07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
“Why is There a Pride Flag over There” – Perceptions of Inclusion and Exclusion in a Culturally Diverse Finnish Secondary School
Jenni Alisaari1,2, Keith O'Neill3, Anna Kuusela1, Anuleena Kimanen1, Aleksi Seger1, Samaneh Khalili1
1INVEST, University of Turku, Finland; 2University of Stockholm; 3Åbo Akademi University
Presenting Author: Alisaari, Jenni
School climate has an impact on how students with a migration background both succeed and experience a sense of belonging at school (Schachner et al., 2019). Students with a migration background often experience a lower sense of belonging than the majority population (Borgonovi, 2018). Importantly, perceptions of a positive diversity climate buffer against personal experiences of discrimination and predict better belonging (Baysu et al, 2016; Heikamp et al., 2020). In this study, we investigate how school climate, students’ sense of belonging, and perceptions of inclusion and exclusion are perceived through the narratives of culturally diverse students in Finland. The research questions are as follows:
RQ1 How do students from diverse backgrounds perceive inclusion and exclusion at their school?
RQ2 What aspects (of identity) are related to inclusion and exclusion in the narratives of diverse students?
With a large and culturally diverse school as its research site, the research attempts to uncover and assess the pluralities of belonging among the student body. This study is a part of a larger research project, which aims to advance understanding of how to develop more inclusive education for all students, especially for those with migration backgrounds.
Being part of a group is a basic need: a sense of belonging positively affects students’ well-being (Anderson & Graham, 2016) and school success (Schachner, et al., 2019). However, studies have shown that some students, especially those with a migration background, have a lower sense of belonging than the majority population in OECD countries in general (Borgonovi, 2018), and in some countries especially if they speak a language other than the language of instruction at home (Author 1 & Author X, 2021).
Sense of belonging is related to the experience of being accepted and belonging to a group (Lambert et al. 2013). The feeling of belonging is influenced by the experience of security, for example, that it feels good to come to school (Antonsich, 2010). However, belonging can also be viewed as discourses and practices of exclusion or inclusion, influenced by the values of different communities and groups (Juutinen, 2018; Yuval-Davis, 2011). Students’ well-being and sense of equality are further supported by their perceptions regarding their possibilities to participate at school, and being respected and listened to (Anderson & Graham, 2016). Students with a migration background often experience feelings of discrimination (Saarinen & Zacheus, 2019), which may affect their experience of school and lead to a weaker engagement in learning (Heikamp, et al., 2020).
Students’ sense of well-being is associated with their perceptions of school climate (Aldridge et al., 2018). A positive school climate is safe, caring, participatory and encouraging, and it is associated with positive academic achievement (Cohen et al. 2009). Positive interactions between teachers and students promote an inclusive climate at school (Mælan, et al., 2020) and students’ well-being (Anderson & Graham, 2016). It is important that the school climate values diversity (Schachner et al., 2019), and actively challenges and works against inequalities (Freire, 1973). This is also essential for social justice (Mikander et al., 2018; Sleeter, 2014). The wellbeing of people with a migration background seems to be optimal when there are mutual positive attitudes as well as the lack of discrimination in the surrounding context (Berry, 1997). When students experience that the school climate values diversity, they have a higher sense of belonging to school, which is associated to better learning outcomes (Schachner et al., 2019). Intercultural education and education for social justice aims to promote these aforementioned issues (Deardorff & Jones, 2012; Freire, 1973; Hoskins & Sallah, 2011).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe collected data for this study through semi-structured group-interviews. The participants (N=55) were diverse students from two different schools in Finland. The participating students were approximately 15-16-years of age from diverse ethnic and linguistic backgrounds.
The participants were recruited with an open call to both students and teaching staff. The researchers visited the schools’ all lower-secondary 8th grade and upper-secondary 2nd grade classes (students approximately aged 15 or 17) and presented the study and its purpose to investigate students’ perceptions on their sense of belonging and engagement at school. Especially students who speak other languages than the language of schooling were invited to participate in the study. One of the teachers offered her English classes to be the sites of the research interviews. All the students and their guardians were informed about the study by sending them a letter including the purpose of the study, information on the interviews, the ethical procedures and the possibility either to participate or not in the study.
