The role played by material inventions, that is, by technology, in social
change probably received most emphasis in the work of William F. Ogburn. It was
Ogburn, also, who was chiefly responsible for the idea that the rate of
invention within society is a function of the size of the existing culture
base. He saw the rate of material invention as increasing with the passage of
time.Ogburn believed that material and non-material cultures change in
different ways. Change in material culture is believed to have a marked
directional or progressive character. This is because there are agreed-upon
standards of efficiency that are used to evaluate material inventions. To use
air-planes, as an example, we keep working to develop planes that will fly,
higher and faster, and carry more payloads on a lower unit cost. Because
airplanes can be measured against these standards, inventions in this area
appear rapidly and predictably. In the area of non-material culture, on the
other hand there often are no such generally accepted standards. Whether one
prefers a Hussain, a Picasso, or a Gainsborough, for example, is a matter of
taste, and styles of painting fluctuate unevenly. Similarly, in institutions
such as government and the economic system there are competing forms of styles,
Governments may be dictatorships, oligarchies, republics or democracies.
Economic system includes communist, socialist, feudal, and capitalist ones.
As far as can be told, there is no regular progression from one form of
government or economic system to another. The obvious directional character of
change in material culture is lacking in many areas of non-material culture. In
addition to the difference in the directional character of change, Ogburn and
others believe that material culture tends to change faster than non-material
culture. Certainly one of the imperative aspects of modern American life is the
tremendous development of technology. Within this century, life has been
transformed by invention of the radio, TV, automobiles, airplanes, rockets,
transistors, and computers and so on. While this has been happening in material
culture, change in government, economic system, family life, education, and
religion seems to have been much slower. This difference in rates of cultural
change led Ogburn to formulate the concept of culture lag. Material inventions,
he believed bring changes that require adjustments in various areas of non-material
culture.Invention of the automobile, for instance, freed young people from
direct parental observation, made it possible for them to work at distances
from their homes, and, among other things, facilitated crime by making escape
easier. Half a century earlier, families still were structured as they were in
the era of the family farm when young people were under continuous observation
and worked right on the homestead.
Culture lag is defined as the time between the appearance of a new material
invention and the making of appropriate adjustments in corresponding area of
non-material culture. This time is often long. It was over fifty years, for
example, after the typewriter was invented before it was used systematically in
offices. Even today, we may have a family system better adapted to a farm
economy than to an urban industrial one, and nuclear weapons exist in a
diplomatic atmosphere attuned to the nineteenth century. As the discussion
implies, the concept of culture lag is associated with the definition of social
problems. Scholars envision some balance or adjustment existing between
material and non-material cultures. That balance is upset by the appearance of
raw material objects. The resulting imbalance is defined as a social problem
until non-material culture changes in adjustment to the new technology.
Socialization is predominately an unconscious process by which a newborn
child learns the values, beliefs, rules and regulations of society or
internalizes the culture in which it is born. Socialization, in fact, includes
learning of three important processes: (1) cognitive; (2) affective, and (3)
evaluative. In other words, socialization includes the knowledge of how things
are caused and the establishment of emotional links with the rest of the
members of the society. Socialization, therefore, equips an individual in such
a way that he can perform his duties in his society. Who are the agents of
socialization? The agents of socialization vary from society to society.
However, in most of the cases, it is the family which is a major socializing
agent, that is, the nearest kinsmen are the first and the most important agents
of socialization. The other groups which are socializing units in a society
vary according to the complexity. Thus, in modern complex society, the
important socializing agents are educational institutions, while in primitive
societies, clans and lineages play a more important role. Socialization is a
slow process.
There is no fixed time regarding the beginning and the end of this process.
However, some sociologists formulated different stages of socialization. These
are (1) oral stage, (2) anal stage (3) oedipal stage, and (4) adolescence. In
all these stages, especially in the first three, the main socializing agent is
the family. The first stage is that of a new-born child when he is not involved
in the family as a whole but only with his mother. He does not recognize anyone
except his mother. The time at which the second stage begins is generally after
first year and ends when the infant is around three. At this stage, the child
separates the role of his mother and his own. Also during this time force is
used on the child, that is, he is made to learn a few basic things. The third
stage extends from about fourth year to 12th to 13th year, that is, till
puberty. During this time, the child becomes a member of the family as a whole
and identifies himself with the social role ascribed to him. The fourth stage
begins at puberty when a child wants freedom from parental control. He has to
choose a job and a partner for himself. He also learns about incest taboo.
Social norms grow out of social
value and both serve to differentiate human social behavior from that of other
species. The significance of learning in behavior varies from species to
species and is closely linked to processes of communication. Only human beings
are capable of elaborate symbolic communication and of structuring their
behavior in terms of abstract preferences that we have called values. Norms are
the means through which values are expressed in behavior.
