Abstract
The Associate Editors and I are pleased to bring to public notice this issue of Equity in Education & Society. As set out in its aims and scope, the journal focuses on broad equity issues within in education and society, and at their intersections and is a central point for international scholarship, research and practice. In other words, the journal acknowledges the relationships among structures, institutions and individuals. At some point or another, structures, institutions and/or individuals may experience ‘shock’ due to events and/or individual actions independent of or in concert with institutions and/or structures. Understanding these relationships is important. For example, structures such as the law and/or policies may simultaneously lead to coherence or mayhem and the impacts and implications of these need to be debated in order to improve public understanding of how structures can lead to improvement in inequity or indeed can create and/or reinforce such inequity.
This issue sustains the broad social justice theme that emerged in Issue 1. It covers a range of topics and concerns located in different professional and/or institutional contexts, and it challenges institutions and society to ‘do better’ to promote and deliver equity for all, in particular those negatively impacted by institutional and structural inequality. This is important since a call for equity is a call for accountability at individual, institutional and societal levels. This interlocking relationship is sometimes misunderstood, if understood at all. Individuals (we) make up society, and individuals (we) make up our institutions. And we take with us into institutions our privilege, values, biases, beliefs and assumptions with us, largely given to us and reinforced by society, where, in many cases these are reinforced and deployed. It is for this reason we are reminded that ‘one cannot do social justice work alone’ (Corbett, 1976), highlighting the need for a ‘community’ (family, workplace, institutional, social, etc.) approach to equity – where ideas are not only foisted on those without or with limited power, but there is symbiotic engagement with uncomfortable and disruptive knowledges.
The papers in this issue will hopefully help us to engage with uncomfortable and disruptive knowledges concerning equity.
Housel sets the tone with an examination of professional development approaches and opportunities for instructors of adult emergent bi/multilingual learners (EBLs). Framed within the context of the United States, this article makes the point that although instructors receive ongoing professional development, this can sometimes be insufficient to address the demands of the 21st century classroom. Put differently, whilst teachers and leaders do benefit from generic subject-based studies, they also need targeted professional development that goes beyond their subject knowledge to promote teacher competency and ultimately outcomes for learners.
Burt, Eubank and Orazem discuss the matter of resilience among students during the ongoing global Covid-19 pandemic. Drawing on evidence from a higher education institution in the United States, they argue that students, in particular students of colour and working class or students from low-income backgrounds, faced a greater challenge for survival. The combination of the global Covid-19 pandemic and poverty and racism are a vicious cocktail of challenges and tribulations. Crucially however, the authors noted that these students showed great resilience in the face to systemic inequalities compounded and exacerbated by the pandemic.
ElMorally, Wong and Copsey-Blake ask an important question: Is STEM sexist and racist? The authors note institutional bias towards (preference for) White male students and applicants is an issue that is well known in UK higher education, in particular in the physical sciences. Using data collected over a 2-year period, they note that ‘the UK is currently experiencing the “height of capitalism”, where the value of labour is considerably disproportionate’. They also contend, ‘The race and gender gaps, particularly in terms of attainment, are two of the most significant avenues where we see the value of labour diminished, and capitalism pronounced’. These observations are not new, but they are certainly illuminating – challenging educational institutions at all levels, and the ‘field of science’ to do more to dismantle barriers to access faced by those who do not identify as white and male.
Arar, Saiti, Anysiadou and Abo-Zaed Arar call attention to how some Greek school leaders engage with migrant students. With increases in global migration, underpinned by intense nationalist sentiments, it is pleasing to see school leaders showing positive attitudes towards migrants. This is consistent with the aims and philosophy of education: equal rights, human flourishing and the protection and promotion of the dignity of each individual. Although not without challenge, the authors noted, ‘No difference in behavior has been found except for a slightly more positive attitude towards emigration’.
Smith-Doerr, Yates and Knuab shift the narrative by introducing us to ‘Social capital, structuralism, and organizational form: Three social network theory perspectives for research in higher education’ in which they argue ‘social capital’ can and does reinforce structural inequalities. They contend that ‘social capital comes from network ties providing access to beneficial outcomes’, that ‘structuralism assumes primacy of network structures, and largely disregards individual agency’ and that organizational networks, although without hierarchies, they can mimic and reinforce structural inequalities. The authors observe this is an area for further research and encourage consideration of other frameworks to study inequity in education.
Wanti, Wesselink, Biemans and den Brok present a systematic review of factors determining access and equity in higher education. Through their analysis of peer-reviewed articles, mostly from three continents: Europe, Australia and America, published between 2014 and 2018, the article identifies finance, family, government and education before starting university as important factors in their overall successful. The compilation of structural, familial/social and personal factors is potentially beneficial to different stakeholders, including governments and universities which must work together and in tandem with students for them to both access and thrive in their education.
Egan-Simon closes out the Issue with a four part framework for ‘active’ engagement in social justice-orientated citizenship. They argue agency, dialogue, criticality and emancipatory knowledge represent an interlocking framework which can support young people’s ‘knowledge, skills and dispositions to work collectively towards solutions to problems such as human rights violations, global poverty and environmental sustainability’. These are important social issues of our time, and by enabling young people to engage with these issues critically, through an accessible framework, can potentially lead to students concerned with developing justice-orientated activism and about making the world more democratic, equitable and just.
The papers in this issue are as wide ranging, as they are important – identifying ongoing challenges to equity work and also identifying good practice where available. I hope you will find this issue, and the journal, an essential point of reference for current and future action and scholarship.
ORCID iD
Paul Miller https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8801-1713