Summary: The analytical lens that will be constructed aims to allow for an interpretation of how students who are attempting to be upwardly-mobile are helped with moving beyond roadblocks that prevent mobility. This is mobility is achieved through a combination of adherence to meritocratic systems and the borrowing of cultural capital. I will argue that reproduction occurs when reliance on meritocracy in the educational system and the limited cultural capital of the student’s working-class parent/s are solely employed. In order to move beyond a mere reproduction of the parent’s social class, I argue that the student must interact with individuals or groups from higher social spheres who know how to activate cultural capital in specific instances …show more content…
This is rise to the top is achieved by all of those that are deserving, all who are able to demonstrate ability, despite their individual race, class, gender, or any other characteristic that is not based on merit. The purpose of a meritocracy, rather than a bureaucracy, is to form a class of elite individuals that are expected to be the most qualified in their line of work (Hayes 2012; 31, 53). In addition to assigning the best people to their respective positions, the meritocracy is also used to instill in people a sense of social belonging and order. When a person is placed in their respective class in society, it is done with careful precision that takes into account only the person’s true worthiness i.e. their merit (Young 1994; 97). The certainty of one’s place in a meritocracy leads to how this concept can be viewed as an …show more content…
It is not a neutral description of a system. The beliefs and values tell a story as to why things things are done in a particular way. People who are ruled in these systems are kept complacent. Every social system, including a meritocratic social system, has an ideology which functions to explain and justify its own existence as a way of life. The ideology of meritocracy reinforces the social system so that everyone is made to feel confident in their placement in society and accepts it without question. Individuals continue to work within the system because the narrative feels natural and unquestionable; they believe that it is working for the advantage of everyone. There is no way to test whether a system actually works which means that the system can neither be proven right or wrong. This unquestioning following happens for students at an early age which helps understand how Marx’s social reproduction theory
In Tokarczyk’s essay, “Promises to Keep: Working Class Students and Higher Education,” she claims that working class students face both academic and institutional barriers in getting college degrees. According to Tokarczyk, working class students usually lack preparation for post-secondary education, which she categorizes as an “academic barrier” (85). Problems such as school policies that are not designed for working class students, peers who are not able to understand the situations that they have, and faculty m...
Race becomes important because it is often the unconscious method of discrimination in the educational structure in Waretown. The Mexican-American girls who become upwardly mobile are seen as the exception. White girls who became upwardly mobile didn’t face any dissonant reactions when they achieved mobility because it was normalized of the white race. Mexican-American girls, however, did face dissonance because it was not typically expected of them. They would often fight the administration much more than white girls in order to avoid being placed on the vocational track and have to work harder to stay out of it. The exceptionality of these girls proves how important and influential cultural capital is in shaping class futures. Only a small fraction of working-class and Mexican-American girls were upwardly mobile, largely due to the fact that they didn’t have the needed cultural capital. There had to be intervening factors, such as sports, private schools, or siblings, in order for these girls to gain the cultural capital needed to be mobile. Without this cultural capital, many of the working-class girls would have had the same future as their parents and remained working class. Cultural capital becomes key for shaping class
Does it matter what your social and economical standings are, and do they play a role in if you will succeed in life? The importance of this essay was to talk about the different viewpoints and to argue the point of succeeding and social statuses. I
The term “merit,” however, is relatively ambiguous. By “merit,” the speaker could be indicating one or many qualities, including, but not limited to, virtue, achievement, a...
One of the factors that create an imbalance of power within a society is a person's socioeconomic status. Often people with low socioeconomic status are undervalued in society. This imbalance can cause issues with the feelings of security and confidence. Also opportunities and choices can be limited for some people, but expanded to others. People often identify with roles of different socioeconomic status groups, based on their own socioeconomic status, and this can limit creativity and the potential of groups or individuals. If the world believes that people can go from “rags to riches” in America, then there should be an opportunity for all socioeconomic groups.
However, to determine your place on the social ladder one needs economic and cultural reproduction. As DeMarrais and LeCompte state “wealth can be converted into social and cultural capital providing distinct non merit advantages that can be transferred to the children of the rich and powerful” (1999, 14). In other words, social capital and cultural capital are crucial assets. Likewise, as stated in The Meritocracy Myth “rather than viewing schooling as promoting democracy, social mobility, and equality, conflict theorists conceptualize schools as reproducing both the ideologies of the dominant social groups and the hierarchy of the class structure” (McNamee and Miller Jr. 2014,
The American Dream, the national promise of equal opportunity and the endless possibilities of economic mobility, has and is still deeply inculcated in American culture. However, there is less economic mobility in the United States than originally thought as proven by many studies of economists, and therefore refutes the basic ideas of the American Dream. Class, one of the major causes to the decrease in economic mobility, remains a sensitive subject in America. This sensitivity stems from popular culture ideals of not debating or discussing class as well as the many myths Americans and foreigners are trapped into believing. Variations in the American life-styles, a component of the ideas of class presented by Mantsios, is another factor to the reduction of economic mobility. This variation is mainly a result of the diversity in the United States and its heterogeneous society. Race, a social construct, is also a major source to economic mobility. Through the help of the media, society has shaped Americans into associating success and wealth with Caucasians, and failure and poverty with minorities. Another major cause to the decline in economic mobility is parental influence, the idea of a child following or straying away from their parent or guardian’s footsteps. Education, America’s token to success, also determines an individual’s economic mobility. In American culture, it is believed that by furthering or completing education automatically guarantees individuals endless opportunities to a job, increased income and upward mobility. In conclusion, class, race, parental influence and education are all interrelated factors to economic mobility.
