The overview below is taken directly from the AQA’s scheme of work and broken down further into more sub-topics to make it more teachable/ learnable. Within each ‘module’ there are about 7 sub-topics, and any of which could (although not necessarily) form the basis of one essay question, so you need to be able to write on each sub-topic for a solid 30 minutes.
This will relevant to most teachers and students teaching the AQA syllabus, unless you do an alternative option to families and households (which I don’t cover!)
My advice is that students generally need at least one side of revision notes for each of the subtopics below, with three-five points/ explanations/ examples and with evaluations (e.g. one side for Functionalism, another for Marxism etc…)
Education
Perspectives on Education
Functionalism
Marxism
Neoliberalism and The New Right
New Labour (a response to the New Right)
Postmodernism
In school process and education
Teacher Labelling and the Self Fulfilling Prophecy
School organisation (banding and streaming)
School Type, School Ethos and the Hidden Curriculum
School Subcultures
Pupil Identities and the Education System
Education Policies
The strengths and limitations of successive government education polices:
1944 – The Tripartite System – brief
1965 – Comprehensivisation – brief
1988 – The 1988 Education Reform Act
1997 – New Labour’s Education Policies
2010 – The Coalition and the New New Right’s Education Policies
Evaluating Education Policies
To what extent have policies raised standards in education?
To what extent have policies improved equality of opportunity?
Perspectives on selection as an educational policy
Perspectives on the increased privatisation of education
How is globalisation affecting educational and educational policy?
Social Class and Education
Material Deprivation
Cultural Deprivation
Cultural Capital Theory
In-School Factors
The strengths and limitations of policies designed to tackle working class underachievement
Gender and Education
Out of school factors which explain why girls do better than boys in education
In-School factors which explain why girls do better than boys in education
Explanations for gender and subject choice
Feminist Perspectives on the role of education in society
The strengths and limitations of policies designed to tackle gender differences in educational achievement
Ethnicity and Education
Cultural factors which might explain ethnic differences in educational achievement
In-School Factors which might explain ethnic differences in educational achievement
The strengths and limitations of policies designed to tackle ethnic differences in educational achievement
Methods in Context
Here you need to be able to assess the strengths and limitations of using any method to research any aspect of education.
The different methods you need to be able to consider include –
1. Secondary Documents
2. Official statistics
3. Field Experiments
4. Lab experiments
5. Questionnaires
6. Unstructured Interviews
7. Overt Participant Observation
8. Covert Participant Observation
9. Non Participant Observation
The different aspects of education you might consider are
•Researching how the values, attitudes, and aspirations of parents contribute to the achievement of certain groups of children
• Why boys are more likely to be excluded than girls
• Why white working class boys underachieve
• Exploring whether teachers have ‘ideal pupils’ – whether they label certain groups of pupils favourably!
• Assessing the relative importance of cultural deprivation versus material deprivation in explaining underachievement
• Assessing the success of policies aimed to improve achievement such as ‘employing more black teachers’
Families and Households
Perspectives on Families
1.1 Functionalism
1.2 Marxism
1.3 Feminisms
1.4 The New Right
1.5 Postmodernism and Late Modernism
1.6 The Personal Life Perspective
Marriage and Divorce
2.1: Explaining the trends in marriage
2.2: Explaining the trends in divorce
2.3: Perspectives on the consequences of declining marriage and increasing divorce
2.4: Examining how marriage, divorce and cohabitation vary by social class, ethnicity, sexuality and across generations.
3. Family Diversity
3.1 – The underlying causes of the long term increase In Reconstituted families, Single parent families, Multi-generational households, Single person households and ‘Kidult’ households.
3.2 Perspectives on the social significance of the increase of all of the above (covered in 3.1).
3.3 – The extent to which family life varies by ethnicity, social class and sexuality.
4. Gender Roles, Domestic Labour and Power Relationships
4.1. To what extent are gender roles characterised by equality?
4.2. To what extent is the Domestic Division of Labour characterised by equality?
4.3. Issues of Power and Control in Relationships
4.4. To what extent has women going into paid work resulted in greater equality within relationships?
5. Childhood
5.1 – To what extent is ‘childhood socially constructed’
5.2 – The March of Progress view of childhood (and parenting) – The Child Centred Family and Society?
5.3 – Toxic Childhood and Paranoid Parenting – Criticisms of ‘The March of Progress View’
5.4 – Is Childhood Disappearing?
5.5 – Reasons for changes to childhood and parenting practices
Topic 6 – Social Policy
6.1 You need to be able to assess the effects of a range of policies using at least three key perspectives
• The New Right
• New Labour
• Feminism (Liberal and Radical)
6.2 You need notes on how the following policies affect men and women and children within the family
• Changes to the Divorce law
• Tax breaks for married couples
• Maternity and paternity pay
• Civil Partnerships
• Sure Start – early years child care
Topic 7: Demography
7.1: Reasons for changes to the Birth Rate
7.2: Reasons for changes to the Death Rate
7.3: The consequences of an Ageing Population
7.4: The reasons for and consequences of changes to patterns of Migration
Research Methods
The Factors Affecting Choice of Research Method – Theoretical, Ethical and Practical Factors.Introduction to Research Methods – Basic types of method and key terms
Secondary Quantitative Data – Official Statistics
Secondary Qualitative Data – Public and Private Documents
Experiments – Field and Laboratory
Interviews – Structured, Unstructured and Semi-Structured
Observational Methods – Cover and Overt Participant and Non-Participant Observation
Other methods – e.g. Longitudinal Studies
Stages of the Research Process
Crucial to the above is your mastery of the TPEN structure
Practical factors –Time, Money, funding, opportunities for research including ease of access to respondents, and the personal skills and characteristics of the researcher.
Ethical factors – Thinking about how the research impacts on those involved with the research process: Informed consent, ensure confidentiality, be legal and ensure that respondents and those related to them are not subjected to harm. All this needs to be weighed up with the benefits of the research.
The Nature of the Topic studied. Some topics lend themselves to certain methods and preclude others!
What is social class? Outlining the Registrar General’s Scale, and the New British Class Survey.
Social Class refers to divisions in society based on economic and social status. People in the same social class typically share a similar level of wealth, educational achievement, type of job and income.
Social Class is one of the most important concepts within AS and A Level Sociology because of the relationship between social class background and life chances (or lack of them) and the debate over the extent to which social class background determines an individual’s life chances.
The concept of social class is certainly relevant today – according to the latest 2022 data from YouGov 68% of young people think that their life chances are ‘broadly determined’ by their parents socioeconomic backgrounds…
Many people in the United Kingdom have an idea of what social class is, but Sociologists define the concept in more precise terms.
Below I look at ‘common conceptions’ of social class before moving on to look at two ways of measuring social class – The Registrar General’s Social Class Scale and The New British Class Survey
Common Conceptions of Social Class
The classic formulation of social class in Britain is to see Britain as being divided into three classes: working, middle and upper class. Social Class, is however, open to change, and most agree that the last two decades have seen the emergence of an underclass, with little prospect of full time employment. These four terms are in common usage and we have to start somewhere, so here are some starting definitions which you should aim to move beyond.
Social Class
Definition/ Defining Features
Working class
Those individuals engaged in manual work, often having low levels of educational achievement. The classic, traditional working class jobs include heavy labouring and factory based work.
