99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
The Maker Approach to Support Equity in STEM Education
Francesca Gratani, Lorenza Maria Capolla
University of Macerata, Italy
Presenting Author: Gratani, Francesca;
Capolla, Lorenza Maria
The transformations of contemporary society inevitably affect the school ecosystem (Sala et al., 2020). The student population appears increasingly heterogeneous in terms of social and cultural background and communication modes. Space-time coordinates lose their clear boundaries and defined connotations, and knowledge becomes more fragmented and sectoral. These elements of complexity call for a rethinking of traditional didactic patterns to generate learning ecosystems that actively engage students and promote the development of 21st-century skills, which are essential to cope with a school and social context characterized by continuous emergencies (Binkley et al., 2012).
Maker education has been developing in recent decades consolidating the trend of so-called “authorship learning” (Donaldson & Bucy, 2017), an educational strand in which the student is at the center of a process of creation, manipulation and imagination, whose products are strongly perceived as their own and personalized. Indeed, learners, as makers, actively and experientially construct their own knowledge through hands-on activities that combine manual and digital skills aimed at solving open-ended and everyday life problems and creating physical or digital artifacts (Repetto, 2020). This educational approach, originated in America in the wake of the Maker Movement (Dougherty, 2012), is considered a technological extension of activism, capable of conveying the development of STEAM and 21st-century skills and promoting a strongly “enactive” participatory design process.
Its main exponents believe that it can “disrupt” traditional educational methods (Martinez & Stager, 2013), transforming the way we understand «what counts as learning, as a learner, and as a learning environment» and marking a bold step towards equity in education (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014, p. 503). Alimisis and colleagues (2019) emphasize the possibility of democratizing access to learning by making and skills development opportunities and, more importantly, to foster positive attitudes and openness to the culture of making for future generations of citizens. The Maker Movement challenges educational systems to provide every citizen with opportunities to learn with recent technologies, regardless of their talents or qualifications in scientific fields.
However, the potential of Maker activities is still not fully exploited. The practical implementation in schools deals with several problems that limit its effectiveness and adequate integration, such as: the rigidity of curricula and other structural and organizational constraints; the inadequate technical and methodological training of in-service and pre-service teachers; the tendency to assume gender stereotypes. Bagattini, Miorri and Operto (2021, p. 252) advance the «glass ceiling» metaphor to allude to the «invisible and transparent barriers that prevent girls from pursuing courses and careers in technical and scientific fields». The gap between males and females in STEM subjects would indeed start as early as the transition between primary and secondary school.
To aspire to effective educational equity, it is thus necessary to avoid the uncritical and non-pedagogically adoption of the Maker approach and the design of predefined pathways, and instead appeal to learners’ individual inclinations and creative/interdisciplinary aspects, enhancing diversity and preventing mechanisms of exclusion (Bevan, 2017; Repetto, 2020).
Based on these needs and theoretical foundations, we developed a research project aimed at outlining a proposal for integrating Maker activities into the curricula of primary and lower secondary schools, answering the following questions:
-
How can Maker education be integrated into the curricular activities of primary and lower secondary schools?
-
What impact does it have on students’ perceived school self-efficacy and attitude towards STEM and 21st-century skills?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe project was divided into two parts. The first part (January - June 2021) involved 50 students attending a fourth, a fifth and a multi-grade fourth-fifth class of the C.I. “S. De Magistris” in Caldarola (MC) and three curricular teachers. Then, the second part (November 2021 – April 2022) coincided with the transition of 58% of the students to lower secondary school. This change led to a redefinition of class groups and teaching staff, which, however, did not affect the balance between genders and school grades. The context and sample were limited due to the ongoing Covid-19 health emergency.
The project developed according to a multidisciplinary and longitudinal approach, oriented towards laboratory and collaborative practices. It adopted the Design-Based Implementation Research (DBIR) methodology (Fishman et al., 2013), as it is based on a mutually transformative relationship between research and practice, involving teachers as co-designers.
We therefore started from the classes’ curricula to define possible integration proposals. We identified three guiding criteria: connecting the activities to the curricular content; working for and on the students’ skills; include the activities in students’ assessment, and some guiding principles: activating students at home through flipped strategies; giving each session the same structure to ensure regularity; proposing authentic tasks and assessment (Gratani, 2021); design pathways inspired by the three principles outlined in Berthoz’s (2009) theory of simplexity (modularity, redundancy, and deviation).
