Similarity Report ID: oid:28625:16235534

PAPER NAME AUTHOR

SOCIOLOGY II 2021BALLB38.docx Astha Mathur

WORD COUNT CHARACTER COUNT

5467 Words 28889 Characters

PAGE COUNT FILE SIZE

23 Pages 136.2KB

SUBMISSION DATE REPORT DATE

Apr 23, 2022 12:53 PM GMT+5:30 Apr 23, 2022 12:55 PM GMT+5:30

7% Overall Similarity
The combined total of all matches, including overlapping sources, for each database.
7% Internet database 2% Publications database
Crossref database Crossref Posted Content database
5% Submitted Works database

Excluded from Similarity Report

Bibliographic material Quoted material
Cited material Small Matches (Less then 15 words)

Summary
THE NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

SOCIOLOGY PROJECT
on

Understanding the Interplay of Education and Sociology

submitted by

Name of the Student: Ashita Mathur

Enrolment Number:

Roll Number: 2021BALLB38

II Semester

B. A. LL. B. (Hons.)

submitted to

Prof. (Dr.) Bir Pal Singh,

Date of submission: 20th April 2022

 1. Declaration

I, Ashita Mathur, Roll Number 2021BALLB38, Enrollment Number A-2335, do hereby

1
declare that the Project titled “Understanding the Interplay of Education and Sociology.” is an
outcome of my own independent research endeavor and has been carried out under the
guidance of Dr. Bir Pal Singh. Literature relied on by me for the purpose of this Project has
been fully and completely acknowledged in the footnotes and bibliography. The Project is not
plagiarized and all reasonable steps have been taken to avoid plagiarism. Similarity Index as
per the Turnitin Report is____%. In case, my project is found to be plagiarized, the course
teacher shall have the full liberty to ask me to revise the Project. If I fail to comply with the
instructions of the teacher, my project may be referred to the Committee Against Use of Unfair
Means and I will comply with the decision of the said Committee.

Date: 20th April 2022 Ashita Mathur

Enrolment Number: A-2335

Roll Number: 2021BALLB38

 2. Acknowledgement

I would take this opportunity to express my utmost gratitude to Prof. (Dr.) Bir Pal Singh for
his constant support and guidance throughout the classes and the readily provided material and
notes. His expansive knowledge and expertise of the subject not just greatly helped me with
this project, but also aided me through the navigation of the curriculum topics. I would also
like to thank the staff of the Gyan Mandir for authenticating the submitted work and facilitating
the same for the final print.
 Table of Contents

1. Declaration
2. Acknowledgement
3. Introduction
4. Synopsis
4.1 Need for Study
3
4.2 Review of Literature
4.3 Statement of Problem
4.4 Research Questions
4.5 Objectives of the Study
4.6 Variables of the Study
4.7 Operational Definitions
4.8 Hypothesis
4.9 Design of the study
4.10 Sampling Technique
4.11 Tools for collecting the data
4.12 Validation Procedures
4.13 Experimentation/Field Work Details
4.14 Tools for analysis
4.15 Limitations of Study
5. Analysis
5.1 Meaning
5.2 Historical Background
5.3 Role of Social Institutions in Education
5.3.1 Family
5.3.2 School
5.3.3 Government
6. Contemporary Significance of Durkheim’s Theory
8. Conclusion
9. Bibliography
 3. Introduction

Education forms one of the core features of society. Without it, society as a whole would not
be able to function or even exist. Not only does it influence the opinions of a society’s members,
but it also has a great impact on the way they conduct themselves, and aids in the development
and improvement of their abilities. While studying the sociological aspect of education, we
study the way society, in the form of institutions and individuals, impacts education and the
learning of people. An attempt to study the influence of education on society has been made
by a number of sociologists, and as a result, multiple varying perspectives on it have developed.

Emile Durkheim, a noted sociologist was of the view that the learning of specialised skills was
one of the most essential objectives of education. The division of labour, or rather the
specialisation of skills, is indeed a pre-requisite of the creation of modern society. Due to this
viewpoint, he developed the assumption that schools are essential for individuals to learn the
values of cooperation and interdependence, all required for even an industrial and modern
society to function properly. It is only after learning such skills can people with more
specialised skills work in a more efficient manner, irrespective of their differences.

