One of the main goals of the European Commission concerning their higher education agenda is “building inclusive and connected higher education systems” (European Commission, 2017). At the European level, several political commitments to strengthen diversity and inclusiveness in higher education (HE) have been made throughout the past few years and social inclusion has gained in importance as well.

Despite broad political commitments, only a few European countries have implemented an action plan on the system level to foster social inclusion in HE. These include Austria, Ireland, the Netherlands and Sweden. Croatia is starting to develop a national strategy and policy measures, as well.

This PhD project will investigate the situation of an underpriviledged group in HE, namely working-class students (operationalization in the methods section) in Austria. Despite the strategic commitment of universities to inclusion and the social dimension, inheritance of educational inequalities (Bruneforth et al., 2016) is still an issue in this country. The HE system is also not necessarily geared up to coping with working class students, as well.

However, the situation is not unique in Europe. As universities will be in the focus, those institutions are places for élite reproduction. The most famous representative of the cultural reproduction theory is Pierre Bourdieu (e.g. Bourdieu & Passeron, 1971). Bourdieu´s theory of the forms of capitals is also useful for understanding that students enter school or university with different pre-conditions (Bourdieu, 1992).

For working-class students the road and the transition to university is especially cumbersome. Working-class students who have “survived” the school system up to the entry qualification for higher education, are less risk-takers and more often decide for vocational training or a university of applied science (Schubert, Binder, Dibiasi, Engleder, & Unger, 2020). When they decide to enter a university they face all kinds of challenges compared to students from an affluent social background, like not fitting in the academic world, not developing a sense of belonging or even feeling lost (Reay, Davies, David, & Ball, 2001).

More precisely, the research question is how the sense of belonging of this student group develops at the beginn of their studies at university. In the field of higher education, sense of belonging is often referred to as student abilities to build social networks and it is gaining importantance as a ‘predictor of positive academic outcomes’ (Lewis and Hodges, 2015, p.1).

Studies show that the development of a sense of belonging can be impeded by the following circumstances: structural barriers including financial constraints (e.g. Clayton, 2018; cited in Murphy et al., 2020) and lower levels of academic preparedness (Jackson & Kurlaender, 2014, cited in Murphy et al., 2020). Joining sport and leisure clubs and attending social events can help to develop a sense of belonging and establish informal networks (Mannay & Ward, 2020).

However, working-class students often need to work and often have to take over more care responsibilities than their more privileged peers. Due to their commitments outside of university, it can be difficult for them to attend initiatives on campus that may foster a sense of belonging.

 This topic is not only interesting for science, however working-class students represent a traditionally disadvantaged social group who managed upward social mobility. Still they are often not mentioned in diversity programs and third mission statements (Dipplhofer-Stiem, 2017). The results will not only be interesting in the German-speaking sphere, however, also other countries can learn from the insights and policy recommendations.

The proposal assumes persistent structural effects of social class background on the living and working conditions on members of society.To address the aims of this study, a qualitative research design was chosen since it sheds light on processes and mechanisms of social reproduction on an individual level. Witzel (2000) points out that qualitative interviews have been given new importance by propositions put forth by individualization theory (among others, Beck 1987). According to this theory, individuals have shed former binding relationships (social rank, social class, etc.) and have to adjust to new institutional dependencies, such as those of the labor market, of an occupation or educational system. However, the focus of this proposal is not only on the dispositions of the subjects, but also the objective chances and the societal framework are central. More specifically, ten to twelve problem-centered interviews with working-class students at public Austrian universities are planned, several were already conducted between 2019 and 2021. The students are in different stages in HE: some are still studying, some have changed their study subject, some are close to graduating or have already graduated. The interview lengths ranged so far between 25 and 65 minutes and they were transcribed in full length. The criteria for belonging to the group of ‘working-class students’ can either be operationalized by objective criteria e.g. parental education status/ household income or it can be self-defined. It is a complex construct that captures various “intersections of socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender, and place; additionally, they have unique perspectives that shape their attitudes and expectations about employment, higher education, and community (Longwell-Grice & Longwell-Grice, 2007, cited in Soria, Stebleton, Michael, J., & Huesman, Jr., Ronald L., 2013, p. 216). Recent studies suggest to apply both objective criteria and subjective measures. The American Psychological Association’s Task Force on social class and SES, has also recommended that researchers employ both subjective and objective measure in their research (Saegert et al., 2006; cited in Rubin et al., 2014, p. 198). The data will be analyzed by using the qualitative data analysis software NVivo. Data analysis will be performed by following Charmaz (2006) Constructivist Grounded Theory principles. Once the interviews are coded, the different experiences of the students will be ordered and interpreted against the backdrop of its material conditions, past transitions and the theoretical background, with attention to the speaker’s accounts of transitions and the development of sense of belonging.

