The school system reproduces the organizational system of the capitalist society and expresses the different patterns of socialization that occur within the social class system. Michael Apple views the hidden curriculum through a Neo-Marxist perspective by providing the concept of having both low and high status curriculums of knowledge. (Apple, 1995) The poor and minorities are excluded from high status knowledge. This type of exclusion comes from the ability to filter students into different levels of stratification and eliminating future career paths, and can be described as functionalist approach (Apple, 1995). Apple focuses on the production of the correspondence theory and applies that there is specific characteristics, behaviour traits
…show more content…
In terms of Neo-Marxism that is discussed in education it is evident that 1. Class and class structure exist 2. The social control of class structure also exists 3. The dominant class controls the school and therefore controls the subordinate class. It is obvious that the roles of Neo-Marxism in schools are the control of classes. The hidden curriculum is seen to do the same thing. The Neo-Marxism uses symbols and meaning of the capitalist society to shape the dominant classes ideologies that are then used to create the curriculum. As Marxism explains the class in relation to the access of means of production is it clear that schools do the same. Neo-Marxist writers such as Michael apple produce the class conflict and view the class structure as the organization of social relations. It is evident that class divide is comprised of racial, ethnic and gender backgrounds. Described in the education systems the working class is prepared for working class jobs, this is held by the dominant class as they maintain the power of economic …show more content…
Overall the ideologies of the hidden curriculum and stratification through a Marxist perspective are very similar. An advantage is placed upon the higher classes, which will benefit them both inside and outside of the education system, leading them to the reproduction of class. Neo-Marxism also describes the fact that, emphasis is put on both the cognitive and behavioral patterns of the students in determining the development. As education is an important factor for future occupation it is post secondary which provides these opportunities. It is clear the stratification system developed in school as a sorting machine, due to the institutional arrangements that are used to stratify a society. The difference is the educational organization system has changed over time, due to the economic strata’s in past generations. Although the generational strata’s have changed the dimensions within education, the framework stays the same. The education’s systems capacity and the flow of young people out of the educational institution. The application of the conflict theory can be used in the stratification of education as it is evident that there is distinct status groups based on class and ethnicity, the status groups tend to occupy different occupational levels and the organizational struggle for power is evident. In it can conflict theory can also help explain the stratification historical changes that have occurred. For the past decades education
In terms of Neo-Marxism that is discussed in education it is evident that 1. Class and class structure exist 2. The social control of class structure also exists 3. The dominant class controls the school and therefore controls the subordinate class. It is obvious that the roles of Neo-Marxism in schools are the control of classes. The hidden curriculum is seen to do the same thing. The Neo-Marxism uses symbols and meaning of the capitalist society to shape the dominant classes ideologies that are then used to create the curriculum. As Marxism explains the class in relation to the access of means of production is it clear that schools do the same. Neo-Marxist writers such as Michael apple produce the class conflict and view the class structure as the organization of social relations. It is evident that class divide is comprised of racial, ethnic and gender backgrounds. Described in the education systems the working class is prepared for working class jobs, this is held by the dominant class as they maintain the power of economic …show more content…
Overall the ideologies of the hidden curriculum and stratification through a Marxist perspective are very similar. An advantage is placed upon the higher classes, which will benefit them both inside and outside of the education system, leading them to the reproduction of class. Neo-Marxism also describes the fact that, emphasis is put on both the cognitive and behavioral patterns of the students in determining the development. As education is an important factor for future occupation it is post secondary which provides these opportunities. It is clear the stratification system developed in school as a sorting machine, due to the institutional arrangements that are used to stratify a society. The difference is the educational organization system has changed over time, due to the economic strata’s in past generations. Although the generational strata’s have changed the dimensions within education, the framework stays the same. The education’s systems capacity and the flow of young people out of the educational institution. The application of the conflict theory can be used in the stratification of education as it is evident that there is distinct status groups based on class and ethnicity, the status groups tend to occupy different occupational levels and the organizational struggle for power is evident. In it can conflict theory can also help explain the stratification historical changes that have occurred. For the past decades education