While functionalists see education as beneficial for society, Marxists take a more critical view. They believe education mainly serves the interests of the ruling class (the bourgeoisie) and helps maintain capitalism by keeping the working class (the proletariat) in their place.
Key Definitions:
Although Marx himself didn't write extensively about education, his ideas form the foundation of Marxist educational theory. He believed that the economic base of society (how things are produced) shapes all other institutions, including education. Schools therefore reflect and reinforce capitalist values and class divisions.
Understanding the Marxist perspective helps us question what schools are really teaching us beyond just subjects. It encourages us to think critically about whose interests education serves and whether it truly offers equal opportunities for all students regardless of their social class.
The official curriculum consists of the subjects and content that schools openly teach and assess. This includes subjects like English, maths, science, history and so on. Schools present this curriculum as neutral knowledge that all students need.
However, Marxists argue that the official curriculum is far from neutral. They believe it:
In many schools, subjects like business studies, economics and computer science (which directly serve the economy) are highly valued. Meanwhile, subjects like art, drama and music (which might encourage creativity and critical thinking) often receive less funding and attention. Marxists would argue this reflects capitalism's priorities - creating workers with skills the economy needs rather than well-rounded, critical citizens.
The hidden curriculum refers to the unwritten, unofficial lessons that schools teach students through their everyday practices, routines and structures. These are not explicitly stated in lesson plans but are learned through the experience of being in school.
Schools train students to accept hierarchy and authority. Bells tell you when to work, teachers tell you what to do and you must follow rules without question - just like in many workplaces.
Schools teach students to accept their position in society. Through streaming, setting and different types of schools, students learn to have "realistic" expectations about their future based on their social class.
Competition for grades, individual achievement and rewards for conformity teach students to accept the values of capitalism as natural and right.
Althusser (1971) argued that education is an "Ideological State Apparatus" that reproduces the values and ideology needed for capitalism to survive. Schools don't use physical force (like the police or army might). Instead, they get students to accept capitalist ideology willingly through the hidden curriculum.
In their book "Schooling in Capitalist America" (1976), Bowles and Gintis argued that there's a close match (or "correspondence") between what happens in schools and what happens in workplaces:
They concluded that schools primarily prepare students for their future role in the workforce by teaching them to be obedient, punctual and accepting of authority.
Willis studied a group of working-class boys (the "lads") in a UK school in the 1970s. He found that these boys actively rejected school culture, creating their own anti-school subculture. Ironically, by rejecting education, they were preparing themselves for working-class jobs. Their resistance to school authority prepared them for manual labour rather than helping them escape it. Willis called this "self-damnation" - the boys thought they were rebelling, but they were actually accepting their future class position.
Bourdieu argued that schools reward students who possess "cultural capital" - the knowledge, language and cultural experiences valued by the dominant class. Middle-class students already have this capital from their families, while working-class students don't. Schools claim to be meritocratic (rewarding talent and hard work), but they're actually rewarding class privilege disguised as individual merit.
According to Marxists, education helps reproduce class inequality in several ways:
Research consistently shows that social class remains the strongest predictor of educational achievement in the UK. According to the Sutton Trust (2019), students from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to achieve top grades, less likely to attend university and less likely to attend elite universities compared to their more advantaged peers. Marxists would argue this isn't accidental but is a feature of an educational system designed to reproduce class inequality.
While the Marxist perspective offers powerful insights, it has been criticised for:
The Marxist perspective challenges us to look beyond the official functions of education and question whose interests schools really serve. It reminds us that education isn't neutral but is shaped by wider social and economic forces.
Even if you don't agree with all aspects of Marxist theory, it provides valuable tools for critically examining educational practices and policies. By understanding how the hidden curriculum might reproduce inequality, we can work towards creating a more equal and just education system that truly serves all students, regardless of their social background.
Log in to track your progress and mark lessons as complete!
Login NowDon't have an account? Sign up here.