I am going to start firstly, by looking at how the family was in the years of the industrial revolution and how education was shaped and changed in this period. Secondly, I will look into the post-war immigration and how education was implicated, due to the introduction of new cultures. Citizenship classes have been introduced to cater for the changes and I will explain why some parents disagree to them. Thirdly, I will explain about the different types of families in the modern day society, looking at how education has not only changed in schools but has also been linked to the home and educating parents in some aspects of family life. I will specifically look at single-parent families and how it has been reported that these children already have a disadvantage in education, if they are from this type of family. In the nineteenth century, the family structure was shaped by the industrial revolution. It spread throughout Britain and there was a massive increase in the number of factories. As the number of factories grew, people moved from the countryside into towns looking for better paid work. The towns were not ready for this great increase of people and housing was very overcrowded. Rooms were rented to whole families. Family size at this time was between six to twelve children and they all slept and fed in a single room. Muncie, et al (1993) cited that Smith (1986:pg 18) showed that in 1860 the average marriage produced seven children. Also part of the family living in one room were the grandparents, this is known as an extended family. Grandparents lived and were looked after by the family because they were a valuable resource, as a childminder. “Kin were an important source of aid in ‘critical life situations’ for exampl... ... middle of paper ... ...terial disadvantage explain the increased risk of adverse health, educational & behaviourial outcomes among children in lone parent households in Britain?’ J Epidemiol Community Health, 59 pg 152-157 (Online). Available at www.ncbi.nlm.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1733007/pdf/v059p00152.pdf (Accessed: 21st March 2011). Stubbs, M. (1976) Language, schools & classrooms: contemporary sociology of the school. 2nd edn. London; Methuen & Co Ltd. Teachers Net (2009) Active Citizenship. Available at www.teachersnet.gov.uk/teachingandlearning/library/activecitizens/ (Accessed: 21st March 2011). West, E. (2010) ‘Citizenship classes are propaganda. Why can’t parents take their children out of them?’, The Telegraph, 22nd January (Online). Available at www.blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100023344/citizenship-classes-are-propaganda-why-can’t-parents-take-their-children-out-of-them/
Why the family is considered the most important agent of socialization? What caused the dramatic changes to the American family? What are those changes? Describe the differences in marriage and family life that are linked to class, race, gender, and personal choice. Do you feel the trend toward diverse families is positive or negative? If the trend changed toward traditional (pre-World War II) families, how would that affect women’s rights?
In the course of this essay I shall be looking at the role of the
Webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk, (2014). Citizenship, Key Stage 2 - Schools. [online] Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130904095049/https://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/primary/b00198824/citizenship/ks2 [Accessed 22 Apr. 2014].
Many of people today feel trapped inside their homes, just how the women of Pre-Industrial Europe felt. Working day in and day out inside the homes, just to keep the family together, and make a little money on the side, these women were an integral part of Pre-Industrial families. Not only were the women important to Pre-Industrial European families, but so were the households. Much of the money was made in the households, and this is where families either succeeded or failed. The household and women of Pre-Industrial Europe played an integral role in the economy of the families, and more importantly, the women of these households kept them running smoothly. Without either of these important aspects of life in Pre-Industrial Europe, it is safe to say that the families would have collapsed, due to a lack of organization and structures. Pre-Industrial Europe, in which the women and the household were “the factories” per se, due to the income they generated, was much different from the Europe we know today. Leading into the Industrialization of Europe beginning in the late 1700's and lasting through the early 1800's, the household played an integral role in the family’s income. Without the household, the families would literally collapse, due to a lack of organization and stability. Within these important family sub-units, there was one married couple, their children, the family’s servants, and in some cases, depending upon the region of Europe, there were grandparents, aunts and uncles. Not only did the father and servants of the house work, but also the women and children. Also, in the case of there being more than one generation of family in a single household, depending upon the region of Europe, the grandparents, aunts, and uncles would also work within the house. Once the children of these households reached a certain age, usually the early teens, they were sent off to work in a house as a servant. These servants were different then the servants of today, as they worked for room, board, and food, not waiting on the family. Once they started to generate income, the teens would save up the money necessary to begin their own family. However, there were the few exceptions; teens that did not work as servants, and ended up marrying into an existing household. This however,...
Traditional family in today’s society is rather a fantasy, a fairy tale without the happy ending. Everyone belongs to a family, but the ideology that the family is built around is the tell tale. Family structures have undeniably changed, moving away from the conventional family model. Nowadays more mothers work outside of the home, more fathers are asked to help with housework, and more women are choosing to have children solo. Today there are families that have a mom and a dad living in the same home, there are step-families, and families that have just a mother or just a father. Probably the most scrutinized could be families that consist of two moms or two dads. These are all examples of families and if all members are appropriately happy and healthy then these families are okay and should incontestably be accepted. So why is the fantasy of the traditional family model still so emphasized in our society? This expectation is degrading and misleading. Progressing with times one ought not be criticized or shunned for being true to their beliefs. It is those living falsely, living as society thinks they should that are the problem. Perhaps as a society, if there were more focus and concern for happiness and peace within ones family and fewer worries for the neighbor then there would be less dilemma.
