Promoting Health And Wellbeing, Task 1 - Speaking Notes Response

Social capital is the is the social connections that allow for social interactions in which an individual has opportunities to build bonds, help others out, and affect change for the better. When the social engagement is reciprocated, it can produce benefits for the multiple individuals engaged in the activity and so further the circumstance of the society.

The conversations and interactions people have with each other is a key necessity in becoming an active member in any society. The bonds and relationships that people make is what forms a community. In Robert D. Putnam’s (2000), Bowling Alone, there are three forms of capital; physical which as physical objects, human so properties of an individual like education, and social which are the connections between individuals. Social capital is what makes us branch out into the world and interact with the ones around us, this is both good for ourselves and for the community. Social capital in America has dramatically decreased throughout each generation of population. With the expansion of technology and social reform, the youngest generation has become the most antisocial generation. This antisocial movement has become noticeable in many of groups interactions that use to have high amounts of interaction like political involvement, civic participation, religious participation, and workplace connections.

Social capital is defined as the capacity of social institutions, such as families, churches, schools, or other community organizations to make an investment of attention and advice, support and concerned interest in other community members according to reformer L.J. Hanifan. As a dependent of the community social capital is applied to my everyday life. It helps me to obtain resources for my education such as scholarships, teaches me how to work together with my peers, becoming a positive role model to youth, and build trusting relationships with others in the community. Social capital is seen as a support group from leaders in the community.

Social disorganization theory was established by Shaw and Mckay (1942) in their famous work “Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas”. The main argument of the social disorganization theory is that, the place where people live will influence the individual’s behavior, and this may lead them to crimes. More precisely, certain characteristics of the neighborhood/community will strengthen or weaken the informal social control within the community, and this has mediating effect on crimes.

Josh et al (2000) suggested that Social Capital was an important explanation regarding health issues. Supporting the theory that life chances are influenced by social environment and the people around us (Holborn, Burrage and Langley, 2009).

This unit aims to prepare the learner for working in a school. It covers key aspects of schools as organisations. This includes the structure of the education system, the roles and responsibilities of key members of the school team and the purpose of school ethos, mission statement and aims and values. Learners will also understand the reasons for the key legislation, policies and procedures which are followed in schools and how schools operate within a wider context.

Learning about social bond of an individual through the life course is important but not focusing also on the greater structural variables is a mistake. High crime rates in many inner cities will not be fixed by simply looking at individual level characteristics and causes but there needs to be policy that create societal changes. Gangs and murders for example become concentrated in areas not solely on individual factors of the people living there but poor minority communities adapt to anomie that is high in their neighborhoods. These different level factors may exacerbate each other and have greater influence on crime when they

So far, both theories are able to explain the crime inequality observed insides neighbourhoods; however, when it comes to explaining the difference in crime rates between neighbourhoods with similarly low levels of poverty, social disorganization theory is not able to fully explain why such difference may occur, as it places a greater focus on the internal dynamics of the neighbourhoods than on the external contingencies (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 92). Based on Table 4.5 of Divergent Social Worlds: Neighborhood Crime and the Racial-Spatial DivideI, minority low-poverty areas have roughly two and a half times more violence than their white counterparts (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 88). Social disorganization theory insists that residential instability (percent of those who owns and percent of those who rent) , population heterogeneity (internal differences, including ethno-racial differences), poverty (percent of those who live in poverty), income, deteriorating neighbourhood, and population loss (percent of those who leave due to deterioration) are mechanisms that leads to the absence of informal social control and increases social disorganization, causing the loss of control over youths who then hang out at spontaneous playgrounds and form gangs with delinquent traditions that get passed down through cultural transmission. If such was the case, then one would expect neighbourhoods with similar and comparable local conditions to have similar average rates of crimes. However,

High social capital refers to the social connections which exist between people who shared their values and norms of behavior, which enable and encourage cooperation. According to Portes and Rumbaut, “since there are many families who do not possess the means to promote educational success, initiation of resources to

Social Capital is defined as the networks of relationships among people, enabling that society to function effectively. James Coleman’s “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital” examines the many benefits of social capital in a society. However, most forms of social capital are public goods and do not primarily profit the person who has to bring it about. Therefore, it’s not in his interest to bring it leading to a shortage. Coleman wants to apply economics’s principle of rational action to the social perspective to increase people’s willingness to socialize. On the other hand, Alejandro Portes’s “The Two Meanings of Social Capital” challenges Coleman’s concept by arguing that people shouldn’t

It focuses on the way of life of cities, such as their unemployment rates, financial instability, and lack of quality in education studies. It also states that the family and friends people involve themselves in their daily lives have a major impact on determining if individuals will commit a crime as a result of their social interactions with them. If an individual’s social influences are engaging in insensitive and delinquent behaviors, then that individual will commit crime because of their peer’s behaviors. Whereas, if an individual involves themselves with people who are positively involved in their communities and committed to good behaviors, then the individual will do the same. Because the social environment causes an individual to commit a crime, then the only way to stop crime is to remove the individual from the negative environment and expose them to good social environments in order to produce lawful behavior.

In 1942, Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay produced Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, which aimed to explain crime in urban communities using social disorganization theory. Elliot and Merrill (1934) define social disorganization as “a breakdown in the equilibrium of forces, a decay in the social structure, so that old habits and forms of social control no longer function effectively” (p.20). Using this definition and the ecological approach, Shaw and McKay argue that low economic status, ethnic heterogeneity, and residential mobility led to the disruption of community social organization (Shaw and McKay 1942). This disruption is what essentially leads to delinquency and further crime. Numerous empirical studies and tests were conducted in order to determine the validity of the theory. Studies done in the United States and in other countries have also shown support for the theory. In addition, the theory has been extended and revised by multiple scholars and applied to nonmetropolitan areas. The numerous studies and tests of social disorganization theory will prove whether the theory is applicable to other metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas and whether the theory is still applicable to the modern era.

When it comes to improving your overall social wellness, one of the best ways to improve it and make it better is through being as active as your can in your community. Join a club, volunteer at local shelters, or join the local basketball team at the local recreational center. There are many ways to get out there and be around others to form new relationships. Find different ways that will allow you to communicate

For example, the validity of the GSS was questionable because it is not specifically designed for evaluating social capital on health. The survey does not cover questions such as tobacco and alcohol usage and body-mass index. Additional limitations are, that all of the social capital predictors in this survey were individual-levels of variability. Therefore, social capital researchers should also consider the impact of community-level civic trust and social cohesion. Also Canada conducts a cycle of the GSS every year, so Habibov and Weaver should have collected data from a recent source other than 2008. So, to increase reliability of endogeneity they used instrumental variable simultaneous equations bivariate probity regression model to understand the direction and magnitude of the effect social capital has on health. Naizm Habibov and Robert Weaver both hope this will create awareness amongst researchers and policymakers that social capital does affect

Although my personal experiences are not involved in gang like activity, or serious deviant behavior, it still resembles the actions children make when they are left unsupervised. These behaviors become so normalized in these inner cities, which people just become accustom to delinquent behavior because it is so embedded within communities. This theories concern is only with how the “characteristics of geographical areas, such as whether they are disorganized, influence crime rates” (Cullen). Although I think that this is an interesting aspect to consider upon looking at crime rates, I do not think it is accurate to study a community without studying the characteristics of those who make up the community as well. Sampson and Wilson argue that social disorganization is linked to racial inequalities rather then it being a natural part of city growth. I think that this is an accurate statement, because racial inequality is what creates such a tremendous divide among communities, and I believe that if racial inequality did not exist, we would not have as much disorganization within communities. It has also been argued that “cultural values emerge that do not