The purpose of this article is to analyze and criticize the main points on social and cultural reproduction theories. Since the 1970s, schools of Neo-Marxism, Critic theory and Structuralism, etc, have strongly criticized the function of modern education. These main theories include social reproduction, correspondence theory, cultural reproduction, and hegemonic reproduction. They argue as follows: 1. The cultural hegemony of the dominant class controls the curriculum and teaching in schools; 2. Educational system loses its autonomy respectively and hence becomes an instrument used for dominating the whole society; 3. Educational system does not fulfill the ideal of equal opportunity of education, the reasons are related to what is mentioned next; 4. Educational system reproduce unfair social classes. However, the author also points out some weaknesses of reproduction theories. They are as follows: 1. Schools are not just a compliant instrument for duplicating social classes; on the contrary, there are controversy, conflict, opposition, and disagreement continuously present within campus; 2. Reproduction theories err as does determinism, and they deny the positive contributions that modern education has made to. social mobility; 3. If the structure of social classes was reproduced undoubtedly through complying, then any social change will not be likely to take place; 4. It seems that resistance theory is more suitable to explain the duplication of lower socio-economic status.
本文之目的是在分析並評論社會與文化再製理論的主要論點。自一九七○年代以來，新馬克思主義、批判理論、結構主義等學派，強烈地批判現代教育的功能。其中主要包括社會再製、符應理論、文化再製、霸權再製等幾種理論。這些理論批判現代教育制度的問題如下：1.統治階層的文化霸權操控學校課程與教學；2.教育制度已失去相對自主性而成為宰制社會的工具；3.教育制度未能實踐教育機會均等的理想，其原因乃是：4.教育制度再製不平等的社會階級。然而，本文作者亦指出再製論的幾項缺點：1.學校乃是充滿對立、矛盾與衝突的機構，而非再製社會階層之柔順工具；2.再製論犯了決定論的錯誤，否定教育對於促進社會流動之正面的功能；3.如果社會階級結構是經由順從而獲得再製，則社會變遷將不可能發生；4.抗拒理論更適合於解釋低社經地位的階級再製。