Since time immemorial, education has been treated as an optimistic initiative meant to facilitate
the development of society and help better it. Its main aim has always been to aid every
individual in the achievement of their maximum potential, so that they will be able to contribute
towards the aforementioned betterment and development of society.1

The formation of a meritocratic society requires the development of each individual’s inherent
potential. The creation of such a society will help achieve true equality in a society and lower
other biases based on caste and class, since education would enable each individual to have a
social standing on the basis of their personal achievements, rather than by birth or
circumstance.

Therefore, the best mechanism for society to achieve true social equality is education.
Harmonious and skilful work exists only as a result of education. According to Durkheim, a
balance between one’s individuality and the values of society must be struck while such skills
are developed. Over the course of this paper, an attempt will be made to understand the

1
Barbara Combеr, 'Litеracy, Poverty And Schooling: What Matters In Young Pеople's Education?' (2014) 48
Literacy.
sociological perspective of education while placing special emphasis on the works of
Durkheim, while applying them to the workings of the contemporary and modern world.
 4. Synopsis

4.1 Need for Study

There exists a need to study and evaluate the existing trends in education, and to analyse the
dynamics within classrooms, which can be referred to as mini-societies, so as to know in what
ways education should be developed in order for society to reach and fulfill its maximum
potential.

4.2 Review of Literature

A number of articles and books were taken into consideration while developing this paper.

 Jeanne H. Ballantine, Floyd M. Hammack, The Sociology of Education: A

Systematic Analysis (New York: Routledge 2016) - The book is a great starting point
for research on education and sociology as two related concepts. It provides a simple
and structured description of the concepts involved which is insightful and the language
used is relatively uncomplicated. The examples in the beginning of each chapter were
also immensely helpful in furthering my understanding.
 Emile Durkheim, Education and Sociology (New York: The Free Press 1956) –
The book is much more comprehensive in terms of concepts. It gives the perspectives
of a number of sociologists and attempts to prove or disprove their theories and opinions
in a convincing manner. However, as a preliminary read this book may not be as easy
to comprehend as the others.
 P. W Musgrave, The Sociology of Education (Routledge 1979) - This book too was
extremely informative and provided valuable insights regarding the importance of
school and the role of teachers in it. It simplifies Durkheim's views on education but
also presents the contemporary issues that might arise on practically applying his theory
in the education system at present.

4.3 Statement of Problem

Expecting there to exist a homogenous set of ideals regarding morality and values among
students in today’s diverse society is not practical.

4.4 Research Questions

  Do social systems have the ability to impact the modern education systems?
 Are the theories propounded by Durkheim still applicable in modern day?

4.5 Objectives of the Study

 To understand the influence social systems have on education.

 To evaluate the relevance of Durkheim’s theories in today’s day and age.

4.6 Variables of the Study

The variables in the study were the different social classes, ethnicities, and genders of the
members of an educational institution.

4.7 Operational Definitions

The operational definition in the current study was the manner in which students and teachers
behave in classrooms, as observed by a 3rd party, intelligence test scores of individuals from
different sections of society and results of tests measuring the emotional intelligence of
individuals as a means to study their value systems and morality.

4.8 Hypothesis

Today’s system of education ensures that students are taught the different morals and values
that exist in the different sections of society, and are made to understand the need to accept
them without discriminating.

4.9 Design of the study

The design of the study has primarily relied on secondary sources of data, along with an
observational mode of data gathering.

4.10 Sampling Technique

As the study was an analysis of an existing theory regarding the interplay of education and
sociology, there existed no mode of first-hand data collection.

4.11 Tools for collecting the data

 The data analysed in the study was obtain through secondary sources primarily.

4.12 Validation Procedures

7
The study has been validated in a manner that ensures that each phase of the chosen research
methodology rigorously adheres to the highest standards of quality.

4.13 Experimentation/Field Work Details

As the study was an analysis of an existing theory regarding the interplay of education and
sociology, there existed no mode of first-hand data collection, leaving no possibility for field
work or experimentation in data gathering.

