achievement. Candidates should consider how family background may impact upon educational achievement. They may refer to a positive or negative impact or a combination of the two FAMILY BACKGROUND – candidates may refer to material, cultural and/or linguistic factors when considering how family background may impact upon educational achievement. Note: the list of possible answers below take the negative view of the impact of family background on educational achievement. These can all be reversed to explain the benefits accrued by the higher classes. Possible answers:
a lack of money may mean not having a quiet place to study;
not having the money to attend pre-school may negatively impact upon a child’s educational achievements at school;
coming from a family that is not financially able to support a child through university may limit aspirations accordingly;
having parents who do not value education is likely to be passed on to the children who are then also unlikely to value it and so not try hard to succeed;
a lack of cultural capital (Bourdieu) may hinder students in schools, particularly in terms of selection examinations e.g. the 11+;
ethnic minority students may be hampered in education if the language of the curriculum is not their/their parents first language;
other reasonable response. Band 0 [0 marks] No creditworthy response. Band 1 [1–3 marks] Answers in this band will show only a limited awareness of how family background may impact upon educational achievement. They may talk about e.g. ‘If you have rich parents then you can afford to attend the better private schools and so get better qualifications’. Responses may be short and un/under developed. At the bottom of the band (1 mark), expect one weak point. Higher in the band (2-3 marks), candidates may offer more than one weak point, but there may be a tendency towards simplistic answers, engaging with sociological ideas without using sociological language Band 2 [4–6 marks] A clear and accurate explanation, showing good sociological knowledge and understanding of how family background may impact upon educational achievement. Sociological terms and concepts should be expected e.g. ‘Bourdieu’s concept of capital is a useful way of explaining how home factors impact upon educational achievement. In terms of money, economic capital, those with high economic capital are able to improve their grades through private tutors, ICT resources, a quiet place to study and the ability to boost classroom study through extra-curricular trips and visits. These opportunities are not available to poorer students who are less likely to do as well’. This would be followed by explanation of factors leading to this. At the bottom of the band, the range of points covered may be narrow or lack detail. Higher in the band, answers will cover more than one factor in a well- developed way or cover several factors in less detail.
2(d)[8]
Explain why some students join anti-school sub-cultures. Candidates need to explain different reasons why some students join anti- school subcultures. ANTI-SCHOOL SUB-CULTURE: where the pupil’s norms and values go against the expectations and values of the school. Possible answers:
teacher labelling – if students are labelled as ‘failures’ this may lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy and the student joining an anti-school sub- culture;
Cohen – status frustration – students may join an anti-school sub- culture as a means of gaining status if they are unable to do this in the school system;
peer pressure – the pressure to conform to one’s peer group may cause some students to join an anti-school sub-culture;
instant gratification – the desire for fun and ‘having a laff’ (Willis, the lads) may encourage some students to reject school values and join an anti-school sub-culture instead;
Willis and Marxists thinkers would argue that anti-school sub-cultures are formed due to the ‘myth of meritocracy’/fatalism;
culture of masculinity – boys in particular may feel pressure to join an anti-school sub-culture so they can prove their masculinity in the feminised world of education;
setting and streaming – anti-school sub-cultures tend to be formed by students from the lower sets, suggesting they are a reaction to low self- esteem and an inability to be successful through the school curriculum;
some students who feel marginalised due to racism may join an anti- school sub-culture as a form of resistance;
other reasonable response. Band 0 [0 marks] No creditworthy response. Band 1 [1–3 marks] Answers in this band will show only a limited awareness of why some students may join an anti-school sub-culture. A tendency to description is likely. Responses may be short and undeveloped, e.g. ‘they join because they find school hard and are in the lower sets’, stated without explanation. Sociological terms and concepts are unlikely to be used. At the bottom of the band (1 mark), expect one weak point. Higher in the band (2-3 marks), candidates may offer more than one weak point. Band 2 [4–6 marks] Answers in this band will show basic sociological knowledge and understanding of why some students may join an anti-school sub-culture. Responses may be underdeveloped and lacking in range. e.g. ‘Schools set pupils based on ability and those in the bottom sets are often looked down on by teachers. This means they don’t value education and have low self- esteem and so rebel against teachers and the system by joining an anti-school sub-culture’ etc. At the bottom of the band, candidates are unlikely to use sociological terms and concepts accurately. Higher in the band, candidates may be beginning to use sociological terms and concepts with greater accuracy. However, some aspects of the answer may only be partially developed/explained. Band 3 [7–8 marks] Answers in this band will show good sociological knowledge and understanding of why some students may join an anti-school sub-culture and will be well developed and explained. e.g. ‘Students joining anti-school sub-cultures are typically male and working class. They are labelled by their teachers as failures and therefore see little point in trying hard in their schoolwork, often living up to their self-fulfilling prophecy. Cohen believes they suffer from ‘status frustration’ and so turn to their anti-school peer group for status instead’. They can then expand on the explanation of this and other factors as necessary. Sociological terms and concepts will be used accurately overall. Answers will be well focused on the question and there will be a range of reasons presented. At the top of the band explanations will be clear throughout.
