龔鵬程對話海外學(xué)者第一百一十三期：在后現(xiàn)代情境中，被技術(shù)統(tǒng)治的人類社會，只有強(qiáng)化交談、重建溝通倫理，才能獲得文化新生的力量。這不是誰的理論，而是每個人都應(yīng)實踐的活動。龔鵬程先生遊走世界，并曾主持過“世界漢學(xué)研究中心”。我們會陸續(xù)推出“龔鵬程對話海外學(xué)者”系列文章，請他對話一些學(xué)界有意義的靈魂。范圍不局限于漢學(xué)，會涉及多種學(xué)科。以期深山長谷之水，四面而出。

史蒂夫·斯特蘭德教授（Professor Steve Strand）

牛津大學(xué)教育學(xué)教授，牛津大學(xué)教育系量化分析研究中心主任。

龔鵬程教授：您好。您研究教育成果中的種族、社會階層和性別差距，真是太重要了。在成績、進(jìn)步、特殊教育、排斥等各方面，請為我們介紹下相關(guān)成果。

史蒂夫·斯特蘭德教授：龔教授，您好。最近的分析是對英格蘭年輕人在16歲完成法定全日制教育時的國家考試。

這很關(guān)鍵，因為當(dāng)時取得的資格，對年輕人未來的教育、經(jīng)濟(jì)、健康和福利成果起著關(guān)鍵作用。

我研究了不平等的三個核心維度：種族、性別和階層。數(shù)據(jù)顯示，學(xué)生在16歲時的成績與社會階層的關(guān)系——無論是通過父母職業(yè)、父母教育還是家庭收入來評估——遠(yuǎn)比與種族或性別的關(guān)系更密切。例如，來自家庭收入最高的20%家庭的學(xué)生和來自家庭收入最低的20%家庭的學(xué)生之間的成績差距非常大（測量為0.91個標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差或SD）。它比男孩和女孩之間的小差距（0.29SD）大三倍以上，比黑人和白人學(xué)生之間的小差距（0.11SD）大八倍以上。

然而，從交叉角度看數(shù)據(jù)也很重要，因為每個人都有一個種族、一個性別和一個階級背景，我們不會孤立地持有任何這些特征。

九個主要的種族群體，按三個層次的社會經(jīng)濟(jì)地位（SES）和兩個層次的性別，產(chǎn)生了54個獨特的種族、階級和性別的組合，我們用統(tǒng)計模型來計算每個群體的成績分?jǐn)?shù)。英國白人和加勒比黑人的低SES學(xué)生，無論是男孩還是女孩，在16歲時的成績都是最差的。少數(shù)民族群體的平均成績通常高于他們的英國白人同齡人，特別是在境況不好的家庭。唯一的例外是來自高SES家庭的黑人男孩，他們的成績沒有英國白人同齡人好，盡管這促使我們問，為什么只是男孩，為什么只是在高SES家庭？

總的來說，這些結(jié)果指向了諸如"學(xué)生補(bǔ)貼 "等政策，這些政策旨在為學(xué)校提供額外的資金，以干預(yù)和支持所有來自低收入家庭的學(xué)生。

The most recent analysis was of the national examinations young people in England complete when they finish statutory full-time education at age 16. This is key, because qualifications achieved then play a critical role in young people’s future educational, economic, health and well-being outcomes. I looked at the three central dimensions of inequality: race, sex and class. The data showed that how well students achieve at 16 is related far more to social class – whether assessed by parental occupation, parental education or household income – than to race or sex. For example, the achievement gap between students from the 20% of homes with the highest household income and the 20% of homes with the lowest household income was very large (measured at 0.91 standard deviations or SD). It was over three times larger than the small gap between boys and girls (0.29 SD), and over eight times larger than the very small gap between black and white students (0.11 SD).

However, it is also important to look at the data intersectionally, since everyone has a race, a sex and a class background, we don’t hold any of these characteristics in isolation. The combination of nine major ethnic groups, by three levels of socio-economic status (SES) and two levels of sex, produces 54 unique combinations of ethnicity, class and sex, and we used statistical modelling to calculate the achievement scores for each of these groups. White British and Black Caribbean low SES pupils, both boys and girls, have the poorest outcomes at age 16. Ethnic minority groups typically have higher average achievement than their White British peers, particularly among families in disadvantaged circumstances. The one exception was black boys from high SES homes who did not achieve as well as their White British peers, though this prompts us to ask why just boys, and why just in high SES homes?