4.14 Tools for analysis

This study has been conducted following the doctrinal method of research. An attempt has been
made to identify the problem, conduct its analysis and arrive at a suitable conclusion using a
holistic approach.

4.15 Limitations of Study

2
Several limitations within the literature studied need to be acknowledged. The limited
information on recruitment, data collection, and analysis across the articles included in the
review makes comparison difficult and makes an attempt at meta-analysis impossible. The use
of secondary data by most of the studies can also affect the quality of the results as it could be
outdated or inaccurate among many other pitfalls leading to measurement errors or bias.
 5. Analysis

5.1 Meaning

The sociological perspective of education has been majorly developed due to Durkheim’s
contributions. According to him, “the sociology of education is a systematic study of education
from the sociological perspective. Sociological perspective here refers to the analysis of the
effect of social institutions an social patterns on the functioning of education”

Brookover and Gottlieb have stated that “education is considered to be a combination of social
acts and sociology is considered to be an analysis of human interaction.”

Taking both definitions into consideration, we can infer that while studying education through
a sociological perspective, we analyse the interplay of the individual and institutional
experiences in the creation of an ‘educated society’.

Giddens had theorised that the sociology of education worked to simply stress upon the impact
and social relevance education has on modern society. It forms the only means an individual
can employ to develop their social and technical skills. As society becomes more and more
industrialised, the division of labour gains more importance.

However, the sole function of education is not just to train people to work in different careers,
but also to entrust with them skills they need to fit into specific social roles.

Sociological problems existing in the field of education are also evaluated. The current systems
of public schooling existing in modern societies are closely analysed. Special emphasis is
placed on the education of adults, the growth of higher education and other systems, etc.

Significant emphasis is placed on the study of teacher-student relationships, classroom

dynamics on different levels of society and the influence an individual’s background has on
their development in the school setting.
5.2 Historical Background

The theories of the sociology of education were put forth keeping in mind formal modes of
education only. Despite Durkheim’s theories being vastly influenced by the turbulent political
and social climates of French society, it was not the first time an idea of sociology affecting
formal modes oof education was put forth. In post revolution France, declarations stating that
5
the right to education is an essential right of all individuals and it is the Nation’s duty to instruct
all its citizens.”

But while these declarations did garner popular support of the people, the concepts of equality
in terms of opportunity in education and state control of education were not accepted until
Durkheim’s time, which was during the late 19th century.

After the Franco-Prussian war, in which France was defeated, (around the 1870s), a period of
depression began in which the people of France faced major financial loses, leading to a decline
in the sentiments of nationalism among the French people. After the 1880s, France made an
attempt to reaffirm the fractured national unity, but it did so through the spread of individualism
and autonomous behaviour of individuals.

However, Durkheim, being an ardent proponent of homogenous societies and solidarity

amongst people facilitated by education, took a strong stance against the rising individualism
in society at the time. He argued that giving the development of the individual priority over the
development of society would threaten the structure of the closely knit social institutions on
which society relied upon for its survival.

Only after World War II was education given its due importance. The rise of industrialisation
had created a demand for people with specialised skills of labour. This led to the undermining
of the existing social stratifications due to rise in education, which in turn led to greater social
mobility.

Neo Marxists were against this theory of education leading to a rise in social mobility. They
were of the opinion that education received in schools set a particular set of values in students,
including values like subservience. They argued that the current modes of education would
lead to nothing more than the creation of a submissive labour force, resulting in the capitalist
classes taking advantage of the labour classes and exploiting them. According to them, schools
served as a mechanism for the ruling classes to create a homogenous society, and that the
patterns in schooling displayed signs of discrimination on the grounds of class, race and
gender.2 These views challenged the theories of education being an ‘unmitigated good’.

However, it must be kept in mind that education, like any other social factor, too has its
advantages and disadvantages. It must be understood that while it has been shown to facilitate
discrimination in society, it is still necessary as one cannot function without it. While it may
give individuals the platform to discriminate, it also gives them the means and skill to remove
or reduce such discrimination. Discouraging education as a whole merely because of a few
negative consequences cannot stand justified, as it has clearly been proved that its pros
outweigh the cons. Instead of removing education in totality, ways to reduce its ill effects must
be found.

