07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Understanding and Analysing Educational Barriers: First Insights and Lessons Learned from a Systematic Literature Review
Monika Lindauer1, Selina Kirschey2, Christina Möller1, Ingeborg Jäger-Dengler-Harles2, Jan Scharf2, Andreas Herz1
1Deutsches Jugendinstitut (DJI)/ German Youth Institute; 2DIPF | Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation/ DIPF | Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education
Presenting Author: Scharf, Jan
Social disparities in education appear as a persistent issue in European societies. In Germany, educational researchers have extensively analysed and systemised the causes of educational inequality in childhood, youth, and young adulthood (Bachsleitner et al. 2022, Becker & Lauterbach 2016; Köller et al. 2019; Scharf et al. 2020). Several primary studies investigate how to overcome or prevent inequality in education (e.g., Blatter et al. 2020; Solga & Weiß 2015). While these studies primarily concentrate on single educational settings or age groups, comprehensive and systematic overviews on overcoming educational barriers in the German context are still missing. Systematic reviews offer the potential to compare findings across different topics, target groups, or contexts; to present generalisable findings for research and practice; and to point out research gaps (Gough et al. 2017; Wetterich & Plänitz 2021). Our project therefore aims at systemising studies on the effectiveness of measures to overcome educational barriers in a comprehensive way. For this purpose, we first investigate how researchers understand and conceptualise educational barriers, before analysing more closely which measures are applied and how they are evaluated.
The study considers formal, non-formal and informal educational settings, as well as all age groups from early childhood to young adulthood (0-27 years of age). The focus is on empirical quantitative or qualitative longitudinal or cross-sectional studies in social and educational science and related disciplines published since 1965 which evaluate the effectiveness of measures to overcome educational barriers in Germany. With respect to selection criteria for identifying educational barriers, a preliminary heuristic framework was elaborated. This framework considers educational barriers on multiple levels (Schmidt-Hertha 2018: 831; Wenzel 2008: 430): the micro-level (individual barriers related to knowledge, competence or dispositions), the meso-level (e.g., learning environments) and the macro-level (e.g., political discourse, political or societal frameworks). All the above-mentioned criteria are the basis for the systematic literature search, screening, coding and synthesis (Newman & Gough 2020), which are currently being carried out in an iterative process.
Using preliminary results of pilot coding (n = 9 studies, 18.01.2024), we will demonstrate which types of educational barriers are identified in the studies and how these preliminary findings contribute to further developing our initial conceptual framework. Although all three levels of educational barriers are apparent in the studies, there are also further categories within the levels. Furthermore, taking into account the interaction of these levels, an educational barrier cannot always be assigned to one single level. In many cases, it remains unclear whether a barrier results from an individual characteristic or from non-adapted structures (e.g., of the educational system) on the meso- or macro-level (see details in Lämmchen et al. in prep.). Moreover, the results provide preliminary insights into what can be considered effective “measures” to overcome educational barriers, which research designs are used for evaluation, and in which age groups and educational settings the educational barriers and measures occur. Overall, these preliminary insights suggest a multitude of definitions, concepts and designs in the research landscape, challenges which need to be considered in the systematic review.
