Growth of immigration in Europe leads to increasing diversity in schools. During the mid-twentieth century, immigration was directed mostly towards cities and often motivated by labour opportunities. Since the 1990s, due to changes in politics and reasons behind immigration, immigrants and refugees have also been moving to rural areas (Haraldsson, 2016; OECD, 2016; SCB, 2016). Many studies in urban schools describe effects of pedagogic practices as marginalising immigrant students (Möller, 2010; Schwartz, 2010). Similar tendencies have been identified in rural schools, but some studies demonstrate the ability of rural schools to adapt to changes and their importance in creating opportunities for all community members (Ásgeirsdóttir, 2002; Kalaoja & Pietarinen, 2009). In this paper, we are analysing the stories of immigrant students in compulsory schools in rural areas of Iceland and Sweden: How do immigrant students talk about their agency in their classrooms, schools and peer communities in rural contexts? How immigrant students use agency in their classrooms and schools in rural contexts? Our analysis builds on fieldwork including classroom observations of teaching content and interactions and 12 interviews with immigrant pupils of age 13-16 in four compulsory schools, two in Sweden and two in Iceland. The analysis is inspired by Carspecken’s (1996) critical ethnography. Ainscow et al’s (2012) concept of ‘ecology of equity’ is used as a tool in investigating power relations with regard to place and agency. It includes the demographics of the areas served by schools and the histories, cultures and economic realities faced by immigrant populations. Analysis also includes investigation of the politics of the teaching profession in response to students’ diversity. Preliminary findings show that students are active participants in the classrooms and receive academic and social support from their teachers, often despite small financial resources and limited professional preparation for work with immigrant students. However, some immigrant students feel excluded from their peers, both in the classroom and outside the school. In Iceland, the context of the social space seems to influence these students’ experiences of inclusion and students in the community with a relatively small share of immigrant population describe that they do not feel nor are considered as ‘others’. This study’s value for European research lies in deepening understanding of students’ agency in different contexts of rurality (cf. Bagley & Hillyard 2015; Gustafson 2009). Obtaining such knowledge is essential to inform policy and discussion on how to work towards inclusion for all students.

Ainscow, M., Dyson, A., Goldrick, S., & West, M. (2012). Making schools effective for all: Rethinking the task. School Leadership and Management, 32(3), 1–17. Ásgeirsdóttir, F. (2002). Sérstaða fámennra grunnskóla í skólakerfinu. Available from: http://netla.hi.is/greinar/2002/007/03/index.htm Bagley, C., & Hillyard, S. (2015). School choice in an English village: living, loyalty and leaving. Ethnography and Education, 10(3), 278–292. Carspecken, P. F. (1996) Critical ethnography in educational research; A theoretical and practical guide. New York: Routledge. Gustafson, K. (2009). Us and them – children's identity work and social geography in a Swedish school yard. Ethnography and Education, 4(1), 1–16. Haraldsson, R. H. (2016) Tölfræðilegar upplýsingar um erlenda ríkisborgara og innflytjendur á Íslandi. Ísafjörður: Fjölmenningarsetur. Kalaoja, E., & Pietarinen, J. (2009). Small rural primary schools in Finland: A pedagogically valuable part of the school network. International Journal of Educational Research, 48, 109–116. Möller, Å (2010). Den ”goda” mångfalden. Fabrikation av mångfald i skolans policy och praktik. Utbildning & Demokrati 19, 85–106 OECD. (2016). Society at a glance 2016. DOI: 10.1787/9789264261488-en. SCB. (2016). Integration - Flyktingars flyttmönster i Sverige. Örebro: SCB. Schwartz, A. (2010). Att “nollställa bakgrunder” för en effektiv skola. Utbildning & Demokrati 19, 45–62.