In line with the Maker approach, we designed challenges based on devising, planning, building, and solving, to be carried out in pairs or groups of three pupils. We chose the 17 SDG outlined by the UN in the 2030 Agenda as an integrating background theme, selecting them according to possible links with the curricula and students’ interests and life contexts.
For the assessment, we selected two validated questionnaires to investigate:
students’ attitude towards STEM and 21st-century skills (Q1): adapted and translated version by Screpanti (2020).
students’ perceived school self-efficacy (Q2): adapted and translated version by Pastorelli and Picconi (2001).
They were administered at the beginning and at the end of the two parts. Alongside the quantitative analysis, we added tools for qualitative analysis to appreciate the many underlying processes activated. These tools were: student logbooks divided into three sessions (introduction, planning, self-assessment); a rubric co-designed with the teachers based on the students’ self-assessment areas; a focus group with teachers carried out between the projects’ two parts.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsRapidly changing socio-cultural contexts highlight both the potential and the need for transformative pedagogy (Yelland & Arvantis, 2018) to generate new ways of teaching and learning that support the increasing diversity of classroom contexts.
The project’s design favored the three basic principles of Berthoz’s (2009) theory of simplexity:
- modularity: tasks as coherent and connected micro-modules in a networked program to promote recursive recalls;
- redundancy: multiple communication channels to foster differentiation of learners’ cognitive styles;
- deviation: ongoing adaptations to respond to feedback from practice.
Students were able to approach technology to solve authentic challenges building fundamental skills for future citizens (Gratani & Giannandrea, 2022). The main positive outcomes include: increased involvement of students and local communities; democratic nature of the activities; added value of technology to foster inclusion; embodied approach; impact on students’ expressive, emotional and relational skills and manual abilities; facilitated approach to STEM subjects.
Specifically, regarding STEM education, data from Q1 reveal overall higher values from female students, proving the need to “eradicate” entrenched stereotypes to support equitable access to studies and technical-scientific professions. In all Q1 administrations, female students show an overall higher attitude than male students towards all investigated areas (except for the post-Part II of the Engineering-Technology area).
Teachers also reported a greater inclination towards scientific subjects from female students and a general different approach to STEM fields (particularly mathematics). According to the teachers, the more playful, humanistic and creative context, not experienced as a pure exercise, facilitated the pupils who usually struggle more with traditional mnemonic and executive exercises, reducing their fear of judgment and encouraging them to bring out their knowledge and abilities.
Finally, teachers emphasized the opportunity to question their own attitudes towards new technologies and experiment a more flexible and effective planning of daily teaching to meet pupils' diverse needs.
ReferencesAlimisis, D., Alimisi, R., Loukatos, D., & Zoulias, E. (2019). Introducing Maker Movement in Educational Robotics: Beyond Prefabricated Robots and “Black Boxes”. In L. Daniela (Ed.), Smart Learning with Educational Robotics (pp. 93-115). Cham: Springer.
Bagattini, D., Miotti, B., & Operto, F. (2021). Educational Robotics and the Gender Perspective. In D. Scaradozzi, L. Guasti, M. Di Stasio, B. Miotti, A. Monteriù, & P. Blikstein (Eds.), Makers at School, Educational Robotics and Innovative Learning Environments. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 240 (pp. 249-254). Cham: Springer.
Berthoz, A. (2009). La Simplexité. Paris: Odile Jacob.
Bevan, B. (2017). The promise and the promises of making in science education. Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 75-103.
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (Vol. 1, pp. 17–66). Netherlands: Springer.
Donaldson, J.P., & Bucy, M. (2017, May). Constructionism and Authorship Learning. AERA Online Paper Repository. Paper presented at the 2017 American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX.
Dougherty, D. (2012). The maker movement. Innovations, 7(3), 11-14.
Fishman, B.J., Penuel, W.R., Allen, A., & Cheng, B.H. (Eds.). (2013). Design-based implementation research: Theories, methods, and exemplars. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 112(2). New York: Teachers College Record.
Gratani, F. (2021). Towards Assessment as Learning: Findings from online courses for secondary school teachers. Education Sciences And Society, 432-433.
Gratani, F., & Giannandrea, L. (2022) Towards 2030. Enhancing 21st century skills through educational robotics. Frontiers in Education, 7,
Halverson, E.R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), pp.495–504.
