Between ‘migration background’ and ‘deprived neighborhood’ : constructions of ‘educational disadvantage’ in two tutoring Initiatives in Rotterdam and Bielefeld

(1)

BETWEEN ‘MIGRATION BACKGROUND’

AND ‘DEPRIVED NEIGHBORHOOD’

Constructions of ‘Educational Disadvantage’ in Two

Tutoring Initiatives in Rotterdam and Bielefeld

Master Thesis in the Master Program

International Migration and Intercultural Relations (IMIB): Erasmus Mundus Master in International Migration and Social

Cohesion (MISOCO) at the University of Osnabrück

By Maria Tenberge

965785

Supervisors:

Prof. Dr. Lisa Rosen (University of Osnabrück) Dr. Bowen Paulle (University of Amsterdam)

Pro (University of Deusto)

(2)

(3)

Preface

This thesis is submitted towards a Master in International Migration and Social Cohesion. Nevertheless, it is an attempt to move away from a focus ‘m ’ ‘ h m s’, following post-modern ideas which call into question seemingly natural binaries, in which y s s ‘ h m’ wh h h s m k d s ‘deviant’. In this fashion, h ‘m ’ h s b h s h , wh m ‘s s s’ (for a related analysis see, for example, Glick-Schiller & Salazar, 2013). Also the category ‘ h m ’ h s b h s h , wh m ‘the v ’ Constructions of difference that arise as a consequence have been used to legitimize differential chances and excuse different outcomes for these two groups (Dirim, Hauenschild & Lütje-Klose, 2008, p.14) I my m v d y ‘ h m ’ through my research, I decided to un-focus this category (as proposed, for example by Diehm, Kuhn & Machold, 2010, p.87-90). Instead, I critically discuss the construction of ‘educational disadvantage’ within two educational initiatives, one of which is aimed at children with migration background in particular. In doing so, I wish to contribute to the field of migration studies by offering a critical account that deals with migration in the broadest sense, but de-naturalizes some pre-supposed notions.

To the People who Engage Enthusiastically and to the Best of Their Knowledge for Equality in Education.

(6)

2

I. INTRODUCTION

“Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”

The quote above represents the fourth of seventeen goals set forth by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in September 2015 (UN General Assembly Resolution 70/1). Th w ds “ensure inclusive and q b d ”1

position this objective within a discourse of equality in education. As a goal, these words make a moral claim; they state what should happen. In demanding to ensure fair education, the actual implementation, this goal coincides with the capability approach authored by Sen (1992). Robeyns (2006) observes that this approach addresses h “ y h v v b s b d d ” ( 78). In opposition to the Human Capital Theory, in which education is sought-after to further economic opportunities of an individual or a society (Robeyns, 2006, p.72), this goal is not directed towards, or utilized for, a greater purpose. Furthermore, it goes beyond formulating a right, as the rights discourse of education would (Robeyns, 2006, p.75 ff). The goal is indeed to provide inclusive and equitable education for all.

Statistical and other evidence demonstrate that currently education is not inclusive and of equitable quality for all (see below). Instead, some people fare worse than others and are identified by certain characteristics. Th E ’s P m I S d Assessment (PISA), for example, has found that in Germany in 2012, “m h h h v [s d s’] m s bs v d b w s h s – a far higher proportion than the OECD averag ” (B m, 2013, 4) I dd , a ‘ w socio-economic status’ correlated with students lagging behind their peers an average of more than an entire year of schooling in mathematics (ibid.), and ‘ mm s s’ in Germany would amount to an even greater lag (Bloem, 2013, p.5). Based on observations like these the characteristics of attending certain schools, a ‘ w s - m s s’, d ‘ mm s s’ that correlated with achieving worse results than others are treated as ‘educational d s dv ’s’ ‘Educational disadvantage’ is a social construct that seems to

1_{As the focus h s h h d s m d h d , h “ s”}

(7)

3 possibly be constituted by any factor that has been found to negatively correlate to educational achievement and is deemed consequential on the basis of other assumptions (correlations are usually tested for theoretically selected variables, like social class, gender, parental educational attainment, rather than body size or favorite soccer club). Through a process of meaning-making, however, the concept of ‘educational disadvantage’ is socially agreed upon, objectivized and thus taken for granted. Wh s, k ‘ d y d s dv d’ d w d w h m , x m by h b v d s s s d repetitively shared by powerful agents, they become objectivated, a thing in the world that people refer to and that have real consequences for people (Berger and Luckmann, 2009). They are acted upon s h y w h ‘ h ’

In order to overcome these ‘disadvantages’ h h w y achieving “inclusive and equitable quality education for all”, the Sustainable Development Agenda cited above proposes that in a common effort “ v m s, h v s , v society, the United Nations system and other actors [should come together] and mobilize all v b s s” (UN G Ass mb y R s 70/1, p. 39). One possible type of such cooperation of multiple actors on different levels are educational initiatives. Despite the great number of enterprises that call themselves educational initiative, it is difficult to find a general definition. What I mean by the term is an organized endeavor by a definite group of people or organizations, from outside the formal education systems, to take action towards a specific goal within the realm of education. I, thus, see educational initiatives situated on the meso-level between formally organized education and the individuals within.

As changes are usually slow on the macro-level of national or even global institutions, these meso-level interventions or “add-ons” to educational system are highly interesting to look at. On one hand, they can potentially absorb and remedy some of the issues that a school system currently cannot. On the other, they can be seen as vehicles for innovation. Being at the brink of to education systems, yet possibly not entirely under their control, might allow for an easier exploration of new ideas. In the light of education systems in which some people are ‘disadvantaged’, educational initiatives could be a way toward the goal of inclusive and equitable education for all, if they manage to address what harms these people.