Middle class
Those individuals engaged in non-manual work, often having higher levels of educational achievement. Classic middle class jobs include everything from doctors and lawyers to clerical workers.
Upper class
The elite class that controls the majority of wealth and power in British society.
According to the UK government’s 2021 Social Mobility Barometer 48% of respondents defined themselves as working class, 36% as middle class and 0% as upper class. 79% of people said they felt there was a large gap between social classes today.
This means that 84% of respondents were prepared to identify themselves with a particular social class background, which suggests that these broad ‘class divisions’ have meaning for people.
The disadvantages of common conceptions of social class is that they lack clarity – although most of us have heard of social class and have some idea of what it means to be a member of a social class, exactly what constitutes middle or working class, for example, is subjective and varies from person to person.
This is precisely why socologists have striven to develop more objective classifications of social class – and below I look at two of these – The registrar General’s Social Class Scale and the New British Class Survey
The Registrar General’s Social Class Scale (1911)
Sociologists use more nuanced categories of social class, than the common sense conceptions above. The way in which sociologists group people into social classes has changed considerably over time, mainly because of the changing occupational structure. To illustrate this just two examples are provided below.
For most of the 20th Century social class was measured using the Registrar General’s Scale. When this was originally conceived in 1911 it was based on the alleged standing in the community of the different occupational groups.
Occupations were divided into the following:
Manual occupations – those that involve a fair amount of physical effort. These are also known as blue collar occupations and are seen as working class.
Non-manual occupations – those that involve more mental effort, such as professions and office work. These are also known as white collar occupations and are seen as middle class.
Registrar General’s Scale: 1911-Present Day
Social Class
Examples of occupation
I Professional and managerial
Accountant, doctor
II Intermediate
Teacher, farmer
III Non-manual – skilled occupations
Police officer, sales representative
III Manual – skilled occupations
Electrician, bus driver
IV Semi-skilled manual
Farm worker, postman/woman
V Unskilled manual
Labourer, cleaner
Strengths and Limitations of the Registrar General’s Social Class Scale
The problems with the above scale is that the occupational structure in the UK has moved on – there are many more unskilled non manual jobs – in call-centres for example, and there is no room for the long-term or intermittently unemployed in the above scale either.
However, even today the majority of occupations fit pretty unambiguously into one of the categories, and six categories broadly organised along educational achievement and income is very easy to manage if we wish to make comparisons, and if we stick to these six simple categories, there does appear to be a historical relationship between these social class groupings and life chances – especially where life expectancy is concerned.
The New British Class Survey
The New British Class Survey was an attempt to update the Registrar General’s Social Class Scale and make it more relevant to contemporary Britain.
The survey was conducted by the BBC in 2011, in conjunction with The London School of Economics, recently conducted an online survey of 161 000 people. The survey measured three aspects of social class – economic capital, cultural capital and social capital.
Economic Capital – Measured by a combination of household income, household savings and the value of house owned.
Cultural Capital – The level of engagement in ‘highbrow’ and ’emerging’ culture. The amount of ‘Highbrow’ culture people consumed was measured by scoring how engaged they were with classical music, attending stately homes and so on. How much ’emerging’ cultural capital people owned was measured by scoring engagement with video games, a preference for hip-hop etc.
Social Capital – Measured using the average status or importance of people’s social contacts and the number of occupations people said they knew.
According to this survey, there are now 7 new classes in the United Kingdom…..
Elite (6% of the population) – The most privileged class in Great Britain who have high levels of all three capitals. Their high amount of economic capital sets them apart from everyone else.
Established Middle Class (25% of the population) Members of this class have high levels of all three capitals although not as high as the Elite. They are a gregarious and culturally engaged class.
Technical Middle Class (6%) – A new, small class with high economic capital but seem less culturally engaged. They have relatively few social contacts and so are less socially engaged.
New Affluent Workers (14%) – This class has medium levels of economic capital and higher levels of cultural and social capital. They are a young and active group.
Emergent Service Workers (15%) This new class has low economic capital but has high levels of ‘emerging’ cultural capital and high social capital. This group are young and often found in urban areas.
Traditional Working Class (19%) – This class scores low on all forms of the three capitals although they are not the poorest group. The average age of this class is older than the others.
Precariat (15%) – The most deprived class of all with low levels of economic, cultural and social capital. The everyday lives of members of this class are precarious.
Strengths and Limitations of the New British Class Survey
This seems to be a clear improvement on previous class scales – it seems to describe social class divisions as they actually are in the UK (you might say it’s a more valid measurement of social class) – and the inclusion of ‘lowest’ class – the precariat reflects the important fact that many people are in low-paid work are in poverty because of the precarious nature of their flexible and/ or part-time employment. It also includes more indicators (or aspects of class) and reflects the importance of property ownership which only typically comes with age.
However, because it includes more aspects of class and because it is more subjective, it is simply harder to ‘get your head around’ – the divisions aren’t as clear cut, and it’s more difficult to make comparisons – of which there are few available because this is such a new measurement. Still, these aren’t necessarily weaknesses if that’s the way social class really does manifest itself in reality in contemporary Britain.
Research Task –Use this link to do the survey and find out more about your class background (you could either enter your parents‘ details, if you know them, or think about where you think you will be in 5-10 years time and enter those details.
Discussion Question: To what extent do you believe someone’s social class background affects their life chances in Modern Britain today?
Definitions of core concepts covered as part of the research methods component of AS and A Level Sociology. Organised in alphabetical order – so effectively this is a research methods A-Z. If this is too much for you, then have a look at my ‘top ten research methods concepts‘ first!
Anthropology – the study of humans, past and present. Historically, anthropologists mostly studied traditional (e.g. tribal) cultures using participant observation as its main method, however, more recently anthropologists have increasingly focused much a greater array of aspects of culture within modern and post-modern societies using a more diverse range of methods. One of the key aims of anthropology is to explore and explain the enormous diversity as well as the commonalities within and between human cultures.
Attrition rate – the percentage of respondents who drop out of a research study during the course of that study. This can often be a problem with longitudinal research.
Bias – where someone’s personal, subjective feelings or thoughts affect one’s judgement.
Case study – researching a single case or example of something using multiple methods, for example researching one school or factor
Closed Questions – Questions which have a limited range of answers attached to them – such as Yes/ No or Likerhert Scale answers.
Confidentiality – the idea that the information respondents give to the researcher in the research process is kept private. This is usually achieved through anonymity.
Covert research – where the researcher is undercover and respondents do not know they are part of a research study. The opposite of covert research is overt research – where respondents know they are part of a research study.
Dependent and independent variables – a dependent variable is the object under study in an experiment, the independent variables are what the researcher varies to see how they effect the dependent variable.
For example, if you grow tomato plants as a hobby and wanted to find out the effect which the amount of water, the temperature, and the amount of light has on the amount of tomatoes each plant produces you could design a series of experiments in which you varied the amount of light etc. and then measure the effects on the amount of fruit produced. In this example, the amount of tomatoes produced is the dependent variable and the water, the temperature and the amount of light are the independent variables.
Ethnography – an in-depth study of the way of life of a group of people in their natural setting. Ethnographies are typically long-term studies (over several months or even years) and aim for a full (or ‘thick’), multi-layered account of the culture of a group of people. Participant observation is typically the main method used, but researchers will use all other methods available to get even richer data – such as interviews and analysis of any documents associated with that culture.
