22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
A Bourdieusian, Intersectional Analysis of In- and Exclusion Mechanisms for ECM Students in Higher Education
Jente De Coninck, Wendelien Vantieghem, Peter Stevens
Ghent University, Belgium
Presenting Author: De Coninck, Jente
This research starts from the observation from previous research higher education (HE) ethnic-cultural minority (ECM) students with a migrant background and those from socio-economically vulnerable families experience many hurdles in their study progress (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Existing research mostly focuses on compulsory education, while the context of higher education remains underexplored (3, 7). This is noteworthy as the continuing massification and democratization of higher education is giving previously underserved populations more chances to enroll, making equity in higher education a contemporaneous and pressing issue (2). ECM students and students from lower socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds bring differing needs with them to HE institutions (HEI’s). Furthermore, SES and migration background are strongly intertwined in the Flemish context, with research indicating that 40% of the educational disadvantage among ECM students is explained by SES (8, 9).
The proposed research aims to uncover mechanisms for inclusive higher education, focusing on two vulnerable groups, specifically ECM and low-SES students. The analysis has the following research objectives: an in-depth analysis of how ECM students and those of vulnerable SES backgrounds navigate the possible barriers and supports in HE.
A theoretical framework that provides important insights for this research is the intersectionality perspective. This framework not only points to the recognition of barriers that may characterize a particular group, but also underlines the importance of "intersections" where characteristics intersect and lead to unique challenges and experiences (10). In addition to the intersectionality framework, I draw upon a set of relational concepts set out by Pierre Bourdieu (11, 12, 13): capital, field and habitus. According to Bourdieu (11), it is important to consider processes of exclusion within the social space in which they take place, which he calls a “field”. He regards fields as mutually different, distinct domains in which a person's life takes place, such as the educational field (14). Thinking in terms of a field implies thinking in terms of power dynamics between people (6, 11). Acquiring power requires capital that comprises not only economic (money), but also cultural (knowledge, skills, education) and social (relationships, networks) capital (11, 13). Cultural capital can be understood as knowledge of the norms, styles and conventions valued in a specific field, while social capital refers to relationships and contacts relevant to achieving goals, like study success (13).
To function well in a field, it is not only essential to have capital. Bourdieu (11, 12) links field to the concept of habitus, which explains how individuals internalize and reproduce social structures through their everyday actions and practices. It refers to having insight into the specific peculiarities of daily practice in a certain field (6). Since habitus, field and the different forms of capital are all intrinsically linked, they must also be considered in relational terms (4), as they achieve their full analytical vigour in conjunction with one another (14). Field, habitus and capital of traditional students entering university are more easily in harmony with one another, while this ideal interplay is rarely not as easily achieved the case for ECM and low-SES students (4).
Hence, in this study we explore which aspects of capital, habitus and field determine academic and social success or lack thereoff in higher education for ECM students from socio-economically vulnerable groups.
The research identifies potential approaches gathered from the in-depth understanding of the sociocultural factors and contextual information regarding the experiences and perspectives influencing inclusive education. Insights from the research can be used as a basis for the development of targeted, evidence-based policies and programs for more inclusive HE and increase support services and staff’s awareness of the specific needs of these students.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedAlthough more and more ECM and low-SES students are enrolling in HE, a problem with so-called “survival” occurs quickly (7). Consequently, in order to avoid selection biases and capture the impact of early exclusionary mechanisms, this research focuses on first-time enrollers in HE. We utilize a bourdieusian approach, since this type of research emphasizes the importance of understanding the ways in which social structures shape individuals' experiences and behaviors. This approach is characterized by a focus on the social dynamics of power and inequality, and the ways in which social structures are reproduced and reinforced through individuals' actions and practices. It also often utilizes the concept of "habitus," which refers to the ways in which individuals internalize and reproduce social structures through their actions and practices (11, 12, 13, 14). Since the research objectives focus on the exploration of experiences and meaning-making, qualitative research methods seemed the appropriate choice. Moreover, in order to create an in-depth view of the institutional context, we conducted data-collection within a single institution for higher education.
