JCS Focus |《教育社会学》最新目录及摘要

2025

JCS Focus

— 这里是JCS编辑部 —

本周的 JCS Focus

小编将继续为大家推送

社会学·国际顶刊

Sociology of Education

（《教育社会学》)

的最新目录与摘要

About SOE

Sociology of Education(《教育社会学》，简称SOE),为教育社会学和人类社会发展相关研究提供了一个交流平台。该刊关注社会制度和个体之间的互动如何影响教育过程和社会发展，刊发的文章从个体到社会和教育制度之间的关系结构等多个层次展开分析。

Current issue

SOE 每年出版四期，最新一期（Volume 98 Issue 1, January 2025）共5篇文章，详情如下。

原版目录.

CONTENTS

原文摘要.

ARTICLES

Message from the Editors

William Carbonaro Anna R. Haskins

Since its founding nearly 100 years ago, Sociology of Education (SOE) has published theoretically rich, methodologically rigorous, and substantively important research by sociologists. We are proud and excited to continue this tradition by serving as Co-Editors for SOE for the next three years. Research on education has grown tremendously in the last 20 years, with growing diversity in the breadth of topics studied, the methodological approaches employed, the data sources analyzed, and the disciplinary and theoretical perspectives utilized by researchers. While the field of education has proliferated, so have societal forces that have impacted global education systems. Examples include the COVID-19 pandemic, which dramatically changed many aspects of schooling and achievement trajectories; an increase in diversity in school-going populations; technological advancements that complicate and innovate teaching and learning; and political culture wars that question what can be taught and learned.

These developments, among others, pose both a challenge and an opportunity for sociologists of education. The challenge for our subfield is to demonstrate that sociologists have a distinctive and valuable perspective to offer in studying education. The opportunity is to draw upon the long tradition of vibrant theorizing and rigorous research in our subfield to bring attention to and find ways to address the many pressing social issues—of health, mobility, diversity, technology, and politics—that intersect with education to impact people’s lives, opportunities, outcomes, and longevity.

More now than ever, a sociological perspective on education is needed. This perspective places learning, education, and schooling in conversation with broader social contexts and concerns and provides theories and concepts that identify specific features of the status attainment process and schooling system that shape students’ access to resources and opportunities that affect their learning and educational attainment. Sociologists examine how families, peers, school personnel, organizations, institutions, and policymakers shape the allocation of educational resources and opportunities and how resources and opportunities shape outcomes. Social reproduction and mobility are strong themes that inform work in our field. Overall, scholars have built a robust body of empirical work that describes and explains how educational systems work; how inequality is generated, perpetuated, and ameliorated; the ways schooling intersects with other social institutions; and the ever-evolving nature of learning. Although theory strongly informs and motivates our work, sociologists of education utilize a diverse array of methodological approaches to studying these questions. Thus, our vision is to draw on the vibrant and diverse methodological and empirical nature of our subfield to bring renewed attention to the varied ways education and learning occur within and outside of schools.

Our foremost responsibility as Co-Editors of SOE is to ensure that the journal publishes the highest quality manuscripts in the field. What do we mean by “high quality”? First, an SOE paper should be well grounded in a sociological framework, where authors conceptualize and frame their research questions using sociological theories and concepts. Sociological theories highlight key attributes of social systems that are overlooked or de-emphasized in other fields and disciplines. A successful SOE paper must demonstrate how sociological theories and concepts are crucial tools for understanding topics and questions regarding education. Second, SOE papers must also be methodologically rigorous. Findings must be credible and convincing to other experts on a given topic, and alternative explanations for patterns in the data must be sufficiently accounted for in the analysis. Finally, research findings do not speak for themselves. SOE authors must communicate the substantive significance and importance of their findings effectively to other scholars and the public, which will enhance their contributions to the field and make work found in SOE increasingly useful for informing policy and practice.

The peer-review process is central to our success as a journal and as a subfield. As Co-Editors, we will ensure that the peer-review process serves not only as a filter for quality but also as a mechanism for improving scholars’ work. We expect our reviewers to provide specific and detailed feedback that helps us evaluate the quality of an author’s work. More importantly, the feedback from SOE reviewers should help authors improve as theorists, analysts, and writers, regardless of whether their papers are accepted for publication or not. Indeed, the entire field benefits when the peer-review process works well, so we hope that all scholars (from the least to the most experienced) accept our invitations to review manuscripts for SOE.

As Co-Editors, we also support greater transparency and openness in research by SOE authors. Recent scandals in academic publishing have created a heightened urgency regarding the issues of transparency and the replicability of published research. It is important for both quantitative and qualitative researchers to disclose as much information as possible regarding their data and research procedures so that other scholars have the necessary information to judge the quality of a researcher’s published work. Numerous models to promote “transparent and replicable research” have already been developed (e.g., Elman, Kapiszewski, and Lupia 2018). Thus, as Co-Editors of SOE, we plan to develop a voluntary set of “open science” guidelines for SOE authors to follow. We hope a critical mass of SOE authors will follow these “best practices” and thereby increase trust in the quality of their scholarship both within the academy and beyond.

