Teachers in Functionalism

I am going to attempt to put my thoughts together in regards to our class discussion about how teachers fit into the functionalist school of thought. I have gathered that based on functionalist thought, school is a much needed part of society as it builds a bridge from family to the general society with an emphasis on "the hidden curriculum" in education; therefore we can establish that good teachers are essential participants in a complex technological society and we can safely say that teachers make a substantial contribution to the "economic, political, and social institutions of that society". To establish this point even further, we have mentioned in past classes that good teachers have not been able to be replaced by modern technologies and other reform movements through American education history.

Where teachers and society seem to struggle with is the way that teachers are rewarded and on what basis. Although I am not a teacher yet, this has been a topic that keeps grabbing my attention as it is highly discussed among the teacher/student community that I am beginning to get acquainted with. The fact that functionalist school of thought does not acknowledge good intentions and hard work but rather achievement is in my opinion one of the reasons that we have such struggle. Achievement has to be defined and functionalism fails to do so in terms of hard work and good intentions which are qualities that a good teacher must possess to be successful in their field.

Functionalism also argues that different people posses different qualities that place them in different levels of jobs (role differentiation). Feinberg and Soltis give an example of this when they explain based on the functionalist view, why a doctor makes more money than a teacher. Once again, in my opinion, this view also creates conflict among the teacher and society in regards to how the former is compensated. But the conflict doesn't seem to be based on teachers believing that they should make as much money as other professions such as a doctor; although some may think so. We all know that bad doctors kill people right (I had to do it)? There seems to be a general decadence in the qualities that society believes a good teacher should have; a general sense of being under valued. Functionalists react to society and how each individual group contributes to it, but we have to remember that society itself and its complexity will set the general environment in which we are to contribute. As mentioned yesterday in class: Right now for the teacher profession, we are dealing with a shortage that is inevitably bringing the quality of teachers down by opening up the field of education to people who may not be suited for the field. This environment falsely, inaccurately, and sometimes unconsciously makes the teacher profession and its characteristics less valuable and unappreciated by our society.

I would have to add that functionalists would probably be pro merit pay for teachers but they would have a very hard time deciphering how to evaluate that merit. Right now, accountability tests are mainly measuring the "manifest functions" of school and we do not all agree that they do it well. Furthermore, these tests do not measure the "latent" function of schools which the functionalists seem to be very concerned with. A functionalist and I would have to agree on the fact that standardized tests are not enough to measure teacher achievement. I can also see how a "hard-core" functionalist would go as far as viewing schools as a small society where different teachers at different grade levels and subject matters are rewarded accordingly.