Students begin their studies at university with an expectation that there will be opportunities to develop social ties (Bogdan and Elliott, 2015; Rubin and Wright, 2015). However, the interviewed students reported that at public universities in Austria, mass lectures with competitive exams hindered their ability to get in touch with their peers and to establish a student network. Overwhelmed… a bit (…) because of the system. It is constructed in a way that you cannot get good access to a small group, instead you have mass classes. Ehm… this means in your studies, it is [swallows] harder to find a group or access in any way. (Interview, August 2019. Franz, Business Administration, age 27, working-class student) Students like Franz could not develop a sense of belonging; neither as residents of student halls, nor at the university. He described his feelings of not fitting in as follows. I would say that I never had a classic student life… ahm and from time to time at the beginning of the studies, I lived at a student hall, ahm and there I went to home parties, but even those were a bit bizarre. (Interview, August 2019. Franz, Business Administration, age 27, working-class student) Based on qualitative findings, like the ones presented above, it will be discussed how working-class students can be supported and how inequality in higher education can be reduced within the Austrian and the European context. It seems like universities that provide additional support in building social networks for students may facilitate the most successful student transition experiences (Brooman and Darwent, 2014). Thus, this presentation would be of particular interest to both scholars/ researchers and also, those who are involved in student support or equity initiatives.

Bogdan, A., & Elliott, I. (2015). Student perspective on transitioning from FE to HE. Enhancement and Innovation in Higher Education, 9–11. Brooman, S., & Darwent, S. (2014). Measuring the beginning: a quantitative study of the transition to higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 39(9), 1523–1541. Bruneforth, M., Eder, F., Krainer, K., Schreiner, C., Seel, A., & Spiel, C. (2016). Nationaler Bildungsbericht Österreich Band 2: Fokussierte Analysen bildungspolitischer Schwerpunktthemen. BMBF, b. Bourdieu, P. (1992). Ökonomisches Kapital. In P. Bourdieu (Ed.), Die verborgenen Mechanismen der Macht (pp. 49–79). Hamburg: VSA Verlag. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage Publications. COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on a renewed EU agenda for higher education COM(2017) 247 30 May 2017: https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/education/files/he-com-2017-247_en.pdf. Dipplhofer-Stiem. (2017). Sind Arbeiterkinder im Studium benachteiligt?: Empirische Erkundungen zur schichtspezifischen Sozialisation an der Universität. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Juventa. Lewis, K.L., & Hodges, S.D. (2015). Expanding the concept of belonging in academic domains: Development and validation of the Ability Uncertainty Scale. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 197–202. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608014002477 Murphy, M.C., Gopalan, M., Carter, E.R., Emerson, K.T.U., Bottoms, B.L., & Walton, G.M. (2020). A customized belonging intervention improves retention of socially disadvantaged students at a broad-access university. Science Advances, 6(29), 1-7. Reay, D., Davies, J., David, M., & Ball, S.J. (2001). Choices of Degree or Degrees of Choice? Class, `Race' and the Higher Education Choice Process. Sociology, 35(4), 855–874. Rubin, M., Denson, N., Kilpatrick, S., Matthews, K.E., Stehlik, T., & Zyngier, D. (2014). “I Am Working-Class”: Subjective Self-Definition as a Missing Measure of Social Class and Socioeconomic Status in Higher Education Research. Educational Researcher, 43(4), 196–200. Rubin, M., & Wright, C.L. (2015). Age differences explain social class differences in students’ friendship at university: implications for transition and retention. Higher Education, 70(3), 427–439. Schubert, N., Binder, D., Dibiasi, A., Engleder, J., & Unger, M. (2020). Studienverläufe – Der Weg durchs Studium: Zusatzbericht der Studierenden-Sozialerhebung 2019. Wien: Institut für Höhere Studien. Soria, K.M., Stebleton, Michael, J., & Huesman, Jr., Ronald L. (2013). Class Counts: Exploring differences in academic and social integration between working-class and middle/upper-class students at large, public research universities. J. College Student Retention, (15 (2)), 215–242. Witzel, A. (2000). Das problemzentrierte Interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 1(1), 1–7.