Equal grades, unequal chances: How implicit expectations shape school transition recommendations

Equal grades, unequal chances: How implicit expectations shape school transition recommendations

by | NW 7 Social Justice and Intercultural Education, WERA

Imagine two children at the end of elementary school. They have the same grades, the same achievements, and the same skills. When it comes to school track recommendations for lower secondary education, the similarity ends. One child is recommended for the path towards higher education, the other towards basic education. The difference? The latter has a migration background. Scenarios like this are not invented – they are an everyday reality. 

Ethnic penalty – or disadvantage by default

The phenomenon of the ethnic penalty describes the disadvantages individuals experience because of their ethnic background, i.e., a background that differs from the majority population. Studies show that this effect is not only prominent in the labour market regarding chances to get job interviews and a higher salary, but also in education. It is well-documented across various national contexts. 

Research consistently proves that the educational gap between students with and without a migration background is, to a large extent, a consequence of socio-economic disadvantages rather than ethnic background per se. Findings from international, representative large scale studies like TIMSS, PIRLS and PISA show that, when controlled for socio-economic background, negative associations between migration background and achievement mostly disappear (Rolfe & Yang Hanse, 2022). This finding is robust and important since it points to structural inequalities that demand structural responses.

Yet this is not the complete picture. Studies also find that even after controlling for socio-economic status, language skills, and measured achievement, a residual gap in educational outcomes and track placement persists in Western European countries (Heath & Birnbaum, 2014). Experimental evidence goes even further. An experimental study with Hungarian teachers shows that when teachers are presented with identical student profiles, perceived ethnic background influences their recommendations independently of performance (Kisfalusi, Hermann & Keller, 2025). A systematic review by Batruch et al. (2023) also highlights that tracking recommendations may be influenced by ethnic background. It is worth noting that the empirical evidence here is more mixed and inconsistent than the findings regarding socio-economic status. 

Taken together, observational and experimental evidence suggests that ethnic background operates as an independent factor in educational sorting, even if its impact is smaller and less consistent than socio-economic effects. 

Why then do equal grades lead to unequal recommendations?

When teachers decide which school track to recommend, they draw on grades, test results, and additional classroom observations. But research consistently shows that they also draw on something else – an implicit sense of whether a child fits the academic path ahead, a feeling that is not measurable. This has nothing to do with active discrimination. Most teachers are genuinely committed to their students’ success. The problem lies in cognitive processes that operate below the level of conscious decision-making.

The Pygmalion effect and implicit bias as key factors

Teacher expectation effects (Pygmalion/Rosenthal effects) are one of the most robust findings in educational psychology. When teachers hold lower expectations of a student, e.g., based on family background, name, or perceived ethnicity, it shapes their interactions with that student. They give them less challenging tasks, show less encouragement and overall investment. In reponse, the student tends to perform in line with what is expected. This dynamic, first described by Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) and replicated extensively since then, is not unique to any one country or school system.

Implicit bias adds a second layer. Even educators who explicitly reject ethnic stereotypes carry implicit associations that can influence their judgement. In the context of school track recommendations, which involve a degree of subjective assessment, these associations come into play. This bias can lead to an objectively inadequate track recommendation.

The result is a compounding effect: lower expectations reduce academic investment, implicit bias shapes the recommendation itself, and the child ends up on a lower track – not because of what they achieved or could achieve, but because of their teacher’s unconscious expections of what they could achieve. This does not make discrimination the primary driver of educational inequality. But it means that addressing socio-economic disadvantage alone is not sufficient because one part of the mechanism operates through an entirely different channel.

An international problem with varying intensity

This pattern holds across Europe, but its intensity varies. Countries with early, rigid tracking systems show larger residual gaps between students with and without a migration background than countries with more flexible systems. The earlier children are sorted into tracks, the less information teachers have available, and the more room remains for factors other than measured achievement to shape the decision.

Countries with later separation, such as Finland or Sweden, show smaller ethnic gaps in educational outcomes, even after controlling for socio-economic composition (Rolfe & Yang Hanse, 2022). Implicit bias nonetheless exists in these countries. But this finding suggests that structural design choices determine how much space cognitive biases have to develop.

What can be done to reduce the ethnic penalty?

Although these mechanisms are well-documented, their implicit nature makes them difficult to address through individual-level interventions alone. Awareness campaigns and diversity training have shown mixed results in changing actual recommendation behaviour. Structural approaches are more promising – standardised assessment criteria, anonymised recommendation processes, and mandatory second opinions reduce the space in which implicit bias can happen. Nevertheless, these approaches remain the exception rather than the rule across European school systems.

For educational researchers, this raises a slightly uncomfortable question: How much of what we measure as achievement gaps is a reflection of how schools sort children, rather than what those children actually know? And what would it take to build systems that are genuinely blind to the factors that should not matter? 