To recruit respondents, an array of different sampling strategies across Ghent University in Flanders (Belgium) was used, utilizing a division between alpha-, beta- and gamma-sciences: giving a short presentation during the beginning of first-year lectures to the students explaining the research and call for participation, posters, snowball sampling, social media posts, university staff spreading the message... Due to an institution-wide recruitment, we made a nuanced analysis of the extent to which the studied mechanisms (barriers, support, pedagogical approaches...) are either widespread or isolated phenomena. For this project the point of theoretical saturation was reached after +30 interviews, and we conducted 37 interviews in total, of which 7 in the alpha sciences, 15 in the beta sciences and 15 in the gamma sciences. We applied a longitudinal approach, in which students are interviewed in the course of the first semester, and they will be interviewed a second time after the exams of January and third time in the first semester of their second year at university. This way, we can tap into the evolution of students’ experiences and views in a timely manner, rather than relying on retrospection. Furthermore, by maintaining contact with the same group of respondents, students who dropped out or were reoriented after the first semester can be interviewed as well. This provides a nuanced view on which factors were perceived as hampering or as effectively supportive.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsIn the next paragraphs are some of the preliminary results derived from the first data collection phase during the first semester of enrollment at university.
For ECM students, the first year of HE is a real endeavor to find the right study approach. The transition from secondary education (SE) to HE is regarded as difficult, as some low-SES ECM students do not possess the sociocultural capital that adequately prepares them for HE in contrast to high-SES ECM peers who felt adequately prepared due to their embodied sociocultural capital, like having parents with a HE-background and supportive SE-teachers. High-SES ECM students emphasize that the foundations for a successful study career in HE are laid earlier, particularly attending SE in general education, meaning they were in contact with mainly native students from predominantly middle-class backgrounds, where starting university studies is expected of them. These students have learned to function in a field attributed to the native middle-class, thanks to intensive contacts with native middle-class peers. This can be linked with habitus, as an individuals' experiences are shaped by their sociocultural environment.
Respondents also brought up their social situation. In several cases, students came from vulnerable home situations, and were responsible for their own living expenses and study costs, unlike their high-SES peers. Students are seen to navigate different, sometimes conflicting, fields, like their field at home, in which attaining a university degree is sometimes regarded as important and even a waste of time and money. Despite these problems, they rarely use psychosocial services and student facilities at Ghent University, due to not knowing them, or having the feeling they do not deserve the extra aid.
In short, sociocultural capital is an important aspect in HE-transition. Having higher-valued capital is an indicator of academic achievement and an easier transition from SE to HE.
References1 Arias Ortiz, E., & Dehon, C. (2013, 2013/09/01). Roads to Success in the Belgian French Community’s Higher Education System: Predictors of Dropout and Degree Completion at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Research in Higher Education, 54(6), 693-723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9290-y
2 Cincinnato, S. (2020). Navigating the road to study success: The importance of study choices after first-year failure in the Flemish open access higher education system. Vrije Universiteit Brussel]. Brussels.
3 Messiou, K. (2017, 2017/02/01). Research in the field of inclusive education: time for a rethink? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(2), 146-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1223184
4 Nairz-Wirth, E., Feldmann, K., & Spiegl, J. (2017, 01/01). Habitus conflicts and experiences of symbolic violence as obstacles for non-traditional students. European Educational Research Journal, 16, 12-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116673644
5 Thomas, L. (2002, 2002/08/01). Student retention in higher education: the role of institutional habitus. Journal of Education Policy, 17(4), 423-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930210140257
6 van Middelkoop, D., Glastra, f., Ballafkih, H., Meerman, M., Wolff, R., Jong, M., Zijlstra, W., Van den Bogaard, M., Donche, V., & Martens, R. (2018). Studiesucces in het hoger onderwijs - van rendement naar maatschappelijke relevantie.
7 Quinn, J. (2013). Drop-out and completion in higher education in Europe among students from under-represented groups.
8 Agirdag, O., Van Houtte, M., & Avermaet, P. (2012, 06/01). Why Does the Ethnic and Socio-Economic Composition of Schools Influence Math Achievement? The Role of Sense of Futility and Futility Culture. European Sociological Review, 28, 366-378. https://doi.org/10.2307/41495129
9 Duquet, N., Glorieux, I., Laurijssen, I., & Van Dorsselaer, Y. (2006). Wit krijt schrijft beter : schoolloopbanen van allochtone jongeren in beeld. Garant.
