Cambridge International AS & A Level Sociology (9699): Paper 3 Education 5.1-5.3 – Education, society and the curriculum – Study Guide

This guide covers sections 5.1 (Theories about the role of education), 5.2 (Education and social mobility) and 5.3 (Influences on the curriculum) of the Cambridge International AS & A Level Sociology (9699) syllabus for examination in 2024, 2025 and 2026. Together they make up topic 5, Education and society. This topic is assessed in Paper 3 – Education, which is an A Level paper, not an AS Level paper.

Use it with the Cambridge A Level Sociology hub and checklist. Education as an agency of socialisation first appears in the Paper 1 study guide.

Coverage table

Syllabus reference	What you must know or be able to do (from the syllabus)	Where assessed
5.1	Functionalist views about how education contributes to value consensus and social solidarity	Paper 3
5.1	Education and role allocation	Paper 3
5.1	Marxist views about how education contributes to the maintenance of the capitalist economic system	Paper 3
5.1	Education as an instrument of ideological control and cultural reproduction	Paper 3
5.1	New Right and social democratic views on the relationship between education and the economy	Paper 3
5.2	Equal opportunity and the idea of meritocracy	Paper 3
5.2	The extent to which education systems are meritocratic today	Paper 3
5.2	The importance of education in influencing life chances, and the consequences of educational under-achievement for the individual and for society	Paper 3
5.2	Evidence and arguments about the links between education and social mobility	Paper 3
5.3	The social construction of knowledge	Paper 3
5.3	Factors influencing the content of the curriculum, including power, status, culture, economic demands, and gender	Paper 3
5.3	Education and cultural reproduction, including the ethnocentric curriculum, the gendered curriculum, and the hidden curriculum	Paper 3
5.3	The curriculum and the concept of cultural capital	Paper 3

The syllabus links this topic to three key concepts: Power, control and resistance; Inequality and opportunity; and Structure and human agency.

How Paper 3 works

Paper 3 – Education is a written paper: 1 hour 15 minutes, 50 marks, 21% of the A Level. You answer four compulsory questions, worth an increasing number of marks:

• Question 1: short answer (AO1).
• Question 2: two explanations for an issue, theory or viewpoint (AO1, AO2).
• Question 3: two arguments against a view in a quotation (AO2, AO3).
• Question 4: an essay worth 26 marks (AO1, AO2, AO3).

Your teacher will confirm how the other 24 marks are split. Paper 3 weightings: AO1 36%, AO2 28%, AO3 36%. Printed command words: Describe, Evaluate, Explain, Give.

5.1 Functionalism: value consensus, solidarity and role allocation

Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) argued that society needs enough shared values to hold together. Education passes on these shared values, so it builds social solidarity. School is a “society in miniature”: pupils follow rules that apply to everyone, not just to family members. This teaches self-discipline and how to cooperate with strangers. Durkheim also argued that a modern economy, with a complex division of labour, needs schools to teach specialist skills.

Talcott Parsons saw school as the bridge between the family and wider society. In the family, a child is judged by particularistic standards: as a unique person. At school, everyone is judged by the same universalistic standards. In the family, status is ascribed (fixed at birth); at school and at work, it is achieved. Schools are meritocratic, so pupils learn that rewards follow effort and ability. This also makes later inequality seem fair.

Role allocation means sorting people into the jobs that suit their talents. Davis and Moore (1945), in “Some Principles of Stratification”, argued that the most important jobs need the most talented people and higher rewards. Education sifts and sorts pupils through exams, so the most able reach the most important positions.

Key terms: value consensus (broad agreement on shared values); social solidarity (a sense of belonging to society).

Evaluation. Marxists argue that schools pass on ruling-class values, not shared values. Some sociologists ask whether diverse, multicultural societies have one set of shared values at all. Melvin Tumin criticised Davis and Moore: higher pay does not prove that a job is more important, and it is hard to show which jobs society needs most. Evidence from 5.2 that class background shapes results also challenges the claim that schools allocate roles on merit.

Worked paragraph. Durkheim saw school as a society in miniature, with rules for all [knowledge]. In a school with pupils from many backgrounds, common rules may build belonging beyond the family [application]. So education can bind a diverse society together [analysis]. However, Marxists reply that this “consensus” may be imposed by the ruling class [evaluation].

5.1 Marxism: ideological control and cultural reproduction

Louis Althusser (“Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses”, 1970 in French, 1971 in English) separated the repressive state apparatus (police, army, courts), which controls by force, from ideological state apparatuses such as the media, religion and education, which control through ideas. He argued that in capitalist societies the school is the dominant ideological state apparatus. It passes on ruling-class ideology while appearing neutral.