The changing of American families has left many families broken and struggling. Pauline Irit Erera, an associate professor at the University of Washington School of Social Work, wrote the article “What is a Family?”. Erera has written extensively about family diversity, focusing on step-families, foster families, lesbian families, and noncustodial fathers. Rebecca M. Blank, a professor of economics at Northwestern University, where she has directed the Joint Center for Poverty Research, wrote the article “Absent Fathers: Why Don't We Ever Talk About the Unmarried Men?”. She served on the Council of Economic Advisors during the Clinton administration. Andrew J. Cherlin, a professor of sociology at Johns Hopkins University wrote the article “The Origins of the Ambivalent Acceptance of Divorce”. She is also the author of several other books on the changing profiles of American family life. These three texts each talk about the relationship between the parent and the child of a single-parent household. They each discuss divorce, money/income they receive, and the worries that come with raising a child in a single-parent household.
Archives are filled with articles focused on the outcomes of children raised in single parent homes versus children raised in the nuclear family setting. The subject is highlighted in mass volumes throughout various internet blog forums, newspaper articles, and popular magazines detailing the statistical data and reputed points of view on the outcomes of the subject. Countless bloggers provide substantial personal testimonies highlighting both ends in the debate, while giving readers an inside-look at this situation from all different walks of life. Developing this issue into a broader context, we as the readers have to consider the magnitude of the issue and ask ourselves, “In concern with the betterment of my family, which lifestyle could I possibly adopt to ensure that my children are adequately socialized and prepped for life outside the parental structure?” However, this is not a question that requires a prognosis from a prominent sociologist; in fact, children raised in single parent families are just as capable at success as children raised in the traditional family setting.
Victorian homes offered children a large network of various caregivers built in to the family structure. Each married couple had an average of six children, but the average household was considerably larger. Rarely would one find the nuclear family living alone. Only thirty-six per cent of families consisted simply of a set of parents and their children. Extended families were also rare. Only 10 per cent of families had three or more generations under one roof. The average household would more likely be a conglomeration of a nuclear family along with any number of random outsiders. The stragglers could include any combination of lodgers, distant relatives, apprentices and/or servants.
It is noteworthy that, although growing up in a household with a single parent is considered as a risk factor, such non-nuclear families have become a rather common phenomenon in the recent couple of decades. Statistics...
The end of the 18th century was a turbulent time in American history. The country had just won its independence from Great Britain and was attempting to find an identity for itself. Up to this point families in America were similar to British families. The father was the head of the household, but lived in harmony with his wife. The children were seen as part of the family’s labor force, helping to produce food and supplies for the family. The church ruled the family as much as colonial law in the late 18th. A change in the general economy paved the way for the emergence of a new type of family.
The family unit is as diverse as the societies they each represent. This sometimes can manifest traditional roles of doting mothers and providing fathers into a home with two sets of parents (Kurrien & Dawn Vo, 2004). Therefore, the involvement and importance of the extended family: grandparents and other family members such as aunts and uncles play a significant role in both its economic and social function.
The television sitcom Modern Family produced by Steven Levitan and Christopher Lloyd shows the many different types of a modern American family. According to Andrew Hampp, “The show is among the most-viewed scripted programs in prime time in its second season, averaging 11 million viewers during original airings and often ranked as the most DVRed program most weeks” (2). The television show is a frequently watched show and is liked by many viewers. Modern Family's storyline helps the families of viewers by being an influential and relatable show to different types of families. The show is about the lives of three different families that are all related. In the show there are Jay and Gloria, an intergenerational couple with two sons-- Manny (from Gloria’s previous relationship) and Joe, their new baby. Jay’s adult son Cameron is married to his gay partner Mitchell, and they adopted Lily from Vietnam. Finally, Jay’s daughter Claire is married to her heterosexual partner named Phil and they have three children. The show is influential to our culture today because it shows these different types of families and addresses controversial themes such as gay adoption, the different family connections and communications, intergenerational coupling, and acceptance of diversity within an extended family. The family is easy to relate to while watching because it is based off of real family situations.
Throughout the years there have been many social institutions that have made a dramatic impact on society; none more important than families. In today’s modern industrialized societies, families carry out basic necessities that other social institutions cannot. Different skills such as responsibility can also be acquired from families where it can be applied to everyday life. Furthermore families in the past needed to be the most important social institution to ensure their survival. Since the pre-industrialized era, families are considered the most important social institution because they provide for our basic needs, teach us to acquire new skills, and assure our survival.
This essay will aim to explain differences between the sociological imagination and common sense. What the sociological imagination and common sense are and how they are at work in our society today. Using the area of educational achievement I will bring into this essay examples through research and findings from sociologists such as; Pierre Bourdieu, Culture Capital (1977), Bernstein-(1961)speech patterns’ and Paul Willis (1977)learning to labour, and use these examples as evidence to show how these would explain educational achievement in relation to the sociological imagination and common sense assumptions. I shall begin this essay by discussing where the sociological imagination arose from and what this is in comparison to common sense.
The extended family predominated pre-industrially because of the need for a large family to help tend the land or look after those who were unable to do so. Infant mortality was high so you had to produce more children to be sure of having enough help. The family were a unit of production producing only the goods needed to survive and trading the remainder. Following the Industrial Revolution in the late 19th century, it was replaced by the nuclear family which was a unit of consumption as family members became wage earners and families needed to become more geographically mobile and move to where they could find work.