Whatever Happened to the Sociology of Education in Teacher Education?

This paper reviews something of the circumstances and factors which have contributed to the development and present status of the sociology of education in teacher education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It reports a survey which presents, through practitioners’ eyes, the discipline's present condition and their view of its future. It contrasts the resulting picture of a demise of the discipline and the pessimism of its practitioners with the condition of the sociology of education outside teacher education. It considers some of the consequences of the decline in the discipline, brought about by a decade of dramatic changes in teacher education.     

A sociology ‘of’ or a sociology ‘for’ education? The New Zealand experience of the dilemma

The sociology of education in New Zealand, as in other countries, is affected by the dilemma inherent to the discipline, namely: is it a sociology of education or a sociology for education? In this article I analyse three factors in which the dilemma is played out: ‘cultural oppositionism’ in the indigenous (kaupapa Maori) approach, critical policy research and the role of empirical research. I argue that a sociology for education is fundamentally weakened by its politicisation, a flaw not helped by the difficulties in drawing political goals from moral imperatives. In contrast a sociology of education, which uses the strengths of empirical research and theoretical analysis, offers the better hope of renewal for, what is, in New Zealand, a moribund discipline.     

Reflections on social exclusion

This article reflects on some of the inclusionary and exclusionary practices of British sociologists of education over the past 30 years, with specific examples relating to gender and internal colonialism. The article opens by revisiting Young's distinction between making and taking problems, illustrated with a current problem taken by many sociologists. It then outlines two grand narratives in British sociology of education, each of which operates as a powerful exclusionary mechanism in the discipline. Then three different operationalisations of the exclusionary agenda are explored. The article concludes by highlighting the exclusionary tendencies of British sociology towards the sociology of education     

The Future of Sport Philosophy in Higher Education Kinesiology

ABSTRACT

Massengale’s Trends Toward the Future of Physical Education (1987) makes no reference to the existence of the philosophic inquiry of physical activity within higher education kinesiology programs—even though the sub-discipline had been formalized by academics in the early 1970s. In contrast, Massengale and Swanson’s The History of Exercise and Sport Science (1997) dedicated a chapter to sport philosophy’s development, including a prognosis of its future. Since then, there has been tremendous growth in the sub-discipline, including an increase in publication outlets, stand-alone monographs, and the creation of academic associations globally. Yet this growth has not necessarily secured sport philosophy’s place in higher education curriculum. In this article, we briefly review the history of philosophic inquiry into physical activity and review previous predictions of the sub-discipline’s future before offering our own prognostication of its future in higher education.     

The end of anti-oppressive education? A differentialist critique

The article explores the relationship between sociology and sociology of education in the United Kingdom (UK), with specific reference to the development of a sociology of higher education. Though the article is mainly concerned with the UK, the broader issues raised, about the status and location of the sociology of education in relation to sociology, who defines research excellence and research prestige and who collaborates with whom (and why) in social science research, are much more widely relevant. There are three main themes. The first concerns the recent history of sociology of education in the UK and its current location in education departments in higher education institutions. The second theme examines the factors that may have led to or are symptomatic of sociology of education's separation from sociology itself. The third theme is the prospect for the development of the sociology of higher education and its potential for collaborative activity with sociologists and other social scientists. In conclusion, it is argued that the sociology of higher education is well placed to collaborate with sociology and other social sciences, whether in research or in programmes for new academics and professional doctorates.     

Transforming Moral Education

Abstract

The anomalous character of approaches to moral education that focus on love and an ethic of care is explained in this paper. It is then argued that if moral education is to foster generative love, education itself must be redefined and moral education as we know it must be transformed.     

Sociology of education: a personal reflection on politics,power and pragmatism

Abstract

This paper attempts to work on a number of different levels. Firstly, it comprises my personal reflections on a career in sociology of education. These reflections are entwined with a history of the discipline that emphasises themes of power, politics and pragmatism. This subjective, and inevitably partial, account is combined with an examination of the structure and composition of the academic field of sociology of education and its relationship with the two disciplines it originates from, sociology and education, but also with the wider field of politics. The ways in which these different strands within sociology of education coalesce or diverge, and the consequences in terms of tensions, fissures and struggles within the field will be considered. I also discuss the subject and content of sociology of education, and its future possibilities for radical as opposed to reactionary or reformist agendas.     

