Although the pursuit of equality of opportunity has been high on the agenda in both policy and practice in recent years, inequality in educational opportunities has meanwhile increased even further, arguably especially since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. Achieving equality of opportunity turns out to be a particularly complex task. It can be characterized as a ‘wicked’ problem – for a number of reasons.

First of all, wicked problems are socially complex, because a large number of actors is involved, in a dynamic social context. Because various stakeholders (can) play different roles in both the causes and the solutions of the problem of inequality of educational opportunities, it can be seen as a multi-actor problem. Relevant actors in the Dutch educational policy context are parents, teachers, school directors, educational directors or school board members, local policy makers and the municipal educational executive.

Secondly, wicked problems are normatively complex, as solutions often require transcendence of individual interests. All aforementioned stakeholders do not only have an actor-specific views and interests, but also a personal or political ones, which at times might contradict each other.

Thirdly, wicked problems are substantively complex, because the problem cannot be defined unambiguously and has a multitude of – often interrelated – causes. Reducing inequality seems a goal shared by many and, at first glance, the definition of equal opportunities seems unambiguous. Research shows that the shared pursuit of equality of opportunity can be and has been interpreted in a variety of ways.

In this study, inequality of (educational) opportunities is approached as a wicked problem that requires individual and collective commitment from various actors in educational policy and practice, such as local governments, school boards, teachers and parents. To reach collective efficacy, each actor should feel responsible for tackling the problem of inequality of opportunities (ownership) and be willing and able to do so (agency). Feelings of ownership and agency, however, might differ as they are affected by the perspective that actors have on the nature, causes and approaches of the problem of inequality of opportunity. Moreover, in order to be able to show agency, the context must provide sufficient space for actors to actually exert influence on a situation or problem.

This study investigates the perceptions and perspectives of various actors within a local context, regarding the problem of inequality of opportunity in education, their own role in tackling it and possible obstacles they might encounter in developing (collective) agency. The aim is to gain insight in the ways in which local networks handle 'wicked' problems. The central question of this study is: What views, ownership and agency do different actor groups in education have with regard to increasing the equality of opportunities in education?

This quantitative study focuses on various actor groups in their local contexts. In two medium-sized Dutch cities, the entire local school networks, including the municipal educational executive and local policy makers, school boards, headteachers, teachers and parents were asked to fill out an online survey.

Although this study takes place in the Netherlands, the insights will be useable by researchers and policy makers across the national borders as well, as the problem of inequality of opportunity and questions of agency and ownership are universal. During the discussion we can compare the results of our study to the experiences of the audience: do they recognize the way this ‘wicked’ problem is viewed and handled in their own local context? Moreover, possible explanations for (a lack of) perceived ownership and agency by various actors and potential implications for policy can be discussed.

In this quantitative study the views, ownership and agency of different actor groups with regard to equality of opportunities in education are investigated. We adopt a case study approach, in which two participating cities or municipalities are considered ‘cases’. The aim was to examine how relevant actors within a given context perceive the ‘wicked’ problem of inequality of opportunity in education. Data are currently being collected in the local contexts of two medium-sized municipalities in the Netherlands. We invited the entire local school networks of both municipalities to participate in the study. Research participants include parents, preschool teachers, primary and secondary school teachers, principals, school board members, local educational policy makers and the municipal executive responsible for education. They were asked to complete an online survey between 8 November 2022 and 6 February 2023. The municipal executive, policy makers, board members and principals were recruited directly via e-mail; samples of five parents and five teachers per school were recruited with the help of the school administration. Parents were all member of the parent association or representative advisory council of their children’s school. At the time of writing, a total of 625 stakeholders filled out the online questionnaire, representing over 60 different schools for primary and secondary education. The online survey consisted mostly of Likert-type questions on: (1) the perceptions of the ideal of equality of opportunity, (2) perceptions on the urgency and solvability of the problem, (3) perceptions on the respondent’s own role and beliefs about their influence, and (4) their perceptions of the local environment and the (pre)conditions for agency. In one of the questions, participants were asked which of six descriptions of the ideal of equality of opportunities best fit their own perspective. Two of the definitions were: “That every student has access to quality education” and “That every student can receive the education that best suits his or her interests and talents.” In two questions on problem attribution respondents were asked to distribute the attributions of a total of 100 percent of the causes as well as of the solutions among actor groups. The data will be analyzed and interpreted, using multilevel regression analysis and SEM models to find any meaningful similarities and/or differences. The differences in views, ownership and agency between actor groups will be analyzed within and across both cities.

