The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social institutio.docx

The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social
institutions and their importance in society by examining one
social institution (social institution: EDUCATION). Each
student will look at social institution (EDUCATION) and create
a presentation that others students will look at. This assignment
has multiple components and early due dates so make sure you
start early.
Step 1: Research about EDUCATION- This is your social
institution.
Step 2: Read the course module on social institutions below.
This will give you an overview of what a social institution is
and how it works in society.
Step 3: Read the assigned sources listed below. You will use
these sources to create a brief presentation about your social
institution.
Step 4: completing the project;
Each student will complete the following
1. A brief presentation about their social institution that
answers some key questions (listed below) about that
institution.
2. 2 to 3 discussion questions about their social institution that
will be added to the end of their presentation.
3. 5 to 7 quiz questions about their social institution that will be
included in this week's quiz.
More information about the presentation:
Your presentation will be a combination of material from your
class modules below, your sources and critical thinking.
It should answer all of the following questions:
1. We defined a social institution as an organization that is
formed to meet basic needs of society what basic needs does
your social institution address
2. What are some of the basic rules or social norms that are
used to maintain order in your social institution?
3. What are some of the major historical changes that have

happened to your institution over time?
4. Analyze your social institution from each of the three
theoretical viewpoints (Below: Sociology's Three Major
Theoretical Perspectives).
5. What are some social issues or problems that society deals
with that are related to your institution?
6. What are some solutions to those problems?
7. What are other important things you can tell us about your
institution (This is the place to summarize and include the other
things about your sources that don't really fit in these questions
but are important)
8. What do you see happening in the future with your
institution?
9. 2 to 3 discussion questions for other students to answer
Your presentation can be in any format. Most students prefer
power point but you can use a document, prezi or any other
format you would like. However keep in mind this is not an
essay or a list of questions and answers. It should be creative
and fun to look at.
Some hints and tips-
· Do use pictures and graphics
· Don't use animations- they can be distracting and not work
consistently
· Keep answers short and simple- remember that you will be
reading all of the other presentations. When putting yours
together ask yourself would you want other students to be
putting this much text on the presentation you have to read?
· If slides are too crowded split them into separate slides
· Stick mostly with given sources rather than outside sources
· Critical thinking is important to answer some of these
questions like what needs does your institution meet or what is
the future of your institution but make sure you are staying
factually correct and in line with the information and evidence
given in your assigned readings
· Do include citations and a list of references
· Do read the rubric- this is what I use to grade your

assignments
More information on the discussion questions-
The 2 to 3 discussion questions should be able to be answered
based on information that is included in your presentation.
These questions should focus on generally on getting students
thinking and talking about social institutions in general and how
your institution contributes to the social structure.
You will be answering the questions of other students so keep
that in mind when constructing your questions.
Discussion questions should be the last thing on your slides-
after your references.
More information on the quiz-
You will create 5 to 7 quiz questions that I will use to create
this week's quiz. Remember that you and other students will
need to answer these. You will not be reading all of the
assigned sources that other students will and they will not be
reading your material. This means you need to provide any
information students need to answer the quiz questions on your
slide.
The most successful questions are those about theoretical
perspectives- if you do a multiple-choice question for each of
the 3 perspectives you are already mostly there. Other questions
should be about the big general ideas in your resources about
your institution.
Try to stay away from the questions pre-constructed in your
sources- some of them presuppose you are reading all of the
sources and tend to be very specific.
Module 4: Social Institutions
Topics
I. The Origins of Social InstitutionsII. Two Examples of Social
Institutions: The Family and ReligionIII. Changing Institutions:
Cross-Cultural and Historical Perspectives

Civilization...is an inexorable result of the changes occurring in
the volume and density of societies. The development of
science, art, and economic activity derives from human
necessity. Men cannot exist without them under new conditions
into which they are thrust. When the number of individuals
involved in social relations grows larger, they can survive only
by increased specialization, by increased labor, by great
refinement of their capacities. From this wholesale excitation
there must come a higher degree of culture.
—Emile Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society
In module 2, we learned that social institutions are stable,
organized units of society developed to meet society's needs.
We gave you a few examples: education, the military, family,
and medicine. We have come to depend on such institutions so
much that they have become taken-for-granted aspects of life in
the United States. Institutions organize social life in that they
provide values, beliefs, norms, and social goals.
Historically, sociologists have identified five major social
institutions: the family, the government, the economy, religion,
and education. In addition, sociologists have noted that as
society has become more complex, other sectors of the social
world have become sufficiently patterned so that they now also
functional as institutions. Among these are work, science, law,
the military, health care, and the media.
Other industrialized countries, such as those in Europe, have
institutional arrangements that are similar to those in the United
States. Overall, institutions tend to be more formalized in
societies that are highly industrialized and less formalized in
non-industrialized, newly developing nations.
I. The Origins of Social Institutions
What Historical Factors Gave Rise to Institutions?
In history, the primary dimension of family life was the
production, consumption, and later, the distribution of goods
(food, clothing, and shelter). In primitive families, this function
was accomplished in small groups or clans. Social organization