Bowles and Gintis, in Schooling in Capitalist America (1976), put forward the correspondence principle: school life mirrors work life. Pupils accept teachers’ authority as workers accept managers’, and work for grades as workers work for wages. They drew on a study by Peter Meyer of the 237 members of the senior class at one New York State high school. Higher grades went with traits such as perseverance, consistency and punctuality. Lower grades went with creativity, aggressiveness and independence. Their view is often summed up as the myth of meritocracy: schools claim to reward ability fairly but in fact reproduce inequality.

Cultural reproduction is the idea that education passes on the culture of the dominant class and so reproduces class inequality from one generation to the next. Pierre Bourdieu, with Jean-Claude Passeron, developed this idea using the concept of cultural capital (see 5.3).

Evaluation. Paul Willis, Learning to Labour (1977), studied 12 working-class boys (“the lads”) in a Midlands school. They formed a counter-school culture and rejected school values. This shows pupils are not passive, which challenges Bowles and Gintis. Yet the lads still ended up in manual jobs, so reproduction happened anyway. Critics also argue the correspondence principle fits 1970s factory work better than today’s jobs, which may reward creativity.

Worked paragraph. Bowles and Gintis argue that schooling prepares pupils for obedient work [knowledge]. A school that rewards punctual homework more than original ideas fits their claim [application]. So schools may reproduce a compliant workforce [analysis]. However, Willis shows pupils can resist, so the process is not smooth [evaluation].

5.1 New Right and social democratic views on education and the economy

Social democratic sociologists, such as A. H. Halsey, support equality of opportunity and state action to bring it about. In England and Wales, many local authorities moved from selective (tripartite) schools to comprehensive schools from the 1960s under a Labour government. Social democrats also draw on human capital theory, developed by economists such as Theodore Schultz and Gary Becker (Human Capital, 1964). It treats education as an investment that raises productivity and growth, so fairness and a strong economy go together.

The New Right believes the state runs schools poorly. Without competition, schools have little reason to improve. Chubb and Moe, Politics, Markets, and America’s Schools (1990), argued that the root cause of poor performance is direct democratic control of schools, and called for parental choice and competition. This is marketisation: schools compete for pupils like firms compete for customers. In England, the Education Reform Act 1988 introduced a National Curriculum, more parental choice of school and local management of school budgets.

Evaluation. Alison Wolf, Does Education Matter? (2002), questioned whether spending more on education automatically drives growth. Critics of the New Right cite Gewirtz, Ball and Bowe (1995), who described “privileged/skilled choosers”, who were mainly middle class and best placed to work the school market, while other parents lacked the cultural skills and contacts to do so. So market choice can widen inequality. Supporters reply that published results give every parent more information.

Worked paragraph. The New Right argues that competition raises standards [knowledge]. If a city published league tables, weak schools would need to improve to attract pupils [application]. This ties schooling to economic efficiency [analysis]. However, Gewirtz, Ball and Bowe suggest choice helps middle-class parents most [evaluation].

5.2 Meritocracy, life chances and social mobility

Equal opportunity means everyone has the same chance to succeed, whatever their background. Formal equality removes legal barriers. Substantive equality also tackles hidden barriers such as poverty.

A meritocracy is a system where rewards depend on ability and effort, not on background. Michael Young is widely credited with coining the word in The Rise of the Meritocracy (1958), a satire. He defined merit as intelligence plus effort. He warned that a meritocracy could create a new, self-satisfied elite.

Are education systems meritocratic today?

• For: open exams, wider access to higher education, and laws against discrimination suggest more pupils can succeed on merit. Functionalists see exams as a fair sifting system.
• Against: Marxists call meritocracy a myth. Bourdieu argues that schools reward the culture of the middle class. Gewirtz, Ball and Bowe show that school choice favours parents with cultural skills and social contacts. Private tutoring and fee-paying schools let some families buy advantage.

Life chances are a person’s chances of gaining good things, such as income, health, housing and secure work. Education shapes life chances because qualifications act as entry tickets to many jobs.

Consequences of under-achievement. For the individual: fewer job options, lower pay and more risk of unemployment. For society: wasted talent, lower productivity, higher welfare costs and weaker cohesion if some groups feel shut out.

Functionalists and social democrats stress the waste of talent. Marxists argue that under-achievement is built into the system, because capitalism needs a supply of low-paid workers. Ronald Dore, The Diploma Disease (1976), described qualification inflation: as more people gain a credential, employers ask for higher ones. Gaining a qualification may then improve life chances less than before.

