"Science capital": A Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Argument for Extending Bourdieusian Notions of Capital Beyond the Arts
"Science capital": A Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Argument for Extending Bourdieusian Notions of Capital Beyond the Arts
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/tea.21227
复制
发表时间：
2015-09-01
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
Wong, Billy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Archer, Louise;Dawson, Emily;Wong, Billy
本文提出了一个论点和方法，超越了主要是基于艺术的概念化的文化资本，一直在布迪厄方法的趋势。我们提出的概念，在当代社会，科学形式的文化和社会资本可以命令一个高的象征和交换价值。在以往的研究[Archer et al.（2014）Journal of Research in Science Teaching 51，1-30]中，提出了科学资本（与科学相关的文化和社会资本）的概念，作为解释青年人的志向和教育参与的不同模式的理论透镜。在这里，我们试图从理论上，方法论和经验推进讨论，我们可能会概念化的科学资本，以及如何将其转化为一个调查工具，供学生使用。我们报告的调查结果进行了3658名中学生，年龄在11-15岁，在英格兰。分析发现，科学资本在学生群体中的分布不均匀，5%的学生被归类为拥有高科学资本，27%的学生被归类为拥有低科学资本。分析表明，科学资本的水平（高，中，低）明显模式化的文化资本，性别，种族，并设置（轨道）在科学。科学资本水平高、中、低的学生似乎也有非常不同的16岁后计划（关于在科学领域学习或工作）和不同水平的科学自我效能。他们在是否觉得别人把他们看作科学家方面也有很大的不同。本文最后讨论了概念和方法问题以及对实践的影响。(c)2015 Wiley Periodicals，Inc.
This paper sets out an argument and approach for moving beyond a primarily arts-based conceptualization of cultural capital, as has been the tendency within Bourdieusian approaches to date. We advance the notion that, in contemporary society, scientific forms of cultural and social capital can command a high symbolic and exchange value. Our previous research [Archer et al. (2014) Journal of Research in Science Teaching 51, 1-30] proposed the concept of science capital (science-related forms of cultural and social capital) as a theoretical lens for explaining differential patterns of aspiration and educational participation among young people. Here, we attempt to theoretically, methodologically, and empirically advance a discussion of how we might conceptualize science capital and how this might be translated into a survey tool for use with students. We report on findings from a survey conducted with 3658 secondary school students, aged 11-15 years, in England. Analysis found that science capital was unevenly spread across the student population, with 5% being classified as having high science capital and 27% low science capital. Analysis shows that levels of science capital (high, medium, or low) are clearly patterned by cultural capital, gender, ethnicity, and set (track) in science. Students with high, medium, or low levels of science capital also seem to have very different post-16 plans (regarding studying or working in science) and different levels of self-efficacy in science. They also vary dramatically in terms of whether they feel others see them as a science person. The paper concludes with a discussion of conceptual and methodological issues and implications for practice. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.