Ethics/ ethical factors – ethics means taking into consideration how the research impacts on those involved with the research process. Ethical research should gain informed consent, ensure confidentiality, be legal and ensure that respondents and those related to them are not subjected to harm. Ultimately research should aim to do more good than harm to society.
Experiments – experiments aim to measure the effect which one or more independent variables has on a dependent variable. Experiments typically start off with a hypothesis, and a good experiment will be designed in such a way that objective cause and effect relationships can be established between variables, so that the original hypothesis can verified, or rejected and modified.
Extraneous variables – undesirable variables which are not of interest to the researcher but might interfere with the results of the experiment.
Field diary – A notebook in which a researcher records observation during the research process. One of the key tools of Participant Observation.
Field experiments – experiments which take place in a real-life setting such as a classroom, the work place or even the high street. See experiments and related terms for a fuller definition.
Focus groups – a type of group interview in which respondents are asked to discuss certain topics.
Formal content analysis – a quantitative approach to analysing mass media content which involves developing a system of classification to analyse the key features of media sources and then simply counting how many times these features occur in a given text.
Going native – where a researcher becomes biased or sympathetic towards the group he is studying, such that he or she loses their objectivity.
Group interviews – where an interviewer interviews two or more respondents at a time.
Hawthorne effect – where respondents alter their behaviour because they know they are being observed. This is one of the biggest disadvantages of overt laboratory and field experiments.
Hypothesis – a theory or explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation. A hypothesis will typically take the form of a testable statement about the effect which one or more independent variables will have on the dependent variable.
Imposition problem – the imposition problem limits the validity of social surveys. It is where respondents may not be able to express their true feelings about the topic under investigation because the questions (and the range of possible responses) which have been pre-chosen by the researcher limits what they are able to say, and may not reflect the issues that respondents themselves feel are important.
Independent variable – see dependent variable.
Informed consent – where the respondent agrees to take part in a research study with full awareness that research is taking place, what the purpose of the research is and what the researcher intends to do with the results.
Interpretivism – an approach to social research which tries to understand human action through the eyes of those acting. Interpretivists want to know the meanings actors give to their own actions, what their own interpretation of their action is. They thus emphasise respondent-led qualitative methods to achieve insight, in-depth explanations and empathy, in order to realise a humanistic, empathetic understanding from the respondents’ point of view.
Interviews – a method of gathering information by asking questions orally, either face to face or by telephone. Interviews can be individual or group and there are three main types of interview – structured, unstructured and semi-structured.
Interviewer bias – where the values and beliefs of the researcher influence the responses of the interviewee. If an interviewer feels strongly about a subject, then he or she might ask leading questions, or even omit certain questions in order to encourage particular responses from a respondent.
Interview schedule – A list of questions or topic areas the interviewer wishes to ask or cover in the course of an interview.
The more structured the interview, the more rigid the interview schedule will be. Before conducting an interview it is usual for the researcher to know something about the topic area and the respondents themselves, and so they will have at least some idea of the questions they are likely to ask: even if they are doing ‘unstructured interviews’ an interviewer will have some kind of interview schedule, even if it is just a list of broad topic areas to discuss, or an opening question.
Laboratory experiments – experiments which take place in an artificial, controlled environment, such as a laboratory. See experiments and related terms for a fuller definition.
Leading questions – questions which subtly prompt a respondent to provide a particular answer when interviewed. Leading questions are one way in which interviewer bias can influence the research process, reducing the validity of data collected.
Life documents – written or audio-visual sources created by individuals which record details of that person’s experiences and social actions. They are predominantly qualitative and may offer insights into people’s subjective states. They can be historical or contemporary and can take a wide variety of forms.
Longitudinal studies – a study of a sample of people in which information is collected from the same people at intervals over a long period of time. For example, a researcher might start off in 2015 by getting a sample of 1000 people to fill in a questionnaire, and then go back to the same people in 2020, and again in 2025 to collect further information.
Likert scale – used to measure strength of opinion or feeling about a statement in social surveys. For example respondents might be asked whether they strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with a particular statement.
Multistage sampling – with multistage sampling, a researcher selects a sample by using combinations of different sampling methods. For example, in Stage one, a researcher might use systematic sampling, and in Stage two, he might use random sampling to select a subset for the final sample.
Non-participant observation – where the researcher observes a group without taking part with that group. This method can either be overt or covert, and data may be recorded quantitatively or qualitatively. Probably the most commonly experienced example of non-participant observation is the OFSTED inspection.
Objective knowledge – knowledge which is free of the biases, opinions and values of the researcher, it reflects what is really ‘out there’ in the social world.
While most sociologists believe that we should strive to make our data collection as objective as possible, there are some sociologists (known as phenomenologists) who argue that it is not actually possible to collect data which is purely objective – the researcher’s opinions always get in the way of what data is collected and filtered for publication.
Official statistics – numerical information collected and used by the government and its agencies to make decisions about society and the economy. Examples include the UK National Census, police recorded crime and data on educational achievement.
Open-ended question – questions for which there are no set answers. Open questions allow individuals to write their own answers or dictate them to interviewers. For example ‘have you enjoyed studying Sociology this year?’
Operationalising concepts – the process of defining a concept precisely so that it can be easily understood by respondents and measured by the researcher. The term may also be applied to the process of determining variables in experiments.
For example, rather than ask a respondent ‘are you religious’, which is a vague question with many interpretations, a researcher might operationalise the concept of religion by using a range of more precise questions such as ‘do you believe in God’, ‘do you believe in the idea of heaven and hell’, ‘ how often do you pray’, and so on.
Overt research – see covert research.
Participant observation – involves the researcher joining a group of people, and taking an active part in their day to day lives as a member of that group and making in-depth recordings of what she sees.
Participant Observation may be overt, in which case the respondents know that researcher is conducing sociological research, or covert (undercover) where the respondents are deceived into thinking the researcher is ‘one of them’ and do not know the researcher is conducting research.
Personal documents – first-hand accounts of social events and personal experiences, which generally include the writer’s feelings and attitudes about the events they think are personally significant. Examples of personal documents are letters, diaries, photo albums and autobiographies.
Pilot study – a test study carried out before the main research study and on a smaller scale, to uncover and iron potential problems which may occur in the main programme of research.
Positivism – an approach to social research which aims to be as close to the natural sciences as possible. Positivists emphasise the use of quantitative data in order to remain detached from the research process and to uncover social trends and correlations which are generaliseable to society as a whole. Their ultimate aim is to uncover the objective social laws which govern human action.
Practical factors – include such things as the amount of time the research will take, how much it will cost, whether you can achieve funding, opportunities for research including ease of access to respondents, and the personal skills and characteristics of the researcher.
Pre-coded, or closed questions – questions where the respondent has to choose from a limited range of responses. Two of the most common types of closed question are the simply yes/no questionnaire and the Likehert Scale (a strength of feeling scale).
Primary data – data collected first hand by the researcher herself. If a sociologist is conducting her own unique sociological research, she will normally have specific research questions she wants answered and thus tailor her research methods to get the data she wants. The main methods sociologists use to generate primary data include social surveys (normally using questionnaire), interviews, experiments and observations.