The paper intends to underline the value of systematic literature reviews and to discuss the approach of conceptualising “educational barriers” based on research on overcoming educational inequalities. This discussion may lead to a more differentiated definition which can be further applied and elaborated in educational research. As an outlook, the effectiveness of measures observed so far as well as the next steps of the systematisation will be debated. The results and discussion issues offer a relevant contribution to a better understanding of educational barriers and effective measures for overcoming educational barriers, which is useful for subsequent research on this matter.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe methodology follows the standard steps of a systematic literature review (Newman & Gough 2020). The systematic literature search was first conducted in the German Education Index, the largest database for educational research in Germany. The search combined German terms related to the concepts “educational barrier” and “overcoming” (Jäger-Dengler-Harles et al. submitted). Next, the search results were automatically filtered for records including terms related to the concepts “social inequality”, “intentionality” (e.g., program, measure), “geographic context” (not: other countries than Germany) and “target age group or educational setting”. The resulting 35.896 records (as of 18.01.2024; searches in English and in other databases in progress) are currently in the process of screening and coding. Abstracts for inclusion have to indicate results on an evaluated measure to overcome an educational barrier. Abstracts are excluded if this is not the case (1), if it is not an empirical study (2), or if the study does not investigate the target age or learner group (3), or geographic context (4). Abstracts are included when the latter four criteria are unclear, full-texts are only included if they meet all criteria. Seven reviewers were/ are involved in screening. For ensuring systematic and consistent abstract screening, a self-developed electronic questionnaire guides the reviewers through the selection criteria and automatically inserts the decisions into the dataset. Each reviewer screened at least 500 abstracts in parallel with another reviewer and each pair agreed on between 80% and 95% of the inclusions. Non-agreements were discussed within the reviewer-pair. Further uncertainties between the pairs and in separate screening are regularly discussed in the whole team.
Two of the reviewers coded eleven of the first full-texts, which had passed through the selection process, in a pilot-coding in MAXQDA, assigning codes for educational setting, age group, educational barrier (including sub-codes for the three levels) and measures. Two of the eleven texts were coded by both researchers who discussed these and the other separately coded texts in regular meetings. These discussions characterise the iterative process of screening and coding, where the criteria are continuously being sharpened. This is also why two of the eleven coded texts were excluded in a later stage of the analysis. Further coding of full-texts is currently in progress and in regular discussion. The piloted codings resulted in first conceptual reflections of the definition of “educational barrier” which will be presented in this paper.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsIn order to systemise the research on overcoming educational barriers, we first need to elaborate a clear understanding of how studies conceptualize and analyse educational barriers. The paper sheds light on the process of this conceptual preliminary work, which is specific to this project compared to other systematic reviews working with concepts that are already defined by the literature. We started out with a preliminary heuristic framework, which differentiated concepts of educational barriers on three levels. During the process of first screening and coding, we gained first insights into what types of educational barriers are investigated in the studies. The preliminary attempt to systemise educational barriers on the micro-, meso- and macro-level turned out to be a partial approach. In particular, it may be more appropriate to not consider the three levels as separate entities. These insights enrich and extend the preliminary framework to a more complex conceptualisation, which will be subject to further modifications in the ongoing process of the project. The initial framework will be treated as a dynamic one in order to allow a more fine-grained conceptualisation of educational barriers. Therefore, the coding scheme was modified so that educational barriers are coded more openly, i.e., only the subordinate code “educational barrier” is applied without further sub-codes. The coded content will subsequently be analysed and systemised in an inductive way. This procedure allows for further development of the definitions of educational barriers in the interplay between the heuristic framework and the text material. The resulting conceptualisation will constitute the basis for the main goal of the systematic review: the analysis of successful measures to overcome educational barriers. Additionally, the theoretic-conceptual work on educational barriers may also be useful as basis for future theoretical and empirical work in educational research.
ReferencesBachsleitner, A., Lämmchen, R., Maaz K. (2022). Soziale Ungleichheit des Bildungserwerbs von der Vorschule bis zur Hochschule. Eine Forschungssynthese zwei Jahrzehnte nach PISA. Münster: Waxmann.
Becker, R., & Lauterbach, W. (2016). Bildung als Privileg. Erklärungen und Befunde zu den Ursachen der Bildungsungleichheit (5. ed.). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Blatter, K., Groth, K., Hasselhorn, M. (2020). Evidenzbasierte Überprüfung von Sprachförderkonzepten im Elementarbereich. Wiesbaden: Springer.
Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews (2. ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Jäger-Dengler-Harles, I., Lindauer, M., Kirschey, S. & Möller, C. (submitted). Strategieentwicklung für eine systematische Literatursuche im Kontext von Forschungssynthesen zum Abbau von Bildungsbarrieren. In A. Wilmers. Bildung im digitalen Wandel. Methodischer Blick auf 20 Forschungssynthesen im Metavorhaben Digi-EBF (working title). Münster: Waxmann.
