SMERG Presentation d. 4/11. Education and ’Identity-formation’
My PhD is regarding the Youth to Youth – Project, where my side project and research interest
concerns educational choice and identity-formation (subjectification) in a poststructuralistic
optic.
The hypothesis of the project is that relations between youths and youths who are one step
‘ahead’ in the educational system, helps developing foreground and gives a different kind of
knowledge than teacher/adult coaching and guiding. The purpose of that knowledge is
helping the youth make the ‘leap’ to an education in science. The projects goal is ultimately
helping more youths from the outlying areas in Nordjylland in getting a higher level of
education.
The Theoretical Frame:
In my first paper on the side project I drew the following figure, based on a poststructuralistic
approach:
This Figure should be seen as an attempt to illustrate the double approach I want to address
in this project 1. The Macro level, which should be seen as a historical and surrounding
frame, which the subject is object to. Foucault and Bourdieu’s different, but align able
concepts illustrate this level. Agency on this level is very limited. 2. The Micro level, which is
the possible agency and practice of the subject, though always within the parameters of the
concepts and limitations on the macro levels. The individual agency and theoretic approach
on this type of micro level in a poststructuralist view is often seen in Judith Butler’s (Butler,
1993; 2005) and Bronwyn Davies’ work (Davies, 2000), though I’m very sceptical about the
version of feminist poststructuralism they adhere to – especially regarding their reading on
Foucault. I’m not the first to see a great potential in combining the thoughts of Foucault and
Bourdieu (Cronin, 1996), but where Cronin wants to expand Bourdieu’s concept of agency I
want to supplement it with a concept of positioning and foreground linked to my research
interest in education and ‘identity-formation’; the limits of Bourdieu’s agency will therefore
be upheld in my theoretical frame.
Figure 1.
Identity - formation /
subjectification
Macro level: Influenced by
epistemé, habitus, doxa,
field, technologies, and
cultural artifacts, and
other ’large’ discourses
(gender, role, class etc.)
Micro level: Influenced by
discursive positioning,
foreground, social
practice and other forms
of agency. Ofcourse
heavily influenced by the
macro level.
On one hand I want to capture knowledge about the subjects possibility to almost transcend
the subjectification regarding education; the pattern-breaking youths in the Youth-To-Youth
Project, which despite upbringing, social class and other deterministic factors seize to
reproduce their educational choice. On the other hand I would like to get a glimpse at some of
the conflicts on the micro level that youths from this area of Denmark face regarding
education in relation to the concepts on the macro level.
In short I’m searching for data regarding: 1. Pattern-breaking Youths that have almost
transcended their educational reproduction. What factors where crucial to their new
direction in education? Which discourses do they draw on regarding their ‘empowerment’
and move ‘forward’? 2. Youths in conflict, which discourses and positioning’s are clashing
regarding the youths and how is their foreground regarding the educational choices they
face?
Concepts and framework – Marriage of Bourdieu and Foucault:
Bourdieu’s empirical theoretical frame and concepts combined with Foucault’s philosophical
and historical method is compatible, but requires clarification and explanations. I will make
examples in the concepts from the two thinkers and how they relate to the project in different
ways. There isn’t place in this first presentation to elaborate on all the concepts mentioned in
figure 1.
The Marriage of Power:
Both Foucault and Bourdieu operate with a concept of power (Foucault 2002a, 2002b, 2003a,
2003b)(Bourdieu, 1977,1991, 1998), and they both link it closely to institutionalized forms of
domination. Bourdieu’s concept of power is connected to his theory of practise and its
interaction with structure/habitus, this symbolic representation of power shapes the
dispositions of the agents in subtle misrecognized ways (Bourdieu, 1977). The way of
analysing power in a bourdieuan way is linked to empirical studies of the practise of agents
and institutions (Bourdieu, 1984, 1990). Foucault’s analysis of disciplinary power is no less
precise, but where Bourdieu uses empirical observations and data in the present, Foucault
uses a genealogical and historical approach, a much more philosophical critique and
approach. Foucault’s concept of power is inscribed in the very network of relations between
‘subjects’ and is encompassing in its influence; power is linked to knowledge, so there is no
emancipatory truth to be found, which can free the subject. Both thinkers are sceptical of the
concept of ‘agency’ in its normative form (containing concepts of meaning and intention).
Regarding my research interest in educational choice and ‘identity’ both of the concepts of
power above plays a crucial role in my understanding of how education and identity is
related.
In line with Bourdieu’s analytical approach I will try to gather knowledge about the forms of
practise linked to the institutions surrounding these youths; I will gather data using
qualitative interviews, surveys, observations of youths, and institutional observation and
analysis in general. The social practices surrounding education is a doorway to understanding
the symbolic forms of power the youths are subjected to, which acts as dispositions limiting
‘the great leap forward’ toward a higher education.
I line with Foucault’s genealogical approach (Foucault, 2002b) I will outline a historical
analysis of the ‘rural modernized subject’, and the discourses that these youths are facing, a
powerful dichotomy between the rural subject vs. urban subject could be at play here.