Martinez, S.L., & Stager, G. (2013). Invent to learn: Making tinkering and engineering in the classroom. Torrance, CA: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.
Repetto, M. (2020). La Maker Education come movimento a contrasto della povertà educativa. QTimes – webmagazine, Anno XII - n. 4, 204-213.
Sala, A., Punie, Y., Garkov, V., & Cabrera Giraldez, M. (2020). LifeComp: The European Framework for Personal, Social and Learning to Learn Key Competence. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Screpanti, L. (2020). Study, assessment and identification of Educational Robotics experiences at school. PhD dissertation. Ancona: Università Politecnica delle Marche.
Yelland, N., & Arvantis, E. (2018). Transformative pedagogies in early childhood education. Global Studies of Childhood, 8(2), 111–113.
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Atypical Academic Pathways: Young Students' Perspectives
Marta de Oliveira Rodrigues1, Sofia Marques da Silva2, Armando Loureiro3
1Centre for Research and Intervention in Education, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences of University of Porto, Portugal; 2Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences of University of Porto, Centre for Research and Intervention in Education, Portugal; 3University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Centre for Research and Intervention in Education, Portugal
Presenting Author: de Oliveira Rodrigues, Marta
In the past decades in the European Union, as well as in Portugal, overcoming school failure and dropout has been a political priority in the promotion of employment, economy, social cohesion, cultural development, and citizenship. Portugal, in recent years, has been systematically reducing these numbers. Although this evolution there are social and educational inequalities that can be translated into high rates of school failure and dropout among students from disadvantaged backgrounds. To address these issues, specific intervention programs and projects have been created. At a European level, several initiatives have been developed (Eurydice, 2021) highlighting in Portugal the implementation of interventions based on objectives such as the promotion of school success and social inclusion (Antunes, 2019; Magalhães et al., 2015).
Developed in the context of a doctoral project in Educational Sciences granted by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (SFRH/BD/143386/2019) and framed in the EDUPLACES project (PTDC/MHC-CED/3775/2014) the presented investigation focuses on the study of two inclusive socio-educational practices developed in the context of two national programs aimed at social inclusion and academic success, the Educational Territories of Priority Intervention Program, developed in the School and the Choices Program, allocated in the Community. Inclusive socio-educational practices are conceptualized as practices implemented under national government programs, in formal and non-formal educational contexts, to promote academic success and social inclusion (Antunes, 2019). Within these practices, we intend to study transformation processes in successful academic pathways in students at risk of school failure and/or dropout. The concept of atypical academic pathways is addressed, with multiple designations (Roldão, 2015), in national and international reference literature in the field of sociology of education (Antunes & Sá, 2019; Lacerda, 2006; Lahire, 2004) to mitigate, in line with Morrow and Torres (1997) the logics "of theories of social and cultural reproduction". These studies are based on questions posed to the macro-structural approaches, namely from the problematic of cultural and social reproduction and of socialization (Bourdieu & Passeron, 2009). Some authors point out approaches at a micro-level placing families and their strategies toward education as the focus in the analysis of educational inequalities (Zeroulou, 1988; Lahire, 2004; Roldão, 2015). In Portugal, only more recently, these trajectories were analyzed as an object of study (Costa & Lopes, 2008; Costa, Lopes & Caetano, 2014; Roldão, 2015).
One of the research questions that this study aims to answer is: "What is the students' perceived impact of participating in inclusive educational practices towards successful academic pathways”?. From a qualitative approach, it was developed a multi-case study (Seale, 2004; Yin, 2010) conducted in a municipality located in the northeast region of Portugal.
The theoretical framework of this study aims to be consistent with the lines of research based on an approach to sociology on an individual scale, considering atypical academic pathways as unique cases studied at a micro-sociological level considering their involvement in a broader and historically situated phenomenon, the school failure and educational inequalities resulting from the massification of school (Antunes & Sá, 2019).
The main objective of this proposal is to bring into academic debate the effects of the dimensions of inclusive socio-educational practices - arising from intervention policies and measures aimed at overcoming school failure, dropout, and social exclusion - that may generate the construction of atypical academic pathways.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study has a qualitative approach to cover the plurality of rationalities and meanings based on the knowledge and contexts under analysis (Seale, 2004). This methodological approach enables a collection of more detailed and in-depth information on the phenomena to be researched (Crabtree & Miller, 1992) with the purpose of expanding the knowledge of the educational pathways of young people involved in the practices under study.