Key Messages

  • The educational gap between students with and without a migration background is largely explained by socioeconomic disadvantage – but this does not tell the whole story.
  • Experimental studies show that perceived ethnic background influences teacher track recommendations independently of student performance.
  • Two mechanisms are key: Pygmalion effects (lower expectations shape student outcomes) and implicit bias (ethnic background influences judgement at the moment of recommendation).
  • Early tracking systems give implicit bias more room to operate and countries with later tracking show smaller ethnic gaps.
  • Structural interventions show more promise than awareness training alone, but remain the exception across European school systems.
Marisa Urban

Marisa Urban

University of Hamburg, Germany

Marisa Urban, M.A., is a doctoral researcher at University of Hamburg, where she investigates environmental knowledge and education for sustainable development (ESD) using international large-scale assessment data. She also teaches a seminar on heterogeneity and inequality in schools for pre-service teachers and leads the third-party funded science communication project TIMSS Connect. Her research interests include educational inequality, multilingual education, and the measurement of competencies in international comparative contexts.

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0991-5458

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/marisa-urban-8ba084226 

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

Batruch, A., Geven,S., Kessenich, E., & van de Werfhorst, H.G. (2023). Are tracking recommendations biased? A review of teachers’ role in the creation of inequalities in tracking decisions. Teaching and Teacher Education (123).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103985

Heath, A. & Brinbaum, Y. (2014). The Comparative Study of Ethnic Inequalities in Educational Careers’, in A.Heath & Y. Brinbaum (eds), Unequal Attainments: Ethnic educational inequalities in ten Western countries, Proceedings of the British Academy. https://doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197265741.003.0001

Kisfalusi, D., Hermann, Z. & Keller,T. (2025). Discrimination in track recommendation but not in grading: experimental evidence among primary school teachers in Hungary. European Sociological Review, 41(3), 411–425.https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcae044 

Rolfe, V., & Yang Hansen, K. (2022). Family Socioeconomic and Migration Background Mitigating Educational-Relevant Inequalities. In: T. Nilsen, A. Stancel-Piątak & J.E. Gustafsson (eds), International Handbook of Comparative Large-Scale Studies in Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88178-8_50

Rosenthal, R. & Jacobson, L.(1968).  Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils’ Intellectual Development. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(196904)6:2%3C212::AID-PITS2310060223%3E3.0.CO;2-U

 

Disclosure: Claude.ai was used for grammar, spelling, and style check of some parts of the blog post. Most of the corrections and suggestions were accepted. 

Positioning universities as conduits for social justice – Charting the way forward

Positioning universities as conduits for social justice – Charting the way forward

by | NW 7 Social Justice and Intercultural Education

From Cape Town to Chemnitz, higher education is shaped by global hierarchies. Institutions in the Global South often feel pressure to emulate those in the Global North—adopting ranking systems, productivity targets, and competitive frameworks that can sideline local needs. Meanwhile, political polarisation and the rise of right-wing movements in many Northern countries feed into neocolonial dynamics, making the pursuit of global educational justice an uphill battle. Moreover, global warming has become an urgent issue for all contexts, as our world is interconnected and interdependent.

In the context of increased globalisation, neoliberalism, stark inequality, factionist behaviours, and the climate crisis, the position of the modern university is once again being questioned.

What is the role, purpose, and function of a public university in the 21st century?

Universities are both products of these forces and shapers of them. That dual role gives them a unique power—and responsibility—to conceptualise and enact alternatives.

Organisational learning for change

Globally, universities are recognized as hubs of knowledge production, innovation, and advancement, benefiting society. More dynamically, they also serve as an ideological mirror reflecting the political and economic realities of their nations, ratifying their positions as extensions of the prevailing political economy.

Universities occupy a unique position in society, serving both as guardians of knowledge and as powerful institutions that produce and perpetuate social inequalities. As sites of education, research, and public discourse, they have the potential to either challenge or reinforce inequalities. In the process of neoliberalisation of higher education, universities have become entrepreneurial organisations, incorporating diversity as a management strategy and presenting themselves as actors for social justice.

At the ECER 2025 conference, our symposium, “Positioning Universities as Conduits for Social Justice,” brought together researchers from Germany, South Africa, and the Netherlands to tackle this question head-on. We explored how higher education institutions (HEIs) could be reimagined—not just as knowledge factories—but as active agents of social justice.
We drew on discourse-analytical and postcolonial perspectives in the context of organisational education—the idea that institutions are not static but can learn, adapt, and transform. This lens pushed us to ask:

• What kind of society should universities help create?
• What kind of citizens should they nurture?

We start from two different pressure points to reflect on the responsibility of universities to chart the way forward for social justice.