Public documents – are produced by organisations such as government departments and their agencies as well as businesses and charities and include OFSTED and other official government enquiries. These reports are a matter of public record and should be available for anyone who wishes to see them.
Qualitative data – refers to information that appears in written, visual or audio form, such as transcripts of interviews, newspapers and web sites. (It is possible to analyse qualitative data and display features of it numerically).
Quantitative data – refers to information that appears in numerical form, or in the form of statistics.
Quota sampling – In this method researchers will be told to ensure the sample fits with certain quotas, for example they might be told to find 90 participants, with 30 of them being unemployed. The researcher might then find these 30 by going to a job centre. The problem of representativeness is again a problem with the quota sampling method.
Random sampling – in random sampling everyone in the population has the same chance of getting chosen. A simple example of random sampling would be picking names out of a hat.
Rapport – a close and harmonious relationship between researcher and respondents, such that both parties understand each other’s feelings and communicate well.
Reliability – if research is reliable, it means if someone else repeats the same research with the same population then they should achieve the same results.
In order to be reliable, research needs to be easily repeatable. Self-completion questionnaires have high reliability because it is easy for another researcher to administer the questionnaire again. More in depth methods such as participant observation, where the researcher can spend several months or even years with a small group of respondents are not very reliable as it is impossible to replicate the exact procedures of the original research. More qualitative methods also open up the possibility for the researcher to get more involved with the research process, with further detracts from the reliability.
Representativeness – research is representative if the research sample reflects the characteristics of the wider target population that is being studied.
Representativenessthus depends on who is being studied. If one’s research aim is to look at the experiences of all white male AS Sociology students studying sociology, then one’s sample should consist of all white, male sociology students. If one wishes to study sociology students in general, one will need to have a proportionate amount of AS/ A2 students as well as a range of genders and ethnicities in order to reflect the wider student body.
Research sample – the actual population selected for the research – also known as the respondents.
Sampling – the process of selection a section of the population to take part in social research.
Sampling frame – a list from which a sample will be drawn.
Secondary data – data that has been collected by previous researchers or organisations such as the government. Quantitative sources of secondary data include official government statistics and qualitative sources are very numerous including government reports, newspapers, personal documents such as diaries as well as the staggering amount of audio-visual content available online
Self-Selecting Sample Bias – where individuals choose whether they take part in the research and the results end up being unrepresentative because certain types of people are more willing or able do participate in the research.
Semi-structured interviews – those in which researchers have a pre-determined list of questions to ask respondents, but are free to ask further, differentiated questions based on the responses given.
Snowball sampling – with this method, researchers might find a few participants, and then ask them to find participants themselves and so on.
Social surveys – typically questionnaires designed to collect information from large numbers of people in standardised form.
Social surveys are written in advance by the researcher and tend to to be pre-coded and have a limited number of closed-questions and they tend to focus on relatively simple topics. A good example is the UK National Census. Social surveys can be administered (carried out) in a number of different ways – they might be self-completion (completed by the respondents themselves) or they might take the form of a structured interview on the high street, as is the case with some market research.
Socially constructed – Interpretivists argue that official statistics are socially constructed – that is they are the result of the subjective decisions made by the people who collect them rather than reflecting the objective underlying reality of social life. For example Crime Statistics do not reflect the actual crime rate, only those activities which are defined as crimes by the people who notice them and who then go on to report those activities to the police.
Stratified sampling – this method attempts to make the sample as representative as possible, avoiding the problems that could be caused by using a completely random sample. To do this the sample frame will be divided into a number of smaller groups, such as social class, age, gender, ethnicity etc. Individuals are then drawn at random from these groups. If you are observing doctors and you had split the sample frame into ethnic groups you would draw 8% of the participants from the Asian group, as you know that 8% of doctors in Britain are Asian.
Structured or formal interviews – those in which the interviewer asks the interviewee the same questions in the same way to different respondents. This will typically involve reading out questions from a pre-written and pre-coded structured questionnaire.
Subjective knowledge – knowledge based purely on the opinions of the individual, reflecting their values and biases, their point of view. See also ‘objective knowledge’.
Systematic sampling – an example of a systematic sample would be picking every 10th person on a list or register. This carries a similar risk of being unrepresentative as random sampling as, for example, every 10th person could be a girl.
Target population – all people who could potentially be studied as part of the research.
Textual analysis – involves examining how different words are linked together in order to encourage readers to adopt a particular view of what is being reported.
Textual analysis also involves the use of semiology – which is the analysis of signs and symbols.
Thematic analysis – involves trying to understand the intentions which lie behind the production of mass media documents by subjecting a particular area of reportage to detailed investigation.
Theoretical factors – validity, reliability, representativeness and whether research is being carried out from a Positivist or Interpretivist point of view.
Positivists prefer quantitative research methods and are generally more concerned with reliability and representativeness. Interpretivists prefer qualitative research methods and are prepared to sacrifice reliability and representativeness to gain deeper insight which should provide higher validity.
Transcription – the process of writing down (or typing up) what respondents say in an interview. In order to be able to transcribe effectively interviews will need to be recorded.
Triangulation – the use of more than one method in social research. For example a researcher might combine structured questionnaires with more in-depth interviews. Triangulation is often used to verify the validity of other data sources and is a good way of improving the reliability of research.
Unstructured interviews – also known as informal interviews, are more like a guided conversation, and typically involve the researcher asking open-questions which generate qualitative data. The researcher will start with a general research topic in and ask questions in response to the various and differentiated responses the respondents give. Unstructured Interviews are thus a flexible, respondent-led research method.
Validity – research is valid if it provides a true picture of what is really ‘out there’ in the world.
Generally speaking, the more in depth the research, the fuller picture we get of the thoughts and feelings of the individuals acting, so the more valid the data; and the more the researcher stands back and allows the respondents to ‘speak for themselves’ the more valid the data. In more quantitative research, such as social surveys, validity may be lacking because the researcher has decided on what questions should be answered by respondents, rather than letting the respondents decide on what they want to say for themselves, as is typically the case with more qualitative methods.
Value Freedom – where a researcher’s personal opinions, beliefs and feelings are kept out the research process so that data collected is not influenced by the personal biases of the researcher.
Verstehen – a German word meaning to ‘understand in a deep way’ – in order to achieve ‘Verstehen’ a researcher aims to understand another person’s experience by putting themselves in the other person’s shoes.
Interpretivists argue that to achieve Verstehen (or empathetic understanding) we should use in-depth qualitative research such as participant observation.
Nature = biology explains behaviour, Nurture = social factors explains human behaviour.
Nature explanations argue that biological inheritance and genetics determine human behaviour; nurture explanations argue that society, culture and social processes such as socialisation explain human behaviour.
While not denying the role of biology in explaining some aspects of human behaviour, sociology very much emphasises the role of society (nurture) rather than nature in explaining human action. The material below forms part of lesson one of an eight lesson introduction to Sociology.
Nature Explanations of Behaviour
In Sociology, we are looking at human behaviour. Human behaviour is the term we use that refers to all of the things that people do. There are many ways of explaining why certain people do things in particular ways.
