The measures taken to prevent the spread of COVID-19 have hampered the functioning of schools and the lives of teachers, students and parents, especially of women and vulnerable students around the world, including European countries (Blundell et al., 2021; Zabaniotou, 2020; Friedman et al., 2021; Di Pietro et al., 2020).

Studies reveal that the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing gender differences at all levels of schooling, with female students particularly affected (Fuller, 2021; Friedman et al., 2021; UNESCO Report, 2021). According to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report (2021), girls in low-income countries have suffered the most severe educational disadvantages due to many factors such as poor financial and cultural resources, discriminatory gender norms in society, even child labour.

Among the marginalized groups of students who are disproportionately negatively affected by the pandemic are also those with low socio-economic status, less educated parents and students living in remote and rural areas (Doyle, 2020). These students are less likely to have an appropriate home environment, parental emotional support, and help with schoolwork, compared to their peers with an advantaged background. In COVID-19 pandemic context, these disadvantages have contributed to inequalities in students’ educational attainments and prospects, with students at a disadvantage legging behind (Di Pietro et al., 2020). Di Pietro et al. (2020) also point out that the pandemic has contributed not only to greater inequalities in cognitive abilities but also to students’ lower emotional well-being and motivation to learn. Here it is important to state that students’ cognitive and emotional skills are relevant predictors not only of students’ educational attainments but also of their labour market prospects.

Croatian education has undergone similar experience during the COVID-19 pandemic as other European countries (Di Pietro et al., 2020; Blundell et al., 2021). The findings also indicate that the COVID-19 measures mostly affected students in final years of upper secondary schools. They mostly felt losses in the quality of teaching and learning, negative effects on their mental health and plans for the future. Girls felt more deprived of the quality of education than boys, especially high-achieving girls (Ristić Dedić and Jokić, 2021).

Gender inequality in education intersects with a wide range of other categories of inequality such as socio-economic and cultural background, rural and urban residential environment and employment opportunities, resulting in multiple exclusions and poorer life opportunities for girls.

Studies highlight the lack of cross-sectoral and integrated efforts to bridge gender gaps and propose integrated policies and interventions to improve the lives of girls and each individual (Fuller, 2021).

The main aim of our research is to identify differences in self-efficacy for higher education (HE) of upper secondary students during the pandemic produced by intersection of gender, class and residential status.

The following research questions will be addressed: 1. Are there differences between and among boys and girls based on class (cultural and economic capital) and residential status (urban vs. rural); 2. Were these differences higher during the pandemic or before the pandemic?

We expect higher self-efficacy of boys than girls. Also, we expect interaction effects in the way that lower class and rural residential status will more negatively affect girls than boys. In addition, we expect that lower class and rural residential status will be related to lower self-efficacy for HE within genders. Regarding second research question, we expect larger gender differences in self-efficacy for HE in boys’ favour during the pandemic than before the pandemic. Furthermore, we expect larger interaction effects during the pandemic, resulting in even lower self-efficacy for HE of girls from lower class and rural residential places compared to more advantaged groups of girls and boys.

We use the quantitative intersectionality approach based on McCall’s intercategorical framework (2005) with multigroup and comparative analysis. Accordingly, we analyse the mutual interaction and joint effect of all categories and groups constituting the categories, namely: 1. gender (girls and boys), 2. social class (lower, middle and upper class) and 3. residential status (students from rural and urban locations). Economic and cultural capital conceptualized according to Bourdieu's theory (1977) are used as indicators of social class, while self-efficacy for HE is conceptualised according to Bandura (1997) as students' belief in their ability to successfully enrol and complete their desired studies. The research was conducted in 2021 within the project “National monitoring of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on educational system in Republic of Croatia” that was funded by the Croatian Ministry of science and education. The data were obtained from a Croatian nationally representative sample of 6350 students (58.3% females) from 77 upper secondary schools. The students attended either gymnasium or vocational programs that allowed them to enter HE. Students’ questionnaire contained the following items/scales: student’s expected GPA, upper secondary school program (gymnasium or vocational), gender, location (urban or rural), indicators of cultural capital (number of books at home, parental educational level), indicators of economic capital (parental employment status, student’s possession of his/her own room), and items measuring students’ self-efficacy for HE (How confident are you that you will successfully…? Pass the State Matura exams, Enrol in the desired study program, Complete the desired study program; 1 factor, α=.86). Cultural capital was dichotomised (0–low; 1–high [student has at least one HE parent and ≥25 books in his/her home]), as well as economic capital (0–low; 1–high [if both parents were employed and student has his/her own room]). We employed multilevel regression modelling with a random intercept to take into account the hierarchical nature of the sample. Students’ self-efficacy for HE served as the outcome variable. Regressors were added to the model in four blocks: 1) control variables (student’s expected GPA, upper secondary school program), 2) main variables (gender, location, cultural capital, economic capital), 3) two-way interactions of main variables, and 4) higher-order interactions of main variables. As the pre-pandemic reference point, the findings of our 2015 research on the upper-secondary students’ self-efficacy for HE were used. In this research, a similar dataset was collected, which allowed comparison between the two time points using the same analytical approach.

