faculty research seminar bourdieul 271004

8/6/2019 Faculty Research Seminar Bourdieul 271004

1/30

Bourdieus notion of social capital

How useful is it in understanding thesocial effects of higher education?

Simon Marginson, 27 October 2004


2/30

Work in progress seminar coverage

Bourdieus notions of social capital, and

social capital in education

Summing up, and some issues and problems

Applications to understanding higher

education

1: hierarchical degree markets2: institutions as producers of social

capital

Concluding remarks


3/30

According to Bourdieu capital is

Inherited from the past and continuouslycreated

Accumulated labour in a materialised,

embodied (incorporated) or immanent form,which when appropriated on a private, i.e.exclusive basis, by agents or groups ofagents, enables them to appropriate socialenergy in the form of reified or living labour

In fields, the positions of actors (individual orinstitutional) are defined by the distribution of

capital and the rules that govern this


4/30

Bourdieus forms of capital

Economic capital

Cultural capital: embodied (in persons),

objectified (e.g. art), institutionalised (e.g.university degrees)

Social capital: resources grounded in durable

exchange-based networks of persons

Symbolic capital: manifestation of each of the

other forms of capital when they are

naturalised on their own terms


5/30

Conversions of capital Bourdieu argues the different types of capital

can all be derived from economic capital.These transformations are not automatic butrequire effort, and the benefits often show

only in the long term. Profits in one area arenecessarily paid for by costs in another (e.g.wealthy parents purchase cultural capital/social capital in independent schools)

The other three forms of capital are notentirely reducible to economic capital theyhave their own specificity but economiccapital is at their root.

- Bourdieu, The forms of capital, in Richardson (ed.) Handbook

of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education,1986


6/30

Bourdieu on social capital

Social capital is the sum of the resources,

actual or virtual, that accrue to an individual

or a group by virtue of possessing a durable

network of more or less institutionalisedrelationships of mutual acquaintance and

recognition.

- Bourdieu and Wacquant, An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology,

1992, p. 119

Note durable- and the emphasis on immanent social capital, on

potentialbenefits/ capacity as well as actual, visible, realised

benefits (as woulkd be preferred by, say, economics). Bourdieus

concept of capital is distinctive


7/30

Social capital provides a

credential which entitles them tocredit

Social capital provides each of its [thegroups] members with the backing of the

collectively-owned capital, a credential

which entitles them to credit- Bourdieu, The forms of capital, in Richardson (ed.) Handbook

of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, 1986

Suggestive of the role of education


8/30

In social groups held together by mutual

self-interest

The profits which accrue from membership in

a group are the basis of the solidarity whichmakes them possible.


9/30

Quantification of social capital

The volume of the social capital possessedby a given agent thus depends on the size of

the network of connections he/she caneffectively mobilise and on the volume of thecapital (economic, cultural or symbolic)possessed in his/her own right by each ofthose to whom he/she is connected.

Note that greater network size is positive but the quality of the

nodes is crucial


10/30

The value of social capital is derived

from prior inequalities/ exclusions

The structure of the field, i.e. the unequal

distribution of capital, is the source of thespecific effects of capital.

Bourdieus social capital is constituted by the socially powerful and

depends on the normality of practices of inequality and socialclosure


11/30


12/30

To them that hath shall be given (1)

The social capital accruing from a

relationship is much greater to the extent that

the person who is the object of it is richlyendowed with capital they are sought after

for their social capital..

The profitability of this effort rises in proportion to the size of thecapital


13/30

To them that hath shall be given (2)

an investment in sociability is necessarily

long-term

and therefore is costly


14/30

Centrality of education in

reproducing forms of capital Because the question of the arbitrariness of

appropriation arises most sharply in the

process of transmission particularly at thetime of succession, a critical moment for all

power every reproduction strategy is at the

same time a legitimation strategy aimed at

consecrating both an exclusive appropriationand its reproduction.

Education a principal instrument of legitimation


15/30

The scope of the educational system

tends to increase

As an instrument of reproduction capable of

disguising its own function, the scope of theeducational system tends to increase, and

together with this increase is the unification of

the market in social qualifications which gives

rights to occupy rare positions.


16/30

Though education can also enable

the retrieval of pre-modern forms ofsocial power

The closures provided by certain kinds of

institutional educational structure, such as

select schools, enable families and kinship

networks to reassemble and reassert their

social power


17/30

Distinguishing Bourdieus social

capital from Putnam, Coleman etc (1)

A more precise notion of particular social

relationships the mainstream concept

seems to take in any and every association Theorisation in terms of inequality, hierarchy.

Putnams arehorizontally formed networks

Class and caste, not neighbourhood

Closure/exclusivity not open-endedassociation: Bourdieus focus is on the dark

side of networks (dark, unless you benefit!)