Köller, O., Hasselhorn, M., Hesse, F. W., Maaz, K., Schrader, J., Solga, H., Spieß, C. K., & Zimmer, K. (2019). Das Bildungswesen in Deutschland: Bestand und Potenziale. Bad Heilbrunn: Julius Klinkhardt.
Lämmchen, R., Kirschey, S., Bachsleitner, A., Lindauer, M., Lühe, J., Möller, C. & Scharf, J. (in prep.). Wissen über Erscheinungsformen und Abbau sozialer Bildungsungleichheit. Methodisches Vorgehen und Einblicke in zwei Forschungssynthesen. In T. Drope, K. Maaz & S. Reh. Bildungsungleichheit als Gegenstand der Bildungsforschung. Epistemologische Annahmen, methodologische Zugänge, Erträge und offene Fragen. (working title).
Newman, M., & Gough, D. (2020). Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application. In O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond & K. Buntins, Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application (p. 3-22). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Scharf, J., Becker, M., Stallasch, S. E., Neumann, M., & Maaz, K. (2020). Primäre und sekundäre Herkunftseffekte über den Verlauf der Sekundarstufe: Eine Dekomposition an drei Bildungsübergängen. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 23(6), 1251-1282.
Schmidt-Hertha, B. (2018). Bildung im Erwachsenenalter. In R. Tippelt & B. Schmidt-Hertha, Handbuch Bildungsforschung (4. ed.) (p. 827-844). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Solga, H. & Weiß, R. (2015). Wirkung von Fördermaßnahmen im Übergangssystem: Forschungsstand, Kritik, Desiderata. Bielefeld: W. Bertelsmann.
Wenzel, H. (2008). Studien zur Organisations- und Schulkulturentwicklung. In W. Helsper & J. Böhme, Handbuch der Schulforschung (2. ed.) (p. 423-447). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Wetterich, C. & Plänitz, E. (2021). Systematische Literaturanalysen in den Sozialwissenschaften: Eine praxisorientierte Einführung. Opladen, Berlin: Barbara Budrich.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Research Directions and Conceptualizations of Equity in School Education: A Systematic Literature Review
Barbara Gross1, Lisa Bugno2
1University of Chemnitz, Germany; 2University of Padua, Italy
Presenting Author: Gross, Barbara
Diversity is a reality in Europe, and the European Union has adopted a variety of policies to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion, such as in the areas of social rights, employment, and education. Regarding the latter, policies are based on the belief that all learners, regardless of their background, should have the opportunity to reach their full potential.
One key policy is the European Pillar of Social Rights, adopted in 2017. The Pillar includes a number of provisions related to education, including the right to quality and inclusive education for all. The Recommendation of the Council on Promoting Common Values, Inclusive Education and the European Dimension of Teaching (2018) calls on Member States to take steps to ensure that all students have access to quality, inclusive education.
Finally, the European Child Guarantee (2022) is also relevant to the promotion of diversity and inclusion in education. The Guarantee aims to ensure that all children have access to the services they need to thrive, including education.
The notion of equity is a fundamental aspect of education and educational research, and its understanding is far from stable or universal. There is a lack of a universally accepted definition not only across scientific disciplines but also within educational science. Indeed, the concept of equity in education is a multifaceted one, shaped by a variety of social, political, and philosophical considerations. By examining the diverse perspectives, theoretical frameworks and research results that inform equity research, we can gain a deeper understanding of this concept and develop more effective strategies to promote equitable educational opportunities for all students.
The central research questions guiding this study are: What are the conceptualizations and understandings (theoretical approaches) of "equity" within the realm of school education? What methodological approaches can be found in the way educational equity is measured in school education? To answer this question, the study aims to investigate the diverse directions that researchers take when engaging in equity research within school education through to an extensive systematic literature review.