Migration, polarisation, and Higher Education

Polarisation and migration are reshaping societies—and universities are right in the middle of it. Insights from a critical analysis of South Africa and the Netherlands reveal how political tensions and demographic shifts challenge the inclusivity and purpose of higher education in these regions. By juxtaposing headline news, NGO reports, official country statistics, and university mouthpieces, the presentation highlights the prevailing narratives and counternarratives of migration debates affecting higher education institutions. It is suggested that if political interference is not curtailed, it will result in erosion of institutional autonomy, instrumentalisation, research constraints, increased silencing and censorship, and the complete evisceration of higher education as a public good.

Climate change and justice in the context of Higher Education

In response to global warming, social movements such as Fridays for Future have emerged within the last five to 10 years (Revsbæk, 2014). In German higher education, we observe an increasing number of study programmes integrating sustainability as a transversal topic, especially but not exclusively in technical study programmes. As part of a BMFTR-funded project involving two higher education institutions in Germany, the study identifies contrasting strategies for addressing gender and sustainability through a comparative case study.

Rather than demonstrating a homogenous picture of how gender and sustainability are discursivied and subjectivised in the context of future and innovation labs, contradictory positions emerge in both cases. This study finds that future and innovation labs have the potential to widen participation for non-traditional students and therefore offer more opportunities for social justice. Simultaneously, they also face the risk of closures, as they may reproduce privileges through self-selection and reinforce institutional power asymmetries.

The specific challenges universities face lead to questions about their role, purpose, and function, and, linked to this, what their societal responsibility is, as further explored below, in the context of the project “Responsible Science?!”funded by the German Research Council.

What is the responsibility of a public university in the 21st century 

Contrasting two different universities in Germany, both reflect broader trends in higher education: social justice is co-opted into managerial strategies, diversity becomes a “resource” for institutional success, and responsibility is depoliticized and individualized. In the first university, the tension between its market-driven self-presentation and its hidden values exposes a fragmented identity, where social responsibility risks becoming a mere afterthought. In the second university, this approach shifts the focus away from institutional accountability, allowing structural and institutional inequalities, such as those tied to race, class, or gender, to persist unchallenged. This raises critical questions: Are universities practising “privileged irresponsibility” by addressing only the inequalities they choose to see? By focusing on global competition or individual behaviour, they risk ignoring their own roles in perpetuating privilege, be it through unexamined traditions, exclusionary practices, or the commodification of social justice.

Charting the way forward

Charting the way forward in a manner that repositions universities as bastions of democratic and inclusive knowledge producers will require strengthening institutional governance, developing legal and financial safeguards, protecting tenure systems and creating systems that can withstand political pressure. To move forward, we need to ask ourselves as universities, what is our responsibility and our response–ability in the current climate? (Bozalek & Zembylas, 2023).

We put forward that universities can be drivers for social change when they:

  • Confront their historical complicity and their Euro-centric standpoint, including the colonial and exclusionary roots of their institutional identities;
  • Shift from individual to structural accountability, ensuring that policies address institutional discrimination and exclusion rather than merely assigning blame;
  • Resist and challenge the neoliberal framing of social justice, where diversity and inclusion are treated as metrics for success rather than ethical imperatives.

Why this matters

In times of climate change, migration, and deepening inequality, universities can either reinforce existing hierarchies or work towards dismantling them. By rethinking their structures, missions, and responsibilities, they can chart a different course—one that’s socially just and globally relevant. At our symposium, we did not just diagnose the problems—we shared possible pathways forward for shaping and transforming the long-term organisational culture of HEIs. Because if universities can learn and change, they can help societies do the same.

Key Messages

  • Universities aren’t neutral spaces. They mirror political and economic realities — and have the power to either challenge or reinforce inequality.
  • From Cape Town to Chemnitz, global hierarchies shape who gets to learn — and how. Researchers are asking: what does a truly just university look like in the 21st century?
  • When “diversity” becomes a management metric and “social justice” a branding tool, universities risk practising privileged irresponsibility. Structural change — not tokenism — is what’s needed.
  • Climate change, migration, polarisation: universities sit at the heart of today’s biggest challenges. They can either reinforce existing hierarchies — or help dismantle them.
  • Universities must confront their colonial roots, shift from individual to structural accountability, and resist treating inclusion as a KPI. Because if institutions can learn and change, so can societies.
Dr Eva Bulgrin

Dr Eva Bulgrin

University of Marburg, Germany

Dr Eva Bulgrin is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Marburg (Germany), where she researches questions of gender, sustainability and responsibility in the context of higher education. Currently, she is also an honorary research fellow in the Centre for International Education at the University of Sussex (CIE), where she completed her PhD. Her research interests span from basic to higher education, encompassing postcolonial and discourse-analytical methodologies, as well as various approaches to teaching and learning.

