Rawolle,
S. & Lingard, B. (2013). Bourdieu and educational research: Thinking tools,
relational thinking, beyond epistemological innocence. In M. Murphy (Ed.), Social theory and education research:
Understanding Foucault, Habermas, Bourdieu and Derrida. (pp. 117-137).
Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge.
The
authors of this chapter give an overview of Bourdieu’s background and the
influence of his ideas on social theory. Rather that purely exploring theory,
Bourdieu emphasised the link between theory and practice. His great interest is
in the “relational workings of the social arrangement” (p. 117) – this links to
his work on fields and the relations within and between different fields.
The
authors suggest that Bourdieu’s work is universal in its application – both globally
and within a range of fields. They posit that Bourdieu’s frequent return to
previous work is indicative of his reflexivity.
Bourdieu
also developed what are called “thinking tools” (p. 119) which he developed and
which continued to be developed throughout his practice.
The
authors indicate that the reception of Bourdieu’s theories as they relate to
education varies internationally. This is in part due to differences in
availability of translated works. Variation may also be due to whether key
academics within individual countries engaged with Bourdieu’s theories.
Wacquant
(1989) describes Bourdieu as developing a set of “thinking tools” which,
although appropriated from a range of disciplines, were developed within
Bourdieu’s studies. These tools can be considered a framework to use in the
examination of a range of applications.
Practice
and habitus: These
two thinking tools developed in relation to anthropological research Bourdieu undertook
in Algeria. He did not alter his approach when researching in the differing
culture of France. Explore this issue? Bourdieu did not provide a
definition of practice but viewed it as the essence of social life, an area to
be explored. Need to find a
clearer definition of practice, if one exists!
The
development of Bourdieu’s thoughts on fields led, perhaps inevitably, to
consideration of a general theory of fields. This could aid understanding of
the relationality between fields, and areas of convergence, overlap and
divergence. This is discussed in Bourdieu (1993) – Sociology in Question. (Look at Maton, 2005).
As well
as providing thinking tools, Bourdieu also gives guidance on how a research
habitus can be developed for using his theories in education.
Methodological approaches and researcher stances: beyond epistemological
innocence
Bourdieu
suggests that reflexive locating of the researcher within the
relevant field(s) is vital for effective social research. This is a really interesting point
to explore further. Does this link with reflexivity such as that espoused by
Heidegger? What does this mean for my research – is it more effective because
of my position and background within the area being researched?
Read “A Bourdieusian approach to methodology in Grenfell (2008).
The final point the authors explore with
regard to Bourdieu is his concept of the “collective intellectual” (p. 132). He
saw the need for academics to work within the political field not only the
academic field, to overcome the dichotomy between academia and political
commitment. This is closer to the French intellectualism tradition.
The authors’ key points from the conclusion:
-
Generative thinking tools: practice, habitus
capital, field
-
Reproduction in education
-
Rejecting epistemological innocence
-
Researcher reflexivity – researcher habitus
-
Research with commitment and being political.
What use is this for me?
An interesting read when I know little of
Bourdieu. It’s given me some good further reading and an overview of the
conceptual tools I would want to use.
No comments:
Post a Comment