Cultural capital—field connections for three populations of Chinese students: a theoretical framework for empirical research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Cultural capital” and “field” are Pierre Bourdieu’s most popular concepts, applied in sociological research around the world, including China. Yet, Bourdieu’s overarching theory of reproduction in education implicitly bore the imprint of a culture-field connection specific to French schooling and society circa 1960–1980. This essay has two broad aims. First, it sketches a comparative framework for connecting cultural resources to their surrounding fields. Second, it applies that framework to three populations of Chinese students: domestic students in China, Chinese international students in North American universities, and Chinese first generation and immigrants in North America. Those populations are used to illustrate several arguments. First, domestic students in China and their diaspora in North America highlight how rationalized competitions in stratified systems trigger intensive “adaptations.” Second, Chinese immigrants have inadvertently triggered new “valuation contests” in North American education. Third, international Chinese students exemplify emerging transnational strategies of opting out of intensive competitions by switching fields. Future directions for research are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".