Arguments about fairness and justice have been up for debate for centuries. "What do we deserve?", a question that has many individuals raising their brows to their efforts in their pursuit to achieve their goals. If it is said that we are all placed on an equal standard why are there individuals struggling to stay afloat? In Arora’s essay, he examines three forms of economic modals of social justices that question that idea of why the prosperous or the impecunious "deserve" their position or stature in life. Out of all of Arora's economic modals that he presents the Meritocratic System is the fairest because it gives everyone a fighting chance.
Members of racial minority groups like the majority aspire to possess material success in life but are void of the means to achieve those (McNulty & Bellair, 2003). The same can be said of the lower class, whose low socio-economic status limit their opportunities for tertiary education which could potentially be imperative in securing lucrative jobs (Curry & Spergel, 1988). Therefore, to satisfy their appetite for success, these people adapt to strain by treading the path of innovators- using illegitimate means to actualise their positively valued goals. Moreover, with global... ... middle of paper ... ...
In many cases the transition of class involves a lot more than hard work and opportunity. In the play A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry, the Younger family is faced with a situation where an opportunity to be prosperous comes at the price of pride. The grandmother talks to her son explaining how the American Dream is not worth losing your pride for, “Son – I come from five generations of people who was slaves and sharecroppers – but ain’t nobody in my family never let nobody pay ‘em no money that was a way of telling us we wasn’t fit to walk the earth. We ain’t never been that poor. (Raising her eyes and looking at him) We ain’t never been that – dead inside.” Slaves had little choice, but to keep their pride hidden; the Younger family now has the choice. This is the issue emphasized by grandmother; a shot at monetary success is not worth pride. However, because the Younger family did not take this opportunity they will be forced to continue working for other people, and even if they feel as though they are working hard little progress can be made. In the trouble with geniuses by Malcolm Gladwell he explores various explanation for the lack of correlation between intelligence and success. Gladwell cites a study preformed by sociologist Annette Lareau. In Lareau’s study she observed an advantage rooted in the
Nevertheless, our social structure isn’t a brick wall were individuals are trapped in there social class. We are still able with education and the opportunities to shape our lives and achieve our full potential. Harlon L. Dalton emulates the possibility within his story about Horatio Alger, “neither Alger nor the myth suggests that we start out equal. Nor does the myth necessarily require that we be given an equal opportunity to succeed. Rather, Alger’s point is that each of us has the power to create our own opportunities.”
Success. Society tends to correlate “success” with the obtainment of a higher education. But what leads to a higher education? What many are reluctant to admit is that the American dream has fallen. Class division has become nearly impossible to repair. From educations such as Stanford, Harvard, and UCLA to vocational, adult programs, and community, pertaining to one education solely relies on one’s social class. Social class surreptitiously defines your “success”, the hidden curriculum of what your socioeconomic education teaches you to stay with in that social class.
Develop an argument on or some ideas of understanding about curriculum as multicultural text by relating the works of Darling-Hammond, French, & Garcia-Lopez, Delpit, Duarte & Smith, Greene, Nieto and Sletter to your experience of curriculum, teaching, and learning as affirming diversity. You could think specifically about the following questions: Is there a need for diversity in curriculum studies and designs? Why? What measures do you think will be effective in incorporating such a need into curriculum studies and designs? What is the relevance of diversity to your career goal, to education in your family, community, and school, to education in Georgia, and to education in general? In which way can you develop a curriculum which helps cultivate empathy, compassion, passion, and hope for citizens of the world, and which fosters social justice?
In other words, one’s parents’ statuses and wealth would be able to triumph over others’ hard work and talents. With rising parental intervention, it would lead to an unequal balance in advantages placed on students due to the differing social classes of their parents. Parents with education are more likely to have a larger social capital with can help earn an edge for their child over their peers. Children of parents who are either part of an alumni association or parent volunteer would stand a higher chance of getting a spot in a renowned primary school. In the top primary and secondary schools, a lopsided number of students are from well-to-do and educated family backgrounds: 6 out of 10 live in private property, when only 2 out of 10 of Singaporeans overall do. Moving on to higher education, students with parents of higher statuses can depend on them to tap on their connections to help them climb up the social ladder such as securing an internship or job spot. This defeats the purpose of having a meritocratic education system as parents of the upper tier possess greater leverage due to their social capital which can determine their child’s future, instead of their own merits and capabilities.
The main non-merit factor which negates the theory of meritocracy is inheritance. Inheritance not only refers to the initial class placement at birth but in fact it also refers to the natural talents one is born with. “Inheritance refers more broadly to unequal starting points in a race to get ahead. The race to get ahead is like a relay race in which we inherit an initial starting point from parents” (McNamee and Miller 3). A person who is born into great wealth will definitely start way ahead of someone who belongs to a poor family. This basically means that someone from a rich family will have better opportunities in