Some biologists and psychologists think that people behave as they do because they are animals who primarily act according to their instincts. This is known as the “nature theory” of human behaviour. Other scientists and psychologists are researching whether our behaviour is “genetic” i.e. certain types of behaviour are passed down from parent to child. Again, this is a nature theory of human behaviour because it supports the belief that our behaviour is pre-programmed to a large extent. For example, it has been debated whether there is a criminal gene which means some people are more likely to commit crime.
Nurture explanations of behaviour
Nurture arguments focus on the way people are brought up and how their environment moulds their personality and behaviour. Sociologists argue that some people are brought up to be kind and caring, and others are brought up to display very different forms of behaviour.
An individual’s personality and identify are moulded and developed in response to their social environments and the people they meet. They are by taught others around them telling them what is right and wrong, including teachers, siblings and most importantly parents. This is why sociologists study the family and education (the two topics on the AS course) amongst other topics because it allows to investigate how these institutions effect human behaviour.
Nurture explains more than nature
We have two different ways of explaining human behaviour. One uses nature to explain behaviour, the other uses nurture. The question is, which is the best explanation?
If you explain human behaviour as being the same as animal behaviour, that means that humans would all behave in the same way. French cats behave in the same way as British cats. Do British people behave like French people? People in Britain do tend to behave in a similar way. They do similar things and wear certain types of clothing. Do all people all over the world behave in the same way? Sociologists tend to say ‘no’ and use two main types of evidence to prove the point:
Nature arguments suggest human behaviour isn’t dissimilar to animal behaviour, which is based on automatic responses and pre-determined modes of behaviour or that our behaviour is pre-determined by our genes. However, human behaviour has changed significantly throughout history whilst animal behaviour has changed only slightly over a very long period of time. This suggests humans interact with their environments in a unique manner, both moulding and being moulded by it.
Rapidly changing gender roles are one example against nature theories of behaviour
Anthropological Evidence against Nature theories
The second argument uses anthropological evidence. Anthropologists are people who study and compare societies from all over the world. If our behaviour was in our genes then people all around the world would behave in the same way. This is because other than the external physical difference between humans, the actual biological difference between people from different parts of the world is tiny. However, anthropologists show that people behave differently in different societies.
Tribal societies with different norms and values are good evidence against nature theories of behaviour
Further evidence against nature theories
The Analaysis podcast below demonstrates the importance of nurture over nature explanations of human action…
What was the pattern in the professor’s family history? What genetic pattern did the professor have?What factors does researcher suggest prevented him from becoming a killer, criminal etc?How do the researchers view of genetics vs surroundings explanations of behaviour change?
Nature or Nurture: Conclusions
NOTE – the Nature Vs. Nurture debate is hotly debated topic. No side can claim to provide compelling evidence that entirely disputes the other i.e. neither side can completely disregard nature or nurture in explanation of human behaviour.
A summary of Webers’ Verstehen Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory, Symbolic Interactionism and and Labellling.
Unlike structural theorists, social action theorists argue that people’s behaviour and life-chances are not determined by their social background. Instead, social action theorists emphasises the role of the active individual and interactions between people in shaping personal identity and in turn the wider society. In order to understand human action we need to uncover the individual’s own motives for acting.
This post provides a summary of the key ideas of Social Action Theory for A-level sociology students studying the theory and methods topic in their second year of study, AQA focus.
Max Weber: Verstehen, and Social Change
Observation alone is not enough to understand human action, we need empathetic understanding. Gaining Verstehen is the main point of Sociology.
Understanding individual motives is crucial for understanding changes to the social structure (as illustrated in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism).
Weber still attempted to make generalisations about types of motive for action – there are four main types of motive for action – Instrumentally rational, value rational, traditional action and affectual action
Different societies and different groups emphasise the importance of different types of ‘general motive’ for action’ – so society still affects individual motives, but in a general way.
Symbolic Interactionism
People’s self-concepts are based on their understanding of how others perceive them (the looking glass self).
We act towards others on the basis of how we interpret their symbolic action, the same action can be interpreted differently by different people – we need to understand these specific meanings to understanding people’s actions.
We ‘are constantly ‘taking on the role of the other’ – thinking about how people see us and reacting accordingly, this is very much an active, conscious process.
Each of us has an idea in the back of our minds of ‘the generalised other’ – which is basically society – what society expects of us, which consists of different norms and values associated with different roles in society.
These social roles are not specific or fixed; they can be interpreted in various different ways.
Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory
People are actors on a ‘social stage’ who actively create an impression of themselves
When we act in the social world, we put on a ‘front’ in order to project a certain image of ourselves (call this part of our ‘social identity’
To create this front we manipulate the setting in which we perform (e.g. our living room), our appearance (e.g. our clothes) and our manner (our emotional demeanour).
Impression management involves projecting an ‘idealised image’ of ourselves,
We must be constantly on our guard to practice ‘expressive control’ when on the social stage.
Acting out social roles is quite demanding and so in addition to the front-stage aspect of our lives, we also have back-stage areas where we can drop our front and be more relaxed, closer to our ‘true-selves’
Most acting is neither fully ‘sincere’ nor fully ‘contrived’ and most people oscillate between sincerity and cynicism throughout the day and throughout the role they are playing.
Labelling Theory
Focuses on how the definitions (meanings) people impose on situations or on other people can have real consequences (even if those definitions are not based in reality)
People in power generally have more ability to impose their definitions on situations than the powerless and make these labels have consequences compared to working class youths. Labelling theory
We still need to understand where people are located in the power-structure of society to fully understand the process of labelling and identity construction.
Positive Evaluations of Social Action Theory
Recognises that people are complex and active and have their own diverse meanings and motives for acting
Overcomes the determinism found in structural theories such as Marxism which tend to see individuals as passive
Goffman’s dramaturgical theory seems especially useful today in the age of Social Media
Labelling Theory recognises the importance of micro-level interactions in shaping people’s identities, and the fact that people in power are often more able to ‘define the situation’.
In-depth research methods associated with social action theory often have high valid
Criticisms of Social Action Theory
It doesn’t pay sufficient attention to how social structures constrain action – for example, material deprivation can have a real, objective impact on your ability to well at school, thus failure is not just all about labelling.
Tends to ignore power-distribution in society – it can’t explain patterns in class, gender, ethnicity.
If people are so active, then why do so many people choose to be so normal?
Labelling theory can also be criticised for being deterministic
The small-scale methods associated with this theory can equally be criticised for lacking reliability and
Signposting and Related Posts
Social Action theory is usually taught as part of the social theory aspect of the second year A-level sociology module in theory and methods, typically in contrast to the two structural theories Functionalism and Marxism, and is followed by (and in some ways is a pre-cursor of ) Postmodernism.
This post on teacher labelling and the self fulfilling prophecy, taught as part of the first year Education module provides a lot more depth on the micro-interactions which make up the whole process of labelling.
You might also like the following two posts which expand on other aspects of the notes above:
What reading should you do in order to prepare for studying an undergraduate degree in Sociology? This post recommends some introductory reading that you might like to do over the summer to get ahead before commencing the first year of your degree in sociology, or related discipline.
I also explore some of the differences between A-level and degree level sociology at the end of the post…
Good introductory text books for studying an undergraduate degree in sociology
You should read at least the introductory chapter to one of the text books below (preferably the one recommended by the university you most want to go to), to give yourself an idea of the core themes in degree level Sociology.
