Abletis, John N.

Sociology of Education
BSS 4-1 Dr. Zenaida Medrano

1. Compare and Contrast the different theoretical perspectives in education.

A. Sociology (Related theoretical perspectives in Education)
Macro-oriented Micro-oriented
Structural- Conflict Symbolic- Ethnomethodology Phenomenology
Functionalism Perspective Interactionism
Education as a Education Education is Accounts Intersubjectivity
fundamental as a tool for crucial in Accounting Typifications
social oppression developing the Accounting Recipes
institution “self” practices
Oriented to different theoretical paradigms, sociologists have been sociologizing education
as a social institution in our society and as a vital process which humans have been undergoing
(consciously or unconsciously) from cradle to death.
In analyzing education as a societal institution, structural-functionalists give heavy
emphasis on its importance in attaining and maintaining social order and harmony (societal
equilibrium). They see education as a tool for societal solidarity, as a process for cultural
transmission, as a contributor for technological development, as a provider of the labor force
needed in a meritocratic society (function in the economy), and as a means for social control and
social conformity (function in politics). In short, structural-functionalists see the functions and
processes of education in the positive, constructive, and conservative light. Although very
idealistic, many structural-functionalists recognize that there are existing failures and/or negative
consequences someone could experience when undergoing the process of education (i.e.
dysfunctions), but they claim that those exist because of the failure to actualize cultural/societal
ideals, hence, they do not believe that failures are inherent within the same education institution
(system). They see these dysfunctions as detrimental to the society and thus, in the latter’s fullest
capacity, formulate measures (ex. laws, sanctions) to avoid dysfunctions. The latter statement
makes structural-functionalism very different (contrasting) from conflict perspective. Conflict
perspective, especially those theories with roots from Marxism, claim that failures are inherent
within the education institution. Conflict theorists are consistent in being critical to the present
social order. They view education as a tool of the elite class in oppressing the lower class. They are
critical to Structural-functionalism since the latter tend to support and perpetuate the prevailing
status qou, which to the former is an explicit manifestation of how the ruling class occupies the
major and influential positions (statuses) in the society. Critical (conflict) theorists tend to attack
how differences in socioeconomic status are reproduced, how dominant (conservative) ideologies
persist, how patriarchy is being perpetuated through teaching (adhering) traditional (conservative)
gender roles (explicitly against Feminism) etc. Since education could be controlled and be
influenced by the dominant class, education, according to conflict theorists, contributes to and
perpetuates the false consciousness (thus, hindering class consciousness). Some of them are also
critical to the curriculum content, contending that the school culture tend to teach the middle-class
culture even to the lower-class students, hence, according to them, making the latter hard to cope-
up with the mediated culture even though they will be, unconsciously, obliged to abandon their
own habitus: failing to do so could make the latter accept their lower-class status in life as their
fate and, as a consequence, would not aspire for better life (culture of poverty; being fatalistic).
Both structural-functionalism and conflict perspective tackle the large (macro)
consequences, functions, and workings education-as-a-social-institution has in our society, thus,
they are macro-oriented.
A considerable number of sociologists analyze (somehow) personal and every day social life.
They tend to focus on how groups and interpersonal-communication functions (structure of the
group, processes within it etc.), and on how the social-self is being developed to every individual
member of the group (society). In short, sociologists working on those fields are micro-oriented.
These micro-oriented sociologists somehow work within the subfield Social Psychology. Applying
Page 1
these to education, sociologists concern their selves in studying interactions and processes within
the classrooms, the school, how students learn, social factors which have influenced school
(academic) performance, student-teacher relationship etc.
Symbolic Interactionists focus on how the self is being developed by the significant others
(primary group) during childhood (G. H. Mead, C. H. Cooley). Including also in the analysis is how
children pass the Imitation, Play, and Game Stages during childhood, and finally, on how they
acquire the generalized others. Teachers, especially during the early years of study, tend to become
authoritative figures for children, and somehow, have been members to the latter’s significant
others. Thus, teachers are models for their students. It is also in the S-I theory where language is
emphasized as both a medium for socialization and cultural transmission. During early
constructive years (nursery, prep, elementary) teachers acquaint students about different symbols,
things, values, habits, rules etc., it is in these processes wherein students slowly become members
of our society (generalized others). Symbolic interactionist also see individuals as active thinkers,
thus, within the school premises, educational sociologists see students as both thinking and are not
only passive in accepting what their teachers say.
Ethnomethodology (H. Garfinkel) concerns on how individuals understand what is
happening on them (in their every day life) based on their common sense, knowledge, procedures,
and considerations. It is then explicit, in this theory, how individuals are active-thinkers within
their social settings. Within the classrooms, teachers and students re-interpret what the books (and
other references) are saying. Their interpretations are their ways of expressing their understanding
on the topic based on their prior knowledge and personal experiences. Thus, they tend to ground
what the book says with the present condition they find themselves in. Ethnomethodologists are
