Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:29:37 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
99 ERC SES 05 C: Social Justice Education in Diverse Contexts
Paper Session
| ||
    | ||
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper Teachers as Practitioners of Social Justice in Education: The Critical Incident Technique Fırat Üniversitesi, Turkey (Türkiye) Presenting Author:Education systems aim to provide equal educational opportunities to individuals with different cultural backgrounds and social statuses in line with the principle of equal opportunity. However, when this approach fails to consider individuals' different needs, starting conditions, and cultural capital, it can lead to the reproduction of existing social inequalities under the guise of equality. In this context, social justice in education requires not only providing the same opportunities to everyone but also recognizing differences and implementing pedagogical arrangements sensitive to these differences. Indeed, it is known that students' academic achievement is influenced by their families' socioeconomic status (Coleman et al., 1966) and their cultural and social capital (Bourdieu and Passeron, 2021; Bourdieu and Passeron, 2022). Therefore, social justice practices gain meaning beyond educational policies, in teaching processes and classroom interactions where inequalities are concretely reflected. For this reason, learning environments emerge as areas where social justice is not theoretically discussed but actually tested. The immediate pedagogical decisions teachers make while interacting with students, content, and institutional structures reveal how social justice gains meaning in education. Even if the education system and teaching programs are structured in line with the understanding of social justice, the impact of these programs in the classroom is largely determined by the perceptions of social justice held by teachers in their role as implementers. Preventing the reproduction of structural inequalities in education requires teachers to go beyond being mere technical actors implementing the program and to adopt a social justice-oriented pedagogical stance (Cochran-Smith et al., 2016). In this context, how teachers understand social justice-based pedagogy and how they reflect it in their classroom practices plays a critical role in ensuring equality and justice in education. Accordingly, teachers are expected to go beyond deficiency-based approaches to disadvantaged groups and adopt pedagogical approaches that center students' experiences, such as discomfort pedagogy and empathy pedagogy, and reflect these approaches in their classroom practices (Zembylas & Papamichael, 2017). These pedagogical orientations position teachers not merely as transmitters of knowledge, but as educators who confront structural inequalities in education and take on transformative responsibilities. In line with this understanding, Giroux (1988) defines teachers as transformative intellectuals who play a critical role in the process of social transformation. Therefore, assessing the impact of social justice in education requires examining how teachers interpret and implement these principles in classroom interactions. Based on the assumption that social justice in education is concretized through the immediate decisions teachers make when encountering inequalities and tense interactions in the classroom, this study focuses on meaningful classroom events experienced by teachers in relation to social justice. The study aims to examine how social justice is established in classroom interactions and the responsibilities teachers assume in these moments through their responses to such events. In this context, social justice is addressed through teachers' decisions to recognize inequalities in classroom interactions, intervene in them, and support students' equitable participation in learning processes. While studies describing teachers' perceptions of social justice and general practices exist in the literature (Öngel & Tabancalı, 2025; Bursa & Ersoy, 2016), there are also studies that examine implemented social justice pedagogies in the classroom context (Philpot et al., 2020) and present teacher profiles based on teachers' responses by addressing the causes of challenges related to cultural diversity (Güven et al., 2023). This study goes beyond teachers' general perceptions of social justice and focuses on the momentary pedagogical decisions in which social justice is concretized in classroom interactions, thus offering a unique contribution to the European literature. Furthermore, the use of the critical incident technique serves as a starting point for research that can be deepened in subsequent stages through observation-based studies. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This research is designed as qualitative. As it focuses on how teachers perceive the concept of "social justice," it has an interpretive and phenomenological epistemological understanding. Furthermore, as it also addresses how teachers' perceptions of "social justice" within educational practices are reflected in classroom applications, the critical incident technique was used in data collection and analysis. Although the critical incident technique, developed with a behavioral psychology background, was first used during World War II to analyze the performance of fighter pilots (Flanagan, 1954), it has been flexibly adapted as a qualitative technique to various research areas such as educational sciences, human resources, and health services (Butterfield et al., 2005). The participants in the study are classroom teachers working in villages in a province in eastern Turkey. Homogeneous situation sampling, a purposeful sampling method, was preferred in determining the participants. This is because interpreting the diversity in perceptions of the same concept (social justice) and the differences in its application in classroom practices seems logically more feasible under conditions that are as homogeneous as possible. The research data is collected through face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured interview form developed by the researchers. The interview form was developed with input from experts regarding its suitability for the critical incident technique, its consistency with the research objectives, and its potential to provide high-quality qualitative data. The interview questions require teachers to describe in detail a situation that required them to make an immediate pedagogical decision related to social justice in the classroom; what they did or chose not to do in that situation; the pedagogical, individual, and institutional factors that shaped that decision; the implications of that decision on classroom interactions; and their assessment of whether they would make a different decision in the same situation in retrospect. Content analysis (Patton, 2018) will be conducted on the collected data to inductively reveal the categories, themes, and patterns within the data. Other elements found in the literature for the critical incident technique will also be considered (Flanagan, 1954; Gremler, 2004; Stauss 1993). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The initial impressions drawn from the data collected so far suggest that teachers have a more superficial understanding of the concept of social justice than its theoretical definition in the literature, and that this superficial understanding does not enable teachers to perform effectively in ensuring social justice in classroom practices. However, it is anticipated that teachers who have had negative experiences with social justice in their personal lives or who have a deeper understanding of social justice will have different stories to tell. References Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J. C. (2021). Reproduction: The Principles of a Theory of the Education System. (A. Sümer, L. Ünsaldı, Ö. Akkaya Trans.). Ankara: Heretik Yayınları. Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J. C. (2022). Heirs: Students and Culture (A. Sümer and L. Ünsaldı Trans.). Ankara: Heretik Publications. Bursa, S., & Ersoy, A. F. (2016). Social studies teachers' perceptions and experiences of social justice. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 64, 319-340 Butterfield, L. D., Borgen, W. A., Amundson, N. E., & Maglio, A. S. T. (2005). Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954-2004 and beyond. Qualitative research, 5(4), 475-497. Cochran-Smith, M., Ell, F., Grudnoff, L., Haigh, M., & Hill, M. (2016). Initial teacher education: What does it take to put equity at the center? Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 67-78. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. US Office of Education. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED012275 Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327. Giroux, H. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals. Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby, Mass.: Bergin and Garvey. Gremler, D. D. (2004). The critical incident technique in service research. Journal of Service Research, 7(1), 65–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670504266138 Güven, M., Babayiğit, B., Sever, D., Çam Aktaş, B., Kip Kayabaş, B., & Aysın Şenel, E. (2023). What happens in 650 multicultural primary classrooms?: A critical incident technique. Teaching and Teacher Education, 130 (104154). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104154 Patton, M.Q. (2018). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (Translation Editors: M. Bütün and S. B. Demir). Ankara: Pegem Academy. Philpot, R., Gerdin, G., Smith, W., Linnér, S., Schenker, K., Westlie, K., … Larsson, L. (2021). Taking action for social justice in HPE classrooms through explicit critical pedagogies. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 26(6), 662–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2020.1867715 Stauss, B. (1993). Using the critical incident technique in measuring and managing service quality. In E. E. Scheuing, & W. F. Christopher (Eds.), The service quality handbook (pp. 408-427). American Management Association. Öngel, G., & Tabancalı, E. (2025). Social justice perceptions, and practices: Turkish teachers’ perspectives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 155 (104901) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104901 Zembylas, M., & Papamichael, E. (2017). Pedagogies of discomfort and empathy in multicultural teacher education. Intercultural education, 28(1), 1-19. 