Thursday, November 28, 2019

Presentation of self outline free essay sample

Erving Goffman was one of the most important Sociologists in the 20th century who focussed his study on aspects of social life. It is often argued that Goffman was â€Å"one of the twentieth century’s most remarkable practitioners of social science† (Smith, 2006:1). He was born on the 11th June 1922 in Alberta, Canada. His parents were Jewish and part of the group of Ukrainians who moved to Canada before the beginning of the First World War. Initially Goffman studied Chemistry before moving to the University of Toronto to study Anthropology and Sociology where he gained an understanding in Durkheim, Warner, Freud and Parsons. Goffman’s wife killed herself after battling with mental illness which provokes him to research into these areas and criticise many medical and scientific claims. Between 1959 and 1969 Goffman published seven significant one of those being the presentation of self in everyday life which will be assessed throughout this review. We will write a custom essay sample on Presentation of self outline or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In the discipline of Sociology Goffman was looked upon highly and today his work is widely cited. He referred to his work as dramaturgical analysis â€Å"Dramaturgical social psychology is the study of meaningful behaviour† (Brissett and Edgley, 1975) which was the study of social interaction on a micro scale looking at the meanings behind everyday events. Nowadays his work can be looked at as symbolic interactionism; the presentation of self in everyday life was and is regarded as one of his greatest contributions to the discipline. It looked at everyday behaviour grasping the elements of social interaction. This was a key contribution and sparked debates amongst sociology in years to come as he was the first to highlight social interaction as something to be studied within Sociology. It was a subject relatively untouched and in Goffman’s world everything is not quite what it seems. Goffman believed social life was based on theatrics and any face to face interactions in society could be interpreted as a theatrical performance. He provides a qualitative analysis of this process looking at the components of interaction. Within social interaction he identifies an individual as  playing a part and uses the term â€Å"performance† â€Å"the impression the actor is making on others† (Messinger et al, 1975) to refer to someone performing an activity in front of a set of observers. Then he talks about a â€Å"front† which can be seen as part of the â€Å"performance† to define the situation to those who are observing. One of the main aspects of this idea is t he â€Å"setting† which provides the background/scenery to the theatrics. Goffman states performance of some cannot take place without the correct setting, the â€Å"actors† must bring themselves to a correct place but â€Å"must terminate their performance when they leave it†. If we apply this to a modern day scenario with a student playing the role of â€Å"actors†, how they behave in social interactions will vary dependant on those involved. The â€Å"actor† would act differently in a social interaction with their personal tutor in comparison to their peers. Vitally important is Goffman referral to the existence of a â€Å"front† and â€Å"back† stage with the â€Å"front† being the stage where the performance takes place (they play the role what they assume is expected of them) with the individual â€Å"acting† throughout the social interaction. But the â€Å"back† stage is behind the scenes a less formal area which allows them to be â€Å"out of character† and converse with other â€Å"actors† in places like smoking areas, the bathroom and basically somewhere away from the â€Å"observers†. As Goffman exaggerates the â€Å"setting† is vital for the â€Å"performance† indicating â€Å"actors† behaviour is dependent on their social situation. Within this section and throughout the book Goffman offers several examples around each theory to enable the reader to grasp a true understanding. Essentially he indicates our social actions within society are shaped by invisible forces and the way we behave is not instinctive but our actions our shaped by the society we live in dependant on the scenario of the social interaction. He also implies how an individual will be focussed on making a favourable show of him (a good impression) which gives another explanation to why humans can be seen as actors in situations of social interaction, they act how they think the audience (observers) want them to act. To summarise his chapter on presentation Goffman’s primary assumption is that individuals differ not by their specific qualities, but by the situations they find themselves in to which they adopt different ‘roles’ to perform for the â€Å"observer†. For this work Goffman gained inspiration from his own personal experiences, as his wife struggled with mental illness and he chose to travel to the Shetland Islands to study the interaction in their society. His wife’s illness may have shaped his argument as another key piece of his work was Asylums where he carried out fieldwork in a hospital where he wished to look at the social world of an inmate. In his findings he was very critical and stated how behaviour that was deemed out of the ordinary was simply someone not conforming to the rules and expectations of society. If those rules or norms/values are broken that person would be viewed as an outsider and therefore displays an inability to play the role of an â€Å"actor†. A key theorist behind his work is Herbert Mead who published a book Mind, Self and Society and he looked at the experiences of human beings and focussed on the development of self. The individual mind can exist only in relation to other minds with shared meanings (Mead 1934) which shows Mead was one of the early sociologists to focus on the self like Goffman. Also Talcott Parsons whose work on stratification may have inspired him to focus on social interaction. Parsons was a structural functionalist and part of his worked looked at how a system adapted to its environment. As we know Presentation of self in everyday life looks at how individuals adapt in different scenarios of social interaction so he may have gained some inspiration from Parsons in that aspect. Emile Durkheim is one of the founders of Sociology and someone Goffman would have looked up to. Goffman makes it clear there are a set of standards which individuals are expected to follow which he describes similarly to how Durkheim did to religion; â€Å"as an expressive rejuvenation and reaffirmation of the moral values of the community†. There are links in their work particular around the concept of â€Å"spontaneity† which is to be spontaneous but to come from natural feelings. Within The presentation of self â€Å"spontaneity† is brought up by Goffman as an element of the â€Å"performance† to make it seem life-life and real, not entirely artificial. In Durkheim’s The division of labour in society he looks at a model of spontaneity although it is about labour it looks at a type of social interaction finely articulated organisation in which each social value is appreciated at its true worth (Durkheim) implying each individual has to conform within the social organisation they find themselves. Some aspects that are weaknesses of the book; what Goffman did not do is complicate his theory of social interaction with is by looking further into these situations and applying class, gender, social status etc. If he had of done this it could have taken his theory to another level as it is not something accounted for. In a sense he presumes all individuals would react similarly and does not take into account. For example if we looked at Pierre Bourdieu’s work on cultural capital, how some have greater access to aspects of society because of social aspects like education, certain knowledge which gives individuals advantage. The differentiation in these people would not be taken into account in Goffman’s work therefore would assume everyone would play the role of the â€Å"actor† the same in a social interaction. Nowadays in modern society it could be argued there is a reduced amount of social interaction due to globalisation and the mass advancements in technology. Therefore the book is not as relevant to modern day society although the key theories are still very much applicable. The issue with applying the theories in this book to society today is that an awful lot of interaction is no longer made face to face. With the advancements in technology since a lot of interactions are made via emails, over the phone, on Facebook obviously making Goffman’s theory deemed useless. It would be interesting to hear his thoughts on those and whether we are still acting whilst communicating through these means or is it the back room and somewhere we are preparing for our next performance. Goffman does come under criticism from other sociologists who claim that work like this makes him unpopular in the discipline. This is because he criticises and highlights what is wrong with society but does not provide an alternative or a solution to what he deems a problem. Of course this book was written in the 1960’s by Goffman but despite this many of his work is still relevant today particular the aspect of using â€Å"fixed crops† like houses, cars, clothes and employment. They still represent aspects of self and are in important aspect of the appearance of the actor. It provides a different view and perspective for members of society to look upon, seeing the self as a cause of cultural and social arrangements. Putting the question into people’s mind when are we truly ourselves and are our actions actually shaped by the society we live in. Although Goffman came under some criticism for highlighting the issues but offering no explanation to overcome them; Manning makes the argument that â€Å"unlike the traditional anthropologist whom broadens our horizons by expanding our knowledge of other societies, Goffman shows us the complexity of our own† (1992). This demonstrates the idea that Goffman with The presentation of self, did broaden people’s perspectives and offered a different explanation about our social conduct. Potentially he may have come under a lot of criticism as people were afraid to accept that he could be correct which would cause a lot of people to re-evaluate their situation. His theory of Presentation of self, talks of how individuals and groups put on a performance in society. Initially the performances are constructed and then maintained and those involved may be unaware of their own performances. A final interesting point raised is whether social arrangements have affected the self which is an example of interesting discussions within the discipline derived from Goffman’s work. To conclude the appreciation of Goffman’s book it is thought provoking not only to the reader but to the theorists in the discipline. His theory on social interaction provided a different perspective to those before him and he raised the question of social circumstances affecting people’s behaviour in social situations. Also the way his work is set out, each theory he lays out is alongside several example which allows everyone to be clear of what he is portraying and he manages to make his theory concise, therefore memorable. Although this piece of work was significant in Sociology and Goffman is now one of the most cited theorists in the subject, his work on the presentation of self; in everyday life has come under considerable amount of criticism. As mentioned this is because of him not offering solutions to the problems and today because of people interacting without being face to face his theory is not entirely applicable. But his work was essentially a metaphor and a lot of modern day theorists have taken his theory too literally.

