The presentation draws on results from a research project that takes its starting point in the dominance of urban studies in contemporary educational research (e.g. Hargreaves, Kvalsund & Galton, 2009, Öhrn & Weiner, 2007) and addresses the need of more knowledge about young people in rural areas. It was designed to develop an understanding of youth, their participation and agency in rural contexts. It asks what it is that distinguishes and unites young people’s social inclusion and participation in various schools and how schools in different places address young people’s opportunities to work and social inclusion. Central to this are understandings of belongings, social relationships, differences and conflicts in various places; who are ’we’, who are ’the others’ and what are the implications of this?

Urban research has explored in depth the growing heterogeneity, segregation and conflicts in cities and proposes a loss of solidarity and community spirit from older times (Sernhede 2007; Waquant 2007). Whether the same applies to rural communities is not clear; some would claim that they experience more fellowship and closeness due to joint histories, family relations and common experiences, whereas others consider this not to be the case (see Solstad 2009). Furthermore, if rural areas do provide a stronger community spirit and sense of solidarity it remains to be explored whether this adheres mainly to the locally bred or also includes (internal and/or international) migrants.

Issues as these were put to the fore in our research as the fieldwork started in 2015, parallel to the large migrant and refugee streams to Europe. In Sweden, the authorities chose to distribute rather large groups that asked for residence permit in the country to rural areas, of which many had hitherto had limited experiences of such a large influx of immigrants. In this paper we examine what happened in six local rural places and their schools when new arrivals were ’placed’ there. How were the placements conducted and motivated by the State? How were the local authorities and schools dealing with this in light of the lack of preparedness and resources? We consider available space in the school e.g. school facilities and teacher shortages in present times when the public services have been opened up to privatisation and capital has become the key actor with regard to different refugee accommodation

Theoretically, the project draws in particular on the work of Doreen Massey (1994) and her understanding of place as continously in process through socio-spatial and material practices, including various identities and contemporary/historical relations and conflicts.  

Gordon, T., Hynninen P., Lahelma, E., Metso, T., Palmu, T. & Tolonen, T. (2006). Collective ethnography, joint experiences and individual pathways. Nordisk Pedagogik, 26(1), 3-15. Hargreaves, L., Kvalsund, R. & Galton, M. (2009). Reviews of research on rural schools and their communities in British and Nordic countries: Analytical perspectives and cultural meaning. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 80-88. Jeffrey, B. & Troman, G. (2004). Time for ethnography. British Journal of Educational Research, 30(4), 535-548. Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. Cambridge: Polity Press. Öhrn, E & Weiner, G. (2007). Urban education in Europe: section editors’ introduction. In W T Pink & G W Noblit (Eds), International handbook of urban education. Dordrecht: Springer. Sernhede, O. (2007). Territorial stigmatisation. Hip Hop and informal schooling. In W T Pink & G W Noblit (Eds), International handbook of urban education. Dordrecht: Springer. Solstad, K J. (2009). The impact of globalisation on small communities and small schools in Europe. In T Lyons, J-Y Choi & G McPhan (Eds), Proceedings from international symposium for innovation in rural education, University of New England, Australien. Wacquant, L. (2007). Territorial stigmatization in the age of advanced marginality, Thesis 11, no 91, 66-77.