Conference Agenda

School exclusions disproportionately affect students from nondominant sociocultural groups in various national contexts (Bennett et al., 2022; Piltz et al., 2025; Stahl, 2007). Students who experience school exclusion have lower academic and social-emotional outcomes due to the exclusions themselves (Okonofua et al., 2016). Scientific examinations of situations, practices, and contexts that support students’ belonging in classrooms rather than their exclusion may offer antidotes.

Recent scholarship on school belonging has examined how schools can be places of inclusion rather than exclusion, where students from diverse backgrounds feel engaged (Matthews et al., 2021). School belonging literature has diverse conceptual and empirical strands. This study defines and examines belonging as a classroom-based teaching practice. It draws upon the theory-methods package of theory of practice architectures to examine teachers’ practices of belonging while contextualizing those practices within specific sociohistorical situations. It addresses the following research questions:

1. How do teachers enact practices of exclusion and belonging?
2. How do students experience these practices?
3. How are practices of exclusion and belonging—and teachers’ and students’ experiences related to these practices—contextually afforded and constrained by particular situations?

Belonging

Belonging literature has roots in psychology, human development, and motivation, political studies, and education. Belonging literature in education can be divided into studies focusing on school belonging and school climate (usually using psychometric methods, e.g., Goodenow, 1993) and those focusing on ecological structures for belonging (usually using qualitative sociological approaches, e.g., Sumsion & Wong, 2011). This study draws upon radical belonging(Louie et al., 2022), one of the concepts developed within this latter strand of literature. Radical belonging takes a critical social justice approach to belonging and defines it as being composed of academic, social, and democratic belonging. Academic belonging, further developed by other scholars as instructional belonging, focuses on teacher practices that promote belonging among students, particularly those who are marginalized or underserved in schooling.

Three Domains of Teaching

This study focuses on teacher practices in the three domains of teaching: relationships, classroom management, and curriculum and instruction, using the following definitions of each domain (Kennedy-Lewis, 2012):

1. Relationships: Sustained patterns of interaction among individuals in the class;
2. Classroom management: Rules, routines, and teacher behaviors that structure teaching and learning;
3. Curriculum and instruction: The content taught and activities used to support students’ learning.

The three domains are interdependent, meaning that each shapes the implementation and outcomes of the others. In this study, each domain is taken up as a separate lens for considering teacher practices of belonging.

Situational Analysis and Theory of Practice Architectures

This study conceptualizes teaching as a situated practice, meaning that the way teachers implement the three domains of teaching depends not only on their knowledge and skills but also on the affordances and constraints of the situations in which they teach. Situational analysis is a theory-methods package that involves the analytical mapping of complex social arenas and worlds to reveal how heterogeneous elements interact to shape phenomena (e.g., practices of belonging; Clarke et al., 2018). Theory of practice architectures is an analytical approach of the cultural-discursive, material-economic, and social-political arrangements that shape specific practices through sayings, doings, and relatings (Kemmis et al., 2014). We use theory of practice architectures to home in on how teachers enact practices of exclusion and belonging within specific situations mapped using situational analysis.

Europe's increasing linguistic and cultural diversity presents both opportunities and challenges for educational systems. Newly arrived migrant and refugee youth face significant barriers to educational integration, with language proficiency identified as the primary risk factor for academic exclusion, early school leaving, and social isolation. While formal education provides essential foundation, research demonstrates that complementary peer-based, intercultural approaches are crucial for holistic language development and social integration. However, systematic models connecting higher education institutions with secondary schools to support migrant youth remain underdeveloped across European contexts.

The Language Buddy project addresses this gap through a structured university-school partnership model. This paper presents a mixed-methods evaluation of an innovative buddy system pairing 50 migrant/refugee adolescents (aged 12-17) with 50 university students from pedagogy, education, and language departments who serve as language mentors. Coordinated by higher education institutions, schools, NGOs, and migrant-led organizations, the program provides non-formal and informal language learning opportunities complementing formal education while developing future educators' intercultural competencies.

Research Questions:

This study investigates three interconnected questions: (1) How does a structured university-school buddy system enhance Romanian language competencies and sense of school belonging among migrant adolescents? (2) What intercultural and pedagogical competencies do university student-mentors develop through mentoring practice? (3) What partnership mechanisms and contextual factors enable effective cross-sectoral collaboration supporting migrant youth integration?

Theoretical Framework:

The study draws on a multi-layered theoretical framework integrating four perspectives. First, sociocultural learning theory (Vygotsky, 1978; Wenger, 1998) positions language acquisition as socially mediated, with peer mentors providing scaffolding within the zone of proximal development and creating communities of practice beyond classroom walls. Second, resilience frameworks (Ungar, 2019; Masten, 2018) guide analysis of how mentoring relationships function as protective factors counterbalancing risk factors of linguistic barriers, educational disruption, and discrimination. Third, funds of knowledge approaches (Moll et al., 1992) ensure migrant students' linguistic and cultural resources are valued rather than framed as deficits. Fourth, intercultural competence development theories (Byram, 2021; Deardorff, 2020) illuminate reciprocal learning processes through which mentees gain language skills while mentors develop critical intercultural pedagogy.

