The socio-economic status (SES) has long been considered a key factor influencing students' educational achievements (e.g., Coleman et al., 1966; Sirin, 2005). Along with theoretical discussions, the significance of SES in educational achievement is also addressed by international studies on student achievement, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA; OECD, 2016, 2019), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS; Mullis et al., 2017), the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS; Mullis et al., 2020), and the International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS; Schulz, 2018), which highlight factors that influence students’ educational outcomes. The results of these studies indicate that in Europe, students from lower SES backgrounds consistently perform worse than their more advantaged peers, with significant gaps observed in reading, mathematics, and science literacy. The PISA 2018 report, for example, shows that across OECD countries, socio-economically disadvantaged students are three times more likely to be low performers in reading compared to their advantaged peers (OECD, 2019). Similarly, students with low socio-economic status in Slovenia, in comparison with their more socio-economically advantaged peers, exhibit lower educational achievement and well-being, as indicated by poorer stress regulation, a lower sense of school belonging, a lower sense of safety in school, higher mathematics anxiety, etc. (Šterman et al., 2024). Furthermore, national research shows that students’ SES is an important factor in shaping their educational and occupational aspirations (e.g., Cankar, 2020).

Educational policies play a vital role in ensuring equal opportunities; however, it is important to understand that the formulation of educational policies is an open and complex process. It is not limited to a rational, linear approach or the simple transfer of international education models to national contexts (Nordin & Sundberg, 2014). Therefore, the successful formulation of national educational policies  necessitates the inclusion of cultural, ideological, and political perspectives, as these influence the interpretation of the problem and strategies for addressing it (Kingdon, 2003; Stone, 2012). When addressing SES, it is crucial to consider its multidimensionality, as it encompasses factors such as income, parental education, occupational status, and access to cultural and social resources (Early et al., 2020; Sirin, 2005). This highlights the need for a broader, holistic approach that goes beyond single, unidimensional factors.

Consequently, we assume that an effective understanding of the public policy problem regarding the impact of low SES on students’ educational achievements, requires engaging with theoretical concepts from multiple fields.

Analysing the issue through diverse theoretical frameworks and disciplines is essential, as each provides unique perspectives, methodologies, and interpretations, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding.

Examining issues through different theoretical lenses promotes critical reflection and prevents narrow interpretations. For example, philosophical and ethical views deepen understanding of justice, while political science and sociology help tailor solutions to specific contexts. Psychological views focus on individuals' motivation and the internal and external factors affecting them, while educational sciences are more oriented towards shaping and adapting the school environment. This broad review leads to a more holistic understanding and adaptable policies that address societal challenges and meet community needs.

The purpose of this paper is to provide in-depth understanding the understanding of the impact of students´ low SES on their educational achievements by analysing relevant literature, and to highlight the importance of an interdisciplinary approach in identifying public policy problem and determining more equitable educational policies. In this context, the paper addresses the following research question: How can an interdisciplinary theoretical and empirical insights contribute to a deeper understanding of the impact of students´ low SES on their educational achievements, the identification of public policy problems, and the development of more equitable educational policies?

This study employs a literature review approach to explore the impact of students' low SES on their educational achievements and to highlight the role of interdisciplinary perspectives in identifying public policy problems and shaping more equitable educational policies. The review synthesizes key theoretical and empirical contributions across multiple disciplines, including education sciences, philosophy, sociology, political science, and psychology. The selection of literature is guided by relevance to the research question rather than by a systematic protocol. Sources include peer-reviewed journal articles, books, and research studies. The primary databases consulted are Web of Science, Scopus, and ERIC, supplemented by reference tracking to identify influential works. Emphasis is placed on recent research (last two decades), while foundational theoretical works are also included to provide historical context. The literature is analysed using thematic analysis, a research method for identifying and interpreting patterns or themes within a data set, often leading to new insights and deeper understanding (Boyatzis, 2010; Elliott, 2018). In this study, thematic analysis is applied to debates related to SES and educational inequalities. We will use comparative analysis to examine how different disciplines conceptualize and address SES-related disparities. Special attention is given to how interdisciplinary perspectives contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the issue, integrating insights from policy analysis, educational theory, and social sciences. This review does not aim to provide a systematic or exhaustive analysis but rather a critical and integrative synthesis of key literature relevant to the topic. The study acknowledges potential biases in source selection, as the review is guided by thematic relevance rather than predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. By examining diverse scholarly perspectives, this study deepens the understanding of SES-related educational disparities and underscores the importance of interdisciplinary approaches in developing more equitable education policies.

This paper represents an initial step in the preparation of a PhD dissertation examining why the low educational achievement of students from low socio-economic backgrounds is not recognized as a pressing policy problem in Slovenia. The in-depth interdisciplinary literature review is crucial not only for understanding the complexity of this issue but also for critically assessing the adequacy—or lack thereof—of current policies that address educational inequalities in a limited and fragmented manner. Given that equity is one of the highest priorities in EU education policy, as reflected in key benchmarks such as the reduction of low achievement in PISA results (e.g. Council of the EU, 2021), this paper holds significance not only for the Slovenian context but also for broader European Union research and policymaking. Identifying and framing policy problems is a crucial stage in public policy formation, as problem definition shapes subsequent policy responses and solutions. If the issue of low academic achievement among socio-economically disadvantaged students is not adequately recognized or framed in policy discussions, the measures addressing it will likely remain insufficient. It is expected that multidisciplinary theoretical insights will demonstrate that low academic achievement among students from disadvantaged backgrounds should not be perceived merely as an educational issue but rather as a broader societal challenge, deeply intertwined with economic, social, and political structures. By highlighting how different disciplines conceptualize SES-related disparities, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the issue and emphasizes the need for holistic, interdisciplinary policy approaches. The findings aim to contribute to existing academic debates and to inform policy discussions, fostering more effective and equitable educational policies that recognize the structural dimensions of educational disadvantage.

Boyatzis, R. E. (2010). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development (Nachdr.). Sage. Cankar, G. (with Zupanc, D.). (2020). Pravične možnosti izobraževanja v Sloveniji populacijska raziskava o učencih s posebnimi potrebami, priseljencih in njihovim socialno-ekonomskim statusom v povezavi z dosežki v šoli. Državni izpitni center. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of Educational opportunity. National Center for Educational Statistic. Council of the Europen Union (2021). Council Resolution on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021-2030) (2021/C 66/01). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021G0226(01) Early, E., Miller, S., Dunne, L., Thurston, A., & Filiz, M. (2020). The influence of socio‐economic background and gender on school attainment in the United Kingdom: A systematic review. Review of Education, 8(1), 120–152. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3175 Elliott, V. (2018). Thinking about the Coding Process in Qualitative Data Analysis. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3560 Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2. ed., 17 [Dr.]). Longman. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2017). PIRLS 2016 International Results in Reading. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 International Results in Mathematics and Science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College. Nordin, A., & Sundberg, D. (2014). Transnational policy flows in European education: The making and governing of knowledge in the education policy field. Symposium Books. OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en Schulz, W. (2018). Becoming citizens in a changing world: IEA international civic and citizenship education study 2016 international report. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417 Stone, D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed). W.W. Norton & Co. Šterman Ivančič, K., Štremfel, U., & Mlekuž, A. (2024). The role of students' well-being in explaining learning motivation and achievement: considering school-level factors and the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. Interim Internal Report. Educational Research Institute.