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Free Essays on Out, Out

Out, out is a good story about a boy who loses his arm after a stupid accident. realize it is happening? That’s what I believe Robert Frost’s poem Fire and Ice is meant to express. Although the poem is short, it holds a very interesting question to think about. The question is which way would you rather the world come to an end. There are two choices. The first two lines in Fire and Ice express the choices, "Some say the world will end in fire, / Some say in ice." I feel that he uses the term fire not to hold the direct meaning of a burning flame, but to represent the punishment something can inflict upon an object. It presents the image of the intense pain in which a burn can inflict, along with the extraordinary speed in which it happens. Fire causes a tremendous amount of destruction to virtually anything within seconds. It could also represent just a violent ending. Either way, it would be nice to have things over with fast, but the intense pain might not make it worth it. For the world to end in ice, seems to present the image of a slower, numbing effect. I feel he uses ice to represent a slow, almost unnoticeable change that eventually causes the destruction of mankind. Fire, instantaneous combustion of an object. Frost uses fire to represent an ending with incredible speed and unimaginable pain. The quote, "From what I’ve tasted of desire" seems to represent the tendency of people to be impatient. The way many people of today are, they can not wait. They must have what they want, and they must have it now. That is one of the main purposes of a loan. Someone wants a car, but does not want to take the time to save the money. They instead borrow the money and have to pay it back, of course at a higher cost with interest. I can honestly say that a huge majority of people are in debt. They could not wait. They had to have something now. I feel that the quote explains this by using the word "desire." It presents the fact that... Free Essays on Out, Out Free Essays on Out, Out Out, out is a good story about a boy who loses his arm after a stupid accident. realize it is happening? That’s what I believe Robert Frost’s poem Fire and Ice is meant to express. Although the poem is short, it holds a very interesting question to think about. The question is which way would you rather the world come to an end. There are two choices. The first two lines in Fire and Ice express the choices, "Some say the world will end in fire, / Some say in ice." I feel that he uses the term fire not to hold the direct meaning of a burning flame, but to represent the punishment something can inflict upon an object. It presents the image of the intense pain in which a burn can inflict, along with the extraordinary speed in which it happens. Fire causes a tremendous amount of destruction to virtually anything within seconds. It could also represent just a violent ending. Either way, it would be nice to have things over with fast, but the intense pain might not make it worth it. For the world to end in ice, seems to present the image of a slower, numbing effect. I feel he uses ice to represent a slow, almost unnoticeable change that eventually causes the destruction of mankind. Fire, instantaneous combustion of an object. Frost uses fire to represent an ending with incredible speed and unimaginable pain. The quote, "From what I’ve tasted of desire" seems to represent the tendency of people to be impatient. The way many people of today are, they can not wait. They must have what they want, and they must have it now. That is one of the main purposes of a loan. Someone wants a car, but does not want to take the time to save the money. They instead borrow the money and have to pay it back, of course at a higher cost with interest. I can honestly say that a huge majority of people are in debt. They could not wait. They had to have something now. I feel that the quote explains this by using the word "desire." It presents the fact that...

Thursday, November 21, 2019

Family and sports, recreation, leisure Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Family and sports, recreation, leisure - Essay Example I have come to realize that these SRL activities also changes with time or the generation (Human Kinetics 2005). You notice that the sports recreation and leisure activities that were practiced by our parents or quite different from what we are practicing today. These few factors made me to talk to my mother and my grandmother in an interest to know more about my family generation history in sports, recreation, and leisure activities. Family interviews I had some questions to ask my grandfather; Me: â€Å"Grandfather, did you consider your family as being poor or rich?† Grandfather: â€Å"I can’t say that we were that rich, but my father had enough properties and resources to support the family’s wellbeing. My father had a large farm and livestock, he was a great farmer. That’s how he managed to raise the family.† Me: â€Å"Did you enjoy your life?† Grandfather: â€Å"yes I really enjoyed my time very well. As a young boy, I always played to gether with other young boys. I also enjoyed assisting my parents in the farm.† Me: â€Å"What recreation or sports activities did you participate during your leisure time?† Grandfather: â€Å"We had a lot of activities to do. ... When I was young, your grandpa took care of me very well. I used to hang out with the rest of young boys when out of school.† Me: â€Å"What were your favorite sporting and leisure activities?† Father: â€Å"There were many sporting activities we used to play. We played board games, high jumps, bullfights and participated in local wrestling competition. We also did some hunting activities but not often. During the night, we could assemble together in a fire and listen for stories from our grandparents.† The Ties of My Grandfather’s Generation with the Readings The time of my grandfather’s youthful age was the time when the communities were still indigenous. The kind of sports, games, and social activities they participated in like dancing and some physical activities were reflecting their culture and a particular way of life. The culture that was adapted was from my grandfather’s tribe. The tribe’s culture and traditions determined thei r leisure and sporting activities. These physical activities, games, and sports were considered very important means of recreation. The different classes of people played their games and sports differently. My grandfather’s ethnic community could not interact or play with other ethnic communities (Mackenzie, Para 7). My Generation Sports, Recreation, and Leisure (SRL) Activities All these activities are quite different from the sporting, recreation, and leisure activities that I practice or the current young people are practicing in their free time. Our sporting activities vary from field sports like soccer, rugby, and athletics and so on to indoor games and computer games. I spend my time playing and watching soccer, which

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

Child Behavior Checklist Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Child Behavior Checklist - Assignment Example It serves as the younger counterpart of adult research study approaches, which mostly deals with adult-focused psychological conditions. Thus, it tends to focus on the conditions more specific to children and young adults, and the foreseen status are acted upon in accordance with outcomes of the assessment.The improvements made were important in addressing several factors. The revised version of CBCL, as explained by Hersen (2004), has been part of an extensive screening program and included the teaching rating (TRF) and self-report (YSR). These were devised to accomplish more understanding of the mental conditions of children. In turn, it gives emphasis to the roles played by parents and other environmental influences in determining possibilities of mental conflicts in children. Despite concerns about the consistency of the discussed screening tool, several adaptations yielded affirmative results. Currently, newer versions were introduced in 2001, with modifications on age divisions for specific scales. New specifications have been added, which replaced subjects that either have been overlooked or neglected by previous design. Furthermore, the empirical-based assessment is combined with Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM)-oriented measurements—ensuring a wide support from professional behavioral scientists and experts. In retrospect, Child Behavioral Checklist (CBCL) is a 15-20 minute child administered measurement based on parent’s account.

