PRIVILEGE: THE MAKING OF AN ADOLESCENT ELITE AT ST PAUL’S SCHOOL. SHAMUS RAHMAN KHAN Abstract The author explains the aspect of democratic yet unequal society in reference to what happens in St Paul’s an elite school in Concord New Hampshire that is famous. He states on how colleges have grown to be racially and ethnically diverse and more welcoming to women but still inequality is on the rise. After many years of being known to be attended by America’s wealthiest sons St Paul’s is now admitting a new face of students of both genders that gives not only hope of openness but also the tenacity of inequality. In the description of a critical perspective of indifference as defined in the book we going to look at it one chapter at a time. In the introduction which flows well to chapter one khan substitutes St Paul’s school to the American this vice of inequality not sure where and when it will end. From the students to the school leaders and the teachers each plays a role in this inequality and in one way or another they are affected. Sociologists should be skeptical about Khan's work due to the advanced possibly hidden issues he raises on the topic of inequality. His research covers much ground and is very critical in the explanations of how even when it doesn't seem like it impartiality is a big part of our society. Though he he shows some bias since he tends to criticise the elites way too much. Khan's work also doesn't focus so much on the solution. He only magnifies the problem at hand. His focus on one school is not enough evidence to finally conclude on this broad critical topic but his research is an excellent source of reference for sociologists. [...]
Critical Review: Imagine that you are reviewing Shamus Khan's Privilege: The Making of an Adolescent Elite at St. Paul's School for an audience of other sociologist (and similar professionals) interested in the study of inequality. They want to read your critical perspective on Khan's research and arguments. Note that "critical" as used here does not automatically mean "disapproving", but rather analytical of strengths and weaknesses." Ultimately, you must offer your argument as to: 1. whether or not the book offers any use for understanding/ studying inequality; and 2. why fellow sociologist should know about it, or conversely, why sociologist should be skeptical of this work.