Actions taken together are better and faster. Human beings congregate to join efforts and knowledge. Teamwork is a clear example of this. If we want to move is better to work among several. The work done by one person in one day can make 24 people in an hour. The capital is built through hundreds of small and large actions we do every day.

Have you looked at some of Bourdieu's work on social/cultural capital.  This is a great theory that can be used to discuss academic achievement.  I would also refer to David Swartz's book:  Culture and Power: the Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu

Thank you for your help Janet and Monica.  I'm already basing my reserach on Social Capital from different perspectives.  USing Bourdieu (1986), Coleman (1988), and Lin(2000).  Great for explaining the differente social interrelationships involve in  the educational arena about knowledge movility through networks.  Also Dika (2007) have presented recent reserch on the subject.

Janet, I rapidly went to Amazon ad bought the book you recomend.  Thank you!  Any other ideas are welcome.

I echo Janet - See Bourdieu theory attached:

Great help, thank you Gina!

see

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/nlc_cdc_wawla03_02_Leading%20together%20to%20build%20social%20capital%20(Think%20Piece%202).pdf

THANKS RAHEAM, VERY GREATFUL!

After looking at the source given by Raheam, I would like to stress that obviously there are at least two different meanings of social capital which are important to distinguish and to take notice of. Bourdieu's concept of social capital refers to the aspect of social inequality in the sense that social capital is seen as a hidden dynamic process of creating and particlularly strengthening and stabilizing social inequality by means of erecting and conserving fine lines of distinction between people from different social strata. Monica's comment and also Raheam's text source offer another meaning of social capital being a social remedy against segregation and in favor of integration resp. inclusion.

Reflecting on Dieter's comments, the bipolar nature of social capital vis a vis intergenerational capital is apparent in maintaining class distinctions.  I want to point out that this has to do with people in class groups, as well as institutions in support of class groupings.  Consider top tier schools in the US, for example, who for years have stressed that they are focused on admitting a diverse enrollment, yet continue to fail at meeting their own goals in that regard year over year.  So upper tier inter generational capital remains in place through the working of institutional action over time.  This occurs also on the opposite side of the continuum, wherein lower SES groupings remain intact despite the attempt to create access to education and employment opportunities.  I think of two lines of thought in that regard, one is that the oppressed are complicit in their oppression, as Freire imagined, and that resource scarcity depletes aspirational goals, as Oscar Lewis' writing suggests.  Lastly, regarding Dieter's comment about social capital as a means toward integration and inclusion, I am reminded of Mickleson's work: 'Segregation and the SAT', published I recall through the Ohio State law school, where in forced integration that created a milieu of multiple SES groups in the schools, did not uncouple segregation between groups when considering access to such areas of social capital as AP courses and SAT prep courses, underscoring the role of institutional action and resource availability as critical in the stratification of social groupings.  What appears on the surface is not always what exists in the weeds.

Bordieu's approach to social capital (cultural capital) is quite interesting, for sure. But from a theoretical point of view it is based on (neo)marxist theory which comes along with certain ex ante assumptions (class conflict, etc.) which determines sometimes already the later outcome...

I think that network approaches that try to explain ressouce flows as structurally determined (while certain actors occupy strategically important positions; e.g. "structural holes" or "Brokerage and Closure") such as R. Burt have the advantage not to narrow theoretical considerations to early and, therefore, grasp more of the underlying social processes.

I have written a paper on the social capital of brokerage roles ("Measuring the Social Capital of Brokerage Roles", in: Connections) - brokers might be considered as (ingroup or between group) leaders. I could imagine that student achievement is also dependent on access to brokers in order to obtain scarce ressources (e.g. information that might be advantageous).