Researching Literacies in Libraries Using Bourdieu’s Conceptual Tools

Elizabeth E. G. Friese

University of Georgia

Department of Language and Literacy Education

At first glance, the connections between libraries and literacy seem obvious. If we take a narrow view of literacy as the act of reading texts, then the motto of the American Library Association (ALA) states the connection between libraries and literacy clearly: “The best reading, for the largest number, at the least cost” (2009b). In recent years, conceptions of literacy evolved and expanded from the technical act of reading the printed word to encompass the numerous forms through which people communicate and derive meaning (New London Group, 1996). Scholars developing nuanced accounts of literacy as situated, social, and ideological (Street, 1984, 1995). Correspondingly, numerous literacies have been identified, theorized, and studied.

The library community responded to these evolving conceptions of literacy in several ways. As examples, scholars recently argued that digital literacies must become part of the library’s mission of supporting a literate society (Berger, 2007). Literacy is currently one of ALA’s Key Action Areas, signifying an area of professional commitment and resource investment (ALA, 2009a). In outlining this action area, ALA defined literacy as “the ability to read and use computers--understanding that the ability to seek and effectively utilize information resources is essential in a global information society” (ALA, 2009a). School libraries emphasized information literacy, or “the ability to find and use information” (American Association of School Librarians and the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 1998, p.1). In the recently released American Association of School Librarians (AASL) Standards for the 21st-Century Learner (2007), eight common beliefs undergird the standards. The first common belief is “reading is a window to the world” (AASL, 2007, n.p.). Reading, as conceptualized in this standards document, is not limited to decoding print on a page, but expanded to include digital and other modes of reading. In fact, the Standards for the 21st-Century Learner encourages numerous literacies, if we accept that literacies include reading, writing, communication, and multimodal text production. Thus, if library policy is any indication, accounting for new and multiple literacies has been a priority for libraries in recent years. Recently, library scholars argued over how new the “new” literacies actually are, and what kind of adaptations libraries and library research should make in regard to new literacies (Buschman, 2009). Despite these disagreements and through these theoretical evolutions, literacy remained an integral part of the library’s broad mission.

Given this longstanding emphasis on literacy in the professional commitments of librarians, we might expect abundant research on literacy in libraries. And yet, as Loertscher (2009) noted, “connecting literacy and libraries is not always as intuitive as we would like” (p. 30). Although excellent libraries are much more than books, libraries struggle to shake their reputation as warehouses for print materials. Libraries have evolved beyond this print-centered model, including other opportunities for literacy that researcher may have overlooked thus far. For libraries, which take up the mantle of literacy as fundamental to their mission, studies of literacies in libraries can suggest ways to develop the opportunities for literacies libraries provide.

Historically, much of the research in librarianship has been based on positivist principles (Harris, 1986) and the lack of a critical perspective has been noted for some time (Wiegand, 1999). In her review of library research, Kapitzke (2006) characterized the literature as “theoretically impoverished” (p. 151). To remedy this, Kapitzke proposed a number of theoretical approaches that might be valuable in library research. One theorist she suggested as useful is French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu.

Taking Kapitzke’s lead, this paper examines Pierre Bourdieu’s theoretical framework as a productive approach for the critical study of literacies in libraries. Bourdieu’s theoretical framework is based on his extensive empirical research. As an example, Bourdieu and de Saint Martin (1965/1994) researched the activities of users in an academic library through an extensive survey on their attitudes. They also observed many patrons using the library, and used these data to develop ideas about the way this community used its academic library. Bourdieu and de Saint Martin also theorized the cultural underpinnings of the usage patterns and activities that different groups undertake in libraries. Although the library was physically open to all, in Bourdieu and de Saint Martin’s assessment, the resources in the library remained inaccessible to students from lower social classes, undermining the principles of accessibility and democratization of knowledge that libraries intend to uphold. As this brief example demonstrates, Bourdieu’s empirical work took a critical perspective on social life and activity. It provides a set of tools for researchers to examine literacy in social spaces such as libraries, and how the possibilities for literacy in libraries might be critiqued and expanded.

