Unit 9

Education and Social Change

Introduction: The term social change is used to indicate the changes that take place in human
interactions and interrelations. Society is a web of social relationships and hence social change
means change in the system of social relationships. These are understood in terms of social
processes and social interactions and social organization. August Comte the father of Sociology has
posed two problems- the question of social statics and the question of social dynamics, what is and
how it changes. The sociologists not only outline the structure of the society but also seek to know
its causes also. According to Morris Ginsberg social change is a change in the social structure.

The Concept of Social Change: While defining the social change we can say that social change is
essentially a process of alteration with no reference to the quality of change. Changes in society are
related/linked to changes in culture, so that it would be sometimes useful to talk about ‘socio-
cultural change’.

Social change has been defined by sociologist Wilbert Moore (1963) as a significant alteration over
time in behaviour patterns and culture, including norms and values.

R. M. Maclver and C. H. Page (1950) The word, 'process' implies the idea of continuity; 'all that is
meant by process is the definite step-by-step manner through which one state or stage merges into
another'. Nothing is said here about the quality, of the process. It is simply a way of describing how
things happen in society; and also the way in which people adapt to certain elements in their society

Characteristics of Social Change:

Social change is universal: It means that social change is not confined to a particular society or
group. It occurs in every society, sociologically, speaking an unchangeable society is considered as a
dead society. Thus, no society is free from the impact of social change.

Speed of social change is related to time factor :The speed of social change is not uniform. It differs
from period to period. In modern society the speed of social change is rapid or faster than traditional
society.

Speed of social change is unequal and comparative: We can argue that speed of social change is
more or less similar in each society. It is slow in traditional society whereas it is rapid in modern
society. In urban areas the speed of social change is faster than the rural areas.

Social change is an essential law : Essential law means a law which occurs and over which we have
no control. It may be planned or not, it must occur.

Social change may be planned or unplanned: Planned changes are those which occur by some
deliberate or conscious effort. On the other hand, unplanned change refers to the change which
occurs without any deliberate effort like earth-quake, war, political revolution and other natural
calamities. Thus, social change occurs both in planned and unplanned manner.

Social change may be short term or long term: Some change brings immediate change which is
known as short term change like fashion. But other changes take years to produce result which is
known as long term change. Custom, tradition, folkways, mores etc. are long term changes.
Social change lacks definite prediction: Prediction means 'foretelling' in case of social change we are
well aware of various factors but we cannot predict although it is a law. Definite prediction of social
change is not possible, because what will be the result of social change we cannot say.

Social change is a community change: Social change does not refer to the change which occurs in
the life of an individual or life pattern of individuals. It is a change which occurs in the entire
community and that change can be called social change which influences a community form.

Social change is the result of the interaction of various factors: A single factor can trigger a
particular change but never causes social change. It is always associated with other factors such as
cultural, biological, physical, technological and others. It is due to the material interdependence of
social phenomenon.