Monday, November 18, 2019

Product Development Theory Comparison Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Product Development Theory Comparison - Essay Example They are not just branding a product. They are designing a total package. In creating a brand there are several different levels to be considered. First, there is the step by step technical issues that have to be addressed. However, creating a brand is more than just creating the catchy phrase, name or design that signifies to the world that this product belongs to this company. Branding and brand creation encompass a whole host of tangible and intangible elements. In beginning, this discussion brand creation, the first area to cover is the technical aspects of creating a brand. After that, the conceptual ideas will be discussed as well as steps to achieving an all-inclusive branding package. The brand itself is more than just the product itself. There are specific steps that must be taken in the brand creation process. The first step is to arrive at a brand name, word, phrase, symbol or device that will set your product apart from the others. It must be unique and creative. It could be catchy, clever, aesthetically appealing, different, or simple yet unforgettable. Whatever the choice it must be unique and distinctive. Upon arriving at a perspective brand, the next important step is to determine that the name is free from all encumbrances, that is, it is not already in use by someone else. This is easy enough to accomplish via the internet to ascertain if someone has the name you have arrived at already brand named. It is also wise to search internationally, as well. You want your brand to stand out. Selecting one so similar to a host of other names will not achieve this. Having determined that your selected brand name is available you should immediately place a trademark on it to make it exclusively yours. Protecting your brand is an essential part of the creating brand value.

Friday, November 15, 2019

What makes education an education?

