Abstract
How do volunteers interpret what their service means to them? Is it based on the values the program instills, or on their experiences before volunteering? To answer these questions, I investigate service interpretation in the AmeriCorps program, a US-based social service agency. I conduct 22 in-depth interviews with AmeriCorps members to highlight how they use their cultural capital—rooted in their raised-class background—to interact differently with those they serve and to interpret different benefits of AmeriCorps. I find members from lower-income backgrounds use their past as a form of cultural capital to connect with their service population. On the other hand, members from more privileged backgrounds see the program as beneficial in the context of future work, yet have more difficulty connecting with those they serve. I conclude that the cultural capital learned from different social classes fosters different service interpretations for AmeriCorps members.
Résumé
Comment les bénévoles interprètent-ils ce que leur volontariat signifie pour eux? Fondent-ils cette interprétation sur les valeurs que le programme instille ou sur les expériences qu’ils ont vécues avant de devenir bénévoles? Pour répondre à ces questions, j’ai étudié le programme AmeriCorps, un organisme de services sociaux américains. J’ai interrogé 22 membres d’AmeriCorps pour découvrir la façon dont ils utilisent leur capital culturel, ancré dans leur éducation et leur classe sociale, pour interagir différemment avec ceux et celles qu’ils assistent et pour interpréter divers bénéfices offerts par AmeriCorps. J’ai découvert que les membres provenant de milieux plus pauvres utilisaient leur passé en tant que capital culturel leur permettant de créer des liens avec la population desservie. À l’opposé, les membres provenant de milieux plus privilégiés considèrent que le programme est avantageux dans le contexte de leur avenir professionnel, tout en ayant plus de difficultés à tisser des liens avec ceux et celles qu’ils assistent. Je conclus que le capital culturel acquis dans diverses classes sociales favorise différentes interprétations du volontariat parmi les membres d’AmeriCorps.
Zusammenfassung
Wie interpretieren Ehrenamtliche, was ihnen ihre Dienste bedeuten? Beruht ihre Interpretation auf den vom jeweiligen Programm vermittelten Werten oder auf ihren Erfahrungen vor ihrer ehrenamtlichen Tätigkeit? Zur Beantwortung dieser Fragen untersuche ich die Dienstleistungsinterpretation im AmeriCorps-Programm, einer Sozialdienstleistungseinrichtung in den USA. Ich führe 22 ausführliche Interviews mit AmeriCorps-Mitgliedern durch, um hervorzuheben, wie sie ihr kulturelles Kapital, das in der Schicht, in der sie aufgewachsen sind, verwurzelt ist, nutzen, um anders mit ihren Dienstleistungsempfängern umzugehen und um die verschiedenen Vorteile von AmeriCorps zu interpretieren. Ich stelle fest, dass die Mitglieder, die aus einkommensschwächeren Verhältnissen stammen, ihre Vergangenheit als eine Form des kulturellen Kapitals nutzen, um eine Bindung zu ihren Dienstleistungsempfängern aufzubauen. Auf der anderen Seite betrachten Mitglieder, die aus privilegierteren Verhältnissen stammen, das Programm für zukünftige Arbeit als vorteilhaft, haben jedoch größere Schwierigkeiten, eine Bindung zu ihren Dienstleistungsempfängern herzustellen. Ich komme zu dem Schluss, dass das in den verschiedenen sozialen Schichten erlernte kulturelle Kapital zu unterschiedlichen Dienstleistungsinterpretationen der AmeriCorps-Mitglieder führt.
Resumen
¿Cómo interpretan los voluntarios lo que significa para ellos su servicio? ¿Se basa en los valores que transmite el programa, o en sus experiencias antes de realizar voluntariado? Para responder a estas preguntas, investigo la interpretación de servicio en el programa AmeriCorps, una agencia de servicio social con base en Estados Unidos. Realizo 22 entrevistas en profundidad a miembros de AmeriCorps para resaltar cómo utilizan su capital cultural - enraizado en sus antecedentes de clase educada - para interactuar de manera diferente con aquellos a los que atienden e interpretar los diferentes beneficios de AmeriCorps. Encuentro que los miembros con antecedentes de ingresos más bajos utilizan su pasado como una forma de capital social para conectar con la población a la que atienden. Por otro lado, los miembros con antecedentes más privilegiados, ven el programa como beneficioso en el contexto de trabajo futuro, sin embargo tienen más dificultades para conectar con aquellos a los que atienden. Concluyo que el capital cultural aprendido de diferentes clases sociales fomenta diferentes interpretaciones de servicio para los miembros de AmeriCorps.
