Existen crecientes evidencias que revelan una influencia considerable de la familia en el desarrollo escolar infantil y que apuntan a la necesidad de llevar a cabo investigaciones teóricas minuciosas y de explicar cómo el hogar y la escuela influyen en la escolarización de los niños. Con este objetivo se proponen en este artículo modelos teóricos tanto psicológicos como sociológicos, cuyos supuestos comunes son, en primer lugar, que las familias y las escuelas afectan muy directamente al niño, y segundo, que las familias preparan y refuerzan diferencialmente las cualidades de sus hijos requeridas por la escuela, y las escuelas pueden o no aprovechar los recursos que los niños traen de casa. Dos de los conceptos teóricos que tratan de explicar dicho impacto y demostrar la importancia de las relaciones activas familia-escuela son el de “capital cultural”, introducido y desarrollado por Pierre Bourdieu, y el de “capital social”, acuñado por James Coleman. Este artículo presenta ambas perspectivas teóricas con el fin de evaluar su pertinencia como marco explicativo desde el que abordar la colaboración entre familia y escuela y la manera en que aquélla influye en el éxito escolar de los niños.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerD.StreetA.Tomlin (2002). Understanding relationships between home and school numeracy practices: Examples from the field. Ponencia presentada en elCongreso Anual de AERA (Nueva Orleans, 1–5 de Abril).
2.
BastianiJ. (1996). Home and school: Building a better partnership.Londres, UK: National Consumer Council.
3.
BeckerH. J.EpsteinJ. L. (1982). Influences on teachers' use of parent involvement at home (Report No. 324).Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.
4.
BellS. E. (1999). On the (re)production of social class. Living in, with, and beyond elementary school.GlassnerEn B.HertzR. (Eds.), Qualitative sociology as everyday life (pp. 69–78). Londres: Sage.
5.
BernsteinB. (1975). Class, codes and control (Vol. 3). Londres: Routledge & Kegan.
6.
BourdieuP. (1977a). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction.KarabelEn J.HalseyA. H. (Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487–511). Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
7.
BourdieuP. (1977b). Outline of a theory of practice.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital.RichardsonEn J. C. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Nueva York: Greenwood Press.
9.
BourdieuP.PasseronJ. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.). Londres: Sage.
10.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
BronfenbrennerU. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives.Developmental Psychology, 22, 723–742.
12.
CampbellJ.MandelF. (1990). Connecting math achievement to parental influences.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15, 64–74.
13.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital.American Journal of Sociology, 94 (Supplement), 95–120.
14.
ColemanJ. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory.Cambridge, MA: Beknap Press.
15.
ColemanJ. S. (1994). Family, school and social capital.HusenEn T.PostlethwaiteT. N. (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (2a ed., pp. 2272–2274). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
16.
CollinsJ.ThompsonF. (1994). Family, school, and cultural capital.HusenEn T.PostlethwaiteT. N. (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (2a ed., pp. 2267–2272). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
17.
ConnorsL. J.EpsteinJ. L. (1995). Parent and school partnerships.BornsteinEn M. (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Applied and practical parenting, Vol. 4 (pp. 437–458). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
CrozierG. (2000). Parents and schools: Partners or protagonists?Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
19.
CrozierG. (2001). Excluded parents: the deracialisation of parental involvement.Race, Ethnicity and Education, 4 (4), 329–341.
20.
EpsteinJ. L. (1992). School and family partnerships.AlkinEn M. (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Educational Research (pp. 1139–1151). Nueva York: Macmillan.
21.
EpsteinJ. L. (1995). School-family-community partnerships: Caring for the children we share.Phi Delta Capan, 79, 701–712.
22.
GeorgiouS. N. (2000). Parent attributions of achievement, parent involvement, and child achievement [Aιτικη απoδoση τηξ επιδoσηξ απo τoυξ γoυειξ, εμπλoκη τωυ γoυιωυ και επιδoση τoυ παιδιoυ]. Psychology [ψυχoλoγια], 7 (2), 191–206.
23.
GroinickW. S.SlowiaczekM. L. (1994). Parents' involvement in children's schooling: A multidimensional conceptualisation and motivational model.Child Development, 65, 237–252.
24.
HendersonA. (1987). The evidence continues to grow: Parent involvement improves school achievement.Columbia, MD: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
25.
Hoover-DempseyK. V.BasslerO.BrissieJ. S. (1987). Parent involvement: Contributions of teacher efficacy, school socioeconomic status, and other school characteristics.American Educational Research Journal, 24, 417–435..
26.
HorvatE. M.WeiningerE. B.LareauA. (2003). From social ties to social capital: Class references in the relations between schools and parent networks.American Educational Research Journal, 40 (2), 319–351.
27.
KellaghanT. (1994). Family and schooling.HusenEn T.PostlethwaiteT.N. (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (2a ed., pp. 2250–2258). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
28.
KilpatrickS.FieldJ.FalkI. (2003). Social capital: An analytical tool for exploring lifelong learning and community development.British Educational Research Journal, 29 (3), 417–433.
29.
LamontM.LareauA. (1988). Cultural capital: Allusions, gaps, and glissandos in recent theoretical developments.Sociological Theory, 6, 153–168.
30.
LareauA. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital.Sociology of Education, 60, 73–85.
31.
LareauA. (2000). Home advantage. Social class and parental intervention in elementary education.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
32.
MarjoribanksK. (1979). Families and their learning environment: An empirical analysis.Londres: Routledge & Kegan.
33.
MollL. C.AmantiC.NeffD.GonzalezN. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms.Theory and Practice, 21 (2), 132–141.
34.
Van de WerfhorstH. G.SullivanA.CheungS. Y. (2003). Social class, ability and choice of subject in secondary and tertiary education in Britain.British Educational Research Journal, 29 (1), 41–62.