(8)

4 The research at hand set out to explore two educational initiatives that each provides tutoring ‘ d y d s dv d ’: the Mercator Förderunterricht in Germany and the SAGA Innovation style tutoring in the Netherlands. Both of the initiatives are using individualized instruction in their efforts to alleviate ‘ d d s dv s’. W h h ‘ m d v b ’ b small group tutoring in both cases, the underlying assumptions on improvement seem to be similar. This assumption about the efficacy of tutoring is supported by various studies (Allor & McCathren, 2004; Bloom, 1984; Fitzgerald, 2001; Pullen, Lane and Monaghan, 2004; Ritter, Barnett, Denny & Albin, 2009). Next to this seemingly similar method of support, however, the two initiatives approach different target groups: the Mercator Förderunterricht is offered to students with migration background, while SAGA Innovation-style interventions operate in low-income school districts or neighborhoods. While both of these target groups might overlap, the framing is decisively distinct. This distinction suggests a different understanding about the locus of the ‘problem’: The decision to tutor children with migration background seems to s s h h s ‘s ’ s d s j s d h s h sys m, wh wh hb h ds s h d s s, wh “ d d d d v wh m d” (SAGA Innovations – Our approach, n.d) appears to make a claim about the system. In one case, h d ‘ d d s dv ’ s ms b d h s d s targeted, and in the other it seems to pertain to the system the targeted students are embedded in. In order to explore these possible understandings, my research question is how the initiatives construct the notion of ‘ d d s dv ’ with regards to their work and how the presented understandings connect the initiatives to broader educational systems.

When ‘ d d s dv ’ s s d x s constitution within the initiatives, it is possible to refer to a range of different discursive ss s P ss b h s ‘ h v s’ s s’ ude, for example, the publicly presented views, on websites, in press releases, mission statement and the like. Furthermore, each initiative, in the case at hand, is a cooperation of an assembling organization that is in contact with different local realizations of the shared ideas. Therefore, the shared agreements between each of the two overarching initiatives and their local realizations, as represented in their communication, are another locus of construction.

(9)

5 Lastly, the notions held by the operational staff, the people that actually carry out the v ’s m, s constructing ‘ d d s dv ’ within the initiatives. As the operational staff in and through their very practices produce meanings that are the closest to the actions on the ground, I consider their perspectives the most interesting to examine. Th , I s d my x h s’ s s educational disadvantage. Wh I h ‘ v s’ s s’ I h s m h tutors constructions.

The initiatives are at the brink of two different educational systems. When referring to the educational systems I mean the structure that arises from the interplay of systems of laws, regulations, policies, practices, and discourses that shape the experience of the people within2.

In the following, I will first of all introduce the two initiatives under consideration as the context of the study. Secondly, I will elaborate on the conceptual framework that my research is based on: The concept of equality in education and the theories of Structuration and Constructionism. Logically situating the discussion at hand within a discourse on equality in education, I on the one hand, provide a normative background against which the observations can be contrasted; on the other hand, considerations in this field help to illuminate the complexity of the structures and the necessity to pay attention to them while working towards the normative goal.

I d w h G dd s’ S Th y (1984), I will argue that these structures and the positions within them are constantly created by interplay between the agents and the current system. As a consequence, the considerations h s’ constructions need to pay attention to the mutual constitution of these discourses and the structure they are embedded in. While agents have the leeway to make quite consequential d s s d m d h s , h s m m h s s s h s’ actions to a confined realm of what is possible. This view is based upon a post-positivist

2

I s h s d m R d d R b ’s (2010) d m m s h system of laws, regulations, and policies at subnational, national, and international levels that have an impact on the lives of migrants. Henceforth, I will use the notions of educational system and education regime interchangeably.

(10)

6 view on the construction of the social world and the power invested therein. Therefore, I will briefly outline the constructionist thought that informs this study.

After thus positioning my thesis theoretically, I will next explain its relation with x s s d s ‘ d d s dv ’ d d v s In reviewing the ‘ d d s dv ’, I firstly point to the wide lack of acknowledgement of the social construction of the conseq ‘ d d s dv ’. Secondly, I review some critical literature that point out the essentializing use ‘ ’ w h h discourse of the German education system. I note that this opens the question in how far the discourse within the educational initiatives that have been set up s y v m ‘ d d s dv ’ v d such ‘d s dv v s’ within the system. With regards to studies about educational initiatives, I criticize the objectivist look-out and the sole concern for efficiency and point out the need for more reflective studies.

Following the theoretical and topical positioning of the research at hand, I elaborate on the practicalities of the research at hand, in chapter five: Firstly, the selection, access and data collection within the local projects in Rotterdam and Bielefeld are described and motivated. Next, the methodological use of juxtaposing the two initiatives is laid out and the choice and consequences of doing semi-structured interviews with the tutors is explained. Then, I turn to my role as a researcher and I discuss myself as an instrument of h s s h h h h ‘ s d w h ’, d d my s s that ethical concerns of this research are met. The chapter closes by a short account of the limitations of this study.

After thus setting the stage, I turn to the constructions on ‘ d d s dv ’ by the tutors. In the analysis, I am taking the reader through a wrap-up of my analytical journey. I start by confronting the initiatives official mission, to provide tutoring to children in a certain neighborhood or to children with m b k d, w h h s’ expressed views. I demonstrate how the tutors move beyond and away from the respective organizational framing of ‘ d d s dv ’ and allow for a more complex picture. The tutors in Rotterdam do not locate the ‘ d d s dv ’ in system-inherent s, wh h h v ’s m d s dv neighborhood might

(11)

7 suggest, while the tutors in Bielefeld take apart the notion of disadvantage through migration background, by focusing on language and the benefits of the supposedly disadvantaging migration background. This demonstrates the diversion between theoretical and operational understanding.

I h s d y s , I x m h s’ s h s d s, d m h ‘ s s d s’ ‘ d d s dv ’. I discuss h s’ individualized view on their students, and point to the connected inclination to locate the d s dv s s d ‘ h s d s’ F y, I -trace the models of ‘ d d s dv ’ that become apparent in the interviews with the tutors. While the tutors in Rotterdam see the ‘ d d s dv ’ of their students in the lack of parental involvement, the tutors in Bielefeld see a language barrier and the categorizing of their students s h s d s’ d m Throughout these elaborations, I demonstrate h w h s’ s s b h sh d by systemic structures and discourses and manage to escape them at certain instances.

I conclude this thesis by retracing the arguments and abstracting their implications for the educational initiatives: The position of the initiatives at the brink of the respective educational regime is reflected in the constructions of the tutors. These constructions, in turn partly conform and partly evade the according discourses. To the extent that they s h ‘d s dv d s s s’ h v s h d y m w s d s h ‘d s dv d’ by h s d w k w ds d q y

(12)

8

II. THE CASES

Th s s h s m d by h m d ‘ s s m h ’, b w s d by the curiosity and irritation that the encountering the differential framing of the Mercator Förderunterricht and SAGA Innovation style tutoring raised in me. Taking an interest in educational initiatives in general, I came across both of them.

