This study explores students' perceptions of multiculturalism within democratic higher education settings, focusing on how universities balance cultural inclusivity while preventing discrimination and inequality. As global demographics shift, higher education institutions face the challenge of fostering inclusivity while ensuring that diverse student populations feel represented and valued. Recent studies indicate that exposure to diverse perspectives enhances students' cultural awareness and political participation (Denson & Bowman, 2023; European University Association, 2022). Moreover, initiatives promoting civic engagement within academic settings have been linked to positive outcomes in students' democratic attitudes and behaviours (Finley, 2022; Hulbert & Harking, 2024).

This research is particularly relevant for Europe, where higher education institutions play a key role in fostering social cohesion, democratic values, and intercultural understanding. As European societies become increasingly diverse, this study contributes to shaping inclusive policies and practices that support student engagement, mobility, and participation in democratic processes (Jones & Thomas, 2021; European Commission, 2025).

The research is guided by the question: How do students perceive multiculturalism and democratic education within higher education institutions, and what factors contribute to their sense of inclusivity and participation? The study is framed within the theoretical framework of multicultural education and democratic education. As conceptualised by Banks (2014) and Sleeter & Grant (2007), multicultural education emphasises the role of inclusive curricula and equitable learning environments in fostering social cohesion. Democratic education, following Dewey’s (1916) and Gutmann’s (1999) perspectives, highlights participatory governance, critical thinking, and institutional responsiveness to diversity as key elements in educational settings.

Higher education shapes students' understanding of democracy, citizenship, and inclusivity. European institutions, particularly within the Bologna Process framework (European Higher Education Area, 1999), strive to enhance student mobility, diversity, and inclusion, making this study highly relevant internationally. Integrating democratic and multicultural education can facilitate the development of active global citizens capable of navigating and contributing to increasingly diverse societies (Smith et al., 2023).

This research aligns with global discussions on the role of universities in promoting equity and diversity. The study’s theoretical foundations build on the work of scholars who argue that education systems should not merely transmit knowledge but also cultivate social responsibility and cross-cultural competence (Banks, 2014; Sleeter & Grant, 2007). By integrating these perspectives, this study contributes to the broader discourse on inclusive education, aligning with European and international efforts to promote intercultural competence and active citizenship in higher education.

By addressing these issues, this study seeks to provide insights that can inform policy reforms and curriculum enhancements. The findings will contribute to ongoing international discussions on education as a tool for fostering democratic engagement and multicultural competence. Future research should explore how these principles are operationalised in different geopolitical contexts to enhance inclusivity and democratic engagement across higher education institutions worldwide.

The research employed convenience sampling to select participants for the study. Convenience sampling is a non-probability sampling method where respondents are chosen based on their accessibility and willingness to participate (Etikan et al., 2023; Taherdoost, 2023). This method was used due to practical constraints and the need to gather data from university students efficiently. The sample consisted of 334 students from three higher education institutions in Latvia: the University of Latvia, Turiba University, and Latvian Culture College. The study included participants from different levels of higher education. The majority of respondents (61.43%) were bachelor's students, followed by those with first-level higher education (22.6%), master's students (10.07%), and doctoral students (5.9%). This distribution reflects the predominant participation of undergraduate students in the survey, which may influence the perspectives expressed on multiculturalism and democracy in higher education (National Survey of Student Engagement, 2023). Additionally, the gender distribution within the sample was significantly skewed, with 81.03% of respondents identifying as female, 15.52% as male, and 3.45% selecting 'prefer not to disclose' or 'other'. The study also considered the type of university students attended. Most (76.18%) were enrolled in public universities, while 23.82% studied in private institutions. Differences between public and private institutions may impact accessibility to diverse cultural experiences and governance structures, which should be explored in further studies (Education State University, 2023). The study analysed students' perceptions of multiculturalism and democracy in higher education through a structured survey distributed via the QuestionPro tool. The survey contained 11 questions organised into four categories: (1) curriculum and teaching competence, (2) institutional attitudes and inclusiveness, (3) student knowledge and perspectives, and (4) student participation in governance. Questions were primarily multiple-choice, with one 5-point Likert scale measuring attitudes towards diversity and democratic education. Data was analysed using SPSS Statistics v.29 and Microsoft Excel. Descriptive statistics were applied to summarise responses, while Cronbach’s alpha assessed internal reliability (α = 0.616). Spearman rank correlation measured relationships between democratic and multicultural variables, and the Mann-Whitney U test identified group differences. Network analysis uses the graphical lasso procedure to examine variable interactions and relationships (Friedman et al., 2008; Louvet et al., 2023). While findings may not fully represent the student population in Latvia or other European institutions, despite this limitation, the study offers valuable insights into students' perceptions of multiculturalism and democracy in higher education.