Recent literacy scholarship (e.g., Albright & Luke, 2008; Marsh, 2006) demonstrates the generativity of Bourdieu’s theoretical tools. In contrast to the growing recognition of Bourdieu’s usefulness in literacy research, his theoretical framework has rarely been used in library scholarship. There are a few researchers (e.g., Budd, 2003; Dressman, 1997; Lincoln, 2002) that suggest the potential of Bourdieusian research in libraries. In this paper, I will provide an overview of some of the main theoretical concepts Bourdieu developed to study social life and spaces, including different forms and states of capital (Bourdieu, 2007), field (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992), habitus (Bourdieu, 2002), and practice (Bourdieu, 1980/1990). These concepts inform all aspects of a research study, including design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. With this principle of applicability in mind, the explanation of each Bourdieusian concept will be accompanied by examples of how that concept might play a role in a study of literacies in libraries. Although Bourdieu embraced a wide variety of methodological approaches, my presentation will focus primarily on qualitative applications. Finally, I will suggest the kinds of insights we might expect to gain from a Bourdieusian study of literacies in libraries, and the strengths and limitations of such an approach.

References

Albright, J., & Luke, A. (Eds.). (2008b). Pierre Bourdieu and literacy education. New

York: Routledge.

American Association of School Librarians. (2007). Standards for the 21st-century learner. Chicago: American Library Association. Retrieved December 10, 2009, from

standards.cfm

American Association of School Librarians, & Association for Educational

Communications and Technology. (1998). Information power: Building partnerships for

learning. Chicago: American Library Association.

American Library Association. (2009a). Key action areas. Retrieved December 10, 2009, from

American Library Association. (2009b). Mission & priorities. Retrieved December 10, 2009

from

Berger, P. (2007). Literacy and learning in a digital world. In S. Hughes-Hassell & V. Harada (Eds.), School reform and the school library media specialist (pp. 111-127). Westport,

CT: Libraries Unlimited.

Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University

Press. (Original work published 1980)

Bourdieu, P. (2002). Habitus. In J. Hillier & E. Rooksby (Eds.), Habitus: A sense of place (pp. 27-34). Aldershot, England: Ashgate.

Bourdieu, P. (2007). The forms of capital. In A. R. Sadovnik (Ed.), Sociology of education: A critical reader (pp. 83-95). New York: Routledge.

Bourdieu, P., & de Saint Martin, M. (1994). The users of Lille University Library. In P.

Bourdieu, J. Passeron, & M. de Saint Martin (Eds.), Academic discourse: Linguistic

misunderstanding and professorial power (pp. 122-133).(R. Teese, Trans.). Stanford,

CA: Stanford University Press. (Original work published 1965)

Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Budd, J. M. (2003). The library, praxis, and symbolic power. Library Quarterly, 73, 19-32.

Buschman, J. (2009). Information literacy, “new” literacies, and literacy. Library Quarterly, 79, 95-118.

Dressman, M. (1997). Literacy in the library: Negotiating the spaces between order and desire.

Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Harris, M. H. (1986). The dialectic of defeat: Antimonies in research in library and information

science. Library Trends, 34, 515-531.

Kapitzke, C. (2006). Redefining libr@ries by rethinking research. In C. Kapitzke & B. C. Bruce

(Eds.), Libr@ries: Changing information space and practice (pp. 151-176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Lincoln, Y. S. (2002). Insights into library services and users from qualitative research. Library

& Information Science Research, 24, 3-16.

Loertscher, D. V. (2009). Connections with people and ideas and the Learning Commons. In

D. V. Loertscher (Ed.), Connections: Papers of the Treasure Mountain Research Retreat

(pp. 9-32). Salt Lake City, UT: Hi Willow Research & Publishing.

Marsh, J. (2006). Popular culture in the literacy curriculum: A Bourdieuan analysis. Reading

Research Quarterly, 41, 160-174.

New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard

Educational Review, 66, 60-92.

Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Street, B. V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development,

ethnography and education. London: Longman.