The Roma in European Higher Education: Recasting Identities, Re-Imagining Futures 9781350109636, 9781350109667, 9781350109643

Citation preview

The Roma in European Higher Education

Also available from Bloomsbury Austerity and the Remaking of European Education, edited by Anna Traianou and Ken Jones Changing Higher Education for a Changing World, edited by Claire Callender, William Locke and Simon Marginson The Governance of British Higher Education, Michael Shattock and Aniko Horvath

The Roma in European Higher Education Recasting Identities, Re-Imagining Futures Edited by Louise Morley, Andrzej Mirga and Nadir Redzepi

BLOOMSBURY ACADEMIC Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 50 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3DP, UK 1385 Broadway, New York, NY 10018, USA BLOOMSBURY, BLOOMSBURY ACADEMIC and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published in Great Britain 2020 Copyright © Louise Morley, Andrzej Mirga, Nadir Redzepi and Contributors, 2020 Louise Morley, Andrzej Mirga, Nadir Redzepi and Contributors have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Au thors of this work. Cover design: Tjasa Krivec Cover image: Elvin Shytaj (© Roma Education Fund, 2014) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc does not have any control over, or responsibility for, any third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet addresses given in this book were correct at the time of going to press. The author and publisher regret any inconvenience caused if addresses have changed or sites have ceased to exist, but can accept no responsibility for any such changes. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Morley, Louise, editor. | Mirga, Andrzej, editor. | Redzepi, Nadine Levy, editor. Title: The Roma in European higher education: recasting identities, re-imagining futures / edited by Louise Morley, Andrzej Mirga and Nadir Redzepi. Description: New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2020. Identifiers: LCCN 2020013769 (print) | LCCN 2020013770 (ebook) | ISBN 9781350109636 (Hardback) | ISBN 9781350109643 (eBook) | ISBN 9781350109650 (ePub) Subjects: LCSH: Romanies–Education, Higher–Europe. Classification: LCC LC3516.E85 R67 2020 (print) | LCC LC3516.E85 (ebook) | DDC 371.829/91497–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020013769 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020013770 ISBN: HB: 978-1-3501-0963-6 ePDF: 978-1-3501-0964-3 eBook: 978-1-3501-0965-0 Typeset by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India To find out more about our authors and books visit www.bloomsbury.com and sign up for our newsletters.

Contents Notes on Contributors Introduction: Recasting Identities, Re-Imagining Futures Part 1  Theories, Resources, Policy and Professional Interventions for Challenging Roma Exclusion from Higher Education 1

2

3

4

5 6

8

1

15

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education: Beyond Sex, Slums and Special Schools, and Towards Epistemic Inclusion  Louise Morley 17 The Roma in European Higher Education: Explaining the Educational Gap of Roma in Higher Education  Andrzej Mirga and Nadir Redzepi 33 The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies for Roma in Higher Education: Racialized Neoliberal Governmentality in Semi-Peripheral Europe  Daniel Leyton 57 Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters) Higher Education Expansion, Roma Access and Neoliberal Globalization  Spyros Themelis 76 Capability Strengthening: Roma as Knowledge Producers  Paul Roberts 94 Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education  Iulius Rostas and Simona Torotcoi 108

Part 2  Focus on Europe: Examples of What is going on in Greece, the Nordic Countries, Serbia and Spain 7

vii

131

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education: Lights and Shades after Three Decades of National Plans for Roma Inclusion  Teresa PadillaCarmona, José González-Monteagudo, and Sandra Heredia-Fernández 133 Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents – Analysing Silences  Jenni Helakorpi and Ulpukka Isopahkala-Bouret 151

vi

Contents

9 Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy: The Case of Serbia  Tanja Jovanovic 168 10 Greek Roma in Higher Education: How Did They Get There?  Panagiota Gkofa 186 Index

211

Contributors Panagiota Gkofa holds a PhD in Education Research-Sociology of Education from King’s College London (UK). Her doctoral study, Greek Roma in Higher Education: A Qualitative Investigation of Educational Success, was funded by the Greek State Scholarships Foundation (IKY). She conducted postdoctoral research on ‘Educational Trajectories in Greek University: Diversity, Inequalities and Inclusion’ (University of Ioannina, Greece) and, currently, she teaches at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (Department of Early Childhood Education). Her research interest is in the sociology of education and education policy. José González-Monteagudo is a Senior Lecturer in Education Theories in the University of Seville, Spain. His research interests span educational theory and policy at all levels, lifelong learning and adult education, intercultural education and mediation, migrations, social inclusion and biographic research methods. Some of his recent publications include Continuity and discontinuity in learning careers: Potentials for a learning space in a changing world (2018) and Higher education, employability and transitions to the labour market (2018). Jenni Helakorpi is a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland. Her research interests focus on justice in education, minoritized groups, racism and whiteness, and ethnographic methodologies. In her PhD project, she has studied the policies and practices that aim to promote the basic education of Roma and Traveller minorities in Finland, Norway and Sweden. Sandra Heredia-Fernández is a councillor of the Seville City Council, Spain. She is Roma and has worked as Head of the International Area at FAKALI (Andalusian Federation of Roma Women). She has been a member of the Spanish State Council of the Roma, Expert of the Council of Europe on AntiGypsyism and Human Rights and Representative of the Spanish State for The Decade of Roma Inclusion. She is developing her doctoral research in the field of representation of Roma women at the University of Seville, Spain.