also concerned on how social norms are reconstructed and reestablished by ordinary people once
violations were done against it (breaching experiments). One’s interpretation of what is happening
(ex. I am explaining this concept) is called an account, the act of pushing or asserting one’s
interpretation in order for it to be accepted is called accounting (ex. arguing that my interpretation
is correct and acceptable), while the act of receiving, evaluating, and accepting/rejecting the
account is called accounting practices (ex. my teacher would decide whether she will accept my
definition or not). Interesting to say that in good classes, accounts made by both teachers and
students are subjected to each other’s criticisms, acceptance or rejection. This implies that
classrooms could be learning venues for both teachers and students and not for students alone.
Phenomenology, especially in the works of Alfred Shutz, concerns on typifications and
recipes. In contrasts to Symbolic Interactionism and Ethnomethodology, Phenomenology
recognizes that not-at-all-times, individuals are able to reinterpret the norms suggested by the
society. Thus, at some point, people may rely on typifications and recipes. Typifications are ready
made, pre-(or ever)-existing, types of people which we are likely to choose in categorizing people
we do not personally (intimately) know. This theory, I think, somehow draws near with labeling
theory, if labels are to be defined as pre-(ever)-existing categorizations people use in categorizing
people. The need to categorize people is inherent especially when dealing with those people for the
first time (first impressions). These typifications affect how we relate to those people that we have
typified. These typifications are usually based on physical appearance, manner of talking, “aura”,
and other prior references about someone’s personality (ex. if a student heard a tsismis that their
teacher is a terror one, and provided that upon entering their classroom, his teacher walks like a
military general, he would surely typify his teacher as terror, hence, he may try to avoid any
inappropriate behavior, he may not draw close to his teacher, he may avoid raising his hand
frequently to avoid embarrassment if his answer is incorrect etc.). Similarly, teachers may label
students as “matalino”, “bobo”, “masipag” etc. this may take teachers to render different treatment
to her students (favoritism, neglecting slow learners, nagging etc.).
From Sociological Social Psychology (microsociology), we now move to the very
individualistic field of Psychology with principles which many educators are more likely to
consider than the other foundations of education (Sociological, Anthropological, Historical,
Philosophical, Legal).
B. Psychology (Fields and Theories related to Education)
Behaviorism (S-R)
Page 1
 Classical Operant • Cognitive Psychology • Psychometric Psychology
Conditioning Conditioning • Developmental • Guidance Counseling
Psychology
Behaviorism or the Stimulus-Response Theory (S-R) is divided into Classical-conditioning
and Operant Conditioning. Classical condition was first made known by Psychologist Ivan Pavlov
in an experiment with a dog that was conditioned on the dog-foods presence (natural stimuli)
whenever the bell rang (conditioned stimuli). The dog’s response was through salivating. Pavlov
found out that when a stimulus is presented, and an animal is conditioned for it (to aspire for it:
motive), then the latter would show behavior indicative to the need to satisfy the motive. He later
found out that learning (change towards the desired behavior) can be acquired through
conditioning. In application: ex. in nursery, preparatory, and early elementary years, teachers
brought real objects (ex. ampalaya) and placards (with the word ampalaya written on it) to teach
students that what are written on the placards (indicate) correspond to the objects they presently
see, the next time they see those words (ex. ampalaya), they will remember what do they look like.
Classical conditioning seems to treat humans as passive beings (spoon fed). This is somewhat
opposite to what B. F. Skinner’s Operant Conditioning is saying. In an experiment with a rat placed
in a maze, he had observed that the rat repeatedly pressed the lever which eventually caused a
pellet of food to fall in front of it. He then theorized that individuals also learn by themselves
through trial and error (thus, individuals are thinking), and that individuals repeat behavior that is
positively reinforced (positive stimulus) and gratifying to them,
Cognitive Psychology deals with higher mental processes such as thinking, memory,
knowing, reasoning, and decision-making. Since these are important in learning, especially in
inculcating skills to students in solving-problems in Mathematics, Science, English etc., teachers
adhere and apply basic principles of them in teaching. Developmental Psychology deals with how
mental processes in humans develop from prenatal to senescence. This is important to education, I
think, because developmental psychology provides principles and insights regarding how students
behave while on their different stages of development, these then, give educators ideas on how and
what kind/level of education that they should be giving to students of different age-groups (ex.
basic math and memorization of ABC for grade 1, algebraic problems for 1st yr. high school etc.).
Psychometric Psychology (I am not an adherent of this), deals with measuring mental traits using
psychological tests and statistical procedures. Intelligence-quotient tests, emotional-quotient tests,
personality tests and even aptitude tests and achievement tests are some of the works of
psychometric psychologists. Sorry but although the validity of using these tests has been
legitimated through time, I don’t believe that intelligence or other mental constructs could be
measured since they are all abstract, regardless of the numerous controversies concerning these
tests. I believe that these mental constructs (i.e. intelligence, emotion, personality) exist but they
could not be measurable. Guidance Counseling is a field in psychology which focuses on advising
and counseling students on personal problems (ex. relationship with parents) and career-related
problems (ex. studying). This field has been “personified” at school through guidance councilors
and in-one-way-or-another, through elementary and high school class advisers.