The primary objective of this research is to provide an in-depth analysis of the evolving landscape of equity research within educational science through a literature review. The study will critically examine trends, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks employed by researchers to conceptualize equity. By understanding the diverse approaches taken by scholars in this field, the research aims to contribute valuable insights that can inform future discussions and policy considerations related to equity in education.
The study adopts a conceptual and theoretical framework that critically examines various perspectives on equity within education. Drawing from influential theories such as Rawls (1971), that proposed a theory of justice that emphasizes fairness and equal opportunity, suggesting that society should arrange institutions so that the least advantaged members benefit the most. Moreover, Sen (2009) introduced the concept of capabilities, emphasizing the ability to pursue one's goals and live a fulfilling life, while Nussbaum (2006) developed a list of ten central human capabilities that should be protected and promoted for all individuals. In addition, the recognition theory (see e.g, scholars like Stojanov, 2007), highlights the importance of addressing social hierarchies and power imbalances that can hinder equitable outcomes. Finally, intersectional approaches, promoted by scholars like Crenshaw (1991), emphasize the simultaneous effects of multiple identities, such as race, gender, and social class, on individuals' experiences and equal opportunities.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe aim of this systematic literature review (Newman & Gough, 2020) is to shed light on the nuanced ways in which equity is conceptualized and is perceived in the contemporary world.
In planning, defining exclusion criteria, conducting, and reporting, we meticulously followed the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram (Page et al., 2020). Our research examined publications from the databases Education Source, ERIC, Scopus, and Web of Science within the specified timeframe (2019 – 2023).
The analysis encompassed three distinct levels. The first level focused on the identification of records from the four databases (N = 3560). Records were removed before the screening for different reasons, including duplications, papers from journals with non-educational focus, and papers in other languages. During the second step, the screening, further papers were excluded through the study of the title and the abstract. The papers included in the review served to answer the research questions.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe expected outcomes of this paper provide an in-depth examination of the complexities surrounding the concepts of social equity and educational equity. They highlight the distinctions and ambivalences that exist between these two interrelated domains, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of equity that encompass both social and educational dimensions.
By providing a clear articulation of the conceptual distinctions between social equity and educational equity, the paper offers researchers a potential direction for further exploration and development of these concepts. Additionally, by addressing the postcolonial and decolonial implications of equity, it encourages scholars to adopt a more critical and reflective approach to their research endeavours. Finally, this comprehensive review not only enhances theoretical frameworks but also offers valuable considerations for practical applications within the field. This would allow for a more holistic and inclusive approach to equity research, one that recognizes the diverse backgrounds, experiences and perspectives of individuals.
ReferencesCouncil Recommendation (2018). Promoting common values, inclusive education, and the European dimension of teaching ST/9010/2018/INIT, OJ C 195, 7.6.2018.
European Council, European Commission and European Parliament (2017). Interinstitutional proclamation on the European Pillar of Social Rights, 13129/17, Brussels.
Newman, M., Gough, D. (2020). Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application. In: Zawacki-Richter, O., Kerres, M., Bedenlier, S., Bond, M., Buntins, K. (eds), Systematic Reviews in Educational Research. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_1
Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of Justice. Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Belknap Press.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
Sen, A. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Penguin.
Stojanov, K. (2007). Intersubjective Recognition and the Development of Propositional Thinking. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 1, pp. 75-93.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Promoting Cultural Literacy in a Time of Uncertainty in two European Countries: Narrative Reviews from Denmark and Germany
Søren Sindberg Jensen1, Lisa Rosen2, Gro Hellesdatter Jacobsen1, Bianca Baßler2, Fenna tom Dieck2
1SDU (University of Southern Denmark, Denmark); 2RPTU (University of Kaiserslautern-Landau)
Presenting Author: Jensen, Søren Sindberg;
Rosen, Lisa
In times of uncertainty, global socio-economic challenges, demographic changes and pressure from hegemonic powers, everyday life is challenged by an increasing intolerance towards cultural diversity (Ferro, Wagner, Veloso, IJdens & Lopes, 2019), a tendency towards a normative majoritarian approach to cultural literacy (Morell, 2017), a lack of inclusion of cultural expressions represented by minoritised and marginalised groups (May & Sleeter, 2010). Furthermore, there is a lack of knowledge on how to strengthen cultural literacy in education, including good and best practices of how to further integrate it in both formal and non-formal settings (Desai, 2019).