viii

Contributors

Ulpukka Isopahkala-Bouret is an Associate Professor at the faculty of education, University of Turku, Finland. Her research interests focus on equality and justice in/through education over the life course. Her specific research topics include post-secondary educational choice, access to higher education, graduate employability and career trajectories, institutional stratification, age and gender. She is currently co-leader of a research consortium ‘Higher Education Graduates’ Employability and Social Positioning in the Labour Market’ (2018–22) funded by the Academy of Finland. Tanja Jovanovic is Roma Feminist Scholar holding a PhD in Education from the University of Sussex, UK. She had a Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the CEU in Budapest, Hungary, and Harvard University in Boston, USA. She was working at the University of Sussex, UK, as Graduate Teaching Research Associate as part of Centre for Higher Education and Equity Research (CHEER). Before that, since 2003 she worked intensively as a Roma activist focusing on Central Eastern Europe. Tanja’s area of interest is how inclusive education, equity and social inclusion play key roles in reducing poverty and overcoming the socio cultural-economic obstacles in developing settings such as the Roma community or any other community with profound poverty. Daniel Leyton is Lecturer at the Department of Education Policy in the Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Chile. He is a sociologist and has a PhD in Education from the University of Sussex, UK. His research interests include education policy, inequalities and internationalization in higher education, and regimes of knowledge and subjectivities through education. Andrzej Mirga is a Polish Roma, an ethnologist, analyst and activist. Most recently he served as the chair of the Board of Roma Education Fund or REF. Prior to that he headed up the Contact Point for Roma and Sinti Issues at the OSCE’s Warsaw-based Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) (from 2006 till 2013). He was the first Roma to study at Jagiellonian University in Krakow where he later taught until 1992. Between 1998 and 2001 he taught at Rutgers University, in New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States, and is a long-term associate of the Project on Ethnic Relations, an organization with headquarter in Princeton. Through this time he wrote and published extensively. Louise Morley is Professor of Higher Education and Director of the Centre for Higher Education and Equity Research (CHEER) at the University of Sussex,

Contributors

ix

UK. Louise has an international profile in the field of the sociology of gender in higher education. She is a fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, and a fellow of the Society for Research into Higher Education. She has published widely in the field of higher education studies. Teresa Padilla-Carmona is Professor in Educational Research Methods at the University of Seville, Spain. Her research interests focus on widening participation in higher education and women’s studies. Some of her recent publications include Just Facilitating Access or Dealing with Diversity? Nontraditional Students’ Demands at a Spanish University (2019), Learning Careers of Non-traditional Students on Employability Skills (2018) and Roma in Higher Education: A Case Study of Successful Trajectories in the University of Seville (2017). Paul Roberts is a doctoral candidate at the Centre for Higher Education and Equity Research at the University of Sussex, UK. His research interests include doctoral education, the doctoral student experience, higher education administration and internationalization, with an emphasis on the issues of power, identity and affect in higher education. Nadir Redzepi is Executive Director at the Roma Education Fund in Budapest, Hungary. By vocation, he is a sociologist and activist. He is a Macedonian Roma and has served in a number of international positions as well as extensively engaging in shaping Roma-related policies and initiatives, including Roma children’s education, Roma participation in policy design and implementation, as well the use of EU funds for Roma policy implementation. Over the years, he has acted as an analyst and researcher, evaluator and trainer for Council of Europe, UNDP, OSCE, Minority Rights Group and Open Society Institute. He is one of the book contributors as discussant From Victimhood to Citizenship (2013). Iulius Rostas is Visiting Professor at the Central European University, Hungary, and the National School of Political Science and Administration, Romania. Between 2016 and 2019 he served as Chair of Romani Studies and Assistant Professor at Central European University. Previously, he was an affiliated fellow with the Institute for Advanced Studies at CEU, Senior Fellow with the Open Society Foundations Roma Initiatives Office and Visiting Lecturer at Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary. He has worked for the Open

