Conference Agenda

Topic and objective

Young people are urged to set high standards for their education and careers throughout Europe. However, these goals frequently materialize in institutional settings characterized by structural constraints and unequal resource access (Cieslik & Simpson, 2013; Walther, 2006). The primary objective of this research is to evaluate how institutional constraints in Kosovo influence, and often distort, youth aspirations and their psychological agency. The research explores the alignment and mismatch between young people's educational and career goals and the institutional realities of the labor market and education systems. By examining young people’s lived experiences, perceptions, and narratives across diverse educational and employment pathways, the research seeks to uncover the meanings and perceived gaps between aspirations and institutional contexts. The educational and professional aspirations of young people, the institutional realities they encounter, and the cognitive-motivational processes influencing their career development (SCCT) are the three primary analytical pillars of this study. This analytical method enables us to comprehend not only what young people desire and idealize for their future (aspirations), but also the opportunities and limitations that the labor market, educational system, institutions, policies, and socioeconomic conditions present (institutional realities).

Research questions

The study is guided by one central question and two supporting sub-questions:

RQ1:
How do young people’s educational and professional aspirations align or mismatch with institutional realities in education and labor market systems?

RQ2:

How do young people articulate their educational and professional aspirations and imagined future pathways?

RQ3:
How do institutional conditions and constraints shape young people’s opportunities to realize these aspirations, leading to experiences of alignment or mismatch?

Theoretical Framework:

The study takes a multifaceted approach by synthesizing Bourdieu's Theory of Capital (Bourdieu, 1986, as cited in Reay, 2019), the Capability Approach (Sen, 1999; Nussbaum, 2011), and Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) (Lent et al., 1994).

Bourdieu’s Theory of Social and Cultural Capital - According to Thatcher et al. (2015), Bourdieu's Theory of Capital (1986) asserts that aspirations are influenced by social, cultural, and economic capital. This study looks at how inherited resources, such as parental education, affect career goals, overcoming institutional obstacles, and social mobility through the lens of "habitus" (Semo & Karmel, 2011). Thus, systemic mismatches are seen as the result of uneven capital distribution and a lack of institutional support.

The Capability Approach (Sen, 1999; Nussbaum, 2011) assesses individuals' "real opportunities" to fulfill ambitions, emphasizing their genuine flexibility to attain particular "functionings" rather than mere access to resources (Walker & Fongwa, 2017). This study uses the framework to identify how institutional barriers—such as program scarcity, lack of support, or financial obstacles—and structural inequities (gender, location, disability) prevent youth from converting potential into true opportunity.

Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) - The study uses SCCT to close the gap between realized capabilities and structural capital (Lent et al., 1994). This theory focuses on outcome expectations (beliefs about the results of their efforts) and self-efficacy (youths' confidence in their capacity to succeed). It clarifies why some young people "downsize" their goals in spite of their potential. Systemic mismatches in Kosovo reduce self-efficacy through negative feedback loops.

By synthesizing Bourdieu’s Theory of Capital with Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) and the Capability Approach, the research innovatively bridges sociological and psychological perspectives creating a multi-dimensional framework to analyze how institutional mismatches in Kosovo fundamentally reshape youth agency, self-efficacy, and the actual freedom to realize aspirations.

International dimension: By incorporating these local findings into the overarching EDU-LAB framework, the research enhances European-level discussions on constructing more resilient transition systems that correspond with the actual aspirations and varied life conditions of today's youth.

The debate sparked by Amy Chua’s Tiger Mother narrative extends beyond parenting controversy to a central question in developmental and cross-cultural psychology: are the effects of parenting on children’s academic outcomes universal or culturally contingent? From a universalist perspective, core parenting dimensions—positive (e.g., authoritative, warm, responsive) and negative (e.g., authoritarian, harsh, neglectful)—exert broadly consistent effects on achievement through fundamental socialization and cognitive mechanisms. Conversely, a cultural-relativist view treats parenting as a socially constructed practice, with behaviors interpreted and evaluated differently depending on cultural norms and institutional contexts. What is supportive in one society may be intrusive or ineffective in another.

Despite decades of research and meta-analyses confirming a general association between parenting and academic performance, critical gaps remain. Existing syntheses often estimate average effects without systematically examining how national cultural values moderate these relationships. Moreover, few studies assess whether cultural moderation differs for positive versus negative parenting, or whether culture retains influence after accounting for socioeconomic development and demographic factors. This meta-analysis addresses these gaps, investigating the asymmetric moderating roles of cultural dimensions on parenting–achievement links while controlling for structural variables, moving beyond a polarized universalist–relativist framework toward an integrative, ecologically grounded understanding of parenting’s role in academic success.

Literature Review

Extant research consistently links parenting styles to academic outcomes (e.g., Brown & Iyengar, 2008; Masud et al., 2015; Pinquart, 2016). Positive parenting—warm, responsive, autonomy-supportive, and authoritative—promotes achievement by fostering intrinsic motivation, self-regulation, and adaptive learning strategies. Negative parenting—harsh, psychologically controlling, or authoritarian—undermines performance by increasing stress and frustrating basic psychological needs (Pinquart, 2016; Spera, 2005; Tan et al., 2025).