What makes education an education? Assignments. Exams. Projects. Papers. All these are matters of concern to every student undergoing schooling. It is truly inevitable not to endure the hardships brought by these school activities for they are part of education. Without them, education can never be the education most people have in mind. However, one may ask, What makes education an education? For most people, especially parents, education is quite an important aspect in the course of human life such that they regard it as the only thing they can impart to their children as an inheritance. While for others, on the part of the students, education is the stage in their life which would prepare them for future jobs. Likewise, for those students who had a firm grasp of the essence of education consider it as a right to be upheld by the society itself. At the end of the day, there are numerous reasons on why not to take education for granted. However, more than the various connotation of education from different perspectives lay a complex meaning of education. As such, seeing schooling in the broader sense entails probing the sociology of education. The basic definition of the term sociology of education conveys that it is the study of the institution of education in its broad social context and of various social groups and interpersonal relationships that affect or affected by the functioning of the educational institutions (Reitman, 1981, p.17). With this meaning, it is but necessary to analyze education not within the four walls of the classroom but beyond the confinements of schools. The larger context then is the society in which schools, the main institution of education, are part of. Belonging to this social order are other key institutions and actors which are essentially significant when examining the sociology of education for these possess power, control and influence that can manipulate and alter the kind of education schools ought to promote and teach to young citizens. Hence, it can be inferred that schools are socially const ructed establishments by which powerful elements have the capacity to shape education. Reitman (1981) supported the thought of how society can produce a great impact on pedagogical realm by stating the central principle of schooling which maintains that schools normally reflects the societyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ it does not lead society in societys effort to adapt and change. Schools tend to change after the rest of society changes, not beforeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ (Reitman, 1981, p. 39). Under this assumption, a study on the role, whether explicit or implicit, of several factors constituting society in the molding process of education is vital to shed light on the issue of how pedagogical structures and methods are developed and set for the pursuance of effective education. It is also noteworthy to express the far-reaching implications of education in the sense that it affects almost every individual. Every person can perhaps be regarded as a stakeholder of education by which each of its aspects, if modified, can create an impact, no matter how minimal it may appear, sufficient enough to seize attention and stir the intellectual and emotional side of the people. Indeed, schooling and education undeniably involves a complex interplay of different elements to which it reacts and to which the produced effects yield to changes in the structure of schooling. These changes on the other hand are oftentimes attached to the interests of the dominant constituent of the social order. To better illustrate this statement, the paper provides a clear-cut description of the nature of education and the scope of schools as an educational institution. Nonetheless, to further understand the technicalities associated with schools, there is a need to define schools as an educational institution, as well as, to expound the structure of authority evident among these institutions. Moreover, the political dynamics accompanying the sociology of education which may be apparent and obscure at the same time are elucidated under the contexts in which education operates such as the cultural and ideological setting of the politicization of education, the milieu of power configurations and relations, and the framework of globalization. Certain pedagogical implications are also explicated to illustrate the wide-ranging bearing of educational reforms or policies on concerned and affected individuals as a whole. Understanding schooling and education in this approach allows the people to view and analyze schooling and education objectively and critically. In this manner, learners, educators, as well as those people who have no access to education, may no longer be mere passive recipients of the conceptions of education as prescribed by the society; rather, they may be the critics of diverse pedagogical perceptions who aim not only the betterment of education itself but the rectitude of knowledge and consciousness schools propagate as well. In connection with this, Henry Giroux (1985) asserted, the need for a passionate commitment by educators to make the political more pedagogical, that is, to make critical reflection and action a fundamental part of a social project that not only engages forms of oppression but also develops a deep and abiding faith in the struggle to humanize life itself (Freire, 1921, p. 5). It is certainly a conviction and a challenge all at once that is not simple and ea sy to actualize, however, displaying a demeanor of open mindedness and critical thinking, such may be achieved. To realize this kind of goal is to take a step-by-step scrutiny of the sociology of education. Initially, a description of schools as an educational institution would help facilitate the study. Educational institutions are considered part of the society which exist to help preserve or modify the conditions of life by promoting teaching and learning of one sort or another (Reitman, 1981, p. 25). These institutions are also responsible for the continuity of social norms, values, customs and traditions in a certain societal area, as one generation passes after another. However, it is important to note that institutions of education do not necessarily denote schools for there are those which have no formalized curriculum or program of instruction, just like what schools have. Those belonging to this type are referred to as the informal educational institutions. These include, as enumerated by Sandford W. Reitman (1981), families, peer groups, mass media, work places, church, special-inte rest groups, social service agencies and the social class or the social stratum. Schools, on the other hand, are identified as the formal educational institutions. Nevertheless, it is surprising to know that the informal institutions have more encompassing influence than the formal ones due to the fact that they occupy a larger portion of the society. Meanwhile, Reitman (1981) on his book entitled, Education, Society, and Change, explained that a changing society that moves forward to a more complex state requires, in effect, a more systematized process of cultural transmission which informal educational institutions cannot fully ensure. Thus, the formation of formal educational institutions or what most people commonly know as schools was introduced. Herein lies various views regarding the issues on what the schools ought to do as part of the society, on what pedagogical methods they should adapt, on how changes in society affect schooling per se, and on how schools consolidate different predispositions of several stakeholders and other equally significant considerations. One of the perspectives delineated in relation to the above-mentioned concerns was the image of school as both a factory-like and temple-like institution. Deal and Peterson (1994) provided two metaphors which mirror contending perceptions about the purpose and design of schools. One metaphor portrays the image of schools being a factory while the other signifies