x

Contributors

Society Foundations, the European Roma Rights Center and the Government of Romania and consulted the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the World Bank, the European Commission, USAID, the Council of Europe and the Roma Education Fund. Dr Rostas is the editor of Ten Years After: A History of Roma School Desegregation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEU Press, 2012) and in 2011, he published Social Inclusion or Exclusion: the Rights of Persons Living with HIV in Moldova (Cartier Publishing, 2011). He is the editor-in-chief of the Critical Romani Studies journal (crs.ceu.edu). His latest book A Task for Sisyphus: Why Policies towards Roma in Europe Are Failing was published by CEU Press in 2019. Spyros Themelis is Associate Professor in Education at the University of East Anglia, UK. His research and publications focus on social mobility, minorities in education (especially Gypsy/Roma/Travellers), widening participation and social movements (with a focus on higher education movements). He has published a monograph, Social Change and Education in Greece: A Study in Class Struggle Dynamics (2013), and several papers in international journals, which include British Journal of Sociology of Education, Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, Research in Comparative and International Education Journal, Journal of Youth Studies, Compare, Ethnicities. Simona Torotcoi is a PhD candidate and a Yehuda Elkana fellow at Central European University, Hungary. Simona has been a visiting scholar at CIPES – Center for Research in Higher Education Policies in Portugal. She received her MA degree in Public Policy at CEU with a specialization in Higher Education Policy, and her MSc in Public Administration from Leiden University as a Praesidium Libertatis scholar. Her main research interests include the study of higher education policies, especially access and participation policies.

Introduction Recasting Identities, Re-Imagining Futures

The Higher Education Internationalisation and Mobility (HEIM) Project This edited collection is the first book to be published that focuses on the Roma1 in relation to higher education. It originates from the Higher Education Internationalisation and Mobility (HEIM) project.2 This project was an act of Roma–Gadji solidarity between three European universities (Seville, Sussex and Umea), and the Roma Education Fund. It focused on the Roma community in Europe as a critical example of a marginalized group, at both staff and student levels in higher education. It took the concept of mobility into account in terms of both higher education as a vehicle of social mobility and inclusion and mobility in relation to opportunities for internationalization in today’s globalized knowledge society. It examined how principles of equity and inclusion can be applied to internationalization strategies and programmes in higher education, as well as on developing research and innovation capacity in this field. It brought together the considerable policy and activist expertise of a large Roma-focused NGO with researchers and scholars of equity in higher education, feminism and policy analysis to consider the Roma in relation to higher education. A further objective was to develop the research capacity, networks and resources of Roma researchers and academics, and to this end, research training and knowledge were exchanged between Roma and non-Roma doctoral scholars (Roberts, 2020). HEIM made a significant contribution to understanding how access to studying and working in an increasingly internationalized higher education sector is marked by particular exclusions for marginalized groups. HEIM

‘Rom’ is the singular noun, ‘Roma’ is plural and ‘Romani’ is the adjective. The term ‘Roma’ encompasses diverse groups, including Gypsies, Travellers, Manouches, Ashkali, Sinti and Boyash. We are aware that while the term ‘Gypsy’ has been reclaimed with pride in the UK, in many countries in Central and Eastern Europe, it is still a pejorative label. 2 http:​//www​.suss​ex.ac​.uk/e​ducat​ion/c​heer/​resea​rchpr​oject​s/ris​e 1

2

The Roma in European Higher Education

produced and coordinated knowledge about the Roma in higher education, and investigated the policies, interventions and methodologies for the inclusion of Roma communities and the internationalization of higher education in three different national locations – Spain, Sweden and the UK. It produced resources with an applied focus including a film Gypsy, Roma and Travellers’ Experiences of Higher Education in English and Spanish,3 a Facebook group to support Roma students,4 a training module in English and Spanish Internationalisation in Higher Education: Practical Guidance for use with international staff,5 and a report Guidelines for Reflexive Internationalisation in Higher Education (Nagy and Olahova, 2018). HEIM also produced national reports and working papers (Alexiadou and Norberg, 2015; Danvers, 2015; Garaz and Notar, 2015; Garaz and Petre, 2015; Idrizi and Lubic, 2015; Padilla-Carmona and Soria-Vilchez, 2015), book chapters (Alexiadou, 2017; Hinton-Smith and Danvers, 2016), academic journal articles (Alexiadou and Norberg, 2017; Garaz and Torotcoi, 2017; Hinton-Smith,Danvers and Jovanovic, 2017; Morley et al. 2018; PadillaCarmona, González-Monteagudo and Soria-Vilchez, 2017) and thinkpieces (Balog, 2017; Bass, 2017; Goracel, 2017; Lacatus, 2017; Mate, 2017). The following sections examine the HEIM project to find how the Roma are faring in national higher education systems in Spain, Sweden and the UK.

