Cosmopolitan capital : intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital through foreign language acquisition among young children

(1)

(2)

II

Cosmopolitan Capital

Intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital through foreign language

acquisition among young children

Student : Ms. Jasmijn de Koning

Jasmijn_1993@live.nl 10879765

Program : Master’s Thesis in Sociology 2015/2016

Supervisors : Dr. Kobe de Keere K.dekeere@uva.nl Dr. Don Weenink

D.weenink@uva.nl

Date

: 30 June 2016

Specialisation : Specialisation in Culture

Words : 22.060

Figure 1. Front Page Child Figure 2. Front Page Eyes

(3)

III

Foreword

This thesis has been written as completion of the Master Cultural Sociology of the University of Amsterdam. In short, cultural sociologists study social relations within and between groups, from a cultural point of view. The subject of this thesis is relevant in this study, because it focusses on cultural reproduction, which is theory related to (cultural) sociology.

From February until May (2016), I conducted this research. Throughout this process, I have learned things such as how to get access to a target group and representative datasets; organising in-depth interviews; creating and distributing an online survey; analysing a fair amount of data and drawing conclusions on them. These are skills I almost certainly will be able to use in my future career.

I would like to thank all the participating schools and respondents for providing me with the information needed to complete this master thesis. Above all, I would like to thank the owner of language school Abrakadabra, Monica El-Sanady, because most of the research took place within her enterprise. I also want to thank Sue Wheelhouse, for language support. Finally, I would like to thank my supervisors, Don Weenink and especially Kobe de Keere, for enlightening me with their advice and guiding me through this process.

Jasmijn de Koning Amsterdam, June 2016

(4)

IV

Abstract

This research has focussed on cosmopolitanism and social class distinction. These concepts have been empirically explored through investigating the cultural position and motivation of parents, who enrol their children (from the age of 3 till 12) into a foreign language class. The Bourdieusian (1984) logic of social reproduction indicates that if parents are cosmopolitans themselves, they will transfer cosmopolitan (cultural) capital on to their children while they are growing up. The main question (and first hypothesis) addressed in this research is therefore: Is enrolling young children for a foreign language class part of the intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital? Prieur and Savage (2013) claim that cosmopolitan capital is the new way of the upper class to distinguish themselves from others. The alternative hypothesis is that parents enrol their children for language class, because of their desire (class ambition) to provide their children with a head-start in a globalising society. The results appear to show that both hypotheses are possible. Parents’ cosmopolitan attitude, cultural position, international behaviours and their motivations for language class are indicative of an intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital to their children. The same parents appear to have an upper middle class descent and behave accordingly. The transfer of cosmopolitan capital can also be seen as a process of cultural distinction. Theories of Bourdieu (1984) and Prieur and Savage (2013) have been further demonstrated by this research.

(5)

V

2. Mixed-Methods ... 20 Interviews ... 20 Survey ... 21 Findings ... 23 1. Social Position ... 24 1.1. Social Participation ... 24 1.2. Education Level ... 26 1.3. Occupation ... 27 1.4. Income ... 27 2. Cultural Position ... 29 2.1. Cultural Participation ... 29 2.2. International Behaviours ... 30

(6)

VI

3. Cultural Parenting ... 39

3.1. Motivation (not rs-parents) ... 39

3.2. Ambition ... 42

3.3. Extracurricular Activities ... 45

3.4. Transgenerational International Disposition ... 48

4. Overall Summary Findings ... 52

Conclusion ... 55 Discussion ... 57 Bibliography ... 59 Interview Respondents ... 59 Tables ... 59 Figures ... 59 Literature ... 60 Annex ... 64

Theory: Forms of Capital ... 65

Survey: Questions ... 67

Survey: Results Parents’ Background ... 71

Survey: Results RS-Parents’ Demographics ... 73

Interview: Topic List ... 76

(7)

1

Introduction

Dutch primary education is on the brink of developing English classes for children, starting from the age of five years old (Ons Onderwijs2032, 2016). One could see this development as Dutch primary education becoming more cosmopolitan. A cosmopolitan has “an awareness of global

connectedness” and has “an orientation of open-mindedness towards the Other” (Beck & Sznaider,

2006; In: Weenink, 2008, p. 1089). Cosmopolitanism describes a certain group of individuals who orient themselves globally in basic matters such as working and living. Being cosmopolitan and having a cosmopolitan view, can thus be described as being open towards and having an interest in a globalising world. Learning English at an early age could mean that children will be able to communicate with nationals as well as foreigners and so be advantaged. English is seen as lingua franca (overarching other languages) and it is used as global means of communication (De Swaan, 2002). The world might open up to this future generation, because they have been educated with a view to cosmopolitanism.

However, this proposal, the blueprint of key objectives in the Dutch primary school curriculum is still in development, which means that not all Dutch schools offer English already at an early age (Ons Onderwijs2032, 2016). Parents who wish their children to learn English as of now, have to look for alternatives themselves. Individual language schools, such as Abrakadabra in Amsterdam, have anticipated this niche in the market as they offer foreign language courses to adults, but also to children (from the age of three years old). The difference with language education in regular primary school is, that this new kind of languages education is stimulated by parents, who enrol their children in these extracurricular language courses. The question(s) arises why this phenomenon is occurring and above all: who are those particular parents?

One plausible explanation could be suggested in Bourdieu’s (1984, 1986, 1990) concept of

social reproduction, by means of children inheriting cultural (cosmopolitan) capital from their

parents. Next to capital that can be inherited in terms of money or housing (economic capital) or social contacts (social capital), children also inherit a whole set of behavioural manners, particular competences (such as language) and dispositions; in other words cultural capital (1986). Cultural capital can also take the form of an international disposition which children might inherit; the internationally biased form of cultural capital can be characterised as cosmopolitan capital. If parents have a cosmopolitan view, the logic of social reproduction bodes that those parents transfer

(8)

2

cosmopolitan (cultural) capital on to their children while growing up or, in this case, by enrolling them for extra foreign language courses. The main question addressed in this research is therefore: Is enrolling young children for a foreign language class part of the intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital?

In a comparable research into parents and their children in secondary school, Weenink (2008, p. 1103) found that parent’s motivation to provide their children with cosmopolitan capital is indeed related to the parents’ own cosmopolitanism, but also to their level of ambition. However possible that learning a foreign language is part of the intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital, it must be anticipated that this phenomenon could be related to an alternative explanation, such as ambition (or more specifically educational aspirations), and therefore class position – ambition is part of a person’s inherited disposition and is interlinked with social class divisions (Bourdieu, 1984). Parents might for example enrol their children in foreign language class because of the fear of their children being undereducated in English when eventually entering secondary school (Thijs, Tuin, & Trimbos, 2011). Language class might be taken into consideration in order to provide their children with a strategical position in the educational market and therewith a better position in the (international) social field. This desire indicates the parents’ (high) class position. The possibility that parents want their children to be successful in secondary education and in the near future, and therefore choose a foreign language class to facilitate this, will be considered.