2
Mark Lyons, 'Child Povеrty, Don Edgar, David Kеane And Petеr Mcdonald, Allen &Amp; Unwin, Sydney,
1989, 207 Pages' (1990) 15 Childrеn Australia.
5.3 Role of Social Institutions in Education

According to Durkheim, society’s very existence relies on the similarities its people share,
along with the values prevalent in every member of it. Each society has certain subsections,
each subsection having a separate set of values considered essential to each member. While
such values may be specific to a particular subsection, it has often been observed that such
values are shared by all of the subsections of a society.

One explanation behind these values being homogenous could simply be because of similar
education being received by all subsections. As these values are shared by a large population,
they must be inclusive of some values (both physical and mental) which the society they belong
to believes each and every member must have and display. They must also be inclusive of
certain values the subsection they belong to, which may be their class, family or profession,
believes each member must have and display.

Therefore, it can be seen that one of the primary functions of the education system is to find a
balance between the values common to the whole society, and values common to a specific
subsection of that society. While it is rare to see any major dissonance in the values of a
subsection within the society as a whole, individuals often do face difficulty in determining
which brand of values to prioritise.

This balance is primarily influenced by the 3 most basic units in a society, being the family,
government and school.

5.3.1 Family

The most basic unit of any society is the family. It can either be considered as the subsection
in which members are linked to each other by way of their birth or similarities in their genetic
makeup. Most societies view the family as the first place a child’s process of socialisation
begins. The first interactions of an individual are with their family. Therefore, this unit helps a
child learn the first and often, most essential values of the society they belong to.

The responsibility of the child’s first moral and intellectual development lies on their family.
A family is the one that helps a child adapt to and learn the norms of the society and culture
the family is a part of. The parents and other relatives of children help them learn the acceptable
forms of behaviour and conduct of society and the outside world. There arises an incredible
need for them to learn what behaviour and attitudes are socially acceptable at an early age, in
order for them to not be shunned by society at large.
However, despite the family playing an immensely important role in laying the foundation of
a child’s value and skill development at an early age itself, it is not enough to prepare the child
for the ‘outside world’. Despite the family itself being a part of the society, it will always have
certain standards and practices that are unique to it, and its treatment of the child will always
be more lenient than the society’s.

In a society, an individual is judged on the basis of standards that are universally accepted.
These standards apply to every member irrespective of their familial relations. Especially in
today’s modern industrial societal system, an individual’s status is assigned to them through a
meritocratic system. On the other hand, within a family, the child’s status is determined solely
by birth.

For example, an individual’s placement in any university or job is done primarily thought heir
own effort, in an ideal world. Therefore, it becomes necessary for the child to learn skills
oriented towards a society’s standards as well.

5.3.2 School

Many sociologists have propounded theories stating that the values learnt in school are different
to those taught by one’s family. Durkheim in particular stated that schools ‘fill in the gaps in a
child’s development’.

While in school, children are expected to learn skills of cooperation including knowing how to
get along with their peers and communicate in styles different than those taught by the family.
In a school’s environment, children encounter and communicate with other children from
vastly different and varied social backgrounds.

Durkheim preferred referring to the school environment as not just a ‘classroom’ where formal
learning occurs, but also as an ‘association’ which is more extensive than the family but less
abstract than political society.

According to Talcott Parsons, after a child has been exposed to the basics of socialisation within
his family, the environment of the school takes over as the primary source of his social
development. A child learns to adapt to a daily routine by virtue of going to class on a regular
basis, and grows an attachment to it eventually, forming a connection and sense of
belongingness with the school they study in. It can be stated that schools serve the function of
a bridge between the child’s family and the ‘outside world’. They provide children with the
necessary tools they require for when they assume the role of adults in formal society.
Therefore, not only does the school function as a bridge between the family and society, it also
works as a bridge between the children’s close social group and the outside world.

It inculcates the aforementioned tools in children through formation of their communication

skills and basic intellectual skills.

