Agentive Motility Meets Structural Viscosity: Australian Families Relocating in Educational Markets

Abstract

This paper will develop and illustrate a concept of institutional viscosity to balance the more agentive concept of motility with a theoretical account of structural conditions. The argument articulates with two bodies of work: broad social theory of reflexivity as negotiating agency and social structures; and sociology of mobility and mobility systems . It then illustrates the concept of viscosity as a variable (low to high viscosity) through two empirical studies conducted in the sociology of education that help demonstrate how degrees of viscosity interact with degrees of motility, and how this interaction can impact on motility over time. The first study explored how Australian Defence Force families cope with their children’s disrupted education given frequent forced relocations. The other study explored how middle class professionals relate to career and educational opportunities in rural and remote Queensland. These two life conditions have produced very different institutional practices to make relocations thinkable and doable, by variously constraining or enabling mobility. In turn, the degrees of viscosity mobile individuals meet with over time can erode or elevate their motility.

KEY WORDS:

• Motility
• Agency
• Viscosity
• Structure
• Families
• Schools
• Neoliberalism

Acknowledgements

The first study was funded by a QUT Vice Chancellor Fellowship, and the second by the Australian Research Council. I am grateful to the Defence Community Organisation, RHealth, the Queensland Police Service, the Local Government Association of Queensland and the Queensland Teachers Union for their permission and support to interview some of their members.

Notes

1. Participants were recruited with the help of Defence School Transition Aides working in primary schools close to major ADF bases. They issued invitations to participate to ADF families with responsibility for school-aged children. At the time of interview, participants’ ADF ranks varied from private to Lieutenant Colonel and Major. The number of children at home ranged from 1 to 4. Youngest child in the home ranged from 6 months to 10 years. Oldest child in the house ranged from 5 to 16. Both parents were ADF members in four families. All were nuclear families, except one ‘blended’ or ‘step’ family.

2. Participants were recruited with the help of the respective unions, employer organisations and professional associations, who passed on invitations to participate to members with responsibility for school-aged children in the selected towns. At the time of interview, ages ranged from 30 to 52. Family size ranged from 1 child to 5 children living at home. Of the families, most were nuclear couple families, but two were ‘blended’ or ‘step’ families, and two were single-parent families. Three families were ‘living apart together’ across localities.

3. Participant codes are included to indicate the variety of voices.