05. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Paper
Promoting Successful Trajectories in Young People who Have Been in Residential Care
Aitor Gomez1, Oriol Rios-Gonzalez2, Susana Leon-Jimenez3
1Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain; 2Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain; 3University of Barcelona, Spain
Presenting Author: Rios-Gonzalez, Oriol
According to previous evidence, both children and adolescents from alternative care show more accused disadvantages than general population ones, even those from lower-income backgrounds (Gypen et al., 2017; Vinnerljung and Hjern, 2011). There is a bigger possibility to experience deprivation, unemployment, housing problems, illegal activities engagement, early pregnancies, healthy-related problems, and low educational levels (Broad, 2005; Simon and Owen, 2006). Former youth in alternative care are at significant risk of social isolation not just while they are in the protective care system but also after they are adults, despite the substantial fiscal costs of alternative care for the government (O’Sullivan and Westerman, 2007; Gypen et al., 2017).
There are differences among these children too. The ones who are adopted experience fewer shortcomings than those who continue to be in foster care (Vinnerljung and Hjern, 2011). Furthermore, it is commonly accepted along literature that the children and adolescents in foster care who have a family perform better than those in residential care without family support in different dimensions: physical and cognitive abilities, academic outcomes, and social integration (Steels and Simpson, 2017). Developmental gaps in physical growth, brain development, cognition, and attention, as well as atypical attachment patterns, are all linked to residential care (Guyon-Harris et al., 2019; van IJzendoorn et al., 2020). Centred on these findings, it appears that residential care facilities are being phased out in favour of other family and community-based alternatives for children in need of care in most European countries; even so, this sort of resource does exist with a variety of characteristics.
The purpose of the study has been to assess the success trajectories of former residential care young people who have enrolled in universities and to pinpoint the factors that enabled them to overcome challenges and diverge from the expected way. In achieving this objective, the application of communicative methodology throughout the research process has been vital, an issue that we will discuss in the following subsection.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study has been conducted in Spain, where residential care currently accounts for 55% of child protection measures and has historically largely outweighed foster care (del Valle et al., 2009, Ministerio de Derechos Sociales y Agenda 2030, 2020). Hence, despite efforts to deinstitutionalize, residential care in Spain is not a last option saved for children and youth with extremely complicated needs but rather a relatively regular resource.
The Communicative Methodology focused on social transformation was used to conduct the study (Gomez et al., 2011; Puigvert et al., 2012). The research implemented a communicative approach focuses on the factors that contribute to overcoming those inequalities rather than just analysing instances of inequality. Communicative Methodology is based on creating an egalitarian and intersubjective dialogue in where the researcher contributes with current scientific knowledge and the participant provides their experience related to the analysed topic, thereby constructing combined knowledge (Gómez et al., 2006). Through this methodological orientation, the contributions’ validity claims are evaluated based on the strongest argument rather than the person’s position of power (Habermas, 1981/1984).
In this study they have taken part twelve participants between the ages of 18 and 28, and who resided in various Spanish cities. Two criteria were considered to sample participants: 1) the situation that they were currently studying or had previously studied at a university (defined by the research team as having achieved success in education) and 2) the fact that they had spent part of their childhood and/ or adolescence living in residential facilities.
Two different methods were used to gather communicative daily-life stories. One of the researchers conducted four face-to-face interviews with young people who felt safe to share. The others were gathered using a video conferencing application due to geographic distance constraints. The researcher who used the data collection technique in each case also worked as a social educator in residential care. To let participants complete freedom to decide whether they wanted to participate, all information about the research and its goals was made available from the start.
The communicative daily-life stories were recorded, and the data were analysed to separate the participants’ barriers (exclusionary dimension) from the solutions to the inequality (transformative dimension) (Pulido et al. 2014). In each set of categories, the exclusionary and transformative dimensions were examined in terms of the educational system, family bonds, social relations, transition to adulthood and residential setting.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe data collected shows the trajectories and the elements that made possible for the participants to study at the university. Most of the research participants discussed how difficult it was to be separated from their fathers and mothers when reviewing their trajectory in the alternative care system, but they also recognised how necessary it was for this separation to occur given the situation of family neglect. They also described the constant change of the social and academic settings before and after alternative care, harming their interpersonal relationships and their academic accomplishment.