Spain: Multiple Policies, Minimal Statistics As Padilla-Carmona et al. consider in Chapter 7 of this book, the Spanish Roma community (Gitanos) is one of the largest in Europe, and Spain was the only country outside of Central and Eastern Europe to participate in the Roma Decade of Inclusion, but statistical data are uneven. It is estimated that between 1.6 per cent and 1.9 per cent of the Spanish population is Roma (Laparra, 2011). Indigenous Roma have been joined by newcomers from Bulgaria and Romania since the European Union (EU) expansion in 2007. The Roma are not officially recognized as an ethnic minority in the country (ERTF, 2014), but estimates suggest that their higher education participation rates are low (approximately 2.2 per cent). Garaz and Notar (2015) posit that the reasons for the low representation of Roma in higher education include disproportionately higher poverty and unemployment levels, relatively lower completion rates of secondary https://youtu.be/8In83QdJQzs https​://ww​w.fac​ebook​.com/​group​s/REF​Schol​arshi​pProg​ramRo​maRes​earch​Netwo​rk/ 5 http:​//www​.suss​ex.ac​.uk/e​ducat​ion/c​heer/​resea​rchpr​oject​s/ris​e/tra​ining​modul​e 3 4

Introduction

3

education, as well as lack of information about enrolment and education process at tertiary level and benefits of higher education. However, there has been some notable policy activity in Spain. In line with the European Commission recommendations, Spain developed a National Roma Integration Strategy for 2012–2020 (Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality, 2011). The Spanish government’s Action Plan for the Development of the Roma Population included higher education in its objectives aimed to ‘facilitate the university entrance and permanence of the young Roma within the system’ (Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality, 2010: 24). Spain also has a robust programme of strategies for widening participation in higher education. However, factors such as ethnicity and social origin are not specifically identified in these initiatives nor do they identify Roma as a target group. Once a Roma student enters university, s/he is observed as equal as her/his non-Roma peers, and therefore does not receive any targeted support. NGOs such as Fakali6 and Amuradi7 in Andalusia support Roma access to higher education, but there are no affirmative action programmes in Spanish higher education system targeting Roma or any other ethnic group (Garaz and Notar, 2015). However, the HEIM project’s findings in Spain identified some good practices including specific and financial supported programmes to encourage participation in higher education among Roma populations (e.g. Programa para facilitar el acceso y la continuidad de estudios medios y superiores de jóvenes estudiantes gitanos y gitanas of the Fundación Secretariado Gitano); high participation rate of Roma community in the design, implementation and monitoring of inclusive plans and measures; and awareness of the importance of giving visibility to Roma people’s achievements (PadillaCarmona and Soria-Vilchez, 2015).

Sweden: Ethnically Neutral Higher Education? The HEIM project’s research on the Roma in higher education in Sweden also reported that one of the main challenges in evaluating change is the lack of publicly available ethnically disaggregated data. As there is no registration by ethnicity, there are only estimates ranging from 20,000 to 42,500 to 100,000 Roma people in Sweden (Alexiadou and Norberg, 2015). Like Spain and the UK, there is not one, but several Roma communities, and recently, Roma EU http://www.fakali.org http://www.amuradi.org

6 7

4

The Roma in European Higher Education

migrants from Romania and Bulgaria and other eastern EU countries have also arrived in Sweden. As Helakorpi and Isopahkala-Bouret discuss in Chapter 8 of this book, there have been some policy interventions for the Roma. While Idrizi and Tomic (2015) report that Sweden does not have explicit affirmative action policies for higher education, Alexiadou and Norberg (2015) highlight how some programmes have been initiated to support Roma access to higher education such as the Agnesberg Roma folk high school and Södertörns University College, which has been given the responsibility for teacher education in Romani Chib.8 As with many Roma policies, the issue of representation and participation has been key. Cooperation with the Roma people and their representatives in all contexts and phases of development has been emphasized as a vital condition for sustainable change. Alexiadou and Norberg (2015) made a range of recommendations to enhance Roma participation in Swedish higher education, including the use of the funds for steering mechanisms for monitoring national progress against the stated goals for education development of Roma people; the need to develop a fuller and more explicit policy definition of inclusion/ integration from the European Commission (as the major policy actor that has some degree of enforcement capacity on Member States); a stronger definition of equality that applies not merely in relation to enabling Roma groups but also to dealing with the wider society and the prevailing attitudes in the wider populations that often result in discriminatory practices for Roma children and young people; full participation of Roma communities, representatives and/ or Roma NGOs in the design of strategies for the integration and progression in education systems. Knowledge exchange between Sweden and some of the Central and Eastern European countries was also proposed. For example, Romania has an affirmative action programme for Roma students that could be transferred to a Swedish context (Pantea, 2015).

