The EU was recently celebrating the 20^th anniversary of the social dimension in the Bologna Process. One of the EU-wide goals was formulated by the European Commission to “building inclusive and connected higher education systems” (European Commission, 2017). A further step is to strive towards a holistic approach with elements such as ‘equity’, ‘diversity’ and ‘community engagement’ (Schmidt Scukanec/Napier 2020, 2). Only on a holistic basis “universities can address a broad range of societal needs, including those of vulnerable, disadvantaged and underrepresented [students]” (Schmidt Scukanec/Napier 2020, 6). Despite political commitments, only a few European countries ­– Austria, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden and Croatia ­– have implemented an action plan on the system level to foster social inclusion in Higher Education (HE).

This PhD project will investigate the development of a sense of belonging of an underprivileged group in HE, namely working-class students (operationalization in the methods section). Despite the strategic commitment of universities to inclusion and the social dimension, inheritance of educational inequalities is still an issue in many countries (OECD 2016). The HE system is also not necessarily geared up to coping with working class students, as well.

For working-class students 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 et al. 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 et al. 2001).

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, or as he would call it ­–  mix of capitals ­–   and a (class-) specific habitus (Bourdieu, 1992).

More precisely, the research question is how the sense of belonging of this student group develops at the begin of their studies at university. In the field of HE, sense of belonging is often referred to as student abilities to build social networks and it is gaining importance as a ‘predictor of positive academic outcomes’ (Lewis and Hodges 2015, 1). The research question will be answered with a qualitative design (see methods section). A gap in the literature that has already been identified is the need to expand the concept of belonging over the course of the student lifecycle.

This topic is not only interesting for scientists as 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, 2017b). This makes the topic also relevant for practicioners and policymakers.

A qualitative research design is appropriate to address the research question (see section before), as well as to shed light on processes and mechanisms of social reproduction on an individual level. The methodology of the data analysis and the interpretation are Constructivist Grounded Theory (CGT) coined by Charmaz (2009), qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz 2012) and the Bourdieusian qualitative research paradigm. As a sampling method, problem-centered interviews were chosen (Witzel 2000). They are helpful to analyse a societal problem ¬– such as sense of belonging at universities – during the data collection stage and the inductive/deductive interpretation phase (Witzel 2000). More specifically, interviews with working-class students at public Austrian universities are scheduled until theoretical saturation is reached. Nine interviews were already conducted between 2019 and 2021. The students are in different stages in HE: some recently transitioned to university (2), others are in the middle of their studies (4) and have already changed their study subject (3). 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 as „a combination of economic status, values, beliefs, attitudes, and assumptions“(Okun et al. 1999, cited by Longwell-Grice & Longwell-Grice, 2007). The American Psychological Association’s Task Force on social class and SES and others have also recommended that researchers employ both subjective and objective measure in their research (Saegert et al. 2006; cited in Rubin et al. 2014,198). The data will be analyzed by using a qualitative data analysis software. Data analysis will be performed by following Charmaz (2006) CGT principles. There will be both an inductive coding to ensure theoretical openness, as well as a deductive coding based on Bourdieusian theory and the existing literature on belonging in HE. In the coding process, different experiences of the students are 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. Their accounts are attempted to be more than anecdotal but enrich the knowledge we have already gained about working-class students at universities.

A preliminary finding is the ambiguous nature of friendships. It is important for students – especially for the development of a sense of belonging – to build friendships with peers at the campus (e.g. Wilcox et al. 2005). However, recent literature talks of advantaged and disadvantages of social relationships for academic development (Donovan & Erskine-Shaw 2020). For mature students, friendships are a way to promote collective learning and to enjoy the student life. However, for first-year students friendships can serve as a distraction to academic commitments (ibid). In one interview, a working-class student reported of the helpfulness of having friends (which were advanced in their studies) at the university: And about my friends, they were naturally helpful, as they were advanced. They were always one or two semesters before me. This was very convenient thus it helped me.(February 2020. Ludwig, Business Law/Medicine) Several interview partners reported of keeping their high school friends and/or close ties with family and their home town community. This is also described in international literature (Barnett 2014, Dipplhofer-Stiem 2017a). It can be a factor for disadvantaged students to keep their identity (Dipplhofer-Stiem 2017a). However, sometimes this provided to be a hinderance to building belonging and friendships at the campus. Ludwig, for example, said: I did not attend any lectures. I had quasi no contact to students except a little tiny bit, just friends from HTL who studied partly the same. (February 2020. Ludwig, Business Law/Medicine) Quotes like these show that working-class students' identities are complex and they need support to develop a sense of belonging at universities. Thus, this presentation would be of particular interest to both scholars and practicioners, who are involved in student support or equity initiatives - not also in Austria, but every country has to deal with students from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds.

Barnett, D. R. (2014). Academic and Social Integration of Nontraditional Students: The Role of Active Learning Strategies and Sense of Belonging in Integration and Persistence Southern Illinois University. Carbondale, Illinois. Bourdieu, P. (1992). Ökonomisches Kapital. In P. Bourdieu (Ed.), Die verborgenen Mechanismen der Macht (S. 49–79). Hamburg: VSA Verlag. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage Publications. Dipplhofer-Stiem, B. (2017a). Nicht ganz ohne. Benachteiligung von Arbeiterkindern im Studium. In: Die Hochschule : Journal für Wissenschaft und Bildung, (26),129-141. Donovan, C., Erskine-Shaw, M. (2020): ‘Maybe I can do this. Maybe I should be here’: evaluating an academic literacy, resilience and confidence programme. In: Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44 (3), 326-340. Hurtado, S., Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of College Transition and Perceptions of the Campus Racial Climate on Latino College Students' Sense of Belonging. In: Sociology of Education, 70 (4): 324-345. 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. Longwell-Grice, R.,Longwell-Grice, H. (2008): Testing Tinto: How Do Retention Theories Work for First-Generation, Working-Class Students? In: Journal of College Student Retention, 9(4), 407-420. OECD (2016). Education at a Glance 2016: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. 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., 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. Schmidt Scukanec, N., Napier, R. (2020). DRAFT: Principles and Guidelines to Strengthen the Social Dimension of Higher Education in the EHEA: Group 1 for Social Dimension. Schubert, N., Binder, D., Dibiasi, A., Engleder, J., Unger, M. (2020). Studienverläufe – Der Weg durchs Studium: Studierenden-Sozialerhebung 2019. Wien: IHS. Soria, K.M., Stebleton, M.J., Huesman, Jr., R. 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. Wilcox, P., Winn, S., Fyvie‐Gauld, M. (2005). ‘It was nothing to do with the university, it was just the people’: the role of social support in the first‐year experience of higher education. In: Studies in Higher Education, 30(6), 707-722. Witzel, A. (2000). Das problemzentrierte Interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 1(1), 1-7.