Finally, we would like to introduce and welcome our team of Deputy Editors: Julia Burdick-Will, Jessica Calarco, Eve L. Ewing, Roberto G. Gonzales, Andrew Halpern-Manners, and Catherine Riegle-Crumb. In making these selections, our goal was to select scholars who possess both substantive expertise and methodological skills that complement our own strengths. We also saw an opportunity to develop and mentor future leaders in our subfield by working with several promising, recently tenured scholars as deputy editors. Shannon Vakil will continue in her role as Managing Editor, which will ensure continuity and stability as we transition into our new roles.

In closing, we would like to recognize and thank John Diamond and Odis Johnson for their work as editors of SOE during the past three years. We hope to continue their record of success and look forward to taking SOE to new heights.

William Carbonaro

Anna R. Haskins
Editors, Sociology of Education

Complicating the “Suburban Advantage”: Examining Racial and Gender Inequality in Suburban and Urban School Settings

Emily E. N. Miller, Alejandro Schugurensky

This article investigates the racial and gender dynamics of educational inequality in suburban public schools in the United States during an era of rapid demographic change. As suburban schools transition from predominantly White enclaves to more diverse settings, it is unclear to what extent the popular narrative of “suburban advantage” holds for newcomers. Using a longitudinal data set of majority non-White, lower-income students (the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study), we explore how these students fare compared to urban counterparts during this transformative period. Our findings suggest that suburban schools are higher resourced than their urban counterparts, yet there are minimal urban–suburban differences in educational outcomes after accounting for individual and family characteristics. Furthermore, we reveal disparities in urban–suburban differences by race and gender. Our research challenges narratives that treat suburban institutions as monoliths and suggests the purported advantages of suburban schooling are not conferred uniformly to all students.

The Expectational Liminality of Insecure College Graduates

Elena Ayala-Hurtado

Graduating from college is widely associated with social and personal advancement, yet many young graduates are not experiencing these benefits. Drawing on 127 interviews with college graduates in the United States and Spain who face employment precarity or economic instability, this study asks: How do these graduates understand their social positions and worth? How does the institution of higher education shape these understandings? The data demonstrate that respondents in both countries largely describe themselves as stalled or stuck. I argue that these are perceptions of “expectational liminality” stemming from the disjuncture between respondents’ expectations and their experiences as college graduates. In addition, I show how three narratives describing the professional/financial success, life course progression, and internal transformation expected of graduates shape respondents’ sense of expectational liminality. I discuss the effects of higher education on graduates’ self-perceptions in uncertain contexts and the relevance of expectational liminality to other contexts where there are disjunctures between expectations and reality.

Month of Birth, Early Academic Achievement, and Parental Expectations of University Completion: A New Test on Sticky Expectations

Fabrizio Bernardi, Manuel T. Valdés

Previous studies have shown that educational expectations of individuals with high socioeconomic status (SES) are relatively unaffected by low academic performance, a phenomenon called “sticky expectations.” However, this result might be biased by endogeneity and reverse causality between academic achievement and educational expectations. Using data from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study from 11 countries with a strict school-entry rule and building on the well-established finding that children born in the months before the school-entry cutoff underperform at school, we use birth month as an instrument to identify the causal effect of early academic achievement on parents’ expectations of university completion by parental education. Our findings based on the instrumental variable (IV) regression show that the moderation of social origin in the relationship between children’s performance and parental expectations is moderately overestimated in cross-sectional data. Nonetheless, the stickiness of high-SES parental expectations is confirmed in the IV model, proving that parental expectations are less affected by children’s early achievement when the parents are highly educated.

The Role of Schooling in Equalizing Achievement Disparity by Migrant Background

Giampiero Passaretta, Jan Skopek

Does schooling equalize achievement disparities among students with and without a migrant background? This question remains largely unanswered in sociology. We hypothesized that children of migrants would benefit more from schooling, thereby making schools engines of educational integration. Our study tests this hypothesis in the context of German primary schooling using data from the National Educational Panel Study. We compared the achievements of students from native families and those with Western, non-Western (including Turkey), and former Soviet Union migrant backgrounds. Using the differential exposure approach, we decomposed learning into two causally distinct components: learning due to school exposure and learning due to being older at the time of testing. Our findings do not support the notion that schooling equalizes migrant–native achievement gaps. Instead, our results suggest that school exposure may widen the gap between the two largest groups of migrants in Germany, with students from the former Soviet Union disproportionally benefiting from school compared to other non-Western students. We conclude that German primary schools are not functioning as engines of educational integration because schooling does not reduce the migrant–native achievement gap and migrant groups with the greatest educational disadvantage benefit the least from schooling.

以上就是本期 JCS Focus 的全部内容啦！

期刊/趣文/热点/漫谈

学术路上，

JCS 陪你一起成长！

关于 JCS

《中国社会学学刊》（The Journal of Chinese Sociology）于2014年10月由中国社会科学院社会学研究所创办。作为中国大陆第一本英文社会学学术期刊，JCS致力于为中国社会学者与国外同行的学术交流和合作打造国际一流的学术平台。JCS由全球最大科技期刊出版集团施普林格·自然(Springer Nature)出版发行，由国内外顶尖社会学家组成强大编委会队伍，采用双向匿名评审方式和“开放获取”(open access)出版模式。JCS已于2021年5月被ESCI收录。2022年，JCS的CiteScore分值为2.0（Q2），在社科类别的262种期刊中排名第94位，位列同类期刊前36%。2023年，JCS在科睿唯安发布的2023年度《期刊引证报告》（JCR）中首次获得影响因子并达到1.5（Q3）。