2. Discuss the importance of having educational philosophy.

Educational philosophy is the statement of the “purpose, process, nature and ideals…”
(Wikipedia, n.d., ¶ 1) the educational system (institution) has in performing its function for the
society. I think that it is a very abstract ideal that the society is expecting educational institutions to
provide with its members; it is also an ideal in the sense that educators should work-out to
actualize it. Since it is ideal, educators try to restate it through their school’s vision-mission. All
these philosophies, visions, and missions are expected to guide educators while performing their
duties in teaching. Without these, I think, education would lack direction, hence, could fail to
perform its duties in integrating members of the society, in providing skills and trainings people
need in other social institutions etc. Without educational philosophy, education as a social
institution would be useless.

Page 1
3. State three educational principles that serve as historical foundations of education.
I think that “principles” and “aims” are similar in the sense that they guide current and
future behaviors within a specific social context. The phrase “historical foundations” requires
principles that were created based on the cultural ideals that were refused to be provided by
authoritative figures (ex. Spanish) in the past, it also implies ideals created by (technological)
developments in the past which caused high expectations in the future. Operating on these
premises, I chose the following education principles (aims):

a. “Education should realize the fullest potentials of all individuals”

b. “Education should enable persons to meet their needs and satisfy their wants”
c. “Basic education aims to provide universal access to quality and relevant education…”

I believe that the first statement imply DepEd’s strong belief regarding potentialities
Filipinos have which need to be actualized (through education). This could also be our response
against the Spaniard’s belief that we Filipinos are indolent, Indio, inferior, unintelligent, and non-
thinking human beings. This is related to the third statement implying the access on basic
education which the Spaniards refused to provide to early Filipinos (i.e. nationwide public
education system not until 1863). Early education in the Spanish Era was purely religious because
the Spanish government solely gave the authority of teaching to friars in local parishes. Early
universities (ex. UST), colleges (ex. Collegio de Sta. Isabel), and beaterios provide higher forms of
education but were too costly that only the sons and daughters of the principales could afford. No
public education system was established during the Spanish occupation until 1863.
The second statement implies education as a tool for improving one’s position in the soci0-
economic hierarchy (social mobility). It also implies an education system that caters, improves, and
encourages technological developments and innovations through research and invention. I think
that the second statement also reaffirms DepEd’s belief on the innate ingenuity of Filipinos (and
again, opposed to what the Spaniards said during their occupation). The latter could be proven by
considering inventions and technological advancement pioneered by Filipinos, aimed for the
betterment of our society.

Sources:
Department of Education, Culture, and Sports (Oct. 1995). Philosophy of Education. Facts and
Figures on Philippine Education, p. 12.
DepEd (n.d.). Historical Perspective of the Philippine Educational System. Retrieved February 12,
2009 from http://www.deped.gov.ph
Ritzer, G. (2003). Contemporary Sociological Theory and Its Classical Roots, New York: Mc Graw
Hill Companies.
Tulio, D. D. (2000). Psychological, Anthropological, and Sociological Foundations of Education:
Book 1, Mandaluyong City: National Book Store Inc.
Wikipedia (n.d.). Philosophy of Education. Retrieved February 12, 2009 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy of Education
Zulueta, F. M. & Parasol, M. (2004). General Psychology. Mandaluyong City: National Book Store
Inc.

Page 1