them as cathedrals or temples. The former symbol perceives schools in a rational way such that schools function like a factory which focuses on results, outputs, structures and roles (Deal Peterson, 1994, p. 70). Such comparison presupposes the goal-oriented approach of schools with regards to their main concerns: student control and academic achievement. In this manner, schools manifest organized, systematized and technical fashion of delivering their functions. Moreover, this way of looking at school emphasizes the importance of managing their technical mission: instruction (Deal Peterson, 1994, p. 70). On the other hand, the latter representation is the symbolic image of schools being envisioned as a temple by which the responsibility of schools to make sure that cultural patterns and practices adhere to the existing values and beliefs of the society is assured. Likewise, it is but necessary to state that this conception embraces the importance of values, commitment, passion, vision, and heart-key ingredients of a beloved institution (Deal Peterson, 1994, p. 71). In this picture, Deal and Peterson (1994) stressed that the factory-like functions of schools are only secondary to that of the functions of the temple figure of schools. Such assumes that these factory roles are to maintain the temple character of schools. Another view on the aspect of school as an educational institution was the belief that schooling opportunity can be considered as one of the best investments a society could make to ensure its own future (Hurn, 1993, p. 264). Christopher J. Hurn (1993) expounded such an optimistic notion of schooling prevalent during the 1970s, stating that education reinforces cognitive competence among citizens of a country which the national economy would necessitate eventually from its populace. In addition to the ambiance of optimism, the faith in education emerged. This so-called faith mainly points out that education plays an important role in shaping a more humane, tolerant, and democratic social order. It is this idea that propagated the impression of how schooling molds the society towards reason and knowledge rather than tradition and prejudice (Hurn, 1993, p. 264). Both of these perceptions of schooling constitute only a few out of the other diverse perspectives of the essence of education. It is important to note, however, the major difference between the two: the former assumes that it is the society which is responsible for the schools make-up simply by comparing it with other institutions of the community, while the latter presupposes that the school and its educational structure primarily affects what the society would be like. Which among the two or the other views of education and schooling would be true is something relative to the interpretation of different people with different stake on education itself. Nevertheless, it is relevant to take into consideration the role of a variety of factors and the interplay of these elements that influence the manner by which people would interpret education. It is because such inclusion to the analysis of the nature and scope of education could perhaps account for the dichotomized, or even dispara te, perceptions of schooling. Further explanations and details regarding this perceptual divide in aspect of schooling would be given specific focus under the discussion of the political dynamics in education found in the succeeding paragraphs. On the other hand, to shed light on the true nature of education and schooling, objective analysis of the functions and the structure of formal education must be taken into account. Reitman (1981) coined the term traditional manifest functions to refer to the functions of schools, particularly American schools, which are demanded by the society. These purposes that tend to serve the social order include the following: (1) selecting and sorting people out for adult roles, considered the most significant manifest function of schools by which students are classified according to academic merits which in turn became the basis for their ability to be qualified in the preexisting economic and social positions; (2) building and maintaining nationalism and citizenship, contextualized during colonial and revolutionary days schools have the duty to establish, inculcate and uphold into students mind allegiance to the national state; (3) transmitting traditional culture, as already mentioned in the previous paragraph, cultural transmission is a relevant obligation of schools that is realized through formal teaching of history and literature; (4) socialization, this, on the other hand, is concerned with the introduction of customs and traditions that are uniformly accepted by the society to the students; (5) propagating religious faith, this applies more to the function of schools in times of colonial period when widespread religious teachings were necessitated to establish colonization; (6) teaching basic skills, reflective of the life-styles and cultural patterns of the society; (7) vocational training, for the mitigation of unemployment in ones economy; and (8) character education, many argued that this purpose is more vital than the first one since this incorporates moral and ethical norms of society which often change overtime (Reitman, 1981, pp. 36-39). Aside from these traditional functions are the emerging school purposes which Reitman (1981) deemed newer and controversial in a sense that they incite deviance from the fundamental and traditional assumptions of education functions. Here are the additional eight functions schools are expected to follow: (1) personal and social problem solving, as manifested in social studies curriculum, schools must be able to adapt to the changing degree of complexity of the society by which individuals and groups are able to solve problems concerning their personal lives and their social environment in which they are part of; (2) social competence in a secondary society, recognizing alterations in the societys operating contexts, one must be able to be adjust to meet new realizations imposed by the new society; (3) diffusion of new knowledge, innovations in technologies resulted to new discoveries that must be taught for students to learn how to cope with a new society different from that of their parents; (4) providing equality of opportunity for a social position, provision of educational opportunities that are accessible to everyone regardless of race, are, gender or economic/social status so as to promote equal competition in the economic marketplace; (5) sex and family life education, the issue of whether schools should involve participation of family and church institutions in teaching such topics which are of immense concern to both; (6) increased functional literacy, the introduction of modern communication aids like visual media put pressure on schools to redesign the basic skills component of their curriculum to integrate latest advancement in technology; (7) development of cosmopolitan attitudes, Reitman (1981) identified vis-à  -vis the idea of cosmopolitanism the role of schools to educate their students to live in such an urbanized, secular, global community (8) existential creativity, development of the free school movement and the thought of open classroom, which perhaps paved the way for the modern idea of academic freedom, provide sufficient grounds for personal expressions of students (Reitman, 1981, pp. 39-43) However, it is important to note that what Reitman (1981) had enumerated as new functions of schools may not necessarily imply the same thing today considering the year such purposes were observed. Yet, these are still relevant facts useful in the analysis of how the sociology of education goes about in line with these functions. Moreover, it is probable to infer that these functions are still regarded as profound insights of school purpose suitably addressed to third world countries. With these purposes and roles of schools and the education that comes with them defined, the need for their fulfillment was to be