The group-interviews were organized in autumn 2022 during the English language classes. There were 4 – 6 students and 2 interviewers in each group. The discussions were recorded and then transcribed by one of the researchers. The transcribed data were used for the content-driven thematic analysis (Krippendorff, 2012).
To code the data, author 2 read the responses to gain an initial understanding of the data and identify sub-categories for coding the data. The suggested categories were then discussed among authors 1 and 2; categories were decided upon. Categories relevant to this research paper that arose from the data were 1. belonging, 2. school climate, and 3. social justice.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe preliminary analysis indicates that the school climate was experienced as highly positive but also simultaneously chaotic, and there were narratives of both inclusion and exclusion. Furthermore, in the narratives, strong presence of discrimination and bullying came up. Interestingly, the students perceived diverse ethnicity as accepted and a marker of inclusion, whereas non-binary gender identity was reported as a reason for exclusion. As an important aspect behind a sense of belonging (see e.g. Anderson & Graham, 2016), the students emphasized that in their school, everyone was accepted when it comes to ethnic position. However, students with non-binary gender identity were perceived as other (both by themselves and by students belonging to mainstream). Thus, it seems that there is a lack of social justice awareness from these marginalized students.
Based on the interviews, it was clear that the students perceived that negative issues were to stay at school and students had to accommodate accordingly. However, more research is required to investigate in detail, how does the agency of students and teaching staff contribute to creating reality. The preliminary results of this study indicate that even though a school climate would value some aspects of diversity (see also Schachner et al., 2019), it does not automatically result in valuing all aspects of identities. Thus, in order to promote social justice at school, there is a need to actively challenge and works against inequalities that arise among the students (see also Freire, 1973). Although the study was conducted in Finland, the results are relevant in improving school climate in global contexts: better understanding of the aspects related to student’s experiences on inclusion and exclusion will help to build more inclusive school environments in many contexts.
ReferencesAldridge, J., McChesney, K., & Afari, E. (2018). Relationships between school climate, bullying and delinquent behaviours. Learning Environments Research, 21(2), 153–172. doi:10.1007/s10984-017-9249-6
Anderson, D. L., & Graham, A. P. 2016. Improving student wellbeing: Having a say at school. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 273, 348–366. doi:10.1080/09243453.2015.1084336
Author 1 & Author X (2021)
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(1), 5–68.
Borgonovi, F. (2018). How do the performance and well-being of students with an immigrant background compare across countries? PISA in Focus, No. 82, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a9e8c1ab-en.
Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180–213.
Deardorff, D. K., & Jones, E. (2012). Intercultural Competence: An Emerging Focus in Post-Secondary Education. In D.K. Deardorff, H. de Wit, J. D. Heyl & T. Adams (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of International Higher Education (pp. 283–303). SAGE Publications.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. Seabury.
Juutinen, J. (2018). Inside or outside? Small stories about the politics of belonging in preschools. Dissertation. http://jultika.oulu.fi/files/isbn9789526218816.pdf
Hoskins, B., & Sallah, M. (2011). Developing intercultural competence in Europe: The challenges. Language and Intercultural Communication, 11(2), 113–125
Krippendorff, K. (2012). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mælan, E. N., Eikeland Tjomsland, H., Samdal, O., & Thurston, M. (2020). Pupils’ Perceptions of How Teachers’ Everyday Practices Support Their Mental Health: A Qualitative Study of Pupils Aged 14–15 in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(7), 1015–1029, DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2019.1639819
Mikander, P., Zilliacus, H., & Holm, G. (2018). Intercultural education in transition: Nordic perspectives. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 40–56.
Saarinen, M., & Zacheus, T. (2019). “En mä oo samanlainen”. Maahanmuuttotaustaisten nuorten kokemuksia ulkopuolisuudesta. In M. Jahnukainen, M. Kalalahti & J. Kivirauma (Eds.), Oma paikka haussa: Maahanmuuttotaustaiset nuoret ja koulutus. (pp. 170–199). Gaudeamus.