Education and Change in Society

Education mediates and maintains the cultural heritage of the society. But, whilst seeking to
conserve, education must also ensure that culture lag in society is minimized. This means
that there must be some attempt to adjust the old culture to new conditions in order that
individuals within a society may keep up with technological change. Patterns of culture and
of institutions change rapidly, even though the average member of society may be virtually
unaware of the transformations taking place around her.
1. Durkheim (1956): There is, and must be, an interaction between education and society. It
is not just a one -way process in which education is wholly determined by the state or by the
demands of society. The institution and structure of education can, in turn, change and
modify the social structure. Society at large may dictate the change, through the free
election of political parties to power. In turn the programme, form and schedule of
education which, to a large extent are directed and controlled by the political and social
aims of society at any particular time, may contribute to the change. A study of comparative
education will adequately reveal the fact that the ideologies, the political ideals, and the
social aims of countries like China, the USA and the USSR, France, Germany and England, are
reflected in their educational systems. Education, however, does not merely reflect society,
it serves to bring change in it too.
2. Karl Mannheim (1960): also explored the problem of social change and social progress in
relation to education. He explained that there was a lack of awareness in social affairs as
well as a lack of comprehensive sociological orientation. The leaders of the nation, including
teachers, should be educated in a way which would enable them to understand the meaning
of change. Mannheim argued that in the present situation no teaching was sound unless it
trained people to be conscious of the social situation in which they find themselves, and to
be able after careful deliberation to make their choices and take decisions. Education, some
philosophers believe, must therefore be for mobility, for flexibility of thought and action, for
producing individuals with a high general level of culture so that they. Adapt to changing
economic and social conditions.
3. According to Kamat (1985) there are four positions regarding education and social change (i)
Education is for itself and has nothing to do with social change; (ii) Education is determined
completely by social factors and can therefore, play no role in changing society. It follows
social change; (iii) Education is an autonomous or relatively autonomous factor and
therefore can and does induce social change; (iv) Educational change and social change must
take place simultaneously .
A). fundamental structural changes in society: post revolutionary period, when
fundamental structural changes are taking place rapidly, education can undoubtedly operate
as a powerful means to demolish the cultural and ideological superstructure and to build in
its place an altogether new structure appropriate to the situation which would be in
harmony with the newborn society. In some L countries, a whole new system of education
evolved replacing the old system after revolutionary socio-economic and political structural
changes. For example, after the British conquest of India a system of modern education was
introduced I under the aegis of the British rulers.
b). an alternative ideology: Education gives place to the alternative ideologies which
challenges the existing ideologies.
c) education as a factor of social development: In essence, education has a bearing on social
concerns; educational change follows social change. More importantly, education conditions
development, but is itself a product of prior social and economic changes in society. It is an
independent factor in social and economic development generating intended and
unintended consequences and conflicts of values and goals. Naturally the relations between
education and developments are not mutually exclusive.
D) Education can be planned to produce social change. The intention is to effect a planned
change in educational standards, which has positive consequences for social and economic
development. The planned educational change is usually not coordinated with changing the
social context that has depressed educational standards. In most developing countries, there
is an enormous unsatisfied demand for education because it is perceived as the gateway to
an improved social position.
a) Education and Economic Development There has long been a widespread understanding
in academic and government circles that education is the main determinant of economic
growth. Especially, in the post-World War II period, the relationship of education to
economic development received serious attention in national and international forums.
Education was conceived as one of the more important factors in economic growth. This
belief also provided a justificati0.n for the massive expansion of education and allocation of
large funds for the education sector. It was soon discovered that education only
strengthened old inequalities and created new ones, on the one hand, and perpetuated the
existing outdated internal politicoeconomic power structures on the other. This means that
the causes of underdevelopment lie in structural factors and not so much in educational
backwardness. Education was thought to be the main instrument of social change, especially
cultural rather than structural chahge in the social sphere. Education, it was realized, by and
large works to maintain the existent social situation and support the ideas and values of the
privileged social classes and their economic, social and political interests. To reiterate, it
seems that however imperative it is for the educational process to keep pace with the
demands made by economic and technical development on the labour force, there is a very
real sense in which educational expansion is a consequence rather than a cause of economic
development. It may also be argued that to concentrate upon the relationships between
education and occupation is to overlook the significance of changes in attitudes and values.
From this point of view, education is seen as introducing the developing society to new
needs and expectations. In short, education helps to wean the developing society away from
the old and lead towards the new social order, it inspires a belief in progress, in efficiency, in
achievement and in rationality. At the same time, education may be seen as creating the
conditions for political as well as economic development by laying the foundations of a
democratic form of government.
b) Education and Democracy It is believed that the higher the education level of a country,
the more likely is it to be a democracy. Within countries, moreover, there is an even
stronger relationship between education and democratic attitudes. Lipset's (1960) studies
show that the higher one's education, the more likely one is to believe in democratic values
and support democratic practices. At the same time there is evidence to suggest that there
is no necessary connection between education and democracy. World War II Germany and
Japan were examples of nations, which combined a high level of literacy with a totalitarian
form of government. China is still another example, with a high literacy rate but a
communist form of government. The content of education is a significant factor in this
context. Most totalitarian regimes attempt to use their schools to inculcate conformity and
submissiveness and uncritical loyalty to the state. In the Soviet Union, for example, the
emphasis in schools had been on the indoctrination of conformity and obedience as also in
love for the Soviet system. The atmosphere was pervaded with a spirit of discipline and
hierarchy. Teachers were warned not to coax students but to demand obedience, for only in
this way would students develop the desired moral qualities. The influence of education
upon political attitudes is much more complex than has sometimes been supposed, and
although it maybe correct to argue that a high level of education is necessary for effective
participation in democratic government, there is no guarantee that education and
democratic attitudes are necessarily related.
9.5 Education and Social Change in India One of the dominant themes in educational
reforms in both the 19th and 20th centuries has been the extension of educational
opportunities to wider sections of the community. In generat, this has taken the form of free
schooling, scholarships and maintenance of grants for needy students, with the objective of
providing equal education opportunity for all classes in the community. However, the
provision of formal equality does little to eliminate educational privilege. Whatever changes
we make in our selection mechanisms, or in the scope of our educational provision, many
children because of their family background are unable to take advantage of the
opportunities. Accordingly, attention is now being turned not simply to the removal of
formal barriers to equality, but to the provision of special privileges for those who would
otherwise be handicapped in terms of educational achievement. Such provision is not new.
The fact that a hungry child cannot learn was officially recognized at the beginning of the last
century. The provision of schoo! milk and meals and school health facilities became the
established features of the British education scene. Yet it has taken a long time to see
beyond the purely physical needs and to grasp the concept of what has come to be
understood as, 'cultural deprivation.' Moreover, although the idea of equal educational
provision for all classes in the community is now accepted, it has by no means been
translated into everyday practice. Even today children from slum homes are all too often
educated in slum schools that are quite untypical of schools elsewhere. Yet increasingly, it is
being believed that for these children, even equality is not enough. Therefore, the need for
positive discrimination was emphasized in favour of slum schools. It is argued that schools in
deprived areas should be given priority in many respects -raise the standard of schooling and
infrastructural facilities. The justification is that the homes and neighbourhood from which
many of the children come provide little scope and stimulus for learning. The schools must
provide an environment that compensates for the deprivation. Some people argue that
compensatory education cannot in itself solve problems of health, housing and
discrimination and that these must be tackled by agencies outside school. None of these
arguments attack compensatory education. While acknowledging that formal equality of
opportunity is an inadequate basis for an egalitarian policy, underline the interdependence
of education with other aspects of the social structure.
Conclusion: The realization that educational reform is not a universal panacea should not,
however, lead us to minimize the importance of knowledge about the educational
institutions in society. This simply means that the relationship between education and social
change is very complex and no simple generalizations can be drawn regarding them.