Having involved in the field of international education, the first concept that comes to my mind in response to the term, “culture,” is the pattern of thoughts, behaviors, attitudes, values, customs, norms, and a variety of forms of communication styles that are being shared, learned, and handed down from generations to generations among the members of a group (Ting-Toomey, 1999). The scope of the concept is not limited to the level of nation states, but encompasses a variety of subcultural groups such as genders, social-classes, ethnical groups, and so on. In addition to this, Bourdieu’s concept of culture gave me further insights to consider the power of culture from a sociological perspective, and guided me to reflect on my own self that is a part of the components of the cultural structure in the society.
I will start by reflecting on my background that led me to pursue my career as an international educator. The point of looking back to my personal background is twofold: First, it is to explore my own cultural capital that I have taken advantage of in the societal structure in Japan. This helps me to reconsider my views as to why I am involved in education. The second point is to question my philosophy as an international educator: What is my role in this position, and in what way am I contributing to the society or not? If education is part of the agency institutionalizing cultural capital within the individuals as Bourdieu argues, what is education anyway? How can we differentiate ourselves from being a potential factor of creating social inequality? I would like to explore these questions as follows.
In my early childhood, I lived in the U.K. with my family up until six years old. Although it was easy to forget English and pick up Japanese as soon as I have returned to my home country, it is no doubt that I benefit from the sojourn experience in the U.K. linguistically. Having the nostalgic memory of living in the U.K., and the favorable attitude towards the language, studying English was one of my favorites as well as my strength at school. My motivation to improve my language proficiency was high, stemming from my childhood experience that underlies a part of my identity.
I have to acknowledge the cultural capital of my being a kikoku-shijo (i.e., a Japanese word indicating the expatriate’s children who have spent some time abroad and returned to Japan). In fact, this word is used with a mixture of positive and negative implications. One is that these children benefit from the overseas sojourn experiences and can be successful with their strengths of the language ability and international experience. On the other hand, they are perceived as outliers, or the privileged ones in the community. Kikoku-shijo represents the group of people, if not a social class, that differentiate themselves from other people (regardless of whether they wish to or not) with their unique cultural capital in possession in Japanese society.
Based on my interest in the English language, I went back to the U.K. as a college exchange student with an ambition to become a language teacher. However, after coming back to Japan and adjusting to the society, I noticed that those who decide to go and study abroad are still restricted to certain groups of people. No matter how international travels have become popular and the advanced technology has connected the world, people’s mindset is still based on the frame of reference that is deeply embedded (or internalized, in Bourdieu’s word) within themselves. To step outside of the country to think and act beyond the framework, three conditions need to be met, namely, the individual’s motivation, opportunity, and financial feasibility. Having realized the privilege I had, I developed my ambition to contribute to the society by getting involved in a broader sense of education: To enhance and support study abroad opportunities for Japanese students as well as international students in Japan.
My personal background of being a kikoku-shijo, and the study abroad opportunity to develop my interest across cultures have certainly driven me to pursue a career associated with languages and internationals. I have to admit that I had the fortune to have gained this career and success (in a sense that I am maintaining a status in the academia, or put it in another way, being successful in the field where I am legitimizing myself with the capital of knowledge) based on my particular background. As Swartz (1997) describes, “a child’s ambitions and expectations with regard to education and career are the structurally determined products of parental and other reference-group educational experience and cultural life” (p. 197). My experience of being a kikoku-shijo and having had the educational credential of studying abroad is relevant to what Bourdieu argues as cultural capital that creates a power differentiation in the society.
The driving factor of my action towards my professional goal is as what Bourdieu conceptualizes as habitus. My interest in languages and foreign countries is the predisposition internalized through my life experience. My ambition to encourage students to go abroad, and to support international students in Japan was based on my experience and belief in the impact of cross-cultural learning. To me, being an international educator is one way to share and transmit what I have experienced and what I believe to be meaningful for young students through cross-cultural learning.