Norms generally are the rules and
regulations that groups live by. Or perhaps because the words, rules and
regulations, call to mind some kind of formal listing, we might refer to norms
as the standards of behavior of a group. For while some of the appropriate
standards of behavior in most societies are written down, many of them are not
that formal. Many are learned, informally, in interaction with other people and
are passed "that way from generation to generation.
The term "norms" covers an
exceedingly wide range of behaviour. So that the whole range of that behaviour
may be included. Sociologists have offered the following definition. Social
norms are rules developed by a group of people that specify how people must,
should, may, should not, and must not behave in various situations.
Some norms are defined by individual
and societies as crucial to the society. For example, all members of the group
are required to wear clothing and to bury their dead. Such "musts"
are often labeled "mores", a term coined by the American sociologist
William Graham Sumner.
Many social norms are concerned with
"should "; that is, there is some pressure on the individual to
conform but there is some leeway permitted also. The 'should behaviors' are
what Sumner called "folk-ways"; that is, conventional ways of doing
things that are not defined as crucial to the survival of either the individual
or the society. The 'should behaviors' in our own society include the
prescriptions that people's clothes should be clean, and that death should be
recognized with public funerals. A complete list of the should behaviors
in a complex society would be virtually without end.
The word "May" in the
definition of norms indicates that, in most groups, there is a wide range of
behaviors in which the individual is given considerable choice. To continue the
illustration, in Western countries girls may select to wear dresses or halters
and jeans. Diets may be done through trainers at the gym or through the benefit
of Medifast coupons, some
people may even prefer diets advertised on tv. Funerals may be held with or
without flowers, with the casket open or closed, with or without religious
participation, and so on. We have confined our examples to just three areas,
but students should be able to construct their own examples from all areas of
life.
The remainder of the definition,
including the 'should-not' and the 'must-not' behaviours, probably does not
require lengthy illustration because such examples are implicit in what has
already been said. One should not belch in public, dump garbage in the street,
run stop signs, or tell lies. One must not kill another person or have sexual
intercourse with one's sister or brother.
Social norms cover almost every
conceivable situation, and they vary from standards where almost complete
conformity is demanded to those where there is great freedom of choice. Norms
also vary in the kinds of sanctions that are attached to violation of the
norms. Since norms derive from values, and since complex societies have
multiple and conflicting value systems, it follows that norms frequently are in
conflict also.
Taking the illustration of American
sex norms, two proscriptive norms prohibit premarital intercourse and
extramarital intercourse. But many boys also have been taught that sex is good
and that they should seek to "score" with girls whenever possible.
Somewhat similarly, girls have been taught that promiscuous intercourse before
marriage is bad; but they have also been taught that sex is acceptable within
true love relationships. Members of both sexes, then, find themselves faced
with conflicting demands for participation in sex and for abstinence from it.
They also discover that there are sanctions associated with either course of
action.
Normative conflict is also deeply
involved in social change. As statistical norms come to differ too blatantly
from existing prescriptive norms, new prescriptive norms give sanction to
formerly prohibited behaviour and even extend it. Recent changes in the sex
norms of teenage and young adult groups provide examples. The change is more
apparent in communal living groups where sometimes there is an explicit
ideology of sexual freedom and the assumption that sexual activities will be
shared with all members of the group. In less dramatic fashion, the change is
evident among couples who simply begin to live together without the formality
of a marriage ceremony.
GLOBAL EDUCATION FOR GENDER
EQUALITY AND SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT : MAKING THE CONNECTIONS
By : Aurora Javate de Dios
1.SUMMARY
The paper examines and explores why
gender equality must be seen as a final goal in and of itself and as a
prerequisite for attaining sustainable human development goals and building
global citizenship. Discriminatory practices in all areas including education,
as well as traditional and harmful gender norms like violence against women
limit, inhibit and eventually impede the full development and empowerment of
women which is critical to the realization of these two goals.
The escalation of economic
globalization has driven a demand for instrumental education which can be
clearly tied to the goals of production, productivity and employment. As a
consequence, programs for the development of critical thinking, humanities and
the social sciences that foster a deeper understanding of global issues social
justice, sustainable development and human rights have been diminished.
Given this situation the question
for educators then is, how do we meaningfully utilize the enormous impact of
globalization to develop and foster not only education to prepare students for
jobs and employment but education that develops a deep understanding and
solidarity for transcendent core values like justice, peace, equality and
sustainable development.
Another purpose of
internationalizing education is to expand and broaden student’s understanding
and appreciation of socio-economic political realities of other countries and
cultures as they relate to their own national and local realities in the hopes
that such exposure can bring about tolerance of difference and solidarity for
the common good. Global learning is also defined as education “that puts
learning in a global context that fosters critical and creative learning;
self-awareness and open mindedness towards difference; understanding of global
issues and power relationships and optimism and action for a better world”.