embodied in the curriculum. The curriculum acts as the means by which the school put into action the functions intended to serve the society (Reitman, 1981). It is described as an organized sequence of learning experiences that seeks to strengthen the concept of education as a tool for the development of knowledge and understanding (Peters, 1991, p.5). In relation to the curriculum schools choose to implement, Reitman (1981) distinguished two of its kinds: the official curriculum and the invisible curriculum. The former which is also known as the formal curriculum reflects the preferred educational purpose of the school and comprises mandated instructions regarding learning processes, usually characterized by the subjects included, the students will experience as they interact with their teachers. On the one hand, the second type of curriculum is called the invisible curriculum. It is invisible in the sense that schools have hidden curricular activities such that the invisible curriculum may be understood as school activity that commonly takes place as part of the implementation of the official program, but which is not officially mandated (Reitman, 1981, pp. 4-5). An example of the implementation of the invisible curriculum is when teachers try to reinforce a sense of superiority among students in the society, to motivate them to study and to maintain their grades qualified for college admissions through mentioning the schools impressive record of getting its graduates into prominent universities (Reitman, 1981). As Hugh Sockett (n.d.) remarked on his article Curriculum Planning: Taking a Means to an End, curriculum is indeed the means which schools utilize to reach the end (Peters, 1973). Looking at the curriculum-based facet of schools, it may appear that schooling has its own way of perceiving and analyzing reality objectively such that the institution itself has no place in the political spectrum of society. It is as if the school is out of the box, or in other words, it is apart from the society it studies, when in reality, schools are affected by the spontaneous and dynamic changes happening in the society. The fact that curricula are set by someone or some group of individuals belonging to the school administration or to a higher level of institution which has a say on the matter emphasizes the idea of school being a political institution, contrary to the belief that schools are nonpolitical institutions and that schooling, as an effect, is a nonpolitical affair. As Reitman (1981) reiterated the idea, he asserted: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.elementary and secondary schools, as well as most colleges and universities, have always been involved in struggles for power over the ends and means of education (underscoring mine). Today, public schools are increasingly forced to compete with other agencies of government for scarce financial and other resources. Schoolingà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ has been a major political endeavor since colonial timesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. (Reitman, 1981, pp.321-322) This statement proves how schooling and education go beyond the four walls of a classroom. In addition, formal education is claimed to be a semblance of a political system and in effect, schooling is somewhat a highly political endeavor (Reitman, 1981). Herein, the taking into account of the structure of authority in formal education to better describe how school became politicized by various factors is necessary. Also, it is important to note that the structure of authority falls under two kinds, whether it be informal or formal: the informal aspect refers to the power and influence of interest groups in the realm of school or educational politics while the formal type implies the hierarchy of authority from the lowest division in the school administration to the higher offices of the state government (Reitman, 1981). Reitman (1981) stated that it is in the schooling processes that school politics starts to develop. It is through these processes that different people want to benefit from in the forms of higher salaries, greater financial assistance for curricular and extracurricular programs, or larger funds for capital outlays for new buildings or updated textbooks, that developed the notion of school politics. With all these interests of different people consolidated according to their similarities, there form interest groups, considering that individual efforts will be likely ignored by higher school officials or decision-makers unless that person is the representative of the group or that individual possesses political influence due to financial and social resources. Participation of these groups to implement their particular educational concerns is made realized through political process (Reitman, 1981). Raywid (n.d.), as quoted by Reitman (1981), separated interest groups into two groups: th e legitimate groups and the illegitimate ones. The difference lies in the three rules to which these groups abide in making and pressing their claims. The rules are (1) rules of evidence (is the truth being sincerely sought after and exposed when found?); (2) rules of democracy (is the group open and above board about its motives and methods?); (3) rules of common decency (does the group avoid smear campaigns and slanderous literature?) (Reitman, 1981, p. 329). Under the legitimate interest group category cited by most political scientists are the local teachers organizations, Parent-Teacher Association, civic organizations, civil rights organizations, local chambers of commerce and branches, and ad-hoc groups of budget-minded taxpayers. Whether these groups support or attack schools in favor of their interests, Raywid considered them legitimate for they adhere to the three sets of broad criteria mentioned above (Reitman, 1981). Meanwhile, Bailey (n.d.) also classified interest groups into two basic types: those pro-school and those in opposition to schools. The former includes (1) educational academics (teachers of teachers) who are very important in initiating debate on many political issues; (2) state educational and political officials who bargain with lobbyist, pass laws, and issue directives; (3) professional educators; and (4) surprise actors, that is, coalitions of citizens who align with schools for various reasons. On the other hand, the latter consists of (1) the Roman Catholic Church; (2) tax-minded business groups or owners of commercial real estate; (3) rural groups such as farmers associations which tend to oppose increasing state involvement in education; (4) conservative politicians and state officials, whose pressures and exposure in the mass media often prevent additional spending for education; and ironically, (5) schoolpersons themselves for their failure to understand, develop, and use political machinery available within their own ranks to pursue educational improvements (Reitman, 1981, pp. 329-330). Aside from the enumerated characteristics of interest groups that make each one different from another, Reitman (1981) concluded that ideological biases strongly influence varying perceptions of the informal nature of power and influence over educational reforms of interest groups. Having discussed the informal aspects of control wielded by interest groups, the shift to the formal one is directed to the role of the state government and the personnel in position with respect on their influence in education. There are four essential authority personalities who correspond, though not entirely, to the formal structure of authority in formal education. The first one is the state governor or the chief executive. Recognizing the essence of state educational politics which according to Reitman (1981) is the bargaining between interest group and elected or appointed officials, the governor stands as the key to the extensive bargaining that goes on between spokepersons lobbying for organized educational interests, such as the state teachers association or union or the state