2(e)[15]
To what extent does the comprehensive system of education improve an individual’s life chances? COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM: non-selective secondary schools accepting all children in the local area, regardless of ability LIFE CHANCES: opportunities to be successful in life. Possible answers: FOR
they allow for equality of opportunity as all students study the same subjects (national curriculum) and have an equal chance of succeeding and improving their life chances;
comprehensive schools operate within a system based on achieved status – this allows anybody, regardless of background, to improve their life chances;
comprehensive schools avoid the disadvantages of selective education whereby children can be labelled as ‘failures’ from an early age, thus limiting their life chances;
functionalist view – comprehensive schools are based on the principle of meritocracy, meaning all students have the same chances to be successful and to improve their life chances;
the comprehensive system means that fewer pupils than ever before leave education without any qualifications thus improving their life chances;
comprehensive schools are free to attend and therefore allows everyone the opportunity to improve their life chances;
the comprehensive system benefits working class pupils in particular as they are least likely to get into grammar or private schools. This therefore improves their life chances;
other reasonable response. AGAINST
critics of comprehensive education say that it lowers educational standards (and therefore life chances) through insufficient challenge and mixed ability teaching;
comprehensive schools tend to be large and impersonal leading to discipline problems that can impinge upon learning so negatively affecting life chances;
comprehensive schools still tend to use setting and streaming and so still label students – this can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy and so lower the life chances of some pupils;
private and grammar schools still achieve better exam results than comprehensive schools meaning that the life chances of their students tend to be better;
many sociologists believe that life chances are linked to a person’s ascribed status – comprehensive schools can do little to challenge or change this;
feminists believe that despite the national curriculum gendered subject choice still occurs in comprehensive schools which limits the life chances of girls who seem to be channelled into lower paid and lower status caring work;
Marxists believe that comprehensive schools make little difference to a person’s life chances as we live in a world in which the ruling class will always exploit the lower classes through their power over them;
comprehensive schools cannot compete with the influence of the old boys network and social capital found in private/independent schools which gives pupils the private sector a clear advantage;
other reasonable response. Band 0 [0 marks] No creditworthy response. Band 1 [1–4 marks] Answers in this band may be vague and largely based on common sense showing limited knowledge of the extent to which the comprehensive system of education can improve life chances is correct. Use of sociological terms or concepts is very unlikely. Responses may be short, undeveloped and one-sided. e.g. ‘Comprehensive education gives everyone the chance to be successful in life’. Lower in the band (1-2 marks), expect one or two weak points. Higher in the band (3-4 marks) candidates may offer more than two points or provide a weak definition of key terms, e.g. A comprehensive school is a school that anybody can go to. Band 2 [5–8 marks] In this band candidates will show some basic knowledge of the extent to which the comprehensive system of education can improve life chances is correct. Alternatively, they may offer an answer which is list-like in nature but there will be no real attempt to assess the issues raised by the question. There may be limited/some use of sociological terms or concepts. Responses may be underdeveloped and lack range. Answers may be simplistic and two-sided responses are unlikely e.g. ‘Comprehensive schools make students all follow the same national curriculum which gives them all the same opportunities in education and later in life’ etc. Lower in the band, the response will be rather narrow in the points covered and there will be little development. Higher in the band, more points will be covered and there will be limited development of some points. Alternatively, a list-like answer with little development covering both sides of the argument may score up to 8 marks. A one-sided answer cannot score higher than 8 marks. Band 3 [9–12 marks] Answers in this band will show good sociological knowledge and understanding of the extent to which the comprehensive system of education can improve life chances is correct. Sociological terms and concepts will be used with greater accuracy and/or frequency. For the most part, answers will be well developed, focused on the question and there will be a range of points presented. Candidates may say that e.g. ‘Despite there being many positive factors to comprehensive education like equality of opportunity and meritocratic principles, Marxists believe that it cannot really improve a pupil’s life chances when education serves the interests of the ruling class and indoctrinates students into capitalist norms values that ensure the working class remain in their low status positions in society. Ascribed status and privilege will always be more important and comprehensive education cannot challenge this’. There will be a two-sided response but this may be unbalanced. At the bottom of the band, candidates may provide a narrower range of well developed points. At the top of the band, expect a wider range of points and clear focus on the question. Band 4 [13–15 marks] Answers in this band will show excellent knowledge and understanding of the extent to which the comprehensive system of education can improve life chances. There will be a strong grasp of the argument as well as accurate and frequent use of sociological terms and concepts. Answers will be well developed, clearly focused on the question and discuss a wide range of points. Responses will be two-sided and balanced. At the bottom of the band (13 marks), the answer may lack a specific conclusion. Higher in the band, there will be a clear attempt to offer an assessment of the ‘To what extent.?’ part of the question through a focused conclusion. Candidates should show consideration of points for and against the idea of whether the comprehensive system of education can improve life chances, citing some of the examples given.

Practise this paper →

Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.