The Mercator Förderunterricht is a very renowned initiative that deals with ‘ d d s dv ’ s d s w h m b k d G m y Th s of this initiative go back to a project in the 1970 in the city of Essen, where teacher trainees of the University Duisburg-Essen3 instructed immigrant children of Turkish and Greek descent in small groups in the German language and thus profited in terms of their own education to become teachers, while benefiting their students (Möllering, Benholz & Mavruk, 2014, p.299). The Mercator Foundation funded the transfer of this practice to other places in North Rhine-Westphalia starting in 2000 and to a total of over 35 locations all over Germany in 2004 (Lorentz, 2010, p.6.). The goal of the initiative, as indicated on s w bs , s “b d s y m s d h s”, b s “[ ] s d s sh w h h d d y s s w h migration background are disadvantaged in the educational system by lacking knowledge h G m ” (P j k – Bessere Bildungschancen für junge Migranten und zukünftige Lehrer, n.d.4). As of the date of writing, the great majority of Förderunterricht locations are becoming independent of Mercator Foundation funding, as they are firmly d h mm s w (“Fö d h w d b d sw b ”, n.d.). In many different places thus, universities and other stakeholders organize the small group tutoring for students with migration background by university-level students. The great success of this spreading initiative was confirmed by a three-year longitudinal study of the educational outcomes (Heckmann, 2009). In the study, the tutoring was found to significantly improve the school performance especially for underperforming students and

3

In opposition to the Netherlands, where teachers in training learn at specialized academies, they are students at general research universities in Germany.

4_{I translated all citations from German and Dutch language sources to English to improve the readability of}

(13)

9 was found to constitute valuable practical experiences for teachers in training (Heckmann, 2009, p.22).

Interestingly, in the USA, Match Education uses a very similar approach: Since the early 2000s, the Match Charter Public High School in Boston has college students or graduates tutor their students as an integral part of the school day (Stilling Candal, 06.02.2015). The great success in terms of improvement in educational outcomes led to the adaptation of this method in schools in Chicago, Newark, Houston (for an evaluation of the adaptation in Huston see Fryer, 2014) and Lawrence, Massachusetts (Stilling Candal, 06.02.2015). The fame of the method was further supported by a randomized clinical study h m 2013 2015, wh h v 2 5 y s’ w h m h h was achieved per year of tutoring (SAGA Innovations, n.d.). On the basis of these experiences the charitable organization SAGA Innovations was founded in 2014 by people initially involved in the Match Charter School in Boston (ibid.). On their website, SAGA Innovations presents itself as dedicated to the proliferation of high-dosage, small-group tutoring, because they see a great need to help students in underperforming school districts (SAGA I v s, d) Th v ’s v h s v y y b s d up-scaling by the Hamilton Initiative, an economic policy initiative at the Brookings Institution (Ander, Gurycan, Ludwig, 2016), which is one o h USA’s d s d m s prominent think tanks. In their proposal, the Hamilton Initiative recommends the institution of Match/SAGA style tutoring for students, at all national school districts that have a high percentage of students from low-income families and thus receive Title I funding5 (Ander, Gurycan, Ludwig, 2016, p.11). At the same time as the initiative is gaining momentum within the USA, a cooperation of SAGA Innovations has exported the idea to Rotterdam in the Netherlands (SAGA Innovations, 06.10.2015), where in a pilot project, tutoring is provided to children at three schools in the neighborhood Pendrecht in the South of the city.

Both of these initiatives are thus implemented in a great number of different local projects. The realization of the central ideas in different localities of course allows for street-level bureaucracy (as famously coined by Lipsky, 1969) and local differentiation. The local differentiation is a mechanisms even consciously supported in the German case. This allows for a great amount of data on variation, which is interesting to study. However,

5_{Title 1 funding is state- v d d “F Ass s T L Ed A s F Th Ed}

(14)

10 due to the focus of the study on the construction of the tutors in the initiatives, I chose to focus on one local realization of each initiative. In this way I was able to really get to know the projects and form a connection to the tutors. The choice for and access to the local projects in Rotterdam and Bielefeld will be elaborated on in the section on data collection.

(15)

11

III. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

In order to position the current research theoretically, the discourse that informs the central research question and theories that shape the way of looking at it will be laid out in this chapter. First of all, the discussion about ‘educational disadvantage’ is positioned within the normative discourse on equality in education, by juxtaposing a situation in which there are advantaged and disadvantaged positions with the desirable situation of equality in education. This connection lends the discourse on disadvantage its relevance to policy; the moral consideration about what should be the case. Furthermore, the cited literature from this field points to many potential dimensions of the concept of ‘educational disadvantage’, which can be used to contrast the constructions of the tutors against. The question of how the initiatives construct the notion of ‘educational disadvantage’ with regards to their work and how the presented understandings connect the initiatives to broader educational systems is mainly informed two theories: Structuration Theory and Social Construction. Structuration Theory s b sh s h d y k h s’ s s isolation, but take account of the context it is set in, and the context it created, because reality emerges from the interaction of agency with structure. This notion is embedded in and supported by the theories of social construction. Both of these two theories will be elaborated on in the second part of the conceptual framework.

2.1. ‘Educational Disadvantage’ and Equality

The notion of ‘ d d s dv ’ is a relational term, as it only makes sense in comparison. s dv s mm y d s d s “s m h h s s d y; something that makes someone or something worse or less likely to succeed than oth s” (Disadvantage [Simple def.] (n.d.)) I “ s d y” d b “w s ss k y s d h h s” d s dv h s s s d m h ‘normal’ status. The fact that some people in education face difficulties and are thus less likely to succeed than h ‘ m ’ others due to disadvantages is a moral problem because it is raises the

(16)

12 intuition of injustice. Such intuitions prompt goals like to “E s s v d q b q y d ” (UN General Assembly Resolution 70/1). Taking a moral stance, however, is not the end, but the beginning of the discussion. It inevitably raises the question of what kind of equality is desirable. Letting everyone attend the same schools? Using the same kind of materials? Teaching until everyone has understood the same contents? Ensuring equal access to educational resources?

A potential answer to this is provided by Robeyns (2006). In her discussion about three models of education she endorses the capabilities approach to education. She explains that b s h “ s to achieve” those things that fundamentally sh s ’s , wh h d “functionings” (R b y s, 2006, 78) “Ex m s of functionings are being healthy, being educated, holding a job, being part of a nurturing family, having deep friendships, etc.” ( b d ).

