Conference Program

The concepts of habitus and identity are central in the sociology of education. However, their longstanding relation has been under-theorised. Despite their prominence in analyses of inequality, these terms are frequently conflated, used interchangeably, or treated in isolation, leaving their conceptual articulation unresolved. This communication seeks to bridge this gap by drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s (1990, 2000) theory of practice alongside significant feminist sociology extensions—notably the work of Diane Reay (2015), Nicola Ingram (2019), and Louise Archer (2003) —while also engaging in a dialogue with Stuart Hall’s (2019) theorization of identity and identifications.

In our presentation, we argue that a precise analytical distinction between habitus and identity is essential for understanding how social structures and individual agency interact within educational fields. Integrating these traditions, the framework conceptualizes habitus through the lens of scholars like Reay, who highlights its emotional and psychosocial dimensions, and Ingram, who explores "habitus under tension" during social mobility. Furthermore, it incorporates Archer’s focus on identity as a performative and relational act through which individuals seek recognition and negotiate belonging. Together, these perspectives show that while habitus orients what feels natural or desirable, identity becomes most visible in moments of friction or misalignment between dispositions and social fields.

Central to this proposal is the metaphor of a tree: habitus represents the "roots"—a hidden but stable structure that draws on the "soil" of structural position to nourish social action. In contrast, identifications are the "leaves"—visible, exposed, and constantly reshaped by the "wind and light" of situational conditions. While habitus operates at a pre-reflexive level with a degree of stability, identifications are more flexible, situational, and potentially reflexive, allowing agents to negotiate who they are in response to specific contexts.

Our paper develops a relational model of identification structured around four key dimensions: becoming, positioning, interacting, and enabling. First, identifications are processes of "becoming" rather than fixed essences, emphasizing the ongoing, processual nature of self-construction. Second, "positioning" highlights how identifications are forged within the frames of available discourses and "doxas" in a particular social field. Third, the "interacting" dimension underscores that identities are constructed through intersubjective recognition or misrecognition in everyday social encounters. Finally, "enabling" accounts for the mobilization of material and symbolic capitals—economic, social, cultural, and symbolic—required to sustain specific identifications.

This framework strengthens intersectional analysis by showing how multiple axes of power, such as class, gender, and ethnicity, are mediated through both embodied dispositions and situational identity work. By distinguishing between durable dispositions and situated negotiations, the model provides researchers with heuristic tools to examine how educational inequalities are lived and reproduced. Ultimately, the communication advocates for a non-deterministic reading of Bourdieu that recognizes the possibility of transformation while remaining anchored in the structural realities that shape individuals' trajectories.