Therefore, a critical cultural literacy approach is fruitful to go beyond ‘high culture’, because it includes within its scope a variety of cultural genres and repertoires from “below” such as street art, hip hop etc. and underlines, that the promotion of cultural literacy has to be understood as a process taking place in situated social interaction, as a dialogic and co-creative endeavour, shaped by power dynamics and structures: As critical cultural literacy is grounded in critical theory, it rests on the assumption “that an interplay of social ideologies and power relations works systematically to advantage some people while disadvantaging others” (Son, 2020, p. 308). So critical cultural literacy can no longer described as a neutral and individual cognitive or technical skill, but rather as a ‘socially situated practice’ (Rutten et al., 2013, p. 445).
Against this societal and theoretical backdrop, the paper presents and discusses preliminary findings from a literature review conducted as part of the EU Horizon project EXPECT_Art ("EXPloring and Educating Cultural Literacy through Art"). The paper focuses in particular on the findings regarding the state of art of cultural literacy and arts education in Germany and Denmark.
In Denmark, arts education has been shaped by the German tradition of Bildung and a Nordic tradition of craftsmanship. In recent years, arts education has developed according to two different societal trends. First, a trend towards perceiving arts education as means of generating entrepreneurship, which underpin a positive economic development in the global market. Secondly, a trend towards perceiving arts education as part of the solution to sustainability challenges (Kallio-Tavin, 2019). Finally, Denmark like the other Nordic countries “never went through a critique of colonialism” and “Nordic democracy does not yet include everybody living in the Nordic countries. Even the local minority cultures are not well represented in the national [arts] curricula” (Kallio-Tavin, 2019, p. 591). This makes Denmark an important context for exploring the potential of decolonisation arts education and education through art to develop critical cultural literacy.
In Germany, there is an urgent need for decolonisation of arts education (see Mörsch, 2021), which was recently underlined by a discourse-analytical study of 850 applications received within the framework of the “Kultur macht stark” and “Kultur macht stark plus” programmes funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research. In these applications, which were submitted for art projects in schools but also for informal learning settings (see Keuchel 2013 for a mapping of arts education in Germany), for example, the stereotypical addressing of refugees and the individualisation of social problems were reconstructed; furthermore, arts education was presented as a mediator of German, European and dominant cultural values, while children from migrant and socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds were denied their own biographical artistic and cultural experiences (Bücken et al., 2018; Baitamani et al., 2020). Nevertheless, arts education is seen as a powerful way to critically reflect on problematic understandings of culture and to motivate children, young people and adults to rethink social conditions, especially privilege and marginalisation and the construction of others (Battaglia & Mecheril, 2020).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe paper builds literature reviews conducted simultaneously, collaboratively and in a coordinated manner in two European countries. According to Newman and Gough (2019), a literature review involves the following steps: defining the review question and selection criteria, developing the search strategy (including the selection of search sources and databases as well as search terms), selecting inclusion and exclusion criteria, screening and coding studies, assessing their quality, and finally synthesising and reporting the results. The paper will then outline how the findings will help to inform the ongoing research process, particularly with regard to a participatory and community-based research approach.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsIn studying articles and materials with the topics of cultural literacy in relation to critical pedagogy, decoloniality, community-based research, and arts-based methods we would like to achieve and to develop methods of research which are crossing borders. These methods should in a decolonial way of social research be brave in a way, that they do not limit themselves by sticking to close to research programs with a colonial heritage (Barry 2023). The collaboration of self-critical art education, the community and the researcher is an important part of this process. There lies an unseen source of knowledge in the everyday community meetings (Barry 2023). We want to take these forms of knowledge production into account in the research process as well as in processes of education. In addition to the review of the topics mentioned above, we are in the process of identifying alternatives besides the dominant forms of knowledge production and will consider reflections of these too.