Schachner, M. K., Schwarzenthal, M., van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Noack, P. (2019). How all students can belong and achieve: Effects of the cultural diversity climate amongst students of immigrant and nonimmigrant background in Germany. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(4), 703–716. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000303
Sleeter, C. (2014, February). Deepening social justice teaching. Journal of Language & Literacy Education. Retrieved from: http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/SSO_Feb2015_Template.pdf
Yuval-Davis, N. (2011). The politics of belonging. Intersectional contestations. London: Sage.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Implementing LGBT-inclusive Curriculum in Multicultural Contexts: Comparing the US and UK
Naomi Moland
American University, United States of America
Presenting Author: Moland, Naomi
Recent years have seen increasing global attention to the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students (Kosciw and Pizmony-Levy 2016; UNESCO 2021). As one strategy for making schools more inclusive, activists have advocated for LGBT themes to be included in curriculum (Camicia 2016). Accordingly, some governments have passed LGBT-inclusive curriculum mandates. For example, the 2010 Equality Act in the United Kingdom mandates that schools teach about same-sex relationships as part of students’ Relationship and Sex Education curriculum (U.K. Department for Education 2014). In the United States, seven states have passed LGBT-inclusive history education mandates, which require, for example, that schools “accurately portray political, economic, and social contributions” of LGBT people (New Jersey Senate Bill 1569 2019).
Like many curriculum reform laws, these mandates have been controversial—particularly in diverse communities. In 2019, predominantly Muslim parents in Birmingham, England protested daily for 12 weeks in response to curriculum that taught about same-sex parent families (Parveen 2019). Also in 2019, in the U.S. state of New Jersey, more than 700 parents—including Coptic Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews, and Evangelicals—signed a petition protesting NJ 1659, which mandates teaching LGBT history. Amidst these larger protests, this study seeks to understand how educators are navigating these complex disagreements in their everyday teaching and interactions. Accordingly, we are conducting a comparative case study of two LGBT-inclusive curriculum mandates implemented in 2019: one nation-wide mandate in the United Kingdom, and one state-wide mandate in New Jersey. Our research questions are as follows:
RQ #1: What do educators include in LGBT-inclusive curriculum, and why?
RQ #2: How do teachers navigate potentially competing goals: teaching about diversity and equality on one hand, and being culturally responsive to their communities on the other hand?
In order to explore these questions, we use curriculum document analysis and educator interviews (see below). Comparing these dynamics in the U.S. and U.K. will enable us to analyze how differing political, demographic, and historical contexts shape the implementation of LGBT curriculum.
Protest against inclusive curricular reforms is nothing new (Figueroa 2003; Petrzela 2015; Zimmerman 2022). The protests against LGBT-inclusive curriculum, however, take a different tone. Rather than debating whether certain minority groups should be included in the national narrative, protesters against LGBT-inclusive curriculum often claim that the reforms violate their religious rights, that they seek to “make kids gay,” or that they inappropriately expose children to sexually explicit content (Nash and Browne 2021). Another key difference is that while majority populations cannot deny the existence of ethnic minority groups in their country (although they may downplay their importance), some anti-LGBT protesters deny the existence of LGBT peoples or claim that they have chosen a transgressive lifestyle that should not be recognized (Camicia 2016; Collins 2006). This case reveals a complex example of competing claims for state recognition by minorities (King and Samii 2020; Kymlicka 2007). While LGBT populations seek recognition via inclusion in the curriculum, some religious groups claim that learning LGBT history violates their rights.
In the midst of these debates, it is crucial to understand how educators—including curriculum writers, administrators, and teachers—grapple with these contradictions. Educators serve as intermediaries between the state and students, translating broad mandates into daily lesson plans. By investigating their thought processes and decision making, this study can provide insights into the possibilities and constraints of diversity and inclusion-based curricular mandates. As such, it aligns well with the ECER conference theme of “The Value of Diversity in Education and Educational Research” by delving into the contradictions of teaching pluralist ideals in diverse societies.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe use a comparative case study methodology (Bartlett and Vavrus 2016) to examine how educators navigate LGBT curriculum reforms in two settings: Birmingham, England and Jersey City, New Jersey. We have chosen these cities strategically to examine how teachers who work with diverse groups of families—which vary by immigrant status, ethnicity, and religion—are navigating the complex debates related to new LGBT curriculum. The U.S. and U.K. are at the forefront of LGBT curricular reform; comparing them will allow us to better understand how different contexts shape curricular implementation and community responses. Moreover, the timing of our study will capture the important first years of these curriculum mandates, as educators are translating policies into lessons and community members are responding to changes.
