1. Social Immobility in the Land of Opportunity
Achievement Ideology
Ø US society as open, fair competition --full of opportunity Ø success based on merit, hard work, effort Ø inequality due to diff in ambition & ability
Reality, as opposed to ideology: For every Andrew Carnegie, there are thousands of also rans who are no less able than Carnegie was
MacLeod uses in-depth qualitative research in order to get at the complicated process by which:
LEVELED ASPIRATIONS BECOME POWERFUL MECHANISMS BY WHICH CLASS INEQUALITY IS REPRODUCED FROM GENERATION TO THE NEXT
SOCIAL REPRODUCTION THEORY
Ø how is the class structure reproduced?
Ø What unseen social forces daily influence children, young adults, working adults?
Ø How do they understand their own prospects?
Ø What are the complex and contradictory msgs that come from family, peers, work, school?
Ø How is it that schooling operates, not as the great equalizer, but as the great reproducer of class inequality?
Ø How is it that the poor and working classes are at a decided disadvantage in the competition for jobs? (On the flip side, how are the middle classes advantaged or privileged?)
Ø Different types of reproduction theorists: ranging from structural determinists to culturalist who pay more attention to individual agency
Chap 2: Social Reproduction in Theoretical Perspective
I. Bowles & Gintis
Ø Structural Marxists, a variation of Conflict Sociology · sees society as an arena of inequality that generates conflict and change. · the focus is on structured social distinctions based on gender, class, race that result in an unequal distribution of power, wealth, status, well being, and life chances or opportunities for attaining these. Ø See school as a mirror of the relations of capitalist production; reflect needs of capitalist society:
Ø Schools also do the work of creating workers for the capitalist system
Ø Similarities in structure of schooling w/ the structure of work:
1. organization of power and authority 2. lack of student control over the curriculum 3. grades=wages 4. specialization of knowledge; competitiveness; fragmentation; division of labor
Critique: B&G's analysis does not explain why the system of schooling affects kids differently
II. Bourdieu: Cultural Capital and Habitus
modified structuralist; incorporates insights of Weber (society as negotiation) and Durkheim (society as organism)
Cultural Capital:
Ø a kind of invisible knapsack we carry around which carries the tools we need to negotiate the socio-cultural order
Ø composed of cultural background, knowledge, disposition, skills, cultural or sociological competencies appropriate for the social location w/in which one is born
Ø Schools reward those w/ the cultural capital associated w/ middle and upper middle class habitus Major Premises:
1. cultural capital distinctive to each class and transmitted accordingly 2. school values more highly upper class cultural capital; denigrates that of the lower classes 3. the job market rewards the academic credentials that are thus rather unproblematically acquired by the already privileged 4. school legitimates the process through tracking and other devices that tend to rank students--ostensibly according to merit--but actually according to class location.
Habitus:
Ø composed of the attitudes, beliefs, experiences of those inhabiting one's social world. Deeply internalized values defines one's social world.
Ø Aspirations reflect one's view of chances for getting ahead and are an internalization of objective probabilities
Ø "The habitus is the universalizing mediation which shapes one's ideas and practices such that they appear sensible, reasonable, and common sense
Ø Functions as a regulator between individuals and their external world
Macleod (16) Thus success or failure in school is determined largely by social class. But cloaked in the language of meritocracy, academic performance is, indeed, the result of ability by both high and low achievers. Not because the low achievers are indeed less intelligent or meritorious. Rather, it is because they have learned--via their habitus--to achieve the place in life.
III. Paul Willis: Learning to Labor Ø moves far away from structuralism, toward a more individualist/culturalist position
[gives explanatory power to culture and the social innovations of the individual]
Ø Investigates the counterculture of the school--led by the lads--who reject the achievement ideology and refuse to conform. They disrupt class, mock the good students, and subvert authority.
Ø They don't believe that they have any remote chances at upward mobility and so they'd rather have a good time, than to take school seriously
Ø Resistance: Their behavior suggests that they resist because they recognize the pretentions behind the ideology.