In this picture of capabilities being the enabling conditions for a ‘good’ life that every person should have, education can be seen as both intrinsically and instrumentally important: On one hand, it is a capability for a good life by itself and on the other hand, it can enable other capabilities (ibid.). Robeyns contrasts this approach by two approaches to education that she demonstrates to be more narrow: Firstly, there is the human capital approach, in which education is seen as a means to (individual or macro-level) economic development, which reduces the view of education radically and neglects other functions, like empowerment and personal development (Robeyns, 2006, p.72). Secondly, there is the rights-based approach to education. From this perspective, education is an unalienable right of every human being (Robeyns, 2006, p.75). While this approach acknowledges the intrinsic value of education, it has certain problems. Robeyns argues, however, that it has the shortcomings of firstly, risking to be only rhetoric, secondly, only appealing to the legal framework, thirdly, potentially limiting the responsibilities of relevant actors to only doing a minimum, and finally, focusing too much on the responsibility of governments and neglecting other actors (Robeyns, 2006, p.75-78). As a normative framework, according to Robeyns, we should therefore s d ’s real opportunities or capabilities to education.

(17)

13 The question wh ‘ s d ’ w d k k is the question that Lynch and Baker (2005) examine in their work on ‘equality of condition’ in education. Their definition of ‘equality of condition’ s “ h sh d b s q s possible h d s h v s ” (Ly h & Baker, 2005, p.132). This definition goes beyond a mere equality of opportunity, because it takes into account the actually available options as a person faces them, as opposed to neglecting a lack of enabling factors. I d s , s S ’s d R b y s’ b s

An ethics informed by such an equality of condition has to encompass five central aspects of equality: economic; culture; love, care and solidarity; and politics (Lynch & Baker, 2005, p.132). In their framework, the authors define each of these dimensions of equality and apply them to their analysis of problems in education. In doing so, they d m s h “ m h s d d h h hievement of equality in d [ ds b k ] w m k s h s y s s” (ibid.). In terms of the first, economic dimension, resources, for example, the authors point to the fact that education is at the same time a privilege-maintaining mechanism of elite m d m y d: “Ed d s y d y relation to class reproduction: while it is the agent of class inequality it is also a potential side for developing resistance to i q y ” (Ly h & Baker, 2005, p.142). Therefore, the existence of education cannot simply be seen as emancipatory, nor as suppressive, as it can be both, a process of subordination or empowerment. In the analysis of the following, cultural dimension, Lynch and Baker (2005) point out how a lack in equal recognition and respect in education can lead to cultural imperialism (p.143 ff). Furthermore, they discuss the political domain of power, as well as the groups in control on macro- and micro-levels of education systems and call for effective democratization of education for the goal of raising emancipated citizens (Lynch & Baker, 2005, p.148 ff). Finally, they call for the inclusion of affective concerns for emotions and emotional development in education, which are still largely missing from education, even though they are recognized to play an important role in learning (Lynch & Baker, 2005, p.150 ff). The authors close their elaborations by underlining the great amount of integration between education and other societal regimes, like economics, politics, socio-cultural and affective systems and the consequent need for broad change (Lynch & Baker, 2005, p. 154).

(18)

14 Agreeing on the normative stance of striving for “inclusive and equitable education for all”, demands a turn to the stories of disadvantage to critically investigate their assembly and use. As the analysis of Lynch and Baker (2005) demonstrates such an investigation has to consider the complex systems that ‘ d d s dv ’s’ work in.

The view that these complex educational systems impact the educational initiatives, while at the same time the constructions of these initiatives can have consequences for the regimes can be understood in the light of the meta-theories of structuration theory and constructionism.

2.2 Structuration Theory

Structuration theory, as put forward by Anthony Giddens (1984) in his seminal w k “Th s s y: h h y s ”, suggests that agents and the structure they are embedded in mutually constitute each other. While the agents in their identity, understandings, and decisions are shaped by the structure, the structure is shaped by the agents, their identities, understandings and decisions. It is the process of dialectic interaction between these two poles that makes up reality. As opposed to atomist notions, this means that the structure that an agent is in contact with is highly consequential. The norms institutionalized within certain regimes, for example, condition what an actor considers necessary or possible. In opposition to purely structural notions, however, structuration posits that actors in turn shape the structure, that for example an initiative could change the discourse within a regime.

This view of reality as emergent from the synergy of agent and structure has two implications for the research question of how the initiatives construct the notion of ‘ d d s dv ’: On one hand, it suggests that the way the initiatives construct ‘ d d s dv ’ will be affected by the structures they are embedded in, for

(19)

15 example the educational regimes. On the other hand, this view implies a degree of s q y h v s’ s s, b s h y, w h v m on the regimes. Therefore, the regimes they are embedded in are potentially connected to h v s’ s s of ‘ d d s dv ’ by influencing them and being influenced in turn. The power and meanings of constructions need to be taken into account.

2.3 Constructionism

In general terms, constructionism is the theory that the world we live in is socially constructed (Hacking, 1999). The categories that we use to think and speak about the world d h v d k bj v w d ‘ h ’, b m d d h meanings through social processes of communication (ibid.). When categories, like ‘ d y d s dv d’ d w d w h m , x m by h b v d statistics on different factors that statistically correlate to lower test scores, and repetitively shared, they become objectivated, a thing in the world that people refer to and that have real consequences for people. This objectivisation is described by Berger and Luckmann (2009): By the process th y ‘ s ’ h m mb s commonly recognize a meaning of a certain thing, actor or action. In the case at hand, this thing is the ‘educational disadvantage’. The iterative process by which such meaning-giving happens is a fundamental process in human interaction (ibid.).

As a consequence of the thus constructed social world, “[k]nowledge about society is thus a realization in the double sense of the word, in the sense of apprehending the objectivated social reality, and s s y d h s y ” (B & Luckmann, 2009). In other words, by making use of the constructs we demonstrate understanding and par-taking in a shared social reality and at the same time make them more real by reproducing them. We realize by understanding and making the construct (more) real.

