Theodore Larkin

Sociology of Education
TuTh 11:30 12:45

Professor Rubinson
Fall 2013
Tarbutton 111

Understanding Education: Schooling as Status Competition

Dewey argued that it was the job of education to encourage individuals to develop
their full potential as human beings. Deweys philosophy, similar to that of the human
capital approach to schooling, hoped that the education system he proposed would
promote flexibility and tolerance, and individuals would be able to cooperate together as
equals. While education is supposed to be free and open to all, in reality certain
individuals have much greater opportunities than the majority of students and conflict
theory is prominent throughout our educational system.
Conflict theory states that employment requirements mirror the efforts of
competing status groups to dominate the job market by imposing their cultural standards
or advantages on the selection process. The status conflict perspective on education
considers schools as being intuitions that "perpetuate" social inequalities in terms of
class, gender, ethnicity, and race. As specific groups seek to preserve a position of
"privilege", the conflict perspective explains why certain individuals benefit more from
the education system and others do not. Conflict theory is responsible for a large part of
the increased schooling required for employment in todays advanced industrial society.
Conflict theorists believe that the education system is a means by which those in power
stay in power and push people of lower status into obedience.
Human capital theory emphasizes that education boosts the productivity and
efficiency of workers through the increasing levels of economically productive human
capability. The provision of formal education is seen as an investment in human capital,

which proponents of the theory have considered as equally or even more worthwhile than
that of physical capital (Woodhall, 1997). Human capital is achieved by working with
students to produce in them proficiencies and capabilities that make them more
productive and is composed of the abilities, knowledge, and dispositions amongst
individual members of a community. Therefore human capital becomes a profitable
benefit for both individuals and the community. In short, human capital theorists contend
that an educated population is a productive population. The product of human capital
theory is a qualified individual whose enriched productive capacity is manifested in a
flow of enhanced services. Because the training of the individual and the benefits take
place over a considerable time period, the value of the resources used in this process may
be considered as investment, and the accredited growth in gross power that results from
training may be considered as its yield.
The fulfillment of ones education is closely associated to ones social class.
Students of low socioeconomic status tend to be unable to afford the same opportunities
than those students of a higher status, regardless of their academic capabilities or
aspiration to learn. Many students from working class families struggle with helping out
at home, fiscal responsibility a family, poor study environments and a lack of support
from their parents. The struggles of these students are challenging matches with
education systems that observe a traditional curriculum that is more easily understood
and fulfilled by students of higher social classes. Further, the absurdly expensive tuition
costs of Colleges and Universities keeps the majority of socioeconomic classes away
from higher achievements in life. Conflict theorists do not believe that public schools
reduce social inequality. Rather, they believe that the educational system reinforces and

perpetuates social inequalities arising from differences in class, gender, race, and
ethnicity.
Multiple studies have shown that even with constant social origins the number of
years of education is a strong determinant of occupational achievement in America.
These studies also show that social origins affect educational attainment, and also
occupational attainment after the completion of education (Blau and Duncan, 1967;
Eckland, 1965; Sewell et al., 1969; Duncan and Hodge, 1963; Lipset and Bendix, 1959).
Formal education has expanded throughout the history of the United States, particularly
since World War II. With each passing generation more people are attending school,
staying in school longer, and spending more on formal education. The school year is
longer and students attend a higher percentage of their classes (U.S. National Center for
Education Statistics, 1975: 34-35). Educational requirements for employment have
become increasingly extensive, not only in elite occupations but also at the bottom of the
occupational ladder. In a 1967 survey of the San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose areas
(Collins, 1969), 17% of the employers surveyed required at least a high school diploma
for employment in even unskilled positions. At the same time, the proportions of the
American population attending schools through the completion of high school and
advanced levels have risen sharply during the last century. Careers are thus increasingly
shaped within the educational system.
One theory proposes that the skill requirements of jobs in industrial society
constantly increase because of technological change. The proportion of jobs requiring
low skill decreases and the proportion requiring high skill increases. Additionally, the
same jobs are upgraded in skill requirements. Formal education provides the training

necessary for the more highly skilled jobs. Therefore, educational requirements for
employment constantly rise, and increasingly larger proportions of the population are
required to spend longer and longer periods in school. The ability to fill positions,
and/or the motivation to acquire the necessary training, is unequally distributed in the
population and inequalities of rewards in wealth and prestige evolve to ensure that the
supply of persons with the necessary ability or training meshes with the structure of
demands for skilled performance.
Educational reform is still viewed by many as a key to reducing economic
inequality. Efforts to generate equal opportunities focusing on characteristics of
individuals, the approach of the 1960's that failed to achieve the desired outcomes, are
unlikely to succeed in the future. We should not be focusing on the relationships between
education and occupation or socioeconomic status. Rather, we should concentrate on the
development of institutions and social affiliations that dictate change, and the sources of
opposition rooted in the underlying structure of American society.
The circumstances of an individuals class is the most important factor influencing
levels of achievement; those who come from well-off classes achieve higher-level jobs.
Children of the wealthy and powerful, through special instruction and increased
opportunities, obtain high qualifications and highly rewarded jobs, regardless of their
abilities. Thus our educational system increases the gap between social classes, confirms
the status conflict perspective and helps maintain the existing class system.