Dr. Marcina Singh

Dr. Marcina Singh

Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, South Africa

Dr.  Marcina Singh is an independent consultant from the Netherlands working with various higher education institutions on topics such as teacher education, teacher professional development, curriculum transformation and decolonisation. She is also a Research Associate in the Faculty of Humanities at the University of Johannesburg, where she heads a national baseline study on the effects of Artificial Intelligence on higher education in the Global South. As an interdisciplinary researcher, she has worked with various multinational organisations, including the British Council, VVOB, CODESRIA and Open Society Foundations. She recently published a book on the Experiences of Newly Qualified Teachers in South Africa (SUN Africa Media, 2025).

Dr. Sarah Wieners

Dr. Sarah Wieners

Goethe University Frankfurt and Marburg University, Germany

Dr. Sarah Wieners is a postdoctoral researcher at Goethe University Frankfurt and Marburg University (Germany). Her research focuses on gendered inequalities in higher education institutions, organisational change, and feminist methodologies.

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

Adler, Annett; Weber, Susanne Maria (2019): Future and Innovation Labs as heterotopic Spaces. In: S. Weber, I. Truschkat, C. Schröder, L. Peters und A. Herz (Hg.): Organisation und Netzwerke. Organisation und Pädagogik, Bd. 26. Wiesbaden: Springer VS (26), S. 375–383. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-658-20372-6_34

Bhabha, H. K. 1994. The Location of Culture. Routledge classics. London, New York, London: Routledge; Taylor & Francis.

Borgonovi,  F. & Pokropek,  A. (2019) Education and Attitudes Toward Migration in a Cross-Country Perspective. Front. Psychol. 10:2224. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02224

Bozalek, V., Zembylas, M. (2023). Response-Ability. In: Responsibility, privileged irresponsibility and response-ability. Palgrave Critical University Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34996-6_4

Fanon, F. (1961) The Wretched of the Earth. Paris: Éditions Maspero.

Revsbæk, Line (2014): Adjusting to the Emergent. A Process Theory Perspective on Organizational Socialization and Newcomer Innovation. Aalborg University. Denmark. Online verfügbar unter https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/549518070/Line_Revsb_k_EPUB.pdf, zuletzt geprüft am 05.01.2025.

Schmidt-Catran, A. W., & Czymara, C. S. (2022). Political elite discourses polarize attitudes toward immigration along ideological lines. A comparative longitudinal analysis of Europe in the twenty-first century. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 49(1), 85–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2022.2132222

Spangenberger, P. (2016): Zum Einfluss eines Nachhaltigkeitsbezugs auf die Wahl technischer Berufe durch Frauen. Eine Analyse am Beispiel des Windenergiesektors. Detmold: Eusl.

Spivak, G.C. (1988) ‘Can the subaltern speak?’, in C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (eds) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, pp. 271–313.

Perspectives on intercultural approaches to education and social justice: impressions from an emerging researcher

Perspectives on intercultural approaches to education and social justice: impressions from an emerging researcher

by | NW 7 Social Justice and Intercultural Education

As a Ph.D. student at the beginning of my career, attending the European Conference on Educational Research in Belgrade was a valuable introduction to the global academic community. ECER was an essential opportunity for academics and emerging researchers to discuss topics at the forefront of educational research, alongside the Emerging Researchers’ Conference (ERC) that took place immediately before ECER.

Overall, the annual event hosted 2,619 scholars, with 1,938 papers presented from 75 different countries, representing a genuinely international community and an amazing array of perspectives. This year’s conference took place amid students’ ongoing mobilisations, which have been continuing for many months already and were focused upon demanding transparency, accountability, and respect for fundamental rights whilst utilising a critical and engaged lens.

These student demonstrations and occupations hold not only an intrinsic political meaning but also an educational relevance. University public spaces have, indeed, been converted into a platform for dialogue and active and democratic participation. I was particularly caught by the slogan in Serbian language “Nije filozofski ćutati,” which stands for “it is not philosophical to be silent,” a catchphrase also quoted by Prof. Pavel Zgaga during his Keynote Speech on ‘educational research, policy and politics’.

Intercultural perspectives that emerged during ERC and ECER and how they might be useful for my educational researcher path

As a listen-only participant, I had the chance to attend several sessions on relevant topics for my research. The latter focuses on on the schooling experiences and integration processes of young people from migrant backgrounds in Italy.

Pertinent themes that emerged were related to students’ cultural and linguistic diversity, education in marginalized urban contexts, and intercultural early childhood education. Attending presentations on social justice and intercultural education – in which research results from different European contexts were highlighted – has certainly helped me broaden my perspective on various aspects of my research. I also believe it is crucial to attend sessions related to other networks to acquire fundamental notions of educational research, particularly linked to theoretical approaches and methodologies to be used. As such, I have also attended various presentations within networks 04 (Inclusive Education) and 14 (Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research).