was, by definition, simple. Over time, three "revolutions"
necessitated changes in the organization of social life.
The agricultural revolution (approximately 5,000 years ago)
brought about substantial changes to hunting-and-gathering
societies. Animals were harnessed to improve agricultural
yields and surplus food production resulted. Increased
production allowed people to begin inventing new and better
tools to do their work and even to specialize in their work.
Because agriculture provided a better way of life, people began
to stay put in one area and to trade with other communities. A
new way of life resulted that began the expansion of the
economy and several new patterns of social interaction
developed to address the now stabilized aspects of family life.
These new institutions were arranged around religion, power
(political relationships), and authority (government regulation).
This period lasted until the mid-eighteenth century.
The second great expansion, the Industrial Revolution, took
place in the middle of the eighteenth century, first in England
and then in the United States and other western societies. This
revolution was associated with massive social changes:
· Work previously done on farms was shifted to wage work in
factories.
· New forms of energy helped give rise to the development of
factories and mass production of goods.
Increasing numbers of people working in factories required a
new kind of organization of work. Thus a division of labor was
developed and people began to specialize in certain tasks.
In the past 50 years, the former Industrial Revolution has
developed into an "information revolution." Instead of tangible
products, we now sell ideas; instead of an emphasis on
mechanical skills, we now focus on informational skills and
higher education. What is more, communication is so rapid as to
be instantaneous. Instead of huge, centralized factories that
manufacture goods, companies tend now to decentralize their
efforts and put production units in areas of cheap labor and raw
materials, both at home and abroad.

Such changes have altered the way we live, work, and think
about life. We now live in a global economy in which the
products we use, the methods by which we communicate, and
the ways in which we live are now almost seamlessly
interconnected.
Think about this…
Take a product you use every day, such as a car. Do you know
where all the parts of your car come from? Globalization is
making it difficult to tell. This article provides a short history
of the auto industry: http://www.aaca.org/autohistory/17.html
Why Are Institutions so Important?
Our basic human needs and desires are related to attachments to
social groups. Small-scale relationships are connected to larger-
scale relationships called social institutions and, ultimately, to
society itself.
People associate themselves with institutions because
institutions tend to reduce uncertainty in human life. More
concretely, children must be socialized, the elderly and the sick
must be taken care of, resources to live must be secured, and
relationships among societies must be managed. Because we
may well have a hard time meeting all of these needs alone, we
align ourselves with institutions and the organized units of
society to help us get our needs met. We rely on institutions to
provide predictability and order. Formalized education, for
example, has the main goal of transmitting the cultural
knowledge and skills to allow full participation in society. We
rely upon schools to educate our children not only in gaining
knowledge, but in learning to act in socially acceptable ways. If
schools fail in their institutional goals, our children can fail to
learn, the family and community can be affected and,
ultimately, social problems can result. Therefore, how well
social institutions both care for and adapt to the needs of
individuals, groups, and society is of key importance in social
life.
What Are the Main Theoretical Approaches to Social
Institutions?

Functionalists argue that social institutions exist because they
are useful (or functional) to the operation of society. In fact,
every society must replace members that die, socialize new
members, produce and distribute goods and services, preserve
order, and provide a sense of purpose. Institutions provide an
organizational solution to the needs of individuals and groups.
Problems can arise, however, when economic or political factors
change life conditions. An example that will help to illustrate
this point can be found in education, a vast, interconnected and
highly organized network whose main goal is to socialize
children into expected ways of acting and living. Fifty years
ago, this institution mainly concerned itself with the 3 Rs—
reading, writing and 'rithmatic (arithmetic, or math)—as basic
competencies for occupational success. Due to technological
change and global marketplace demands, however, educational
systems are increasingly under pressure to widen their curricula
to include computer and Internet literacy as well as foreign
language and cultural competency skills. As a result, there is
less time to devote to art, music, and physical education,
subjects thought fifty years ago to be crucial cornerstones of
education. Furthermore, schools are increasingly diverting
resources to social control measures and security as a response
to concerns about violence in schools. In addition, pressure for
funding led schools to accept corporate sponsorship of teams
and cafeterias, which has led at least one critic to claim that a
fourth R has been added to the 3 Rs—retail!
Think about this…
There is a growing trend for schools to accept free or reduced-
price goods and services in exchange for logo placement and
marketing products on school property. What are the advantages
and disadvantages for schools and the children they wish to
educate? This article provides an introduction to the
issues: http://www.alissaquart.com/articles/2003/01/unbranding
_boston_globe.html.
The point here is that although institutions such as education
are able to adapt to new demands, teachers can be overwhelmed

