?

The Cultural Studies on Labor Education

  • Shaoming Xiao
Expand
  • Center for Contemporary Education Research and Development, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China

Online published: 2022-01-20

Abstract

Labor education is a process of cultural practice in which people transform the external world, realize the cultural value of people’s free and all-round development, and meet people’s material and spiritual cultural needs. The critique of “labor worship”, “labor determinism”, “labor ends” and “human being’s origin in labor” and the debate on labor education in Chinese and foreign education history reveal that culture is the essence of labor and labor education, and their studies require cultural study. “Labor”, “culture” and “education” have common meanings in etymology. Labor education, as cultural practice, is the unity of “civilizing” to transform nature through material and energetic transformation and “education” to transform society through information-language. It contains different levels of culture and its practice synthesis, such as value-norm, behavior-function, language-symbol, knowledge-technology and so on. Labor education has the characteristic of culture materialism. In another word, it has the cultural characteristics of material and broad masses, based on material production and social reality oriented mass culture. The cultural value of labor education lies in that it is the cultural enlightenment to liberate all people, and its knowledge and culture enlightenment to reflect and express the culture of social life. In a word, the cultural essence and practice of labor education fully present the transformation of substance, energy and information, the material transformation and spiritual creation among human, nature and society. It is a historical, realistic and social dialectical relationship and unity between the “education” of labor and the “labor” of education, physical labor education and mental labor education, civilizing and enlightenment, elite and the public, theory and practice.

Cite this article

Shaoming Xiao . The Cultural Studies on Labor Education[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2022 , 40(2) : 17 -28 . DOI: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2022.02.002

References

1 阿伦特. (2009). 人的境况(王寅丽译). 南京: 江苏人民出版社.
2 巴克. (2013). 文化研究: 理论与实践(孔敏译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
3 鲍德里亚. (2015). 符号政治经济学批判(夏莹译). 南京: 南京大学出版社.
4 鲍尔德温等. (2004). 文化研究导论(陶东风 等译). 北京: 高等教育出版社.
5 陈桂生. (2000). 教育原理. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
6 杜威. (1964). 自由与文化(傅统先译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
7 杜威. (1990). 民主主义与教育(王承绪译). 北京: 人民教育出版社.
8 福西耶. (2007). 中世纪劳动史(陈青瑶译). 上海: 上海人民出版社.
9 格尔茨. (2014). 文化的解释(韩莉译). 南京: 译林出版社.
10 哈贝马斯. (1999). 作为“意识形态”的技术与科学(李黎, 郭官义译). 上海: 学林出版社.
11 黄济. (2004). 关于劳动教育的认识和建议. 江苏行政学院学报(社会科学版), (5), 17- 22.
12 李刚. (2011). 从“思辨逻辑”到“文化逻辑”——《1844 年经济学哲学手稿》展现的思维方式变革. 理论月刊, (9), 36- 40.
13 娄雨. (2020). 劳动的古典观念及其对劳动教育的当代启示. 劳动教育评论, (4), 12-27.
14 罗萨(2018). 新异化的诞生: 社会加速批判理论大纲(郑作彧译). 上海: 世纪出版集团.
15 马克思. (1956a). 马克思恩格斯全集第1卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
16 马克思. (1956b). 马克思恩格斯全集第22卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
17 马克思. (1972a). 马克思恩格斯选集第1卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
18 马克思. (1972b). 马克思恩格斯选集第3卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
19 马克思. (1975). 资本论第1卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
20 马克思. (1979). 马克思恩格斯全集第42卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
21 马克思. (1980). 马克思恩格斯全集第46卷下册(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
22 马克思. (2000). 1844年经济学哲学手稿(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
23 马克思. (1982). 马克思恩格斯全集第49卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
24 苗相甫. (1991). 劳动?文化?人: 关于劳动创造人的思索. 殷都学刊, (4), 48- 52.
25 皮凯蒂. (2014). 21世纪资本论(巴曙松 等译). 北京: 中信出版社.
26 瞿葆奎. (2005). 劳动教育应与体育、智育、德育、美育并列?——答黄济教授. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), (3), 1- 8.
27 瞿葆奎, 郑金洲. (1998). 教育基本理论之研究(1978—1995). 福州: 福建教育出版社.
28 檀传宝. (2017). 劳动教育的本质在于培养劳动价值观. 人民教育, (9), 45- 48.
29 汤普森. (2012). 意识形态与现代文化(高铦 等译). 南京: 译林出版社.
30 王松江主编. (2015). 现代西方劳动哲学名著选编. 北京: 中国言实出版社.
31 于光远. (1980). 关于建立和发展教育经济学的几个问题. 经济研究, (8), 13- 16.
32 张应强. (2020). 新时代学校劳动教育的定性和定位. 重庆高教研究, (5), 1- 7.
33 郑金洲. (2009). 教育起源研究十七年. 纪念《教育史研究》创刊二十周年论文集, (1), 84- 90.
34 Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic.
35 Gino, C., Simone, F., and Paul, A. (2014). Insiders, Outsiders and the Struggle for Consecration in Cultural Fields: A Core-Periphery Perspective. American Sociological Review, 78, 417- 447.
36 Oxford Latin Dictionary. (1968). Oxford Latin Dictionary. London: The Clarendon Press.
37 Schudson, M. (1992). Ideology and Modern Culture: Critical Social Theory in the Era of Mass Communication. Contemporary Sociology, 21 (1), 106- 108.
Outlines

/