The AMIF project named “Support the language learning of migrant children and young people through language buddies (Language Buddy)” is implemented by a consortium of 16 organizations (8 NGOs and 7 universities) from eight European Union states. This framework positions the project within broader European integration policy contexts (EU Action Plan on Integration and Inclusion 2021-2027) while examining implementation within Romania's specific educational system, migration patterns, and sociolinguistic landscape. The comparative dimension considers transferability across diverse European contexts with varying educational structures, migration histories, and linguistic environments, contributing to knowledge on scalable integration approaches addressing educational equity across the European Higher Education Area.

The theoretical synthesis conceptualizes the intervention as addressing educational risk through relationally-grounded, culturally-responsive language learning that simultaneously builds linguistic capital, social belonging, and intercultural understanding. By engaging multiple ecological levels - individual skill development, relational mentor-mentee bonds, institutional partnerships, and community engagement - the model creates sustainable support ecosystems rather than isolated interventions. This approach challenges deficit narratives about migrant students, positioning them as active agents with valuable linguistic and cultural resources while acknowledging structural barriers requiring systemic responses.

The framework further recognizes Romania's position within broader European migration dynamics, with recent arrivals from Ukraine, and other contexts bringing diverse linguistic backgrounds and educational experiences. Understanding how the buddy model functions within this specific context while maintaining transferability to other EU settings represents a key theoretical and practical contribution, advancing knowledge on context-sensitive yet scalable approaches to supporting migrant youth across Europe's diverse educational landscapes.

Despite numerous initiatives for Roma inclusion, the inequalities they experience persist, with Roma children remaining among the most vulnerable populations in Europe. Successful models have often remained isolated, while persistent stereotypes, poverty, discrimination, and structural disadvantages continue to shape Roma families’ lives across Europe (Byrne, 2024). These inequalities are reflected in school systems, where Roma children face segregation, exclusion, and limited access to quality education (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), 2025). FRA (2025) warns against accepting minimal improvements and stresses the urgency of addressing the structural conditions that sustain long-term social and educational disadvantage.

Schools can have a significant role in the inclusion of the Roma community as they hold the potential to contribute to social transformation (Freire, 2017). In this sense, theories of education for social justice position teachers not only as educators but as competent agents responsible for addressing barriers to learning and inclusion (Cochran-Smith et al., 2010; Pantić & Florian, 2015). Meaningful learning opportunities and high academic expectations are central to social justice (Cochran-Smith et al., 2010). Within this view, students’ cultural identities, languages, and lived experiences are recognised as resources for learning, and collaboration with families and communities is seen as integral to teaching practice (Cochran-Smith, 1999). At the same time, these perspectives emphasise that educational practices are shaped by broader structural and social conditions, and that teachers alone cannot resolve social inequalities (Apple, 2013).

Building on these perspectives, this qualitative multiple case study draws on four cases — two in the Czech Republic and two in Serbia — contexts marked by long histories of discrimination and exclusion of Roma communities (Amnesty International, 2015; Perišić & Vidojević, 2015). The study conceptualises teachers’ responsibility as enacted through everyday practices that shape students’ opportunities for engagement, learning and well-being. To examine these processes empirically, it adopts Self-Determination Theory (SDT) as its primary analytical framework (Ryan & Deci, 2017).

SDT is grounded in the assumption that individuals are inherently oriented toward psychological growth, learning, and integration, but that these tendencies depend on supportive social conditions. There are three basic psychological needs — competence, autonomy, and relatedness. In educational settings, when these needs are supported, students are more likely to feel motivated and engaged in learning. Competence refers to students’ sense of being able to meet learning challenges through appropriate structure, guidance, and feedback; relatedness concerns feelings of belonging and emotional security fostered through caring relationships with teachers and peers; and autonomy involves students’ experience of agency and meaningful participation in learning (Ryan & Deci, 2020). From an SDT perspective, reasons for students’ disengagement are not found within the students but as a response to unsupportive educational contexts. SDT thus takes a critical stance toward schooling, emphasising that schools can either support students’ development or, through neglect, exclusion, or controlling practices, actively undermine it. When neglecting students’ needs, schools may contribute to experiences of low competence, withdrawal, weakened agency, and alienation (Ryan & Deci, 2017). For marginalised students, teacher support of basic psychological needs is therefore central to access to learning opportunities and inclusion, while a lack of such support risks reinforcing existing inequalities.

Accordingly, this study aims to explore how teacher practices support Roma students’ basic psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Drawing on social justice perspectives, the study situates teacher practices within broader questions of inequality and exclusion. In doing so, it seeks to contribute to a more grounded understanding of how schools may challenge or reproduce educational inequalities experienced by Roma students.

While the separate effects of reading and mathematical skills, mental health difficulties, and ADHD symptoms on students’ educational attainment have been studied (Dupéré et al. 2018, Fried et al., 2016; Hakkarainen et al., 2015), there is very limited evidence using a person‑centered approach that considers different combinations of academic skills and related challenges in predicting long-term outcomes. Therefore, in the present study, we first aimed to identify academic skills–ADHD and depressive symptom profiles based on five indicators: reading fluency, reading comprehension, mathematical skills, and self‑evaluated ADHD and depressive symptoms. Second, we investigated whether profile membership predicts two later outcomes: graduation from upper secondary education and receipt of basic social assistance in young adulthood.

The following research questions were addressed:

(1) What kinds of profiles of academic skills (i.e., reading and mathematical skills) and ADHD and depressive symptom profiles can be identified in adolescence?

(2) How are identified profiles of academic skills and ADHD and depressive symptoms related to adolescents’ graduation from upper secondary studies and receiving basic social assistance in young adulthood?