99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper Tensions and Reconfigurations of Cultural Democratization in France: Participatory Research at the Heart of a Children's Orchestra Université Toulouse Jean Jaurès, France Presenting Author:This proposed conference paper is based on research conducted as part of a PhD in Education and Training Sciences since October 2023. Our work examines French public cultural policies. Since the second half of the twentieth century, these policies have largely focused on disseminating what is considered French heritage—namely “artistic and high culture ” (Liot, 2018), historically associated primarily with social elites. In response to concerns about declining attendance at traditional cultural institutions (Arnaud et al., 2024), combined with the rise of new practices linked to digital technologies, cultural policies have intensified their efforts to “democratize” culture among younger generations. However, the direction of this effort is shifting. This paper questions the nature of that transformation : does cultural democratization still aim to provide access to culture for all, or is it increasingly oriented toward a normative transmission of French heritage? After several decades dedicated to cultural dissemination, connecting audiences with artistic works, and expanding cultural infrastructure across the country, cultural policies today seem to be moving toward a logic of protection against the fragmentation of national identity. Culture is mobilized as a vehicle for national integration, even assimilation (Park, 1964). Through the study of a program designed to democratize orchestral music practice among young people considered distanced from culture, this research enables us to investigate how the stakes of cultural democratization are being reconfigured. We examine the gaps between institutional discourses on cultural democratization and its objectives, and the realities experienced in the field by both beneficiaries and professionals. In parallel, we also seek to account for the different strategies, specific to each category of actors, used to appropriate (Bonasio & Veyrac, 2022) a national program. We will highlight strategies of social mobility (Amico, 2017) pursued by beneficiaries, as well as strategies of protection and dissemination, and even a will to assimilate audiences from immigrant backgrounds, on the part of professionals and institutional actors. In this sense, we will analyze the effects of this new form of cultural democratization on the identity construction of the individuals who benefit from the program under study. Above all, we will focus on the “place” (Bordes & Ruel, 2019) left to each category of actors in the process of appropriating a national prescription. This research is rooted in the interactionist approach (Goffman, 1991) associated with sociologists of the Chicago School. The theoretical framework allows us to place individuals at the center of each stage of the research, considering that the situations studied result from the ways people interact and attribute meaning to what they experience. In this respect, we will draw on the theory of “thick description” (Geertz, 1998), which involves describing facts in relation to the symbolic meanings of each element, constructed within a given social and cultural context. Our analysis also incorporates the notion of cultural rights (Lucas, 2022), which entails a shift in approach: the goal is no longer only to make culture accessible, but to recognize each person as a cultural subject, carrying values, practices, and legitimate forms of expression. Through a strongly inductive approach (Olivier de Sardan, 2013) and the participatory methodology adopted, we seek to consider different forms of knowledge on an equal footing. Scientific knowledge steps back without disappearing, making room for lay, practical, or experiential knowledge. In this way, “intersubjective knowledge” (Anadón, 2007, p. 218), referring to knowledge co-constructed between researchers and participants throughout the research process through dialogue, exchanges of viewpoints, situated interactions, and shared experience, can emerge. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This research is grounded in a socio-ethnographic approach (Bordes, 2015), which combines ethnographic data-collection tools with sociological interpretive frameworks. This method requires prolonged immersion, here within a national children’s orchestra program that seeks to democratize access to orchestral music practice in priority neighbourhoods. The research methodology is grounded in the concept of epistemic injustice (Fricker, 2007), which makes it possible to examine the power relations that shape the collective production of knowledge. The aim is to enable the sharing and recognition of multiple forms of knowledge, without hierarchical ordering, by building common spaces for understanding and action. Drawing on the crossing of knowledges approach (Brun, 2017), a stance of listening and co-learning, combined with an interactionist perspective (Goffman, 1991), takes shape through long-term immersion and the sharing of participants’ everyday lives. The researcher adopts a position of stepping back and becomes a learner of the field. This posture helps counterbalance subjectivity by integrating a multiplicity of perspectives into the analysis and by mobilizing “thick description” (Geertz, 1998) to account for what is implicit and invisible, as well as the meaning behind facts and interactions. Throughout the research process, the ongoing search for the “right distance” (Brun et al., 2014, p. 117) is an