Although the participants trajectories before being institutionalized were being extremely difficult for them, they showed how a close-knit environment during a child or adolescent development can be a critical protective factor for a child or adolescent who is experiencing carelessness. The participants explained how their friends, teachers, and family members helped them and, in some cases, protected them from their families’ neglect.
All the participants also stressed the value of the educators to them after they move into residential care, underlining how some of the residential carers, especially their mentors who served as role models for them, showed them dedication, effort, high expectations, enthusiasm, and affection.
Some age-related challenges in various facets of life were faced by participants who had matured out of care. Many of the research participants discussed the financial challenges they met in enrolling in, continuing in, and providing for their own needs during their time in higher education.
Nevertheless, despite their difficult circumstances, the participants' narratives highlight crucial elements that allowed them to enrol in university. These identified educational success facilitators have been the participants’ awareness of the relevance of education; the prioritisation of education in the residential care home, the extended learning time, looking for other complementary help (such as private funding).
ReferencesBroad, B. (2005) Improving the Health and Well-Being of Young People Leaving Care. Russell House Publishing.
Del Valle, J. F., López, M., Montserrat, C. and Bravo, A. (2009) ‘Twenty years of foster care in Spain: Profiles, patterns and outcomes’. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(8), 847–53.
Gómez, A., Puigvert, L. and Flecha, R. (2011) ‘Critical communicative methodology: Informing real social transformation through research’. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(3), pp. 235-45.
Gómez, J., Latorre, A., Sánchez, M. and Flecha, R. (2006). Metodología Comunicativa Crítica. El Roure.
Guyon-Harris, K. L., Humphreys, K. L., Fox, N. A., Nelson, C. A. and Zeanah, C. H. (2019). ‘Signs of attachment disorders and social functioning among early adoles- cents with a history of institutional care’. Child Abuse and Neglect, 88, 96–106.
Gypen, L., Vanderfaeillie, J., De Maeyer, S., Belenger, L., Van Holen, F. (2017) ‘Outcomes of children who grew up in foster care: Systematic-review’. Children and Youth Services Review, 76, 74–83.
Habermas, J. (1981/1984). Theory of Communicative Action: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Beacon Press.
Ministerio de Derechos Sociales y Agenda 2030. (2020). Boletín de Datos Estadísticos de Medidas de Protección a la Infancia, 22, Datos 2019. Available online at: https://observatoriodelainfancia.vpsocial.gob.es/productos/pdf/BOLETIN_22_final.pdf
O’Sullivan, A. and Westerman, R. (2007) ‘Closing the gap. Investigating the barriers to educational achievement for looked after children’. Adoption and Fostering, 31(1), 13-20.
Puigvert, L., Christou, M. and Holford, J. (2012) ‘Critical communicative methodology: Including vulnerable voices in research through dialogue’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42(4), 513-26.
Pulido, C., Elboj, C., Campdepadro´s, R. and Cabre´, J. (2014). ‘Exclusionary and transformative dimensions communicative analysis enhancing solidarity among women to overcome gender violence’, Qualitative Inquiry, 20(7), 889-94.
Simon, A. and Owen, C. (2006) ‘Outcomes for children in care: what do we know?’, in Simon, A., Jackson, S. and Chase, E. (eds), Care and after: A Positive Perspective (pp. 26–43), Routledge.
Steels, S. and Simpson, H. (2017) ‘Perceptions of children in residential care homes: A critical review of the literature’. The British Journal of Social Work, 47(6), 1704–22.
van IJzendoorn, M. H., et al. (2020) ‘Institutionalisation and deinstitutionalisation of children 1: a systematic and integrative review of evidence regarding effects on development’. The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(8), 703-20.
Vinnerljung, B. and Hjern, A. (2011) ‘Cognitive, educational and self-support out- comes of long-term foster care versus adoption. A Swedish national cohort study’, Children and Youth Services Review, 33(10), 1902-10.
05. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Paper
Grasping and Working with Inclusion and Exclusion in Urban Youth Work in Denmark.
