S.Bowles와 H.Gintis의 對應理論(Correspondence Principle)과 B.Berstein의 敎育課程 社會學

A Theoretical Study on Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis's Correspondence Principle and Basil Bernstein's Sociology of Curriculum

본 연구에서는 보울즈와 긴티스가 제시한 자본주의 사회에서의 학교교육에 관련되는 문헌 및 연구물들과 그리고 번스타인의 교육과정 및 교수법에 관련되는 문헌 및 연구물들을 분석함으로써, 다음을 알아보고 있다. 1. 보울즈와 긴티스는 학교교육과 경제적 생산관계에 대해 어떻게 보고 있으며, 그들의 이러한 견해에 있어서 논리적으로 모순되는 점은 무엇인가? 2. 이들에 비해서 번스타인의 이론은 어떤 새로운 연구접근들을 시사하고 있는가? 3. 번스타인의 이론접근에 있어 미비한 점은 어떤 것들인가?

This study has analyzed the linkage hyphothesized in the correspondence principle recently advanced by Bowles and Gintis. In essence, the correspondence principle serves as a sensitizing perspective because it is not fully and explicitly testable in its present form. More concretely, the principle relies on 'corresponding' social relationships in various social institutions to develop and promote specific aspects of personal development. Relying on the paradigmatic perspective implicit in the literature on schooling in capitalist america and companion articles, the socialization literature was used to analyze a portion of the correspondence principle. The findings raise an issue of conceptualization that must be more definitively addressed before this aspect of the correspondence principle advanced by Bowles and Gintis can be fully assessed. In response to the economic determinism of Bowles and Gintis, which viewed schooling in direct correspondence to the capitalist relations of production, new sociologist of curriculum and pedagogy sought to understand the degrees of autonomy in schools, as well as the specific ways that schooling is related to larger social, political, and economic conditions, Bernstein is an outstanding example of one who hasmade an original contribution to the sociology of education that does not hesitate to draw upon both the macro and the micro approaches. In an attempt to connect the macro and micro, Bernstein's work since the 1960s has centered on a model of pedagogic practices. beginning with the concepts of classification and framing and continuing to a more systematic outline of the "what" and the "how" of education. This study has analyzed Bernstein's works, related to his theory of curriculum and pedagogy. In addition, it has suggested still-unsolved or unresolved questions in his works.