Current state of cosmopolitan courses in Dutch primary education

As will be discussed in the theoretical framework, the reproduction of cultural capital is the result of social origin and social trajectory (Bourdieu, 1984). Going to school is an important part of a person’s social trajectory (Bourdieu, 1986). A child’s cosmopolitan capital could therefore be obtained through socialisation in the educational system. In the next section, the current state of cosmopolitan courses in Dutch primary education will be clarified.

In 2011, Thijs et al. researched the current state of English in Dutch Primary Education. The study found that the broad formulation of key objectives in teaching English resulted in marked differences between schools and pupils acquisition of language; causes were variation in starting point, time spent learning English and the level of mastery at the end of primary school. Adding to this, World Orientation in primary education by Jonk (2015) concluded that schools focussed on geography, history and the natural world, but world orientation received less attention – this field

(9)

3

is not formulated as a key objective. One could ascertain that cosmopolitan courses are present in Dutch primary school curricula, but by not having specifically formulated objectives, there is variation in the output of primary education.

Later in 2015, Platform Ons Onderwijs2032 was founded by the government to evoke a dialogue with pupils, teachers, parents, schools and other interested parties about what skills children will need in the future. In January 2016 the advice of the Platform was presented, advocating an innovated primary school curriculum with newly formulated key objectives. Ons Onderwijs2032 (2016) suggests that English should have a more prominent position in primary education; the objectives need to be more specific and the course intensity needs to increase. They found that English is encountered in daily life: “… students need to feel at home in a global society in which

English is a second language” (Onderwijs2032, 2016, p. 30). Another reason was that there are

certain expectations about speaking English in the labour market (and in universities) – they spoke of “Cross-border labour” (p. 14). English is therefore gaining attention in primary education.

World orientation is also on the priority list. Ons Onderwijs2032 (2016, pp. 37, 38) stressed the importance of students gaining knowledge about the world and learning skills that are practical in an international society. They suggest to include a course called “Knowledges of the world” in the curriculum. Instead of the separate courses geography, history and the natural world, the Platform (2016) advocates the use of trans-curricular domains, such as People & Society and Language & Culture. This way students learn: “…concepts, principles, skills, ways of thinking and ways of

looking at the world” (2016, pp. 37, 38). These skills that the Platform is promoting can be seen as

cosmopolitan capital. In March 2016 Ontwerpteam2032 was introduced to create clearly formulated key objectives, which can be put into practice in Dutch primary education (Rijksoverheid, 2016). Cosmopolitan courses will occur in future education, which means that children with non-cosmopolitan parents will also get the chance to acquire cosmopolitan capital.

Reproduction of social inequality in Dutch primary education

As will also be discussed in the theoretical framework, people rich in cosmopolitan capital are more likely to have a higher social class position (Prieur & Savage, 2013). Children with (upper class) cosmopolitan parents, might acquire more cultural (cosmopolitan) capital before going to school, and thus have an advantage. It would appear that the education system is supporting

(10)

4

unequal distributions in social class positions (Bourdieu, 1984). The next section will review this reproduction of social inequality in Dutch primary education.

The Dutch educational inspectorate (Onderwijsinspectie) found that children who have highly educated parents, have a better chance to be admitted to higher education themselves, even if their talents are equal to children from lower educated parents (2016). Vogelzang (2016, p. 5) of the educational inspectorate says in their annual report: “With equal intelligence, your choice of

school and your school career are increasingly determined by family origin. The education level of your parents plays an important role”. Origin is thus crucial in a child’s educational career.

The reasons the report gives for this phenomenon are that higher educated parents are more involved in the educational career of their children, they are more articulate, they choose better secondary schools more consciously, they help their offspring more often with homework and send their children to extra tutoring faster (Vogelzang, 2016, p. 6). The teacher is, according to Vogelzang (2016), also vital in this process; they automatically expect less from children with lower educated parents. Lastly, children from richer parents and from richer municipalities are often advised a higher educational route when leaving primary school (Vogelzang, 2016).

The educational inspectorate researched the long-term consequences about children leaving primary school and found that half of the students with higher educated parents end up in havo or vwo (average and upper level high school), in contrast to the quarter of children with lower educated parents. Consequently, 55% of those children with high educated parents find themselves with a hbo- (college) or a university degree, compared to 26% of children with lower educated parents. The percentage of children who have both higher educated parents and go on to have a higher education level themselves, is notably higher than children with lower educated parents.

One could see this as the reproduction of social inequality; for with a higher educational diploma one has more chance of a well-paid job and therefore more chance to gain a higher social class position. Bourdieu wrote his work on social inequality in 1984, however his reproduction theory is still valid/relevant. Vogelzang (2016, p. 6) hopes: “To reverse this growing inequality between

children with and without highly educated parents, that is the future challenge. So that children with the same talents also get the same good odds”. The question is whether this will be possible?

(11)

5

Two opposing hypotheses can be derived from the information discussed so far. Parents’ motivation behind their children's acquisition of a foreign language at a young age could be connected to the international outlook/practices, or cosmopolitan capital, of the parents themselves. Those parents are internationally oriented and behave accordingly; speaking multiple languages and/or travelling a lot. In this hypothesis, a foreign language can be seen as intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital. However, parents’ motivation behind their children's foreign language acquisition might also be triggered by the fear of under-education of their children as a result of the globalisation in education, and so, parents’ class ambition to provide their children with a strategical position in the international social field. In this hypothesis, cosmopolitan capital is acquired by means of creating a head start in their child’s educational career and future. It is also possible that whilst both hypotheses have elements of truth, other aspects might shed light on this phenomenon too.

The phenomenon of children learning foreign languages early in life has sociological relevance because it has much to do with the position of the Netherlands in a globalising world, as well as the influence this has on social distinction. Apparently acquiring cosmopolitan capital, like learning English, has such value in Dutch society that both parents and the government want to invest time and money in teaching the future generation this particular skill. Moreover, companies, school- and television programs have emerged from this phenomenon. This thesis examines the underlying motivation of parents. Although there is a notable academic canon in relation to cosmopolitanism – by for example Beck (2000) and Calhoun (2003) – there are few empirical studies on cosmopolitan performances in daily life (Weenink, 2008, p. 1089). The aim of this research is to contribute to filling in this research hiatus and reflect on current cosmopolitan behaviours.