(20)

16 In these processes of production and re-production of knowledge, power plays a central role. On one hand, the objectivated social reality of successful constructs determines ’s x ences and choices, on the other hand, constructions of those in power will more likely become shared amongst more people and thus become more consequential than other accounts. This makes our social world a very complex system. Comparing it to past systems, Foucault has observed that

In short, it is a question of orienting ourselves to a conception of power which replaces the privilege of the law with the viewpoint of the objective, the privilege of prohibition with the viewpoint of tactical efficacy, the privilege of sovereignty with the analysis of a multiple and mobile field of force relations, wherein far-reaching, but never completely stable, effects of domination are produced. (1980, p.102) In our world, those discourses and concepts that seem to obje v y y ‘ y’ d work efficiently within the system are the most powerful. A statistic of which groups of students fare better on tests than others, for example, seems to be just an objective collection of numbers, plainly representing reality. This view, however evades scrutinizing the categories it presupposes and the methodological assumptions that guides the assembly s h d I h s w y, s h ‘ bj v d v s’ manage to create systems with little to no resistance, because of their invisibility. Therefore, Foucault demands that

we must question [our discourses] on the two levels of their tactical productivity (what reciprocal effects of power and knowledge they ensure) and their strategical integration (what conjunction and what force relationship make their utilization ss y v s d h v s s h ) ” (1980, p.102, parenthesis original)

He asks us here to critically inspect discourses in order to, firstly, see how they can potentially enable or disable certain actor, legitimize a particular knowledge and condition the interaction between these two. Secondly, we must endeavor to find out how the discourses came into being with regards to the prior constellation of power and knowledge. The analysis of the construction of ‘ d d s dv ’ by the tutors, accordingly, has to take into account the embeddedness of the initiatives within the social world at large and the education systems in particular. The knowledge expressed and supported by the discourse needs to be considered with regards to the power structures that support it and that it supports and vice-versa. An additional point that needs to be noted

(21)

17 with regards to constructionism is that the analysis at hand is but one account that can be made; one way, I can think to analyze and frame the communications and impressions I have made. In recounting it, I myself participate in the discourse. Foucault cautions that

We must make allowance for the complex and unstable process whereby discourse can be both an instrument and an effect of power, but also a hindrance, a stumbling-block, a point of resistance and a starting point for an opposing strategy. Discourse transmits and produces power; it reinforces it, but also undermines and exposes it, renders it fragile and makes it possible to thwart it. (1980, p.101)

I am an actor within a structure that grants me the power to express my analysis of the ways of language and power within two initiatives that seek m w ‘ h d s dv d’ I want my reader to be mindful of the necessary simplification and framing that any account will ever be.

(22)

18

IV. LITERATURE REVIEW

The account of the construction of ‘educational disadvantage’ as furthered by the tutors within the initiatives does not exist in a topical vacuum. In the following, I will briefly elaborate on existing literature on ‘ d d s dv ’ and educational initiatives. In my elaborations, I point out that most of the literature on both topics presupposes a certain types of ‘ d d s dv ’ and reify this category by appealing to it. Such accounts view the social world as one-dimensional and cannot do justice to the productive h w d s S m s d s, h w v k h ‘d s dv v s’ within the broader education system and thus open the question in how far educational initiatives are able to evade these very productive constructions. In order to contribute to the more critical literature and k bj v d s ‘ d d s dv ’, the study at hand set out to examine the constitution of the notion of ‘educational disadvantage’ in the case of the two educational initiatives.

3.2. ‘Educational Disadvantage’ in Academic Literature

Many accounts of ‘ d d s dv ’ and educational initiatives focus on objectivist notions of these two concepts. Studies like the aforementioned Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), for example research the relative achievement of students. Letting students in different countries take the same tests this program presupposes a generalizable standard of what ‘education s ss’ should look like. According to one standard they set, they evaluate students and countries on their performance. Then they compare different groupings of students with regards to their results to each other to determine how they perform and to see who is ‘disadvantaged’ with regards to what. Interestingly, this allows very large-scale comparisons. However, even beyond the risk of overestimating a correlation to mean causation, there are problems with this approach. Th k w d d sk s q d b s d b ‘ h s m ’ d d

(23)

19 of the country context it is tested in, ss m bj v w d ‘ h ’ h s assimilated to a high degree. Even if this was the case, this method of inquiry presupposes the potentially consequential categories and is thus unable to see beyond expected groupings and preformed understandings.

Other studies take up such statistical evidence to explore the according theories trying to explain the ‘ d d s dv ’ of certain groups: One very prominent theory that sets out to unpack an ‘ d d s dv ’, or as it is often called in this context the racial achievement gap, is th h y s ‘ wh ’ The hypothesis was originally put forth by Ogbu and his fellow academics who aimed to explain low school efforts in certain minority groups (Farkas, Lleras & Maczuga, 2002, p.148). It holds that due to low expected returns for their efforts, certain groups of students develop an s s h w k d k d w s “ wh ” ( b d ) Th s s d s h w k s “ wh ” d m v s from making an effort (ibid.). The discussions about this theory range from discussions about the proper statistical tests to use (e.g. Farkas, Lleras & Maczuga, 2002), to refining the hypothesis to more specific ways of working and again testing it by means of statistical tests (Wildhagen, 2011), to including qualifications under which conditions the theory works (Tyson, Darity & Castellino, 2005) and what alternative explanations for the ‘ d d s dv ’ of these radicalized and classed groups should be considered (Paulle, 2013).

Similar discourses exist about the ‘ d d s dv ’ of groups that are defined not by a racialization, but via other social markers, like class, neighborhood (Garner& Raudenbush, 1991) migration background (Kristen & Granato, 2007) or even marital status of their parents (Evans, Kelley & Wanner, 2001). Many of these studies take into account multiple ‘disadvantaging factors’ and the intersecting regimes that create multiple disadvantages, educational or otherwise (see for example Crul and m k’s study on the Turkish and Moroccan second generation in the Netherlands, 2003).

What most of the studies discussing ‘ d d s dv ’ have in common though, is that they presuppose a certain type of ‘ d d s dv ’ and reify this category by appealing to it. The reification, the powerful confirmation and objectification of a differential category, of the matter under scientific scrutiny, seems hardly preventable,

(24)

20 because to discuss a topic, without making it a topic does not really work (Diehm, Kuhn & Machold, 2010). In order to address this problem, Diehm et al. (2010) propose a range of strategies to sensibly reflect on the reifications researchers make, like taking the categorizations out of focus by not using a single spotlight, but illuminating multiple focal points, contextualizing the perceived differences, and questioning own understandings (Diehm, Kuhn & Machold, 2010, p.87-90).