The two books below are on Globalisation, one of the most important concepts which Sociology deals with, and they are written by two of the leading Sociologists in the world today, at least they were until Bauman died in January 2017 (RIP!)
Giddens (2002) Runaway World (Kindle edition is less than £4)
Podcasts/ Videos and blogs – to you keep up to date with contemporary sociology
You won’t be able to keep up with everything, so for the area of Sociology you are most interested in – search for that topic on any of the forums below…
‘Thinking Allowed’ on Radio 4 – This is a weekly 30 minute sociology Podcast, which typically covers two pieces of research from two different Sociologists. Their archive is excellent.
‘TED’ talks are interdisciplinary but there is a lot of Sociology in here if you search – TED talks are 20 minutes long, but you can nearly always skip the first few minutes. NB – The most popular TED talk is Ken Robinson’s ‘How Schools Kill Creativity’
The London School of Economics blog is more specifically political/ economic/ sociological than either of the above sites, but has some good updates on Sociological research.
Bristol is ranked number two for sociology in the U.K. Below I reproduce the University of Bristol’s recommended introductory reading list for its various core introductory courses for 2018, which are the bold headings below.
The Sociological Imagination
Z Bauman and T May, 2001, Thinking Sociologically, Oxford: Blackwell.
R Jenkins, 2002, Foundations of Sociology, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
N Abercrombie, 2004, Sociology, Cambridge: Polity.
Key Social Thinkers
Calhoun, C., Classical Sociological Theory
Craib, I., Classical Social Theory
Fevre, R., and Bancroft, A., Dead White Men and Other Important People: sociology’s big ideas
Giddens, A., Capitalism And Modern Social Theory
McIntosh, I., Classical Sociological Theory: a reader
McLennan., G. Story of Sociology
Ritzer, G., Classical ‘Sociological Theory
Social Inequalities and Divisions
Geoff Payne (ed), 2000, Social Divisions Basingstoke: Palgrave
Castles, Stephen, and Miller, Mark J. 2009. The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cohen, Robin, and Kennedy, Paul. 2007. Global Sociology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lash, Scott, and Lury, Celia. 2007. Global Culture Industries: The Mediation of Things. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Martell, Luke. 2010. The Sociology of Globalization. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Massey, Douglas S., Arango, Joaquin, and Hugo, Graeme. 2005. Worlds in Motion: Understanding International Migration at the End of the Millennium. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
An Introduction to the Sociology of Culture
Bennett, A. (2005) Culture and Everyday Life London: Sage Publications
Gray, A. and Mc Guigan, J. (eds) Studying Culture: an Introductory Reader London: Edward Arnold.
Hesmondhalgh, D. (2007) The Cultural Industries (second edition) London: Sage Publications.
Jenkins, H. (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide New York University Press
Strinati, D. (2004) An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture (second edition) London: Routledge.
Research Methods
Devine, F., Heath, S. (1999) Sociological Research Methods in Context. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gilbert, N. (ed.) (2001) Researching Social Life (2nd edition). London: Sage.
May, T. (2001) Social Research. Issues, Methods and Process (3rd Edition). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research (2nd Edition). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ruane, J.M. (2005) Essentials of Research Methods. Oxford: Blackwell.
Seale C.F. (ed.) (2004) (2nd edition) Researching Society and Culture. London: Sage.
What’s the difference between studying sociology at ‘A’ Level and studying sociology at ‘degree’ level?
In terms of content – Sociology is a lot more diverse at degree level than at ‘A’ Level – Sociologists research very diverse topics and universities have more freedom to set the modules which they teach than at A level. Degree content will thus vary with the specialisms of the staff, and varies enormously from university to university – some universities will be more focused on politics and social policy, and others more on the media and the study of culture, for example.
Sociology lot more interdisciplinary at degree level– there is a lot more overlap between Sociology and other subjects such as Anthropology, Development Studies, Criminology, Psychology, and Social Policy. Most students studying Sociology actually combine it with something else.
You will need to do a lot more in-depth reading at degree level (this is the case in any social science, or humanities subject). You will typically need to read a minimum of one chapter from a book and one or two other sources which relate to this core reading. In total, this will mean at least 40 pages of reading per module per week, and you will probably be studying 4 modules at a time – so that means 160 pages per week – and you’ll need to add on more for the essays you’ll be doing.
You will need to know the knowledge in much more depth at degree level – you will be expected to read and summarise extracts of core-texts each week and be able to critically evaluate these texts in discussion and essays.
In terms of skills – you need show greater depth of critical awareness, analysis and evaluation, and be able to demonstrate all of these verbally and in writing, using evidence.
You need to more self-starting in terms of reading and writing essays – there is a lot less contact time at university.
Although your options in Sociology will vary enormously from uni to uni, pretty much all degree-courses will have compulsory modules in the following
Common Themes in most Sociology Degree Courses
Research Methods
Social Theory – Classical and Contemporary
You will also find options in the following areas in most university departments:
Globalisation
Identity
Gender
Dissertation option (which will be restricted by staff interests)
Two examples of Sociology departments to start you off
The University of Surrey – useful to know because it has reading lists attached to its courses (many universities don’t have these publically available)
The London School of Economics – useful to know even if you aren’t likely to get the grades due to its excellent public lecture programme and various blogs.
NB – There are another 99 universities which offer Sociology in the UK
This post attempts to demonstrate what sociology is by examining how the discipline approaches one particular issue – why some children do worse at school than others…from a sociological perspective, educational failure is not simply down to the individual!
The easiest way to illustrate the sociological imagination, and to demonstrate how sociologists ‘do sociology’ is to look at an example of how Sociology approaches a particular social issue – such as the the issue of educational underachievement. Most Sociologists regard this as a social problem because leaving school with few or no formal qualifications is strongly related to a future of unemployment and/ or low-skilled and low-paid work.
This post has primarily been written for students studying A-level sociology, to read as part of a two week introduction to sociology.
Why do some children fail where others succeed?
The most obvious place to look for this answer is the the children themselves – either their educational failure is a matter of low intelligence or lack of aspiration and individual effort, in which case either there’s not a lot else that anyone could do (in the case of low intelligence), or it’s down to the individual student to pull their socks up (in the case of low aspiration or effort).
A second common place to look is the individual school which could be ‘letting the students down’ – either the teachers are not committed enough, or the school is badly managed, in which case new teachers or management are required.
While Sociologists do not dismiss either of the above explanations as factors related to educational underachievement, they argue that they do not look deeply enough at the underlying causes of this problem, and if you dig deeper (using statistical methods, and more of that later), you will see that there are more significant factors related to differential educational underachievement – such as the level of income of parents, the values of parents.
Poverty and Educational Underachievement
There is in fact a very strong relationship between the amount of income and wealth parents have and how well their children do in school. To put it bluntly, the poorer someone’s parents are, the more likely their children are to get poor GCSEs.
This is because poverty acts as a limiting factor on educational achievement. Poverty leads to material deprivation which in turn is related to such things as poor diets, which means higher levels of illness, and fewer bedrooms in the household which means there is less likely to be a private study-space, and later on, being from a poor background means teenagers are more likely to take up part-time jobs while studying A levels or degrees, which means less study time.
At the other end of the scale, a higher income can mean private tuition or even private schools. Think about it – parents wouldn’t pay £10 000 a year if private schools didn’t work!