chamber commerce (Reitman, 1981, p.343). The next two officials are under the local government: the school board and the school superintendent. The school boards, according to sociologist Norman Kerr (n.d.), have the responsibility to legitimize policies of the school system to the community, in contrast to the common notion that their task is to represent the community to the school administration in line with educational program. On the one hand, they hire school superintendents who are professional experts in the field of formal education. Hence, superintendents became agents of the boards such that they work with them to accomplish objectives at hand which were identified by the school boards and the community to be relevant given certain conditions (Reitman, 1981). The last wielder of influence would be the personnel closest and most accessible to those who need to be educated, the teachers or professors. Although they are large in number, most of them are passive recipients of pedagogical instructions set by those people higher than them in terms of authority. Often times, they are also not fully aware of the political aspects of education particularly those teachers of el ementary and secondary schooling. In this regard, Reitman (1981) raised a challenge for the teachers to contemplate and deliberate on, saying that: Once teachers have seen through the defeating myth of nonpoliticalization of schooling and have begun to comprehend how the myth desensitizes teachers to objective diagnosis of some of their students genuine learning needs, they have reasonable chance to proceed realistically on behalf of their own and their students interests. Armed with the realization that no single one, but rather a variety of sophisticated interest groups possess political clout in this society, a teacher can, if so inclined, participate with other like-minded professionals in organizational efforts to develop political power in educational affairs. (Reitman, 1981, p. 351) Such strong and straightforward statement implies how great the capacity of teachers is in initiating actions calling for improvements in education. However, the implication of this idea also goes with the critical analysis of how formal influence and power to set the manner and content of teaching trickles down from the highest authoritative body to the lowest group of teachers, as educational perspective becomes modified through each level of authority. In this respect enters the political dynamics occurring in the realm of education that entails departure from the confined conception of schooling. Here, it assumes that there exists a larger framework in which conflicting interests of those interest groups and the complex struggle over influence and power of those key actors discussed above are part of and are in the state of continuous interaction. Yet, this larger context also contains competing paradigms of ideological and/or cultural viewpoints which serve as the instrument that shape contrasting interpretations and perceptions of schooling and education. The debate about what schools ought to teach emanated from ideological disparities. These differences on ideologies, on the other hand, resulted from the diverse assessment concerning the critique of the traditional belief of schools as an educational institution. This long-established principle holds that schools taught fundamental skills and basic knowledge of the societys culture and institution, promoted cognitive development, and fostered such essentially modern attitudes and values as tolerance, respect for rationality, and openness to new ideas (Hurn, 1993, p. 270). This view was challenged by three major educational ideologies: the conservative, the liberal or reform and the radical or reconceptualist. The conservative educational ideologies, as expounded by Reitman (1981), strive to perpetuate the socioeducational status quo. Herein lies three rationales, provided by Reitman (1981), that explain education in the angle of the conservatives. The first one is the ideological view of education as human engineering. It explains schooling as a utility designed at making students just the way the society requires them to be and not the other way around by which these students would likely become the critics of that society. This ideology is greatly exhibited in the schools pedagogical measures and curricula such as career education, behavior modification, accountability, the competency movement (which subsumes competency/performance-based teacher education), programmed instruction and teaching machines, behavioral objectives, and performance contracting. The next rationale under the conservative ideology is centered on education as revival of the fundamentals. The idea of revivalistic fu ndamentalism fosters the back-to-basics principle such that supporters of conservatism eagerly demand for stricter school policies (i.e. hair and dress codes) as well as tougher academic standards and grading system. Such creed of conservatives is too extreme such that they even argued that new curricula and progressive teaching methods tend to undermine basic skills which may lead to educational decline and decay (Hurn, 1993). The third and last conservative belief is education as knowledge for the sake of knowledge. As the phrase implies, it basically advocates schooling as a tool directed towards guiding the students in their pursuit of personal intellectual development. To further understand the conservative educational ideology, its basic difference to radical ideology would be helpful. Hurn (1993) stated that most of the arguments asserted by the conservatives negate the claims of the radicals. For instance, radical theorists argue that schools are major props of the established order while conservatives opposed it by claiming that schools, in fact, promote cultural and moral relativism which lead to the disintegration of the homogenous set of cultural and moral ideals of schools such that it further caused the decline of their authority cajole or inspire the young to learn what they have to teach (Hurn, 1993). Adding evidence to the divergence of both ideologies, Freire (1921) in his language of crisis and critique averred that conservatives claim that schools fell short in realizing its purpose to meet the demands and imperatives of the capitalist market economy, thereby, implying that conservatives preserve the status quo of the society, being capitalist in nature. Conversely, schools which act as reproductive sites that smoothly provide the knowledge, skills, and social relations necessary for the functioning of the capitalist economy and dominant society are merely reflex of the labor market in the viewpoint of the radicals (Giroux, 1985). In such image of schools, the means for critical thinking and transformative action are not embodied in the education they provide. The second educational ideology was the liberal or reform type. Reitman (1981) categorized four conceptions about education under this ideological perspective which all seek to modify society as it changes continuously through time via educational processes. These are basically different from the conservatives in terms of their approach regarding norms and values that appear to be obsolete as time passes. Liberals or reformists prefer to preserve them and to integrate improvements for their continuity in contrast to conservatives who will insist in reviving such forgotten customs (Reitman, 1981). The first one among the liberal/reform conceptions is the view of education as ethnic revitalization. This caters developments such as ethnic studies, multicultural education, bilingual education, and community control so as to represent schools as venues for the unification of the diverse nature of a pluralistic society in terms of ethnic differences. Next in line is the second belief which is education as social reengineering. Although this is somewhat similar to the notion of human engineering feature of education employed by the conservative theorists, liberals social reengineering boil

