Bourdieu’s conceptual tools, particularly cultural capital, social capital, field and habitus, have been used in higher education participation literature to explain how particular academic and social circumstances render students educationally (dis)advantaged; the setting for this research tending to be the ‘Global North’ (e.g. Reay, David and Ball 2005, Brooks 2003, Thomas 2002). This paper locates Bourdieu’s conceptual apparatus in a Croatian higher education setting in order to explore its usefulness for understanding the educational experiences of Croatian first year undergraduate students of different socio-economic backgrounds. The first part of the paper is theoretical. It takes as its focus Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital, since its forms were identified as significant contributors to educational (dis)advantage in the conducted research study. This part lays out Bourdieu’s concretization of the concept (1986, 1977), the ways in which it has often been spelled out in educational research as ‘highbrow’ status practices (e.g. DiMaggio 1982, Ganzeboom, De Graaf and Robert 1990, Sullivan 2001), as well as more recent uses of the concept which include its qualitative and subjective dimensions and the ways in which institutional practices recognize its different aspects (e.g. Reay 2004, 2005, Lareau and Weininger 2003). In addition, the importance of locating the concept of cultural capital in Bourdieu’s wider theoretical framework, rather than treating it in isolation, is addressed. Building on from that, the paper looks at how instances of cultural capital (non)possession were identified in the conducted research study as shaping educational (dis)advantage for Croatian higher education students. These instances are classified and their repercussions discussed according to Bourdieu’s distinction between the three forms of cultural capital: parental educational level, parental educational support and type of completed secondary schooling are identified as indicators of cultural capital in its institutionalized state, available study materials as the objectified state and vocabulary and eloquence as linguistic cultural capital. The theoretical premises of the concept as laid out in the first part are interacted with throughout this section. The overall aim of the paper is to discuss both the objective and subjective repercussions of cultural capital (non)possession in the particular educational context, as well as the concept’s theoretical premises. In addition, it relates the policy implications of these findings to the so-called 'social dimension' of the Bologna process.

The paper reports findings from a study which associates Bourdieu's theoretical lens with mixed methods research and a critical realist perspective. More specifically, it draws on selected multiple data (secondary statistical data, questionnaire data, interview data and visual data) gathered in the academic year 2006/2007 with first year undergraduate students at six case study departments within the University of Zagreb. The statistical data includes information for all the students at the University of Zagreb (e.g. parental educational level), the questionnaire data includes responses from 642 students at the six departments, whereas the interview data and visual data were collected from 28 students at the same six departments whose progress was followed during their first year of study.

The paper makes a case for the usefulness and applicability of the concept of cultural capital for 'noticing' the ways in which social (dis)advantages are perpetuated in a Croatian higher education context. In addition, it contributes to previous theoretical developments of the concept by illustrating how its variants, as identified in the research, are not always necessarily inherited but can also be individually generated and how these variants can reinforce each other, as well as reinforce other forms of capital; how cultural capital variants have grades, i.e. cultural capital is not just a matter of possession or non-possession, as well as how possession of cultural capital does not always necessarily have positive repercussions but can have its drawbacks too. Finally, the paper addresses the contribution the concept of cultural capital can have for spelling out more specifically the current vagueness of the Bologna process' 'social dimension' action line.