Across Europe, the massification and expansion of higher education have strengthened expectations that education functions as a pathway to upward social mobility for marginalized students (Padilla et al., 2022). This dynamic is evident in Hungary, where participation in tertiary education has continued to rise despite demographic decline, increasing pressure on higher education institutions to respond to growing social and cultural diversity (Híves & Kozma, 2025). As a result, transforming universities into more inclusive environments has become a central concern for policy and research (Casey, 2016). Within this context, inclusion-oriented frameworks, like the Inclusive Excellence (IE) movement, have gained prominence by framing diversity as an institutional asset capable of enhancing educational quality and student success when supported by organizational practices (Milem et al., 2005). Despite these developments, educational expansion has not produced equal opportunities across student groups.

Across Europe, members of Roma groups are consistently identified as the most underrepresented in higher education, with only 1–4 percent attaining tertiary qualifications (Frazer-Marlier, 2011). These enduring disparities expose the limits of expansion and underscore the need for targeted initiatives addressing the barriers Roma students face in accessing, navigating, and succeeding in higher education. In response, support mechanisms for Roma students have emerged across Europe. In countries such as Spain and Serbia, these initiatives have largely developed through bottom-up efforts led by civil society, while in contexts including the United Kingdom, Portugal, and increasingly Hungary, support has been shaped by national governments or local authorities (Bhabha et al., 2018; Calado et al., 2019; Danvers & Hinton-Smith, 2022; Hensby et al., 2024). These approaches reflect a growing European recognition that meaningful inclusion requires institutionalized support extending beyond formal academic provision.

The paper examines Roma student societies in Hungary as inclusive, non-formal micro-communities operating alongside universities (Rogers, 2014, p. 15). Although embedded within a specific national regulatory framework (Government Decree No. 24/2013 (II. 5.), these institutions address challenges common across European higher education systems, including the underrepresentation of first-generation, socioeconomically disadvantaged, and racialized minority students (Bhabha et al., 2018; Calado et al., 2019; Simić & Vranješević, 2019; Danvers & Hinton-Smith, 2022; Hensby et al., 2024). The Hungarian case is therefore situated within broader European debates on widening participation, inclusive excellence, and intercultural approaches to higher education (Casey, 2016; Gallego-Noche & Goenechea-Permisán, 2022). The analysis draws on a theoretical framework integrating the Inclusive Excellence movement (Milem et al., 2005), non-formal learning theory (Rogers, 2014), and interculturality, informed by sociological and educational research on minority students’ social mobility. Inclusive Excellence conceptualizes diversity as an institutional resource enhancing student engagement and success when embedded in organizational practice, while research on non-formal learning highlights flexible yet pedagogically structured environments characterized by experiential learning, horizontal relationships, and individualized engagement that bridge formal education and students’ lived experiences (Rogers, 2014; Hawley-Woodall, 2019).

In this theoretical framework this paper addresses the overarching research question: How do Roma student communities enhance social inclusion within higher education? Three interrelated questions guide the analysis: how members of Roma student societies conceptualize a “cooperative community”; how Roma students experience personalized support while navigating social disadvantage and upward mobility; and how elements of the “Roma intellectual” identity emerge within both university settings and Roma student societies. These questions are examined within the intercultural environment of Roma student societies and the wider university context.

Our study is based on empirical research conducted in 2022 across all institutions of the Hungarian Roma Student Society Network (N=11). Data were collected through an online, access-based questionnaire distributed to students enrolled in Roma student societies. From the total student population of the student colleges (approximately 300 students), 182 individuals completed the questionnaire. As the present analysis focuses specifically on Roma students, only responses from participants who self-identified as Roma were included (n=108). The research instrument combined closed-ended and open-ended questions, allowing for a mixed analytical approach. Quantitative items captured key sociodemographic characteristics, educational background, and access to social support, while qualitative questions explored students’ experiences, perceptions of higher education, and pathways of social mobility. We conducted our data analysis in multiple stages. Closed-ended items were analysed using descriptive statistical methods, while open-ended responses were subjected to qualitative content analysis following a systematic coding procedure. Coding was carried out by three independent coders to ensure reliability and consistency; discrepancies were resolved through discussion, and the agreed-upon code categories were subsequently applied in the analysis. An important qualitative instrument was an introductory associative task in which respondents were asked to list five words they associated with the terms: “university” and “student society.” These associations were analysed to identify differences between the two institutional contexts, with particular attention to emotional valency and non-formal characteristics. To minimise potential response bias, the questionnaire did not explicitly ask respondents to evaluate Roma student societies; instead, we invited participants to reflect on the following question: “Who and what help you cope with the difficulties encountered in higher education and with the tensions arising from social mobility?”, and all references to Roma student societies thus emerged organically. These responses were analysed both in terms of frequency and thematic content and are illustrated through selected excerpts. Our sample was characterised by a high proportion of socially disadvantaged students, most of whom come from small settlements and have parents with low levels of educational attainment. Among the Roma respondents (n=108), over 90% qualified as socially disadvantaged, primarily due to low household income and/or low parental education. Nearly 90% grew up in villages or small towns where access to public services is limited, conditions that highlight the particular importance of Roma student societies as a key support structure within higher education.