There are some examples that demonstrate a critical examination of the construction of the category applied. I h b k “E h s h V d h s h k d S h ”6

, Dirim, Hauenschild and Lütje-Klose (2008) for example, want to stimulate a more constructive political discourse on cultural diversity and heterogeneity (p.19). They point to the fact that current policies in Germany are informed by discourses that attribute differences in educational outcomes to language and culture (Dirim et al., 2008, p.14 ff). Coinciding with S h k ’s ‘culturism’ (2013, p.1145), Dirim et al. (2008) d s b h w ‘b d ’ s d “ h s s d d m s h b d b w s h d [ h m y] h m s” ( 14) I h s s h d s dv w h h ‘ e’ s s apegoat is found and accordingly, d b ms dd ss d by k d ‘s ds d y’ h d w h immigration background (ibid). Comparing the results of such policies to statistics from other countries with different narratives and policies, the problematic of ignoring socio-economic factors and systematic disadvantages becomes visible (ibid.). By ignoring structural factors, the educational practices can actually perpetuate disadvantage rather than alleviate it.

A very vivid version of this argument was put forth by Diehm and Radtke (1999) by comparing the discursive concept of the student with migration background with the h h w k ’s d h m h ys d , h s y disadvantaged figure in the German context (p.180-185). The later concept, so the authors, had been used to eliminate discrimination along the factors of religion, social class, location and gender in the 70s (ibid.). Prior to this, inequalities between boys and girls were legitimized through the construction of an inherent difference between the male and the

(25)

21 non-m d h ss d ‘s d h m ’ Th h d an emancipation of the women, however, were not a supposedly necessary special treatment, but allowing females into the thus far gender-elite institutions (Diehm & Radtke, 1999, p.185). In juxtaposing the story of gendered disadvantage with the ‘ d d s dv ’ of children with migration background, Diehm and Radtke (1999) de-naturalize the construction of a widely used category by showing its parallels with one that has become less acceptable in current discourses. In this current discourse, the concept of the student with migration background is still used as an explanatory construction, scapegoating culture and language, instead of seriously considering structural mechanisms of discrimination and exclusion.

Th s s d s m sk h ‘d s dv v s’ within the broader education system. With regards to the study at hand, they open the question in how far the discourse within the educational initiatives that have been set up to s y v m ‘ d d s dv ’ v d h ‘d s dv v s w h the system.

3.3 Educational Initiatives in Scientific Literature

The kind of educational initiatives under consideration in this research enter the stage in the mission to alleviate a specific ‘disadvantage’, wh h s v d s d h s d upon. The mission to allevi h ‘d s dv ’, in turn, is what most research on ‘ d d s dv ’ in fact focuses on. How successful is the initiative? Can it be transferred to other contexts? Which components should be reproduced?

The two initiatives at hand, for example, have been examined in academic research. The Mercator Förderunterricht was, amongst others, subject of a book published by the funding foundation, for which researchers provided accounts of the efficacy of the initiative and provided insights into the local innovations and their effects (Mercator, 2010). Its predecessor, the educational support program in Essen was analyzed with regards to its

(26)

22 workings and impacts by Möllering, Benholz and Mavruk (2014). Similar studies exist of many educational initiatives.

There is also research that studies educational innovation, as for example practiced by initiatives like the two under consideration here, in a comparative manner to extrapolate which ideas and methods should be used more widely. An example of a study like that is the b k “S ss d s s d s h s E ” (Fletcha, 2015). In the book education is treated as a complex machine of many component parts that have to be adjusted correctly for the greatest gain. Using communicative m h d y, wh h h “k w d s s d d b w s h s d end- s s” (F h , 2015, 9), h s h s h s j , b s d h v s methodology that included its subjects. Through including the social agents in the field and assessing the outcomes of their actions, they found that the actions implemented where of great importance. I s dy h ‘s ss d ’ h s w y, h s h s contribute to the discourse on action- v h m s, b k “ h ss s d h s h s d s s ” ( h m , 2016, 22), h ys s reifies existing concepts uncritically.

Overall, the literature available about educational initiatives can be said to be very s d s y Th s s h m m s y R b y s’ (2006) human capital discourse on education mentioned earlier, as they answer questions more akin to ‘h w can the greatest s s b d?’. When researching with regards to equality in education, as discussed earlier, the questions should rather pertain to the empowerment of the students or processes that impact this. An additional problem with these typical studies rely on the discursive level of the initiatives studied, reifying the field-specific processes, instead of questioning them (Charmaz, 2016, p.22). I x m h s’ s s of the concept of ‘ d d s dv ’, I attempt do precisely that: to unpack and critically reflect upon the constructions of the initiatives.

(27)

23

V. METHODS

In order to gain an understanding of the tutors’ constructions of the concept of ‘ d d s dv ’ with regards to their students in reflection of their respective contexts, I conducted a comparative interview study on the basis of Grounded Theory principles. In the following, these principles, as well as, other issues pertaining to the methodology of this study are elaborated. I explain the research process of gaining access and collecting data in the local projects, the methodologically comparative nature of the research, the basics of the interview and the way I analyzed them. Furthermore, I elaborate on my own role in the study, as a research instrument and in ethical concerns. The chapter closes by a short mention of the limitations of the study.

5.1 Grounded Theory

In order to gain an understanding of h s’ s s ‘ d d s dv ’ with, I conducted a comparative interview study on the basis of Grounded Theory principles. In a broad sense, “Grounded Theory consists of systematic, yet flexible guidel s d y q v d s h s ‘ d d’ h d h ms v s” ( h m , 2006, 2). In taking the data as a starting point, it connects our attempts to make sense of the world closer to h ‘ h w d’ s s d them, first of all, with other theories that attempt to make sense of the world. This does not presuppose that data objectively portray reality. Indeed, Charmaz (2006) points out that Grounded Theory can be used with very different meta-physical assumptions in mind: “Like any container into which different content can be poured, researchers can use basic Grounded Theory guidelines such as coding, memo-writing, and sampling for theory d v m , d m v m h ds , m y w ys, ” ( 9). The container of Grounded Theory is the methodological approach that makes research an iterative process of reflecting, collecting data, and analyzing. As Charmaz (2006, p.10 ff) describes, the

(28)

24 analyzer moves from the initial research question to a first stage of data collection and initial coding. On the basis of the initial codes, the first tentative categories and write ups of emerging analytical thoughts and ideas are composed(ibid.). From here, more focused data is collected and the analysis is constantly refined, as ideas emerge and are either supported and elaborated or discarded(ibid.). In back and forth between the data and their analysis, a theoretical understanding can be gained (ibid.).

In the following, I will elaborate on the process of my own research in reference to the basic tenets of Grounded Theory and intensive interviewing.

