Holly, Mary and Oliva’s subjectivities are constituted through the discourses of needing to be 'hardworking and intelligent’, as previously discussed, (4.1) and also to be 'self-disciplined yet influenced by parents’ (4.10). Mary referred to her mum wanting all her children to do really well, pushing her, and needing to get her skates on, when Mary suggested studying medicine (4.10). Olivia referred to thinking that her mum had always wanted her to study medicine, though she never pushed it, allowing her to do what she wanted to do (4.10). Mary and Olivia’s references to what their mothers said to them may seem contradictory if read literally in isolation. However, these parental influences in the students’ lives, asserting the need to work hard, yet being free to choose what to study, are neo-liberal discourses which shift Mary’s and
172 Oliva’s subjectivities towards becoming prospective medicine students (4.10). Olivia's subjectivity is also constituted through the discourse of medicine being for the elite (4.9). Olivia describes a perspective shift (4.9). At an elitist school in the lower stream, medicine was never considered as an option for study at university (4.9), yet as a graduate from a Russell Group university, the elite profession of medicine is within her grasp.
Power operates productively through each of these discourses to enable Oliva, Holly and Mary to become prospective medicine students. As graduates, they have proved their high level of intelligence and through university studies have established a hard work ethic (2.11) and self-disciplined study regime. Furthermore, their parents are implicated in promoting the discourse of hard work through being described as asserting that their daughters need to perform well and be successful (4.10).
Holly (4.8), like Barbara (4.1), is constituted through the discourse of hard work (2.11) to become a self-directed learner. Holly referred to being a 'goal-orientated' person and writing 'to do' lists to ensure that she achieved the standard she was aiming for in her studies (4.8), hence showing her determination to work hard. Holly implicates me in promoting this discourse, pointing out that I had said that you need to spend as much time on independent study as in lessons (4.8). Barbara pointed out that many Access to medicine peers had described various things they had had to give up to take on studying the course (4.1) as discussed previously in this chapter. Holly describes giving up on sporting activities, seeing her friends less frequently and moving away from home (4.8). Mary refers to slipping back into a self-study routine without feeling anything (4.8). Showing that they are accustomed to such routines, they show that they are established students and are becoming prospective medicine students.
Olivia’s subjectivity as a prospective medicine student is also constituted through the
discourses of 'parents always wanting the best for their children' (4.10) and 'medicine being a career for the elite' (4.9). At an elitist fee-paying school, Olivia describes herself as not having been part of the elite who were set to study medicine, so at that time, she did not realise the possibility of studying medicine (4.9). Her mother 'wanting the best for her' persuades Olivia to take on the Access course. However, Olivia’s mother does not explicitly tell Olivia what to do; the discursive practice that 'career decisions should not be forced upon anyone' is apparent. Olivia's subjectivity as a prospective medicine student is also constituted through the discourses of 'being free to choose whatever you wish to do' and being able to
173 'accomplish anything if you put your mind to it'. However, the dominant discourse of
medicine being for the elite now also constitutes Olivia’s subjectivity as a prospective medicine student because Olivia can demonstrate her superior intellect and superior study skills so that on the Access course, she is part of the elite to progress from the Access course to study medicine at university (4.9). These discourses constitute Olivia’s shifting
subjectivities towards becoming a prospective medicine student.
Winifred describes (4.10) as a child, her parents suggesting that Winifred was not working hard enough when Winifred suggested studying medicine. The discourses of 'medicine being highly competitive' (4.2) and 'the need to work hard' (4.1) flow through Winifred’s
descriptions of what her parents said to her to constitute Winifred’s subjectivity as a schoolchild as not becoming a prospective medicine student. However, through the same discourses now on the Access to medicine course, Winifred asserts that she works
exceptionally hard to show that she can beat the competition and is becoming a prospective medicine student (4.11). Again, the discourse of 'parents wanting the best for their children’ is apparent (4.10). Winifred describes their influence through these same discourses as constituting Winifred’s shift in subjectivity to becoming a prospective medicine student now that Winifred demonstrates the hard work ethic (4.1).
The discourses of hard work (4.1) and competition (4.2) constitute the subjectivities of those sharing a house to becoming prospective medicine students (4.11). Winifred highlights a discourse of 'helping each other through working together', which constitutes the subjectivity of the caring and collaborative Access to medicine student. It is as if the students are all working for the same team competing with others outside the team for places at medical schools. In contrast with the 'perpetual tension between ‘collaborating’ and ‘competing’ with peers' (4.2) as discussed earlier, there is no tension here. The students are collaborating as a team to support each other through their studies to potentially outcompete unknown others to places at medical schools (4.11). However, this competitive spirit is experienced negatively in that students like Winifred feel that there is no let-up in the pressure 'to perform at the highest of academic standards’. Here the discourses of 'medicine being for the elite' and it being 'necessary to be hardworking and competitive' pull together to constitute the subjectivity of the hardworking and highly academic prospective medicine student (4.9, 4.1, 4.2).
Sam asserts that students should study hard and take responsibility for their learning. Sam uses the idea of 'independent study' as a justification of why he is 'stronger' than a traditional
174 A level student. Sam draws on the dominant neo-liberal discourse (2.11, (Connell, 2005, p. 186) of learning being self-directed and autonomous as ideal (4.14). So, by drawing on a dominant discourse of learning, he makes himself as convincing as possible in resisting being positioned inferior by a traditional A level student at a university interview.
Possibly recognising that he has disclosed losing the battle with the A level student to me, his course leader, a person in traditional authority over him, Sam (4.14) switches through the interview to describe his previous role at work where he had the traditional power to hire or fire people within the company. In so doing Sam repositions himself, weak in one context, tough in another.
Later in the interview (4.14), perhaps not wanting to be perceived as harsh and intolerant Sam describes how through studying on the Access course at college he does not always behave so fiercely like “battleaxe” in his previous job role and through another discourse associated with studying at college, he constitutes a subjectivity for himself which is softer or more tolerant of others. So, Sam's story (4.14) demonstrates that our subjectivities are constituted through discourses within context. As discourses vary, subjectivities morph.
5.7 Subsidiary Research Question 2: How Does Power Operate Amongst Access to