However, their resistance is coopted and their class location is reinscribed by other values: manual labor over mental labor. Hence, they value the dead end jobs that they end up taking on.
IV. Henry Giroux: Student Resistance to School
Ø adopts a middle range position between structuralism and individualism
In the structuralist perspective humans are registered as the effects or products of structure that appear to work with the certainty of biology. People are simply seen as bearers of roles already laid out for them.
Culturalists pay too little attention to how social structures presses down on human experience and determines much of people's lives.
Ø Resistance
· a response to the educational system, a response rooted in 'moral and political indignation'
· But the analysis needs to proceed carefully because not all forms of opposition are significant, not all stem from a more or less conscious critique of schooling.
· The violation of a school rule is not by itself radical or resistance unless committed by someone who actually sees through the veneer of the schools' achievement ideology
V. Resistance Theory: examines the ongoing, active experiences of individuals while also perceiving in oppositional practices a response to structures of constraint and domination.
Macleod locates his research within these theoretical debates and asks about the value of each of them and what the Hallway Hangers and the Brothers have to say to these theories:
1. If social structure is so overwhelming, why do two different groups of boys respond so differently?
2. How much autonomy do they have in response to structural constraints/ Why?
Examines the ways in which social structure is reproduced and views "occupational aspirations as a mediating link between social structure (what society offers) and individuals at the cultural level (what one wants)"
CHAP 3: CLARENDON HEIGHTS: The Hallway Hangers and the Brothers
The Hallway Hangers: "You Gotta Be Bad"
-Inverts the dominant culture's value system -masculinity, toughtness, streetwise -sanctions against good grades & commitment to school -drugs and drinking -capping--playing the dozens -solidarity to member of the hangers -petty theft, drug dealing, gambling, hustling -racial antipathy (stems from feelings of economic competition)
NOTE: MacLeod does not absolve them of responsibility for their racism. But, he also wishes to make sure that we consider this racism from a sociological perspective. "we must also blame the economic and social condition of lower-class life"
While they recognize the stigma associated with the hangers, But they take pride in it. Still there is an ambiguity in this pride:
Their pride is perceived by the dominant culture's negative judgment: that they are personally deficient. They cannot completely shield themselves from this negative evaluation. The result is that they feel a deep ambivalence toward themselves, their peers, their community.
The Brothers: Conspicuous by their conventionality
Conform to the dominant culture's value system:
-do not just hang -resist drugs and alcohol -hold down jobs -work hard at school -conform to authority -peer group is not as solidaristic -girls are the main object of their attentions -some involved in sports -reject the Hangers attitudes -weak hierarchy, not based on physical toughness
Chap 4 The Influence of the Family
Hangers:
Fathers?: while not dominant, a significant proportion of boys come from fatherless households
Education? low attainment--most didn't graduate from high school
Occupational histories of parents & siblings? manual laborers, menial, low paying sporadic employment
Tenancy in public housing?: most have lived in public housing for years
They respect parental authority and it appears that parents accord a great deal of autonomy and decision making to the members of the Hangers.
Parents don't seem to be involved in their lives and exercise minimal authority over them
Indicate that parents don't encourage high aspirations for fear that they will be dashed ___________________________________________________________
Brothers: typical of lower class households and much like Hangers
Fathers? --most come from single mother households --there does seem to be some father figures involved (extended kin network)
Education?--low attainment but still most graduated from high school
Occupational History? unskilled, menial labor
Tenancy? much shorter than Hangers
Parents are quite involved in their lives and exercise quite a bit of authority
Hold them to high aspirations in terms of education and occupation, who may be projecting their own educational and occupational aspirations.