by the responsibilities for both teaching and maintaining social
control, parents can become dismayed when there is more
classroom time spent on computers than on reading and writing,
and children who attend schools full of corporate logos may
learn more about consumerism than about math and science.
Conflict theorists see social institutions as a forum for social
order, but that social order is characterized by a struggle over
power and wealth. To use the example of education mentioned
above, conflict theorists believe that educational institutions
tend to perpetuate inequality. One way they do this is through
the unequal funding of schools. Wealthier communities with
high property taxes can afford to hire more teachers (and thus
ensure low class size) and spend more money per pupil than
poor communities can. In addition, salaries for teachers can be
higher and student resources, such as computers, science labs,
and sports facilities, can impart a better chance for success to
students than is the case in poorer communities.
A third perspective, symbolic interactionism, concerns itself
with how institutions shape the behavior, thoughts, and beliefs
of individuals and groups, including interaction within and
across institutions. Recall, from module 3, for example, how
religion was used to justify interactions between slaves and
slave owners. One additional example can be found in the
military, an institution with formalized power and authority
hierarchies. This institution has a profound influence on
individuals and family members. The deployments and
relocation that is required by the military clearly shape
behaviors, beliefs, and on a very personal level, the feeling,
values, and perspectives of its members.
Functionalist, conflict, and symbolic interactionist perspectives
are useful frameworks to explore various institutions such as the
military, law, media, or the economy. You will see these
approaches reappear as you study the different institutions
discussed in your textbook.
II. Two Examples of Institutions: The Family and Religion
The Family

How Has the Family Functioned as an Institution?
In early America, the family was the main provider of food,
clothing, health care, education, and religious instruction.
Family members were collectively involved in making a living,
from the child who could hoe or care for animals to young
adults who were socialized by their parents into their parent's
own gender-specific roles and responsibilities. Emotional and
material security were among the results of this arrangement.
These securities, however, were not provided to all families. By
way of illustration, African American families within the
American slave system were often not permitted these securities
or even the opportunity to create them: children were sold,
families were split up and, in some cases, people were not
permitted to have a family.
Think about this…
Read his article and imagine the different worlds of early free
and enslaved families.
http://www.iath.virginia.edu/vshadow2/HIUS403/freedmen/fs/in
tro.html
The Industrial Revolution brought massive changes to family
life. Work that previously took place within the household was
moved outside of the home into factories. Over three centuries,
responsibilities for heath care, education of children, and even
religious participation shifted from the self-sustaining unit of
the family to institutions physically outside of the family home.
This change brought major implications for family ties. Because
the labor-intensive work requiring the efforts of all family
members gradually decreased, it was no longer of value to have
a large family.
Other changes also occurred in the family structure in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In the nineteenth century,
for example, women began working for pay outside of the home
in various textile factories, particularly the textile mills in
Massachusetts. In fact, the first labor organization for women
was established in Massachusetts in 1844 (Bolden, 2002). In the

twentieth century, the onset of world war saw unprecedented
numbers of married and unmarried women entering the labor
force.
The two wars, particularly World War II, fundamentally
changed the number and perception of women in the workforce.
As men went to fight in the war, women were needed to fill the
labor gaps at home and they did. Moreover, in spite of the
return of many women to domestic roles following the war,
their role in the workforce during the war permanently changed
attitudes about women as workers and mothers. A majority of
women today, including women with children, work outside of
the home (Lindsay, 1997).
It is important to note that family life varies throughout the
United States by such factors as social class and culture. For
example, significant cultural differences distinguish Latino and
Hispanic families from Asian-, Native-, or African American
families. In general, the more resources the family has, the more
it seems to assume middle-class characteristics of a nuclear
family. Last, as family members age, family structure shifts
when children leave or spouses separate through divorce or
death.
How Have Changes in the Family Affected Other Institutions?
We can see from the history of the family that as the family
changed over time, some functions seemed to break down. As
industrialization seemed to weaken the family, new formal
organizations began to replace some of the family's traditional
functions. For example, medical treatment began to be provided
by hospitals, child care moved from the home to day care
facilities and schools, and higher education institutions, such as
high schools and colleges, arose to take over the education of
young adults—education that was previously provided by the
family or by guilds.
As a second example, religious participation within the home
gave way to more formalized participation in religious
organizations outside of the home, e.g., congregations, temples,
or other places of worship. Overall, traditional functions