integral part of the researcher’s reflexive work. Practically speaking, we created collective spaces for the emergence and cross-fertilization of knowledge through the development of a consultation process (Beuret, 2006). Over one year, seven socio-cultural organizations were involved, along with around one hundred children and families and about twenty professionals. This process was organized in stages and remained adaptable to field realities. First, we conducted peer workshops, fifteen in total. This was followed by seven intermediate plenary feedback sessions, using varied formats adapted to the diversity of the audience. These exchanges were accompanied by the sharing of a written document translated into English, French, and Arabic, enabling the widest possible appropriation of the initial lines of inquiry. Participants’ reactions and feedback were incorporated into the dataset. The analysis is built on a corpus comprising outputs from the collective workshops, participant observations conducted over several years, and individual interviews, allowing us to articulate the viewpoints of the program’s different actors. We began with a thematic analysis (Bardin, 2013), through which conceptualizing categories emerged (Paillé & Mucchielli, 2021). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This research offers an updated understanding of the stakes of cultural democratization, taking into account the needs and expectations of the people directly concerned, the professionals’ capacity to work with, and recompose, the existing framework, and the institutional injunctions that shape the policy environment. First, we wish to emphasize the autonomy of each category of actors in the way they appropriate spaces of cultural democratization. While prescriptions are clearly formulated, they are systematically reconfigured in practice, generating tensions that in turn produce strategic effects. Families facing social and economic precarity, mostly from first or second-generation immigrant backgrounds, don’t adopt a passive stance. On the contrary, they consistently pursue social mobility, which is facilitated by participation in cultural democratization programs. They hope to offer new frames (Goffman, 1991) for the generations to come, fully aware that their own trajectories have often placed them in situations of difficulty. Nevertheless, a symbolic hierarchy of cultures remains at work. Classical music, and, through it, high culture, continues to be overvalued in comparison with young people’s cultural practices. This hierarchy is closely tied to the objective of preserving a French heritage and a homogeneous national identity. These issues primarily concern institutional actors and those who set the agenda for the democratization of culture. Yet they are also widely carried by professionals, who tend to reproduce the model they are familiar with and through which they themselves were recognized. These findings on cultural democratization and the reconfiguration of its objectives are supported by an interactional analysis that highlights a process of reciprocal socialization (Bordes & Ruel, 2019) between audiences and institutions. This reciprocal socialization constitutes an in-between space, within which cultural rights can be made tangible through the emergence of new cultural practices and renewed stakes, within a program whose governance remains relatively constrained and compartmentalized. References Anadón, M. (Dir.). (2007). La recherche participative : Multiples regards. Presses de l’Université du Québec. Amico, M. (2017). Pratiques collectives en orchestre et accès à la culture : Réinventer les modèles sociaux avec l’orchestre. https://demos.philharmoniedeparis.fr/Default/doc/SYRACUSE/13513 Bardin, L. (2013). L’analyse de contenu (2e éd.). Presses universitaires de France. Bonasio, R., & Veyrac, H. (Eds.). (2022). Appropriations de nouvelles prescriptions : Activités en éducation scolaire. Octarès. Bordes, V. (2015). L’approche socio-ethnographique ou comment trouver des résultats que nous ne cherchons pas. Spécificités, 7(1), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.3917/spec.007.0027 Bordes, V., & Ruel, S. (2019). Faut-il laisser une place aux jeunesses ? Dans S. Labbé & F. Hille (Dirs.), Professionnalisations : repères et ouvertures. L’Harmattan. https://hal.science/hal-03555241 Brun, P. (2017). Le croisement des savoirs dans les recherches participatives : Questions épistémologiques. Vie sociale, 20(4), 45–52. https://doi.org/10.3917/vsoc.174.0045 Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press. Geertz, C. (1998). La description épaisse : Vers une théorie interprétative de la culture (A. Mary, Trad.). Enquête, 6, 73–105. Goffman, E. (1991). Les cadres de l’expérience (I. Joseph, Trad.). Les Éditions de Minuit. (Ouvrage original publié en 1974) Grignon, C., & Passeron, J.-C. (1989). Le savant et le populaire : Misérabilisme et populisme en sociologie et en littérature. Gallimard/Seuil. Liot, F. (2018). Droits culturels : Vers une nouvelle définition des politiques publiques de la culture ? Cahiers de la LCD, HS(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.3917/clcd.hs01.0052 Lucas, J. (2022). Relativisme ou universalité des droits culturels ? Dans L. Anselme (Ed.), Droits culturels : Les comprendre, les mettre en œuvre (pp. 46–56). Éditions de l’Attribut. Olivier de Sardan, J.