In the chapter Theoretical Framework (p. 6) the three topics of Cultural Distinction, Cultural Reproduction and Cosmopolitan Capital and relevant social theory are debated. Subsequently, the research was executed through mixed methods of multiple interviews and an (online) survey, which has been sent to the target group and a control group. A description of these research methods can be found in the chapter Methods and Approach (p. 17). In the chapter Findings (p. 23), all the information resulting from the research methods (interviews and an online survey) is presented and compared with the proceeding theory. This thesis will close with the Conclusions and a discussion.

(12)

6

Theoretical Framework

The focal point of this research is parents’ motivation behind their children's acquisition of a foreign language at a young age; is this connected to the parent’s own amount of cosmopolitan capital (international behaviour and -orientation) and/or with their class position? Is this motivation based on cultural reproduction – do internationally orientated parents want their children to be internationally oriented as well? – Or is the motivation part of cultural distinction – do higher class parents want their children to have a distinguishable position in the educational and social field? The topics discussed in this theoretical framework are therefore: Cultural Distinction and

Reproduction and Cosmopolitan Capital.

1. Cultural Distinction and Reproduction

The questions which are explored in this section are: to what extent parents’ possession of cosmopolitan capital is related to their class position and if cosmopolitan capital can be seen as a distinguishable factor in positioning in the social field. After the mechanisms of Distinction and

Reproduction are explained, the relation between class position and education is elaborated in Efficient Cultural Capital. Lastly, how cosmopolitan capital may be seen as the new way of the

high class to distinguish themselves is reviewed in New ways of Distinction. The coming sections are for the greater part based on a Bourdieusian view (1984, 1986, 1990).

1.1. Distinction and Reproduction

Bourdieu (1984, p. 31) explains in his book Distinction that in the past only those of means (rich in capital) had access to pleasures such as art, music, paintings and books; the masses or ‘common people’ could not afford this. This demonstrates how economic capital forms the basis of class distinction. Social and cultural capital are also of importance, because with solely economic capital, a person would lack knowledge about behavioural manners (cultural capital) needed to use one’s network (social capital) and to maintain sociability in one’s social class (see annex, Forms of

Capital, p. 65). Not every civilian has the same amount of economic, social and cultural capital,

and so capital distribution is the underlying structure for different class positions in society (Bourdieu, 1986).

(13)

7

The extent to which one is culturally rich, is according to Bourdieu (1986, p. 49), what distinguishes that person from others: “… distinction … secures material and symbolic profits for

the possessors of a large cultural capital: any given cultural competence ... derives a scarcity value from its position in the distribution of cultural capital and yields profits of distinction for its owner”.

Different forms of cultural capital have corresponding scarcity values. This exhibits that the scarcer capital is, the more profitable distinction it yields. The culturally rich thus have more material and symbolic profits from their cultural capital, and can appropriate their capital to an effective end and exert power from this. A large amount of cultural capital is thus a characteristic of the higher class. When elaborating distinction, Bourdieu (1984) claims that the high class, with high cultural capital, want to distinguish themselves from the ‘ordinary’. This makes a social break visible, because, as the high class prefers “rare”, “legitimate” and “less widespread” activities, the low and middle class prefer the “common”, “less legitimate” and “widespread” things in life (Bourdieu, 1984, pp. 18-32). They are less rich in cultural capital and therefore engage in lowbrow activities with popular delights, such as a story with a pleasant ending in theatre; they lack the capital to appreciate highbrow activities. The choice for legitimacy is a class characteristic and presents itself in one’s preferences, or in other words, one’s taste.

Taste is, according to Bourdieu (1984, p. 8) an important aspect in the struggle between class and cultural production. He explains that the moment a person expresses his/her preference, taste comes to light and class is revealed (1984). Through economic and social (-cultural) conditions, different ways of relating realities, for example one’s taste in what is ‘beautiful’ or ‘ugly’, are closely linked to different positions in social space (Bourdieu, 1984, pp. 5, 6). How a person sees reality is thus associated with that person’s social environment. As a result, this disposition or habitus is constrained with class position: “… systems of dispositions (habitus) [are a]

characteristic of the different classes and class fractions” (Bourdieu, 1984, pp. 5, 6).

Taste and habitus are not solely acknowledged in abstract preferences; it also shows in a person’s everyday life. A particular disposition, and related principles, are applied in “the most

everyday choices of everyday life, in cooking, dress or decoration” (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 40). These

everyday life decisions, based on taste and habitus, may result in having a certain life-style, by which each class fraction can be characterised (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 260). To be able to interpret these different classes, Bourdieu (1984, p. 18) claims that one must therefore analyse fully the tastes and social uses of for example art, music, theatre and literature. If one follows this reasoning,

(14)

8

it should follow that, for example, the less widespread a particular kind of music is, the more the high class would prefer it; and vice versa.

What class a person is in thus influences one’s disposition, meaning giving, lifestyle and distinguishes that person from others (Bourdieu, 1984). Cultural capital is therefore the result of a person’s class, and depends on the disposition given by one’s parents and a person’s social trajectory. The reproduction of cultural capital is somewhat more complex than the reproduction of the other two forms of capital, for cultural preference cannot be given as birthday present (Bourdieu, 1986) – economic capital can be given as money and social capital as contacts. Cultural reproduction is a time-consuming, invisible and mostly unconscious process, in which firstly the foundations of one’s capital are dependent on the amount of capital of both parents and grandparents, for example while growing up. Second, one’s capital is lifelong developing throughout that person’s social environment (Bourdieu, 1986), for example the school environment one is in. Social origin and trajectory are key aspects in the reproduction process of cultural capital.