What all the above means, is that OBJECTIVELY, all other things being equal, if you take two students, one rich kid and one poor kid, and the poor kid is ill more often, can’t concentrate on homework because he has to share a room with his younger brother, and does 15 hours work a week while doing A levels, while the rich kid has none of the above barriers and has a couple of hours private tuition a week, it is hardly surprising that the rich one is going to get better results.
Parental Values and Educational Underachievement
A second factor which influences how well a child does at school is the values of the parents – it is parents, after all, who teach their children about the value of education, or not; about the importance of sacrificing pleasure now in order to study, or not; and who inspire them to go to university (which requires decent A levels), or not!
It is similarly parents who read to their children when they are young, or not; help children with homework, or not; and police children through their 11 years of formal schooling, or let them run wild on the streets – don’t forget that once you factor in holidays, weekends, and weekday morning and evenings children actually spend far more time outside of school than in it, which suggests parenting (or lack of it) is going to have far more of an impact on how well a child does than schooling.
Numerous studies have shown the importance of Primary Socialisation (the teaching of norms and values in the family) in explaining differential educational achievement – and there are significant differences in the how rich and poor, and male and female children are socialised.
Working class children are more likely to suffer from what sociologists call ‘cultural deprivation‘ – they are more likely to grow up thinking that ‘university is not for the likes of them’ because their parents never went and thus don’t talk about it, which helps to explain why fewer working class teenagers opt to go to university, even when they get good A levels.
While girls are read to more often than boys, which might explain the 10% gender-gap in English GCSE results. Ethnicity also matters. You’ve probably heard of the stereo-type of the fearsome Chinese ‘tiger parents’ who demand their children make enormous effort in school – well, research backs this up – Chinese parents are the most demanding parents, and it works, British-Chinese children outperform every other ethnic group in GCSEs.
All of the above illustrate the importance of not relying on individual level explanations for social phenomena – how well an individual does in school is not just down to their individual talents, it is partly a result of their socialisation, of their background, and social class, gender and ethnicity all have their independent, and combined influences on how well a child does in school.
Still the above isn’t enough to explain differential educational achievement – you also need to look at issues of POWER within the education system.
Power within the Education System
It shouldn’t surprise you that the education system is shaped and run by educated people, typically from wealthy backgrounds, and it is these people and their children who have benefited from various changes in policy over the past century: our education system has changed considerably since WW2, but the middle classes have always come out on top – so it seems that education is primarily about ‘the reproduction of class inequality’ – a mechanism whereby middle class children can do well and go on to get well-paid middle class jobs, while working class children are defined as failures and go on to get low-skilled, lower paid jobs.
The most obvious example of this lies in the existence of private schools, some of which cost up to £30K a year – only 7% of children go to private schools, but over 50% of all the high-paying professional jobs are taken up by these 7% – jobs such Doctors, lawyers, journalists and so on.
Conclusions… why do some children underachieve in education?
So to summarise the lessons from the above example – Sociologists do not accept that an individual fails (or succeeds) at school simply because of their individual talents, they succeed or fail at least partly because of their background – the amount of money their parents have, and the values their parents instil in them, which together influence how well the child can do in school, and looked at even more deeply, it seems that the education system is set up to empower the middle classes over the generations, because no educational policies have been put in place which have really broken down inequalities over the decades.
Lessons to learn from the above, and what Sociology does next…
Firstly you are better equipped to find out more about why some kids fail and other succeed – There are of course those from deprived backgrounds who do succeed, and Sociologists recognise that people are not determined by their backgrounds, rather they are steered down certain paths by them, and the question of how such children do succeed is of interest to sociologists as is the question of what we should do about the above unjust situation.
Secondly – learning the above should be empowering – because you now know that the system is not fair – don’t necessarily assume that just because someone has failed at school they are stupid or lazy, and vice-versa about someone who has done well.
Thirdly – there is the question of what we do with the above knowledge – eventually you’ll need to decide whether you work within the system to make it fairer, or whether we need complete systemic change, or whether there’s nothing we can do, and so go and do something else instead!
Signposting/ Find out More
This post has primarily been written for students studying A-level sociology, to read as part of a two week introduction to sociology.
Karl Marx and Louis Althusser are Modernist, Structural Conflict Theorists while Antonio Gramsci is a Humanist Conflict Theorist.
Marxism for A Level Sociology
Karl Marx: Key Ideas
Two classes – Bourgeois – Proletariat
Relationship between them is Exploitation/ Surplus Value
The Base (economy) determines the Superstructure (all other institutions)
The ruling class have ideological control through the superstructure
The proletariat exist in false consciousness
The fundamental problem with Capitalism is that it causes alienation
Revolution is inevitable because the iron law of Capitalism is that exploitation must carry on increasing.
Communism is the final stage of societal evolution (the abolition of private property)
The purpose of research is to find out more about the laws of Capitalism to see when revolution is ripe.
Antonio Gramsci: Humanistic Marxism
Criticised Marx because he thought individuals are more active, not passive
Introduced the concept of Hegemony – Ruling class maintain power through Coercive and Hegemonic control
Ruling class hegemonic control is never complete because they are too few and they have the proletariat have dual consciousness – they can see through Bourgeois ideology.
To bring about social change the proletariat needs its own organic intellectuals to develop a counter-hegemony – a realistic alternative to Communism, to lead people to Socialism.
Louis Althusser: Scientific Marxism
Criticised Marx – There are three levels of control: economic, political, and ideological. The Bourgeois maintain control on all three levels and they all reinforce each other.
They maintain control through the Repressive state apparatus – the army
More importantly – the Ideological state apparatus – everything else, most obviously education and the media.
Criticised humanistic Marxism – structure determines everything, people are incapable of having genuinely revolutionary ideas within the existing Capitalist system
Capitalism needs to collapse before socialism comes about.
Overall Evaluations of Marxism
Eight ways in which Marxism might still be relevant today
Transnational Capitalist Class (Sklaire)
Global Exploitation by TNCs (Wallerstein’s WST)
Evidence of elite control of superstructure – Independent schools links
Ideological Control – Agenda Setting and Jeremy Corbyn
Advertising and False Needs
Alienation – Amazon!
Contradictions in Capitalism – David Harvey
Marxism Conference – Organic Intellectuals?
Criticisms of Marxism
X – More complex class structure
X – Capitalism is less exploitative (welfare state)
X – Relative autonomy
X – Postmodernism – people are free, not under false consciousness
X – Work is less alienating for self-employed people
X – Scientific Marxism is economically deterministic (Interactionism)
Functionalism as a Structural/Systems Theory – it focuses on the needs of the social system as a whole; it is a consensus theory – it sees society as based on shared values; it is also a modernist theory – it believes that research can find the truth and lead to progress. Functionalism is closely related to the New Right and Modernisation Theory.
Functionalism for A Level Socioogy
Introduction/ Society as a System
Historical Context: the 1890s to the 1950s
Parsons uses the term ‘organic analogy’ to describe society.
Parsons sees three similarities between society and a biological organism: both are self-regulating, both have needs, both have sub-systems which perform specific functions.