Deconstructing the modern science student and the relations of power it is enmeshed in is
crucial to the understanding of the conflicts and disciplinary power the youths are object to.
The problem of the identity-concept:
Within the theoretical frame of Bourdieu and Foucault the general notions of identityformation and self-reflexivity, which I basically see as one and the same, must be closely
elaborated. There is no free ‘phenomenal’ reflexivity on identity, which unconditionally can
lift the subject’s notions of self out of the habitus and social practise and discourse, which
generated it. Bourdieu writes on intention and habitus:
“The homogeneity of habitus is what – within the limits of the group of agents
possessing the schemes (of production and interpretation) implied in their
production – causes practises and works to be immediately intelligible and
foreseeable, and hence taken for granted. This practical comprehension obviates
the “intention” and “intentional transfer into the Other” dear to phenomenologists,
by dispensing, for the ordinary occasions of life, with close analysis of the nuances
of another’s practise and tacit or implicit inquiry (“What do you mean”) into his
intentions. “ (Bourdieu, 1977, p. 80)
Why I insist anyway on using identity as a term is because The Identity is a powerful
discourse among youths and their thoughts about education and their total life trajectory. So I
hope not to fall back into a ‘subject as consciousness frame’, where identity is the subjects
true ‘account of oneself’ or self-image or other such notions; Strozier’s analysis of Foucault’s
self-reflexivity and identity concept (Strozier, 2002) gives an accurate description of The
Identity as discourse originated from Descartes and onward – the birth of the introspection as
a discourse. I am though very much in line with Bourdieu’s concept of identity as the agents
internalized concept of its own social practise and behaviour, based on its experiences with
habitus, dispositions and other agents (Bourdieu, 1998) – this is a typical constructivist
concept of agency also found in cultural-historical psychology (Cole, 1996) In my empirical
research and qualitative methods I will use The Identity as a discourse, but placed in a
theoretical frame, where it is a powerful tool for subjectification and domination by
institutions and ‘large’ discourses, which the youths are enmeshed in.
Using The Identity as a discourse gives me a language, which I hope will supply an optic into
the conflicts on the micro level that the youths struggle with. Positioning’s regarding different
‘identity-options’ linked with education is a very precise prism, which will give new
knowledge about educational reproduction, foreground and life trajectory-choices.
Agency and the pattern-breaking youths of the project:
Moving beyond binary structural concepts of subject vs. object, determinism vs.
indeterminism or ‘free will’ it’s important not falling into the trap of making an idealistic
representation of agency transcended from the concepts of power, social practice and habitus.
Every agency is within the confines of the concepts on the macro level I stated earlier; this
doesn’t mean that agents can’t have a more or less critical reflexive approach to the practise,
but notions of emancipatory escapism is impossible in my theoretical frame. The project,
which I’m evaluating, is in itself a product of powerful discourses and symbolic power
regarding for example notions about the ‘good’ progress of scientific education, society’s
interest in having as many youths as possible getting an education, uneducated living vs.
educated living etc. The pattern-breaking youths of the project are in a dispositional conflict
regarding education and upbringing, and their personal account can help enlighten the
internal conflicts of transgressing educational reproduction, and how the social practises
work around these youths.
I find using the more fluid concept of positioning (Davies, 2000) and foreground
(Skovsmose, 1994) on the micro level regarding discourse, social practices and educational
trajectory; this gives me a conceptual tool, which I can use in my qualitative methods and
supplement my analysis of the dispositional conflicts and social practises of the habitus. I
don’t abandon my first notions, about the illusions of ‘true agency’ and escaping habitus.
Reference list
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25th printing. 2010.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. London: Routledge Pub. 2010.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press. 2010.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press. 2010.
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason. Oxford: Blackwell Pub.
Bourdieu,P & Passeron. J. C. (1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. 2nd ed.
London: SAGE Pub. 2000.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: on the discursive limits of “sex”. London: Routledge Pub.
Butler, J. (2005). Giving an Account of Oneself. New York: Fordham University Press.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology – a once and future discipline. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 6th printing. 2003
Cronin, C. (1996). Bourdieu and Foucault on power and modernity. In: Philosophy & Social
criticism. 22: 55. SAGE Pub.
Davies, B. (2000). A body of writing, 1990-1999. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Pub. Inc.
Foucault, M (2000). Klinikkens fødsel. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Foucault, M. (2002a). Overvågning og Straf – Fængslets fødsel. Mathiassberg: DET Lille
FORLAG.
Foucault, M. (2002b). Viljen til viden – Seksualitetens historie 1. Mathiassberg: DET Lille
FORLAG.
Foucault, M.(2003a). Ordene og tingene – En arkæologisk undersøgelse af videnskaberne om
mennesket. København: Nordisk Forlag A/S.
Foucault, M.(2003b). Galskabens historie i den klassiske periode. Mathiassberg: DET Lille
FORLAG
Skovsmose, O. (1994). Towards a Philosophy of Critical Mathmatics Education. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Pub.
Strozier, R. M. (2002). Foucault, subjectivity and identity: historical constructions of subject and
self. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press.