To answer our research question "What is the students' perceived impact of participating in inclusive educational practices towards successful academic pathways?" the methodology selected to develop this investigation was a multi-case study (Yin, 2010) carried out in a municipality located in the northeast region of Portugal. The research was aimed at young students selected according to three inclusion criteria: (i) have participated in the practice for at least one year; (ii) have reversed the initial expectations of the school pathway of failure and/or dropout and; (iii) were attending the 2nd or 3rd cycle of compulsory education.
To allow the interviewer and the interviewee to increase reflexivity (Costa et al, 2008) two semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten students, aged between 11 and 18 years old, six girls and four boys who participated in the inclusive socio-educational practice of Study Support (allocated in the Community) and Ability Grouping (developed in School). The option for the semi-structured interview technique is related to its particularity in "discursively capturing, with symbolic depth and narrative density the respective points of view on certain practices, experiences, and/or interactions" (Ferreira, 2014:168).
Subsequently, a content analysis (Bardin, 1995) of the interviews were performed according to the main focus of the study by identifying three categories with greater impact: personal, social, and academic dimension (information about the students' narrative of the socio-educational practice and their school pathway in a personal, social and academic dimension) which correspond to the categories elucidated to constitute the contributions of research on atypical academic pathways. Through the perspectives of young students, the aim of this study is to understand the multidimensional factors that occur in the transformation processes, in the personal dimension, and that contribute to the construction of successful academic pathways.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe presented study aims to contribute to increasing knowledge about successful atypical academic pathways of young people, who attend inclusive socio-educational practices inserted in educational policy measures that aim to promote school success and social inclusion, in order to provide a broader understanding of social and educational inequalities.
Thus, the expected results are intended to promote the understanding of young students' attitudes and decisions regarding education, school, (in)success, and drop out. Based on these meanings, we will develop an approach that allows the development of portraits of atypical academic pathways of young students and profiles that characterize these academic pathways (Antunes & Sá, 2019; Costa, Lopes & Caetano, 2014; Roldão, 2015).
This proposal will present young students' perspectives and voices to comprehend social reality as a human construction considering the subjective meanings of practices, interactions, devices, and interpretations in distinct configurations and combinations, but denoting social regularities in formally and informally organized contexts (Antunes & Sá, 2019).
With the data analyzed so far throughout this research, by means of content analysis, it was possible to identify factors that promote transformation processes in the construction of atypical academic pathways focused on a personal dimension such as their mobilization to learn, self-esteem, self-confidence, responsibility, work organization, attendance, well-being, autonomy, and goal settings.
Dispositions, such as the willingness to learn, the acquisition of study methods, commitment, and interest were identified as vectors that contribute to the academic success of the young students interviewed that suggest an articulation with the student’s craft (Perrenoud, 1995), the rules of performance (Bernstein, 1996), as well as the relation with knowledge (Charlot, 2009).
ReferencesAntunes, F. (2019). Remar contra as desigualdades: práticas, vozes e percursos. V. N. Famalicão: Húmus.
Antunes, F., & Sá, V. (2019). Se houvera quem me ensinara, quem aprendia era eu: percursos académicos de jovens – trilhos sinuosos, futuros possíveis. In F. Antunes (Eds.), Remar contra as desigualdades em educação: Práticas, vozes, percursos (pp. 69-124 ISBN 978-989-755-428-5). V. N. Famalicão: Edições Húmus.
Bardin, L. (1995). Análise de Conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70.
Bernstein, B. A Estruturação do Discurso Pedagógico. Classe, Códigos e Controle. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1996.
Bourdieu, P. & Passeron, J. P. (2009). Los herederos: los estudiantes y la cultura. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI Editores Argentina.
Charlot, B. (2009). A Relação com o saber nos meios populares. Porto: CIIE/Livpsic.
Costa, A. F et al. (Coord.). (2008). Os estudantes e os seus trajetos no ensino superior: Sucesso e insucesso, padrões e processos, Promoção de boas práticas. Lisboa, CIES-IUL e IS-FLUP.
Costa, A. F., Lopes, J. T., & Caetano, A. (Orgs.). (2014). Percursos dos estudantes no Ensino Superior. Fatores e processos de sucesso e insucesso. Lisboa: Editora Mundos Sociais.