摘要
志愿者如何解读所提供的服务对他们的意义?这基于计划所灌输的价值,还是他们在志愿前的经历?为回答这些问题,我调查了AmeriCorps计划的服务解释,这是一家位于美国的社会服务机构。我对AmeriCorps成员进行了22次深入的采访,重点介绍他们如何使用提升的等级背景根植的文化资本 - 以不同的方式与服务的人群交互,提升解释AmeriCorps的各种好处。我发现,更低收入背景下的成员将过去用作一种文化资本形式,以与服务人口连接。另一方面,拥有更多特权背景的成员会认为该计划在未来的工作背景下有好处,然而仍更困难与所服务的人群连接。我得出的结论是,从不同的社会等级学到的文化资本增强了AmeriCorps成员的不同服务解释。
ملخص
كيف أن المتطوعين يفسرون ما تعنيه خدمتهم لهم؟ هل هي على أساس القيم التي يغرسها البرنامج، أو على تجاربهم قبل التطوع؟ للإجابة على هذه الأسئلة، أنا حققت في تفسير الخدمة في برنامج (AmeriCorps )، وكالة خدمة إجتماعية- قائمة في الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية. أنا أجريت 22 مقابلة بعمق مع أعضاء (AmeriCorps) لتسليط الضوء على كيف يستخدمون الأصول الإجتماعية الخاصة بهم في الخلفية الطبقة الخاصة بهم التي تم رفعها لمستوى أعلى- لتتفاعل بشكل مختلف مع الذين يقومون بخدمتهم و لتفسير فوائد مختلفة ل(AmeriCorps). وجدت أعضاء من خلفيات ذات الدخل المنخفض يستخدمون ماضيهم كشكل من أشكال الأصول الإجتماعية للتواصل مع السكان الذين يقومون بخدمتهم. من ناحية أخرى، أعضاء من خلفيات أكثر حظا” ينظرون إلى البرنامج على إنه مفيد في سياق عمل في المستقبل، لكن لديهم المزيد من صعوبة في الإتصال مع الذين يقومون بخدمتهم. أنا أختتم أن الأصول الإجتماعية المستفيدة من مختلف الطبقات الإجتماعية تعزز تفسيرات الخدمات المختلفة لأعضاء (AmeriCorps).
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
11 April 2018
The PDF version of this article was reformatted to a larger trim size.
References
AmeriCorps. (2012). Benefits of AmeriCorps service. www.americorps.gov/for_individuals/benefits/index.asp.
AmeriCorps NCCC. (n.d). AmeriCorps NCCC service through teamwork. USA Freedom Corps.
Barber, K. (2011). The emotional management of a stranger: Negotiating class privilege and masculine academics as a Hurricane Katrina evacuee.”. In D. A. Hidalgo & K. Barber (Eds.), Narrating the storm: Sociological stories of Hurricane Katrina (pp. 78–89). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 41–58). New York: Greenwood.
Bourdieu, P. (1987). What makes a social class? On the theoretical and practical existence of groups. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 32, 1–17.
Ceresola, R. (2015a). Doing Poor in AmeriCorps: How National Service Members Deal with Living below the Poverty Line. Qualitative Sociology Review, 11(4), 116–137.
Ceresola, R. (2015b). What’s pay got to do with it? Collective Identity formation in the AmeriCorps program. Michigan Sociological Review, 29, 22–47.
Corporation for National and Community Service. (2016). CNCS Fact Sheet. Washington: CNCS.
Coser, L. A. (1965). The sociology of poverty: To the memory of Georg Simmel. Social Problems, 13(2), 140–148.