UK: Gypsies, Roma and Travellers The HEIM project’s research on the situation of Gypsy, Roma and Travellers (GRT)9 in UK higher education found that these communities are often excluded from widening participation policies, strategies and interventions for inclusion http:​//www​.esv.​se/Ve​rktyg​--sto​d/Sta​tslig​garen​/Regl​ering​sbrev​/?RBI​D=151​45 23 The term ‘Gypsy, Roma and Traveller’ is a collective term used to describe a wide variety of cultural and ethnic groups in the UK including Romany Gypsies, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh Travellers, and Roma migrants from Central and Eastern Europe.

8 9

Introduction

5

and support of under-represented groups in UK higher education (Danvers, 2015; Gagnon, 2016; Garaz and Petre, 2015). Unlike Spain and Sweden, the UK does collect ethnically disaggregated data and the 2011 national census was the first that included self-identification for GRT communities. In the 2011 UK population census, 58,000 people in England and Wales identified themselves as Gypsy or Irish Travellers (Office for National Statistics, 2014). Other estimates vary between 150,000 and 300,000 people, while the Council of Europe estimates 225,000 Gypsies, Roma and Travellers in the UK (including Roma migrants since the EU’s enlargement in 2004 and 2007) – that is, 0.36 per cent of the UK total population (Garaz and Petre, 2015). Exact numbers are difficult to ascertain, as GRT communities are often outside national census data because of, for example, mobility or stigmatization that leads some people to not declare their GRT ethnicities. The University and Colleges Application Service (UCAS) data has separate ethnicity categories for ‘Gypsy and Traveller’ and ‘Irish Traveller’ (Northern Ireland only) but nothing for Roma (UCAS, no date). In the majority of publicly available datasets, Gypsies and Travellers are included within the category of ‘White’ although disaggregated data are available, on request, from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). Nevertheless, from the data that do exist it is possible to estimate that between 3 and 4 per cent of the GRT population over the age of eighteen is accessing higher education (HESA, 2014). This compares to 43 per cent of those aged eighteen to thirty for the population as a whole (Department for Business Innovation and Skills, 2014). In the academic year 2015/16, the proportion of Gypsies and Travellers who were students in higher education was approximately eleven times lower than that of the whole population. Only 12 per cent of GRT pupils achieved five or more good GCSEs, including English and mathematics, compared with 58 per cent of all pupils. Research reports extensive discrimination, bullying and prejudice experienced by GRT school pupils (Bhopal and Myers, 2016). Progress on Roma integration and inclusion in the UK (in response to the EU National Framework for Roma Integration) is slow or even absent in many policy areas. There has been a lack of national direction and impetus for widening access to, and supporting the retention and success of, GRT in UK higher education (Mulcahy et al. 2017). There are no affirmative-action-based programmes in the UK specifically targeting Roma populations (Garaz and Petre, 2015). Policy guidance from the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) requires education institutions to ‘consider’ targeting additional groups in their Access Agreements such as ‘students from Gypsy and Traveller communities’ who are ‘currently under-represented and/or disadvantaged in higher education at a national level’ (OFFA, 2016: 13). A HEIM report suggests

The Roma in European Higher Education

6

Table 0.1  Students in Great Britain – Whole Population and Gypsies and Travellers

Population Number of UK domiciled students (2015/16) Percentage who are students

All ethnicities

Gypsies and Travellers

63,258,400a 2,280,830c

61,892b 200d

3.6

0.32

a

2015 Great Britain Population – Office for National Statistics (2017).

b

Figure collated from UK census analysis from the: Scottish Government (2013) and Office for National Statistics, (2014).

c

HESA (2017).

d

Figure supplied by HESA.

that enablers include good quality, desegregated schooling for GRT children, transparent and accessible information about higher education opportunities and financial support and scholarships for GRT students (Danvers, 2015). Some UK universities are addressing Roma issues. For example, the University of Hertfordshire has for twenty years published books about the Roma, and additionally has been the chief outlet of a whole generation of Romani authors/ scholars. Another example is the University of Manchester, which is sponsoring a multi-university project investigating the Romanian Roma migration to Western European countries for the purpose of both increasing knowledge and influencing policy. The University of Manchester also hosts an online archive of Romani linguistic and educational resources.10 The University of Sheffield also has a website on Romani Studies.11 However, while the UK has some active and effective NGOs and advocacy groups including the Advisory Council for the Education of Romany and other Travellers (ACERT),12 Friends, Families and Travellers,13 and National Association of Teachers of Travellers and Other Professionals,14 there is a noticeable lack of both scholarship and empirical data that details the particular issues and requirements faced by GRT communities studying in UK institutions and young people thinking of accessing higher education in the future. This relative silence in the literature leads to GRT communities often not being on the agenda when higher education inequalities

12 13 14 10 11

https​://ro​mani.​human​ities​.manc​heste​r.ac.​uk https://romanistudies.com http://acert.org.uk https://www.gypsy-traveller.org https://www.natt.org.uk

Introduction

7

are being discussed. A major recommendation from the UK knowledge exchange events was for further collaboration between academic and activist communities.