The sessions I attended were marked by a positive exchange of ideas and opinions, with the purpose of finding strategies that can be implemented in educational and pedagogical practices. A feature that emerged from several presentations is that education also presents a sociopolitical dimension (Akkari & Radhouane, 2022). As part of the so-called ‘second generation of migrants in Italy’, I would even push myself to affirm that there is nothing more antithetical to education than neutrality, especially considering the subaltern position of migrant communities in Europe.

Insights from the ‘Social Justice and Intercultural Education’ Workshop

A large building with a statue in the middle of a courtyard

A key activity that has been very supportive for my first experience at an international conference on educational research is represented by the workshop “How to develop a decentralised way of doing research?” led by Professor Lisa Rosen.

A range of strategies for decentering dominant narratives and strengthening marginalised voices were mentioned. This activity, open to professionals at different stages of their careers and particularly to emerging researchers, was aimed at promoting decentralisation from exclusively Eurocentric models, creating socially and interculturally sensitive knowledge and to question our positions and prejudices as researchers.

Discussing the issue seems to me fundamental to avoid reinforcing power relations and tokenism by excluding (even inadvertently) marginalised groups. I believe that the positionality of the researcher in the areas of Social Justice and Intercultural Education could put us, as academic researchers, in a vulnerable position. As suggested during this session, it is appropriate to employ it when an analysis is implemented or an in-depth study is conducted. I would like to mention some key points on the positional statement that caught my attention and may be useful to early-career researchers:

– Be aware that identity, beliefs, and values may influence research work in different ways

– Consider biases, emotional responses, and transparency in your research efforts

– Do not ignore the relevant balances and imbalances of power, as well as the institutions involved and political implications

– Knowledge and analysis of the research context, through a critical approach, holds crucial importance

Reflections for the future

ECER provided me with an extraordinary opportunity to outline the prospects for educational research in the European context, particularly in my specific field of investigation.

My main challenge now is to build on what I have learned, the advice I have received, and the insights gained during the conference to foster dialogue with other emerging researchers and fuel gradual but steady academic growth. In a closing remark, I believe that fostering critical awareness of educational practices, promoting social purpose in research, and strengthening methodological commitment should be central to interculturalism, innovation, and social responsibility.

Key Messages

  • International conferences accelerate early-career development – ECER/ERC offer essential exposure to global educational research perspectives and networking opportunities for emerging scholars.
  • Education is inherently political, not neutral – Educational research must critically engage with power dynamics, especially when working with marginalised and migrant communities.
  • Researcher positionality shapes research quality – Awareness of your own identity, biases, and values is essential to avoid reinforcing power imbalances in intercultural research.
  • Decentre Eurocentric narratives – Decentralised research approaches that amplify marginalised voices create more socially sensitive and robust knowledge.
  • Critical awareness drives meaningful research – Combining methodological rigour with social purpose is central to impactful intercultural and social justice education research.
Charaf El Bouhali

Charaf El Bouhali

Università di Padova

Charaf El Bouhali: PhD student in Pedagogy, Education and Instructional at the University of Padua. His research focuses on the schooling experiences and integration processes of young people from migrant backgrounds in Italy.

Orcid: https://orcid.org/my-orcid?orcid=0009-0001-1663-3019 Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/charafel

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

References and Further Reading

Akkari, A. and Radhouane, M. (2022). Intercultural Approaches to Education: From Theory to Practice, Springer, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70825-2 

Cabiles, Bonita S. (2025). Internalised deficit perspectives: positionality in culturally responsive pedagogical frameworks.Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 33(4), 1129-1146 https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2024.2326004 

Conti, L. (2025). Intercultural education: recalibrating meanings, objectives, and practices. Intercultural Education, 36(4), 418–436. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2025.2484514 

O’Neil, D. (2025). Complicated shadow: a discussion of positionality within educational research. Oxford Review of Education, 51(4), 579-594. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2024.2351445

Inclusive education – between policy and practice

Inclusive education – between policy and practice

by | NERA, NW 4 Inclusive Education

Researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, (NTNU) presented their INCLUSCHOOLproject, funded by the Research Council of Norway, at ECER 2025. The project’s main objective is to gain new knowledge about inclusion and inclusive practices in schools.

Inclusive education is high on the global agenda and is described by UNESCO (2003) as an ongoing process grounded in the conviction that it is the responsibility of the mainstream school system to educate all children. The UN Sustainable Development Goal on Quality Education (goal no. 4) emphasizes that “Access to inclusive, high-quality education is one of the most important conditions for welfare, health and equality in all societies”.