become less a part of family life, other changes (often seen as
dysfunctions) occurred. For example, traditional societies were
marked by close kinship networks, small communities, and more
often than not, large households that in many cases included not
only children but extended family members and unrelated
household workers. Today's nuclear families are smaller, the
networks around these small families can be greatly dispersed,
and the families are dependent on fewer people for material and
emotional support. This situation makes families vulnerable to
stress when serious illness, job loss, or other disruptions occur.
Another type of family change related to trust and business
dealings. Relations in traditional communities based on
handshakes, family reputation, unwritten agreements, and so on,
no longer could be trusted as society became larger. Witness
today's institutional norms of impersonal and bureaucratic
interaction and the overlap of such institutions as the law, the
courts, and the criminal justice system. As communities became
interconnected and interrelated by mutual interests, the
relationships between larger and larger groups, and the
commerce within and between such groups, gave way to more
formal aspects of the economy and government.
In sum, we can see that to meet the needs of people faced with
change, there is a growing tendency toward the division of labor
and specialization of function that accompanies increasing size
and increasing complexity. This thinking is in line with the
observations of Emile Durkheim over a century ago.
How Can the Family Be Understood in a Theoretical Context?
Functionalists argue that the family performs key functions that
benefit society, such as regulating sexual activity; replacing,
producing, and socializing new members of society; and
providing the center of intimacy and companionship so
necessary to human life. There are signs, however, that such
traditional functions of the family are now changing. For
example, with the advent of the Information Age, it is clear that
children are being socialized, in part, outside of the traditional
family by such factors as the Internet, video games, TV, and

films.
A number of trends run in stark contrast to conventional
television images of the 1950s. It seems that the structure of
family life in America is under change. Trends, such as the
delay in age of marriage and cohabitation, are related to the
increased labor force participation of women and the increasing
difficulty (at least in part) in securing the economic means for
marriage. The birth of children outside of marriage and the high
divorce rate have led to dramatic increases in the proportion of
female-headed families in poverty. Rising divorce rates and
remarriage requires that families rewrite the books on family
arrangements as they struggle to incorporate step-children, ex-
spouses, and ex-extended family members into new family
forms that blend old and new relationships.
Finally, as a final illustration, given that families now are
smaller and more isolated from support networks than they were
fifty years ago, we're finding that husbands and wives don't
always play the idealized roles of partners in harmony and bliss
so prevalent in the 1950s. There is growing concern about the
amount of violence within the family and the short- and long-
term effects on children who grow up in violent households.
Think about this…
Go to The National Criminal Justice Reference Service
at http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/topics/topic.aspx?topicid=179 to
read more about domestic violence. What are the trends in
domestic violence in America? How do rates of domestic
violence in poor, middle class, and rich families vary? (When
you go to the Web site, scroll down to select articles of interest
to you.)
Whereas functionalists view the family as a relatively stable
institution, conflict theorists emphasize that the family serves
the interests of groups in power and plays a role in perpetuating
inequality. For example, the family subordinates women, is the
center of violence, and family structure perpetuates an unequal
stratification system.
Friedrich Engels (1942/1884) wrote extensively on the family as

a patriarchal system that justifies the primary position of the
male in the family. Even today, women in the workforce
continue to be paid less yet assume the major responsibility for
child-rearing and housework. When wives concern themselves
with the unpaid domestic labor in the household, the husbands
are thus freed to devote all their attention to work. Sociologist
Arlie Hochshild calls the double burden of domestic labor after
coming home from a job the "second shift" (Hochshild, 1989).
Religion
How Do Sociologists Study Religion as an Institution?
Sociologists who research religion analyze the relationship
between religion and society, looking at the role religion plays
in people's lives. Rather than evaluating religious beliefs as "the
truth" or verifying or disproving scripture, sociologists concern
themselves with empirical matters about religion and the impact
religion has on social structures as well as on individuals in
their personal life. This emphasis is illustrated in sociological
studies that look at, for example, the effect religion has on
voting practices, political beliefs, or such topics as abortion, the
death penalty, or cloning. In addition, how behavior is shaped
by religious beliefs is also of interest.
How Are Theoretical Perspectives Used to Study Religion?
Classical definitions of religion reflect the early functionalist
views of religion as an institution. Emile Durkheim defined
religion this way:
A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to
sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden—
beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral
community called a Church, all those who adhere to them.
(Durkheim, 1964/1915, p. 37, cited in Morris, 1987.)
Durkheim thought of religion as a universal institution that was
functional because it met basic human needs. Among its
functions are:
1. Religion provides emotional comfort and meaning to life. It
assures people that there is a meaning to life and suffering.
2. Religion unites people through shared norms, symbols, and

