The Organizational Context of Teaching and Learning Changing Theoretical Perspectives
The Organizational Context of Teaching and Learning Changing Theoretical Perspectives
复制标题
教学和学习的组织背景改变理论视角
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. Marrett
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Adam Gamoran;Walter G. Secada;C. Marrett
社会学家对集体有偏爱。我们主要关注社会事实、集体特征，这些特征塑造了个人行为并提供了动力。关于学校教育的社会学研究也对集体有同样的兴趣。学校资源、构成、氛围、领导力和治理，所有学校的集体属性，通常被视为影响个别学生学业成绩的来源。然而，对学校组织的研究更多的是失败而不是成功。尤其重要的是，社会学家对学校教育研究的最重要贡献——著名的 1966 年科尔曼报告——也是在教育环境中将集体与个人联系起来的最引人注目的失败。学校条件的变化在很大程度上与学生成绩的差异无关，因为学校水平的影响与家庭环境对学生学习的强大影响相形见绌。尽管政策制定者从学校中白人学生比例对学习的积极影响中得出结论，但与个人家庭背景因素的重要性相比，种族构成的影响很小。这种结果模式强调个人胜过
Sociologists have a predilection for the collective. We are centrally concerned with social facts, characteristics of collectivities that give shape and motivation to individual action. Sociological research on schooling shares this interest in the collective. School resources, composition, climate, leadership, and governance, all collective attributes of schools, are often looked to as sources of influence on the outcomes of schooling for individual students. Yet the study of school organization is marked more by failure than by success. It is especially significant that the most important contribution by sociologists to research on schooling—the famous Coleman Report of 1966—is also the most spectacular failure to connect the collective with the individual in an educational setting. Variation in school conditions was largely unrelated to differences in student outcomes, as school-level effects were dwarfed by the powerful influence of the home environment for student learning. Though policymakers drew implications from the positive impact on learning of the proportion of White students in a school, the effect of racial composition was small compared to the great importance of individual family background factors. This pattern of results, emphasizing the individual over