Vibe Larsen, Ditte Tofteng, Katrine Scott, Lone Brønsted
University College Copenhagen, Denmark
Presenting Author: Larsen, Vibe;
Scott, Katrine
Marginalised youth in Copenhagen, like in many other big cities, face challenges of inclusion and participation in education, the labour market and civil society activities (e.g., sport) (Red Barnet 2020). On a national level, efforts have been made to handle these challenges through a focus on inclusive education, youth work, improved professional training and an increased interprofessional cooperation between welfare professionals. This paper conceptualises young people’s marginalisation as complex processes of inclusion and exclusion in a presentation of findings from two research projects. The research project The Gendered Youth Club [Køn i klub] investigates youth workers’ narratives of forms of inclusion and exclusion that are produced in urban youth work. The research project Youth and Pedagogical work in Urban Arenas [Ungeliv og pædagogisk praksis i urbane arenaer] explores young people's own problem definitions and proposed solutions based on their own experiences of marginalisation. In the paper, we compare findings from the two projects in order to answer the research question: How do young people in marginalised positions and youth workers describe and understand forms of inclusion and exclusion in urban youth work?
The two research projects draw on different theoretical frameworks with a common research interest in urban youth work. The Gendered Youth Club investigates youth workers’ narratives of gender, sexuality, race/ethnicity and class in relation to young people's opportunities in both institutional and societal participation, and analyses how these narratives also shape relations between young people and youth workers. The project is informed by international gender and intersectionality research (Butler 1993, Nayak & Kehily 2006, Wetherell 2008) as well as Danish research about how gender and other socio-cultural categories are regulated and negotiated in every day institutional life (Kofoed 2008, Staunæs 2003).
The project Youth and Pedagogical work in Urban Arenas explores lived experiences of marginalisation among youth in the city by involving young people actively in the research process. Marginalisation is understood within the theoretical framework of wicked problems (Horst, Rittel & Weber 1973, Bladt & Tofteng 2022). Wicked problems are characterised by a complexity of simultaneous problems within social structures, cultural and individual spheres which together shape social exclusions and differentiations. By involving young people in participatory processes, we enhance our knowledge about the complexity of the wicked problems both at an individual level, but also at a more general or societal level (Bruselius-Jensen 2021, Percy-Smith 2006, Percy-Smith, McMahon & Thomas 2019).
Bringing together findings from the two projects provides a double perspective including both youth and youth workers’ attempts to grasp and work with urban marginalisation.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe projects adopt an explorative approach within qualitative research. The empirical data in the project The Gendered Youth Club consists of interviews with 20 youth workers from 15 youth clubs across Copenhagen. The youth workers have been recruited through the method of snowball sampling that employs research into participants’ social networks to access specific populations using interpersonal relations and connections between people (Brown 2003). The method works through referrals made among people who share or know of others who have knowledge or a position that are of research interest (Biernacki & Waldorf 1981). The interviews are focused on questions about forms of inclusion and exclusion in youth work with a focus on gender and marginalization.
The empirical data of the research project Youth and Pedagogical work in Urban Arenas consists of interviews with young people conducted by youth workers from four youth clubs across Copenhagen. The emperical data was generated within one workshop with 25 professionals conducting 15 interviews with youngsters at the age of 12- 14 years. The aim of the interviews is for the professionals to learn from the youth by involving them in problem identification and analyses of mechanisms of social exclusion in everyday life (Bruselius- Jensen 2021, Tofteng & Bladt 2021, Wulf- Andersen et al 2021). The method draws on an understanding of the need to bring young people and youth workers’ perspectives and experiences into the research process not only as informants but also as active participants in knowledge production (Bladt 2013, Tofteng & Bladt 2021, Wulf- Andersen et al 2021).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe two projects illustrate the complex nature of urban youth work that targets young people at the margins of a welfare society. However, the projects also show that although both youth workers and the young people themselves have great insights into complex forms of inclusion and exclusion, youth workers at times find it difficult to describe everyday examples of exclusionary practices in their work out of fear of contributing to further marginalisation. This difficulty becomes clear through hesitant and fumbling language when youth workers try to point out how gender, sexuality, race/ethnicity, and class become visible in youth work. Lack of a professional vocabulary to talk about and identify gendered, racialised and classed processes of inclusion and exclusion, is an obstacle in youth work that aims to include and involve a diverse group of young people.
We show that young people can contribute with new insights and innovative ideas that challenge traditional ways of organizing youth work and welfare systems of inclusion and support. This insight underlines the importance of working with youth participatory methods in youth work and it is also in line with other studies that have shown that when young people help to define issues and participate in creating concrete changes, they experience it as meaningful and as significant for both them and others. We find that when young people and youth workers work together to create solutions, the solutions seem to leave a more lasting impression on the young people's everyday lives than when the solutions come from the youth workers alone.