values. It provides a community framework in which values and
perspectives are shared. In this way, religion facilitates social
order and social control.
3. Religion often is used to support the political activities or
governments of countries.
4. Religion can be a catalyst for social change. (The Civil
Rights Movement is a notable example).
As in all institutions, religion can be dysfunctional as well as
functional and can be a disruptive force in society. In addition
to Durkheim's focus on the integration function of religion,
Weber has shown how religion can contribute to social change.
The conflict perspective on religion focuses on how religion can
be used to reinforce or establish inequalities. Karl Marx,
himself a non-believer, felt that religion was a tool of those in
power to control the oppressed. (He called it the opiate of the
masses for the effect he thought it had on oppressed
individuals.) When individuals are suffering, religion provides a
justification for the suffering. When oppressed people fail to
rise up, protest, or fight for a better life, those in power are
advantaged. Thus, religion provides a legitimization of social
inequalities.
Max Weber did not agree with the conflict theory perspective of
religion; instead, he saw religion as a profound source of social
change. Weber lived in Germany in the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution at a time of great social change and when
some countries were quite advanced while others seemed
backward and behind. Weber concluded that religion was the
key to the transformation of traditional societies to modern,
industrial societies. In his book, The Protestant Ethic and the
Spirit of Capitalism (1904-05/1958), Weber noted the
significance of religion as the basis for modern economic
systems. Whereas countries such as India or China had natural
resources and big populations available for work, they did not
modernize. He also looked at traditional countries, some with
strong Roman Catholic traditions for example, and concluded
that their traditional religious approaches tended to block new

ideas and be resistant to change. Capitalism seemed to be
flourishing wherever the Protestant religion was practiced. The
principles of hard work, frugality, and thrift, all part of the
Protestant Ethic, lead to the accumulation of money, the
investment in capital, and, ultimately, to greater productivity
(Landis, 1999).
What Does Religion Have to Do with Politics?
Sociologists have long noted that many issues facing society are
influenced by religious perspectives. Such issues as family
planning, abortion, and cloning stir up not only ethical
concerns, but religious ones as well.
We have already mentioned that religion is used as an
ideological support for the power of governments. An obvious
example is national flags that are prominently displayed within
religious institutions. Governments tend to reciprocate by using
religious scriptures, symbols, or clergy in official state events.
When religion is closely tied to governments and power,
religions might be used to provide the ideological justification
for war, violence, or persecution. History is filled with
examples of war based on the comingling of religion and
politics. Religion can also be a force in social change. Civil
rights efforts are often tied to religious ideals in the United
States as well as in other countries. Places of worship can serve
as centers in which individuals seeking social change organize
their efforts and support each other (Aho, 2001, at
http://www.cqpress.com/context/articles/epr_violence.html).
Think about this…
What is the relationship between religion and political unrest?
Visit the Relgioustolerance.com Web site for an interesting
discussion about this
issue: http://www.religioustolerance.com/curr_war.htm
III. Changing Institutions: Cross-Cultural and Historical
Perspectives
How Do Institutions Vary in Form?
Institutions vary in their form and content across cultures. All
societies have families and religious institutions, but the

structure of families and the types of religions vary enormously.
To return to the example of the family, around the world, love
and personal decision are not the only way that one finds a
marriage partner. In some places in the world, the man or his
family pays for a bride through a bride price or bride service. In
others, a dowry or an exchange of money between families
secures a bride. Marriage by arrangement, common in India and
Pakistan, is based on the importance of marriage in the society
and the view that such a critical decision shouldn't be left to the
young. Of course, marriage by consent, the norm in the United
States, emphasizes the personal happiness and fulfillment the
couple expects in marriage. It is interesting to note that the
contemporary American concept of love as the basis of marriage
is largely a characteristic of modern societies and is not the rule
around the world.
Think about this…
The custom of dowries in India can sometimes have serious
consequences for poor women. To read more go to the article by
Shravanti Reddy at the Digital Freedom
Network:http://dfn.org/news/india/dowry.htm
Where couples live—and with whom—after marriage also varies
cross culturally. In many countries, couples are expected to live
with the bride's or groom's family; whereas couples in the
United States are expected, upon marriage, to establish their
own home away from either family. Social norms regarding
residence are important because proximity plays a role in
influence and power over the family.
How Do Institutions Vary Across Time?
First, there has been a substantial increase in dual-earner
families over the past half century, which has a number of
important implications for social life and has affected other
institutional arrangements in society. Women's work and the
shift of children to day care centers have triggered general
concern about the quantity and quality of socialization children
receive. Mothers can feel caught between society's expectations
that they work and the assumption that they should be the main