Gender equality in educational
access, participation and outcome is central to the promotion of democracy. A
vibrant civic life in which citizens are engage in all aspects of society is
critical to the flourishing of democratic institutions, and an important
precondition for promoting social justice and human right. As Educational For
All Global Monitoring Report 2011 : A Gender Review assert, education is a
human right of everyone, including girls and women. Much more needs to be done
in terms of educational reforms such as redefining quality of education to
include : (1) transformative, gender-responsive educational processes and
outcomes, (2) ensuring safety and protection of girls particularly in conflict
areas, (3) higher investment in early childhood care and education is crucial
for promoting sustained girl’s education, and (4) engendering school thru
textbook revisions and teacher training, and providing space and support
systems to encourage girl and young women to take on non-traditional subjects
such as math and science.
The Human Development Report of 1995
asserted that there are four elements in the concept of human development which
includes productivity, equity, sustainable, and empowerment. The human
development paradigm must be engendered and based on three principle : (1)
equality of rights between women and men as a fundamental principle, (2)
recognition that women are agent s and beneficiaries of change, and (3) the
engendered development model, though aiming to widen choices for both women and
men, should not predetermine how different cultures and different societies
exercise these choices. For illustration, the specific example of Miriam
College in the Philippines, is used to discuss both the possibilities, and
challenges of gendered global learning strategies.
II. REACTION PAPER
I
agree that the women have to struggle for gender equality by demanding rights
and access to education which is a key step in their political participation
and empowerment. Eventhough the role of women as equal as a man, the woman
should responsible to her duty as wives, woman career, and mother. The reason
above is the basic for developing the next generation in the future.
In conclusion that global education
must embrace the principle of social inclusion, gender quality, peace, human
right, environment and diversity as ways to develop global citizenship. Global
citizenship principles, values and behavior can be proactively promoted now. In
promoting education to integrated a gender perspective that requires national
curricula to :
a.Unpack
the historical and sociological meaning of national curricular norms;
b.Recognize
(if not deconstruct) the various male and female forms of knowledge and their
representations in the curricula;
c.Understand
the different types of gendered performance within different school subject;
d.Be
sensitive to the changing gender relations brought about by globalization and
its significance in terms of male and female relationship to knowledge.
Quality and equality in education are
inextricably linked (UNESCO 2004). Poor or marginalized children, who are more
likely to have illiterate parents and less access to reading materials in the
home, are more dependent on their teachers for their learning than are
better-off children. As a result, poor instruction perpetuates inequities
because it is more often the most marginalized children who become school
leavers, either through failure or voluntary termination. Research has shown
that girls seem to be more sensitive to school quality than boys and that the
quality of teachers has a greater impact on the demand for girls’ education
than for boys’ (Kane 2004).
There
are four main dimensions of gender equality outlined in the framework : (a) equality of access, means that girls and
boys are offered equitable opportunities
to gain admission to formal, non formal, or alternative approaches to basic
education. Actual attendance, rather than enrollment, is a better indicator of
whether access has been achieved (b) equality
in the learning process, means that girls and
boys receive equitable treatment and attention and have equal opportunities to
learn. This means that girls and boys are exposed to the same curricula,
although the coursework may be taught differently to accommodate the different
learning styles of girls and boys. Equality in the learning process also means
that all learners should be exposed to teaching methods and materials that are
free of stereotypes and gender bias. In addition, it means that boys and girls
should have the freedom to learn, explore, and develop skills in all academic
and extracurricular offerings. (c) equality
of educational outcomes means that girls and boys enjoy equal opportunities
to achieve and outcomes are based on their individual talents and efforts. To
ensure fair chances for achievement, the length of school careers, academic
qualifications, and diplomas should not differ based on a person’s sex, and (d)
equality of external results, occurs
when the status of men and women, their access to goods and resources, and
their ability to contribute to, participate in, and benefit from economic,
social, cultural, and political activities are equal. This implies that career
opportunities, the time needed to secure employment after leaving full-time
education, and the earnings of men and women with similar qualifications and experience
are equal. (Subrahmanian n.d.).
References :
USAID, Education From A Gender Equality Perspective, This
report was developed for USAID’s Office of Women in Development by the EQUATE
Project, Management Systems International (Prime Contractor).
Minority Access to Higher Education and its Social
Outcomes
Noga
Admon
New York
University
The
mobilization of demands by minority groups for mobility opportunities through
schooling can only contribute an extension of the prevailing pattern.”
(Collins, 1971 p. 1016). Interestingly, internal stratification within the
system casts doubts on the successes of community colleges and open admissions
in narrowing social gaps. Neither was able to offer minorities with real equal
opportunity in higher education, without explicitly or implicitly diverting
them to lower-prestige, lower-strata credentials.