ReferencesBiernacki, Patrick, Waldorf, Dan (1981), Snowball Sampling. Problems and Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling, Sociological Methods and Research, 10:2, 141-163.
Bladt, M. (2013), De Unges Stemme – udsyn fra en anden virkelighed. University of Roskilde.
Browne, Kath (2005), Snowball sampling: using social networks to research non‐heterosexual women, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8:1, 47-60.
Bruselius-Jensen, M. (2021), Et kontinuum over børn og unges deltagelsesformer, Forskning i Pædagogers Profession og Uddannelse, 5:2
Butler, J. (1993): Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of ‘Sex’. Routledge, New York.
Horst, W. J. Rittel, & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Scien-ces, 4(2), 155–169.
Juelskjær, M., Falkenberg, H., & Larsen, V. (2018). Students of reforms. Investigating and troubling the enactment of student voices in research on reform. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(5), 436-451. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2018.1449981
Kofoed, J. (2008), Appropriate Pupilness: Social Categories intersecting in school life, Childhood, 15:2
Nayak, A. & Kehily, M. J. (2006), Gender undone: subversion, regulation and embodiment in the work of Judith Butler, British Journal of Sociology of Education,27:4, 459-472
Nielsen, A. M. W., & Bruselius-Jensen, M. (2021). Journey mapping as a method to make sense of participation. I M. Bruselius-Jensen, I. Pitti, & E. K. M. Tisdall (red.), Young people's participation in Europe: Revisiting youth and participation (s. 235-253). Policy Press.
Percy-Smith, Barry, McMahon, Gráinne, Thomas, Nigel (2019), Recognition, inclusion and democracy: learning from action research with young people, Educational Action Research, 27:3, 347-361
Percy-Smith, Barry (2006), From Consultation to Social Learning in Community Participation with Young People, Children, Youth and Environments 16(2): 153-179.
Red Barnet (2020), Bryd barrieren – en analyse af, hvordan flere unge i udsatte positioner kommer med i positive fællesskaber.
Staunæs, D. (2003), Where have all the subjects gone? Bringing together the concepts of Intersectionality and Subjectification, Nora: Nordic Journal of Women's Studies, 11:2
Tofteng, Ditte, Bladt, Mette (2020), ‘Upturned participation’ and youth work: using a Critical Utopian Action Research approach to foster engagement, Educational Action Research, 28:1, 112-127
Tofteng, D.M.B. & Bladt, M. Dilemmaer (2022) og bæredygtighed i demokratiske deltagelsesprocesser – når marginaliserede unges viden og erfaring står i centrum. I Forskning og forandring. 5. 1 102 – 121.
Wetherell, M. (2008), Subjectivity or Psycho-Discursive Practices? Investigating Complex Intersectional Identities, Subjectivity. 2008/22.
Wulf- Andersen. T., Follesø. R., Olsen, T., (2021) Involving Methods in Youth Research. Reflections on Participations and Power. Studies in Childhood and Youth. Palgrave Macmillan
05. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Paper
Discipline on the Edge: School Discipline and Social Marginalization within Segregated Urban Schools
Thorsten Hertel
University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany
Presenting Author: Hertel, Thorsten
School can be understood as an institution through which power circulates in multifarious ways.
School curricula represent legitimate bodies of knowledge, rules define which behavior is accepted and which is not. Spatial structures serve the purpose of disciplining and observation, methods of testing and analysis help to generate complex knowledge about students. Through a Foucauldian lens, school appears as a ‘dispositif’ of power, a complex network of material structures, discursive and non-discursive practices which serves to produce the modern individual (Foucault, 1978). A substantial amount of research argues that power structures have continually transformed toward more soft and subtle approaches. Those ‘technologies of power’ associated with modern governmentality and the societies of control (Deleuze, 1992) no longer target the ‘docile body’ by physical discipline (Foucault, 1995) but strive to produce a self-governing entrepreneurial subject through neoliberal discursive invocation. However, the argument can be made as well that school still reflects the logic of the disciplinary society and that those systems of school discipline developed during the 19th Century are still very much in place.