Our study concludes results on the presence of Roma student societies within higher education and their impact on individual students as well as on the broader higher education context. Based on our data, we demonstrated how members of the student societies perceive the notion of cooperative communities, which we explored through the characteristics of non-formal and informal communities. We also sought to identify what kinds of “personal support” Roma youth, who are pursuing upward social mobility through education, associate with Roma student societies. The words emerging refer to support functions, assisting actors, and the material learning environment that facilitates educational attainment. Finally, we addressed the student society function that simultaneously supports Roma identity and autonomous intellectual development (“becoming a Roma intellectual”). Roma student societies as non-formal spaces scaffold Roma students’ experience of bicultural identity and their pathways of social mobility. We aim to develop a model, grounded in our data, previous studies, and fieldwork experience, that presents the nature of Roma student societies at a systemic level. Based on our study and the model developed from it, we argue that Roma student societies, within the examined social and higher education context, provide a protected environment that facilitates the emergence of intercultural interactions in the broader higher education setting. Our paper makes a key argument: The Roma student society examined in our analysis functions as an active community whose influence unfolds through its embeddedness in collective relationships. Finally, it is important to highlight the international adaptability of our paper and model. The study represents one example of non-formal micro-communities in higher education, and the model derived from this practice can also be adapted to other social and higher education contexts (A non-formal micro-community model adaptable to individual contexts), considering that every disadvantaged and/or underrepresented student group has distinct needs.

Bhabha, J., Matache, M., Chernoff, M., Fuller, A., Lloyd McGarry, S., Simić, N., Vranješević, J., Stančić, M., Spasić, B., & Mihajlović, M. (2018). One in one hundred. Harvard FXB Center for Health and Human Rights & Center for Interactive Pedagogy. Casey, L. (2016). The Casey Review: A review into opportunity and integration. Department for Communities and Local Government. Calado, P., Moreria, L.j., Costa, S., Simoes, C., & de Matos, M. G. (2019). The Roma Population in Portugal: A Changing Picture. In Ohidy, A. (Ed.). Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, (pp. 117-137). Emerald Group Publishing LTD. Danvers, E., & Hinton-Smith, T. (2022). Marginalisation and mixed feelings: supporting students of Gypsy, Roma and traveller heritage imagining higher education in the UK. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 54(3), 518–535. Frazer, H., & Marlier, E. (2011). Building a stronger EU Social Inclusion Process: Analysis and recommendations of the EU Network of independent national experts on social inclusion. European Commission. Gallego-Noche, B., & Goenechea-Permisán, C. (2022). What makes them thrive? Protective factors for the academic success of Roma university students: A case study. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 19(1), 95–109. Hawley-Woodall, J. (2019). Inclusive campus climates. Journal of Higher Education Policy, 12(1), 22–39. Hensby, A., Adewumi, B., Twumasi, A.-M., & Thomas, D. S. P. (2024). BAME students’ extracurricular belonging at university. In A. Hensby & B. Adewumi (Eds.), Race, capital, and equity in higher education (pp. 85–113). Palgrave Macmillan. Híves, T., & Kozma, T. (2025). Tíz év után: a felsőoktatási expanzió helyzete és kilátásai=Ten years after: The state and prospects of higher education expansion. Educatio, 34 (2). pp. 238-250. Milem, J., Chang, M., & Antonio, A. (2005). Making diversity work: A researched based perspective. Washington D.C., Association of American Colleges and Universities. Padilla-Carmona, T., González-Monteagudo, J., & A. Tenorio Rodríguez, M. (2022). Lights and Shadows: The Inclusion of Invisible Students in Spanish Universities. Autonomy and Responsibility Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(1), 37–44. Rogers, R. (2014). Critical approaches to inequality in education. Educational Theory, 64(1), 1–20.