Overall, the results point to policies such as the ‘pupil premium’, which target additional funding to schools to intervene with and support all pupils from low-income families.

龔鵬程教授：學(xué)生公平和學(xué)校效率之間的關(guān)系，您認(rèn)為是怎樣的？

史蒂夫·斯特蘭德教授：政府政策通常將解決公平差距的主要作用歸于學(xué)校，有時甚至認(rèn)為"失敗的學(xué)校 "是造成這種差距的因素。

然而，盡管最好的學(xué)?？梢蕴岣叱煽兒涂s小公平差距，但學(xué)校本身的作用是有限的。事實上，我的研究表明，在被英格蘭教育標(biāo)準(zhǔn)辦公室判定為"杰出 "的學(xué)校與被判定為 "需要改進(jìn) "的學(xué)校中，長期存在的 "邪惡 "的不平等問題，如與貧困有關(guān)的成績差距，其比例是一樣大的。

好的學(xué)校為所有人提高了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，但卻很難縮小差距。這表明，了解和解決學(xué)校所在的整個地區(qū)和社區(qū)的問題是多么重要，包括就業(yè)機(jī)會、醫(yī)療保健服務(wù)、住房、犯罪率、交通和福利。

這需要對整個社區(qū)進(jìn)行"聯(lián)合 "思考，我相信地方教育當(dāng)局曾經(jīng)做得更好，在2000年之后，他們的權(quán)力被削減，資金被日益削弱。

It is common for Government policy to ascribe a primary role to schools in addressing equity gaps, sometimes suggesting that ‘failing schools’ are even instrumental in creating such gaps. However, while the best schools can raise achievement and reduce equity gaps, there is a limit to what schools alone can do. Indeed, my research has shown the long-standing and ‘wicked’ problems of inequality, such as the achievement gap related to poverty, is proportionally just as large in schools which the England Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) has judged ‘Outstanding’ as they are in schools judged to ‘Require Improvement’. Good schools raise the bar for all, but struggle to close the gap. This indicates how important it is to understand and address the whole area and community in which a school is located, including employment opportunities, heath care provision, housing, crime rates, transport and well-being. It requires ‘joined-up’ thinking for a whole community, something that I believe Local Education Authorities (LEAs) used to do better, before their powers were curtailed and funding increasingly eroded through the late 2000’s.

龔鵬程教授：社會經(jīng)濟(jì)貧困與學(xué)生在科學(xué)領(lǐng)域的參與和成績間的關(guān)系，可以為我們分析一下嗎？

斯特蘭德教授：我對英格蘭國家學(xué)生數(shù)據(jù)庫（NPD）進(jìn)行了分析，以便在皇家學(xué)會2017年發(fā)表的一份報告中回答這個問題。該報告包含了對NPD中關(guān)于境況不好的學(xué)生在全國科學(xué)測試中的得分的大量分析，以及與來自更富裕背景的學(xué)生相比的其他科目分析。

來自經(jīng)濟(jì)困難家庭的學(xué)生，在享受免費校餐（FSM）的情況下，在7歲、11歲、16歲和18歲的全國科學(xué)測試和考試中的得分比來自更富裕家庭的學(xué)生低得多。

分析結(jié)果還顯示，處境不利的學(xué)生在學(xué)校生涯的每個階段都在科學(xué)學(xué)科方面取得了較差的進(jìn)步。

每當(dāng)我們研究在某一階段享受FSM的學(xué)生和其他學(xué)生在科學(xué)學(xué)科成績上的差異時，在控制了學(xué)生在以前階段的成績水平后，我們?nèi)匀话l(fā)現(xiàn)這兩個群體之間的差距，表明弱勢學(xué)生隨著時間的推移進(jìn)一步落后。在科學(xué)學(xué)科不再是學(xué)校的必修課之后，同樣的差距也出現(xiàn)在科學(xué)學(xué)科的參與上，處境不利的學(xué)生在16歲以后繼續(xù)學(xué)習(xí)科學(xué)學(xué)科的比例較低。

弱勢學(xué)生和非弱勢學(xué)生之間的差距，并不只存在于科學(xué)領(lǐng)域。國家統(tǒng)計局的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，兩組學(xué)生在其他科目，如英語和數(shù)學(xué)的成績上也存在同等差距。

對于試圖解釋學(xué)生的社會經(jīng)濟(jì)地位和他們的科學(xué)學(xué)習(xí)之間的緊密聯(lián)系的研究人員來說，境況不好的兒童在各門學(xué)科上遇到的困難的普遍性是很有價值的信息。這意味著阻礙低社會地位兒童學(xué)習(xí)科學(xué)學(xué)科的因素很可能也影響著更廣泛的學(xué)校教育。

I conducted an analysis of the England National Pupil Database (NPD) to answer just this question for the Royal Society in a report they published in 2017. The report contains an extensive analysis of data in the NPD on the scores of disadvantaged pupils in national tests in science, and in other subjects, compared to pupils from more prosperous backgrounds. Pupils from economically disadvantaged families, where pupils are entitled to Free School Meals (FSM), have much lower scores in national science tests and examinations at age 7, 11, 16 and 18, than pupils from more prosperous families.