The errors of redemptive sociology or giving up on hope and despair

Abstract

This paper considers the sociology of education (SOE) as a modern human science. It suggests that the SOE is mired in a set of unreflexive, redemptive, Enlightment rationalities, and explores the messy relationships of the sociology with education that result from this. It is argues that the sociology of education has consistently failed to distance itself from the metaphysics, optimism and oppressions of modern schooling. That it has failed to call into question either the basic building blocks of schooling, or what we call education – pedagogy, curriculum and assessment – or the buildings themselves, the spaces of education. The paper concludes by asserting to need for critique rather than simply criticism as a starting point for thinking education differently.     

Gender division in sociology degree programmes – causes and effects?

In spite of engagement and efforts to bring about gender equality in Swedish universities, gender division paradoxically appears in both old and new degree programs and academic disciplines. In recent years there has been a tendency for higher education students to enrol in degree programmes rather than in single subject courses. Due to the decreasing number of students taking subjects like sociology, Halmstad University College has constructed a degree programme, Sociologi och socialt utvecklingsarbete [Sociology and social development], focused on community development and social action; sociology is the main specific subject here. In the autumn of 2007, 95% of the 61 students were female, compared to the 75% of female students in sociology degree courses that Sweden has had in the past seven years. The problem of skewed gender representation in sociology is discussed here, and its consequences for educational practices in sociology as well as for the contents and status of the discipline in the future.     

‘The shape of things that are and were’ and ‘the shape of things to come’: some reflections on the sociology of education at the 40th anniversary of BJSE

Abstract

Reflecting through the prisms of past, present (“the shape of things that are and were”) and future (“the shape of things to come”), this paper discusses three challenges for sociology of education: the rise of populism and declining faith in ‘experts’; inequities within and re/produced by the sociology of education; and how to enact a sociology of education that can ‘make a difference’ to social inequalities. The paper puts forward some ideas in support of a current and future practice of the discipline that is pluralistic and orientated towards social justice. Arguments are made for the value of public-orientated dialogue that is conducted in a range of registers and the importance of acknowledging and engaging with the ‘debt’ (Ladson-Billings) that is owed to minoritized communities and minoritized researchers. Finally, a case is made for a sociology of education based on the principle of service as enacted through praxis partnerships.     

Research in translation: an invitation to converse about the languages and locations of research

ABSTRACT

This article seeks to introduce Research in translation as a new section of the journal. Its goals are to expand and diversify the flow of ideas in the sociology of education, to make available perspectives and notions from other research traditions to readers from diverse parts of the world, and to enrich the conversations about how these movements transform the ways in which social knowledge about education is produced. This introduction underlines that research is always produced in and as translation between different sets of practices and registers; it also wants to visibilize the craft of translation and its effects in the production of knowledge in an increasingly internationalized, plurilingual academia.     

Questioning ‘integrated’ disaster risk reduction and ‘all of society’ engagement: can ‘preparedness pedagogy’ help?

Abstract

AbstractThis paper contributes to the conceptual and empirical development of ‘preparedness pedagogy’. Preparedness involves learning, thus disaster risk reduction (DRR) should be discussed more in the field of education, particularly its sub-discipline of public pedagogy. Disaster risk reduction education should have an element of a pedagogy in the interest of publicness, which is an experimental pedagogy in which citizens act in togetherness to develop their own preparedness. The paper pays attention to the two phrases utilised in the recent DRR discourse – ‘integrated’ DRR and ‘participation by all’ – and examines the case of Japan, applying whole-system thinking. It is suggested that ‘the mesosystem’ of the DRR system yields relationships and learning, and thus enables collaboration, change and ‘participation by all’. Preparedness pedagogy has a role to play in this. The mesosystem functions as the confluence between state-led and community-based DRR to truly integrate the system.     

Assessing learning in a sociology department: what do students say that they learn?

Assessment plays a central role in evaluating and strengthening student learning in higher education, and sociology departments, in particular, have increasingly become interested in engaging in assessment activities to better understand students’ learning. This qualitative study builds on previous research on assessment by asking what students in one American university department see themselves learning in the sociology major. Rather than asking students to reflect on what we think they are learning, we asked open-ended questions about skills, topics and modes of education they considered most significant to their learning. The 25 sociology majors in our study included second-year students, graduating fourth-year students and alumni who had graduated five years prior, enabling us to compare what students have learned or are learning across cohorts. Our findings demonstrate that students emphasise a common collection of skills, topics and – especially – modes of learning in the major, despite their various course selections and interests within the discipline, and also that majors’ orientations to sociology vary as they move through, and beyond, the undergraduate curriculum.     