5.2 Research Process

The research process throughout my study of the two initiatives was informed by various factors that I want to reflect upon in this section. First of all, I will elaborate on gaining access to the local projects in Bielefeld and Rotterdam and reflect upon the data collection in the projects. Secondly, follows an elaboration on the effects of the juxtaposition of the two initiatives for my research. Subsequently, I will discuss the interviews and the analysis of the data.

5.2.1 In the Local Projects

The choice of which local implementation to examine was largely informed by practical considerations but had some important implications for my position as a researcher (which I will reflect more on in chapter 5.3). After attempting, unsuccessfully, to access the ‘ v s s’ h ves, in Chicago and in Essen, I focused on local realizations that were readily accessible to me and set in contexts that I was already familiar with.

I gained access to the local implementation of the SAGA Innovations style tutoring project at the Rekenfaculteit in Rotterdam through a research team of the University of

(29)

25 Amsterdam. The Rekenfaculteit is part of the Kinderfaculteit Pendrecht, an organization set up for the children in the neighborhood Pendrecht. It is supported by the philanthropic foundation Stichting de Verre Bergen, who brought in the research team to evaluate and advice the organization. I became part of the research team and in exchange to sharing my data with the other members of the team gained access to the project in Rotterdam in the Netherlands. Having spent the biggest part of my tertiary education in the Netherlands, I was already familiar with the educational system and able to follow the Dutch-language interactions within and around the Kinderfaculteit. Throughout, one month of research I spent a considerable amount of time within the project. I held semi-structured interviews with all seven of the local tutors and their site director. The interview and other interactions I shared with the people within and around the project were informed by a prolonged stay in the tutoring project: Throughout the month, I observed 22 tutor sessions and attended and addition 5 tutor meetings, in which the tutors and the site director work as a team to plan and organize their intervention.

Of the Mercator Förderunterricht projects, I chose the FörBi Förderunterricht für Schülerinnen und Schüler nicht Deutscher Herkunftssprachen in Bielefeld (FörBi)7. FörBi is one of the projects in the regional state of North-Rhine Westphalia in Germany. In Germany education is under the jurisdiction of the regional states, which differentiated the educational regimes in different regions in Germany from each other. I grew up and went to school in the state of North-Rhine Westphalia, which makes me familiar with the education system from the perspective as a student. Furthermore, my sister studies at the University of Bielefeld, where the FörBi is situated. Through my sister, I was already familiar with the university and the city of Bielefeld and, on visits had already experienced some of the s’ d y v s s s d s w h h v s y I gained access to the project by contacting the coordinator and through her received the contacts of the supervisors for the new tutors, who subsequently put me in touch with some of their tutors. During a time spread over more than a month, I visited the project multiple times. I conducted five semi-structured interviews with a total of six tutors (two tutors chose to do the interview together; one of the tutors works in a double-function as tutor and tutor coordinator),

7_{The name of the project transl s “R m d s d s w h -German languages of}

(30)

26 attended three tutor sessions (one in math and two in German) and one reflection meeting between the tutors that had just finished their first semester of tutoring. In the project in Bielefeld, students at the university who become tutors will teach in teams of two for one semester, while being supervised through a seminar and gaining credits towards their own education for the first semester. Afterwards, some of them continue to tutor in the project as a student job.

The choice of the local projects in Rotterdam and Bielefeld allowed for an interesting comparison: Their set-up with support of a big foundation, their close affiliation to a university, and the educational system they interact with (three-tired, tracked system in d h s’ mm d s) v y s m , wh h y x (The Netherlands and Germany), internal organization (team-work and individual/partner work), selection of tutors (college/university graduates and teachers in training), size (60 students through random selection in their school and about 300 students recruited through word-of-mouth), scope (4 times 1 hour per week and 1 time 2 hours per week), experience level (founded in 2015 and founded over 14 years ago) are very different.

5.2.2 Doing a Comparative Study

The choice to do a comparative study that juxtaposes to projects like this arose from the initial irritation about the observation that different tutoring initiatives framed their target groups differently. This observation de-naturalized and casted doubt on the concept of ‘educational disadvantage’ d h q s wh s d d s s h Th m s itself raised this concern.

Comparison by itself is a foundation of Grounded Theors. A Grounded Theory informed study is constantly comparative in and by itself in that it compares data with data, codes with data and arising categories with each other (Charmaz, 2006, p.54). The comparison between two initiatives, allowed for an additional methodologically useful level of comparison that aided taking an analytical distance and the de-naturalization of the bs v d ss s T k y d s , “E md ”, is a necessary step in research in order to not just reproduce the narrative that was observed but analyze,

(31)

de-27 naturalize and question it. Charmaz (2016) recounts the dangers that are bypassed through the iterative process of the Grounded Theory method:

This logic [of going back and forth between data and analysis] aids you in overcoming several ethnographic problems: 1) accusations of uncritically adopting research participants' views, 2) lengthy unfocused forays into the field setting, 3) superficial, random data collection, and 4) reliance on stock disciplinary categories. (p.24)

Akin to the detachment gained by the method, the comparison of the different initiatives in the different contexts added a content-based detachment from the processed and narratives for me. By providing an additional case, an additional scenario of what is possible, each of the initiatives served as a background to contrast the other against. In this way, the comparative nature of this research helped to focus my attention and practice detachment from the each of the two contexts that I felt so close with and thus helped me overcome the “d v d h b m y w h m ” h h my s h (Amann& Hirschauer, 1997).

4.2.3 The Interviews

The question of how the tutors in the two initiatives construct ‘ d d s dv ’ is a question that requests information from the tutors. Therefore, I decided to conduct in-d h v ws As h m (2006, 25) s , “ s v v w m s in-depth exploration of a particular topic or experience and, thus, is a useful method for v q y ”

I scheduled a period of at least 45 minutes for each of the interviews. In Rotterdam, all interviews were held in one of the rooms of the initiatives, usually, with only me and my conversation partner in the room. In two instances, other workers of the initiative were present for part of the interview, quietly working in a corner. The interviews in Bielefeld, on the other hand, were less private. Within the big building of the university, we would in each case, find a quiet corner, where we could talk; in some instances that would be a working space on a quiet corridors, in others on a table at the side of a big hall.