Impact, Knowledge Exchange and Recommendations for Change The HEIM project aimed to generate impact internationally, and various events brought together policymakers, activists, NGOs and academics to exchange knowledge about some of the initiatives in Central and Eastern Europe, and identify strategic actions for change. An impact seminar at the University of Sussex in May 2016 (Gagnon, 2016) catalysed a UK study conducted by King’s College, London (Mulcahy et al., 2017). It received some rare media coverage and began to create public and policy awareness (Jovanovic, 2016; Mathews, 2016). At the seminar, four key impact aims were identified: 1. To generate awareness of issues of equity and inclusion of the Roma community in higher education among a target audience, with a view to influencing policies, practices and public engagement. 2. Secure the commitment of a target group of stakeholders to the project aims via participation and networking among researchers and partner bodies. 3. To build capacity and facilitate mobility for academics, non-academic partners and students from diverse social groups and European regions, with a view to exchanging knowledge and skills on the project’s aims. 4. To generate evidence-based training materials and practices on equality and diversity for use within higher education (HE) and other relevant contexts. In July 2017, an Experts’ Meeting was held at the University of Sussex during which the following action points were agreed: ●●

●●

●●

GRT students to be targetted more prominently as a target group for widening participation initiatives. Setting up a local forum of key stakeholders in Sussex to discuss how schools, local authorities and universities can better work together on this issue. Including knowledge and awareness training for colleagues working in widening participation and promoting GRT inclusion on relevant professional mailing lists.

8 ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

The Roma in European Higher Education

Embedding GRT issues and knowledge within school and university curricula. Creating case studies of GRT graduates as a form of awareness raising for young people who might be considering attending HE. Working with diversity champions in our own institutions to ensure GRT is on their agenda. Looking at how international study abroad opportunities could be better promoted to marginalized groups in higher education, including GRT. Linking existing advocacy groups (e.g. the Advisory Council for the Education of Romany and other Travellers) with All Party Parliamentary Groups to instigate policy change.

In November 2017, an Experts’ Meeting was held at the University of Seville (El Correo de Andalucia, 2018), during which the following action points were agreed: ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

Organizing meetings with Roma students in the university in order to identify the difficulties or special barriers they experience. This information could inform the guidance plans in every school or faculty. Promoting case studies of Roma students and graduates to raise aspirations for young people who might be considering attending HE. This entails working upward from Nursery Education with the Roma families, with a special focus on marginalized or disadvantaged communities. Designing specific measures targetted to Roma students inside the guidance plans of each university faculty, in collaboration with pro-Roma Associations. Integrating new actions targetting Roma students in the already existing programmes for coexistence promotion in secondary schools carried out by an NGO. Developing joint projects between academics and pro-Roma Associations (e.g. under the current funding scheme for cooperation actions). Involving the university in the programme for Roma women carried out in one secondary school in a disadvantaged area of Seville. Requesting the establishment of a special quota from the regional government for Roma students wishing to access higher education, using HEIM results as a referent.

Introduction

9

We are delighted to announce that the HEIM project is also contributing to a campaign to widen access to higher education for people from the GRT communities led by Baroness Janet Whitaker in the UK’s House of Lords, and it is hoped that this edited collection will be a resource for future impact.

International, Inter-agency and Interdisciplinary Analyses of the Roma in Higher Education This book brings together scholars – at different career stages – policymakers and activists who are committed to Roma inclusion and achievement in higher education, and who have been directly involved, or have supported the HEIM project. It spans a range of national and regional locations including Greece, the Nordic countries, Serbia and Spain, and applies diverse theories such as intersectionality, governmentality, post-colonialism, neoliberalism, epistemic justice, inclusion and social mobility to the analysis of the under-researched issue of the Roma in higher education. Louise Morley discusses how higher education can play a part in interrupting the inferiorization of Roma communities. She examines how representation inhabits responsive and responsible action, fights discrimination and racism, promotes epistemic inclusion and redistributes higher educational opportunities without objectifying Roma communities. Andrzej Mirga and Nadir Redzepi critically examine the work of the Roma Education Fund (REF) to promote and support the rise of educated strata of young Roma, successful in the labour market, either as a skilled vocational labour force or as professionals having university education, being linked to the Roma cause and communities, ready to act as triggers or champions of change in mainstream society and in their own community. They argue that it is essential to ensure that Roma communities have an educated leadership through their participation in higher education. They are especially interested in whether REF’s interventions make a difference in progressing with Roma social inclusion, and what impact REF is generating at the level of community – encouraging and stimulating interest in higher education and, at the system level – making it receptive and supportive of this individual and obvious Roma minority need. Daniel Leyton subjects the discourse and interventions for affirmative action to some critical scrutiny. He invokes the theoretical frameworks of racialized neoliberalism and governmentality to problematize the assumed understanding of equality as inclusion and citizenship in policy interventions. Spyros Themelis critically examines Roma participation in higher education in the context of globalization and EU policy initiatives. Paul Roberts considers capacity