Delp, L., Wallace, S. P., Geiger-Brown, J., & Muntaner, C. (2010). Job stress and job satisfaction: Home Care Workers in a consumer-directed model of care. Health Services Research, 45(4), 922–940.
Demetry, D., Thurk, J., & Fine, G. A. (2015). Strategic poverty: How social and cultural capital shapes low-income life. Journal of Consumer Culture, 15(1), 86–109.
DiMaggio, P. (1982). Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status culture participation on the grades of US high school students. American Sociological Review, 47(2), 189–201.
Finlay, A. K., Flanagan, C., & Wray-Lake, L. (2011). Civic engagement patterns and transitions over 8 years: The AmeriCorps national study. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1728–1743.
Frumkin, P., Jastrzab, J., Vaaler, M., Greeney, A., Grimm, R. T., Cramer, K., et al. (2009). Inside national service: AmeriCorps’ impact on participants. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28(3), 394–416.
Holt, D. B. (1998). Does cultural capital structure American consumption? Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 1–25.
Kalfa, S., & Taksa, L. (2015). Cultural capital in business higher education: Reconsidering the graduate attributes movement and the focus on employability. Studies in Higher Education, 40(4), 580–595.
Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60(2), 73–85.
Maki, A., Dwyer, P. C., & Snyder, M. (2015). Understanding AmeriCorps service: Perspectives from psychological theory and research on volunteerism. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 15(1), 253–281.
Marshall, W., & Magee, M. P. (2005). The America Experiment and the future of national service. Washington: Horizon Communications.
Mickelson, K. D., & Williams, S. L. (2008). Perceived stigma of poverty and depression: Examination of interpersonal and intrapersonal mediators. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27(9), 903–930.
Perry, J. L., Thomson, A. M., Tschirhart, M., Mesch, D., & Lee, G. (1999). Inside a Swiss army knife: An assessment of AmeriCorps. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(2), 225–250.
Prieur, A., & Savage, M. (2011). Updating cultural capital theory. Poetics, 39(6), 566–580.
Prieur, A., & Savage, M. (2013). Emerging forms of cultural capital. European Societies, 15(2), 246–267.
Reutter, L. I., Stewart, M. J., Veenstra, G., Love, R., Raphael, D., & Makwarimba, E. (2009). “Who do they think we are, anyway?”: Perceptions of and responses to poverty stigma. Qualitative Health Research, 19(3), 297–311.
Rothstein, B. (2001). The universal welfare state as a social dilemma. Rationality and Society, 13(2), 213–233.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2009). Burnout: 35 years of research and practice. Career Development International, 14(3), 204–220.
Segal, E. J. (1994). AmeriCorps: Coming Soon to Communities Everywhere. Washington, DC: Corporation for National Service.
Simon, C. A., & Wang, C. (2002). The impact of AmeriCorps service on volunteer participants: Results from a 2-year study in four Western States. Administration & Society, 34(5), 522–540.
Stuber, J., & Kronebusch, K. (2004). Stigma and other determinants of participation in TANF and Medicaid. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(3), 509–530.
Stuber, J., & Schlesinger, M. (2006). Sources of stigma for means-tested government programs. Social Science and Medicine, 63(4), 933–945.
West, C., & Fenstermaker, S. (1995). Doing difference. Gender & Society, 9(1), 8–37.
Willekens, M., & Lievens, J. (2014). Family (and) culture: The effect of cultural capital within the family on the cultural participation of adolescents. Poetics, 42(2014), 98–113.
Williams, N. (2015). Fighting fire: Emotional risk management at social service agencies. Social Work, 60(1), 89–91.
Williamson, V., Skocpol, T., & Coggin, J. (2011). The Tea Party and the remaking of Republican conservatism. Perspectives on Politics, 9(1), 25–43.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Institutional Review Board Statement
This study received institutional approval from the Institutional Review Board at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ceresola, R. The Influence of Cultural Capital on How AmeriCorps Members Interpret Their Service. Voluntas 29, 93–103 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9858-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9858-9