Turning a Bourdieuian lens on English teaching in primary schools: linguistic field, linguistic habitus and linguistic capital

The research project used to frame discussion in this chapter was a doctoral study of the experiences of English primary school teachers teaching pupils whose home language was not English in their previously monolingual classrooms. They taught in a region in the south of England which experienced a significant rise in the population of non-native English speakers following Eastern European member states’ accession to the EU in 2004 and 2007. The study focussed principally on the teachers’ responses to their newly arrived Polish children because Polish families were arriving in far greater numbers than those from other countries. The research aims focussed on exploring and analysing the pedagogical experiences of teachers managing the acquisition of English language for their Polish children. Critical engagement with their experiences and the ways in which they did or did not adapt their pedagogy for teaching English was channelled through Bourdieuian constructs of linguistic field, capital and habitus. The following sections explore my reasons for adopting Bourdieu’s work as a theoretical lens, the practicalities and challenges of incorporating Bourdieu’s tools for thinking in data analysis, and the subsequent impact on my research activity.

Putting theory to work: the use of theory in construction research

Attention to epistemology, theory use and citation practices are all issues which distinguish academic disciplines from other ways of knowing. Examples from construction research are used to outline and reflect on these issues. In doing so, the discussion provides an introduction to some key issues in social research as well as a reflection on the current state of construction research as a field. More specifically, differences between positivist and interpretivist epistemologies, the role of theory in each and their use by construction researchers are discussed. Philosophical differences are illustrated by appeal to two published construction research articles by Reichstein et al. and Harty on innovation (Reichstein, Salter and Gann, 2005; Harty, 2008). An analysis of citations for each highlights different cumulativity strategies. The potential contribution of mixed research programmes, combining positivist and interpretivist research, is evaluated. The paper should be of interest to early researchers and to scholars concerned with the ongoing development of construction research as an academic field.