10

The Roma in European Higher Education

strengthening at doctoral level for Roma scholars. Drawing on experiences of HEIM’s interventions to support doctoral scholars and the international literature on doctoral studies, he explores how the pursuit of knowledge is intertwined with issues of identity and power. Iulius Rostas and Simona Torotcoi critically review the little literature that exists about the inclusion, participation and achievement of Roma students in higher education. In so doing, they explore the contribution of Roma students and academics to furthering learning, knowledge and research in higher education. Teresa Padilla-Carmona, José González-Monteagudo and Sandra Heredia-Fernández focus on Spain – the only country outside Central and Eastern Europe to be included in the Roma Decade of Inclusion. They argue that while Spain has a long tradition in the promotion of Roma social and educational inclusion and has gained international recognition for its so-called Spanish model for Roma inclusion, existing statistics convey poor participation of Roma students in higher education. Jenni Helakorpi and Ulpukka Isopahkala-Bouret present the ways in which higher education of Roma and Traveller groups is framed in policy initiatives in four Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. They interrogate gaps and silences in Roma policies, higher education policies, interventions and research on the topic in these countries. Tanja Jovanovic explores the experiences of Roma accessing higher education in Serbia, analysing the effects of racism, marginalization, poverty, misogyny and social exclusion on accessing higher education. Panagiota Gkofa examines the situation of Roma in Greek higher education, reporting how policy has been developed and identifying factors which have influenced Roma students’ uptake of higher education. Chapters in this edited collection suggest that more needs to be done to include GRT communities in higher education by fostering more inclusive practices, and by factoring consideration of GRT issues into all aspects of higher education including staffing, undergraduate, postgraduate, doctoral scholarship, widening participation policies and internationalization. However, these practices need to be subjected to rigorous critical scrutiny and evaluation to ensure their effectiveness and that they are recasting, rather than reinforcing identities. Can we refresh narratives, images and accounts of/from/about/for the Roma? We wish to inquire whether a new ethics, new theoretical frameworks and a new aesthetics can be forged, and what part higher education can play in this process? We hope that this edited collection will be a valuable resource for policymakers, activists and academics who are committed to epistemic inclusion, social justice and higher education inclusion for GRT communities in Europe and beyond. A key invitation to us all is to imagine different futures for the largest ethnic minority group in Europe.

Introduction

11

Acknowledgements We wish to thank the European Union Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation for funding the HEIM project (Grant number: H2020-RISE-2014-643739), and for all the participants in the HEIM project in the Universities of Seville, Sussex and Umea and the Roma Education Fund.

References Alexiadou, N. (2017). ‘Equality and Education Policy in the European Union—An Example from the Case of Roma’. In S. Parker, K. N. Gulson and T. Gale (eds), Policy and Inequality in Education. Volume 1, Series: Education Policy & Social Inequality. Singapore: Springer Press, 111–31. Alexiadou, N. and Norberg, A. (2015). ‘Roma, Education, and Higher Education Policies: The International Context and the Case of Sweden’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex. a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​swedi​sh-re​port-​wp4-f​i nal1​.pdf&​site=​41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Alexiadou, N. and Norberg, A. (2017). ‘Sweden’s Double Decade for Roma Inclusion: An Examination of Education Policy in Context’. European Education, 49(1), 36–55. Balog, I. (2017). ‘Do “National Roma Integration Strategies: A First Step in the Implementation of the EU Framework”’. Achieve Goals in Housing of Roma in Hungary? https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​heim-​ resea​rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-im​re-ba​log-n​ation​al-ro​ma-in​tegra​tion-​strat​egies​.pdf&​site=​ 41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Bass, T. (2017). ‘Go After the World – Creating a Roma Education Movement’. https​://ww​w. sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​heim-​resea​rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-to​mbas​s-cre​ating​-a-ro​ma-ed​ucati​on-mo​vemen​t.pdf​&site​=41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Bhopal, K. and Myers, M. (2016). ‘Marginal Groups in Marginal Times: Gypsy and Traveller Parents and Home Education in England, UK’. British Educational Research Journal 42 (1), 5–20. Danvers, E. (2015). ‘Supporting Roma Students in Higher Education: Briefing Report on Higher Education, Internationalisation and Roma in the UK’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex. a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​susse​xheim​repor​t-uk-​-fina​l.pdf​&site​=41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Department for Business Innovation and Skills. (2014). ‘Participation Rates in Higher Education 2006-2013’. London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills. El Correo de Andalucia. (2018). ‘Un estudio de la Hispalense cuestiona la oposición de la cultura gitana hacia los estudios superiores’ (9 January). https​://ww​w.20m​inuto​s. es/​notic​ia/32​29416​/0/es​tudio​-hisp​alens​e-cue​stion​a-opo​sicio​n-cul​tura-​gitan​a-hac​iaes​tudio​s-sup​erior​es/. Accessed 20 March 2018.