1.2. Efficient Cultural Capital

The amount of capital possessed by a person’s family and a person’s social trajectory thus determine the amount of cultural capital that person possess (Bourdieu, 1984). An important part of this social trajectory, and therefore influential for a person’s socialisation process, is the education one has had (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990). Next to the unconsciously acquired capital while growing up, capital is acquired additionally through socialisation in the educational system. Bourdieu and Passeron (1990, p. Preface) claim that social reproduction of inequality occurs through the transmission of cultural capital (across generations) in the education system. As we have read previously, the volume of cultural capital one possesses, is intrinsically linked to one’s social class (Bourdieu, 1986, pp. 48, 49). This class distinction is according to Bourdieu (1986, p. 49) supported by the education system, because not all parents have the economic and cultural means to provide their children with more education beyond the minimum. Consequently, not every child has a sufficient amount of cultural capital to appropriate in the education system. This makes for less success in the educational field and binds them to less valued and low-educated jobs. Higher educational degrees are expensive, and so if parents do not have much economic capital, their child is less likely to gain such a degree. Whether parents possess much cultural capital also influences their children’s chance of achieving a higher educational degree. Bourdieu (1984, p. 23)

(15)

9

explains that both transmission processes – family and school – are important in the creation of educational capital, however its ‘efficiency’ is determined by the amount of cultural capital the family gives the child. Whether a child will be good at the school subject music for example, is determined by how much music he/she receives while growing up. Bourdieu (1986, p. 47) calls this the “best hidden and socially most determinant educational investment, namely, the domestic

transmission of cultural capital”. This explains the relation between the possession of cultural

capital and degree of success in the educational system (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990, p. 73). This efficiency can here be seen as the difference in time the school needs to bring children’s cultural capital to an average level, between a child who is poor in cultural capital and a child who acquires a great deal of cultural capital while growing up (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990, p. 72). This concept of social reproduction is explained by Bourdieu and Passeron (1990): the pedagogical work that needs to be done depends on the ‘distance’ between the capital a child has already acquired from, for example his/her parents, and what capital the school system aims for that child to acquire. If the distance between the two is negligible, a child will be more successful in school than for a child where there is a large gap. The cultural capital parents give their children is therefore crucial.

This concept is comparable with getting your driver’s licence: if a person has practiced driving a car with one’s parents before having official riding lessons, he/she will be more efficient during his/her driving lessons and get his/her licence in a short amount of time. This is in contrast with a person who has never driven a car before and has to learn everything during driving lessons. This gap is comparable to a child who possesses a lot of cultural capital before going to school and a child who has less cultural capital; this variation in cultural competence is explained by social origin. Bourdieu (1986, p. 49) claims that “… the precondition for the fast, easy accumulation of

every kind of useful cultural capital, starts … without wasted time, for the offspring of families endowed with strong cultural capital”. Even if the intelligence between those two children is equal,

the cultural child has a head-start and has more chance to be successful educationally, allowing him/her to get a higher educational degree and thereby get access to high-valued and educated jobs. Although, unequal scholastic achievements are the results of the unequal distribution of cultural capital between classes (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 47), not every type of cultural capital makes for academic success; not any cultural capital is recognised as a legitimate investment. Bourdieu (1984, p. 86) claims that the more legitimate capital is, the more it is ‘profitable’ to acquire and the more ‘costly’ to be incompetent. Knowledge of classical or avant-garde literature did, according to

(16)

10

Bourdieu (1984, p. 87), yield (in 1984) higher legitimate profits than knowledge of cinema of strip cartoons. Educational capital corresponds to some extent to socially profitable cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 80). Which specific knowledge or competences are profitable are dependent on that chances which the family, the educational and the labour market combined offer for accumulation (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 86). The dominant classes and their institutions, as Bourdieu claims, decide what are legitimate cultural competences, and determine the price of those competencies. Currently, acquiring cosmopolitan capital, such as the skill of learning English, has a high recognition (accumulation) value.

1.3. New Ways of Distinction

Prieur and Savage (2013, p. 252) argue in Emerging Forms of Cultural Capital that cultural capital from the Bourdieusian framing has changed in meaning. They also claim that traditional highbrow culture has faded in Europe and is no longer applicable in marking class distinctions anymore. Prieur and Savage cite multiple studies, such as Lamont and Lareau (1988) and Prieur, Rosenlund and Skjott-Larsen (2008), that are indicative of how traditional highbrow culture is losing recognition in Europe. Although, avant-garde literature, classical music and modern arts are still mostly practiced/preferred by the highly educated, they practice other kinds of cultural activities too (2008). This concept can also be referred to as cultural omnivores: enjoying both highbrow and lowbrow features simultaneously (Peterson & Kern, 1996). Traditional highbrow culture may not be considered a characteristic of the high class, cultural omnivorousness is (Prieur & Savage, 2013).

Consensus over high status signals may thus have weakened; playing a violin for example may nowadays not be directly associated with being a member of the higher class. However, even if highbrow culture alone does not reflect current class position anymore, class differences in cultural orientation are still eminent. Prieur & Savage (2013, p. 254) say that while ‘others’ still hope to gain status by practicing the violin, ‘social agents’ are developing effective reproduction strategies. These strategies, Prieur and Savage (2013, p. 259) claim to be investing in cosmopolitan capital, or in other words: “…the capacity to stand outside one’s own national frame of reference”. According to Prieur and Savage (2013) cosmopolitan capital is the new way of distinguishing the privileged. The study of Heikkilä and Rahkonen (2011) showed that the upper class regarded European habits as sophisticated and most refined. Class structured differences thus become clear through cosmopolitan capital. What cosmopolitan capital is, will be elaborated in next section.

(17)

11

2. Cosmopolitan Capital

The main hypothesis of this research is that parents’ motivation behind their children's acquisition of a foreign language is initiated by their own cosmopolitanism. In this section the concept of

Cosmopolitanism is therefore elaborated first, thereafter the class-related feature of

cosmopolitanism is discussed in Cosmopolitanism & Class. Finally, the globalising Dutch education system is examined in Cosmopolitanism & Education, and two types of cosmopolitans are reviewed in Dedicated versus Pragmatic Cosmopolitans.

2.1. Cosmopolitanism

Cosmopolitanism has been given several definitions, however it often addresses a certain group of individuals who orientate themselves globally in basic matters such as working and living (Prieur, Rosenlund, & Skjott-Larsen, 2008, p. 67). According to Hannerz (2000) cosmopolitanism is firstly an orientation towards others; a willingness to engage with the ‘other’ and an ‘openness’ towards cultural experiences. Cosmopolitans are open to others with a different cultural background. One could argue that cultural differences do not scare off cosmopolitans; on the contrary, this is precisely what attracts them. Beck (2002) argues that “including otherness” – in the sense of accepting the others’ ‘being different’ – is anchored in cosmopolitanism. This would mean that cosmopolitans do not see foreigners as a distanced other, but are willing to engage with them.

Cosmopolitanism is furthermore referred to as a way of viewing the world (Stevenson, 2003); an adherence to a global culture; or world citizenship (Lizardo, 2005). Cosmopolitanism is not only a tolerance for the cultural other, but is also engaging in worldly, global and international practices, such as speaking English at work (instead of a mother tongue), travelling frequently, having knowledge about other cultures and reading magazines intended for a global audience. Prieur et al. (2008, p. 67) explain the ‘openness’ Hannerz speaks about, rather as cosmopolitan ‘connectedness’, which encompasses the way cosmopolitans are connected to the world in everyday practices.