In that regard, the adults in the school, i.e., both the teaching and non-teaching staff provide an
example for the students to learn through, by way of the observational modes of learning, social
learning theory propounded by Bandura. Similar to the way children learn by observing the
adults in their family, the adults in a school are intentionally positioned in places where they’ll
have the ability to influence the child’s behaviour.

This learning is not just accomplished through observational learning or formal modes of
education. It is also done through the following of rules enforced by the school. Such rules lead
to the formation of what can be referred to as a ‘miniature society’, where the students interact
under the umbrella of these shared rules and learn to either abide by them or deviate from them
completely.

Students must learn to establish themselves and solidify their status under the ambit of the
rules3, and since schools in particular function on a meritocratic basis, their status will be highly
influenced by their worth or merit. In school, these rules and determinants of status are set
regardless of a child’s caste, race, gender or familial background. A child’s conduct is measured
in accordance with the rules of a school. An example of this would be the status being accorded
to students on the basis of their performance in the exams conducted by the school.

According to Durkheim, the enforcement of these rules is an absolute necessity and those who
were found in contravention of those rules must face punishment. This ought to be done to
teach the children the consequences of their actions, along with making them acknowledge
their actions had a negative impact on the social group they are a member of.

Further, imposing punishment on them would teach them how to maintain self-discipline as
well. The aim of the punishment should not be to spread fear of doing wrong in the students,
but rather should teach students about the impact and extent of the damage caused as a result
of their actions. And how what they do also affects the groups they are a member of.

3
J. Shеrwood Williams, Allan M Schwartzbaum and Rodney F Ganеy, Sociological Research Symposium V
(1975).
Durkheim acknowledge the risk of their abidance by the rules turning into mindless submission
to a tyrannical authority. However, while acknowledging this risk, he also stated that the
chances of students gaining a legitimate understanding of the functioning of authority were far
higher than them developing fears of authority, as long as the administration did not mete out
punishment arbitrarily and set rules with no logical reasoning or need. 4
3
According to him it is by respecting the school rules that the child learns to respect rules in
general, that he develops the habit of self-control and restraint simply because he should control
and restrain himself. It is a first initiation into the austerity of duty. Serious life for him has
now begun.

While in school, the teachers not only play the role of a facilitator of knowledge and a role
model, they also function as counsellors. They aid the students in acquiring skills of
communication and the values of morality that would help them blend in seamlessly into formal
4
society and live life in a responsible manner. Durkheim has stated that Teachers must also have
an understanding of how individuals in association with others (a group) spontaneously
develop a collective psyche. A knowledge of group psychology is of particular importance. A
class is a miniature society and not merely an agglomeration of individuals which are
independent of each other.5

When we consider the formal education a student receives in school, the level of understanding
of the student is greatly dependent on the teacher’s attitude towards his students. It has often
been observed that a student’s favourite subject to study has been assigned that status
specifically because the student holds a great deal of understanding with the teacher who
teaches him that subject.

Here there exists a need for the teacher to learn how to strike the perfect balance between the
use of their power and providing students freedom. An abuse of their power would lead to the
students forming negative attitudes about not only that teacher, but also about the schooling
system as a whole. Meanwhile, providing students with absolute freedom would lead to the
students not treating their education or even the school environment as a serious setting, and
they would take it lightly, in turn jeopardising their own development.

4
Mporananayo Noеl, 'LECTURE NOTES SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATION' (Academia.edu, 2022)
<https://www.academia.edu/38834970/LECTURE_NOTES_SOCIOLOGY_OF_EDUCATION> accessed 20
April 2022.
5
Steve Fenton, Durkheim And Modern Sociology (Cambridge University Prеss 1984).
Durkheim placed great emphasis on the influence of the school environment on the social and
civic education of the pupil. It was within this concept that he explored the double-edged sword
that was the relationship between a teacher and student. He drew comparison of this situation
to that of a hypnotist and the person hypnotised by him.