Comenius,moral and pious education,and the why,when and how of school discipline

ABSTRACT

The present study provides an analysis of John Amos Comenius’s thoughts on moral and pious education, educational governance and school discipline as expressed in Didactica Magna. This is examined from the background of his view of education as a societal phenomenon, the purposes of different categories of knowledge for individual formation and the role of pedagogy in the upbringing of children. Theoretically, this paper expands on Michel Foucault’s ideas about governmentality and discipline, as well as on Henri Lefebvre’s spatial theories. The article argues that Comenius can be viewed as a significant contributor to the early modern shift towards new administrative techniques for school governance, transmitting the mode of disciplinary power into pedogogised and didactic forms. The article contributes to achieving more systematic knowledge for understanding the focused areas of schooling, the concept of discipline and the pedagogic premises of disciplinary practice in an early-modern European educational context.     

中国教育社会学"学科论"百年概要

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。     

站在教育的边缘思考——试论教育社会学的学科精神

学科精神是学科意识的灵魂和根基。学界内对教育社会学学科精神的认识存在着各种相互区分而又有着或多或少联系的观点。教育社会学作为社会学的应用学科,其学科精神应是陌生化、不认同和在他处的边缘精神,这一精神要求教育社会学学者站在教育边缘对教育现象进行社会学的探讨。     

我国教师教育专业设置研究

本文在借鉴发达国家教师教育专业设置经验的基础上指出,在高等教育学科谱系中增加教师教育二级学科,在此学科下根据不同的教育层次来设置宏观的教师教育专业,在这个宏观布局下再根据教学科目来设置微观的教师教育专业或方向。     

Sociology of education

Three stages in the institutionalization of educational sociology in the U.S.A. are identified, i.e. (1) sociology for teachers, up to the 1910s, (2) sociology for education in the 1920s, and (3) sociology of educational problems, in the 1930s. After the war educational sociology became an established sub-discipline of sociology, called sociology of education, which has roughly three approaches, namely (1) cultural anthropological, (2) social psychological, and (3) historical-in-stitutional. In the 1960s the crisis of education provoked by the explosion in enrolments led to the wider interest of sociologists in education. They analyzed the crisis and cooperated in planning remedies. In the 1970s a “new” critical sociology of education emerged, particularly in Britain, which opposes the functionalism and optimism of the “old” sociology of education.     

Positivism,Structurationism and the Differentiation‐Polarisation Theory: a reconsideration of Shilling's novelty and primacy thesis

This paper critically assesses Chris Shilling's claims that structuration theory provides a new and important direction for sociology of education. That assessment is conducted with particular reference to the long‐standing research programme in the sociology of education, known as the differentiation‐polarisation theory (d‐p). The plausibility of the claim that d‐p is positivist is examined, and the extent to which d‐p meets the supposed inadequacies of sociology of education allegedly exposed by structuration theory is investigated. It is concluded that the novelty and importance of structuration theory for sociology of education and a fortiori education policy remains unproven.     

教育学的出路何在：创建新教育学

教育学无法成为学科主要是因为找错了研究对象。＂目标-手段-结果＂是教育实践的整体框架。如果我们把＂手段＂完整地理解为教育系统,这个系统既是其他学科无法研究的对象,也隐含着对教育的整体理解。在教育系统中,任何局部的信息处理和交互都可以由心理学、社会学等学科解释,但是整个教育系统何以能够具有达到具体教育目标的功能只能由教育学系统机制来解释。研究教育系统能够发展出科学与技术知识,这些知识能提升从教者对教育的理解力和行动力。因此,教育系统是教育学的研究对象,而这种教育学不再是教育术语意义上的教育学,而是新教育学。新教育学包含教育技术学、教育现象学、教育价值学三个分支,主张践行以设计为中心的研究范式。新教育学不宣布一般的教育目的是什么,而是为制定清晰合理的教育目的和目标提供理论支撑;不关注泛泛的方法模式,而关注如何具体问题具体分析地设计教育系统以达到具体的目标;不关注有效性,而关注教育实践中的一致性;不关注人成长和社会发展的规律,而关注教育自身的规律;不关注实践的成功,而关注教育系统的缺陷。新教育学作为后发学科虽已开始,但其走向实践,转化为教育生产力的路还很长,至少需要在人员素质、实情数据以及软件工具等多方面做好准备。