scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Elliot B. Weininger

Bio: Elliot B. Weininger is an academic researcher from State University of New York at Brockport. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cultural capital & Social class. The author has an hindex of 12, co-authored 19 publications receiving 2595 citations. Previous affiliations of Elliot B. Weininger include State University of New York System & Temple University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors assess how the concept of cultural capital has been imported into the English language, focusing on educational research and demonstrate that neither of these premises is essential to Bourdieu's understanding of culture.
Abstract: In this article, we assess how the concept of cultural capital has been imported into the English language, focusing on educational research. We argue that a dominant interpretation of cultural capital has coalesced with two central premises. First, cultural capital denotes knowledge of or facility with “highbrow” aesthetic culture. Secondly, cultural capital is analytically and causally distinct from other important forms of knowledge or competence (termed “technical skills,” “human capital,” etc.). We then review Bourdieu’s educational writings to demonstrate that neither of these premises is essential to his understanding of cultural capital. In the third section, we discuss a set of English-language studies that draw on the concept of cultural capital, but eschew the dominant interpretation. These serve as the point of departure for an alternative definition. Our definition emphasizes Bourdieu’s reference to the capacity of a social class to “impose” advantageous standards of evaluation on the educational institution. We discuss the empirical requirements that adherence to such a definition entails for researchers, and provide a brief illustration of the intersection of institutionalized evaluative standards and the educational practices of families belonging to different social classes. Using ethnographic data from a study of social class differences in family-school relationships, we show how an African-American middle-class family exhibits cultural capital in a way that an African-American family below the poverty level does not.

1,171 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors examined the characteristics of networks across different classes and explored the ways that networks come into play when parents are confronted by problematic school situations, finding that middle-class parents tended to react collectively, in contrast to working-class and poor parents.
Abstract: Focusing on parental networks—a central dimension of social capital—this article uses ethnographic data to examine social-class differences in the relations between families and schools. We detail the characteristics of networks across different classes and then explore the ways that networks come into play when parents are confronted by problematic school situations. The middle-class parents in our study tended to react collectively, in contrast to working-class and poor parents. The middle-class parents were also uniquely able to draw on contacts with professionals to mobilize the information, expertise, or authority needed to contest the judgments of school officials. We did not find substantial race differences. We affirm the importance of a resource-centered conception of social capital that grants the issue of inequality a predominant place.

784 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Ingersoll as mentioned in this paper used multiple regression analysis (MRA) to study the distribution of power and control in schools in the United States, and found that the majority of the teachers in the US are controlled by a hierarchy of boards and administrators.
Abstract: tion theorists believe that such teacher autonomy reduces the chance for success and competence in transmitting academic knowledge to students. Their evidence in their research for academic failure is low scores on standardized tests: math, reading, and so on. The second theoretical orientation in this debate is an antibureaucracy, anticentralization perspective. This group sees the hierarchy tightly organized, with control completely withheld from the teachers. All control comes from above, imposing all decisions from boards and administration, leaving no autonomy to teachers themselves. This stifling of teachers prevents them from successful teaching of academic knowledge to students. Research provides evidence of this failure in the low test scores students make on standardized tests on math, reading, and so on. These competing views have become politicized and involved in school reform movements. Ingersoll finds them the main explanations for school issues, and a major problem is that both sides of the debate claim victory based on the same data: scores on tests. Ingersoll finds both perspectives to be partially correct and partially incorrect. For theory to be useful as explanation, these two views must be shown in terms of truth and error. Therefore, both perspectives must be researched and modified to eliminate the contradictions and offer an alternative explanation from some combination of both sides of this debate. Ingersoll is especially interested in centralization and decentralization of teachers’ work and the problem of accountability. To research these issues Ingersoll develops definitions that can be utilized in both orientations to avoid biases from assumptions and definitions on either side. One of the most interesting differences between his research and both sides of the debate is the use of scores on academic tests. Both sides of the debate depend on scores to operationalize their dependent variables; and I should expect opposition from both sides in Ingersoll’s development of definitions without using test scores. A second area in which Ingersoll may meet opposition is in his attempt to research teaching as maintenance of education as a social institution rather than simply as transmission of academic knowledge. There is no doubt but that teachers are expected to transmit values of appropriate behavior and societal expectations, but both sides of the debate may well believe test scores to be necessary data for such a study. Finally, one of the most interesting factors in the research of this book is Ingersoll’s attempt to use both quantitative and qualitative techniques to gather data for analysis. The quantitative data is taken from large government surveys, primarily from the Schools and Staffing Survey gathered by the statistical arm of the U.S. Department of Education. SASS is collected from a wide range of types of schools, both public and private, from random samples stratified by state, school sector, and school level (p. 255). Ingersoll carefully describes his analytic techniques (Multiple Regression Analysis) both in an appendix and in Chapter 6. In addition, he engaged in interviews and observations in a variety of schools to gather qualitative data for analysis from school personnel. This book is well written and organized to keep the readers’ interest. The data base is well chosen for the analysis offered. Ingersoll offers a significant contribution in theory, and he manages to answer questions about the distribution of power and control in schools in the United States.