It is argued in cosmopolitan theory, such as Prieur et al. (2008), that cosmopolitan openness provokes cosmopolitans to become involved in international practices, and so develop cosmopolitan capital. Weenink (2008, p. 1092) defines cosmopolitan capital as “… a propensity to

engage in globalizing social arenas … [it] comprises predispositions and competencies (savoir faire) which help to engage confidently in such arenas”. Cosmopolitan capital is made up of the

(18)

12

dispositions and competencies which are chiefly used in globalising social arenas. An example would be the high mobility characteristic of cosmopolitanism. Calhoun (2003, p. 12) discusses the travel frequencies of cosmopolitans and their “cosmopolitan mobility”. Holt (1997, p. 111) describes this concept as the “… frequent integration into new social networks … structuring a

cosmopolitan sensibility”. Cosmopolitans thus are able to quickly change geographic and social

environments, and so be flexible in encountering different types of people. This is an example of cosmopolitan capital – savoir faire/sensibility – which helps manoeuvring in globalising arenas.

Hannerz (2000) secondly sees cosmopolitanism as a search for contrast rather than homogeneity. Cosmopolitans thus seek for the unusual. Holt’s (1997, p. 112) research showed that cosmopolitan tastes, such as exotic food and entertainment, are in contrast with local tastes; cosmopolitans have a “desire for the exotic”. The unusual can also be interpreted as: non-national. Weenink (2014, p. 112) claims that cosmopolitans would rather operate globally, than be restricted to local or national practices. In addition, Savage, Wright and Gayo-Cal (2010) found that cosmopolitanism belongs to younger age groups. The young seek contrast from old, national matters in new, international matters. Cosmopolitans thus prefer the unusual over the usual; the international over national.

Cosmopolitanism can also differ per nation, according to Savage et al. (2010). They found that their British respondents have a specific idea about what culture is and what is not considered cosmopolitan. American and Australian cultural forms for example are cosmopolitan, however another culture might not be. Beck (2011, p. 12) disagrees with this statement. He finds that cosmopolitisation means that both ‘self’ and ‘other’ are transforming (including otherness) and he finds national societies are losing ground to global society. Calhoun (2007) has a similar point of view, for he emphasizes that cosmopolitanism advocates cultural diversity as the norm, which facilitates living together in a global society. Weenink (2007, p. 511) adds that with cosmopolitan capital one can escape the restriction of space and can thus escape local social struggles. There is, however, a downside to this line of reasoning as the global society Beck and Calhoun write about, originates from national social interrelations, which weakens social solidarity (Savage, 2010).

2.2. Cosmopolitanism & Class

As has been discussed earlier, cultural capital is acquired through growing up and through one’s social trajectory (Bourdieu, 1984). Cosmopolitan capital is acquired in the same manner. Weenink (2008) claims that an offspring’s cosmopolitan capital is related to the parent’s own

(19)

13

cosmopolitanism, which is evidence for the reproduction of cosmopolitanism. He suggests that mapping people’s social trajectory can provide insight in how cosmopolitan capital is acquired, because the extent to which the people in one’s social environment have cosmopolitan capital, effects that person’s amount of capital (2008, p. 1103). A person’s social environment has also to do with one’s social class. In preceding sections, the mechanism of scarcity has been explained, and how one can exert social power and social distinction from being rich in scarce capital. Globalisation is becoming tangible in Dutch society, which implies that there is a certain worth to acquiring cosmopolitan capital (Beck, 2000; Weenink, 2008, p. 1092). Cosmopolitan capital, such as speaking multiple languages or having lived abroad, can be considered scarce, which gives cosmopolitans a dominant position. Having a large amount of cosmopolitan capital is thus a characteristic of the high class.

Another example of the latter is given by Holt, who saw cosmopolitanism as an attitude among the highly educated and who found that respondents with a high level of cultural capital understood their world as “more expansive than those with low level … Many had lived in other states or

countries, and they all travelled regularly” (Holt, 1997; In Prieur et al., 2008, p. 67). Living abroad

and travelling frequently are cosmopolitan practices, which are chiefly accessible to the upper middle class due to their richness in capital. This means that cosmopolitanism can be seen as a characteristic of the upper middle class; highly educated professionals and higher managers who are rich in cultural capital (Calhoun, 2003; Weenink, 2008; Prieur & Savage, 2013). To have cosmopolitan capital gives a person status, and may be seen as a perk in positioning in the (international) social field (Weenink, 2014). Weenink (2014, p. 112) explains that in fields such as the labour market or higher education, cosmopolitan capital is seen as means of admission and it determines your position in those social fields. Should parents want their child to have a strategic position in these fields, they might invest in cosmopolitan capital.

Not all international behaviours are considered to be high class: “… the cultural elites … do not

regard the eating of hamburgers or the listening to Britney Spears as particularly cosmopolitan and sophisticated habits” (Prieur & Savage, 2013, p. 260). Only some particular international

features are valued as cosmopolitan capital and emit the associated social power, others are not. In addition, cosmopolitans only reference themselves to other “right” kind of cosmopolitans. Weenink (2008, p. 1096) found that cosmopolitans were referring to a specific kind of foreigner and that a “wrong type of foreigner” exists as well. Western foreigners for example are interesting and

(20)

14

welcome, whereas expatriates from poorer countries are avoided (Wagner, 1998). The cultural openness of cosmopolitans thus has its limits (Weenink, 2008). Furthermore, Savage et al. (2010, p. 612) explain that cosmopolitans indeed like to engage with the (earlier explained) ‘other’, as long as this other is: “… congenial to the world-views of the white, educated middle classes”. The other might thus be another (white) educated person from upper middle class descent. Cosmopolitanism is therefore class biased.

Weenink (2007) compared established forms of power resources with new, cosmopolitan ones, and found that the upper middle class still distinguished themselves on the basis of the former established power resources, such as economic- and social capital. However, due to globalisation, which is influencing European economic systems, cosmopolitan capital is interweaving in “the

total package of powers on which the upper middle class relies” (Weenink, 2007, p. 512). The kind

of social power resources the upper middle class uses becomes cosmopolitan. An example of this can be found in Weenink’s (2014) research into students’ plans to study abroad. He found that pupils’ cosmopolitan disposition is related to pupils’ upper class descent, which is due to the transnational activities of upper class families, such as their travel frequency. “Obviously, going on

a holiday abroad is far from restricted to upper-class families only. However, the analyses suggest that when families do so more often, it starts to affect the dispositions of children” (2014, pp. 111,

123, 124). Transnational class practices are thus of influence in children’s cosmopolitan disposition. Cosmopolitanism can be seen as a contributing factor in class reproduction.

