UNICEF estimates that 616 million pupils worldwide have been excluded from regular schooling as a consequence of the coronavirus. As a result, many countries have put in place processes and structures, such as remedial education programmes, to address growing educational inequalities and promote school participation (Groß Ophoff et al. 2023). Such measures include summer-schools. They are typically used to reduce educational inequalities, in particular the socially disparate summer gap effect (Helbing et al. 2021). According to the faucet theory, pupils with low socio-economic status are disproportionately affected by summer learning loss (Alexander et al. 2001). The explanation for this phenomenon is that disadvantaged pupils have structurally less or no access to institutional and non-formal educational settings during holidays. 

With regard to effects of summer-schools, there is evidence that they can have positive effects on pupils' literacy or numeracy skills, confidence and self-regulation (Cooper et al., 2000; Quinn et al. 2014; Lynch et al. 2023). However, the overall effect is expected to be rather small, at d=.23 (Hattie 2020). In addition, effect sizes are higher for middle class children than for low SES children. In addition, effect sizes are higher for middle class children than for low SES children. Successful programmes are characterised by the use of professional (trained) educational staff, meaningful preintervention assessment of performance and needs, parental involvement and the use of individualised support approaches (Zierer 2021).

The Austrian Ministry of Education (BMBWF) has introduced a ten-day summer-school at the end of the summer holidays in 2020. It aims to reduce the risk of learning loss for pupils with a non-german mother tongue and/or low academic achievement by providing individualised and linguistically adapted instruction during the summer holidays. In 2021, the programme was opened to all interested pupils and extended to other subjects (including Maths and English). The programme is now open to all pupils with different learning needs (repetition and consolidation of learning content, targeted support to compensate for deficits, preparation for the next school year and support for the transition to a new school form). Teaching should take place in small groups, across classes and school levels, and be project-oriented and language-sensitive. Student teachers and official teachers are responsible for the implementation of the programme (BMBWF 2023). 

To date, there are only a few studies that provide insights into the summer school intervention. The main focus has been on the student teachers teaching in the summer school and their competence and professional development (Kart et al. 2022; Groß Ophoff et al. 2023; Lenz et al. 2023; Pham Xuan et al. under review). There is no evidence on the impact of the Austrian programme at pupil level. This study therefore focuses on the pupils who participated in the summer school. The research project aims to answer the following research questions:

- What experiences and perceptions do the students report after their participation in the summer school with regard to the objectives of the BMBWF?

- How are these reports to be interpreted in the light of the Faucet Theory?

To answer these questions, four group interviews were conducted with lower-achieving pupils (from less privileged backgrounds). The interviews provided an in-depth insight into the support programme and shed new light on the participants' experiences. The data were analysed using structured qualitative content analysis. The results will be discussed in the light of the international literature on the impact and conditions for success of summer-schools. Finally, the suitability of summer schools as an intervention to ensure school participation, as implied in the title, is addressed. The paper concludes with a discussion of conceptual considerations for the further development of summer-schools.

The qualitative study design of group interviews was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, group interviews allow researchers to capture the opinions and experiences of multiple participants simultaneously, which can increase the efficiency of data collection (Nentwig-Gesemann & Gerstenberg 2014). Secondly, group interviews provide an opportunity to observe and analyse social dynamics and interactions within the group, and break up traditional interview settings with relatively unequal power relations between interviewer and interviewee (Vogl 2019). Therefore, the interview questions focused on the pupils' experiences with the objectives set by the Ministry of Education (BMBWF) and their personal assessment of the teaching and learning environment. Other topics included expectations regarding participation, personal achievement development and relationships with staff in the summer school programme. A total of 18 pupils participated voluntarily. 10 children were female and 8 were male. 11 of the pupils interviewed had a history of international migration. The average age of the pupils was 11.7 years. The average length of the interview was 32 minutes. Participants were selected in consultation with the organisers at the school site (selection criteria: previous academic performance and family background). The four group interviews took place in different schools in Tyrol. During the interviews, care was taken to create a sensitive and protective atmosphere for the children. The audio files of the interviews were pre-transcribed using AI software (fx4), and then final transcribed in two rounds by the research team. The interview data were processed and analysed using structured qualitative content analysis (Mayring 2022). The structured data analysis was conducted using MAXQDA 26 software for qualitative data. As part of the structured qualitative content analysis, a theory-based deductive category system was first developed. This was then applied to the text corpus (Mayring 2022). On the one hand, it is based on the literature on the characteristics of effective summer school interventions (teaching in small groups, performance diagnostics before the intervention, individualised support concepts, supervision by professional educational staff, etc.). The second thematic area was derived from the administrative objectives of the BMBWF. All theoretically based deductive categories were reflected in terms of the research interest of the summer school as a structure for school participation. During the coding process, text passages containing judgements, evaluations and experiences were categorised according to their deductive content. In addition, further themes and categories were identified inductively.