Libertarian educators before Durkheim, such as Tolstoy, propounded that the right to educate
4
does not exist, school must allow students to experience full freedom to learn and to work
things out among themselves as they see fit.6 They stated that an educator’s main problem was
to behave with students in a way that does not seem excessively permissive nor should it seem
excessively violent. He believed that any relationship with an imbalance of power had violence
inherent in it and an educator’s responsibility is always to keep any violent impulses they may
have in check.

It has been presumed that a child’s behaviour while in class compared to his behaviour while
alone is starkly different. These differences can be observed in the manner in which they think,
act and feel. Therefore, it falls on the educator to decipher the differences in their behaviour in
order to form a better understanding of the techniques the student employs to process
information and learn.

5.3.3 Government

The responsibility of the beginning stages of a child’s mental, physical and moral development
is given to his parents while his education is primarily a private ordeal that requires minimal
intervention on the behalf of the state. Therefore, the state should only intervene in a child’s
care in the event that the family has been proven to be incapable of providing support to a child.

However, this intervention should remain restricted to instances like providing financial aid in
the funding schools specifically meant for children from low-income backgrounds.
Sociologists like Durkheim are of the view that any actions taken beyond this would be the
state stepping outside of the matters under its purview.

Many sociologists disagree with this theory. They are of the opinion that education’s main
objective is to aid children in the development of values society deems acceptable, and if the
state remains a ‘mute onlooker’, this objective would remain unfulfilled. According to them,

6
(2022)<https://www.raggeduniversity.co.uk/2014/08/13/sociology-education-durkheimian-
view/?doing_wp_cron=1621622309.0255808830261230468750> accеssеd 20 April 2022.
as education is a collective function, the need for state intervention may arise under some
circumstances.

If there is a complete lack of state intervention in education, there would be a complete

breakdown of the education system, which in turn would spread chaos in the society. There
does exist a need for the state to oversee regulation of the education system. There must be a
framework provided by the state which the teachers can use to know how to establish classroom
dynamics and how to teach the ideas, values and beliefs students require to know in order to
adapt to society.

Therefore, as education is a social function, the state cannot remain a mere disinterested
onlooker in the affairs of a field with such an incredible impact on the very society the state
works to better.

However, despite education requiring a certain degree of state interest, there cannot be
complete and absolute control of the state over the system. Absolute monopoly over it would
lead to a lack of innovation in education. As the functioning of the state is static and
conservative in nature, and there exists a lack of innovation, the evolution of education too
would be in danger of becoming static in nature, and not adapting to the rapidly changing
behaviour of society.

While the responsibility of disseminating the societal values, beliefs and morals does not lie in
the hands of the state, the state does carry the obligation to maintain and consecrate them.
Despite today’s world having vastly different cultural identities, one must accept and abide by
a set of principles common to everyone. Such principles include those the state has the
responsibility to maintain, i.e., a sense of democratic morality.

Therefore, the role of the state in making an outline for such principles and working towards
their protection has to be done in a manner that ensures the students are able to process and
understand the information.
 6. Contemporary Significance of Durkheim’s Theory

A major part of Durkheim’s theory was the need for students to learn from a common set of
beliefs, values and morals that society would accept. A value one section of society might
consider to be offensive may be a value another section considers essential to its functioning.
Therefore, in such a situation, the aforementioned phrase “common set of acceptable values
and morals” is vague, and the creation of a common and fixed set of values would then become
tedious.

The contention that one set of values will remain common within a country does not always
hold true, as seen in the case of India, where there exist several communities, each displaying
major dissimilarities in their shared value systems.

As Durkheim’s ideals had been formulated in an era when migration to different countries was
virtually non-existent in nature, it is expected that his theory did not contain the possibility of
a country having vastly different values.

His theory also needs to be re-evaluated in light of changes in the teacher-student relationship.
A teacher himself belongs to society and will contain certain values and beliefs, which will
have an impact on the teacher-student relationship. It is necessary for a teacher too to learn
about the different values and beliefs of other societies. Through this the teacher too would
learn to become more understanding of others cultures, along with the students. Therefore, in
a classroom, every member learns to peacefully coexist with others from vastly unique
backgrounds.7

Theories of Karl Marx also disagreed with Durkheim’s views. Marx’s theories propounded that
the entirety of the modern education system worked towards capitalist ideals. According to
them, schools work towards the creation of a working class that lives to serve the elite.

