The French Immersion program in northern Ontario is examined in the light of the correspondence theory of Bowles and Gintis. It is argued that to view schools as simply a means of reproducing class-stratified society is inadequate and distorting. Instead, it is argued that we need to consider the ways in which schools also produce social inequality through the mediation of social actors. The motivation and actions of middle-class parents in controlling French Immersion programs for the benefit of their own children are examined. It is argued that schools must be recognized as sites of contestation and struggle and that both the form of transmission and the content of schooling are open to real reform as part of the struggle to build a more democratic, just society.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnyonJ.Social class and the hidden curriculum of work. Journal of Education, 1980, 162, 67–92.
2.
AnyonJ.Elementary schooling and distributions of social class. Interchange, 1981, 12, 118–132.
3.
AppleM.The other side of the hidden curriculum: Correspondence theories and the labour process. Interchange, 1980, 11, 5–22.
4.
AppleM.Reproduction, contestation and curriculum: An essay in self-criticism. Interchange, 1981, 12, 27–47.
5.
BeattieC., DesyJ., & LongstaffS.Bureaucratic careers: Anglophones and Francophones in the Canadian public service.Ottawa: Information Canada, 1972.
6.
BernsteinB.Class, codes and control (Vols. 1–3). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1971.
7.
BlauP., & DuncanO.D. (with A. Truce). The American occupational structure.New York: Wiley, 1967.
8.
BourdieuP., & PasseronJ. C.Reproduction in education, society, and culture.London and Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1977.
9.
BowlesS.If John calls, tell him things didn't work out …. Radical Education Dossier (Glebe, New South Wales, Australia), 1976, 1, 4–11.
10.
BowlesS., & GintisH.Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and contradictions of economic life.New York: Basic Books, 1976.
11.
BravermanH.Labor and monopoly capital.New York: Monthly Review Press, 1974.
12.
BretonR.Cultural boundaries and cohesion of Canada.Montreal: Institute on Policy Research, 1980.
13.
BurnsG., & OlsonC. P.Implementation and politics in French Immersion.Toronto: OISE Research Report, 1981.
14.
BurnsR. M. (Ed.). One country or two.Montreal: McGill, Queen's University Press, 1979.
15.
Coleman report, Equality of educational opportunity.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office: M66, 1966.
16.
ConnellR. W., DowsettG. W., KesslerS., & AchendenD. J.Class and gender dynamics in a ruling class school. Interchange, 1981, 12, 102–117.
17.
ConnellR. W., DowsettG. W., KesslerS., & AchendenD. J.Making a difference.Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin, 1982.
18.
ElliottI. C. (Ed.). Two nations, many cultures: Ethnic groups in Canada.Toronto: Prentice Hall, 1979.
19.
FreireP.Literacy and the possible dream. Prospects, 1976, VI, 68–71.
20.
GaskellJ.Women and education for work. Paper presented at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education conference, The political economy of gender relations, October 30, 1981.
21.
GintisH.Towards a political economy of education: A radical critique of Ivan Illich's Deschooling Society. Harvard Educational Review1972, 42, 70–96.
22.
GintisH., & BowlesS.Contradiction and reproduction in educational theory. In BartonL., & WalkerS. (Eds.), Schooling, ideology and the curriculum.Sussex, England: Falmer Press, 1980.
23.
GramsciA.Selections from the prison notebooks. (HoareQ., & SmithG., eds. and trans.) New York: International Publishers, 1971.
24.
HabermasJ.Theory and practice.Boston: Beacon Press, 1973.
25.
HallJ., & JeffersonT. (Eds.). Resistance through rituals.London: Hutchinson, 1976.
26.
KatzM. (Ed.). Education and social change: Themes from Ontario's past.New York: New York University Press, 1975.
27.
KoskitaloL.Northeastern Ontario statistical profiles.Toronto: Ontario Ministries of Treasuries and Economics, Economic Development Branch, 1979.
28.
La ClauE.Politics and ideology in Marxist theory.London: New Left Books, 1977.
29.
LapkinS., AndrewC. M., HarleyB., SwainM., & KaminJ.The immersion center and the dual-track schools: A study of the relationship between school environment and achievement in a French Immersion program. Canadian Journal of Education, in press.
30.
LaxerR. M. (Ed.). Bilingual tensions in Canada.Toronto: OISE Press, 1979.
31.
McRobbieA.Working class girls and the culture of femininity. In CCCS Women's Studies group, Women take issue: Aspects of women 's subordination.London: Hutchinson, 1978.
32.
OlsonP., & BurnsG.Immersed for change: Politics and planning in French Immersion education. Orbit, December 1981, pp. 7–14.
33.
Peel County Board of Education.Processed report of the ad hoc committee on French Immersion, 1976.
34.
PiddlingtonM.Why we need progressive schools. Radical Education Dossier, (Glebe, New South Wales, Australia) 1977, 2, 16–17.
35.
SewellW., & HauserR. [with Alwin and others]. Education, occupation, and earnings; Achievement in the early career.New York: Academic Press, 1975.
36.
SwainM., & LapkinS.French Immersion in Ontario: A decade of findings.Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education, 1981.
37.
Timmins Board of Education.Final report of the ad hoc committee on French Immersion programs in secondary schools, 1980.