Chap 5: The World of Work
The Hangers: Keeping a Lid on Hope
"The notion of a career, a set of jobs that are connected to one another in a logical progression has little relevance"
Work is simply work. Something one must do. It is a necessity, but not something one cultivates. It is simply given and inevitably boring, undifferentiated, unrewarding
WHY are the aspirations leveled w/ regard to work? · they don't appear to have low perceptions of their abilities · they question the view, dominant in the US, that social mobility is open to those who work hard and earn their place in the economic structure · their experience contradicts dominant ideology (family, community, friends) Plenty of folks are capable, talented, hard working. Still they don't have good jobs let alone well paying jobs · they recognize that the job market is not based on merit, but who you know
The Brothers: Ready at the Starting Line
· views are consistent with dominant ideology: failure is a personal rather than social problem · devalue manual labor · have modestly high aspirations and can envision themselves as upwardly mobile (compared w/ Hangers) · they view the Hangers as losers b/c they are personally deficient; opportunity structure is open to all who exert effort and exhibit talent
Chap 6: School: Preparing for the competition
While Hangers see the race as rigged from the start, the Brothers see the race as essentially fair.
"Before we analyze how the same race can be viewed (differently), we must investigate how the two peer groups prepare for the competition. School is the training ground....As we might expect, the boys who plan to run the race competitively approach their training in a fundamentally different way than do those who already have conceded defeat"
Lincoln High offers · four regular academic houses · our alternative programs Ø Enterprise Co-op, career oriented for dropouts and potential DOs
ØThe Pilot School, less regimented, collaborative learning environment, creative community
ØFundamental School, more regimentation, discipline
ØAchievement School, intensive compensatory education in basic academics
· Occupational Education Program
· Building Trades & Services Program (BTS) Ø high rise students w/ disciplinary problems
Ø basic academics supplemented by course in carpentry, building trades
Ø stigmatized program
· Adjustment Class
Ø for those labeled emotionally disturbed
Ø counseling
Ø smaller classes
Ø run by Jimmy Sullivan, a man seen as much like his students in his dismissive attitudes toward the rest of the members of Lincoln High
Ø Promotes physical prowess, esp. through martial arts
Ø flexible program focusing on rudimentary skills at the fifth grade level
Ø half day spent at school, rest working or....
Ø very informal, pass/fail approach. minimal demands placed on students
TRACKING:
Students abilities are determined and they are then placed in 'tracks' accordingly, grouped together w/ those of similar abilities (general, intermediate, advanced) This tracking takes place in academic as well as vocational programs
While The Brothers exhibit conformity and compliance, the Hangers are considered a "teacher's nightmare"
Ø demonstrate little motivation; reject dominant ideology of schooling; lack of commitment
Ø fail to see the connection between schooling and work as anything but arbitrary
Ø undisciplined, less bright (according to school)
WHY the discrepancy? The Underlying logic of student behavior.
Achievement Ideology: teachers attempt to secure discipline by reinforcing the achievement ideology: "Behave, work hard, good grades, good job, lots of money."
Rests on Two Assumptions:
1. efficacy of schooling--the notion that academic performance is the link to economic success
2. the existence of equality of opportunity
Brothers: Faith in Achievement Ideology, and according the efficacy of schooling and equality of opportunity
Ø Work hard but still seem unable to do as well as they'd like
Ø They are not, though, demonstrably less talented or gifted than Macleod or his classmates
Ø Despite setbacks, they continue to try hard--though their self esteem is clearly affected
Hangers: Spurn Achievement Ideology
Ø don't see themselves headed for jobs that require an education; see little value in school
Ø Some don't see school as a pay off for ANYBODY; though most do know that some do make it because of school (Billy)
Ø job experience seems more relevant
Ø immediate income also seems imperative
Ø present as opposed to future oriented
WHY?
Ø obvious answers: lack of self discipline, dull wit, laziness, inability to consider the future
Ø nonobvious answer: they are making a rather rational choice to work and make money and gain experience rather than commitment themselves to an education which they see as having little currency.
