Page 41 - Igor Ž. Žagar in Ana Mlekuž, ur. Raziskovanje v vzgoji in izobraževanju: mednarodni vidiki vzgoje in izobraževanja. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut, 2020. Digitalna knjižnica, Dissertationes 38
P. 41
inequality, poverty and education in the post-yugoslav space
Figure 1: Percentage of tertiary Level Students in Croatia By Father’s Educational evel
2001/2 – 2011/1
possible to trace elements of this in relation to the educational system, and
particularly access to higher education. Unfortunately, there is no single
text that brings together the structural and intersectional nature of educa-
tional disadvantage in our region, addressing the mutually reinforcing na-
ture of class, gender, ethnicity, disability and region. What we have, within
a normative stance that mobility is important for a kind of equal oppor-
tunity neoliberalism that leaves inequalities unchanged but allows for the
exchange of elites, are crude renderings of ‘educational disadvantage’ by
so-called ‘socio-economic status’ or its acronym SES (Waters and Waters,
2016). In this narrative, we are meant to prefer meritocracy to patronage,
or, let us recall Katarina Kitarović here, »background, means, and connec-
tions«.
Of course, there are real problems with the deeply politicized nature of
the marketization of higher education across our region: the necessity for
party membership to reach positions of influence; the rise of new, and of-
ten very dubious, private universities; the number of politicians with pla-
giarized doctoral dissertations, and so on. However, removing all of this
and leaving meritocracy intact is hardly a vision for the future. If we focus,
for the moment, on Croatia, we find, even within an expansion of high-
er education, a reduction in the prospects of children from working-class
backgrounds having access. The work of Karin Doolan and her colleagues
(Doolan et al, 2017) show that student numbers rose by almost exactly 50%
41
Figure 1: Percentage of tertiary Level Students in Croatia By Father’s Educational evel
2001/2 – 2011/1
possible to trace elements of this in relation to the educational system, and
particularly access to higher education. Unfortunately, there is no single
text that brings together the structural and intersectional nature of educa-
tional disadvantage in our region, addressing the mutually reinforcing na-
ture of class, gender, ethnicity, disability and region. What we have, within
a normative stance that mobility is important for a kind of equal oppor-
tunity neoliberalism that leaves inequalities unchanged but allows for the
exchange of elites, are crude renderings of ‘educational disadvantage’ by
so-called ‘socio-economic status’ or its acronym SES (Waters and Waters,
2016). In this narrative, we are meant to prefer meritocracy to patronage,
or, let us recall Katarina Kitarović here, »background, means, and connec-
tions«.
Of course, there are real problems with the deeply politicized nature of
the marketization of higher education across our region: the necessity for
party membership to reach positions of influence; the rise of new, and of-
ten very dubious, private universities; the number of politicians with pla-
giarized doctoral dissertations, and so on. However, removing all of this
and leaving meritocracy intact is hardly a vision for the future. If we focus,
for the moment, on Croatia, we find, even within an expansion of high-
er education, a reduction in the prospects of children from working-class
backgrounds having access. The work of Karin Doolan and her colleagues
(Doolan et al, 2017) show that student numbers rose by almost exactly 50%
41