The question whether the ‘shift’ towards a less rigid and less punitive ‘governmental’ discipline is extensive and whether it has affected most parts of the educational system therefore remains to be further explored. And it becomes even more relevant when the link between power, inequality and social marginalization is considered. This link can be studied when focusing on schools situated in segregated urban areas, as these schools are focal points of social and educational inequality within which disruptive behavior and problems with classroom management seem to be more prominent than elsewhere (Fölker, Hertel, Pfaff & Wieneke, 2013; Racherbäumer, Funke, Ackeren & Clausen, 2013; Weiner, 2003). Research suggests that the already given tendency of educational systems to reproduce structures of class and ethnic differences intensifies within these schools, with pedagogical practices playing a potentially crucial role in perpetuating or counteracting dynamics of misrecognition, discrimination, and territorial stigmatization (Sernhede, 2011; Wacquant, 2000, 2007; Wellgraf, 2018).
The importance of disciplinary practices for dynamics of marginalization has been stressed especially by studies from the US-American discourse, showing how Zero-Tolerance approaches not only fail to create less disruptive educational environments, but happen to further disadvantage those students who are already marginalized, reproducing ethnic differences through practices of punishment and exclusionary discipline. Firstly, studies on the relation between the discipline gap and the achievement gap show that racial disparities in educational achievement and in the intensity and frequency of punitive school discipline reproduce each other (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010; Skiba et al., 2011). Secondly, qualitative studies looking at the ‘micro level’ of disciplinary practice have repeatedly shown how cultural stereotypes and images about ethnic minority groups are closely intertwined with punitive school discipline (Ferguson, 2000; Gray, 2016; Morris, 2005).
Within the German educational research discourse, literature on the relationship between school discipline and marginalization is scarce. The paper at hand presents results from a study investigating disciplinary practices within schools in deprived urban areas through a qualitative-reconstructive approach (Hertel 2020). Drawing on Foucauldian concepts, the study has investigated the implicit knowledge underpinning disciplinary practices as well as ‘disciplinary cultures’ of schools and their interplay with established systems of power. The presentation at ECER 2023 will outline the main results and reflect on them against the backdrop of the conference theme, raising the question of how school discipline tends to value or de-value cultural and social diversity in school.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study was carried out as a qualitative-reconstructive analysis of interviews and group discussions. The data was obtained in three different urban schools situated in deprived areas within German major cities and mainly attended by students from disadvantaged milieus. Most students had a migration background. In each school, teachers and students were included into the sample. The interviews and group discussions have then been transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the documentary method (Bohnsack, 2010, 2017). This method draws on concepts from Mannheim’s sociology of knowledge. It is based on the assumption that social practice is driven by different ‘layers’ of knowledge. While theories, programs and institutional norms are constituted by explicit knowledge, everyday social practice and routine behaviors are mainly driven by habitual and practical knowledge. This type or layer of knowledge is produced within and through collective experience and remains mostly implicit. The documentary method aims at the systematic reconstruction of this implicit layer of knowledge and the ‘modi operandi’ underpinning social practice, which is achieved by a three-step approach: The first step consists of the ‘formulating interpretation’, which identifies the analyzed material’s content on an explicit level. The second step, called ‘reflecting interpretation’, aims at the analysis of habitual knowledge by reconstructing the implicit framework of meaning within which a certain topic is processed (Bohnsack 2010, pp. 110f.). In order to achieve this goal, those passages within the data material characterized by high metaphorical and interactive density are chosen for in-depth analysis, as they provide privileged access to the implicit framework of knowledge driving a subject’s or group’s practice (ibid., pp. 104f.). In the third step, a typology is generated through comparative analysis. Within the study presented here, two different types of ‘knowledge of power’ underpinning disciplinary practice of teachers were identified and theorized on the backdrop of Foucauldian theory of power (see section “conclusion”). Further analysis then focused on the highly contrasting ‘disciplinary cultures’ of two of the schools in the sample. This part of the analysis reconstructed the mechanisms and dynamics of disciplinary culture anchored in the schools’ history and their relationships with the urban environment, the role of spatial arrangements and the reproduction of disciplinary culture through interactions between teachers. Finally, the interactions and experiences of students were considered as well by showing how they relate to their school’s disciplinary culture.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe analysis identified two overarching types of ‘power knowledge’ which drive different practices of school discipline. Both types are underpinned by contrasting modes of constructing students as ‘pedagogical subjects’:
The ‘repressive type’ unilaterally imposes social and behavioral norms through harsh punishment and control. In this type, the logics and punitive techniques of the ‘disciplinary society’ (Foucault 1995) are very much dominant. Disciplinary practices of the repressive type aim to control and contain the behavior of students which are constructed as socially deficient and notoriously deviant individuals. In and through this type of school discipline, the students’ already given position of social and symbolic marginalization is reproduced and consolidated.
