Cultural Capital In Post-Secondary Education

Why do professors tend to be liberal, and why does this matter to conservatives? These two questions have been dancing in the background of American universities for decades, and yet few have acknowledged their significance. Sociologist Neil Gross compiled various interviews and survey data over the course of seven years, discovering the basis for these claims and the implications they hold for educators and students. His publication of Why Are Professors Liberal and Why Do Conservatives Care? offers an in-depth examination and analysis of professional politics on college-campuses, leading readers to discover new answers for old questions.

Bourdieu defines cultural capital as "the general background, knowledge, disposition, and skill that are passed from one generation to the next" (13), and he affirms that children from different classes inherit different cultural capital. Bourdieu suggests that the cultural capital that upper class children

In fact, the gap between test scores between the rich and the poor “has grown from 40% to 50%” (Source E). Overall, cultural capital has completely influenced the ability for students to achieve academic success and in most cases determines a person’s social status and success later in life. Not only does cultural capital affect education, but it also is a defining determinator of socioeconomic status that affects the ability of people to reach success. Someone who is of lower social status or class commonly has a low amount of cultural

As described in Social Class Matters, placement in a class system can occur through ascription or achievement. The class that a person is ascribed to or achieves greatly correlates to the privilege in their life, and can determine many things in life – access to quality education, availability of medical care or living conditions. Social class matters as it can almost pre-determine the quality of life that a person will lead.

Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital has been extremely influential, and has garnered a great deal of literature, both theoretical and empirical. Like Marx, Bourdieu posited that capital was the foundation of social life and dictated people’s position within the social hierarchy (Bourdieu 1986). According to Bourdieu, the more capital one possesses, the more prestigious a position one occupies in social life (Bourdieu 1986). In addition to that, Bourdieu extended Marx’s idea of capital beyond the economic and into cultural symbolism (Bourdieu 1986). Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital that refers to the collection of symbolic elements (e.g. skills, tastes, clothing) one acquires through being part of a particular social niche and his concept of habitus that refers to the physical manifestation of cultural capital owned by individuals due to life experiences are his major influential concepts that are very useful in deconstructing power in development and social change processes. However it must be recognized that these concepts also propagate social inequalities at the same time. This essay will closely examine his concepts of capital that comes in three forms - embodied, objectified, and institutionalised, and habitus in the fields of education and stratification have made of it. Bourdieu’s work will be analysed in the context both of the debate on class inequalities in educational attainment and of class reproduction in advanced capitalist societies.

Pierre Bourdieu developed the concept of cultural capital in order to attempt to explain the differences in educational outcomes in France during the 1960’s. Cultural capital is theorised as the forms of knowledge, skill, education; any advantages a person has which, give them a higher status in society, including high expectations (Nick Stevenson, 1995.pp.46-48). This differentiates economic and social status from the class agenda which, is rigidly sustained through an exclusive cycle. Cultural capital itself can be used in analysis of the class system, and how the dominant aesthetic and ideology is sustained from generation to generation.

In fact, much cultural molding only becomes evident as an individual advances slowly through life. One such example is the role of education in the household. Gladwell identified the fact that there is a disparity among social classes in terms of how deliberate parents are in ensuring that their children continue education while school is not in session. It was clear that wealthier children tended to do better in school, but what was surprising was the fact that they were not advancing beyond their peers during the school year. Instead, it was the rich families who took it upon themselves to enhance the knowledge of their children over the summer which truly set the children apart. When poor children were backsliding during the summer, wealthy children were actually improving intellectually (Gladwell, 2008, p.255-258). In this case, it was not the raw ability or drive of the wealthy children which placed them above their peers. Instead, it was the cultural phenomenon where wealthier parents tended to prioritize the continuous education of their children during summer

Cultural capital is the concept that middle and upper class parents pass on behaviors and habits to their children that promote acquisition of wealth and education. When I examine my life, I realize that I may have benefited from cultural capital. I grew up in a rural farming town with a population of 1,500. The town was isolated, 40 miles from another city. Most families in this town were of lower social economic status, and depended on farming as a livelihood. My father worked as a Mechanical Engineer 40 miles away. Compared to the population, my family was wealthy (although wealth is relative to a location). My family was of middle socioeconomic status. I saw my family receive benefits over other families in the town. My family could afford