Emile Durkheim’s Functionalism (1858 – 1917) – The first ever ‘Sociologist’
Concerned with understanding rapid social change brought about with industrialisation
Traditional society based on ‘mechanical solidarity’ and strong collective conscience
Industrial society = more complex causes change and anomie, challenge of modernity = how to achieve ‘organic solidarity’
Society exists as a separate entity above its members, as a system of ‘social facts’. It affects people irrespective of their individual thoughts and feelings.
Studied suicide to illustrate the above.
Talcott Parson’s Functionalism
Society is based on value consensus and social order
Society needs individuals to be integrated – this is achieved through socialisation and social control
The social system has four basic needs: instrumental (adaptation and goal attainment) and expressive (integration and latency)
Social change is gradual and evolutionary/ progressive – societies gradually evolve by moving from simple to more complex and larger structures.
Robert Merton’s Functionalism
Merton’s Three Internal Critiques of Functionalism: Not everything is necessary; not everything is interconnected; some institutions are dysfunctional
Merton’s ideas of Latent and Manifest Functions: Intended and unintended (so functions may be more complex than Parson’s suggests)
Overall Evaluations of Functionalism
Durkheim’s study on suicide – trends still true today
Governments view society as a system
Development theorists view society as a system.
X – Logical Criticisms – Functionalism is teleological – it explains an institutions existence in terms of its effect, and the effect may not be necessary
X – Conflict Perspectives – Functionalism ignores power inequality and exploitatio
X – Action Perspectives – Functionalism is deterministic
X – Postmodernist Critiques – society is not as stable, orderly, or predictable as Functionalists suggest.
Functionalism applied to other topic areas within sociology
The Functionalist perspective on the family
The four universal functions of the family
Functional fit theory
Primary socialisation
Stabilisation of adult personalities
Traditional gender role
The Functionalist perspective on education
Secondary socialisation
Social Solidarity
Skills for working
Meritocracy
Role Allocation
Modernisation Theory (Functionalism applied to development)
Aid injections and five stages of growth
Cultural Barriers
Capitalist/ Industrial model of development
Functionalist and Social Control theories of crime
Bonds of attachment theory
Positive Functions of Crime
Inevitability of crime
Functionalist research methods – Positivism
Social Facts
Objectivity
Official Statistics
Correlations
Generaliseablity
Science
If you like this sort of revision-thang, then why not contribute to my early retirement fund and buy these revision notes for Theory and Methods – they’re structured as in the picture below, and cost less than a pint of yer finest ale!
A brief summary of Anthony Giddens’ Modernity and Self Identity – chapter two – in which he focuses on the psychological aspects of identity
Chapter 2 – The Self – Ontological Security and Existential Anxiety.
An account of self-identity should be based on a stratified model of the psychological make-up of the individual.
(Following Wittgenstein) to be human is to know what one is doing. Reflexive awareness is characteristic of all human action, and most people when asked can give a discursive account of why they are doing what they are doing.
The social conventions which are produced and reproduced through social interaction are reflexively monitored by individuals. However, much of what allows us to ‘go on’ with our daily lives is carried on at the level of practical consciousness – this is non-conscious, bound up with the taken-for-granted routines of daily life. We do not ‘keep in mind’ most of what we do most of the time, we just act in ways because they are conventional, we do not question many of our social conventions.
Ontological Security and Trust
Following Garfinkel, we interact in accordance with a number of conventions which essentially bracket out existential questions and allow us to ‘go on’ – we bracket out questions about the nature of time, space, continuity, identity and the self, which are fragile constructs, because if we were to subject the premises of our day to day assumptions about our attitudes to such things to philosophical enquiry, we would find that such ideas lack stable foundation.
Practical consciousness, with its day to day routines, help bracket out existential questions so that we are freed from a level of anxiety and so that we may ‘go on’ with life. We need to invest a level of trust in these routines so that we may be free from anxiety and are actually capable of living in the world. Trust involves both an emotional as well as a cognitive commitment to certain forms of practical consciousness.
Following Kierkegaard – dread and anxiety are a fundamental part of the human condition, and we need to develop a sense of trust in something in order to ‘go on’. Developing trust in routines is fundamentally tied up with the interpersonal organisation of time and space.
Giddens now switches to the development of personality in infants – he seems to be arguing that infants need to develop a ‘protective cocoon’ which is basically a bracketing out of all the things that could harm the security of the individual, which is provided by the caregiver in the early stages of life – in this sense the protective cocoon is an unreality. As well as needing the security of the protective cocoon, infants also need to be creative enough to develop an independent sense of self, a sense of space between themselves and caregiver.
Anxiety and Social Organisation
Acquiring routines and learning how to act are constitutive of an emotional acceptance of the reality of the external world, and are a pre-requisite of developing self-identity. We all develop routines for the sake of our ontological security.
Anxiety has to be understood in relation to the overall security system the individual develops. Its roots lie in the separation of the infant from the caregiver. Anxiety is a natural part of life and much of what we do can be seen as developing coping mechanisms to overcome anxiety – such as civil indifference in public spaces, and the various rituals associated with day to day life in public spaces.
Existential Questions
To be ontologically secure is to possess, on the level of the unconscious and practical consciousness, ‘answers’ to fundamental existential questions.
Anxiety stems from human liberty. Freedom is not a given characteristic of the human individual, but derives from the acquisition of of an ontological understanding of external reality and personal identity. The autonomy which human beings acquire derives from their capacity to be familiar with events outside of their immediate settings – anxiety (following Kierkegaard) is ‘the possibility of freedom’.
There are four existential questions which the individual must answer (not cognitively, but through being in the world, at the level of practical consciousness and the unconscious). These are questions to do with:
Existence and being
Finitude and human life
The experience of others
the continuity of self-identity.
It is the later which I’ll go into here:
What exactly is self-identity? It is not something that is just given, but something that has to be routinely created and sustained in the reflexive activities of the individual…. Self-Identity is the self as reflexively understood by the person in terms of her or his biography.
It is easiest to analyse SI by looking at cases where an individual’s identity has been fractured (following Laing) – where individuals either lack a consistent feeling of biographical continuity, or are paralysed in terms of practical action because of an external environment full of changes (experiencing an inner deadness) or feel a lack of trust in their own self integrity.
A normal sense of self-identity has all three of the above – a sense of biographical continuity, a protective cocoon of practical consciousness which ‘filters out’ several options of how to be in the world and finally there is sufficient self-regard to sustain a sense of the self as ‘alive’ –a feeling of being in control of things in the object-world, at least to a certain extent.
Self-identity is reliant upon the capacity to keep a particular narrative going, and presupposes the other elements of ontological security. Self-Identity is both fragile and robust and the form and content of keeping a narrative going differs enormously in late modern society.
Body and Self
The self is embodied, and in contemporary society the body is of particular importance in keeping a self-narrative going – such that we have developed regimes of control, most notably diets.
Motivation (Shame)
Shame is anxiety about the integrity of the narrative through which one sustains a coherent biography. Shame (or rather its avoidance) takes over from guilt as the primary ‘motivator’ in late-modern society – Shame is to do with integrity of the self, guilt is to do with wrong doing.
Shame derives when we cannot live up to the vision of the ideal self – when we fail to achieve our goals, but also when trust is violated and we have to go back to those fundamental questions such as ‘where do I belong’ or ‘who am I’?
Pride (of which narcissism is the extreme expression) is the opposite of shame, and derives when we have a lack of worthwhile ideals to pursue.
