In the 20th century Norbert Elias suggested that as a society we do not understand how to help children enter into such a complex and unchildish society such as ours, which demands a high degree of foresight and self-control. Elias also looks at whether children can survive the individual civilising process without being stunted for their chances of joy and pleasure. But, surely it can be argued that given the modern form of education and the wide net our society entraps, that the adults and parents of society have enough insight and knowledge to educate and guide children into society, in a calm and playful manner. Or has the increased level of technology such as the internet where the child and adult can develop and even express themselves …show more content…
He believed that people are becoming independent on society and this is leading to an increase in self-restraint, in all aspects of life, from the concealment of the body, to the use of knives and forks. But he also believed that it was not linear and rarely consistent (Fisher, 2012). With this in mind how in society are we supposed to educate and prepare children for society. And, what is their fundamental use within today’s society and how does it compare with that of the middle …show more content…
Children were not separated from society as they seem to be today. However, with the changes in living standards brought about in the 19th century and the separation of the child from the adult’s life, placed a glass wall (Elias, 1998:197) between the parent and child, not only segregating the child from society but also making the society in which we live in today an unchildish one. In today’s society ‘children are a mystery to their parents,’ (Elias, 1998:190) and this has made it difficult for adults and parents to teach children what they understand about today’s society. In previous centuries, much of society was structured on class and race, yet this system of hierarchy seems to have faded and it can be argued that we now live in a meritocratic society. This means that how well you do in society, in terms of work or education, states where you are in society. This idea of a meritocracy is not child friendly. If society has therefore become unchildish how can we prepare children for it as it is not designed for
Louise Gluck and Robert Koertge convey how dividing education can be between mothers and children, teachers and children, and children
Nurturing and guiding the next generation, immediately from the beginning of this arduous journey, becomes a battle of ideology and principles among its participants. In her article titled “The Overprotected Kid,” journalist Hanna Rosin advocates that children should be free to experience the environment around them, a “‘free and permissive atmosphere’ with as little adult supervision as possible,” while lawyer and author Amy Chua seemingly argues, “it is crucial to override their preferences,” in the Wall Street Journal’s article, “Why Chinese Mothers are Superior,” an excerpt from Chua’s book, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother.” Solely between these two extremes of exploratory freedom versus strict seclusion, in this age of technological dependence,
In Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life, Annette Lareau discussed the extensive amount of research she conducted employing observational and interview techniques. She collected data on the middle class, working class, and poor families. She was trying to understand the impact of a child’s early parental guidance on the child’s life. She was able to conduct this research with 12 families, all of whom had fourth graders. She gathered enough information to conclude the major differences in the parenting styles of each type of family, which was directly correlated to socioeconomic status. Annette Lareau opens her book with two chapters to give the reader an idea on what the examples she gives will detail.
Putnam refers to this segregation as “residential sorting”, and states that, “residential sorting by income [.] has shunted high-income and low-income students into separate schools,” (163). Rich parents want their kids in the best schools, with the best teachers and the best peers, and are able to afford living in the right areas to send their kids to the right schools. Overall, Robert Putnam’s Our Kids presents an interesting argument about the class inequality in America and the resulting opportunity gap between the upper and lower class. He points out the differences between upper class and lower class family life: upper class have more successful marriages and are better prepared for the bear children, and so their children are better off than the lower class children (61-79).
MANLINESS AND CIVILIZATION : A CULTURAL HISTORY OF GENDER AND RACE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1880-1917. BY Gail Benderman.
Unequal Childhoods overall is a great book with many strengths and very few weaknesses. Lareau’s book has much depth because she was with these families morning, day, and night, and observed the each family’s daily routine firsthand. It is very impressive that she was able to conduct the study by observing these families so closely but never directly getting involved with what was going on. Lareau would sometimes interview the families’ and record their answers so accurately because it was crucial to the study to get every word they were
Juveniles are being taught that in order to have a nice car, branded cloths and the house of their dreams, by getting into an expensive mortgage, they have to be an employee of a huge corporation. In addition, they have to undergo to a prestigious school, study hard, have excellent grades in order to become popular and respectable in the world. However, many people would not become those super leaders, but these majority of people have a great role in the capitalism society of the US. As Gatto says, “We buy televisions, and then we buy the things we see on the television. We buy computers, and then we buy the things we see on the computer. We buy $150 sneakers whether we need them or not, and when they fall apart too soon we buy another pair” (38). Such results are in part of a wrong education that teenagers have received trough many decades. In addition, Gatto highlights that modern educational system has been working in a six basic functions methods that makes the system strong and unbreakable: The adjustable function, indulge students to respect authorities. The integrating function, which builds the personality of the students as similar to each other as possible. The diagnostic and directive function, which allows a school to set permanent scholar grades in order to determinate his or her future role in society. The differentiating function, which gives to the student a good education and after his or her role is diagnosed, they prevent any educational progress. The selective function, function that the system has used to prevent academic growth for the non-selected students. The propaedeutic function, which works in the selection of specific groups of intellectual adults to keep perpetuating the system all over again making it a continuous sequence. (Gatto 34). Gatto’s facts revealed the survival of the educational system for decades,
...oming to an understanding of the daily struggles of every person, who attempts to raise a child in the American society. Inferring from the book, the extent to which the scholar discusses race as a key influence of childhood inequality is not as extended as that of social class. This is clear evidence that the Lareau dwells much on social class as the principal and prevalent theme in the American society towards parenting and child bearing (4). Indeed, at some point, Lareau reports that while race produces childhood inequality, most outcomes for children, from interactions to education, largely depends with social stratification (4). Therefore, she discusses that social class is more influential in relation to race.