196 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Oct 2003-Poetics
TL;DR: In this article, a set of detailed transcriptions of conferences between teachers and parents of middle-class children, on the one hand, and working-class and poor children, were examined, and the interaction that occurs in such conferences at the micro-level.

131 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article used a nationally representative sample of children's time diaries, merged with extensive information on their families, to model participation in, and expenditures on, organized extracurricular activities.
Abstract: Recent research suggests that participation in organized extracurricular activities by children and adolescents can have educational and occupational payoffs. This research also establishes that participation is strongly associated with social class. However, debate has ensued—primarily among qualitative researchers—over whether the association between class and activities stems exclusively from inequalities in objective resources and constraints or whether differing cultural orientations have a role. We address this debate using a nationally representative sample of children’s time diaries, merged with extensive information on their families, to model participation in, and expenditures on, organized activities. While we cannot directly observe cultural orientations, we account for a substantially wider array of resources and constraints than previous studies. We find that, above and beyond these factors, maternal education has a consistently large effect on the outcomes we study. We discuss the plausibility of a cultural interpretation of this result, as well as alternative interpretations.

122 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A decade ago, Walker et al. as mentioned in this paper proposed a model of the parental involvement process that focused on understanding why parents become involved in their children's education and how their involvement influences student outcomes.
Abstract: A decade ago, Hoover‐Dempsey and Sandler offered a model of the parental involvement process that focused on understanding why parents become involved in their children’s education and how their involvement influences student outcomes. Since then, we and others have conducted conceptual and empirical work to enhance understanding of processes examined in the model. In this article (companion to Walker and colleagues’ article about scale development on the model in this issue), we review recent work on constructs central to the model’s initial question: Why do parents become involved in children’s education? Based on this review, we offer suggestions for (1) research that may deepen understanding of parents’ motivations for involvement and (2) school and family practices that may strengthen the incidence and effectiveness of parental involvement across varied school communities.

1,103 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Sampson, Robert J. as mentioned in this paper, The Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2012. pp. 552, $27.50 cloth.
Abstract: Sampson, Robert J. 2012. Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN-13: 9780226734569. pp. 552, $27.50 cloth. Robert J. Sampson’s ...

1,089 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The book Inequality by Christopher Jencks is in one sense an arid waste of somewhat confusing and misleading statistics between chapter one and chapter nine, and, in another sense, a destructive, unscientific critique of American education and families.
Abstract: The book Inequality by Christopher Jencks is in one sense an arid waste of somewhat confusing and misleading statistics between chapter one and chapter nine, and, in another sense, a destructive, unscientific critique of American education and families. Jencks' interpretation comes down hard on his basic feeling that "The crucial problem today is that relatively few people view income inequality as a serious problem; indeed the Nixon administration apparently convinced itself that income was too equally distributed in 1968 and that the rich needed additional incentives to get even richer . The Kennedy and Johnson administrations were only marginally better. Neither made any explicit effort to equalize incomes; the subject was hardly discussed. Instead reformers focused on equalizing opportunity." This view is probably correct but it is no excuse for an unscholarly, unscientific polemic against far from "peripheral institutions," which is Jencks' evaluation of the American schools. This book states

1,030 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors make the case that consideration of the how, whom, and why of parents' involvement in children's academic lives is critical to maximizing the benefits of education.
Abstract: A key goal of much educational policy is to help parents become involved in children’s academic lives. The focus of such efforts, as well as much of the extant research, has generally been on increasing the extent of parents’ involvement. However, factors beyond the extent of parents’ involvement may be of import. In this article, the case is made that consideration of the how, whom, and why of parents’ involvement in children’s academic lives is critical to maximizing its benefits. Evidence is reviewed indicating that how parents become involved determines in large part the success of their involvement. It is argued as well that parents’ involvement may matter more for some children than for others. The issue of why parents should become involved is also considered. Implications for future research and interventions are discussed.

977 citations