2.3. Cosmopolitanism & Education

Globalisation currently influences our everyday lives. Beck and Sznaider argue that people cannot escape being connected to the global web and that people are confronted more and more with what they call the “everyday experience of cosmopolitan interdependence” (Beck & Sznaider, 2006; Weenink, 2008, p. 1091). This confrontation leads, according to Weenink (2008, p. 1091), to globalising of minds and the awareness of being part of the world. This awareness entails that ‘the international’ is no longer far away and it integrates in national cultures (Beck, 2000, p. 12). As discussed in the Introduction, cosmopolitan and ambitious parents like to provide their children with cosmopolitan capital so they can manoeuvre in globalising social arenas and so they have a competitive head-start against opponents (Weenink, 2008, p. 1092). This awareness Dutch people

(21)

15

have about how acquiring cosmopolitan capital is a key factor in getting ahead in society, leads to the internationalisation of the Dutch educational system.

Weenink (2009) argues that Dutch education is adapting to the social reproduction strategies of the privileged social classes by ‘globalising’ their curricula. Secondary schools highlight their internationalised streams as exclusive and high-quality, and so create a niche in the educational market; marketization and internationalisation are present in Dutch education (Weenink, 2009, p. 496). Additionally, organisations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Developments (OECD) and the Social and Cultural Planning Office both indicate that there is an increasing competitive pressure on secondary schools, which makes schools only want “the most

capable pupils” (Weenink, 2009, p. 498). This pressure has made more school introduce

international streams, but it has also caused selective admission procedures for future students. This makes certain schools harder to gain admission to, which initiates “a mechanism of social

exclusion” (Ball, Bowe, & Gewirtz, 1995) and “… an educational system with a high degree of class closure by design” (Weenink, 2009, p. 507). Cosmopolitan capital is thus the niche in an

educational market, which reproduces social exclusion and class closure.

2.4. Dedicated versus Pragmatic Cosmopolitans

Weenink’s (2008, pp. 1093-1099) research unfolds a division between pragmatic- and dedicated cosmopolitan parents. Dedicated parents are embodied or ‘true’ cosmopolitans. They for example feel that the world is there to be explored; they are flexible and open minded towards foreign cultures; and they are willing to engage with other nationalities and the (foreign) ‘other’ (2008, pp. 1093-1099). Weenink (2008, p. 1095) describes that dedicated cosmopolitans have experienced foreign cultures themselves, and so had to develop an open mind-set and that they wanted their children to inherit this disposition. This is an example of the reproduction of cosmopolitan capital in the sense that it is a disposition one should take towards other cultures. This type of parent like to expose their children to foreign cultures (2008). Cosmopolitanism is here seen as: “…a mental

disposition about taking the world as their horizon, daring to look and go beyond borders, and being open to foreign cultures” (Weenink, 2008, p. 1095). The world is seen as a cosmopolitan

playground.

Pragmatic cosmopolitan parents on the other hand are more practical cosmopolitans. They, for example, feel that having an international orientation is an advantage and an instrument for later

(22)

16

study or career, but they are not particularly interested in the opportunities for their children to go abroad, because English is of practical use in the Netherlands as well (2008, pp. 1093-1099). Weenink (2008, p. 1096) explains that this kind of cosmopolitans have had international work experiences, and discovered the advantages of developing an international orientation and skills, such as speaking proper English, and so they wanted their children to acquire these orientations and skills. Again, this reflects the reproduction of cosmopolitan capital, however in the sense that it is instrument with which one has a head start over others. Pragmatic parents restrict cosmopolitanism to: “… learning English and … appropriating this asset as a competitive

advantage” (Weenink, 2008, p. 1097). The world is seen as a cosmopolitan field of survival.

Although, cosmopolitan capital was reproduced in the lives of both sets of children, pragmatic cosmopolitans did not relate learning English to: “… a world without borders that is open to be

explored for everyone” (Weenink, 2008, p. 1096). They were motivated by pragmatic reasons, such

as obtaining a prominent position in later study or career. Economic capital, instead of cultural capital, is what in this case drives the parents to have their children be taught English. Bourdieu (1986) claims that, though concealed, economic capital is at the root of all other types of capital. One can thus see the appropriation of cosmopolitan capital as well as a way to ultimately get economic capital; and therefore a more prominent social class position. Class position may not solely be the result of economic capital, it is the originating motivation; “the root of effects” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 54). This may at first sight be less true for dedicated cosmopolitans; their motivation leans more towards endowing their children with a particular kind of cultural capital. However, even this motivation is, according to Bourdieu, economically based and results in a more prominent class

With which type of cosmopolitanism the parents in this research will identify most arises from whether the underlying motivation originates from adaption to a globalising world or from believing the world is truly a playground. The latter relates to the research questions: Can the target group be labelled cosmopolitan? And is their cosmopolitanism the driving motivation for enrolling their child in language class? In short: Can cosmopolitanism be reproduced, in a like manner as cultural capital? Or does parents’ class descent play a role in this process? Can the target group be labelled high class? Is their class descent the driving motivation for enrolling their child in language class? After discussing the Methods and Approach, these questions will be answered in the

(23)

17

Methods and Approach

This chapter will give an outline of how the research in relation to cosmopolitan capital was conducted, which methods for data gathering were used and how the data was analysed. First the research approach is elaborated. Then, the (mixed) methods of interviewing and distributing an online survey are discussed. This research leans more to deductive theory gathering: based on current theory about cosmopolitanism and class, two hypotheses were formulated and tested against the data found in this research (Bryman, 2012).

1. Research Approach

Several different schools have participated in this research, namely: Abrakadabra, Bilingual Kids, Inetlingua, Tera Languages and Mr. J.J.L. van der Brugghenschool (primary school).

Abrakadabra

Most of the research took place within the organisation Abrakadabra Speeltaalschool Amsterdam, a private foreign language school for children. The researcher teaches at Abrakadabra, therefore she had access to the owner, staff and clients. This made access to the contact details of the parents possible. This type of sampling can be referred to as non-probability convenience sampling, for the respondents were chosen by convenience of access of the researcher, and so the sample was not random/arbitrary.

After receiving the interview invitation, half of the 15 interviewees contacted the researcher themselves, for example by contacting the researcher directly via phone/e-mail or by leaving their e-mail address at the end of the survey. One must take sampling bias into account as less proactive parents were not included in the interviews. The other half of the respondents were approached by the researcher herself, because the researcher was working for Abrakadabra, and had direct access to the clients. At the end of the interview the respondents were asked if they knew other qualified respondents for the interview and if they would be so kind as to promote the interview with them, and so word of mouth and/or (non-probability) snowball sampling is applicable.