Document Analysis
In order to understand how educators are translating LGBT curriculum mandates into specific classroom lessons, we collected 89 LGBT-related lesson plans from the U.S. and 42 from the U.K. (total = 131). The lesson plans are created by outside organizations, which teachers often rely on to implement new curriculum mandates (e.g., in the U.S., GLSEN, History Unerased; and in the U.K., No Outsiders, Schools OUT). To gain an overall picture of the lesson plans, we organized them by country, intended age group, and main topic. Using the qualitative software Dedoose, we coded lesson plans by topic categories, such as role models; legal cases; social movements/protests; PRIDE events; symbols/flags; art, literature, and media; civic spaces; families; and self-expression/identity. Additionally, we are currently coding the narratives that are woven through lesson plans, such as persecution, resilience, progress, individualism, celebration, differences and commonalities, erasure, and so on.
Semi-structured Interviews
To understand the goals and perspectives of various educators, we are interviewing curriculum writers, school administrators, and teachers (interviews are currently in progress). We aim to interview 30 individuals in each city (60 total): five curriculum writers; five administrators; and 20 teachers. In these interviews, we are exploring educators’ goals, successes, and challenges related to implementing LGBT-inclusive curriculum. We also hope to learn what kinds of community responses they are receiving, and how they are navigating disagreements that arise. We will also use Dedoose to analyze our interviews. To create deductive codes, we rely on existing literature about how teachers navigate controversial curriculum (Binder 2002; Petrzela 2015; Zimmerman 2022). We will then inductively add codes as our data reveals additional themes (LeCompte and Schensul 2012).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsOur research is in progress, and our findings are preliminary. In our analysis of lesson plans, we find interesting trends in the topics. Both countries contain numerous lesson plans on individual role models, possibly reflecting American and British individualistic values and beliefs in meritocracy. British lesson plans focus somewhat more on social movements and transnational LGBT issues, while American lesson plans are focused more locally. Both countries seem to espouse narratives of progress—suggesting that serious discrimination against the LGBT community is a thing of the past, and societies are moving towards tolerance.
As we conduct interviews, we are hearing how curriculum writers seek to balance narratives of LGBT history—acknowledging past persecutions and injustices while also presenting narratives of resistance and empowerment. They grapple with potentially contradictory goals of telling a more accurate history, while simultaneously helping LGBT students to “see themselves” represented in curriculum in ways that improve self-image. We also hear how teachers, intimidated by backlash against LGBT issues, often censor themselves and stick to a more traditional history curriculum. Teachers grapple with how to respect the beliefs of their local communities, even when local communities want to eliminate the teaching of LGBT history.
This research is significant for three reasons. First, investigating LGBT curriculum mandates can help us better understand the benefits and drawbacks of curricular mandates as tools for making schools more inclusive (Camicia 2016). Secondly, this research will help us understand education policy implementation more broadly, by illuminating how policies and curricula shift—sometimes in response to backlash—in different communities (Honig 2006; Moland 2020). Finally, this study will bring important insights into the complexities of multiculturalism and globalization. Because both pro-LGBT advocates and conservative minorities draw on pluralist rights-based frameworks (Binder 2002; Collins 2006), this case illustrates the contradictions inherent in pluralist ideologies.
ReferencesBartlett, Lesley, and Frances Vavrus. 2016. Rethinking Case Study Research: A Comparative Approach. 1st edition. New York: Routledge.
Binder, Amy J. 2002. Contentious Curricula: Afrocentrism and Creationism in American Public Schools. Princeton University Press.
Camicia, Steven P. 2016. Critical Democratic Education and LGBTQ-Inclusive Curriculum : Opportunities and Constraints. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315885254.
Collins, Damian. 2006. “Culture, Religion and Curriculum: Lessons from the ‘Three Books’ Controversy in Surrey, BC.” The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe Canadien 50 (3): 342–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0064.2006.00145.x.
