• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Gender and Education >Back to the future on gender and anti-school boys: a response to Jeffrey Smith
【24h】

Back to the future on gender and anti-school boys: a response to Jeffrey Smith

机译：回到性别与反学童的未来：对杰弗里·史密斯的回应

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article examines recent claims by Jeffrey Smith that: (1) 'hegemonic masculinity' is an expression of working class counter-school culture; (2) some teachers are 'cultural accomplices' in constructing 'hegemonic masculinities' of anti-school working class boys, thereby contributing to their underachievement; and (3) these 'cultural accomplices' are an emerging response to recent moral panics and neo-liberal managerialism concerned with 'failing boys' at school. It is suggested that 'hegemonic masculinity' is not necessarily associated with anti-school values in working class culture. Many working class boys might subscribe to 'hegemonic masculinity' without rejecting learning. Contrary to Smith's emphasis on how working class culture generates anti-school 'hegemonic masculinity', there is the possibility that 'hegemonic masculinity' is fused with anti-school values produced by organisational differentiation. The continuing commonalities between working class anti-school boys and the 'gender regime' of some secondary schools for over 20 years implies something more enduring at work than recent moral panics.
机译：本文研究了杰弗里·史密斯（Jeffrey Smith）的最新主张：（1）“霸权男性气概”是工人阶级反学校文化的一种表达； （2）一些教师在建构反学业工人男孩的“霸权男性气概”方面是“文化帮凶”，从而助长了他们的学业不佳； （3）这些“文化帮凶”是对与学校中“失败男孩”有关的近期道德恐慌和新自由主义管理主义的新兴回应。有人认为，“霸权男性气概”不一定与工人阶级文化中的反学派价值观有关。许多工人阶级男孩可能会接受“霸权男性气概”而不会拒绝学习。与史密斯强调工人阶级文化如何产生反学校的“霸权男性气概”相反，“霸权的男性气概”可能与组织分化产生的反学校价值观融合在一起。工人阶级反学童与某些中学的“性别政权”之间持续的共同性长达20多年，这意味着工作上比最近的道德恐慌更持久。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号