A survey was conducted, because pre-research showed that parents who have little time to participate in an interview might be more willing to complete a survey. The survey was designed

(24)

18

through a program called Survey Monkey – which is a popular tool in making online surveys – and it was announced in the newsletter of the participating schools. Additionally, a hardcopy invitation was put in the school bags of the Abrakadabra students, because parents might not be so eager to answer a random e-mail. The purpose of the interviews and survey is to discover whether or not the parents – who enrol their children for language courses – are cosmopolitans and what this has to do with their class position.

Bilingual Kids, Inetlingua & Tera Languages

Next to Abrakadabra, the survey was sent to similar language schools. Desk-research showed that there are a lot of language schools in the Netherlands, such as the British Language Training Centre, Talenpracticum and Taleninstituut Nederland, however, there are few schools that teach children. This was already mentioned by the owner of Abrakadabra, in terms of why Abrakadabra is so successful. Desk-research was also the tool used to find other language schools with the same concept as Abrakadabra. As well as Amsterdam, schools throughout the Netherlands were contacted, enabling sampling of multiple areas of the Netherlands, so that the urban west (known as de Randstad) was not the only area utilised in the research. In this situation one cannot speak of a 100% probability sample, because of bias in website proficiency, which cause unequal access.

Seventeen schools were assessed to be suitable by the researcher. All of these schools were sent an e-mail requesting their participation in the research through interviews and forwarding a survey to their clients. Four schools, including Abrakadabra, reacted positively to the research. The other thirteen schools – if they responded at all – gave reasons such as “We already send too many

surveys to our clients”. When access to clients was granted, the language schools were sent the

same online survey as the parents whose children are enrolled in Abrakadabra. The participant schools are: Abrakadabra (80 children in Amsterdam), Bilingual Kids (about 50 children in Maastricht, Arnhem, Nijmegen and Eindhoven), Inetlingua (40 children in Delft) and Tera

Languages (about 30 children in Hoofddorp). Eventually, about 200 parents could be surveyed,

however it was anticipated that reaching those parents will be problematic, because the researcher did not have direct access to them as in Abrakadabra. The aim was to get a hundred responses, which is 50%; respondents participation is the bottle-neck of this research. In the end, 33 respondents (15%) from Abrakadabra, Inetlingua and Tera language filled in the survey. Bilingual Kids agreed to send the survey round, however no one responded.

(25)

19

The target group entails all parents, who enrolled their child for language class in the above mentioned private foreign language schools. They will as of now be referred to as ‘language school

parents’ or ‘ls-parents’.

Mr. J. J. L. van der Brugghenschool

A tailored version of the above mentioned survey was sent to the parents of the Mr. J.J.L. van der Brugghenschool in Katwijk, for the purpose of getting information about parents whose children receive English in a regular school program, not as an additional one. This extra survey has two aims: firstly, for the purpose of testing the research instrument; and secondly, these respondents may serve as a control group alongside the previously described target group, regarding the findings where there is simply no (representative) alternative material available for comparison. This control group will from now on be referred to as ‘regular school parents’ or ‘rs-parents’. The amount of potential rs-respondents was circa 300. Again, the respondents were chosen (non-randomly) by the convenience of access for the researcher, suggestive of non-probability convenience sample.

(26)

20

2. Mixed-Methods

Mixed-Methods approach is the type of research in which both qualitative- and quantitative methods are used to complement each other (Bryman, 2012). The qualitative interviews were mixed with the quantitative survey.

Interviews

The interviews took about 30 minutes and were conducted both face-to-face as virtually, such as via Skype or Facetime. The aim of the interviews was to get perspective, context and narrative about the target group. With the interviews the background and experience of the parents has become clear. The interviews were semi-structured, which means that the researcher handled a topic list for all interviews (see annex, Interview Topic List, p. 76). Topic list consisted of Parents (the respondents themselves), Motivation, Child and a Statement based on the theory of Weenink (2008). In Parents the researcher asked about background information, such as where they came form; what studies did they do; did they work in an international organisation; what languages do they speak; do they travel a lot; do they have foreign family/friends etc. The same sort of questions were asked about their partner/other parent.

Thereafter followed the topic: Motivation, in which their motivation for enrolling their child in language class was evidently the main conversation topic. The researcher suggested the possible motivation of ‘fear for the child falling behind in future educational career’, to which the respondents could respond. The researcher also asked questions relating to whether language class could be seen as an alternative for after school day-care. One has to take into account that this is a question of conscience, and the interviewees may not have responded openly because of this. The researcher additionally wanted to know whether there were alternatives extracurricular activities for languages class, such as sports or playing an instrument.

In the topic Child the child’s life was discussed in terms of international behaviours. The parents were asked for example if they had introduced the child to foreign restaurants or taken the child with on holidays to foreign countries; to which countries specifically and what activities they then did. Furthermore, the parents were asked whether they thought that their international orientation and behaviours were influential on their child and, if so, in what way.

The interview ended with the interviewees’ response to a Statement, based on the research of Weenink (2008) into cosmopolitan parents. He found that there are two kinds of cosmopolitan

(27)

21

parents: a. Pragmatic- and b. Dedicated cosmopolitan parents (see Theoretical Framework 2.4., p. 15). The respondents could choose between two answers, which each illustrated a type of parent:

Do you see the skill of speaking a foreign language more as:

a. an instrument or competitive advantage your child might need in future educational/job career (Pragmatic parent);

or as:

b. a flexible, open mind-set towards foreign cultures (making contact), which might make your child feel at ease within foreign cultural contexts (Dedicated parent).

The interview results are transcribed and coded, so conclusions about all the respondents could be compared. Much used codes were “Languages”, “Job”, “Study”, “Former Career”, “Foreign

Friends”, “Foreign Family”, “Lived Abroad”, “Child initiative” and so forth. Thereafter, the

relevant codes from all transcripts we combined and assigned to several sections in the Findings.

Survey

The survey, Parents and Children's Acquisition of Foreign Languages, had 40 questions (see annex,

Survey Questions, p. 67), which took the respondents about 10 minutes to fill in. The aim of the survey was to get an overview of the international characteristics of these specific respondents and to get an idea about their class position in comparison with the Dutch population. The questions were divided in 10 topic pages: Welcome page, Your child, Ambition, Motivation, International orientation, Background information, International behaviours, Social participation, Cultural participation and the Last Questions page. The survey questions were both in Dutch as in English, to support non-native Dutch respondents. Although the respondent rate was only 15%, the questions concerning cosmopolitanism appear to be operative.

