Rawolle, S. & Lingard, B. (2013). Bourdieu and educational research: Thinking tools, relational thinking, beyond epistemological innocence.

Bourdieu is well-used in educational research (some may argue over-used) but what I have read resonates with my own thoughts on academic skills development and transition to/within HE. I’m therefore starting to explore his conceptual tools in relation to educational research. I decided not to jump in at the deep end and read his own work straight away – I’d rather get my head around his ideas first, as I believe his writing is somewhat hard-going.

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.

The Wolf Report

This post looks at the Wolf report into vocational education. It's a recent key report into VE, and I should probably have been more aware of its contents than I was. Its content and recommendations aren't probably of specific relevance to my current work, but it's important to have an understanding of the context of the politics surrounding FE. The report stresses the relevance and employers' understanding of long-standing vocational qualifications at level 3, such as the BTEC. Where Wolf feels that students are let down are many of the lower level VQs which do not lead on to further qualifications. However, as an  overview to remind me at a later date, I've put down the key points and spent some time on the context, as I'm lacking in knowledge of the background.

Wolf, A. (2011). Review of vocational education - the Wolf Report. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/180504/DFE-00031-2011.pdf

Purpose: Consider how we can improve VE for 14 to 189 yos and thereby promote successful progression into the labour market and into HE and training routes.

The working definition of VE used: all qualifications, other than GCSEs, A levels, IGCSEs and IB, that incorporate clear vocational content and referencing.

Introduction: There are around 2.5 million 14-19yos, most in full- or part-time education. Education and training programmes should allow young people to progress. There is high youth unemployment. Most 14-19yos take some form of vocational qualification. Almost two thirds of young people don't take A levels - the conventional academic route. Wolf suggests that there is a failing of vocational provision, with no clear progression opportunities. Around 350,000 young people "are poorly served by current arrangements" (p. 21). This is not just a failure of education provision but of changes in labour markets. There is failure of vocational programmes due to constant reorganisations of 14-19 education by central government. She suggests we need a reduction in the centralised management of qualifications and greater involvement of employers, increased efficiency and more relevant qualifications.

The social and labour market context: There has been a reduction in the youth labour market. There are high returns on education and qualifications and high aspirations to HE. There are also high returns to work experience. Rapid economic change is having unpredictable effects on the labour market. All of these impact on 14-19 VQs.

1. Collapse of the youth labour markets: Apprenticeships are a valuable route into employment throughout the EU. The number of young people in employment is low. Those not in education and training face high levels of unemployment. England has very high youth unemployment, up to 25yos. People are pushed into education due to the lack of jobs. even before the 2009 recession, youth unemployment was rising and the number of NEETs increasing.

The nature of the labour market: There is a high level of 'over-qualification' for jobs, but shortages in very specific areas - as demonstrated by the returns for specific qualifications, especially quantitative ones. It is now harder for 16 -17 yos to find employment due to legislation making it more difficult (H&S). The employer perception of 16-17yos leaving education is one of 'low achievers'.

2. High returns to education and qualifications: Education and qualifications 'pay'. Low level VQs have very low returns - they have little or no labour market value (level 2 qualifications). Employers look for qualifications with which they are familiar, rather than trying to keep up with constant qualification reforms.

3. High returns to apprenticeship and employment: Employers value work experience - this explains the high returns associated with apprenticeships. "The best predictor of being employed in the future is being employed now" (p. 34).

4. Occupational change: There is rapid economic and occupational change and a decline in skilled manual jobs.

Implications of change (A): YPs entry into the English labour market:- YP are very likely to change both jobs and occupations in the first years of employment, There is considerable 2churn2 in and out of education and employment.

Implications of change (B): How education systems are adapting - facts and misconceptions:- Most developed countries now delay specialisation to later stages. England pushes for earlier and more complete specialisation in both academic and vocational tracks.

Implications of change (C): Challenges for VE:- VE needs to take into account the varying job histories YP can expect to experience. Needs to take into account aspirations for higher study.

The educational context:
Issues: Young people taking VQs which the labour market does not reward; and also established VQs valued by industry being denied accreditation and funding by the government. YP are being encouraged to take VQs which will reduce opportunities for progression. There are high drop out rates and 'churning'. The funding systems discourage further English/maths courses post-16. There is a marked decrease in returns to post-16 VQs. The causes of these issues are complex.

There has been rapid and repeated change in VE over the past 25 years, for example: new 'non-academic' qualifications such as the Diploma, designed by central government; increasing regulation of qualifications for 14-19yos; redesign of VQs to a specific vocational focus; changes in performance management by central government; apprenticeship reform; changes in funding formulae for 14-19yos; changes/redesign of maths and English, especially for those on VQs.

Key issues A: Key Stage 4: Until recently, VQs were only a small proportion of a 14-15yos timetable. In the 1990s, GNVQs were introduced, at first for post 16s only. Then came GCSE equivalencies for VQs such as BTEC Firsts. The QCA's programme of 'equivalencies' to ensure all qualifications at a particular level are treated as substantively equivalent (and with parity).

Key Issues B: Upper 2nd, age 16-19: No major changes, unlike KS4. Most study for AS and A levels - the 'sixth form' pathway. BTEC awards also attract substantial numbers and are well recognised by HE; these are teacher assessed and awarding body verified.

