[1]李晓萱 程天君.再制与超越:教育社会学“文化再生产”研究前沿比较[J].清华大学教育研究,2025,(03):28-36. LI Xiao-xuan CHENG Tian-jun.Reproduction and Transcendence: A Comparison of the Frontiers of“Cultural Reproduction” Research in the Sociology of Education[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2025,(03):28-36.
This study examines the frontiers of cultural reproduction research by analyzing articles published in the Sociology of Education and the British Journal of Sociology of Education over the past decade. The findings indicate that American research in this field is predominantly quantitative, leveraging long-term data and engaging in theoretical reflection. In contrast, British research tends to focus on qualitative methods and cross-cultural comparisons on a global scale. The study also reveals that middle-class educational anxiety and the crisis in elite education have become global focal points in the sociology of education. Despite differing academic traditions and social contexts, Western cultural reproduction studies follow a common “reproductive” logic. In China’s unique “education-centered society”, cultural reproduction combines production, maintenance, and mobility. The lower classes utilize education for upward mobility, while the dominant class classes employ it to preserve their status. Education serves as a vital ladder for social mobility. Furthermore, the current research on cultural reproduction in China not only provides in-depth explanations of local educational phenomena but also offers new theoretical perspectives and intellectual resources for global education research.
相似文献/References:
[1]程猛 ? 康永久.物或损之而益”——关于底层文化资本的另一种言说[J].清华大学教育研究,2016,(04):83. [2]保罗·威利斯 朱 丽.文化生产:历史回顾与未来展望[J].清华大学教育研究,2025,(04):1. Paul Willis ZHU Li.Cultural Production: Historical Review and Future Prospects[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2025,(03):1.