Today,
high schools promise open access to college and generate high student aspirations
regardless of academic performance, and as a result students do not see the relevance
of high school performance to future success (since in a seemingly open admissions
system they see little reward for high school success and little penalty for
lack of high school success; Rosenbaum, 1998). They do not realize that in
reality, high school grades hold the strongest effect on college success (Lavin
and Hyllegard, 1996; Adelman, 1999) and that open admissions exist almost
exclusively in community colleges and not in 4-year schools. Minority students,
who perform less well than Whites in high school (Digest of Educational
Statistics 2001, table 139), are being fed false hopes, and end up at a
disadvantage as they graduate and suddenly realize that their high school
records are not sufficient for the kind of higher education they had hoped for.
In addition, inadequate student-to-counselor ratio, which can be seen in many
inner-city schools, leaves many students with deficient information.
First-generation college-goers in particular lack information about college,
and are especially affected by high school counseling; ironically, an
inadequate student-to-counselor ratio is more common in schools serving
first-generation college-going students (McDonough, 1997). This affects
minorities in
particular, as they have large rates of potential first-generation
collegegoers.
During
the 20th Century, as minority groups gained access to different levels of
education, the
value of these levels has decreased. As education expands among lower status groups,
it also expands among high-status groups, and so the gap remains. As a result,
the returns for higher education were depressed. Higher education cost was
increasing as a response to the increased demand, but salaries stood still, especially
for those college graduates who were filling out previous “high school” jobs (20%
of degree holders in 1990 were either unemployed or employed in “high school” jobs),
and the rapid technological changes of our era make it also difficult for older
graduates to find jobs (Tyler, Murnane and Levy, 1995).
Professions
who let minorities in are still afraid they will suffer a prestige loss, similar
to the one experienced by professions as they went through the process of feminization
during the last century. We should stop looking at higher degrees as the simple
solution to social inequality, since their success in reducing social gaps is contingent
upon the market’s recognition of these degrees as valuable market currencies. Pushing
the entire system upwards is not synonymous with reducing the social gaps between
Whites and minorities. We should not be content with minority access to community
colleges. Our goal should be equal opportunity, not equal participation.
RESPONSE
Based on the descriptioninthe abovejournal, can be saidthat
theopinionfrom Noga Admon is
similar with the opinion of Randall Collins about Some Comparative Principles of Educational
Stratification. Three major points that Noga Admon says are (1) internal
stratification within the system casts doubts on the successes of community
colleges and open admissions in narrowing social gaps, (2) high schools
promise open access to college and generate high student aspirations regardless
of academic performance, and as a result students do not see the relevance of
high school performance to future success, they do not realize that in reality,
high school grades hold the strongest effect on college success. (3) As
education expands among lower status groups, it also expands among high-status
groups, and so the gap remains. As a result, the returns for higher education
were depressed. Higher education cost was increasing as a response to the
increased demand, but salaries stood still, especially for those college
graduates who were filling out previous “high school” jobs, and the rapid
technological changes of our era make it also difficult for older graduates to
find jobs.
Randall
Collins said that a great deal of research in the sociology of education has
taken an existing structure and its content for granted and concentrated on
describing the social processes that occur within it. And at the same time education
may be explain as a weapon in the struggles for domination that make up the
phenomenon of stratification, whether considered from the viewpoint of Marxist
theory, Weberian Theory, or some mixture of the two.
Economic
classes or organizational politicians are stronger if they also possess the
unity that comes from common cultural resources. Three types of resources may
be differentially distributed : strong ethnic, national, religious, or other
cultural divisions can shape struggles for economic or political domination
into pattern very different from those emerging along class lines. The most
common modern interpretation of the role of education is that it meets the
demand for technical skills. Most contemporary evidence, however, contradicts
this interpretation.
The
content of most modern education is not
very practical : education attainment and grades are not much related at
work performance, and most technical skill are learned on the job. Although
work skill are more complex in some modern jobs than in most preindustrial job,
in many modern jobs they are not. Similar pattern appear in an overview of
society throughout history. And in the other side School have sometimes been
established in cases where the fundamental components of practical skill could
be learned by repetitious drill, such as in the acquisition of literacy and
arithmethics skill. Usually such schooling has been unritualized and aimed at developing
proficiency in the most efficient manner. This has been particularly true
where dominant social classes have had a ritualized form of education and
practical work has been relegated to unprivileged middle or lower class. Powerful
groups have incorporated practical education into a ritualized system. In the
United Stated, for example, a formal structure surrounds elementary education,
which alone among all levels of modern education bears a clear relationship to
economic productivity.
References :
Admon Noga, Minority Access to Higher Education and its Social
Outcomes, New York University
Collins, Randal. Some Comparative Principles of
Educational Stratification, University of California, Riverside