Cross-cultural evidence complicates this picture. The strength and even direction of effects vary across contexts: authoritative parenting is more strongly linked to achievement in individualistic Western societies(Park & Holloway, 2013), whereas in some collectivist Asian contexts, certain authoritarian practices may align with normative expectations of obedience and discipline. These patterns suggest parenting efficacy is filtered through cultural meanings (Leung et al., 1998).

Hofstede’s (2011) multidimensional framework provides a lens for theorizing this moderation. Dimensions such as Individualism–Collectivism, Power Distance, Long-Term Orientation, and Indulgence–Restraint shape how children perceive parental authority, autonomy support, and warmth. Prior meta-analyses hint at cultural moderation but are limited by single-dimension focus or failure to separate cultural effects from correlated socioeconomic factors.

Parenting also interacts with structural conditions. Macro-level indicators (e.g., GDP per capita, Human Development Index) and demographics (e.g., parental role, child’s developmental stage) influence how family practices affect outcomes. Socioeconomic development may buffer or substitute for parental input, while developmental stage determines sensitivity to parenting (Tucker-Drob et al., 2014). Because cultural values often correlate with economic development, multivariate approaches are necessary to isolate culture’s unique moderating role—a complexity rarely addressed in previous reviews (Zhao et akl., 2024).

Previous research and Research Question

Prior meta-analyses have focused on average parenting–achievement effects, often neglecting cultural contingencies, differential moderation of positive versus negative parenting, and the role of socioeconomic and demographic factors. These gaps underscore the need for a comprehensive meta-analysis examining how culture and structural conditions jointly shape parenting’s impact, motivating the present study’s four research questions:

RQ₁: What is the overall global relationship between positive and negative parenting styles and academic achievement?

RQ₂: To what extent do cultural values moderate the relationship between parenting styles and academic achievement? How do cultural values moderating effect differ for positive versus negative parenting styles?

RQ₃: Beyond culture, how do socioeconomic indicators and demographic variables independently moderate the strength of the relationship between parenting styles and academic achievement?

RQ₄: When considering cultural dimensions and structural factors simultaneously, to what extent is the role of culture independent of economic development levels?

Economic education is a lifelong process through which citizens develop competences enabling them to make informed decisions, critically understand economic phenomena, and act responsibly within their socio-economic contexts (Fornero & Lo Prete, 2023; Lusardi & Mitchell, 2023). In a complex global context, characterised by rapid economic and technological change and the transfer of financial responsibility to individuals (Amagir et al., 2018; Kaiser & Lusardi, 2024), economic education has become a central focus of international education policies (European Commission/OECD, 2023; OECD, 2020). In Italy, this thematic area was formally introduced as part of the “Citizenship Education” curriculum in 2024: from primary school onwards, children are expected to develop economic competences aimed at individual and social well-being, and at the exercise of active and responsible citizenship (Gazzetta Ufficiale, 2024).

However, the implementation of these policies is not always underpinned by a deep understanding of the social, political, economic, and cultural ecosystems in which they are embedded. Children’s economic knowledge often remains marginal in educational debates, still relying on outdated empirical evidence (Berti, 2004). Curricular decisions are frequently made without sufficient consideration of children’s interpretative models of economic phenomena and the everyday practices that stem from them. At the same time, the role of the family, as the primary agency of economic socialisation, is often underestimated, despite its influence in mediating meanings and practices that interact with school-based education (Kardash et al., 2023; Zhao & Zhang, 2020).

Moreover, teachers often lack the competences required to address economic education in a reflective and structured manner (Compen et al., 2019; Jayaraman et al., 2022). National and international studies report generally low levels of economic and financial literacy across age groups and contexts (Kaiser & Lusardi, 2024). In Italy, opportunities for initial and in-service teacher education in this field remain limited, increasing the risk that economic education is introduced in a largely formal way, without solid theoretical and methodological foundations. Many teachers lack both disciplinary knowledge in economics and the pedagogical competences needed to design, implement, and assess meaningful learning pathways.

Within this framework, a central question emerges, directly addressing the relationship between knowledge and educational action: how can effective educational interventions in the economic domain be promoted if children’s prior knowledge and representations are not understood, if appropriate teaching methods are not critically examined, and if assessment tools sensitive to knowledge-construction processes are lacking?

In response to these challenges, the present study investigates primary school children’s naïve economic theories and analyses how family economic socialisation processes contribute to their construction. The study aims to examine how children’s economic knowledge develops in a situated and relational manner, while also providing empirically grounded insights to inform educational policy and support teachers in introducing economic education in epistemologically sound, pedagogically coherent, and developmentally appropriate ways.

The study is guided by the following research questions:

(RQ1) What naïve economic theories do children aged 6, 8, and 10 hold regarding money and currencies, work and income, and prices and payments?

(RQ2) Are there differences in the development of these theories between rural and urban contexts? If so, what are they?

(RQ3) How do family economic socialisation processes intertwine with children’s models of economic knowledge?

This study conceptualises economic education as a complex process of knowledge construction involving subjects, contexts, and practices (Fornero & Lo Prete, 2023). Children are viewed as knowing subjects, whose naïve economic theories represent situated and contingent forms of bottom-up knowledge production – often invisible within accountability systems, yet crucial for understanding how economic knowledge is interpreted and enacted in educational and social contexts.