The Sociology of Education

An Introduction

Ivor Morrish

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781000639773
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Éducation
• Subtopic: Éducation générale

First published in 1972, this book aims to provide an introduction to the teacher, or teacher in training, to society and its relationship to education. Although very much a product of its time rather than an instructive text for teachers in the 21st century, this work will be of interest to those studying the evolution of the study o

Chapter 1
The Nature of Sociology

The word 'sociology' first appeared in one of the volumes by Auguste Comte (1798-1857), entitled Cours de Philosophie Positive (1). Comte considered that one could discern the natural development of society in accordance with some law within the history of mankind. He further believed that there was some form of progress attendant upon this natural development of society, and that the main task of sociology was concerned with the reconstruction and progress of social forms and structures. According to Comte there were three definite stages in the law which governed such progress:

1. the theological or fictive;
2. the metaphysical or abstract;
3. the scientific or positive.

This third stage, the phase of science, included sociology which was, to Comte, the very crown of science and of intellectual achievement.

Comte undoubtedly saw sociology as a humanizing science. It would react upon the other sciences and show their true function in the fabric of man's intellectual achievement; and, in consequence, sociology as a discipline and study was of pre-eminent importance. Moreover, it was a positive science; it was a science in its own right and not simply as a specialized application of one or more of the other sciences. Comte was looking for the laws which governed the actual observed phenomena, and not for any absolute or ultimate inner essences of a metaphysical order. He considered that these latter were neither knowable nor useful; but the regulating laws behind and in observable phenomena were facts both discoverable and socially helpful.

As one reads Comte on the spirit of social science and the possibilities of 'rational prevision' or prediction based upon the precise observation of social phenomena (2), one feels how remarkably 'modern' he is, and that many of the current attacks on sociology as a sort of parvenu science are wide of the mark. Nearly a century and a half have passed since Comte first began to write on sociological matters, and first sought to separate the disciplines of philosophy and sociology. In the judgement of Professor E. A. Tiryakian of Princeton University the consequences of this divorce have been twofold:

'On the positive side, one may mention that it has enabled sociology to

On the more negative side, however, Tiryakian feels that sociology has tended to concentrate on 'problems at the microscopic level' (4), and that, in consequence, research projects tend to accumulate rather than to be cumulative.

Any relatively new discipline - it sociology can really be so called - is certain to be the object of considerable scrutiny and criticism; at any rate, sociology has been no exception to this. Like some great octopus sociology seems to have extended its tentacles in every direction, missing nothing that even remotely resembles a social fact or relationship, whether it be in the bedchamber or the council-chamber. There are the natural prudes, and even the naturally reluctant who are not necessarily prudes, who feel that there is something vaguely indecent about the detailed inquiries into their sex life, whilst others equally resent the probing of their religious and political persuasions. It remains true, however, that the steady, thorough, unremitting march of the sociologist will leave no observable social fact unrecorded. A glance at the 'Index of Research' of The British Sociological Association Register (5) will reveal that at the time of writing over two hundred social questions of a general nature, or branches of sociology, or constellations of social facts are being investigated. Topics range from consumer behaviour and cybernetics to bereavement and social ecology; and there is in evidence a very wide interest in every conceivable facet of social life and activity.

It is, perhaps, partly because of this catholic interest that sociology has been attacked as being a 'non-subject', or a depository of all subjects. But attacks of this sort, when they are not motivated merely by vested interests, are mistaken with regard to the nature of sociology itself. Sociology is concerned with social facts: this means, more specifically, that it is the province of sociology to examine both the structural aspects of human society and every type of social relationship that occurs within those structures. And all this information must be investigated and tabulated as objective facts. Indeed, the sociologists' increasingly cold, statistical and scientific assessment of such social fact has often been a matter of discomfort to many in society. 'Instead of being content just to state it, describe it and analyse it, why don't they do something about it?' This represents the cry of concern of those who feel strongly about social abnormality and pathology. The answer is simple, and it has been made by Professor P. L. Berger in the following terms: 'Social work, whatever its theoretical rationalization, is a certain practice in society. Sociology is not a practice, but an attempt to understand' (6).

become an academic discipline in its own right, free from the shackles of subordination. In divorcing itself from metaphysics and social philosophy, sociology became an empirical science' (3).

This does not mean, of course, that sociologists are not interested in corrective or compensatory action in society, or that they have no philosophy of life, or that they are determinists, or are all immoral, or humanists, or atheists. They may, in fact, fall into any of these categories; but, primarily, sociologists are just people serving society in a variety of capacities as teachers, lecturers, researchers, journalists, workers in industry, personnel officers, social workers or administrators, town planners, parsons, criminologists, probation officers and so forth. As sociologists they are interested in establishing the facts of society and of social relationships in as objective and scientific a manner as possible; as people living and working in society, with its multifarious problems, they are - most of them also interested in passing some judgement upon the facts and in seeking some solution to social problems. In doing so they are changing their role from that of sociologist qua sociologist to that of (say) moralist, philosopher, reformer, or just a member of society with a concern for people and their social relationships - particularly, perhaps, where those social relationships have somehow gone astray, or where weak relationships require reinforcing.

Naturally, the abnormal has its fascination; there is nothing more intriguing than social pathology. But, again, it would be quite a mistake to imagine that this is the prime interest of the sociologist. Social facts, whatever their nature, are the raw material of the sociologist; and his concern is to establish what those facts really are when divested of personal prejudice and opinion in recording and in observation. Equally, of course, he is concerned to delineate social aspects of opinion and prejudice. In it all, however, he is involved not in the making of value judgements but of factual-judgements. That is, if he is investigating the sexual behaviour of a particular society, as a sociologist he neither approves of nor condemns any particular form of sexual activity; he notes it as accurately as he possibly can and seeks, at the same time, to establish whether it is normal or abnormal for that particular society, or for the observed section of a particular society. Later, when he has doffed his role as an objective investigator, that is, as a sociologist, he may wish to praise or express his abhorrence of such behaviour. In doing so he may take on the role of a social philosopher, or he may speak as one who adheres to a particular religious and moral code, or simply as one who accepts or objects to certain forms of behaviour on aesthetic grounds.

Or, again, the sociologist may take the very tolerant view that all things are relative. The 'realities' of society as we know them are expressed in very limited historical contexts; and if

'sociological laws, structures, types and classifications have no absolute character and are general only in a partial sense ... All analyses in the social sciences are relative to a certain moment in a historical period and to a certain geographical area' (7),

then we must be doubly wary of any value-judgements made at a different point in time or from a different location in space.

It is important to establish norms of behaviour in all sorts of social relations, even in order that the abnormal may be fully understood. Thus we find sociologists researching into 'the role of the beerhalls', 'the employment of married women', 'the social effects of redundancy', 'the structure of solidarity', 'the social and economic position of widows in Australia', 'living accommodation for young people', 'the sociology of popular music', 'the social consequences of shift working', and a thousand and one other intriguing social topics. And not only intriguing - some of them at first glance may appear to be almost bizarre. One sometimes gets the impression that a particular sociologist has gone out of his way to find a topic that no one else could possibly have dreamed up, and has then set to in order to research it and become the world's authority on some isolated piece of social interaction.

This, however, is not quite fair or true. The old gibe about knowing more and more concerning less and less has some validity; but it is also true that the researcher - if his research is to be of any value at all - must first of all, in the present context, have had a thorough grounding in general sociology, its organization, and its methods of inquiry. Even then, however, his detailed research may still be of little value in isolation: it must be seen in the perspective of the totality of all similar or related research (8). There is a lot of 'dead wood' in the archives of the universities; and many a researcher mu...