Part 4: Audit of current provision
In 2009 11.4% of UK applicants accepted for HE entry had BTEC ND and no A levels. A further 1.7% had BTEC national plus A levels. 37.1%  had A levels alone. In 1999 only 4.9 of acceptances had only BTEC nationals. 14-19 education should equip young people to follow different routes successfully and not operate as a tracking system.

1. There is a mismatch between labour market requirements and VE provision. The content of many current VQs is not valued by employers and the labour market. Level 2 courses allow limited progression and lead to churning.
2. The labour market recognises qualifications that are stable and familiar - academic qualifications have been relatively stable. YPs employment patterns imply a need for more general rather than highly specific VQs; however, YP are increasingly being offered only highly specific VQs.

The report discusses the mismatches in VQs and the labour market in detail as well as the role of apprenticeships. There are a large number of recommendations, which the 2015 review returns to.


Need to: Review the Government's response to the Wolf report and also any updates (2015) - for future work rather than of relevance now.

Bringing together the week 1 reading

Even before the weekend, I'd started to get an understanding of why we'd been given the articles to read. They all revolve around the idea of validity. How do we know that research is good research? Do we actually need to know this?

Different paradigms raise different interpretations of what is meant by 'good' research and how this can be determined.

At the weekend session, each group was given a paper to discuss. we ended up with Lather, which was rather mind-blowing.

What was said about each author?

Hammersley: A post-empiricist, believing in 'subtle realism'. He believes that rigorously conducted method is a guarantor of truth, from a scientific viewpoint. "Validity is a synonym of truth and method its guarantor" (p. 69). This is the correspondence theory of truth. For Hammersley, research is science.

Smith: Outlines three perspectives that challenge the dominant view. He suggests that all judgements are based on practical, ethical issues - we are all post-foundationalists. We make judgements based on social interaction. The criteria aren't fixed in advance (compare to Hammersley). Think about how you judge art. You engage with the piece - you ask questions of it, it asks questions of you - a "fusion of horizons" - dialectical criteria.

Collins: Structures in society perpetuate the dominant truth. Concrete experience is required.

Lather: Not quite 'anything goes' but suggests a more open view of what can be used to consider validity. Be aware that even in alternative views of validity, the shadowy hand of positivism remains.
 Use of reflexive poetry, reflecting on participants' feedback. All needs t be considered. And maybe all's been done before...Erasmus Darwin  - scientific prose in poetry! It seems that, although Lather suggested that some of her ideas were undoubtedly ephemeral; nevertheless, some seem to have ensured over 20 years... http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08893675.2015.1051293

A new day, a new dawn, a new life and I feel...

...terrified?

A long, long, time ago, I was sort of given the opportunity to study for a PhD. I was coming to the end of my Master's and had done an assignment that had impressed a lecturer in poultry welfare. He suggested I might want to apply for a PhD studentship they had going in the subject of broiler welfare. I was flattered that someone thought I could cope with a PhD but I wanted to be with my partner, and not have to commute to see him for another three years. Besides, he'd been completing his PhD and I'd learnt all about the visitations from the 'elephant of despair' as he was writing it up in the final year. No. Goodbye academia.

Sort of.

As fate would have it, I ended up in academia. Firstly teaching (mostly) HE in FE, and then working solely in HE. As it happens, I also missed the challenge and excitement of learning new things, so have dipped in and out of formal education ever since. I suppose, if I were truthful, I've always had a little hope that some day I could go and complete that doctorate I gave up the opportunity for.

And so... panning forward to 2015. I um and ah about applying for a professional doctorate at my current workplace. So many things act as potential obstacles: a small child still at nursery; my own vacillation; concern over whether my husband would think it a silly thing to do - a 'vanity' qualification. So many times I talked myself out of applying. maybe next year when small child is at school. But.. new logistical problems would undoubtedly rear their heads. In the end, I enquired, and there was still time to apply. I have applied and will shortly be having an interview.

And now... mild panic. I don't feel I have a strong enough background in education. It may have been my 'career' (using the term loosely) for the past 13 or so years, but I've always felt an interloper. Never more so than in my current job, where most consider our roles as being on the fringes of academia, and where each  of us has 'fallen' into the job. There's no set way to become a study skills adviser, and so perhaps I feel my lack of confidence in the role stems from this. Others know more, can quote learning theory off pat, can discuss philosophical theories. I feel like an outsider. The EdD is, at some level, an attempt to show myself (and others) that I do have the knowledge to support others, that I can support students effectively. A little bit of it is that I would have the letters Dr in front of my name - that means quite a lot in students' eyes, and academic colleagues' eyes. Perhaps it shouldn't, but it does.

What I do have is an idea to develop. I know what I want to do. I want to investigate student transition from vocational FE to HE. What are the challenges? How can we overcome them, or help students and colleagues at FE colleges too overcome them? Is there a problem there at all? Anecdotally there seems to be. But in reality? I don't know. Is it a worthwhile topic? Again, I don't know. The research project is years away. There are many challenges to come before then.

Am I up to them? I don't know. It's a new day it's a new dawn, it's a new life, and I feel excited.