socializers of their children.
Second, for a variety of reasons, cohabitation is on the rise in
American and western societies. Proponents of the traditional
family have become concerned about this rise, particularly when
children are born. Are unmarried parents with children a
family? What rights should they be given? Is the family
changing to a new form or should traditional definitions of the
family be redefined to include new family forms such as
cohabiting adults, including those of the same sex, and adoptive
families where parents and children are of different races?
Last, because institutions are interrelated, challenges and
changes of one institution can affect other institutions. For
example, changes in family institutions are interrelated with
change in other institutions such as religion, the economy,
work, or law. Two examples provide illustration of this point:
· Controversial family issues such as proposals to allow
homosexual adults to marry or adopt children or the issue of
whether to allow the cloning of babies have stimulated not only
strong debate among political, legal, and religious institutions.
· The rising life expectancy and the improving economic
situation for elderly Americans have caused changes not only in
medicine but in the economy (because the elderly are an
important consumer group that needs goods and services
tailored to their needs) and politics (because the elderly
constitute a well-organized voting constituency).
Think about this…
To what extent is pregnancy, marriage, cohabitation, and the
birth of children a concern of society and not just a personal
decision? What social problems arise when people have
relationships and children without regard to the communities
and society around them? How do such personal decisions relate
to one's participation in other related institutions such as work
or religion?
How Do Institutions Change Over Time?
As you can see, institutions contain relatively stable elements
but also change in response to internal factors (such as trends in

behavior) and external factors (such as in response to economic
downturns or war). Because institutions encompass value and
norms, they tend to provide the basis on which to judge people's
actions. It is easy to understand why individuals and groups
concerned with traditional family ideals would look critically
upon dual working families, day care, cohabitation, and out-of-
wedlock births.
Today, however, changes in the institution of the family are
posing a number of challenging questions:
· Are alternative family forms bad for society and for the
children who are raised in them?
· Should society try to control such family forms (by making
them illegal or by forcing people into marriage, for example)?
· Should society accommodate new family forms and, if so,
what might those accommodations look like (for example,
should homosexuals be allowed to marry)?
When we turn to the institution of religion, we can see that
religions are also in a state of change. Because of the potential
for religion to be used as an ideological support to governments,
we often see that conflicts between governments and states can
contain religious overtones.
Traditional religions that resist modernization and separate
themselves from interaction with others can pose threats to
social stability. Intolerance of religious beliefs can also pose
real barriers to understanding and harmony between individuals,
groups, and societies.
Think about this…
Go to Religioustolerance.org for a discussion about the
relationship between religious intolerance and
conflict. http://www.religoiustolerance.com
READ or VIEW: Sources
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S294zRodS_4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYMk3Bk08NA
Openstax Introduction to Sociology chapter 16- Introduction to
Education

Sociology's Three Major Theoretical Perspectives
Three classical research perspectives used in sociology are
described in your textbook. You will note that two perspectives
employ a macro level of analysis and the other employs a micro
level of analysis. Macro-level analyses are research focused on
large-scale patterns of society. Micro-level analyses focus on
social interaction—what people think and do, what social
influences are present, and how perceptions of those social
influences shape behavior.
These perspectives are briefly described below to aid you in
conceptualizing how they are interrelated. (Hold your cursor
over the green type for key term definitions.)
Table 1.1
Comparison of Sociology's Three
Major Theoretical Perspectives
Think about this…
Which perspective would best explain why there seem to be so
many poor people in America although we are among the richest
countries on earth?
Topic 3- The three sociological perspectives or paradigms
Although we have many theories in sociology we have 3 general
ways of looking at the world that come from early sociological
theorists. All three approaches have strengths for examining
certain types of problems but all have weaknesses as well. One
of the most challenging and important parts of an introductory
sociology class is to understand the three basic approaches and
how best to apply them. Here are the 3 sociological paradigms
- Structural Functional theory- sometimes called structural
functionalism or functionalism or functionalist theory
This paradigm is our oldest. It started with our early
sociological theorists like Spencer and Durkheim. They started
working toward ideas of sociology during the industrial
revolution. While many theorists and others were concerned
with how society was falling apart. Theorists like Spencer and
Durkheim watched the farmers get up everyday and work their