Figueroa, Peter. 2003. “Multicultural Education in the United Kingdom: Historical Development and Current Status.” In Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education, edited by James A. Banks and Cherry A. McGee Banks, 2nd edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Honig, Meredith I. 2006. “Street-Level Bureaucracy Revisited: Frontline District Central-Office Administrators as Boundary Spanners in Education Policy Implementation.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 28 (4): 357–83. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737028004357.
King, Elisabeth, and Cyrus Samii. 2020. Diversity, Violence, and Recognition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kosciw, Joseph G., and Oren Pizmony-Levy. 2016. “International Perspectives on Homophobic and Transphobic Bullying in Schools.” Journal of LGBT Youth 13 (1–2): 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2015.1101730.
Kymlicka, Will. 2007. Multicultural Odysseys: Navigating the New International Politics of Diversity. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
LeCompte, Margaret D., and Jean J. Schensul. 2012. Analysis and Interpretation of Ethnographic Data: A Mixed Methods Approach, Second Edition. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Moland, Naomi A. 2020. Can Big Bird Fight Terrorism?: Children’s Television and Globalized Multicultural Education. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Nash, Catherine J, and Kath Browne. 2021. “Resisting the Mainstreaming of LGBT Equalities in Canadian and British Schools: Sex Education and Trans School Friends.” Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 39 (1): 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654419887970.
New Jersey Senate Bill 1569. 2019. https://legiscan.com/NJ/bill/S1569/2018.
Parveen, Nazia. 2019. “Birmingham Anti-LGBT Protesters Banned from School by Injunction.” The Guardian, June 11, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/11/birmingham-anti-lgbt-protesters-banned-school-injunction.
Petrzela, Natalia Mehlman. 2015. Classroom Wars: Language, Sex, and the Making of Modern Political Culture. 1st edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
U.K. Department for Education. 2014. “The Equality Act 2010 and Schools: Departmental Advice for School Leaders, School Staff, Governing Bodies and Local Authorities.”https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/315587/Equality_Act_Advice_Final.pdf.
UNESCO. 2021. “Don’t Look Away: No Place for Exclusion of LGBTI Students.” Policy Paper 45. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377361.
Zimmerman, Jonathan. 2022. Whose America?: Culture Wars in the Public Schools. Second edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Social Justice Leadership for Resilient Students at Schools with Low-Socio Economic Level by Considering Centralized Education System
Neşe Börü1, Sadife Demiral2
1NEVSEHIR HACI BEKTAS VELI UNIVERSITY, Turkiye; 2TURKISH NATIONAL EDUCATION MINISTRY
Presenting Author: Börü, Neşe;
Demiral, Sadife
Students with low socio-economic backgrounds (SES) often have extenuating circumstances that interfere with their academic performance (Gardner, 2021). For example, students with low SES are slower to develop academic skills because of the underresourced school systems, the home literacy environment, the number of books owned, and parent distress (Aikens & Barbarin, 2008; Bergen, Zuijen, Bishop, & Jong, 2016) students with low SES often have fewer experiences that facilitate the development of basic skills such as phonological awareness, vocabulary, oral language and reading (Buckingham et al., 2013; McCracken (2013). In addition to reading, these students often struggle with science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) subjects (Banajeer, 2016). According to Jeynes' (2011) research, parents who are particularly well-educated, have key positions at work or earn a high salary are more concerned with their children's academic growth than parents who are from lower socioeconomic standing. Moreover, the last research shows that assignments are also beneficial in favor of students with high SES levels in terms of academic development (Calarco, 2022.) Children who attend schools in underprivileged areas also experience higher rates of drug use, homelessness, and violence than students attending wealthy schools. Social services must do more to assist students in these areas (Jeynes, 2011; Wilson, 1987, 1996). Another problem for schools in regions with low socio-economic status is the school budget. Schools in economically weaker areas have more limited budgets than those in wealthier areas (Şirin, 2005). Schools in Turkey are all managed by a centralized administration. This means that the budget that is allocated for each school is the same. However, according to regulations from the parent-teacher association, these organizations can provide financial and moral support to individual schools (Börü, 2019). This function of the school-parent union creates a socio-economic difference in schools in Turkey. In consequence, students may fall behind in academic development due to the lack of budget in schools with low SES levels in Turkey.