(32)

28 Interviewing, as a method within Grounded Theory, v s h s h “m direct control over the construction of data than most other methods such as ethnography or x ys s ” ( h m , 2006, 28) Th s b s ss b y b useful data, but it also implies the responsibility of the researcher for the co-constructed data and the interview situation. In order to do justice to this responsibility, careful preparation, conduction and reflection are key. In preparation to the interviews, I designed an interview guide8 that would help me lead the conversations and prompt the tutors to share their views. Before the interview, I would inform the tutors about the purpose of this study to learn about their views, ask them for their active consent in participating and informed them that they could interrupt and discontinue doing so at any point. Finally, I also asked for permission to record the interviews.

During the interview, I would focus on the conversation and use the interview guide as a reminder of the topics I wanted to explore: their views on the initiative and its purposes, their target group, and the education system at large. In order to make sure that I understood the tutors’ ideas, I often asked them to tell me more about a topic or concept they had mentioned. Even though the broad topic of the conversation did not concern very personal topics, some of them told me private or difficult stories. In such situations, it is obviously important to prioritize the human being, over the data (Charmaz, 2006, p. 30).

In the analysis that followed the transcription of the audio recordings, I paid careful attention to my own role. The analysis itself was guided by Grounded Theory methodology.

4.2.4 The Analysis

As mentioned earlier, the Grounded Theory method is an iterative process. The analysis happens in multiple recurring steps. Once I had collected my interview data, I transcribed them to facilitate coding.

As a first step, I coded the interviews in accordance to the topics they talked about and the concepts they used. In this way, however, I remained at the surface of the data. Going into the field, I had suspected to find the tutors telling me how they thought their

(33)

29 students were ‘disadvantaged’. The confrontation with the reality of the field in which the s’ w s w h h ‘d s dv d’ b w h h humans sitting in front of them, created the necessary irritation that led me to discard my initial codes. I had fallen into the trap that Charmaz cautiones about:

To the extent that ethnographers treat their topics as separate segments of the studied world or as structures but not processes, completing a Grounded Theory analysis poses difficulties. Their fieldnotes may describe the topic as a thing, an object, without showing the actions and process that construct it. The ethnographer as well as the participants may take the processes for granted that construct the studied topic or structure. (Charmaz, 2016, p. 22)

Discarding my initial codes and approach, I went back to the data, now focusing not on what the tutors were saying but what they were doing by means of their utterances. In the following explorations, I realized that indeed the tutors were constructing ‘ d d s dv ’, just not how I had suspected it. My initial position had blinded me.

The influencing role of the researcher in a study like this is undeniable. On one hand, I co-created the data (Charmaz, 2006, p.27) that I then went to analyze, and on the other my own identity shapes my perception and analysis of the data (Charmaz, 2006, p.27). In order to prevent the normalization of my perspective, I will next reflect on my own person as an instrument in this research.

5.3 My Role as a Researcher

With regards to my role as a researcher, for this study two important points need to be discussed: Firstly, I will discuss myself as an instrument of this research through the ‘ s d w h ’, d s d y, I w d s ss my s h h concerns of this research are met.

y s h s s h b d s h ‘ s d w h ’ I h b s “ h s s b k m s h h ” s

(34)

30 (1986) explains on how black women trained in sociology remain confronting strangers within a discipline that has been constructed through the selective view of upper-class white males (p.26 ff). They remain in this position, because a full adaptation of the view of this discipline would mean to assume its reductive view of the identities that pertain to themselves (p.27). Being within the sociology through their training, black women, as well s h ‘ - m ’ s h v h w v w h d s d m k m s v I s’ (1986) words:

Learning the subject matter of sociology stimulates a reexamination of one’s own personal and cultural experiences; and yet these same experiences paradoxically help to illuminate sociologies anomalies. (p.29)

I h h s’ account, my personal background qualifies me in special ways to conduct the research at hand. Beyond my academic training, my personal biography shapes and sensitizes my analysis and should, therefore, be elaborated on.

As noted above, I am familiar with the two educational systems that the initiatives are situated in, as a subject of the systems. Beyond this, I felt very connected to the tutors in both projects and experienced them as peers. Having just finished university, or being in the process, they are in the same phase of life as I am, and engaging in a social project, they have similar interests to mine. In a reflection after a day in the project in Rotterdam I wrote b my d y m my s s h , b s “ h w y , s well as the types of creation (events, regular practices, mutual advice, problem-solving, group work), I see is s h b d m ” ( w , 05 01 2016) Th s pertained especially to the team situations in the project in Rotterdam, but also to the more individual experiences in the project in Rotterdam. This close connection that I felt, and saw reciprocated by the tutors in the way they interacted with me, allowed me to gain a d d s d h ’s s v

Besides strongly identifying with the tutors, however, I also feel like an ‘outsider within’ s s h B s h w d b d d s ‘ d y d s dv d’ m k s m s d h s y v y y Growing up I did neither knew nor notice that statistically I was supposed to be educationally disadvantaged due to my s’ d ainments (finishing the lowest and middle track of secondary

(35)

31 education; neither of them attending university), occupation (house wife and employee), and even my par s’ d v (K h& F y, 1988; Ev s, K y &W , 2001). On the other hand, I encountered social pressures as a girl interested in physics. Being one of two girls in the advanced physics class in the highest track of secondary school, my gender w s d s ss d v b s my s ss h ‘b y s bj ’ Not feeling consequences of the supposedly significant factors to ‘ d d s dv ’, while very much experiencing the consequences to others, gives me a motivation to scrutinize the issue.

Next to being a direct instrument for this research, as a researcher, I also hold an important role in ensuring that ethical concerns, like anonymity and consent, are met with regards to this research. Following the Code of Ethics of the International Sociological Association (International Sociological Association, 2001), I ensured that my data collection did not harm anyone. In particular, I protected the privacy of all participants by the use of pseudonyms. Due to the specific gender distribution in the small group of tutors interviewed, I opted to use only pseudonyms that can apply to all genders. All tutors were informed on at least two occasions (when first introducing the study, and before holding the interview) that participation was optional and contingent on their active consent that could be withdrawn at any moment.

5.3 Limitations of the Study

I h s dy h d, I s y h s’ s s h ‘ d d s dv ’ with regards to their work and how the presented understandings connect the initiatives to broader educational systems. In answering this question, I am constructing an interpretation myself. While tracing the understandings of the tutors, assembling those words that I regard as meaningful, and putting them into the context of selected literature, I myself am making use of my power and am engaging in a discourse.

Between ‘migration background’ and ‘deprived neighborhood’ : constructions of ‘educational disadvantage’ in two tutoring Initiatives in Rotterdam and Bielefeld