fields and the bakers make their bread and while everyone else
was asking why is the world falling apart they started asking-
how in times of turmoil does the world actually hold together.
What they realized is that even during difficult chaotic times
the world mostly works- people get up and do their thing. This
was the beginning of Structural functional theory- this idea that
the things in the world are mostly designed to function and that
this function created stability in society.
So Structural functional theory is most interested in how society
works and how society creates stability. But it is founded on a
very basic premis- a working society is good for all member of
that society.
Structural functional theorists became fascinated with ideas of
different jobs in the world or what they called the division of
labor. They came to see this as the foundation of a working
society. They conceived society as much like the human body –
our body has different systems – circulatory, digestive etc and
they all work together to keep the body stable, functioning and
healthy. In this way symbolic interactionists saw the division of
labor as the way a functioning society met all of its needs to
keep it functioning and healthy. To functionalists all things that
exist in society exist to keep the society stable and functioning
and if they are not helpful to society they will seize to exist.
This is where structural functional theory starts to fall apart-
this means that the theory can’t explain bad things happening in
the system. The best they can do is say that they are like a
disease in the body- they call them dysfunctions and they
believe the society will work (much like an immune system) to
eradicate dysfunctions on its own without intervention.
So the main criticism of Structural functional theory is that they
system does not seem to right itself without intervention.
Structural functional theory is particularly bad at explaining
inequality – if everything functions in a society for the stability
and well being of all members then inequality can’t exist
because that would mean the society functioned better for some
than for others. Since we know inequality exists structural

functional theory basically breaks.
Structural functionalist inability to explain inequality and their
ties to eugenics has basically meant that it is no longer used as
a macro level theory by sociologists very frequently. Instead it
is used as more of an applied theory to explain how certain
parts of society function (or fail to function). It is now much
more often used to target potential solutions for intervention
and change as a mid-range theory which is very different than
its original intention.
We keep it around in introduction classes because it is still
useful to explain how society continues to work on a day to day
basis even in the most chaotic times and it is useful as a mid-
level theory but students often go wrong when trying to apply
this theory to larger social structural issues- particularly those
involving inequality.
-Conflict Theory (critical theory)
Where structural functional theory falls down is exactly where
Conflict theory is at its best. Our first and most important
contributor to Conflict theory is Karl Marx. Although he
considered himself a philosopher and a political activist he is
most fundamental in building this paradigm. Mark believed that
the world was divided into those that owned the means of
production and those that owned only their labor. He believed
that history was a cycle of the tension between those that had
resources and those that did not and this inherent inequality
caused tension that resulted in conflict and this conflict resulted
in social change. Marx was primarily concerned with economic
inequality. He saw the fight for limited resources as the driving
force of larger social structural realties.
While this does a much better job explaining social inequality
compared to structural functional theory is it pretty simple and
may not be as applicable to societies with many social levels.
So future conflict theorists like Weber and others built on this

theory to include other areas of inequality beyond economic-
like power. They looked at other minority groups like race, or
gender. Most importantly they started to focus on inequality in
general and not inequality as only based on conflict. Because
the focus on conflict can be both unrealistic and unhelpful
newer conflict theorists are often called critical theorists
because they critically look at the inequalities in the social
structure. Thinking of this theory as critical theory is helpful
for students who see the word conflict and think that any sort of
contentious or violent or fighting type of behavior automatically
means conflict theory applies.
Even Marx knew that conflict was not an inherent part of
inequality. He claimed that often oppressed groups actively
supported ideas that resulted in them supporting policies of the
majority group that kept them in power . He called these
legitimizing myths. He believed that social institutions (like
religion and education) used these myths to keep control of
exploited classes of people. This is because the people in power
are generally a small group and they can be overthrown if the
larger oppressed group if the group bands together. This means
groups in power benefit when oppressed groups fight with each
other over small amounts of resources rather than banding
together to oppose the group in power.
Because of the power of legitimizing myths and the power of
social structure often oppressed groups feel powerless and do
not band together, rise up or create conflict but we still
inherently care about the inequalities in the social structure.
In addition to thinking this theory applies to all conflict the
other way students most often go wrong applying this theory is
trying to apply it at a micro level. Conflict theory is always
about the larger social structure. So when we examine concepts
like racism, sexism and privilege there is a tendency to lose
sight of the idea that this is about the larger social structure and
think about individual experience or ideas.
-Symbolic interaction
These theories actually developed out of psychological theories