The analysis also showed that disadvantaged pupils make poorer progress in science at every stage of their school career. Whenever we looked at the differences in science attainment between pupils entitled to FSM and other pupils at one stage, after controlling for the pupils’ level of attainment at previous stages, we still found a gap between the two groups, indicting disadvantaged pupils fell further behind over time. The same gap shows up in participation in science after it ceases to be a compulsory subject at school, with disadvantaged pupils proportionally less likely to continue with science in the post-16 years.

The gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils is not unique to science. The NPD data show equivalent gaps between the two groups of pupils in their attainments in other subjects, such as English and mathematics, as well. The generality of the difficulties that disadvantaged children have across school subjects is valuable information for researchers trying to explain the strong connection between pupils’ SES and their science learning. It means that the factors that hold low SES children back in learning science are likely to be ones that affect a wide range of school learning.

龔鵬程教授：您的研究是否包括國家或社會壟斷，對教育的影響？在歐洲，這些影響大嗎？

史蒂夫·斯特蘭德教授：在英格蘭，93%的義務(wù)教育年齡段的學(xué)生（4-16歲）在國家資助的教育機(jī)構(gòu)上學(xué)，所以在很多方面，教育可以被認(rèn)為是國家壟斷。國有和私有部門之間存在公平差距。

例如，在2020年和2021年，當(dāng)疫情限制以教師授予的成績?nèi)〈鷩铱荚嚂r，這兩個部門之間的成績差距擴(kuò)大了。這可能是因為私立學(xué)校的教師面臨著來自付費家長的極大壓力，需要授予高分，而且由于班級規(guī)模小，也不太可能受到政府的任何調(diào)節(jié)程序。

然而，正如我在回答上述前三個問題時指出的那樣，公立學(xué)校的成績也存在很大差距。

現(xiàn)任政府認(rèn)為，他們的學(xué)院化計劃是一項"以學(xué)校為中心 "的政策，強(qiáng)調(diào)學(xué)校的自主權(quán)，并將學(xué)校從地方政府的控制中解放出來。

然而，有一種強(qiáng)烈的觀點認(rèn)為，這只是增加了中央政府的權(quán)力，同時減少了地方對公共資助的服務(wù)的民主控制。

中央和地方之間的這種緊張關(guān)系是教育政策的一個持續(xù)的主題，不僅在英國，而且在歐洲許多地方都有。

This is an interesting question. In England, 93% of pupils of compulsory school age (aged 4-16 years) attend state-funded educational establishments, so in many ways education might be considered a state monopoly. There are equity gaps between the state and private sectors. For example, the achievement gap between the two sectors widened in 2020 and 2021, when COVID restrictions replaced national examinations with teacher-awarded grades. This might be because teachers in private schools were under the greatest pressure to award high grades from fee-paying parents, and were also less likely to be subject to any government moderation processes because of their small class sizes. Nevertheless, there are also big disparities in achievement within the state sector, as I have indicated in answering the first three questions above. The current government argue their academisation programme is a ‘school-centred’ policy, emphasising school autonomy and freeing schools from Local Authority control. However, there is a strong argument that this just increases the power of central government, while reducing local democratic control over publicly-funded services in a local area. This tension between the central and the local is a continuing theme in education policy, not only in England but in many parts of Europe.

龔鵬程，1956年生于臺北，臺灣師范大學(xué)博士，當(dāng)代著名學(xué)者和思想家。著作已出版一百五十多本。

辦有大學(xué)、出版社、雜志社、書院等，并規(guī)劃城市建設(shè)、主題園區(qū)等多處。講學(xué)于世界各地。并在北京、上海、杭州、臺北、巴黎、日本、澳門等地舉辦過書法展。現(xiàn)為中國孔子博物館名譽(yù)館長、臺灣國立東華大學(xué)終身榮譽(yù)教授、美國龔鵬程基金會主席。