Preliminary findings of the dataset from 2021 indicate that all regressors have statistically significant effects. In line with our hypothesis, boys have higher self-efficacy for HE than girls. It has to be noted that both girls and boys on average report high levels of self-efficacy and gender effect is small. Also, students of urban residential status have higher self-efficacy for HE than students from rural area. In addition, students are on average more self-efficient for HE if they have high cultural and economic capital. When it comes to control variables, students have higher self-efficacy for higher education if they have higher GPA and if they attend gymnasium programs. Similar main effects were replicated within genders. Introducing the interactions to the model did not resulted in better model fit. The only statistically significant interaction was the one between gender and cultural capital. This indicates that boys benefit somewhat more from high cultural capital than girls when it comes to self-efficacy for HE. In other words, our hypothesis that lower class will more negatively affect girls than boys was only partially confirmed. On the other hand, rural residential status affected girls and boys similarly. Shortly, preliminary data from 2021 indicate the intersection of gender, class (capitals), residential status and type of upper secondary school with the students’ self-efficacy for HE. The data also suggest that cultural capital is the strongest dimension of inequality in self-efficacy for HE between girls and boys. Regarding second research question, gender differences in self-efficacy for HE in boys’ favour had similar, i.e. small, effect sizes before (dataset from 2015) and during the pandemic (dataset from 2021). However, the overall self-efficacy for HE was slightly higher before the pandemic. Presentation further discusses the similarities and differences between and within genders as well as the pre-pandemic and pandemic findings.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman, New York. Blundell, R., Cribb, J., McNally, S., Warwick, R., & Xu, X. (2021). The implications of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Institute for Fiscal Studies. https://ifs.org.uk/inequality/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/BN-Inequalities-in-education-skills-and-incomes-in-the-UK-the-impl Bourdieu, P. (1977). The forms of capitals In: A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown and A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy, and society (pp. 46-58). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Di Pietro G., Biagi F., Costa P., Karpinski Z., Mazza, J. (2020) The likely impact of COVID -19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets. JRC Technical Report, European Commission. Doolan K., Barada, V., Burić, I., Krolo K., Tonković Ž. (2020). Student life during the Covid-19 pandemic: Europe-wide insights. The European Students’ Union, University of Zadar and the Institue for the development of education in Croatia. Doyle, O. (2020). COVID-19: Exacerbating educational inequalities?, Public Policy. IE. Evidence for Policy. UCD. Friedman, J., Montoya, S., & Gakidou, E. (2021). Gender equality in the global return to school. Think Global Health. https://www.thinkglobalhealth.org/article/gender-equality-global-return-school Fuller, Sarah H. (2021). This International Women’s Day, the spotlight is on gender equity during and beyond the COVID-19 response. https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/sarah_fuller_blog.pdf Global Education Monitoring Reort. (2021). Her education our future. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375707/PDF/375707eng.pdf.multi McCall L. (2005) The complexity of Intersectionality. The University of Chicago Press Ristić Dedić Z. and Jokić B. (2021). Generation of the "deprived" - the effects of the pandemic on the students' mental and educational well-being from the perspective of students. Presentation, 25th Ramiro and Zoran Bujas Days - 25th DRZB, University of Zagreb. Zabaniotou, A. (2020). Towards gender equality in higher education institutions: Equal female academics in the Mediterranean during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Global University Network for Innovation. http://www.guninetwork.org/report/towards-gender-equality-higher-education-institutions-equal-female-academics-mediterranean