Educational inequality has traditionally been one of the main objects of study in research on schooling, whether from sociological, pedagogical, psychological or social intervention approaches. Since the 1960s, there have been intense debates within these disciplines about the most convenient theoretical and methodological approaches to understanding and explaining this inequality, its causes and consequences (Martínez García, 2004; Tarabini and Curran, 2015). In subsequent years, concern about educational inequality has progressively entered the field of public policy, a point on which both sides of the political spectrum will coincide. From progressive perspectives, educational inequalities would hinder effective equality of opportunities regardless of social origin. From conservative views, this inequality means an inefficient use of public resources and a "loss of talents" with negative consequences for economic development, an idea based on the Human Capital perspective (Perrenoud, 2006: 81-83). 

Today, the fight against educational inequality is integrated as a fundamental part of school policies at the international level. In the European context, the European Commission's Education and Training Monitor annual report (2021) points out that, although significant progress has been made, characteristics such as social class, ethnic and national origin and gender still retain an important influence on individuals' educational trajectories. This inequality is manifested in terms of access (different possibilities of accessing the different routes and levels within the education system), process (differences in the day-to-day relationship with the institution and in the quality of learning) and outcomes (differences as reflected in the classic performance indicators: qualifications, diplomas), with all three dimensions being interrelated.   

However, there are major disagreements on both diagnoses and potential solutions to these inequalities. Indeed, the very meaning of educational equity (what is to be understood by an ‘equal education’) is contested. For some perspectives, equity means 'fair' inequality, i.e. not mediated by social determinants, and resulting solely from individual effort and ability. Other views question whether pure capabilities, which exist independently of social factors, can be rewarded, and emphasise universal access to school knowledge and skills (Bolívar, 2013). Similarly, proposals to alleviate educational inequalities have been very diverse, and have focused on different aspects of the system: didactics, curriculum, interactions in classroom, the distribution of students among the different schools, the structuring of the different levels or stages, the division between itineraries, etc. In addition, there are initiatives that have tried to go beyond the school, acting on other areas related to educational inequality (leisure and free time, family, labour market…). 

A review of the various measures and proposals against educational inequality reveals important contradictions. Analyses of these guidelines sometimes lead to very different conclusions about their effect on educational inequality. On occasions, measures that were intended to make education more inclusive have ended up having the opposite effects to those intended or have produced new forms of inequality, pushing vulnerable students to the margins of the school system (Fernández Llera and Muñiz Pérez, 2012; Escudero Muñoz and Martínez Domínguez, 2010). 

The aim of this paper is to analyse the different dilemmas and contradictions surrounding the policy against educational inequality in the Spanish context. Based on a qualitative analysis of the discourses of key stakeholders in the field of education, we identify the main conflicting positions, their arguments and the unresolved debates. This paper aims to provide a better understanding of the mechanisms at work in educational inequality and to help to overcome existing dilemmas in the fight against it. 

This research work is part of the H2020 PIONEERED project "Pioneering policies and practices tackling educational inequality in Europe" (GA-No 101004392), developed by research teams from thirteen different universities and research centres. The methodology presented here has been agreed by the different project teams to be applied in different national contexts, with a view to the comparability of the results. Still, conclusions of this work have been drawn from the analyses carried out in Spain. This research focuses on qualitative data obtained from six in-depth interviews, two focus groups and two workshops. Stakeholders included representatives of teaching staff, policy-makers, academics and members of third sector organisations and think tanks whose activity is related to education (especially the fight against educational inequality). We tried to include in the sample stakeholders with experience in different stages of the educational system, with different vulnerable groups/types of inequality and related with both formal and non-formal education. The interviews and focus groups asked about stakeholders' understanding of educational inequality (mechanisms that cause it, vulnerable groups), practices and measures to combat it in the Spanish context, successes and failures of such measures, possible guidelines not yet developed, future perspectives (increase, reduction, changes in the main mechanisms), challenges not yet overcome, dilemmas and contradictions. The two workshops focused almost exclusively on the dilemmas surrounding the fight against educational inequality (one focused on inequality within formal education, the other on non-formal education.). The main points of dissent previously identified in the analysis of the interviews and focus groups were presented. In compliance with the ethical protocols that should guide social science research, the fieldwork respected participants' capacity for self-determination and their right to decide. The research team formally required their consent. In addition, their privacy and confidentiality were assured. The request for consent was preceded by the provision of adequate, adapted, accessible, understandable and documented information, in a way that was pertinent, clear and intelligible. The nature, objectives and funding of the research were disclosed. The researchers emphasised that the provision of consent was voluntary and revocable.

We identified several main sources of conflict in the discourses surrounding the fight against educational inequalities: - Flexibility vs. homogeneity: it is argued that the rigidity of the Spanish school system penalises students (usually vulnerable) with little interest in the more academic knowledge. On the other hand, it is noted that a greater diversification of the compulsory stages would lead to a hierarchy within the student body, reproducing inequalities of social origin. Similar debates are found around the role of pedagogies: there is a defence of personalised learning in order to adapt it to the interests of pupils more distanced from academic culture, but it is pointed out that this may reinforce the interests socialised by children and adolescents on the basis of their gender, social or ethnic origin. - Outside vs. inside the school: Several stakeholders point out that the school only reproduces external inequalities, so it is unrealistic to expect that purely educational reforms can end inequality. This problem should be addressed through social, economic and labour market reforms. However, other positions accuse these approaches of being paralysing and deterministic, and argue that schools have room for manoeuvre. Moreover, some school-based measures could work empowering vulnerable groups and addressing broader inequalities - The dilemma of innovation: traditional teaching and the lack of educational innovation is pointed out as one of the main problems of education in Spain, and it is seen as related to the maintenance of inequality. However, several stakeholders point out that innovation is not necessarily inclusive, it may benefit privileged peers or generate new forms of segregation. An important part of this debate focuses on the use of ICT: while some see it as a means to bridge the digital divide, others argue that it will reinforce inequalities associated with digital skills and access to electronic devices.

Bolívar, J. A (2013). Justicia social y equidad escolar. Una revisión actual. Revista Internacional de Educación para la Justicia Social, 1(1), 2-45. Escudero Muñoz, J. M., & Martínez Domínguez, B. (2011). Educación inclusiva y cambio escolar. Revista iberoamericana de educación, 55, 86-105. Fernández Llera, R., & Muñiz Pérez, M. (2012). Colegios concertados y selección de escuela en España: un círculo vicioso. Presupuesto y gasto público, 67, 97-118. Martínez García, J. S. (2004). Distintas aproximaciones a la elección racional. Revista internacional de sociología, 62(37), 139-173. Perrenoud, P. (2006). El oficio del alumno y el sentido del trabajo escolar. Madrid: Editorial Popular. Tarabini, A., & Curran, M. (2015). El efecto de la clase social en las decisiones educativas: un análisis de las oportunidades, creencias y deseos educativos de los jóvenes. Revista de investigación en Educación, 13(1), 7-26. Varela Fernández, J. (1990). Clases sociales, pedagogías y reforma educativa. Revista de educación, 292, 219-236.