Jordyn Fernandes Blog 2

I found this chapter difficult to fully understand because it was so dense but the ideas of structural functionalism through the lens of Emilie Durkheim and credentialism were two that caught my attention. Structural functionalism is a group of theories which see the world as a set of interrelated parts that interact to create the society we live in today. (p. 19) Specifically Durkheim's theory is moral regulation is one that I really had difficulties agreeing with. He focuses on the idea of society working with a collective conscious and educational institutions perpetuating these collectivist values through socialization and integration. The problem I find with this idea is that inequality is perpetuated by dismissing cultures, communities and peoples who do not wish to encourage these so called "universal" values and morals. Durkheim's idea of society operating based on an unwritten moral code does not work because the general values the citizens are expected to hold can be in conflict with their personal moral beliefs so they must choose one. (p.20) Problems arise when they choose their own moral beliefs and values as being more important to them than the collective values. Even in a classroom a teacher with racist tendencies can disrupt a child's understanding of what the true belief is supposed to be. If a moral code really was universal we would have no reason for things like jails or a justice system because we would all be operating under the same ideas and a collective conscience.

The second idea that I had a strong reaction to was the idea of credentialism. The idea of needing the right credentials is very prevalent in Canada and educational institutions. Most professors begin their introductory classes with listing off their degrees, accomplishments and places they studied to show that they are smart enough and have enough merit to teach us. All of us in the faculty of education have a bachelor degree of some sort, we have the piece of paper to say we have that credential but if I was quizzed on different theorists in psychology, different dates through history, or the like I doubt I would be able to answer all questions accurately. Most information I will walk away from the university remembering are not fates and names of influential people in the field but practical information like how the importance of making an outline before starting an essay, the stress that procrastination leads too, how to properly study. From the faculty of education most information I will retain will be from things experienced during practicum. The problem is that this knowledge does not come with a piece of paper with a special seal so it is not valued. Many students in the core areas of cities are looked down upon and dismissed because they are seen as less than their counterparts in affluent neighbours because their marks on paper are less. This inequality is frustrating because the street smarts many of the children have are not things that can be taught. As a teacher it is my job to teach students math, English and so forth but the street smarts many of the kids from rough neighbours have are not things that can be taught but impressive skills and knowledge that can take them a long way in life, sometimes much further than my teaching them what 5x12 equals. Due to theories and ideas such as credentialism the impressive knowledge these children have is not valued and that is not fair.

Discussion question: Are the ideas of credentials and merit so entrenched in our system that people cannot prove their value with out special papers and certificates?