BOURDIEU

Ideas O Bourdieu



Ideas O Bourdieu

Introduction

This paper begins by outlining the theory of social capital. Bourdieu's perspective, in particular, is presented as the most useful approach in informing (and renewing) learning partnerships for social inclusion. Notwithstanding the fact that learning partnerships often vary in size, membership, geographical location, cultural ethos, mission, and learning activities (see O'Brien and Ó Fathaigh, 2005), they are likely to exhibit a common main purpose.

With specific attention to learning partnerships for social inclusion, we see such a common purpose as: The will to support the development of a learning community that serves as an advocate for local learning needs (specifically the needs of disadvantaged groups), while taking into account the possibilities and constraints of national policy frameworks Bourdieu's theory proffers an invaluable conceptual lens through which social inclusion in education may be investigated and advanced alongside this learning partnership rationale.

Despite this claim, an overview of contemporary literature research reveals that this theory is grossly under-utilised. The paper concludes by highlighting how Bourdieu's insights can be viewed principally as a critique of existing theoretical and methodological approaches to our understandings of 'social capital'. Moreover, Bourdieu's ideas are shown to inform more effective educational measures for social inclusion.

The theory of social capital

'Social capital' theory can be sourced to the works of three main authors - James Coleman, Robert Putnam and Pierre Bourdieu. Coleman's (1988, 1990, 1992) interpretation of the concept is the most frequently cited in the educational literature. For Coleman, social capital exists in the structure of relations between individuals and is thus largely intangible. Its potency, however, is realised in its capacity (just like physical and human capital) to facilitate productive activity.

This is achieved through the formation of social relationships built up over time which enables individuals to achieve their interests over-and-above those that can only be attained independently. Four important forms of social capital are identified: a) obligations and expectations (e.g. doing favours for and receiving favours from other people), b) informational potential (e.g. sharing useful information that may inform some future action), c) norms and effective sanctions (e.g. the establishment of community values and shared standards of behaviour) and d) authority relations (e.g. skilful leadership that informs others' actions).

It is noted that social capital through these means can benefit others who do not directly participate. Coleman (1990, p 313) gives the example here of the work of parent-teacher associations who set disciplinary standards for the benefit of all in the school community. Some form of investment in social capital (e.g. concerted group involvement) is deemed necessary, however, for any such rewards to be amassed. While social capital can be created, conversely it can also be destroyed.

Putnam's (1993, 1995) theory of social capital has functionalist roots also (especially its focus on social integration), but it is furthermore influenced by notions of pluralism and communitarianism.

His central thesis is that a well functioning regional economy together with a high level of political integration are the result of that region's capacity to successfully ...