EDM 6210
Education Policy and Society
Lecture 6
Education Policy and Social Differentiation:
Theorizing Social Inequality and Stratification
A. Inequality and Stratification as Social Institution
1. Durability or even inevitability of social inequality in human society
2. Universality and resilience of social inequality in human society
3. Studies of the durability and resilience of unequal human relationship in
modern society: Theorizing social inequality and stratification
4. “Stratification system refers the complex of social institutions that generate
inequalities… The key components of such systems are (1) the institutional
processes that define certain types of goods as valuable and desirable, (2)
the rules of allocation that distribute these goods across various positions or
occupations in the division of labor, (3) the mobility mechanisms that link
individuals to occupations and thereby generate control over valued
resources.” (Grusky, 1994, p.3)
5. Education and social stratification
a. Education as process of distributing educational inequality and
subsequently socioeconomic inequality
b. Education as the rule of the game (i.e. institution) defining and
legitimatizing educational and socioeconomic inequality
c. Education as the mobility mechanism of redistributing and/or reproducing
educational inequality
6. The institutional contradictions of education in modern society
a. The structural contradiction of modern schooling system
i. Inequality: The structural imperative of capitalist class structure on the
output of education system
ii. Equality: The structural imperative of democratic citizenship on the
process of education system
b. The functional contradiction of modern schooling system
i. Schooling is to prepare children to be employable, effective, efficient
and competitive labor in capitalist-global market
ii. Schooling is to prepare children to be free, equal, rational and
articulating citizen in liberal-democracy
B. Social Inequality: A Social Phenomenon
1. Wright’s definition and typology of inequality
a. “To speak of a social inequality is to describe some valued attributes which
can be distributed across the relevant units of a society in different
quantities, where ‘inequality’ therefore implies that different units process
different amount of the this attribute.” (Wright, 1994, p.21)
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
1
b. Typology of inequality
Form of the Unequal Attributes
Form of the Process
of Distribution of
Attribute
Relational
Monadic
Relational
Power
Income
Monadic
Talent
Height
2. Grusky’s forms of social inequality: David B. Grusky categorizes social
inequality in accordance with the types of assets in allocation
B. Social Stratification: A Social Institution
1. Grusky’s definition
“Stratification system refers the complex of social institutions that generate
inequalities… The key components of such systems are (1) the institutional
processes that define certain types of goods as valuable and desirable, (2)
the rules of allocation that distribute these goods across various positions or
occupations in the division of labor, (3) the mobility mechanisms that link
individuals to occupations and thereby generate control over valued
resources.” (Grusky, 1994, p.3)
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
2
2. Conceptual dimensions of social stratification study
a. The degree of inequality: It refers to the extent of dispersion or
concentration of a given of assets (i.e. income)across the individuals in the
population.
b. The rigidity of stratification: It refers to “continuity (over time) in the social
standing of its members. The stratification system is said to be highly rigid,
for example, if the current wealth, power, or prestige of individuals can be
accurately predicted on the basis of their statuses or those of their
parents.” (Grusky, 1994, p. 5-6)
c. Crystallization of inequality: It refers to the extent of correlations among the
various assets in a given society. “If these correlations are strong, then the
same individuals (the ‘upper class’) will consistently appear at the top of all
status hierarchies, and other individuals (the ‘lower class’) will consistently
appear at the bottom of the stratification systems.” (Grusky, 1994, p. 6)
d. Ascription vs. achievement process: It refers to the principles of allocation
in use in the allocation process of a given asset to the eligible individuals.
By ascription process, it refers to the allocation process is primarily
determined by individuals’ “traits present at birth (e.g. sex, race, ethnicity,
parental wealth, nationality)” (Grusky, 1994, p. 6); while achievement
process refers to the allocation process is mainly determined by
individuals’ own abilities and efforts.
3. Education and social stratification systems in modern society
a. Thesis of meritocracy: It is argued by functionalist sociologists such as
Talcott Parsons that as human societies developed from traditionalism to
industrialism, the principle of allocation in use in stratification system will
shifted from ascription to achievement.
b. It is further argued that as a result the incumbents in the upper strata in
traditional society, i.e. aristocracy (ascribed their statuses by birth) will be
replaced by meritocracy in the modern society.
c. By meritocracy, it refers to individuals who have achieved and possessed
merits which are socially recognized as relevant to a given social hierarchy
(e.g. economic wealth, political power or cultural prestige).
d. In Michael Young’s conception, merits that are most commonly in use in
achievement-oriented social institutions in modern society are intelligence
and efforts. And these two kinds of merits can most effectively be verified
and certified in modern educational system.