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

Comparing Hitlers Germany and Stalins Russia :: Comparison Compare Contrast Essays

Comparing Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia Why is it that Germany's fascism lasted a relatively short time compared to Russia's communism? The regimes established under Hitler and Stalin were incredibly similar with respect to the rise and control of the state. Both systems were based on entirely different ideology and goals. Hitler's Mein Kampf established the superiority of the German race and the need to expand as wanted by God. Hitler wanted the world. The government in Russia established by Lenin was based on a book called Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx, a call to the proletariate to unite and rebel against their selfish employers. It is my belief that Lenin had entirely good reasons for doing as he did, and felt he was helping the world as apposed to Adolf Hitler. Immediately after Lenin's death, a man very much the same in nature as Hitler, Stalin, came to control the Bolsheviks and throw Russia in a civil war in a quest for power. You now have two men of equal aspirations soon to be in control of two very similar governments. In any rise of power, there needs to be a period of careful planning requiring much thought. These two men had very little history with which to work with which to model their revolutions. Times had been changing rapidly, technological improvements in the fields of manufacturing, transportation, and communication made this period of time very different from any other. Hitler spent his time imprison writing his book, Mein Kampf, filling it full of warped ideas of conquest and superiority of one race over another. I think it is strange that such works would go unnoticed with nobody left to watch a man with such dangerous ideas. Lenin planned his revolution while in exile in Switzerland. Then he made a deal with the German government whereby he was hid on a train and passed through enemy Germany to Russia. The conclusions with respect to methods of acquiring power and controlling it when they did get it were very much the same. Both rulers had full run of their respective governments. Stalin was already dictator of Russia with his power and loyalty of the people guaranteed by the secret police, the Cheka. This entity provided Stalin with an easy means of destroying the opposition and weeding out the undesirable to be sent to prison camps in Siberia, a virtual death sentence. For Hitler to ascend to that level of power he rammed the Enabling Act through the German Congress which gave him the power to enact laws.