Social mobility is movement between social classes. Intergenerational mobility compares a person with their parents. Absolute mobility is the total amount of movement. Relative mobility compares the chances of people from different class backgrounds.

• John Goldthorpe and colleagues ran the 1972 Oxford Mobility Study, reported in Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain (1980). Absolute upward mobility rose as the occupational structure changed. Relative mobility stayed broadly stable, so class background still mattered.
• Comparisons of two British birth cohorts, born in 1958 and 1970, suggest family background did not weaken as an influence over time and may have strengthened.
• The “Great Gatsby curve”, popularised by the economist Alan Krueger in 2012 using data from Miles Corak, shows that countries with more income inequality tend to have less mobility between generations.

Evaluation. Expanding education does not by itself equalise chances: if every group gains more qualifications, the gap between groups can stay the same. Many mobility studies focus on Britain, so apply them to other countries with care.

Worked paragraph. Goldthorpe found absolute mobility rose while relative mobility stayed stable [knowledge]. Where many new office jobs open up, working-class children may rise while middle-class children keep their head start [application]. So more mobility does not prove a fairer system [analysis]. Functionalists reply that exams still let able pupils rise [evaluation].

5.3 Knowledge, the curriculum and cultural reproduction

The social construction of knowledge means that what counts as valuable knowledge is decided by people, not fixed by nature. The new sociology of education of the 1970s, including the collection Knowledge and Control edited by Michael F. D. Young, argued that school knowledge is socially organised. Michael Apple, Ideology and Curriculum (1979), asked whose knowledge becomes “official” in schools and argued that the curriculum is not neutral.

Factors influencing the content of the curriculum:

• Power: governments and powerful groups decide national curricula and exam content.
• Status: academic subjects often carry more status than practical or vocational ones.
• Culture: curricula tend to reflect the language, history and religion of the dominant group.
• Economic demands: governments push subjects linked to the economy, such as science, technology and vocational courses. Alison Wolf led a review of vocational education in England (2011).
• Gender: subjects can be seen as “for boys” or “for girls”, and the content may leave out women’s contributions.

The ethnocentric curriculum gives priority to the culture, history and language of one ethnic group. Bernard Coard (1971) argued that British schools treated the culture of West Indian children as second-rate, which could harm their self-esteem. (Coard’s wider argument about attainment is covered in the ethnicity and gender study guide.)

The gendered curriculum means content and subject choices that follow gender stereotypes. Dale Spender, Invisible Women: The Schooling Scandal (1982), argued that the curriculum and classroom practices had left out or played down women’s contributions.

The hidden curriculum is what pupils learn from the way school is organised, not from formal lessons: obeying authority, punctuality, competition. Philip Jackson coined the term in Life in Classrooms (1968). Functionalists see it as teaching shared values; Marxists, as training for obedient work. Ivan Illich, Deschooling Society (1971), argued that schooling as an institution cannot deliver true education for all.

Cultural capital is the knowledge, tastes, language and attitudes valued by the dominant class. Bourdieu, in “The Forms of Capital” (1986), described three forms: embodied (manner, speech, tastes), objectified (books, art, instruments) and institutionalised (qualifications). Habitus is the set of tastes and dispositions learned early in life. Because the curriculum and its tests reward middle-class cultural capital, pupils who already have it start ahead.

Evaluation. Many schools now include more diverse history and literature. Postmodernists argue that the idea of one dominant culture is too simple. Others argue all pupils need the same powerful knowledge.

Worked paragraph. Bourdieu argues that schools reward middle-class cultural capital [knowledge]. In a literature course built on classic texts some families discuss at home, those pupils start ahead [application]. The curriculum turns home advantage into qualifications [analysis]. However, pupils can also gain cultural capital at school [evaluation].

Common errors

• Writing that Durkheim used the terms “particularistic” and “universalistic”. These are Parsons’s terms.
• Saying Bowles and Gintis studied British schools. The high-school data they used came from New York State.
• Treating Willis as simple support for Bowles and Gintis. He shows resistance, even though reproduction still happens.
• Mixing up absolute and relative mobility.
• Describing cultural capital as money. It is cultural knowledge and dispositions.
• In a quotation question, giving arguments that agree with the quotation when the task asks for arguments against it.

Next, read the revision notes, then try the practice questions. For Paper 4 essays, see the Globalisation, Media and Religion study guide.

Official syllabus

This guide is based on the Cambridge International AS & A Level Sociology (9699) syllabus for examination in 2024, 2025 and 2026. Check the latest version on the Cambridge International website, and your teacher will confirm any details not printed in the syllabus.