The researcher tried to minimize the amount of open questions, for the assessed target group would not appreciate those (Bryman, 2012). Next to the two open- and seven semi-open questions 31 questions were closed questions. These questions encompassed degrees of agreement, frequencies in time and grading one’s situation from 0 to 10 or 0 to 6. A Likert scale was used in those questions (Bryman, 2012). Other questions were mostly nominal or ordinal questions. About 13 questions are derived from other sources such as Weenink (2008), the Vrijetijdsomnibus or

(28)

22

VTO (Banning, Kloosterman, Kruiskamp, & Vree, 2013) and European Social Survey or ESS (2012). The survey questions (and matching results) are further discussed in the chapter Findings.

The survey was analysed through the results from the survey-operator Survey Monkey. All the (descriptive) results were analysed by the researcher and combined with the relevant codes from the interview in the Findings. Due to the (too) small amount of survey respondents, data analysing programs, such as SPSS, could not be used to make multivariate analyses. Any regression or correlation analysis would result in non-significate outcomes, consequently, the data sets of VTO and ESS were not used for these purposes. The descriptive frequencies of those data sets, however, have been used to describe the demographic context as representative of the Netherlands. The VTO and ESS data has been used to compare the target group with the Dutch population in items such as cultural and social participation, education and income. See Table 1 for an overview of all used datasets.

Name Datasets Referred to as: N

Parents, Children and Foreign Language

Acquisition Target group / LS-Parents 33

Ouders, Kinderen en Buitenlandse Talen

(Dutch version of the survey above) Control group / RS-Parents 75 Vrijetijdsomnibus (2013) VTO / The Netherlands 3.138 European Social Survey 6 (2012) ESS / The Netherlands 1.845

(29)

23

Findings

So far, the available theories on cosmopolitan capital and the methods used in this research have been discussed. In this chapter, Findings, the results from the research are presented and compared with the proceeding theory. First, the results concerning parents’ backgrounds are presented briefly. Parents’ Social Position is thereafter examined and related with theory about cultural distinction and reproduction (see Theoretical Framework 1, p. 6). Next, parents’ Cultural Position is discussed, which entails parents’ cultural and international behaviours. The question if parents could be considered cosmopolitans – and if so, what kind of cosmopolitans they are – will be answered (see

Theoretic Framework 2 Cosmopolitan Capital, p. 11). Cultural Parenting is lastly elaborated.

Cultural participation, the motivation for language class, parents’ ambition and the issue of whether international disposition, if present, could be transferred from generation to generation are clarified. The findings presented here stem from both in-depth-interview as well as results from the survey. Per topic, the findings of the interviews will be discussed first, the survey results will follow.

The parents’ background from both the interviews and the survey is mainly Dutch. The majority of the sample is living in the west of the Netherlands, mostly in the capital. The variety in nationalities is higher in the target group (language school) than in the control group (primary school), and the partners of the respondents have even more diverse nationalities. Ls-parents are more internationally originated than rs-parents. The parents from this sample are mostly female and of middle-age. The children of the respondents are all of primary school age (3 to 12 years old), the majority has Dutch as mother tongue and there were more girls than boys in this sample. Although gender is an influential factor in acquiring cultural capital (Weenink, 2008), due to a differential focus, this research will not elaborate this issue. More ls-children are raised bilingually than the rs-children, and ls-children also speak more languages than rs-children. English is the most important language children learn in language schools, followed by French and Spanish. Children from the control group learn less variated language; mostly English. For more information on parents’ background see annexes Parents’ Background (p. 71) and Interview Summary (p. 77).

(30)

24

1. Social Position

The main questions concerning parent’s social position was whether cultural distinction is one of the underlying forces driving language class. To determine this social position, the topics Social

Participation, Education level, Occupation and Income have been researched and will be

elaborated in this section.

1.1. Social Participation

The larger part of the interviewees were assessed as belonging to upper middle class. Only two respondents seemed to be of lower/middle class descent. To measure social participation in the survey, two questions from the ESS (2012) were used: the questions regarded what social position the parents would places themselves in and how closely they are connected to their social environment. For subjective social position (see Figure 3), parents had to grade their position in society from 10 to 0.

(Source: ESS and Parents, Children and Foreign Language Acquisition) Figure 3. Subjective Social Position

The figure first shows the language school parents and second the ESS-result, which represents the Netherlands. For the same results about the regular school group, see annex RS-Parents’

Demographics (p. 73). The category ‘above average’ (7 to 10) is most represented; 63% of

ls-parents and 61% of the Netherlands. The majority of the Dutch people give themselves a 7 (33%), followed by an 8 (24%) and a 6 (18%) – average and above average – while language school parents

4 4 33 22 11 11 7 0 4 0 0 1 3 24 33 18 16 3 1 1 1 ₀ 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

% Subjective Social Postition

LS-parents Netherlands

n= 33 n= 1.845

(31)

25

grade their position chiefly with an 8 (33%), followed by a 7 (22%) – above average and higher. Language school parents put themselves in a higher social position than the Netherlands in general. The interviewees’ upper middle class descent is thus supported by the survey data. The following category ‘average’ (4 to 6), is second most represented in this sample – 29% of ls-parents and 37% of the Dutch population. The last category ‘below average’ (0 to 3), is least represented.

Although, both groups are spread over more levels of society, the ls-group has more extremes. There are for example more people claiming to be in the top level of society in the ls-parents, than in the Netherlands sample. According to Calhoun (2003), Weenink (2008) and Prieur and Savage (2013) the concept of cosmopolitanism is a characteristic of the upper middle class. Due to the high class position of the target group, cosmopolitanism has a high chance of occurrence and might be of influence in enrolment of their child in language class. If one follows the reasoning described by Bourdieu (1984), the upper middle class position of the language school parents entails that they must be richer in at least one of the forms of capital. The amount of social capital parents have, has been tested by the second ESS-questions (2012): Social Environment. Parents had to grade to what extent they received help from their close social environment when in need (see Figure 4).

(Source: ESS and Parents, Children and Foreign Language Acquisition) Figure 4. Social Environment

The first category entails the grades 6 to 4, in which the respondents indicate that they always, almost always and often receive help from those in their nearest environment. Most Dutch people believe that those in their social environment will always help when in need; 41% grade their

19 26 22 19 4 4 4 41 37 13 5 2 ₁ ₁ 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 % Social Environment LS-parents Netherlands n= 33 n= 1.845

Cosmopolitan capital : intergenerational transfer of cosmopolitan capital through foreign language acquisition among young children