Culture Is Influenced by Social, Economic, and Political Factors
As is evident from the above, intimately related to the fact that culture is bound to a particular context is that it is greatly influenced by the political, historical, and economic conditions in which it is found. It
134 culture and education
exists not in isolation but through concrete relationships characterized by differential access to power. As a result dominant social groups in a society often determine what counts as culture. This is why, for example, a dominant cultural group unabashedly can designate itself as “the norm” and others as “culturally deprived.”16 Those who are so designated may not necessarily see themselves in this way, but naming by others takes on great power; eventually many of those who are designated as “culturally deprived” may learn to believe it. Yet “cultur- ally deprived” actually means simply that the group in question does not share in the culture—and consequently in the power—of the dominant group. The paradox of this stance is that while many Whites see them- selves as culturally neutral or “cultureless,” at the same time they insist, through constant messages in the dominant ideology, that theirs is the valued and valuable culture.
The theories of sociologist Pierre Bourdieu are significant here. According to him, it is not simply money, or economic capital, that determines one’s standing in the social structure; equally important are what he has termed social capital and cultural capital. Social capital is made up of social obligations and networks that are convertible into economic capital. Cultural capital, which is more immediately important to us here, can be defined as the acquired tastes, values, languages and dialects, or the educational qualifications that mark a person as belonging to a privileged social and cultural class. Just as in the case of learning one’s native culture and language, cultural capital is acquired in the absence of any deliberate or explicit teaching; it is therefore unconsciously learned. The initial accumulation of cultural capital, in the words of Bourdieu, is “the best hidden form of hereditary transmission of capital.”17
In essence, then, culture is deeply entangled with economic and political privilege. That is, the tastes, values, languages, and dialects that have the greatest status are associated with the dominant social class not because these tastes, values, languages, or dialects are inherently better but because they have higher social prestige as determined by the group with the greatest power. As a case in point, for many years linguists have proposed that Black English is a rich and creative variety of English, as logical and appropriate as standard English for purposes of communication.18 Yet the conventional wisdom still common among teachers is that Black English is simply “bad English.” Thus, rather than building on students’ native discourse—what has been termed additive bilingualism19—most teachers simply attempt to eradicate Black English and replace it with standard English, a subtractive form of bilingualism. On the other hand, when expressions from Black English make their way into standard
135nieto
English because they are used by middle-class Whites, they immedi- ately take on a higher social status and thus become acceptable.
The example of Black English underscores the impact that culture may have on learning and academic achievement. Most schools are organized to reflect and support the cultural capital of privileged social and cultural groups; in the United States, that group is middle class, or upper class, English-speaking Whites. As a result of their identity and upbringing, some children arrive at the schoolhouse door with a built-in privilege because they have learned this cultural capital primarily in the same way as they have learned to walk, that is, unconsciously and effortlessly. Their culture, in this case, the variety of English that they speak, seems both natural and correct. Yet as suggested by Carol Lee and Diana Slaughter-Defoe, because of the low prestige of Black English, “the influences of language on learning for African Americans are both complex and problematic.”20
This example also places in bold relief the arbitrary nature of cul- tural capital. Paulo Freire captured the frivolous essence of such desig- nations when he asked, “When did a certain form of grammar become ‘correct’? Who named the language of the elite as ‘correct,’ as the standard?” He answered his own question by stating, “They did, of course. But, why not call it ‘upper-class dominating English’ instead of ‘Standard English?’ That authentic naming would reveal, instead of obscure, the politics of power and language in society.”21 Further on, in discussing the same topic, he added, “This so-called ‘standard’ is a deeply ideological concept, but it is necessary to teach correct usage while also criticizing its political implications.”22
One could envision another, quite different, scenario. If, for instance, through some extraordinary turn of events, working-class African Americans were to become the esteemed social group in the United States, Black English probably would become the new standard. In turn, schools would make certain that the curriculum, texts, and other mate- rials would reflect this new form of cultural capital; in addition, only those teachers who were intimately familiar with Black English and who considered it an innately superior variety of English would be hired. Accordingly, the children of working-class African-American homes would enter school with a built-in advantage compared with other children, who would be considered “culturally deprived” because they did not have the cultural capital of Black English. As far-fetched as this scenario is, given current economic and political realities in the United States, it serves as a graphic example of the capricious nature of deter- mining whose culture becomes highly valued.