Ø they are skilled in the values of the street and the skills necessary for survival, but these are not valued in the school and, in fact, they're devalued and penalized
Ø Hangers also reject the middle class lives and values of many of the teachers. (Like Jimmy b/c he's streetwise and street oriented)
Ø antipathy toward middle class teachers has been revealed in other studies
Chap 7: Leveled Aspirations--Social Reproduction takes its toll
"That many boys in both groups do not even aspire to middle class jobs is a powerful indication of how class inequality is reproduced in American society. These youths prospects for socioeconomic advancement are doomed before they even get started; most of the boys do not even get a foothold on the ladder of social mobility."
What contributes to the process of social reproduction of leveled aspirations:
Ø tracking in schools which relegates students to pre planned paths that funnel them into certain jobs
Ø the norms of the school which reward middle class values and behavior and penalize others
Ø the process whereby individuals come to accept their own position and the inequalities of the social order as legitimate. They internalize the blame for their failure and their potential criticism is quelled and deflected toward themselves rather than the social system
How is this reproduction possible in the absence of force and coercion, in an ostensibly free society?
Ideology is the primary mechanism whereby individuals come to accept dominant ideologies even in the face of countervailing evidence to the contrary.
WEBER: Ideology is the 'myth' by which the powerful ensure belief in the validity of their domination
"Every highly privileged group develops the myth of its natural superiority. Under conditions of stable distribution of power...that myth is accepted by the negatively privileged strata."
MARX: Ideology is actually 'false consciousness'--an apparently true but essentially illusory set of views that disguises and distorts the true workings of the capitalist system. It operates so that the ruling class might presere expoitative relations in capitalist societies which favor those already in power. The current relations appear legitimate
The ruling class "is compelled...to represent its interest as the common interest of all members of society....It has to give its ideas the form of universality, and represent them as the only rational, universally valid ones"
Hangers: Internalizing probabilities, rescuing self-esteem
Are the Hangers falsely conscious?
Ø in a sense, NO, because they do not by the achievement ideology completely
Ø they see a ladder w/ no rungs on it or none they can reach
Explanations for their leveled aspirations:
1. Bowles & Gintis: socialized for their jobs hold true when considering the tracking system
Ø they internalize their objective probabilities in the race
Ø the school does not do so consciously and actively but rather unconsciously and passively
Ø that is, the school simply allows existing differences to unfold and the differences are magnified
How does this happen?
a. The tracking system rests on decisions largely made by students and their parents and its not clear that they actually have the skills and knowledge to assess the different programs or their abilities and accuities. They are only in eighth grade
b. there is some reason to believe that teachers and counselors steer them
MacLeod's objection to the internalization of objective prob thesis:
MacLeod rejects this thesis b/c it does not account for human agency, creativity, and freedom --particularly when considering the influence of the peer group
Instead, he argues that the peer group becomes an important mechanism for protecting the boys from the negative valuations of the larger culture.
The peer group become the context within which they can shore up their self esteem, self respect and dignity
The peer group, then, subverts and inverts the dominant value system
BUT, because they cannot fully escape the dominant culture, they are led to internalize the blame. Hence the oscillation between bravado and shame, between streetwise rejection of dominant ideology and self blame, between an assessment of the social structure as the problem and an assessment of themselves and their inadequacies as the problem
"The Hangers see through parts of the achievement ideology, but at some level they accept the aspersions it casts on lower class individuals...However, although the Hangers do not escape emotional injury, neither does the social order emerge unscathed. In the eyes of the Hangers, the opportunity structure is not open, a view that prevents them from accepting their position and the inequalities of the social order as completely legitimate"
lecture notes from Jay MacLeod's Ain't No Makin' It
Kelley
"i also would like an academic job. i am not very good at much else, plus i don't like following others' orders (and don't do it very well) or getting up in the morning for a 9 to 5. the idea of not being able to get an academic job makes me a little nervous since this is exactly why i went into a grad program." --Sarah M. Pitcher, Syracuse University (quoted w/ permission)