-P. (2013). La rigueur du qualitatif : Les contraintes empiriques de l’interprétation socio-anthropologique. Academia–Bruylant. Paillé, P., & Mucchielli, A. (2021). L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales (5e éd.). Armand Colin. Park, R. E. (1964). Racial assimilation in secondary groups. Dans Race and culture (pp. 204–220). Free Press of Glencoe. (Travail original publié en 1950) 99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper The Pedagogical Challenges for Students without Citizenship in Italy: a Focus on Social Justice Education. Università degli Studi di Padova, Italy Presenting Author:This paper concerns the issue of citizenship recognition for young students with a migrant background in Italy, a matter that represents a “major educational problem” (Agostinetto, 2022). This contribution draws on the theoretical framework of Social Justice Education (hereinafter: SJE), which aims to develop critical awareness in order to foster reflection on power dynamics, systemic inequalities and processes of exclusion in educational contexts. From this perspective, education represents both a tool for emancipation and a powerful mechanism for reproducing inequalities (Freire, 1970; bell hooks, 2009; McLaren, 2015; Giroux, 2020). This study, therefore, is based on a critical perspective to interculturalism aimed at developing a theoretical positionality that considers power relations and a series of privileges that influence the ''relationship between autochthones and allochthones'' (Burgio, 2022). Students with a migrant background are often required to justify their presence, even if they were born and/or raised in the destination country of their families' migration journey (Akkari and Radhoune, 2022; Hakuzwimana, 2024). Current legislation on Italian citizenship, governed by Law No. 91 of February 5, 1992, emphasizes the exclusive legal principle of ius sanguinis. Citizenship is therefore obtained by right of blood if at least one parent is Italian, regardless of place of birth. Citizenship status is also acquired through descent (iure sanguinis), with a limit of two generations. An idea of citizenship linked purely to biological criteria is a harmful and anachronistic ideological choice (Agostinetto, 2022) and a ‘‘reform is needed for a post-colonial turning point’’ (Nanni and Fucecchi, 2024). Those who do not hold Italian citizenship may apply for it under several different circumstances: by naturalization, by birth on Italian territory (upon reaching the age of majority), for special merits and through marriage to a person with Italian citizenship. It is not necessary to dwell on these specificities in depth here, as the unequal and asymmetrical relationship between the native population and communities with a migrant background is already clear (Fiorucci, 2020). This paper raises a clear pedagogical question: is it possible to educate people on citizenship without recognizing citizenship itself? The question arises from a pedagogical paradox fuelled by a clear discrepancy between educational discourse and legal reality. Institutions educate people in democratic values, but at the same time, exclude diasporic communities from the full exercise of constitutional freedoms and rights. Current legislation is considered anachronistic in that it does not represent “a pluralistic society differentiated by cultures, ethnicities, languages and religions” (Nanni and Fucecchi, 2024). The privileged space for intercultural dialogue is the school, but “alone it is not enough” (Fiorucci, 2020). Furthermore, intercultural dialogue requires basic conditions that do not fully exist in our country today (Fiorucci, 2020). Intercultural pedagogy – as intentional educational action in the face of multicultural dynamics (Akkari and Radhouane, 2022; Agostinetto, 2022) – must avoid the risk of falling into rhetoric by recognizing its inherently political nature (Tarozzi, 2015; Fiorucci, 2020; Agostinetto, 2022). Interculturalism is an essentially political task, and the action that stems from it should be aimed at revealing the processes of “subordinate integration” that “undermine the very notion of dialogue” (Fiorucci, 2020). The vast heterogeneity of migratory experiences leads me to avoid potentially approximate categorizations through the use of terms such as “second generations” or “new Italians”. For conceptual simplicity – and to clarify the basic positioning – the term “Italians without citizenship” will be employed. The latter, who represent 914,000 pupils without Italian citizenship (MIM, 2024), grow up with the idea that their identity is not legitimate, an aspect that has been little explored and which constitutes a rather significant symbolic damage (Hakuzwimana, 2024). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used In order to identify the key aspects of the issue under investigation and analyze it in depth, a focus group (n=9) was organised with the participation of young people from migrant backgrounds. The group included not only young people without Italian citizenship and international students, but also people born in Italy who were only able to apply for citizenship after reaching the age of majority. Based on data relating to young people with a migrant background without citizenship attending Italian schools (MIM, 2024) and the rejection of the 5th referendum questionnaire of 8-9 June 2025 to simplify the requirements required to apply for citizenship, four sets of questions were proposed to guide this exercise in ethno-educational reflection: 1. Educational experiences related to the aforementioned pedagogical paradox; 2. How this status affects identity-building processes and the sense of belonging; 3. Practical and emotional repercussions; 4. Future prospects from a transformative perspective. This research line is part of a broader doctoral study focusing on a qualitative interpretive research on schooling and integration experiences of young people with a migrant background in Veneto, Italy. The topic addressed in this paper is also emerging in the semi-structured interviews currently being conducted (n=40), which focus not only on the issue of citizenship but also on other themes arising from the doctoral research mentioned above. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The results emerging from the focus group can be traced back to several recurring themes, such as: - The presence of an invisible hierarchical structure composed of a dominant group and subordinate migrant communities; - An unstable ‘relationship’ with Italy, which on the one hand promotes active citizenship but on the other excludes the most marginalized groups; - A sense of exclusion (both material and emotional), frustration, disillusionment and stigmatization; - Proposals for change through the transition from “concession to right” to citizenship; - Language used towards young people with a migrant background. The implications that arise are multidisciplinary and intersect with each other. From a pedagogical point of view, it is useful to promote educational practices of cultural recognition and enhancement in order to spread educational spaces of counter-narrative. Training in intercultural education and critical pedagogy for teachers and educators is also considered necessary. Educational action requires the adoption of a critical view of the surrounding reality, since “teaching is not transferring knowledge, but creating the possibilities to produce and construct it” (Freire, 1996). Greater awareness of the dynamics affecting groups with a migrant background can lead us to promote and/or implement approaches geared towards social justice. Examples include SJE and the concept of intersectionality in combating racism and discrimination (Akkari and Radhouane, 2022). Lastly, it is key to rethink school curricula (Fiorucci, 2020) and certain subjects (like civic education) to highlight systemic contradictions, such as the lack of recognition of citizenship. References Agostinetto L. (2022). L’intercultura in testa. Sguardo e rigore per l’agire educativo quotidiano. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Akkari, A., Radhouane, M., (2022). Intercultural approaches to education. From Theory to Practice. Berlin: Springer. bell hooks (2009). Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom. New York: Routledge. Birkvad, S. R. (2019). Immigrant meanings of citizenship: mobility, stability, and recognition. Citizenship Studies, 23(8), 798–814. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2019.1664402 Burgio G. (2022). Pedagogia postcoloniale. Prospettive radicali per l’intercultura. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. Fiorucci M. (2020). Educazione, formazione e pedagogia in prospettiva interculturale. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum. Freire P. (1996). Pedagogia dell’autonomia. Saperi necessari per la pratica educativa. Torino: Edizioni Gruppo Abele. Giroux, H. A. (2020). On Critical Pedagogy. Bloomsbury Publishing. Hakuzwimana E. (2024). Tra i bianchi di scuola. Torino: Einaudi. McLaren P. (2015). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (6th ed.). New York: Routledge. Ministero dell’Interno, Direzione Centrale per i Servizi Elettorali, Eligendo (2025). Archivio Referendum 08/06/2025. https://elezionistorico.interno.gov.it/ Ministero dell'istruzione e del merito, Direzione Generale per l’innovazione digitale, la semplificazione e la statistica, Ufficio di statistica (2024). Gli alunni con cittadinanza non italiana 2022-2023. https://www.integrazionemigranti.gov.it/AnteprimaPDF.aspx?id=6525 Nanni, A., Fucecchi, A., (2024). Postcolonialismo e intersezionalità: nuovi percorsi per l’intercultura. La cittadinanza come banco di prova. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Nuove norme sulla cittadinanza. Legge 5 febbraio 1992, n. 91. https://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:legge:1992-02-05;91 Osler, A. (2020). Education, migration and citizenship in Europe: untangling policy initiatives for human rights and racial justice. Intercultural Education, 31(5), 562–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2020.1794231 Save the Children (2025). Chiamami col mio nome. Un’indagine quali-quantitativa sugli alunni con background migratorio. A cura di Valeria Fabretti e Christian Morabito. https://s3-www.savethechildren.it/public/allegati/chiamami-col-mio-nome.pdf Tarozzi, M. (2015). Dall’Intercultura alla giustizia sociale. Per un progetto pedagogico e politico di cittadinanza globale. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Vieluf, S., & Sauerwein, M. N. (2018). Does a lack of teachers’ recognition of students with migration background contribute to achievement gaps? European Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 3-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118810939 | ||