of development. Mead and his students developed these theories
by considering the social nature of human development. They
contend that all human behavior and activity is inherently social
(even when you are alone) because it is all based on your
socialization and social context.
Central to these theories are ideas of use of symbols (like
language) and the way we use symbols to share meaning with
each other. We interact with each other and build shared
understandings through these shared understandings we build
relationships, roles, habits, values. From those relationships,
roles, habits and values we build and define situations and
activities and with those we build our societies.
I think this is the most complicated and interesting paradigm
but it is also pretty easy to get the basics. We use our daily
interactions to build meanings we use meanings to create
society and that created society then constrain future building of
meaning. We are both constrained by our society and actively
changing and constructing it.
The place students most go wrong with this theory is failing to
see it as a social theory- they think only about individual
actions and behaviors rather than how individual actions and
behaviors build a social structure. This is still a sociological
theory not a psychological one. We are still most interested in
how the construction of meaning build our social worlds.
-the fourth paradigm- Life course theory
The biggest limitation of the three social paradigms is that they
don’t really talk to each other. They are all on different levels
and in the case of structural functional and conflict theory even
directly contradict each other. Life course theory started as a
theory but it is quickly developing into a paradigm because of
its ability to help us understand broad ideas about the world.
Life course theory is an interdisciplinary and micro, macro and
mid level theory. Its strength is that it looks at how all aspects
of our life both big and small work together to create our
trajectory through life. Life course theory was originally
developed by Glen Elder. He was interviewing adults who were

children during the great depression and he realized that the
great depression did not impact all children equally. Their age
at the time of the great depression, their family structure, their
location (urban or rural etc), their income level all impacted
how the great depression influenced their outcomes as adults.
He realized that social location mattered and came up with the
main tenants of life course theory (Elder).
Grading rubric
criteria
Excellent
Level 5
Satisfactory
Fair
poor
No participation
Group project
18-20 points
Project answers all questions about their social institution
Project does a clear and complete summary of key points their
sources with few organizational or grammatical errors
Project includes at least 2 good discussion questions
Project turns in at least 5 multiple choice questions by Thursday
and all questions were used on quiz as is
Project was creatively presented and interesting to look at.
15-17 points
Project does a summary of key points of their sources with few
organizational or grammatical errors
and all questions were used on quiz with minor revisions
Project was interesting to look at but not as creative as those
earning an excellent.

12- 14 points
Project does a summary of their sources but may miss key
points or have organizational or grammatical issues
but some questions need revisions or were unusable
Project was not as interesting or creative as projects earning a
good or excellent
9-11 points
Project misses some questions about their social institution,
misses key points from the sources, or misrepresents some
concepts
Project has organizational or grammatical errors
Project includes discussion questions but they may not be very
useful to enhance student understanding
Project turns in multiple choice questions but are missing some
or some are of poor quality and need major revisions
Project was not interesting or creatively presented
8 or less points
Project misses questions about their social institution, misses
key points from the sources, or contains errors or
misunderstandings about topic
Project has major organizational or grammatical errors
Project does not include discussion questions or includes poorly
conceived questions
Project is missing multiple choice questions or questions are of
poor quality and need major revisions
Project presentation was distracting or detrimental to
understanding
Group did not turn in a project - no points for entire group
regardless of personal participation
Individual participation
+ 3-5 points to group grade (up to 100 percent)
Individual was active throughout project, contributed to
organization and generation of ideas. Person completed their

parts and helped others where needed. Person was critical to
success of project but did not overstep their role.
+ 1-2 points to group grade (up to 100 percent)
parts and helped others where needed. Person was important to
success of project but did not overstep their role.
awarded group points
parts.
- 1-2 points from group project
Was less active in participation needed help completing tasks or
was difficult to contact and had to be asked to do tasks by other
group members
or
Overstepped own role in project - dictated to other students or
took over portions of their task without being asked or without
attempting to contact them
- 3-5 points from group project
Was not active in participation needed lots of help completing
tasks or was difficult to contact and had to be asked multiple
times to do tasks by other group members or professor
or
Overstepped own role in project - dictated to other students or
took over large portions of the project or attempted to do all of
the project by themselves. Needed intervention by the professor
to stop conflicts with other students
Individual did not participate in project- does not earn any
group points

The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social institutio.docx

The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social institutio.docx

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social institutio.docx

Semelhante a The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social institutio.docx (20)

Mais de alexanderp24

Mais de alexanderp24 (20)

Último

Último (20)

The purpose of this assignment is to learn about social institutio.docx