what he noticed about how Americans use non-verbal communication. He said that it is very easy to tell when something is bothering us or we are excited about something. We as Americans follow Albert Mehrabian’s thought on non-verbal communication and show our emotions more with gestures. This was something I learned from the interview because I was not aware of this culture aspect we as Americans hold.
Meritocracy, unlike aristocracy, is the system in which talented people are rewarded and promoted to leadership positions based on their merit. According to James Whitehurst, meritocracy “now refers to organizations where the best people and ideas win.” However, as true as it may sound, meritocracy in America is still a myth and is not a certainty. In the article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack,” McIntosh’s disdain of meritocracy when she described as “I must give up the myth of meritocracy.” She mentioned the meritocracy myth because in reality, many people who lack talents and experience can still climb the upward mobility ladder and become wealthier while the rest of
Turkle argues that technology has fundamentally changed how people view themselves and their lives (271). She reports that, “BlackBerry users describe that sense of encroachment of the device on their time. One says, ‘I don’t have enough time alone with my mind’; another, ‘I artificially make time to think…’” (274). Her point is that people have to make a deliberate choice to disconnect, to exist in their own mind rather than the virtual world (Turkle 274). Another point Turkle brings up is that in this technologic age children are not learning to be self- reliant. Without having the experience of being truly alone and making their own decisions, children are not developing the skills they once did (Turkle 274). As Turkle reports, “There used to be a moment in the life of an urban child, usually between 12 and 14, when there was a first time to navigate the city alone. It was a rite of passage that communicated, ‘you are on your own and responsible.
Class is something that is often defined by ones income, job, and family background, the area in which they live or indeed the schools or universities they have chosen to attended. This criteria is used to label people as a certain class and is something that can be seen in education through the likes of theories such as cultural capital. In this essay I am going to compare and contrast differences between middle and working class experiences of education focusing on two main theories; Cultural capital and social reproduction. I am going to concentrate upon the primary sector in oppose to secondary or higher education due to the fact I believe that primary school is where most children develop their personalities which they carry with them in further life and it is their first academic experience; therefore it is where social class first becomes clearly noticeable. In relation to these theories I am going to research into the argument that parents have a strong influence on their child’s education from this young age.
James, Jenks and Prout (1998) argue that childhood is characterised by sets of cultural values whereby the ‘…western childhood has become a period of social dependency, asexuality, and the obligation to be happy, with children having the right to protection and training but not to social or personal autonomy’ (James, Jenks and Prouts 1998 pg. 62). Here, childhood is described in sets of distinguished features and these features imply that the concept childhood may vary from place, culture and time. Therefore suggesting that there is no fixed or universal experience of childhood, for example, childhood in the medieval UK will be extremely different to the childhood in modern UK and therefore it varies over time, place and culture. Since the definition and state of childhood may vary depending on our cultural and historical background, some sociologist claim that childhood is not just biological, but must have been socially constructed for a specific society needs at a particular time. In this essay, I will attempt to explore ways in which childhood is said to be socially constructed by looking at historical childhood and how it has led to construction of modern childhood in the modern society. I will also explore the agency of children as competent social actors able to construct their social world.
This paper will critically discuss the ‘disappearance of childhood’ debate which centres on electronic media and consider why such a debate has come into existence. This essay will critically discuss both sides of the debate that is the disappearance proponents and those who are more optimistic about the effects of technology on the lives of children. In response to both arguments, I will propose that there is a new concept of childhood which has evolved throughout history; this concept is one of changing childhoods for a whole variety of reasons. It is noteworthy that these arguments are developed from American and European opinions and do not necessarily reflect the experience of children internationally.
Everyone is born into some form of family, with the family taking the responsibility of nurturing, teaching the norms or accepted behaviors within the family structure and within society. There are many types of families, which can be described as a set of relationships including parents and children and can include anyone related by blood or adoption. Family is the most important, “for it is within the family that the child is first socialized to serve the needs of the society and not only its own needs” (Goode, 1982).