However, this is a very cynical point of view of the modern education system does have many
benefits and the alternative of there being no systemised education would lead to a chaotic and
anarchic world.

One of the main aims of educations must be to enable each and every student to work towards
their highest potential. A student’s main traits must noy be side lined to ensure they’re living

7 6
L. Platt, 'Anthony F. Heath And Sin Yi Cheung (Eds.): Unequal Chances: Ethnic Minorities In Western Labour
Markets' (2008) 25 Europеan Sociological Review.
in accordance with societal values. A certain degree of individualism is necessary for a
harmonious social system. In that regard the core values and beliefs of society must also be
dynamic in nature so that they can adapt to the needs and beliefs of every individual. In this
sense, Durkheim’s theories did cater to the values of individuals.
 8. Conclusion

While the positives of Durkheim’s theories significantly outweigh the negatives, as observed
over the course of this study, one cannot deny that his theories do require adjustments in order
to adapt to today’s world. The values suggested by Durkheim to apply to society as a whole
were those of peaceful coexistence, respect etc. However, in today’s world, there exists a need
to accept a larger variety of beliefs and morals, as the constantly changing nature of society
compels people to broaden their value systems.

The modern system of education encourages students to display their individuality. However,
this individuality is not allowed to flourish because of the immense academic pressure students
undergo and the resulting stress, anxiety and depression it may cause. If the mental and physical
health of the students deteriorates, it would not be possible for them to develop their
individuality, which would in turn impact the growth of society as a whole.

The current styles of education promote memorisation over learning, and practices such as rote
learning do not encourage learning of values in schools. Pure dissemination of information is
given priority over providing students with knowledge. This further pushes the need to develop
a new system of education, one that would include the learning of life skills and vocational
skills.

Over the course of this study, it was observed that Durkheim’s views on education are not fully
compatible with today’s education system, since they talk of a world that is ideal in nature. He
did provide helpful insight on the development of individuality, however, while looking at the
values he suggested for society, we must accept that society has developed greatly since his
time. It has grown to be more multicultural and diverse in nature, with broader differences in
the values of individual societies.
 9. Bibliography

Books:
1. Ballantine J., Hammack F., The Sociology of Education: A Systematic Analysis (New
York: Routledge 2016).
2. Durkheim E, Education and Sociology (New York: The Free Press 1956).
3. Musgrave P., The Sociology of Education (Routledge 1979).

Websites:
1. Grace M. Barnes, 'Emile Durkheim's Contribution to the Sociology of Education'
(1977) 11(3) JET
<www.jstor.org/stable/23768661?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents/>
2. *Education and Sociology (1922)'
<https://open.oregonstate.education/sociologicaltheory/chapter/education-and-
society/>
3. Karl Thompson, "Talcott Parsons' Perspective on Education'
<https://revisesociology.com/2017/09/05/taclott-parsons-perspective-on-education/>
4. Karl Thompson, *Durkheim's Perspective on Education'
<https://revisesociology.com/2017/08/22/functionalist-durkheim-role-education/>
5. Mporananayo Noel, 'Lecture notes Sociology of Education'
<www.academia.edu/38834970/LECTURE NOTES SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATI
ON>
6. "The Sociology of Education: A Durkheimian View'
<www.raggeduniversity.co.uk/2014/08/13/sociology-education-durkheimian-view/>
 Similarity Report ID: oid:28625:16235534

7% Overall Similarity
Top sources found in the following databases:
7% Internet database 2% Publications database
Crossref database Crossref Posted Content database
5% Submitted Works database

TOP SOURCES
The sources with the highest number of matches within the submission. Overlapping sources will not be
displayed.

University of Malaya on 2021-11-12

1 2%
Submitted works

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
2 1%
Internet

coursehero.com
3 1%
Internet

raggeduniversity.co.uk
4 1%
Internet

tandfonline.com
5 <1%
Internet

academic.oup.com
6 <1%
Internet

hdl.handle.net
7 <1%
Internet

Sources overview