By contrast, the ‘explorative type’ tends to handle social and behavioral norms more flexible. Instead of punishment, this type employs disciplinary measures of subtle control and focusses on questioning and on attempts of understanding students’ motives and behaviors. Accordingly, students are not constructed as notorious deviants, but as victims of their marginalized circumstances. Yet, this type of discipline is anything but powerless, as it aims at generating knowledge and uncovering ‘inner truths‘, which then can be used to softly but more efficiently ‘govern’ the individuals. Here, techniques of pastoral power are at play (Foucault, 1983). Cultural and class related differences are met with more acceptance and recognition and integrated into practices of ‘gentle’ discipline and control. However, also within the explorative type, disciplinary power (Foucault 1995) never fully vanishes, as it constitutes the structural canvas on which school discipline unfolds. The presentation at ECER 2023 will outline the theoretical framework, methods and empirical results of the study. Finally, the types of disciplinary practice described above will be systematically reflected with regard to their relation to social, class, and ethnic diversity.
ReferencesBohnsack, R. (2010). Documentary Method and Group Discussion. In R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff, & W. Weller (Eds.), Qualitative Analysis and Documentary Method in International Educational Research (pp. 99-124). Opladen/Farmington Hills.
Bohnsack, R. (2017). Praxeologische Wissenssoziologie. Opladen/Toronto.
Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. October, 59, 3-7.
Ferguson, A. A. (2000). Bad Boys. Public Schools in the Making of Black Masculinity. Michigan.
Fölker, L., Hertel, T., Pfaff, N., & Wieneke, J. (2013). „Zahnlose Tiger“ und ihr Kerngeschäft – Die Abwesenheit schulischer Ordnung als Strukturproblem an Schulen in schwieriger Lage. Zeitschrift für interpretative Schul- und Unterrichtsforschung, 2(1), 87-110.
Foucault, M. (1978). Dispositive der Macht. Michel Foucault über Sexualität, Wissen und Wahrheit. Berlin.
Foucault, M. (1983). The Subject and Power. In H. L. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics (2. ed., pp. 208-226). Chicago.
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York.
Gray, M. S. (2016). Saving the Lost Boys: Narratives of Discipline Disproportionality. Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching and Program Development, 27, 53-80.
Gregory, A., Skiba, R. J., & Noguera, P. A. (2010). The Achievement Gap and the Discipline Gap: Two Sides of the Same Coin? Educational Researcher, 39(1), 59-68.
Hertel, T. (2020). Entziffern und Strafen. Schulische Disziplin zwischen Macht und Marginalisierung. Bielefeld.
Morris, E. W. (2005). “Tuck in that Shirt!” Race, Class, Gender, and Discipline in an Urban School. Sociological Perspectives, 48(1), 25-48.
Racherbäumer, K., Funke, C., Ackeren, I. v., & Clausen, M. (2013). Schuleffektivitätsforschung und die Frage nach guten Schulen in schwierigen Kontexten. In R. Becker & A. Schulze (Eds.), Bildungskontexte. Strukturelle Voraussetzungen und Ursachen ungleicher Bildungschancen (pp. 239-267). Wiesbaden.
Sernhede, O. (2011). School, Youth Culture and Territorial Stigmatization in Swedish Metropolitan Districts. Young, 19(2), 159-180.
Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Chung, C.-G., Rausch, M. K., May, S. L., & Tobin, T. (2011). Race Is Not Neutral: A National Investigation of African American and Latino Disproportionality in School Discipline. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 85-107.
Wacquant, L. (2000). Deadly symbiosis. When ghetto and prison meet and mesh. Punishment & Society, 3(1), 95-133.
Wacquant, L. (2007). Territorial Stigmatization in the Age of Advanced Marginality. Thesis Eleven, 91(1), 66-77.
Weiner, L. (2003). Why Is Classroom Management So Vexing to Urban Teachers? Theory into Practice, 42(4), 305-312.
Wellgraf, S. (2018). Schule der Gefühle. Zur emotionalen Erfahrung von Minderwertigkeit in neoliberalen Zeiten. Bielefeld.
|
