The ‘New Paradigm’ of Sociology of Childhood famously maintains that childhood is socially constructed and supposedly places a much greater emphasis on the agency of children: children should not simply be framed as the passive receivers of socialisation. The aim of this article is to demonstrate that such a ‘social construction’ of childhood is not concretely articulated and that the theoretical understanding of the ‘social construction’ of childhood is simply delegated to historiographical or ethnographic accounts. In doing so, it advances a new criticism of the New Paradigm and radicalises previous ones. Here, key is the theoretical engagement with the concept of ‘human capital’: foregrounding its critique, this article proposes the link between ‘human capital’ as a neoliberal version of labour power and the concept of socialisation. The aim is to show that the ‘social construction’ of childhood is central, but the New Paradigm uses categories that are at the same time founded on neo-liberal views and abstracted from concrete social relations. This article maintains that a concrete critique of processes of socialisation (which is here understood as the socialisation of childhood as human capital) is needed instead of abstract critique of reified childhood. Two alternative pedagogical practices are used to provide an example of such a concrete critique.

童年社会学的“新范式”著名地主张，儿童时代是社会建构的，据说应该更加重视儿童的代理权：不应简单地将儿童视为社会化的被动接受者。本文的目的是证明这种童年的“社会建构”并未具体阐明，并且对童年的“社会建构”的理论理解仅被委托给史学或民族志研究。在此过程中，它对新范式提出了新的批评，并激化了以前的批评。在这里，关键是对“人力资本”概念的理论介入：在提出批评之前，本文提出了作为新自由主义劳动力形式的“人力资本”与社会化概念之间的联系。目的是表明童年的“社会建构”是中心，但新范式使用的类别同时基于新自由主义的观点，并从具体的社会关系中抽象出来。本文认为，需要对社会化过程进行具体的批判（在这里被理解为作为人力资本的童年社会化），而不是对具体化的童年进行抽象的批判。两种可供选择的教学实践被用来提供这种具体批评的例子。本文认为，需要对社会化过程进行具体的批判（在这里被理解为作为人力资本的童年社会化），而不是对具体化的童年进行抽象的批判。两种可供选择的教学实践被用来提供这种具体批评的例子。本文认为，需要对社会化过程进行具体的批判（在这里被理解为作为人力资本的童年社会化），而不是对具体化的童年进行抽象的批判。两种可供选择的教学实践被用来提供这种具体批评的例子。