C. Theorizing Social Stratification: Functionalism
1. Functionalist Approach (Gradational approach) to stratification
a. The nature of inequality: Technocracy and Meritocracy
b. The structure of stratification: division of labor and occupational groupings
c. Gradational approach to inequality in occupational structure
2. Davis and Moore’s functionalist principles of stratification
a. Functionally more important positions and their performances required
special skills
b. Limited supply of talents and trained skills to fill these important positions
and perform tasks expected from incumbents of these positions
c. Sacrifice/cost of conversion of talents into skills
d. Additional rewards are needed to induce talented persons to fill these
positions
e. Functionally more important positions are therefore institutionally attached
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
3
with additional rewards
f. Institutionalization of social inequality is positively functional and inevitable
in any society
3. Tumin’s critique on Davis and Moore’s Thesis
a. Tautology of the proposition of functionally important positions
b. Scarcity of talent is not the cause but the result of stratification
c. The sacrifice fallacy
d The reward controversy
4. Tumin’s thesis on the dysfunctions of stratification
a. Social stratification functions to limit the possibility of discovery of the full
range of talent available of a society
b. Social stratification functions to limit the possibility of expanding the
productive resources of a society
c. Social stratification functions to rationalize the inequality of the status quo
and legitimize the power of the ruling elite
d. Social stratification functions to distribute self-images unevenly throughout a
population and therefore function to limit the development of the creative
potential of a society
e. Social stratification functions to create inequality which entails hostility,
suspicion and distrust among members of a society. As a result it limits the
possibility of extensive social integration
f. Social stratification functions to distribute unequally the sense of significant,
loyalty, and motivation of participation in a population
D. Theorizing Inequality and Stratification: Weberian Approach
1. Max Weber's conceptions of Power, domination, order
a. Power: "The chance of a man or of a number of men to realize their own
will in a communal action even against the resistance of others who are
participating in the action." (1948/91, p.180)
b. "Domination refers to a meaningful interrelationship between those giving
orders and those obeying, to the effect that the expectations toward which
action is oriented on both sides can be reckon upon." (1968/78, p. 1378)
c. Weber’s two bases of domination
i. Monopoly of interest
ii. Legitimation and authority
d. Economically conditioned power and the constitution of economic order
e. Power conditioned by social honor and the constitution of social order
f. Power in its intrinsic form (physical force or legitimate authority) and the
constitution of political order
2. Three domains of stratification
a. Classes in economic order
i. Economic order refers to "the ways in which economic goods and
services are distributed and used." (1948/91, P. 181)
ii. Classes are typical groups in a given economic order and participating in
the distribution of economic goods and services
b. Status groups in social order
i. Social order refers to "the way in which social honor is distributed in a
community." (1948/91, P. 181)
ii. Status groups are "typical groups" in a given social order and
participating in the distribution of social honor
c. Parties in political order
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
4
i. Political order refers to the way in which both physical force and
legitimate authority are distributed in a community
ii. Parties are “typical groups” in the arena power contest in a given
community
3. Theory of class structuration
a. Distinction between concepts of economic class and social class
i. Economic class, class situation and market situation
ii. Social class and mobility chance
b. Theory of class structuration
i. Class structuration as “process whereby economic classes become
social classes” (Giddens, 1981, p. 105)
ii. Mobility-table and status-attainment analyses
4. Parkin’s theory of social closure
a. Social closure as form of monopolization of specific opportunity
i. Exclusion
ii. Usurpation
b. Mechanism of social closure
i. Property ownership
ii. Credentialism
5. John H. Goldthorpe’s thesis of class analysis
a. Class structure
b. Class mobility
c. Class consequences: Class interest, class action and class struggle
E. Theorizing Inequality and Social Class: Analytical Marxist Approach
1. Marxist Approach to stratification
a. The nature of inequality: Exploitation
b. The structure of stratification: Capital and means of production as the core
and primary dimension
c. Relational approach to inequality in class relation, class structure and class
society
2. Conceptualization of economic oppression and exploitation
a. Three conditions of economic oppression
i. The material welfare of one group of people causally depends on the
material deprivation of another.
ii. The causal relation in (i) involves the asymmetrical exclusion of the
exploited from access to certain productive resources.
iii. The causal mechanism which translates exclusion (ii) into differential
welfare (i) involves the appropriation of the fruits of labor of the exploited
by those who control the relevant productive resources.
b. Distinction between exploitative and non-exploitative economic oppressions
i. “Economic exploitation is a specific form of economic oppression
defined by particular kind of mechanism through which the welfare of
exploiters is causally related to the deprivations of the exploited. In
exploitation, the material well-being of exploiters causally depends upon
their ability to appropriate the fruits of labor of the exploited. The welfare
of the exploiter therefore depends on the effort of the exploited, not
merely on the deprivations of the exploited.” (Wright, 1994)
ii. “In non-exploitative economic oppression there is no transfer of the fruit
of labor from the oppressed to the oppressor; the welfare of the
oppressor depends on the exclusion of the oppressed from access to
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
5
certain resources, but not on their effort.” (ibid)
c. The degree of moral indictment between exploitative and non-exploitative
economic oppression: The game theory analysis of the case of Manna from
Heaven
Preference
Ordering
1
2
3
4
Non-exploitative
Exploiter
Oppressed & Exploited
oppressor
All manna to
All manna to
All manna to
oppressors
exploiters
oppressed/exploited
Evenly divided to Destroy the manna
Evenly divide the
everyone
manna
All manna to the
Evenly divide the
Give manna to the
oppressed
manna
exploiters
Destroy the manna Give manna to the
Destroy the manna
exploited
d. The abandonment of the labor theory of value and the concept of surplus
value
i. Orthodox Thesis of exploitation
- Socially necessary labor time determine value
- Labor and labor alone create value
- The laborer receives the value of his labor power
- The value of the product is greater than the value of his labor power
- The labor receives less value than he creates
- The capitalist appropriated the surplus value
- The laborer is exploited by the capitalist
ii. Cohen’s reformulation of the labor theory of value
- The labor is the person who create the product, that which has value
- The capitalist appropriates some of the value of the product
- The labor receives less value than the value of the laborer created
- The capitalist appropriates some of the value of what the laborer
creates
- The laborer is exploited by the capitalist
3. Research Agenda in class analysis
a. Class structure
b. Class struggle
c. Class consciousness
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
6
F.
Synthesis: Comparison between Weberian and Marxist Approaches to Class
Analysis
Conception of Class
Class Structure
Analysis
Class Formation
Analysis
Tsang & Pong
Education Policy & Society
Weberian Approach
Economic Domination
Economic Inequality
Class Mobility
Class Structure
Class Interest
Class Action
Class Struggle
- Exclusion
- Usurpation
Marxist Approach
Economic Exploitation
Economic Inequality
Class Structure
Class Consciousness
Class Struggle
- Class revolution
- Class Dictatorship
7