Although research on inclusive education has intensified in recent decades, the concept continues to be interpreted and implemented in diverse ways (Keles et al., 2024). What inclusive practice actually entails remains unclear(Nilholm, 2021). Accordingly, understanding how inclusion is experienced by those directly affected, particularly students, can offer critical insights into why such gaps persist and how they might be addressed (Chapman and Ainscow, 2021; Messiou, 2024😉

The scope and aims of the INCLUSCHOOL project

By exploring inclusive practices from the bottom up in a super diverse primary school, the INCLUSCHOOL project seeks to contribute new student- and context-sensitive knowledge to the field. The project adopts a user-centered, collaborative approach, in which the students themselves, teachers and other professionals play a key role in shaping both the project design and the research process, step by step. By following their initiative, we explore how they experience, perceive, and practice inclusion in everyday school life.

Through three sub-studies, the project will gather knowledge about:

Students' perspectives on inclusion and their participation in the school's inclusion work. Inclusion as an interactional practice in linguistically and culturally complex school environments. Students' participation in interprofessional collaboration, and the process that may potentially lead to a legal entitlement to special education provision and professionals’ perspectives on this.

A scoping review on students’ perspectives on inclusion

At this year’s ECER conference, participants learned more about a scoping review carried out as part of the first subproject, which aimed to map existing research on students’ voices on inclusive education.

The scoping review is intended to provide valuable insights into research on inclusive education through the voices of students, contributing to the field globally. It also aims to inspire further research into which students themselves are placed at the center.

Likewise, the study offers meaningful contributions to the INCLUSCHOOL project by raising researchers’ awareness of both the opportunities and the potential challenges involved in student-centered research. In particular, the review of 51 research articles focuses on the samples, research methodologies, and themes explored. The majority of the articles involved diverse student populations in their sample. A wide variety of research methodologies have been used in the articles, with qualitative interviews as the most common one.

The students are able to share their perspectives on many different topics, and the research articles include open-ended questions about students’ school life experiences, their socio-emotional experiences at school, and academic experiences and learning environments. Additionally, some articles included questions about students’ need for resources, access, and adjustments, their self- and other perceptions in diverse learning environments, and their life experiences and prospects of the future.

Presenting our findings from the review

Our takeaways include that student voices on inclusive education are multidimensional and complex. For example, students’ experiences of inclusion do not concern solely social-emotional or academic aspects. When schools remain arenas where the majority of students’ time is occupied by learning, their social inclusion depends on whether they are granted equitable access to shared learning activities in the classroom.

If we interpret the collective ambition of these studies as an effort to understand students inclusion experiences as multidimensional and complex, and to explore what they need to experience inclusion in school, we suggest a holistic approach. This perspective highlights the importance of contextual, processual, and interactional sensitivity in the field of inclusive education. Such an approach may offer new and valuable contributions to the field of inclusive education.

Key Messages

  • The INCLUSCHOOL project in Norway explores inclusion as an ongoing process focused on students’ presence, participation, and achievement.

  • Despite international commitments, progress towards inclusive education remains slow, with certain student groups at risk of exclusion.

  • The project adopts a user-centred, collaborative approach in a super-diverse primary school setting.

  • Preliminary findings from a scoping review highlight the complexity and multidimensional nature of students’ perceptions of inclusion.
Professor Marit Uthus

Professor Marit Uthus

Department of Education and Lifelong Learning, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Marit Uthus, professor, Department of Education and Lifelong Learning, Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Her research interests fall within the field of special education and educational psychology. Marit is currently leading the INCLUSCHOOL project, which is funded by the Research Council of Norway.

https://www.ntnu.no/ansatte/marit.uthus

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1263-1486

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marit-Uthus

Fenna Verkerk

Fenna Verkerk

Department of Teacher Education, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

Fenna Verkerk is a PhD candidate at the Department of Teacher Education at NTNU. She is affiliated with the INCLUschool project and her research is about pupils’ voices on inclusion at school. 

https://www.ntnu.edu/employees/fenna.verkerk 

Associate Professor Hanne Kristin Aas

Associate Professor Hanne Kristin Aas

Department of Education and Lifelong Learning, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Hanne Kristin Aas, associate professor, Department of Education and Lifelong Learning , Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Hanne does research in Educational Theory, Special Education and Teacher Education.

https://www.ntnu.no/ansatte/hanne.k.aas

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6033-0966

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hanne-Aas

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

Add your list of references here. Use [1], [2], [3]… to mark where they are used in the text above.
What’s missing in ITE? Preparing teachers to address poverty in mathematics education

What’s missing in ITE? Preparing teachers to address poverty in mathematics education

by | NW 10 Teacher Education Research

In Scotland, as in many parts of the world, child poverty presents a significant barrier to educational attainment and well-being. The impact of poverty on academic achievement, including lower attainment in mathematics, is well-documented and framed as the poverty-related attainment gap within education policies in Scotland (Scottish Government, 2023).

