紀登斯(A. Giddens)「結構化理論」對教育社會學研究的啟示

Abstract

由於長久以來受到社會科學研究取向分流的影響，教育社會學的發展陷入微觀與鉅觀研究的紛爭之中。前者著重在般及社會互動的探討，後者以社會系統及教育政策為對象，兩者之間呈現一種二元對立的關係。這種紛爭不僅發生在教育社會學的領域中，更是所有社會科學所面臨的難題，也造成社會科學整體發展的滯礙。雖有學者不斷嘗試將兩者加以融合統整，但是仍只限於研究結果的應用，並未觸及真正的核心。直到紀登斯提出結構化理論後，結構與行動兩者才真正統整在連貫的理論系統中。他認為過去有關行動與結構的論點都應該被重新概念化，兩者的關係不再是二元對立，而是相輔相成的雙重性。紀登斯主張結構不再只是以往研究中的外在非人為因素影響；相反的，它應被視為是社會交互作用的媒介及結果。另外，紀登斯雖然並未直接論述本身理論在教育情境的應用，但他所提出的結構化理論卻對教育社會學的研究產生深遠的影響。據此，本文旨在闡釋紀登斯結構化理論的重要內容，以了解行動與結構兩者之間的真正意涵，進而申述其對教育社會學研究的啟示。

Due to long influences of divisions of social science studies, developments of the sociology of education have fallen into disputes of micro and macro studies. The former focuses on discussions of social interactions in class; the latter has social systems and educational policies as subjects, a kind of dualism relationship presented between the two. This kind of dispute not only occurred in the area of the sociology of education, but also became thorny problems that all social science faced；in addition, it also caused impediments toward the whole development of social science. Although some scholars constantly tried to blend and unite the two, it is still limited to applications of study results that are yet to touch the core. The two, structure and agency, were not really united in the continuous theoretical system until Giddens referred to the structuration theory. In his opinion, the past points at issue about agency and structure should be re-conceptualized；the relationship of the two is no longer dualism, instead, the complementary duality. Giddens' advocated structure is no more non-man-made influential factors in past investigations; on the contrary, it should be regarded as the go-between and result of social interactions. Although Giddens did not directly state the applications of his social theory in educational situations, the structuration theory he had referred to produced deep and far reaching influences toward and sociology of education. According to the above, this article aims at expounding the significant content of Giddens' structuration theory and determining the real meaning between agency and structure and further stating the implication that it has toward the sociology of education.