10 Hankivsky, O. (2014). Intersectionality 101 (Vol. 64).
11 Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social Space and Symbolic Power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.2307/202060
12 Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction. In Power and Ideology in Education (pp. 487-511). Oxford University Press.
13 Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). Westport, CT.
14 Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology [Réponses. Pour une anthropologie réflexive, Pierre Bourdieu, Loïc J. D. Wacquant]. https://doi.org/10.2307/3322492
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Intersectionality of LGBTQIA International Students: Impact of Perceived Experiences on Academic Performance and Campus Engagement
Andrew Herridge1, Hugo A Garcia2
1University of Southern Mississippi, United States of America; 2Texas Tech University, United States of America
Presenting Author: Herridge, Andrew
According to the Institute of International Education, international student (IS) numbers continue to be on the rise. Regarding the LGBTQIA community, individuals tend to wait to “come out” until they are in college (Beemyn, & Rankin, 2011). This can be due to moving to a location that may be more accepting or learning more about the LGBTQIA community (Beemyn, & Rankin, 2011). Coming to the United States (U.S.) provides IS with the opportunity to “develop and explore in a supportive environment” that may not be available in their home country (Valosik, 2015, p. 48).
Students experiment with various identities as they develop (Morgan et al., 2011). It may become difficult for individuals to navigate their identities because of the social and political climate at their institution (Morgan et al., 2011). Students that hold multiple intersecting identities may face forms of discrimination and oppression due to all of the identities that they hold (Harley et al., 2002). Individuals experience different forms of marginalization when they have multiple intersecting identities such as sexual, gender, and race (Kulick et al., 2017).
Additionally, like their domestic counterparts, IS are at risk of experiencing identity development issues that can cause distress and confusion. LGBTQIA IS on U.S. campuses experience compounded distress due to transitional difficulties and sexual identity development. It was found that four in five students who hold an identity of being an IS, Muslim, or LGBTQIA experience increased anxiety within their campus environment because of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Looking specifically at LGBTQIA IS and their interactions with a campus environment and experiences, the Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development is the theoretical model used. This study focused on two research questions:
1. What are the experiences of LGBTQIA IS on college campuses in the United States?
2. How do LGBTQIA IS describe the impact student services have on their on-campus experiences?
The Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development consists of two parallel elements of development: individual sexual identity development and social identity process (Dillon et al., 2011). Sexual identity development is “the individual and social processes by which persons acknowledge and define their sexual needs, values, sexual orientation, preferences for sexual activities, modes of sexual expression, and characteristics of sexual partners” (p. 657). Whether progressing through individual sexual identity development or the social identity process, sexual identity development consists of five statuses: compulsory heterosexuality, active exploration, diffusion, deepening and commitment, and synthesis. Compulsory heterosexuality applies to any individual that accepts the societal notion that heterosexuality is innate and adheres to cultural norms. Individuals within the compulsory heterosexuality status are likely to perceive others as heterosexual and to hold prejudices against individuals holding sexual minority identities. Active exploration is the “purposeful exploration, evaluation, or experimentation of one’s sexual needs, values orientation and/or preferences for activities, partner characteristics, or modes of sexual expression” (p. 660). Active exploration can be conducted through either cognitive or behavioral actions. It must, however, be a purposeful means of exploring sexual identity to meet an established goal. Diffusion is the “absence of commitment and of systematic exploration” (p. 662). There are two forms of diffusion: “diffused diffusion” and “carefree diffusion.” Carefree diffusion consists of having little concern about not having strong commitments. Diffused diffusion is associated with experiencing stress about not having commitments. Individuals within this status are experiencing an increase in their commitment to their identity. Within this status, individuals have an increased likelihood of questioning the societal construct of heterosexuality being the norm. Within the status of synthesis, individuals begin to align their identity and beliefs with their attitudes and behaviors (Dillon et al., 2011).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis qualitative research study was guided by the Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development (Dillon et al., 2011). This study utilized a narrative approach with semi-structured in-person interviews with participants to attain a deeper insight and perspective on the experiences of LGBTQIA International students. Purposeful sampling procedures were utilized throughout. Developing the interview protocol, a series of questions were crafted, aligning with the research questions and the theoretical perspectives guiding the study. Criteria for inclusion in the study were international student enrolled at a public postsecondary institution in the United States and holding an identity as a member of the LGBTQIA community.