The study findings highlight a generally positive perception of institutional inclusiveness, though gaps persist in curriculum integration and student governance participation. While democratic education principles are moderately embraced, knowledge dissemination on human rights and democratic values remains inconsistent. Additionally, multicultural themes are insufficiently embedded within university curricula, limiting students' exposure to diverse perspectives. Institutional governance structures require improvement, as nearly half of respondents felt that minority representation was lacking. Many students also expressed uncertainty regarding their institution's efforts to combat discrimination, suggesting a need for more transparent communication of diversity policies. Strengthening faculty development programs is essential for equipping educators with the necessary skills to foster inclusive classroom environments. This research underscores the importance of integrating multicultural and democratic education into institutional policies and curricula. Universities should adopt comprehensive reforms, enhance student engagement in governance, and diversify curricula to reflect contemporary multicultural realities. Future studies should incorporate qualitative research methods to understand better students’ lived experiences regarding multiculturalism and democratic education.

1.Banks, J. A. (2014). Diversity, group identity, and citizenship education in a global age. The Journal of Education, 194(3), 1–12. 2.Denson, N., & Bowman, N. A. (2023). University diversity and preparation for a global society: The role of diversity in shaping intergroup attitudes and civic outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 38(4), 555–570. 3.Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. Macmillan. 4.Education State University. (2023). Multiculturalism in higher education. Retrieved from https://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2253/Multiculturalism-in-Higher-Education.html 5.Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2023). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 7(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20230701.11 6.European Commission. (2025). European Universities Initiative: Outcomes and Transformational Potential. Retrieved from https://education.ec.europa.eu/education-levels/higher-education/european-universities-initiative/outcomes-and-potentials 7.European Higher Education Area. (1999). The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. http://www.ehea.info/page-ministers-conference-1999 8.European University Association. (2022). Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in European Higher Education Institutions: Results from the INVITED Project. Retrieved from https://www.eua.eu/publications/reports/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-european-higher-education-institutions-results-from-the-invited-project.html 9.Finley, A. (2022). How College Contributes to Workforce Success: Employer Views on What Matters Most. Association of American Colleges and Universities. 10.Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2008). Sparse inverse covariance estimation with the graphical lasso. Biostatistics, 9(3), 432–441. 11.Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2008). Sparse inverse covariance estimation with the graphical lasso. Biostatistics, 9(3), 432–441. 12.Hulbert, I. G., & Harkins, D. (2024). Assessing the civic campus: The link between higher education and democracy. Ithaka S+R. https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.320850 13.Jones, A., & Thomas, L. (2021). Diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education: Challenges and best practices. Higher Education Research, 35(2), 102-117. 14.Louvet, G., Raymaekers, J., Van Bever, G., & Wilms, I. (2023). The influence function of graphical lasso estimators. Econometrics and Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosta.2023.03.004 15.National Survey of Student Engagement. (2023). Engagement insights: Survey findings on student participation. Retrieved from https://nsse.indiana.edu 16.Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (2007). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class, and gender (6th ed.). Wiley. 17.Smith, R., Patel, J., & Gonzalez, M. (2023). Global citizenship and education: Integrating diversity into university curricula. Journal of Multicultural Studies, 12(3), 67-85. 18.Taherdoost, H. (2023). Understanding convenience sampling: Applications and limitations in research. ScienceDirect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574013723000618