This study will contribute to both knowledge and policy development by helping policymakers and education professionals to make a problem analysis and to identify points of departure for improvement. It supports educational actors in shaping individual and collective efforts to aim for equality of opportunity. We hope to gain a better understanding of the preconditions for agency in tackling wicked problems such as inequality of opportunities. Firstly, this study will provide an overview of the extent to which certain views and perspectives are endorsed by actors in the local context. The extent to which these visions differ within and between different actor groups will also be examined. From this overview, it can be deduced whether one of the possible conditions for developing collective agency is met: having a convergent view on equality of opportunities within the local network; aiming for the same goal. Secondly, this study will provide insight into the extent to which actors consider themselves and their own actor group responsible for the solution of this problem, and to what extent they attribute it to (an)other actor group(s). Finally, at the conceptual level, relations between the concepts of views, ownership and agency will be examined. We will also provide insight into certain environmental factors that can hinder or benefit the perceived influence and agency of actors, such as (a lack of) time, resources or support. This knowledge about possibilities and obstacles for the individual and collective commitment to equality of opportunities of various actor groups is of value to professionals in policy and practice who individually and jointly want to shape the social task of achieving equality of opportunity in education.

Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the life course: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132–149. Cardozo, L., & Simoni, T. (2015). Machismo and Mamitas at school: exploring the agency of teachers for social gender justice in Bolivian education. European Journal of Development Research, 27(4), 574–588. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2015.51 Cavazzoni, F., Fiorini, A., & Veronese, G. (2022). How Do We Assess How Agentic We Are? A Literature Review of Existing Instruments to Evaluate and Measure Individuals’ Agency. Social Indicators Research, 159(3), 1125–1153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02791-8 Coleman, J. S. (1968). The Concept of Equality of Educational Opportunity. Harvard Educational Review, 38(1), 7–22. http://meridian.allenpress.com/her/article-pdf/38/1/7/2108061/haer_38_1_m3770776577415m2.pdf Denessen, E. (2020). Ongelijke kansen; een gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid voor een gezamenlijke aanpak. [Unequal Opportunities; a shared responsibility for a collective approach.] De Nieuwe Meso, 7(1), 50–54. Elffers, L. (2022). Onderwijs maakt het verschil: kansengelijkheid in het Nederlandse onderwijs. [Education makes the difference: equality of opportunity in Dutch education.] Walburg Pers. Haelermans, C., Korthals, R., Madelon, J., de Leeuw, S., Vermeulen, S., van Vugt, L., Aarts, B., Prokic-Breuer, T., van der Velden, R., van Wetten, S., & de Wolf, I. (2022). Sharp increase in inequality in education in times of the COVID-19-pandemic. PLoS ONE, 17(2), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0261114 Jencks, C. (1988). Whom Must We Treat Equally for Educational Opportunity to be Equal? Ethics, 98(3), 518–533. https://doi.org/10.1086/292969 Korsten, A. (2019). Omgaan met ‘wicked problems.’ [Dealing with ‘wicked’ problems.] Beleidsonderzoek Online, 0(3). https://doi.org/10.5553/bo/221335502019000002001 Pantić, N. (2021). Teachers’ Reflection on their Agency for Change (TRAC): a tool for teacher development and professional inquiry. Teacher Development, 25(2), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2020.1868561 Priestley, M., Edwards, R., Priestley, A., & Miller, K. (2012). Teacher Agency in Curriculum Making: Agents of Change and Spaces for Manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-873X.2012.00588.X Robeyns, I. (2006). Three models of education: Rights, capabilities and human capital. Theory and Research in Education, 4(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878506060683 UNICEF Office of Research. (2018). An Unfair Start: Inequality in Children’s Education in Rich Countries, Innocenti Report Card 15. www.unicef-irc.org Vilakazi, T. T. (2008). Principals as agents of change. http://repository.nwu.ac.za/handle/10394/1857 Westen, P. (1985). The Concept of Equal Opportunity. Ethics, 95(4), 837–850.