Pierre Bourdieu is a French Theorist. Bourdieu’s theory is to emphasize constructivist structuralism and he was influenced by Karl Marx by cultural capital. Bourdieu presents the question of class. Bourdieu claimed that capital forms the foundation of social life. Bourdieu thinks the more capital a person have, the more powerful they will be, and Marx had the same view as well. Bourdieu went on to claim that it had something to do with the symbolic realm of culture. When Bourdieu brings culture into it he means the peoples attribute to the world, structured by inequality and culture structures of inequality, also states that is a big part of social inequality. Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital is skills, tastes, posture, clothing, mannerisms, material belongings, credentials, etc. You usually receive them through a social class. Bourdieu divides capital into three forms embodied, objectified, and institutionalized. He gives an example of embodied cultural capital, while a luxury car is an example of cultural capital in its objectified state. In its institutionalized state cultural capital would be credentials and qualifications (degrees or titles that shows cultural authority and acceptance.

Cultural capital and field results in inequality for a number of reasons. Cultural capital has to do with capital resources such as skills learned and specific knowledge pertaining to certain subjects. It also has to do with skills and behaviors learned at home. Field has to do with a social institution such as a school. These two things result in inequality because of the way children are brought up and how involved they are in social institutions. When a child is involved in a multitude extracurricular activities, they are more likely to succeed in school because they have a more stable schedule and not as much free time so they are forced to learn time management. Often times schools favor middle class cultural capital because middle class

That a student’s social class origin impacts on their learning outcomes is self-evident across much of the developed world, with entrenched disparities in academic achievement that are inversely correlated with family income (Snook, 2009:3, Argy, 2007:para 3, Reay, 2006:289, Nash, 2003:179-180).

Cultural capital helps us become successful, achieve goals and rise up the social ladder. Without necessarily having financial capital or wealth. French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu saw social class groups as identifiable according to their levels of “cultural and economic capital.” Increasingly, individuals distinguish themselves not according to economic or occupational factors but on the basis of cultural tastes and leisure pursuits (Giddens 211). Cultural capital can exist in three forms: embodied state, for example, personality, skills, and speech. Institutionalized, such as, education or specialized knowledge. And objectification, in

Secondly, for people to be successful in a higher education, cultural expecations play a role. People from a high income family receive a higher education because they have the means to afford it, unlike people from the lower middle class to the poor, have little means to afford a higher education. All cultures have pre-determined ways to think about and interact with different kinds of outsiders. Everyone has a place. In a global city, for example, some outsiders are the scapegoats. These are usually a lower-status immigrant group that takes the blame for all of society’s ills. These cultural norms are built around social stereotypes, and when an outsider doesn’t behave as expected, he doesn’t fit the suit. This can be seen as good or bad,

Cultural capital is an idea that was used by Bordieu to contribute to his explanation of inequality in social settings (Zepke & Leach, 2007). It comprises the “norms, values and practices of a society” (Zepke & Leach, 2007, p.657). “Cultural capital includes cultural resources and activities that are expressed in the relationships between parents and children” (Tramonte & Willms, 2010, p.203). This results in cultural capital being different in different social settings. This can create inequality because of the difference in values, knowledge and skills that individuals can bring to a certain environment. One issue can be the conflict between teacher and student because of their cultural capital and can result in unequal educational outcomes because the cultural capital of others is valued higher than other students.

Many scholars and journalists (e.g., Bergin & Bergin, 2015; Boaler & Staples, 2008; Lareau & Horvat, 1999; Lareau, 2002; Lewin, 2005) insisted that culture initiated and possessed by different groups of people influences schooling and learning of children in distinctive ways. This paper aims to investigate students? cultural capital from home influencing schooling and learning. Regarding Bourdieu?s (1986) culture capital, group of people has been creating and living within their own habitus embedding believe, culture, cultural materials and activities, norm, and so on. Framed by Bourdieu?s cultural capital states, this paper demonstrates three aspects of cultural capital including the embodied, the objectified, and the institutionalized states. Generated within our habitus, these three aspects create us differently regarding our beliefs, thoughts, behaviors, and interaction. I interviewed several colleagues and fellows and selected five interviewees whose data is synthesized and presented in the following sections. In addition, the interviewees? personal and educational background will briefly be presented. In a conclusion section, I specifically suggest parents to support their children? cultural capital. However,