Overall, the pupils were positive about the programme. They stated that they felt the summer-school was an enjoyable opportunity to repeat learning. The relationship with the teachers was particularly emphasised. The lessons were described as frontal teaching with elements of individual support. With regard to the requirements of the BMBWF, there is no evidence of project-oriented, language-sensitive or highly individualised teaching. The results point more towards conventional one-to-one tuition. The small group sizes and the quiet in the classroom were positively evaluated. The resource of the multilingualism of migrant pupils was not taken into account. Individual assessment was not mentioned by the pupils (BMBWF 2023). In the context of the Faucet Theory, the pupils' perceptions can to some extent be seen as an advantage, as they were at least able to have a positive experience of institutionalised education during the summer holidays (Alexander et al. 2001). However, it must also be pointed out that the absence of some of the announced design features of the lessons and known effective features of the summer-schools points to possible development potential (differentiation and individualisation of learning as well as performance diagnostics). In this context, the group of trainee teachers who were largely responsible for organising and delivering the lessons should be mentioned again. If student teachers are to be used, it could be beneficial to give them more support in organising and running the summer school. Student teachers should therefore be given more support through mentoring programmes. This would presumably also benefit the quality of teaching and thus the educational experience of the participating pupils. In summary, the proposed presentation is intended to contribute to the inclusion discourse, which refers to in-depth insights and experiences of disadvantaged students with institutionalised educational settings during out-of-school times in order to ensure school participation.

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Olson, L. S. (2001). Schools, achievement, and inequality: A seasonal perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 171–191. BMBWF, (2023). Sommerschule 2023. Stand 2. Mai. 2023, https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/Themen/schule/zrp/sommerschule/sommerschule2023.html Cooper, H., Charlton, K., Valentine, J. C., Muhlenbruck, L., & Borman, G. D. (2000). Making the Most of Summer School: A Meta-Analytic and Narrative Review. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 65(1). Groß Ophoff, J., Helm, C., Bremm, N., & Reintjes, C. (2023). Aufholen in und nach Krisenzeiten. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung. Hattie, J. (2020). Lernen sichtbar machen. In J. Hattie, W. Beywl & K. Zierer (Hrsg.), Lernen sichtbar machen. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren. Helbig, M., Edelstein, B., Fickermann, D., Zink, C., & Himmelrath, A. (2022). Aufholen nach Corona? Maßnahmen der Länder im Kontext des Aktionsprogramms von Bund und Ländern. DDS - Die Deutsche Schule. Herzog-Punzenberger, B., & Kart, A. (2021). Sommerschulen und andere Aufholprogramme – internationale Einblicke. SchulVerwaltung, 9(4), 106–109. Kart, A., Groß Ophoff, J., & Pham Xuan, R. (2023). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes about teaching and learning in multilingual classrooms. Insights from the Austrian-wide summer school programme in 2021. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 36(3), 276-292. Lenz, S., Gamsjäger, M., Severa, M., Kladnik, C., Prammer Semmler, E., & Plaimauer, C. (2023). „… und dann sagten sie plötzlich Frau Lehrerin zu mir!“ Die Sommerschule als Lernfeld für Lehramtsstudierende. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 13(2), 237-257. Lynch, K., An, L., & Mancenido, Z. (2023). The impact of summer programs on student mathematics achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 93(2), 275-315. Mayring, P. (2022). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse (13. Aufl.). Weinheim: Beltz. Nentwig-Gesemann, I., & Gerstenberg, F. (2014). Gruppeninterviews. Handbuch Kinder und Medien, 273-285. Pham Xuan, R., Groß Ophoff, J. (under Review). How is summer school actually delivered? A latent class analysis of student self-reports from 2020-2022. Frontiers Education. Quinn, D. M., Lynch, K., & Kim, J. S. (2014). Replicating the Moderating Role of Income Status on Summer School Effects across Subject Areas: A Meta-Analysis. Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. UNICEF. (2022). COVID:19 Scale of education loss ‘nearly insurmountable’, warns UNICEF. Vogl, S. (2019). Gruppendiskussion. In: Baur, N., Blasius, J. (eds) Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21308-4_46 Zierer, K. (2021). Ein Jahr zum Vergessen: Wie wir die Bildungskatastrophe nach Corona verhindern. Verlag Herder GmbH.