| 中国教育社会学"学科论"百年概要 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 程天君.中国教育社会学"学科论"百年概要[J].北京大学教育评论,2011,9(4):154-172. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 程天君 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 南京师范大学教育社会学研究中心,南京,210097 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 江苏高校哲学社会科学重点研究基地重大课题“教育社会学理论发展研究”;江苏省社会科学基金一般项目“中国教育社会学学科发展研究”;全国百篇优秀博士学位论文作者专项资金资助项目“中国教育社会学百年:历程、经验及前景” |
| |
| 摘 要： | 教育社会学学科论包括学科要素与学科历史两个基本论域,学科要素则主要由研究对象、学科性质及方法论三者构成。通览我国教育社会学近百年的学科论,可概括大要为如下四则:"一涉",即研究方法论上的"价值涉性";"二说",即研究对象上的"社会化过程说"与"相互关系说";"三论",即学科性质上的"规范学科论"、"事实学科论"及"事实与规范兼有论";"四段",即学科历史上的"初创"、"停滞"、"重建"及"转型"四个阶段。本文以史带论地检视了我国教育社会学学科论中的四个困扰性问题:研究对象上长期主导的"关系说"其实并不能标示教育社会学的学科独特性,学科性质上不得不坚持的"事实学科论"事实上难以成立,学科历史上惯常的"三段论"不免失之粗混,方法论上的"综合论"实乃说到容易做到难。
|
| 关 键 词： | 中国教育社会学 学科论 学科要素 学科历史 问题 |
100 Years of Chinese Sociology of Education:A Summary of Its Discipline Theories |
| |
| Cheng Tianjun.100 Years of Chinese Sociology of Education:A Summary of Its Discipline Theories[J].Peking University Education Review,2011,9(4):154-172. |
| |
| Authors: | Cheng Tianjun |
| |
| Institution: | CHENG Tianjun |
| |
| Abstract: | The discussion about sociology of education as a discipline covers two main fundamental areas:the factors and history of the discipline,the former of which include subject matters,methodology and subject nature.The academic discourse concerning the discipline of sociology of education in China over the past 100 years can be captured by the following four phrases:1) one relevance,i.e.the value-relevance of methodology;2) two doctrines about the subject matters,which refer to " socialization process" and "relationships between society and education";3) three theories about the nature of the discipline,which is reflected in the tensions between a value-driven approach,a fact-driven approach,and a hybrid approach;4) four stages in the history of the discipline,which include establishment,stagnancy,reconstruction and transformation.The article further examined four confusing issues in the disciplinary inquiry of sociology of education of China with historical materials and comments: 1) dominating views regarding the subject matters as relationships between society and education actually can not explain the unique characteristics of sociology of education;2) the doctrine on the subject nature which has emphasized on factuality is indeed untenable;3) the common expressions that divide the subject history into three parts are somewhat sketchy;4) the expectations to integrate different perspectives are more difficult to act than they are suggested. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《北京大学教育评论》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《北京大学教育评论》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