This blog post argues that child poverty should be explicitly addressed within ITE programmes, particularly in mathematics education, to help student teachers make clearer connections between issues of social justice and the teaching of mathematics, rather than addressing poverty under the broad terms of inclusion or the poverty-related attainment gap.

Why poverty matters in mathematics education

Mathematics has long been seen as a “gatekeeper” subject. Doing well in mathematics often decides who can progress to higher education and to better job opportunities, and who gets left behind (Douglas & Attewell, 2017; Durrani & Tariq, 2012; Martin et al., 2010). Yet mathematics is too often treated as if it were neutral, separated from inequality. In reality, however, children growing up in poverty are more likely to face lower expectations, be placed in low-ability groups, and receive simplified tasks that limit their chances to succeed (Hoadley, 2007; Jorgensen et al., 2014; Oakes, 1990; Schoenfeld, 2002).

These practices reinforce the idea that only some students are “naturally good” at mathematics, while others are left with fewer opportunities. Because of its central role in shaping opportunities in life, mathematics education is a crucial context to tackle questions of social justice.

This blog post is based on my PhD research, which revealed that student teachers often compartmentalise the idea of social justice and teaching mathematics, treating them as separate concerns. This disconnection presents a significant challenge to preparing student teachers for equitable practice.

The key question is: what within ITE can potentially help to make this connection clearer.

What has been done in an ITE context in Scotland?

The ways we do work should involve providing options and developing flexibility and valuing diversity applying any context. Having said that, I do think the design that we use with the student teachers is a crucial part of improving outcomes for people who live in poverty. It is just we don’t label it that way. We do not say, this is how we are going to tackle poverty, we will do this. Because actually all children can benefit from it.

This reflection comes from an ITE tutor in the research context. As this and other reflections illustrate, in ITE settings child poverty is generally addressed under the broader umbrella of inclusion and rarely directly addresses mathematics teacher education. While this approach indeed reflects a degree of awareness amongst student teachers, it may fail to engage with the lived realities of children growing up in poverty.

What’s missing in ITE?

Valuing diversity in education may require not only offering flexible teaching but also paying closer attention to what that diversity in a classroom actually entails. Poverty, for instance, can shape children’s mathematical learning through the resources and early experiences (Ellis & Sosu, 2015; Greaves et al., 2014; James-Brabham et al., 2023; Marks et al., 2006) they have access to, as well as the confidence they bring into the classroom. At the same time, children living in poverty often demonstrate resilience, benefit from targeted interventions, and thrive with parental and school support (DePascale et al., 2024; Sheehan & Hadfield, 2024). If these aspects remain unspoken, teachers may find it harder to create socially just practices that respond to culture, recognise strengths, and address limitations.

Nancy Fraser’s (1999) multidimensional conception of social justice (encompassing redistribution, recognition, and representation) offers a useful framework for understanding and addressing issues related to injustices in education. Fraser argues that neither redistribution, understood as the fair allocation of resources and opportunities, nor recognition, understood as the acknowledging and embracing of diverse identities of the learners, is sufficient on its own to address injustice.

Representation, understood as ensuring that all learners have a genuine voice and the ability to participate in the classroom, is equally essential. Ultimately, achieving social justice requires the integration of all three dimensions: redistribution, recognition, and representation.

The idea that all children benefit from inclusive pedagogies aligns with the redistribution principle – according to the tutor cited above, the key mission of ITE programmes is to teach student teachers to provide all children with opportunities to succeed. To do this, they need flexibility in their mathematics teaching practice, and a general idea of valuing diversity. However, this does not always recognise how non-school knowledge (for example, budgeting with limited resources, navigating public transports or household tasks) could be meaningfully connected to classroom mathematics.

Equally, redistribution was under-addressed in this context, discussions of equitable access rarely touched on the material and structural factors that affect how children learn mathematics, such as availability of mathematical manipulatives, after-school programmes, or adequate funding at schools in high-poverty areas.

Social justice requires more than providing fair opportunities for the learners; it involves understanding and embracing differences and empowering students to be active participants of the learning environment while considering carefully what they might need to achieve this. However, this was largely absent within the research context, with children’s participation framed as teacher-directed rather than as opportunities for learner agency in shaping mathematical learning. Without stronger attention to these dimensions, student teachers may leave ITE with a limited understanding of how mathematics education itself can either reproduce or challenge social justice issues linked to poverty.

Final thoughts

This study is based on interviews with ITE tutors and therefore reflects their perspectives on programme design and pedagogical intentions rather than the full complexity of classroom practice. As a result, the everyday realities of teaching may reveal stronger forms of recognition and representation than those captured in this analysis, as well as additional ways in which student teachers engage with children’s lived experiences of poverty.

Acknowledging this limitation is important when interpreting the findings. Nevertheless, the interviews with tutors provide valuable insight into how poverty is currently conceptualised and addressed within ITE, offering an important basis for considering how ITE might be strengthened.

