sosiologi pendidikan

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of The Study According to Charles A. Ellwood in Subadi (2009: 64), education sociology is the science which aims to reveal the connections at all points between the educative process and social process. The sociology of education is the study of educational structures, processes, and practices from a sociological perspective. This means that the theories, methods, and the appropriate sociological questions are used to better understand the relationship between educational institutions and society, both at the micro and macro levels. The sociology of education is dominated by tension between those who regard it as a science and those who see it as an applied and policy-related discipline, and the tension is between the empirical and the normative, which is between the study of education scientifically as it is and the study of it in terms of what it ought to be. In the early history of the sociology of education, this distinction was sometimes reflected in the name used to describe the discipline. Those who saw the discipline as an objective science used the label “sociology of education,” and those who saw it in policy and reform terms used the label “educational sociology.” (Saha, 2008: 300) B. Problem Statement The problem statements of the study are as follows: How 1. Is historical sociology of education? 2. Are theoretical perspectives of structural functionalism? 3. Are theoretical perspectives of education and social reproduction? 4. Is sociology of education in Indonesia? 5. Are sociological research phenomenology and ethnography methods? C. Objective of The Study The objectives of the study are the following: To analyze 1. Historical sociology of education. 2. Theoretical perspectives of structural functionalism. 3. Theoretical perspectives of education and social reproduction. 4. Sociology of education in Indonesia. 5. Sociological research phenomenology and ethnography methods. D. Benefit of The Study The two benefits can be gained as follows: 1. Theoretical Benefit The study is projected to give contribution and information to the larger body of knowledge, an academic reference by other researchers to conduct the research, and particularly in the sociology of education studies in Indonesia. 2. Practical Benefit The study is expected to enrich the knowledge and experience of the writer and other students at Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta or other universities who interested in the sociology of education studies. CHAPTER II UNDERLYING THEORY A. Historical Sociology of Education Modern sociology was born out of the Industrial Revolution and the increasing awareness of radical shifts in the social structure of society, in particular in Europe and England. But it was during this period that education as we know it was also expanding, so that in a way, industrialization and educational expansion went hand in hand. Education did enter into the writings of the early classical sociologists, although not always in well thought-out forms. Karl Marx (1818–1883) never fully developed or integrated education into his theory of capitalism and social class. But he and Fredrick Engels did refer to education frequently in their writings about the class struggle. They advocated education for all, but they were primarily concerned with the type of education that was given to the children of the working classes and how this education served the interests of the ruling class, the bourgeoisie, in maintaining their social dominance. Although Marx did not focus directly on education in his theory of society, his ideas have formed the base of what later would become known as neo-Marxist sociology of education. This perspective is very much related to forms of reproduction theory, in which education is thought to serve as a mechanism for reproducing the class structure of society, there by reproducing the privileges of the dominant class. Max Weber (1864–1920) is not normally regarded for his focus on education in his early sociological writings. Nevertheless, his theory of social structure and the interplay between social class, social status, and power did acknowledge the importance of the mechanisms through which one social group could maintain its position in society. Credentials that reflected the possession of knowledge were one way in which individuals could make a legitimate claim for membership in particular class, status, or power groups. It follows implicitly that education, as a mechanism for the development and transmission of knowledge, is an important social institution in this stratification process. The notion of education as a source of knowledge and its manifestation in educational credentials was also important in Weber’s notion of bureaucracy and the increasing rationality of society. Weber believed that European society was developing a new kind of organization as forms of societal authority changed from traditional structures (for example, a monarchy) to rational structures (an elected Parliament). He thought this shift permeated the economic facets of society and particularly society’s productive sectors. Industry and manufacturing gradually shifted from domestic and cottage production to factory production and this required a new form of organizational structure called “the bureaucracy,” or a type of hierarchical authority structure based on rational and legal rules. For Weber, the bureaucracy represented “the purest type of legal authority,” and the concept has since become the foundation for sociological studies of organizations in modern society. Weber’s ideas have had a major effect on studies of the social organization of schools, and within them, the roles of principal and teachers and the hierarchical relationships between them. The study of teachers as professionals and B. Theoretical Perspectives Structural Functionalism This theoretical orientation views society as a complex interconnected system of parts that work together in harmony. “… This approach points to the importance of social structure, any relatively stable pattern of social behavior. Secondly, this approach looks for any structure’s social function, the consequences of any social pattern for the operation of society as a whole” (Macionis 2006: 12-13). Structural Functionalists approach society from a macro-level perspective; they view society and its pieces as a whole. Major sociological theorists or contributors to this theoretical approach include: Auguste Comte (considered the founder of sociology); Emile Durkheim; Herbert Spencer; Talcott Parsons; and Robert Merton. C. Theoretical Perspectives Education and Social Reproduction The concept of intelligence is rooted in entrenched cultural models and has significant effects on individuals through their implicit theories about themselves, others and the world (Kunda, 1999; Malle, 2004). When regarding the concept of intelligence, one notion is that children at school learn about intelligence as a way of determining who will be fit for intellectual labour in contrast to those who won’t (Beach, 1999, 2001). These sorting processes seem to be systematically related to social class (Ostrove & Cole, 2003; Beach & Dovemark, 2009). As Parker (2007) states, capitalist society is