Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

T0066


Interdisciplinary and Intersectional Approaches to Wellbeing and Equity in/through Education (Panel 1 of 2): External Constraints, Aspirations and Wellbeing  
Convenor:
Joan DeJaeghere (University of Minnesota)
Send message to Convenor
Format:
Thematic Panel
Theme:
Education, rights, equalities and capabilities

Short Abstract:

This panel is part of a two-part series of papers from different disciplinary perspectives that use a capabilities approach in examining intersectional inequities in secondary and tertiary education. The papers focus on how the external environment affects aspirations, agency and wellbeing.

Long Abstract:

This panel is part of a two-part series that brings together scholars from different disciplinary perspectives and locations to extend the use of a capabilities approach in examining intersectional inequities in secondary and tertiary education.

A capability approach has been used extensively in education (DeJaeghere & Walker, 2021) and a considerable amount of this research takes an intersectional approach, particularly examining racial, poverty and gendered inequities (Balsera, 2014; Mkwananzi, 2019). Intersectionality is foundational to a CA (Robeyns, 2017; 2021), yet the use of intersectional approaches in different contexts reveals both similar and different conditions that foster equity and wellbeing. The use of intersectional approaches benefit from drawing on disciplinary, theoretical and methodological pluralism. The papers in these panels aim to engage with pluralism and bridge different disciplinary perspectives and ways of knowing that can push the uses of a capabilities approach in new ways in educational research.

Much research using a CA in education is conducted by educators using qualitative approaches, such as narrative, participatory, and ethnographic approaches to show how aspirations and agency matter in achieving wellbeing (Mkwananzi, 2019; Owens et al., 2022; Walker & Mathebula, 2020). At the same time, knowledge produced in the disciplines/fields of economics, health, development studies, and psychology have focused on quantitative measures of equity and wellbeing (Alkire, 2008; Unterhalter et al., 2022; White et al, 2016), and social structures that can inhibit them. By drawing on different disciplines and ways of knowing, we aim to deepen our understanding of the complex and intersectional ways that aspirations, agency, equity, and wellbeing are connected.

Inequities in education are complex, dynamic, and intersecting and occur at the level of systems and structures (e.g. lack of quality educational resources or policies that do not equitably distribute resources); through discourses of policy and curriculum (e.g., how students are represented in racialized, gendered or other ways), and through interpersonal interactions (teachers’ pedagogy and students’ interactions) (Tikly & Barrett, 2011; Unterhalter et al, 2022). Furthermore, the complexities of intersecting inequities within education are further affected by systems (policies and practices) outside education, including health and welfare (e.g., disability policies), social (family, community), economic (employment), and political (representation in policymaking). Integrating interdisciplinary perspectives and different ways of knowing can help advance research and practice on advancing equity in and through education.

In this first panel, the papers focus on how the external environment affects young peoples’ educational aspirations and learning. They also speak to how macro-level policies focused on removing external constraints need to pay attention to micro-level and internal processes that affect the use of capabilities to achieve wellbeing.

The first paper examines how poverty in the context of South Africa influences aspirations by limiting one’s freedom to aspire. It argues that poverty is more than a set of resources or external conditions, it also includes social and psychological attitudes and behaviors.

The second paper, drawing on the same study but with different theoretical tools, examines aspirations and the capacity to aspire more closely by examining aspiration windows and agency in relation to broader macro-level constraints in South Africa.

The third paper examines the learning capabilities of young people from lower socio-economic backgrounds in India. The analysis shows how differential resources and parenting conditions – non-material factors such as social and psychological support and regulation - affect learning outcomes between higher and lower income students in the same school. In particular, students from higher socio-economic backgrounds are regulated by parents in how they use their resources, such as time. Their parental and school regulation thus advantages them to be regarded by teachers as more agentic in being able to regulate their own learning. This study has important implications for how non-material conditions are used to convert opportunities into outcomes that are at least desired by society and families.

The fourth paper takes a macro and quantitative analysis of the Gender Development Index (GDI) in Africa to examine the social, economic and political factors that affect capabilities, with particular attention to education measures. It argues for the need to understand enhanced capabilities toward the achievement of greater gender equality.

Together these papers point to the importance of examining the external environment in relation to internal processes of marginalized people to understand how these conditions foster aspirations, agency and achievement of wellbeing outcomes.

References

Alkire, S. (2008). Concepts and measures of agency. Working Paper. Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI).

Balsera, M. R. (2014). Young migrants’ aspirations, expectations and perspectives of well-being investigated using biographical narratives, the capability approach and intersectionality.

DeJaeghere, J. and Walker, M. (2021). The capability approach. In T. Jules, R. Shields, and M. Thomas (Eds.) Bloomsbury Handbook of Theory in Comparative and International Education, (pp. 461-474). Bloomsbury.

Mkwananzi, F., (2019). An Intersectional Analysis of Capabilities, Conversion Factors and Aspirations. Higher Education, Youth and Migration in Contexts of Disadvantage: Understanding Aspirations and Capabilities, 207-229.

Owens, J., Entwistle, V. A., Craven, L. K., & Conradie, I. (2022). Understanding and investigating relationality in the capability approach. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(1), 86-104.

Robeyns, I. (2021). The capability approach. In The Routledge handbook of feminist economics (pp. 72-80). Routledge.

Tikly, L., & Barrett, A. M. (2011). Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries. International journal of educational development, 31(1), 3-14.

Unterhalter, E., Longlands, H., & Peppin Vaughan, R. (2022). Gender and intersecting inequalities in education: Reflections on a framework for measurement. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 23(4), 509-538.

Walker, M., & Mathebula, M. (2020). A participatory photovoice project: Towards capability expansion of ‘invisible’students in South Africa. Participatory research, capabilities and epistemic justice: A transformative agenda for higher education, 189-213.

White, R. G., Imperiale, M. G., & Perera, E. (2016). The Capabilities Approach: Fostering contexts for enhancing mental health and wellbeing across the globe. Globalization and health, 12(1), 1-10.

Accepted papers:

 
A A A A A
current theme change theme