Building on this, to more effectively prepare student teachers, ITE programmes could move beyond broad commitments towards inclusion to instead offer more concrete preparation for working with children in poverty. Central to this shift is the need for ITE to explicitly embed the three pillars of social justice: redistribution of resources, recognition of diverse identities, and representation of student agency. Although ITE programmes already take on a wide responsibility when it comes to diversity – covering areas such as gender, race, immigration, and more – these aspects of diversity often overlap, and by addressing one dimension thoughtfully, we also contribute to the others.

Key Messages

  • To effectively prepare student teachers to address poverty in their teaching practice, ITE programmes could move beyond broad commitments to inclusion and offer more concrete preparation for working with children in poverty.
  • Valuing diversity in education may require not only offering flexible teaching but also paying closer attention to what that diversity in a classroom actually entails. 
  • Achieving social justice requires the integration of all three dimensions: redistribution of resources, recognition of diverse identities, and representation of student agency
  • Social justice requires more than providing fair opportunities for the learners; it involves understanding and embracing differences and empowering students to be active participants of the learning environment while considering carefully what they might need to achieve this.
Dr. Nejla Tugcem Sahin Bayik

Dr. Nejla Tugcem Sahin Bayik

Directorate of Basic Education at the Ministry of National Education (MoNE) in Türkiye

Dr. Nejla Tugcem Sahin Bayik is an Education Specialist in the Monitoring and Evaluation Department of the Directorate of Basic Education at the Ministry of National Education (MoNE) in Türkiye. She is also a part-time lecturer at TED University. She earned her PhD in Education from the University of Aberdeen and holds an MA Degree in Mathematics Education from University College London. Having lectured at the University of Aberdeen, she has also contributed to various research projects as a researcher in the UK and in Türkiye. Her main research interests are social justice issues in education, inclusion, diversity, and children’s rights.

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nejla-tugcem-sahin-bayik

Personal Blog: https://tugcemsahinbayik.blogspot.com/

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nejla-Sahin-Bayik

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

DePascale, M., Bustamante, A. S., & Dearing, E. (2024). Strengths-Based Approaches to Investigating Early Math Development in Family and Community Context: A Conceptual Framework. AERA Open, 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241302059

Douglas, D., & Attewell, P. (2017). School Mathematics as Gatekeeper. 58(4), 648–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2017.1354733

Durrani, N., & Tariq, V. N. (2012). The role of numeracy skills in graduate employability. Education + Training, 54(5), 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211244704

Ellis, S., & Sosu, E. (2015). Closing poverty-related attainment gaps in Scotland’s schools: What works? From:https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/54123/15/Ellis_Sosu_IPPI2015_closing_poverty_related_attainment_gaps.pdf

Fraser, N. (1999). Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics: Redistribution, Recognition, and Participation. In L. Ray & A. Sayer (Eds.), Culture and Economy after the Cultural Turn (pp. 25–52). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446218112.n2

Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange. Verso.https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=IJxT6pxjO7YC&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Greaves, E., Macmillan, L., & Sibieta, L. (2014). Lessons from London schools for attainment gaps and social mobility. Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission. From: https://socialmobility.independent-commission.uk/app/uploads/2024/07/London_Schools_-_FINAL.pdf

Hoadley, U. (2007). The reproduction of social class inequalities through mathematics pedagogies in South African primary schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(6), 679–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270701261169

James-Brabham, E., Loveridge, T., Sella, F., Wakeling, P., Carroll, D. J., & Blakey, E. (2023). How do socioeconomic attainment gaps in early mathematical ability arise? Child Development, 94(6), 1550–1565. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13947

Jorgensen, R., Gates, P., & Roper, V. (2014). Structural exclusion through school mathematics: Using Bourdieu to understand mathematics as a social practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9468-4

Marks, G. N., Cresswell, J., & Ainley, J. (2006). Explaining socioeconomic inequalities in student achievement: The role of home and school factors. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610600587040

Martin, D., Gholson, M., Leonard, J., Martin, D. B., Gholson, M. L., & Leonard, J. (2010). Mathematics as gatekeeper: Power and privilege in the production of knowledge. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 3(2), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.21423/jume-v3i2a95

Oakes, J. (1990). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. The RAND Corporation. From: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2006/R3928.pdf

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2002). Making Mathematics Work for All Children: Issues of Standards, Testing, and Equity. Educational Researcher, 31(1). https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031001013

Scottish Government (2023). Pupil attainment: closing the gap – Schools. Retrieved May 15, 2025, from https://www.gov.scot/policies/schools/pupil-attainment/

Sheehan, J., & Hadfield, K. (2024). Overcoming socioeconomic adversity: Academic resilience in mathematics achievement among children and adolescents in Ireland. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 42(4), 524–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12512