Considering the social justice leadership of school principals in this context, it is thought that the instructional leadership practices of school principals in low-voice schools should differ from those of high-voice ones. In this instance, the aim of this study is to determine how the instructional leadership practices of school principals should be for the development of social justice in schools with low SES and to evaluate the functionality of The MoNe regulations in practice. Accordingly, the research questions:
1. What are the requirements of students at low SES schools?
2. What should be the practices of school principals in schools with low SES?
3. How is the functionality of the MoNE applications in low SES schools?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThrough a case study based on the qualitative research methodology, this study aimed to understand the phenomenon of " School Leadership for Resilient Students at Schools with Low-Socio Economic Level by Considering the Centralized Education System in Turkey." According to Yin (2009), a case study is an up-to-date research method that is used to answer how and why questions when the researcher scale does not have dimensions on variables. In addition, a case study is an in-depth description and examination of a limited system and serves as an illustration of the many aspects and how they combine to affect the phenomenon under consideration. (Merriam, 2009). Although personal experiences and perceptions may show relativity between individuals, individuals working under similar conditions for the same purpose may cause the meanings attributed to the facts to be similar. Therefore, the use of a case study design was deemed appropriate for this research. This study focuses on the role of school managers in students learning in a school located in a region with a low socioeconomic level, resisting the difficulties they face in order to achieve academic success.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe teachers' enthusiasm was low, and the class culture was detrimental to the advancement of academic achievement in this school, which had pupils coming from poor social-economic levels. The school budget and the building were inadequate for developing social activities. There were no teachers of fine arts, athletics, or music in this school. These subject teachers play a crucial role in creating social activities that can be used to modify troublesome student behavior. The school counselor was also understaffed, which meant that he was not sufficiently concerned with the students’ issues. Teachers expected the principal to be success-oriented, decisive, fair, and able to prevent the negative effects of parents on teachers and ensure school discipline. These behaviors play an important role in teachers’ motivation and the management of class culture. A negative classroom culture negatively affects the development of students, those who focus on academic success. The principals look for donations to expand social programs at schools. School principals ought to promote parental education.
The school's principal believed that to fulfill these obligations under a centralized management system, they lacked sufficient authority, particularly when it came to enforcing school rules and controlling parents' behavior. Due to the various challenges with school discipline and student issues, this type of school requires dedication and additional counselors. The school's facilities, financial situation, and parents’ perception particularly concerning social activities all need to be improved. Students with poor socioeconomic status who are focused on academic success have an opportunity because of free weekend classes and course materials. Free weekend classes are useful; however, the printed course materials are considered inadequate owing to their quality, and the digital course materials are also deemed inappropriate because the students' homes lack adequate Internet infrastructure. In addition to public books, schools also need money to purchase printed course materials. MoNe emphasizes that these subjects provide social fairness.
ReferencesCalarco, J. M. (2022). ‘There’s only so far I can take them’ – why teachers give up on struggling students who don’t do their homework.
https://theconversation.com/theres-only-so-far-i-can-take-them-why-teachers-give-up-on-struggling-students-who-dont-do-their-homework-187896
Jeynes, W. (2011). Parental involvement and academic success. New York, NY: Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843444
Oplatka, I. (2014). The Place of “social justice” in the field of educational administration: A journals-based historical overview of emergent area of study. In International handbook of educational leadership and social (in) justice (pp. 15-35). Springer, Dordrecht.
Sirin, S. R. (2005). A Meta-Analytic Review of Research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
Wilson, W. J. (1987). The hidden agenda. In W. J. Wilson (Ed.), The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass and public policy (pp. 140–164). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/T/bo13375722.html
Van Ewijk, R. and Sleegers, P. (2010), “The effect of peer socioeconomic status on student achievement: a meta-analysis”, Educational Research Review, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 134-150.
Wilson, W. J. (1996). When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
https://scholar.harvard.edu/wwilson/publications/when-work-disappears-world-new-urban-poor
|
