Name: Rodcel Shane N.

Libre Date: March 4, 2019

Subject/Schedule: EDUC 101 – MWF(2:00-3:00) Learning Task No. 2

I. Theoretical Perspective on Social Capital and Education

A newly proposed theoretical framework, social capital has successfully extended its

influence over multiple disciplines. Although controversies exist in perspectives to define the

theory, the common ground of these perspectives refers to extend that social networks are

assets. This paper reviews studies of social capital and discuss the two perspectives and their

use in education. For the normative perspective, learning and teaching strategies to promote a

learning atmosphere in schools or student groups are encouraged. The strategies help to

shape a shared value that learning becomes possible among students. For the resource-

oriented perspective, building instrumental relationships with school personnel is particularly

useful for students’ schooling from disadvantaged background. Moreover, the paper calls

attentions on two issues. One is that educational programs could be significant means to

empower students from low-status families. The other is that more studies are needed to

understand the roles of school personnel. The significant role of school children plays an

important role in bridging resources for students.

-Pierre Bourdieu

He developed the idea of cultural capital as a method that groups use to identify and trade on

status. For example, the ability to utilise Debrett’s Eticate is not a sign of intrinsic superiority but

cultural currency used by a particular social group in order to maintain advantage over other

groups. Whether this is simply a primate grooming exercise or a deliberate holding of group

boundaries (or a mixture of both according to context) is a matter for discussion.

Cultural capital did not just represent people’s resources of financial capital. It is shaped by

family circumstances and school tuition, and can exist independently of monetary holding and

even compensate for lack of money as part of a strategy to pursue power and status.

Bourdieu developed a way of conceptualising agents in the social field as being determined in

part by the amount and weight of their relative capitals and the strategies that they adopt to

achieve their goals. We work not only with economic capital but also of cultural and social types

too which may not be interchangeable however in combination may create new capital.

--James Colemen

Like Bourdieu, Coleman saw social capital as essentially residing in the social structure of

relationships among people. However, where Bourdieu was concerned with power and status and

the uneven distribution of social capital between individuals, Coleman saw social capital as a

public good where the actions of individuals benefits the whole. As such Coleman

conceptualised social capital as a collective asset of the group and made little provision for

inequality that results or a causes differential power and status. This neglect of power and

conflict probably stems from Coleman’s preoccupation with social capital being largely a

product of social structure. This is a significant departure from Bourdieu’s theory which treated

collective property attributes under the term cultural capital. This means that Bourdieu’s and

Coleman’s theories of social capital are fundamentally different, and this has resulted in

confusion in the literature about what is and is not social capital.

Robert Putnam

The central premise of social capital is that social networks have value. Social capital refers

to the collective value of all “social networks” [who people know] and the inclinations that

arise from these networks to do things for each other [“norms of reciprocity”].

Information flows (e.g. learning about jobs, learning about candidates running for office,

exchanging ideas at college, etc.) depend on social capital.

– Norms of reciprocity (mutual aid) rely on social networks. Bonding networks that connect

folks who are similar sustain particularized (in-group) reciprocity. Bridging networks that

connect individuals who are diverse sustain generalized reciprocity.

– Collective action depends upon social networks (e.g., the role that the black church played

in the Civil Rights movement) although collective action also can foster new networks.

II. This study investigate the impact of social capital on child's educational achievement and

personality development by using primary data of Southern Punjab (Bahawalpur and

Bahawalnagar District). Through multi stage cluster sampling a total of 600 hundred

household head were selected as sample size for this study. The educational production

function was used.in this study. This approach (educational achievement) was measured as

output and other elements (Social capital) that have direct link with education was studied as

inputs. The results indicate that while taken into account other variables, social capital

resources have direct and indirect effects on their personality development and their

educational achievement. Moreover, human and social capital do not exist in seclusion from

each other. These two are connected in complex ways and to some extent, feed into each
other. In other words, social capital promotes the development of human capital (education)

and human capital take part in generating future human capital (education). This research

helpful for educational policy makers in making better policies that are socially acceptable.

III. The interest in social capital has led to a profusion of studies on its economic and social

effects, as well as its sources of origin and accumulation mechanisms. Social capital as

Putnam (1993, 1995, 2000) connotes, is an aggregate concept that encompasses the

association networks, norms and trust that facilitate collective interactions for mutual

economic and social benefits. The scope of social capital ranges from the micro and meso

levels to the macro level (Grootaert, 1998; Grootaert and van Bastelaer, 2001). The micro

level of social capital, also called individual social capital, is generally seen as an aggregate

of two dimensions - trust in general people and personal involvement in social activities. The

meso level refers to average level of trust, number and density of social groups in a given

community.