ReferencesBaitamani, W., Breidung, J., Bücken, S., Frieters-Reermann, N., Gerards, M. & Meiers, J. (2020). ”Fakt ist, dass geflüchtete Jugendliche kaum jemals die Chance haben ein Kunstprodukt zu erstellen.“ Kulturelle Bildung für junge Menschen mit Fluchterfahrung im Fokus einer rassismuskritisch positionierten Diskursanalyse. In S. Timm, J. Cost, C. Kühn, & A. Scheunpflug (Eds.), Kulturelle Bildung. Theoretische Perspektiven, methodologische Herausforderungen und empirische Befunde. (pp. 197–211). Waxmann.
Barry, C. (2023). Methoden dekolonisieren. “grenzenlos und unverschämt. forschung gegen die deutsche sch-einheit“. In Y. Akbaba, & A.B. Heinemann (Eds.), Erziehungswissenschaften dekolonisieren. Theoretische Debatten und praxisorientierte Impulse (pp. 249-272). Beltz.
Battaglia, S., & Mecheril, P. (2020). Die politische Dimension kultureller Bildung in der Migrationsgesellschaft. In: M. Gloe, & T. Oeftering (Eds.), Politische Bildung meets Kulturelle Bildung (pp. 33–45). Nomos.
Bücken, S., Frieters-Reermann, N., Gerards, M., Meiers, J., and Schütter, L. (2018). Flucht – Diversität – Kulturelle Bildung. Eine rassismuskritische und diversitätssensible Diskursanalyse kultureller Bildungsangebote im Kontext Flucht. Zeitschrift für internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik, 41(4), 30-34.
Desai, D. (2019). Cultural Diversity in Art Education. In R. Hickman (Eds.). International Encyclopaedia of Art and Design Education, Volume II: Curiculum. (pp. 1023–1044). Wiley-Blackwell.
Ferro, L., Wagner, E., Veloso, L., IJdens, T., & Lopes, J. T. (2019). Arts and Cultural Education in a World of Diversity: ENO Yearbook 1. Springer
Kallio-Tavin, M. (2019). Arts and Design Curriculum in the Nordic Countries. In K. Freedman (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Art and Design Education (Vol. II, pp. 589–607). Wiley Blackwell.
Keuchel, S. (2013). mapping//kulturelle-bildung. Edited by Stiftung Mercator. Retrieved from: https://www.stiftung-mercator.de/content/uploads/2020/12/Keuchel_mapping_kulturelle-bildung.pdf [07.03.2023]
May, S., Sleeter, C.E. (2010). Critical Multiculturalism. Theory and Praxis. Routledge
Morrell, E. (2017). Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Popular Culture: Literacy Development Among Urban Youth. (pp. 413-417). In A. Darder, R. D. Torres and M. P. Baltodano (Eds.), The Critical Pedagogy Reader. Routledge.
Mörsch, C. (2021). Decolonizing Arts Education. Skizze zu einer diskriminierungskritischen Aus- und Weiterbildung an der Schnittstelle von Bildung und Künsten. Zeitschrift Kunst Medien Bildung | zkmb. URL: https://zkmb.de/decolonizing-arts-education-skizze-zu-einer-diskriminierungskritischen-aus-undweiterbildung-an-der-schnittstelle-von-bildung-und-kuensten [07.03.2023]
Newman, M.; Gough, D.; (2019). Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application. In O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond, & K. Buntins (Eds.), Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application (pp. 3-22). Springer.
Son, Y. (2020). Critical literacy practices with bilingual immigrant children: multicultural book club in an out-ofschool context. International Journal of Early Years Education, 30 (2), 307–21.
|