Crabtree, B. & Miller, W. (1992). Doing qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Eurydice (2021). Portugal Overview. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/portugal
Ferreira, V. S. (2014). Artes de entrevistar: composição, criatividade e improvisação a duas vozes. In Leonor L. Torres & José A. Palhares (Eds.), Metodologia de investigação em Ciências Sociais da Educação (pp.165-195). Vila Nova de Famalicão: Húmus.
Lacerda, W. M. (2006). Percursos escolares atípicos: O possível contra o provável. Revista de Ciências Humanas, 6(2), 171-195.
Lahire, B. (2004). Sucesso escolar nos meios populares: As razões do improvável. São Paulo: Ática.
Magalhães, A., Araújo, E., Macedo, H., & Rocha, C. (2015). Early school leaving in Portugal. Policies and actors’ interpretations. Educação Sociedade e Culturas, 45, pp. 97-119.
Morrow, R. A., & Torres, C. A. (1997), Teoria social e educação, Porto, Afrontamento.
Perrenoud, P. (1995). Ofício de aluno e sentido do trabalho escolar. Porto: Porto Editora
Roldão, C. (2015). Fatores e perfis de sucesso escolar “inesperado”: Trajetos de contratendência de jovens das classes populares e de origem africana (Tese de Doutoramento). Instituto Superior de Ciências do Trabalho e da Empresa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Seale, C. (2004). Researching society and culture (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Yin, R. (2010), Estudo de caso: planejamento e método. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
Zeroulou, Z. (1988). La réussite scolaire des enfants d’immigrés: L’apport d’une approche en termes de mobilisation. Revue Française de Sociologie. 29 (3), 447-470.
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Exploring the Impact of a Widening Participation Outreach Programme on Second-level Students’ College Readiness and Educational Progression.
Eilis Ni Chorcora, Ronan Smith
Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, Ireland
Presenting Author: Ni Chorcora, Eilis
Background
Research suggests that educational disadvantage exists across the life course and education sectors including the transition from second to third level. Recent decades have seen a dramatic decrease in early school leaving across Europe. However, in their 2021 report, Eurostat data showed that just 41% of the EU population aged 25-34 had a third level degree. The EU now has a policy target of 45% of 25-34-year-olds attaining tertiary education by 2030 (EUROSTAT, 2021b). In January 2022, equity and inclusion was identified as a clear priority by the EU commission in their Strategy for Universities. Following this, in March 2022 the EU commission released the Eurydice report titled ‘Towards Equity and Inclusion in Higher Education in Europe’. This report highlights how some education structures and policies tend to perpetuate the exclusion of socially disadvantaged and vulnerable groups and that their participation in higher education remains low across all EU Member States. In times of increased social and economic inequality, a major challenge for universities internationally is to address the lack of diversity and access for groups that are underrepresented. There is an increasing policy emphasis on how systems can support students from these groups to progress to Higher Education. However, research on the effectiveness of interventions which increase post-primary students’ aspirations and progression to higher education is limited.
Theoretical Framework
Researchers have linked the lack of social and cultural capital of low-income students to the lack of access to higher education (Perna & Titus, 2005). Bourdieu described cultural capital as “institutionalised or widely shared high status cultural signals (attitudes, preferences, formal knowledge, behaviours, possessions and credentials) used for cultural and social exclusion form jobs and resources and the latter to exclusion from high status groups” (p. 158). Bourdieu described how humans acquire cultural capital throughout childhood within the family. First generation students or students from low-income backgrounds are less likely to engage in conversations about possibility of college, to discuss the importance of academic success with their family or peers or to engage in educational activities outside of school. Researchers argue that students with limited access to college going social networks have less post-secondary options compared to their more affluent peers who are exposed to a range of college going options (Bell, Rowan-Kenyon, & Perna, 2009; Farmer-Hinton, 2008; McDonagh, 2005). University Access programmes aim to support young people, through familiarising students with college campuses, college applications and providing information about courses, scholarships and grants. By giving students this information and support, they can be empowered to ulilise their social and cultural capital in educational contexts and enabling them to reach their full potential.