Interested participants completed an online screening form through Qualtrics. Those who met the criteria to be included in the study were asked to opt-in to participate in a 60-minute interview. Participants were contacted to schedule an interview and were given an option of a face-to-face interview or an interview through the institution’s Skype video conferencing system. All interviews were recorded for accuracy and transcribed. Member checking was then conducted. Ten participants from two states self-identified to researchers, agreeing to an interview. Participants self-identified as international students studying in the U.S. from three regions: South, Southeast, and Southwest Asia (5), Europe (2), and Latin America (3). Of the ten participants, five self-identified as female and five as male.
The interviews were semi-structured and lasted for approximately 60 minutes. All interviews followed an outlined interview protocol that consisted of thirteen questions and seventeen written demographic questions. Prior to the start of the interview, the participant was asked to select a pseudonym to be used. The research team individually reviewed the transcripts and developed codes based on the theories. They then met and discussed the identified codes, collapsing similar codes and removing those that did not receive a group consensus. The transcripts were then individually coded using the NVivo coding software. Coding was completed based on the previously established codebook. Coding was conducted in a three-step process established by Strauss and Corbin (1998). First, open coding was completed to establish categories. Second, through axial coding, categories were combined, and subcategories were established. The third step involved selective coding through the development of themes. Based on the coding, a list of common themes was developed.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe first research question focused on the experiences of LGBTQIA international students (IS) based on their intersecting identities. Respondents indicated a mixture of experiences based on their sexual orientation and national identity. Three emerging themes that appeared were Fear, Isolation, and Openness. The themes are defined as follows: (i) fear is the concern for safety or the thought of needing to behave in a certain manner to avoid potential discrimination or backlash; (ii) isolation is the feeling of being alone, not included within a group, or that one cannot actively participate; and (iii) openness is the need for an individual to come out to friends or family on multiple occasions.
The second research question focused on how resources can impact the experiences of LGBTQIA IS based on their intersecting identities. Respondents expressed the utilization of a wide variety of resources from campus based on online resources. Three emerging themes appeared were Campus-Based Resources, Online Resources, and Negative Experiences. The themes are defined as follows: (i) campus-based resources are those resources that are funded by and provided to students by their institution; (ii) online resources are resources that are publicly available on the internet and accessed electronically; and (iii) negative experiences include experiences that were negative in nature when engaging with either campus resources or online resources.
Policy implications include a recommendation for institutions to develop resources for LGBTQIA IS within the International Student Services. Through the creation of LGBTQIA related resources specific to IS, IS will have the opportunity to connect with other IS with similar identities, build connections, have dedicated staff that can provide support, and have a sense of belonging. Regarding the campus community, educational workshops and programming are recommended as a way to educate the campus on different cultures and identities, challenging stereotypes.
ReferencesBeemyn, G., & Rankin, S. (2011). Introduction to the special issue on LGBTQ campus experiences. Journal of Homosexuality, 58(9), 1159-1164. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2011.605728
Dillon, F. R., Worthington, R. L., & Moradi, B. (2011). Sexual identity as a universal process. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.) Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 649-670). Springer.
Harley, D. A., Nowak, T. M., Gassaway, L. J., & Savage, T. A. (2002). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender college student with disabilities: A look at multiple cultural minorities. Psychology in the Schools, 39(5), 525-539.
Kulick, A., Wernick, L. J., Woodford, M. R., & Renn, K. (2017). Heterosexism, depression, and campus engagement among LGBTQ college students: Intersectional differences and opportunities for healing. Journal of Homosexuality, 64(8), 1125-1141. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2016.1242333
Morgan, J. J., Mancl, D. B., Kaffar, B. J., & Ferreira, D. (2011). Creating safe environments for students with disabilities who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Intervention in School & Clinic, 47(1), 3-13. doi: 10.1177/1053451211406546
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications, Inc.
Valosik, V. (2015). Supporting LGBT International students. International Educator, 48-51.
|