E

mphasis on access to resources


18/30

Distinguishing Bourdieus social

capital from Putnam, Coleman etc (2) Understanding of social capital as potential

benefits not just realised benefits (tends to

conflate group membership, intra-groupexchange, the benefits of membership)

Emphasis on long-term investment in durable

networks not weaker associationality

Stronger emphasis on groups themselves,

less on social capital as individual attributes,

though acknowledges both I & S dimensions

Norms not isolated from power and practices


19/30

Some issues and problems

Convertibility of forms of capital

(commensurate, homogenous value)?

Social capital/ cultural capital overlap

Expansionary networks?

Social networks that are always homogenous

where does structured diversity fit in, e.g.bridging relationships?

Social networks that always exclude? What

role for a democratising social capital, rather

than a conspiracy of the oppressed?


20/30

In considering the role of education

Bourdieus notions of cultural capitaland social capital overlap (1) Educational credentials represent

institutionalised cultural capital. But they alsosignify/ enable membership of certain

networks, e.g. communities of professionals,

communities of elite graduates (e.g.

Melbourne Grammar Old Boys)

i.e. they are also instrumental in social capital

in Bourdieus sense of the term

Both concepts used to explain inequalities


21/30

In considering the role of education

Bourdieus notions of cultural capital

and social capital overlap (2)

The economic and social yield of theeducational qualifications depends on thesocial capital, again inherited, which can beused to back it up

NB. though upwardly mobile acquisition of credentials takesplace, acquisition of social capital follows less often


22/30

Broader networking or narrower

networking? The profitability of building social capital is

enhanced by the range of networking

connections butB

ourdieus argumentsuggests an inevitable trade-off betweenbreadth on one hand, and exclusivity (whichenhances value of social capital) on theother. As competition intensifies, the benefits

of breadth appear ever more diffuse. Note that nevertheless, many IT networks

have an expansionary logic. If this is not

building social capital, then what is it?


23/30

Does education have potential as a

universalising democratic instrument? Social networks that always exclude? What

role for a democratising social capital/

network, rather than a conspiracy of theoppressed?

If this is not capital in Bourdieus sense (hisnotion of capital is privatised and exclusive,

with good grounds), then what do we call it? Or is the implication ofBourdieu that this

function is incompatible with (or at leastconstantly undermined by) the credentialing

role of education?


24/30


education: 1. degree markets (1)

As Bourdieu suggests, students compete for

access to the scarce cultural and social

capital (degrees, networking opportunities)gained in elite universities/ courses

Economisation of the competition (fee-based

market) assists the socially powerful groupsto mobilise economic capital to create social

capital, andcreates greater exclusion (and

hence more valuable SC) in universities


25/30


education: 1. degree markets (2) Note the different social roles of generalist

credentials (Arts, Business), mass

professional degrees, exclusive credentials

Differential opportunities to secure socialcapital via education are field of study based,and also institution-based. The classicaldifferentiation was always field-based

(different cultural attributes enabling mutualrecognition, and social networks). But marketstratifications puts institution-baseddifferentiation on the agenda


26/30


education: 2. institutions asproducers of social capital Universities are creators of social capital,

enablers of its formation outside their walls(and sometimes foster its critique!)

Mass education brings institution stratificationin place of exclusion from education

Mass universities a limited capacity to createvaluable social capital. Largely confined tohigh elite institutions, especially at theoverlap with formation of the professions.

Alumni association looser thanB

ourdieus SC


27/30

Analysing university networks

Exclusive

(closing out)

Inclusive

(reaching out)

Open

(no border)

Bounded field of

study/ profession

Medicine? Education?

Generalist field

of study

Business?

Cross-field

structure

All fields

(instituional)

Academic

unionism?

Student

unionism?


28/30

Concluding remarks 1 Perhaps it is more helpful to talk about the

different forms of capital creating thepossibility of the formation of each other, nottransferring (zero-sum transference

between capitals only part of the time) Not all networks are social capital, unless we

can define capital in collective terms. (Thenotion of capital as all good things, every

public good etc. is analytically useless) Volume of networks less important in

constituting social value, than extensity andintensity of the interactions that take place


29/30

Concluding remarks 2

B

ourdieu draws attention to group practices,the continuous work of network formation.

More rigorous definition of networks in termsof mutual recognition and acquaintanceship,not just any de facto association

Every network can be understood in terms ofinclusion/exclusion. Crucialvariable

Exclusive networks protect their membersfrom internal competition, and individualisedforms of external competition, but enhancethe external competitiveness of the group


30/30

Concluding remarks 3

Universites are themselves institutional

agrregators of social capital, and also

(inefficient) site of its production by others The credentialing role of education is

sometimes uppermost and sometimes not

Much depends on (1) how social groups use

education and reproduce themselves viaeducation, (2) how education is politically

(economically) structured as a field, in its

institutional and credential structures

faculty research seminar bourdieul 271004

Documents