Research Aim
The Trinity Access 21 (TA21) project is a widening participation (WP) outreach initiative that aims to support students from socioeconomically disadvantaged areas to reach their full academic potential. The outreach programmes include, but are not limited to, mentoring programmes for students and a range of pathway to college activities that give students the information and skills needed to make informed decisions about college. This paper examines the evidence base for university access strategies by investigating the impact of a WP outreach intervention on students’ college readiness in Ireland. In so doing, it aims to provide guidance for policymakers and practitioners on what types of interventions work, and if they work, how and why are they effective.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe paper uses data from a broader study on widening participation which surveys over 3600 students attending schools which have a disadvantaged status and receive additional funding from government based on this. All schools included in the study are linked with the university widening participation outreach programme. Students were asked about their level of participation with the TA21 outreach interventions, as well as self-reported educational outcomes on their college readiness. College readiness in this instance refers to four validated self-reported measures; active engagement in education, educational aspirations and goals, college application efficacy, and students’ confidence in college success. One-way MANCOVA tests were conducted in order to compare outcomes between those students who had participated in mentoring programmes and those who had not but were in the same schools, while controlling for students’ mother’s education. Mentor type and relationship was also investigated. In order to explore the impact of pathways to college activities on students’ college readiness, analyses were also conducted on students’ participation in Campus Tours; Application Clinics, College Project work; College Talks and Careers Fairs.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe findings confirm the positive effects of certain WP outreach programmes on students’ college readiness. In particular, there was a significant difference in college readiness scores when comparing students who had a college student as a mentor and those that did not, even after controlling for students’ mother’s education. Students who reported having a college student as a mentor or having a staff member from their school as a mentor reported having statistically higher scores on all four college readiness measures. Having an older student in your school as mentor predicted higher scores on two out of four measures of college readiness. Students’ perceived relationship with their mentor was particularly important in influencing higher college readiness scores. Findings showed that students who engaged in three or more Pathways to College activities had significantly higher scores on all measures of college readiness. These findings give important insights into the roll out of mentoring programmes and which types of mentors can be most impactful for young people from disadvantaged areas. Discussion of the analyses point to the fact that short, day-long events such as college fairs, campus tours, application clinics and college talks can be effective in increasing college readiness . However, multiple activities are needed throughout the year to ensure they have an impact on students’ college readiness. The paper also identifies important gaps in the scientific evidence base that warrant further research.
ReferencesYounger, K., Gascoine, L., Menzies, V., & Torgerson, C. (2019). A systematic review of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions and strategies for widening participation in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(6), 742-773. doi:10.1080/0309877x.2017.1404558
Armstrong, D., & Cairnduff, A. (2012). Inclusion in higher education: issues in university–school partnership. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(9), 917-928.
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2022. Towards equity and inclusion in higher education in Europe. Eurydice report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Connor, H., S. Dawson, C. Tyers, J. Eccles, J. Regan, J. Aston, 2001. Social class and higher education: issues affecting decisions on participation by lower social class groups, Research Report RR 267, Department for Education and Employment, London.
Webb, S., Burke, P. J., Nichols, S., Roberts, S., Stahl, G., Threadgold, S., & Wilkinson, J. (2017). Thinking with and beyond Bourdieu in widening higher education participation. Studies in Continuing Education, 39(2), 138-160.
Reay, D., David, M. E., & Ball, S. J. (2005). Degrees of choice: Class, race, gender and higher education. Trentham Books.
Reay, D. (2018). Miseducation: Inequality, education and the working classes. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 27(4), 453-456.
Smyth, E., McCoy, S., Darmody, M. and Watson, D. (2014). Leaving School in Ireland: A Longitudinal Study of Post-School Transitions, Research Series, No. 36. Dublin: The Economic and Social Research Institute.
Guerin, B. (2014). Breaking the cycle of disadvantage: Early childhood interventions and progression to higher education in Europe.
Osborne, M. 2003. ‘Increasing or Widening Participation in Higher Education? – a European overview.’ European Journal of Education 38 (1): 5–24. As of 13 March 2014: http://www.ugr.es/~temcu/Recursos/bibliografia/Documents/participation%20in%20higher%20educ.pdf
Goodman, A., & P. Gregg (eds). 2010. Poorer children’s educational attainment: how important are attitudes and behaviour? York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. As of 13 March 2014: http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/poorer-children-education-full.pdf
Kintrea, K., R. St Clair & M. Houston. 2011. The influence of parents, places and poverty on educational attitudes and aspirations. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. As of 13 March 2014: http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/young-people-education-attitudes-full.pdf
|