Now, would Bourdieu consider the increasing trend of studying abroad as another power of education creating a societal inequality? Am I involved in this profession based on my cultural capital only to reinforce a privileged education? What is the desirable role as an international educator, and what is our contribution to the society then?
Before going into these questions, I will touch on Bourdieu’s argument about educational institutions. He gives three central functions in education system: First, it is to provide sets of knowledge as well as to transmit a particular cultural tradition through socialization. Second, it reproduces social-class relations through reinforcing unequal cultural capital. Third, it legitimizes itself by valuing the objective and content of education, and disguises the core function of social reproduction (Swartz, 1997).
That having said, what are the functions of education abroad in comparison to traditional education? First, it is an experiential learning utilizing multiple learning skills and a variety of knowledge from an interdisciplinary approach (Mestenhauser, 1998). The individual will be placed into a total different pattern of socialization that needs exploratory learning beyond the cultural tradition transmitted at home. The individual is forced to come with new levels of consciousness and understanding in a new framework of system, which is distinctive in its nature of learning, and unachievable in traditional education. Second, it does reinforce unequal cultural capital, however, the primary function is not to reproduce social-class relations. I would argue that it functions to redistribute economical and social capitals across different groups (or classes) of people. To a certain extent it is true that the earned degree, international experience, and language ability serve to distinguish the individuals from others and continues to create inequality in the society. Nevertheless, it contains the possibility to interweave a broader range of groups as the options of study abroad opportunities and freedom of choice are, and will be expanding in the coming years in the movement towards globalization.
Our responsibility is to be aware of the cultural power relations in the capacity of educators. My specific area of international education is unique in that it does not reach out every student. This will be considered to be part of the cultural structure reinforcing the power differentiation in education, however, at the same time, I believe the cross-cultural educational opportunity still has the possibility of reconstructing students' frame of reference that may restrict their potential of what they have internalized in the grown-up social structure. That having said, studying abroad is not only to differentiate the privileged from others in the society, but contains the power to reshape the habitus that students live with.
*Reference
Mestenhauser, J. A. (1998). Introduction and portraits of an international curriculum. In J.
A. Mestenahauser & B. J. Ellingboe (Eds.), Reforming the higher education
curriculum (pp. xvii-xxvii, 3-39). Phoenix: The American Council on Education/ Oryx Press.
Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: Guilford Press.
1 comment:
I wanted to say I truly enjoyed reading your blog. I think it brings a much needed perspective into the work that we are trying to do in education. So if I misunderstood something, please don't hesitate to let me know. Here goes...
Since I used to do intercultural work for a school district, I’m also familiar with this definition of culture (your reference of Ting-Tommy, 1999). I had to remind teachers of it all the time, but like you said it is something different when the considerations of power are examined. I’m glad you put that out there because people have to be reminded of what it is all the time.
You talked about how kikoku-shijo can be outliers. I was just talking to my husband today about the concept of outliers. It was in regard to an episode of Tavis Smiley show on PBS. Malcolm Goodwell was the special speaker and he was talking about his book called Outliers. Outliers can be good and bad. Many times in organizations they come out to be very astute in their profession. The key is how the outliers use their privilege. Do they use it to help the every day person (as some would say “Joe the Plummer”) or do they perpetuate oppression with their privilege? I think your example of how these outliers use their status to “enhance and support study abroad opportunities for Japanese students as well as international students in Japan” is a good example of a positive outlier.
“My experience of being a kikoku-shijo and having had the educational credential of studying abroad is relevant to what Bourdieu argues as cultural capital that creates a power differentiation in the society.” This point in your paper goes back to how power us used and diffused. Power is bad when it privileges certain groups of people. So if the kikoku-shijo is privileged how are members of that group using their privilege to create equality so other people can have opportunities too?
I agree “international experience, and language ability serve to distinguish the individuals from others and continues to create inequality in the society”. My question again is how can we create equality? Misa, I may be totally off point in my writing, because I’m thinking about it in an encapsulated way. So don’t hesitate to correct me if I do not understand the point you are trying to make.
Post a Comment