查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 教育階層、教育擴充與經濟發展=Educational Strata, Educational Expansion, and Economic Development |
---|---|
作 者 | 黃毅志; | 書刊名 | 國立政治大學社會學報 |
卷 期 | 28 1998.10[民87.10] |
頁 次 | 頁25-55 |
分類號 | 520.1 |
關鍵詞 | 教育階層; 人力資本; 文化資本; 教育擴充; 經濟發展; Educational strata; Human capital; Cultural capital; Educational expansion; Economic development; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 雖然有許多國內外研究都顯示教育對於職業、收入都有著重大的影響,然而關於 〞教育本身究竟代表什麼〞這項核心問題,功能論或人力資本理論、與文化資本理論,卻有 著截然不同的詮釋,而成為重大的議題。此外,西方的社會階層化研究者,特別是地位取得 研究者,往往預設著〞經濟階級或報酬、社會聲望和政治權力都植根於職業,職業為代表個 人社會階層位置高低的最佳單一指標;並根據〞教育是影響職業地位之最重要變項〞的研究 發現,強調教育對於解釋職業地位的作用,然而教育本身所代表的重要階層區分,就沒得到 多少注意。許多地位取得研究者在預設著職業特殊重要性的前題下,很可能也預設著在社會 階層化的過程中,教育主要的作用是用來解釋職業地位。這對於深受「萬般皆下品,唯有讀 書高」的傳統文化之影響,很可能教育本身就具有很崇高的價值,代表一項很重要的地位或 階層區分,以至於衍生嚴重的升學主義弊端,並引發一連串教育改革運動的臺灣社會而言, 以上的預設可能會有相當的爭議性。本文針對以上兩個相關連的議題作探討。首先,針對微 視面,以個人為分析單位的臺灣社會階層化研究作文獻檢討,以釐清〞教育在社會階層化中 的位置,是否主要的作用是用來解釋職業地位,或者本身就是很重要的階層區分〞。結論是 :在臺灣社會裡,教育除了對於職業、收入往往有重大影響,可作為提高職業、收入的工具 之外,其本身也代表著很重要的階層區分,甚至於很有可能就是最重要的階層區分,這反映 出臺灣社會特別重視教育的特殊文化傳統。其次,於釐清教育在臺灣社會階層化的位置之後 ,本文並進一步根據歷年官方所蒐集的資料,針對鉅視面,以整體臺灣社會為分析單位的臺 灣教育擴充與經濟發展之關連性,作時間系列 (民國 54 年至 80 年 )GLS 迴歸分析,以釐 清教育本身究竟代表什麼。如果教育所代表的是人力資本,則經濟發展促進教育擴充;如果 教育所代表的是文化資本,則教育擴充不但不能促進經濟發展,反而是經濟發展的結果。迴 歸分析結果顯示:臺灣的教育擴充不但不能促進經濟發展,反而是經濟發展的結果,教育所 代表的主要當是文化資本。 |
英文摘要 | Many studies have indicated that there existed important relationships between one's education and occupation as well as income. However, explanations in concerning "what on earth education represents" by functional theorists, human capital theorists and cultural capital theorists, are so different that it comes to an important issue on this topic. Besides, Western social stratification researchers, expecially those who studied in status attainment, usually assume that a person's "economic class, income, social prestige and political power were all rooted in his/her own occupation". One's occupation can be a best single index in presenting his/her social strata. According to the finding that education is the most important factor in influencing one's occupation status, it emphasized that education has an strong influence on occupation. However, less attentions were paid to what education itself represents in strata distinctions. Based on the specifical importance of one's occupation, many status-attainment-researchers may assumed that, in the process of stratification, the major function of education was to explain one's occupation status. However, since there is a tradition in Chinese culture that "nothing is more worthy except studying", it suggested that education itself has a high value in it, such as representing an important strata distinction of one person in Taiwan, Thus, it produced serious defects such as diploma disease, and resulted in a series of educational reforms in Taiwan. Nevertheless, these assumptions described above might have many disaggrement in them. Due to these suspecious or disaggrable assumptions, this article intends to examine the two related questions as follows. First, from analysis in micro level, we reviewed stratification studies in Taiwan society which analyzed data in individual unit. Thus, it identified that whether education was taken mainly in explaining occupation status in Taiwan, or education represented an important strata distinction in itself. The results indecated that, education in Taiwan not only had an important relationship with occupation and income, but also used as an instrument in promoting one's job status and income level. Moreover, education itself represents and important/even the most important index of strata distioncion. These reflected the special cultural tradition that the Taiwan society values highly in education. Second, after identifying the important position education stood in stratification in Taiwan, we collected official data historically. From analysis in macro level we examined the relationships between educational expansion and economic development, which analyzed in the unit of the whole Taiwan society. We made a time series (1965-1991) GLS regression analyses, which were to identify what education represents. If education represented human capital, then the results should show that economic development had improved educational expansion. However, if education represented cultural capital, then the results should show that educational expansion were the results of economic development, but not the causes in improving economic develpoment. The regression analyeses in the present study indicated that educational expansion in Taiwan did not improve economic development. In contrast, it was the result from economic development. This finding suggested that education should mainly represent cultural capital in our society. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。