still (globally) dependent on an economic underclass for symbolic and economic exploitation. Moreover, this underclass still comprises the majority of the global population and schools are significant institutions in relation to the discursive construction, ideological justification, normalisation and social reproduction of this class (Beach & Dovemark, 2005, 2007, 2009). This applies even in a society like Sweden, which presents itself to others and even to itself as middle class, as if the under-class of workers were just an unfortunate minority. There is a contradiction between the image of a middle class society for everyone, in the current Swedish conception of it, and the reality of a working class society without stable work for many people who are then also forced to live out naïve beliefs about what is wrong with them. Teachers and schools play an important role as the makers and mediators of judgments about intellectual achievement. According to Ahmavaara and Houston (2007), Gould (1996) and Pramling and Saljo (2007) these judgements rest on a foundation of specific scientific theories of intelligence such as for example Spearman’s (1904) scientific theory of intelligence, the two-factor theory or the more recent Cattell-Horn-Carrol (CHC) theory, one of several variants of g-factor theory (Ackerman & Lohman, 2006 and for an elaborated discussion of the two-factors/one-factor model see for example Sternberg, 2004). These theories are important in that they explicitly state that intelligence is naturally inborn and in essence a more or less unchangeable entity that you either have or do not have. They make the assumption of a natural ability amongst children as something that is understood as fixed, unevenly distributed among the population, difficult in itself to influence and continually operational in classrooms as the key factor that lies behind differential and differentiating educational performances in schools today (Beach, 1999, 2001, 2003). This way of sorting children in school forces each child to live its failures, as something from which they are alienated‟, as something, deep within themselves‟ and as something which they can neither comprehend nor escape from (Parker, 2007, p. 3). The school as an institution plays an important role today in the constitution of this class. First in a selection process by means of which the people that make it up are judged as incapable of intellectual achievement and categorised to perform manual labour in a majority middle class society. Secondly through the projection of a dominant ideology about how the differences that are seen can be made sense of and understood in a manner that does not destabilise the foundations for the existing social order. The role of the school in the creation, justification and reproduction of social class involves, indeed relies upon, teachers acting as intermediaries and mediators of distinct social values that are communicated to pupils, about life, learning, knowledge, intelligence, themselves and their abilities and capabilities (Beach, 1999, 2001; Beach & Dovemark, 2005). D. Sociology of Education in Indonesia E. Sociological Research Methods CHAPTER III CLOSURE According to Charles A. Ellwood in Subadi (2009: 64), education sociology is the science which aims to reveal the connections at all points between the educative process and social process. This theoretical orientation views society as a complex interconnected system of parts that work together in harmony. “… This approach points to the importance of social structure, any relatively stable pattern of social behavior. Secondly, this approach looks for any structure’s social function, the consequences of any social pattern for the operation of society as a whole” (Macionis 2006: 12-13). Structural Functionalists approach society from a macro-level perspective; they view society and its pieces as a whole. Moreover, this underclass still comprises the majority of the global population and schools are significant institutions in relation to the discursive construction, ideological justification, normalisation and social reproduction of this class (Beach & Dovemark, 2005, 2007, 2009). This applies even in a society like Sweden, which presents itself to others and even to itself as middle class, as if the under-class of workers were just an unfortunate minority. There is a contradiction between the image of a middle class society for everyone, in the current Swedish conception of it, and the reality of a working class society without stable work for many people who are then also forced to live out naïve beliefs about what is wrong with them. Teachers and schools play an important role as the makers and mediators of judgments about intellectual achievement. The role of the school in the creation, justification and reproduction of social class involves, indeed relies upon, teachers acting as intermediaries and mediators of distinct social values that are communicated to pupils, about life, learning, knowledge, intelligence, themselves and their abilities and capabilities (Beach, 1999, 2001; Beach & Dovemark, 2005). BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerman, P. L., & Lohman, D. F. 2006. Individual differences in cognitive functions (pp. 139-161). In P.A. Alexander & P.H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. London: LEA. Ahmavaara, A., & Houston, D. 2007. The effects of selective schooling and self-concept on adolescents‟ academic aspiration: An examination of Dweck‟s self-theory. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 613-632. Beach, D. 1999. Alienation and fetish in science education. Scandinavian Journal of Education Research, 43(2), 157-172. Beach, D. 2001. Alienation, reproduction and fetish in Swedish education. In G. Walford (Ed) Ethnography and Education Plicy. (Studies in Education Ethnography Volume 4). New York: Elsevier. Beach, D. 2003. Mathematics goes to market. In D. Beach, T. Gordon, & E. Lahelma (Eds.), Democratic Education: Ethnographic Challenges. London: Tufnell Press. Gould, S. J. 1996. The mismeasure of man. London: W. W. Norton & Company Ltd. Kunda, Z. 1999. Social cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Malle, B. F. 2004. How the mind explains behaviour: Folk explanations, meaning, and social interaction. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Ostrove, J. M. & Cole, E. R. 2003. Privileging class: Toward a critical psychology of social class in the context of education. Journal of Social Issues, 59 (4), 677-692. Parker, I. 2007. Revolution in psychology Alienation to emancipation. London: Pluto Press Pramling, N., & Saljo, R. 2007. Scientific knowledge, popularization, and the use of metaphors: Modern genetics in popular science magazines. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51 (3), 275-295. Spearman, C. 1904. “General intelligence”, objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201-293. Sternberg, J. R. 2004. International handbook of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Subadi, Tjipto. 2009. Sosiologi dan Sosiologi Pendidikan Suatu Kajian Boro dari Perspektif Sosiologis Fenomenologis. Solo: Fairuz Media Duta Pertama Ilmu. Macionis, John J. 2006. Society: The Basics, Eighth Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.