12

The Roma in European Higher Education

European Roma and Travellers Forum (ERTF). (2014). ‘Making Early Marriage in Roma Communities a Global Concern’. Romani Women Informal Platform “Phenjalipe”. http://www. ertf.​org/i​mages​/Repo​rts/M​aking​_Earl​y_Mar​riage​_in_ R​oma_C​ommun​ities​_a_gl​obal_​con- cern.pdf. Accessed 20 August 2019. Gagnon, J. (2016). ‘Including Roma Communities in European Higher Education: Celebrating Successes and Identifying Challenges: Impact Report’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex. a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​impac​t-rep​ort--​-incl​uding​-roma​-comm​uniti​esin​-euro​pean-​highe​r-edu​catio​n-jul​y2016​.pdf&​site=​41. Accessed 15 March 2018. Garaz, S. and Notar, I. (2015). ‘Marginalized Minorities in Higher Education in Spain: Policies and Practice’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​ margi​naliz​ed-mi​norit​ies-i​n-hig​her-e​ducat​ion-i​n-spa​in-fe​b2016​.pdf&​site=​41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Garaz, S. and Petre, G. (2015). ‘Researching Marginalized Minorities in the UK Higher Education and the Case of Roma: Policies and Practice’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​ webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​repor​t---r​esear​ching​-marg​inali​zed-m​inori​ties-​ in-uk​-high​er-ed​ucati​on-an​d-the​-case​-of-r​oma.p​df&si​te=41​. Accessed 14 March 2018. Garaz, S. and Torotcoi, S. (2017). ‘Access to Higher Education and the Reproduction of Social Inequalities: The Case of Roma University Students in Eastern and SouthEastern Europe’. European Education, 49(1), 10–35. Goracel, I. (2017). ‘The Impacts of Internationalisation on Roma Civil Society in Romania’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​heim-​resea​ rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-io​n-gor​acel-​the-i​mpact​s-of-​inter​natio​nalis​ation​-on-r​oma-c​ivil-​ socie​ty-in​-roma​nia.p​df&si​te=41​. Accessed 14 March 2018. Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2014). ‘Statistical First Release 210 Student Data [online]’. http://www.hesa.ac.uk/free-statistics. Accessed 16 May 2018. Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) (2017). Higher Education Student Enrolments and Qualifications Obtained at Higher Education Providers in the United Kingdom by Ethnicity 2015/16. London: Higher Education Statistics Agency. Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E. and Jovanovic, T. (2017). ‘Roma Women’s Higher Education Participation: Whose Responsibility?’ Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–28. Hinton-Smith, T. and Danvers, E. (2016). ‘Exploring Identity and Belonging for Roma Women Students in International Higher Education’. In L. Morley (ed.), The Europa World of Learning Essays 2017: Gender and Access to and Participation in Higher Education. London: Routledge. Idrizi, M. and Tomic, L. (2015). ‘Researching Marginalized Minorities in Higher Education in Sweden and the Case of Roma: Policies and Practice’. https​://ww​w.sus​ sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​draft​-repo​rt-re​searc​hing-​margi​naliz​edmi​norit​ies-i​n-hig​her-e​ducat​ion-i​n-swe​den.p​df&si​te=41​. Accessed 14 March 2018. Jovanovic, T. (2016). ‘Higher Education Must Not Exclude Roma Communities’. https​ ://ww​w.tim​eshig​hered​ucati​on.co​m/blo​g/hig​her-e​ducat​ion-m​ust-n​ot-ex​clude​-roma​ -comm​uniti​es. Accessed 12 March 2018.

Introduction

13

Lacatus, R. (2017). ‘Mind the Gap: Promoting Social Inclusion in Higher Education at the International Level’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​ heim-​resea​rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-ra​du-la​catus​-prom​oting​-soci​al-in​clusi​on.pd​f&sit​e=41.​ Accessed 14 March 2018. Laparra, M. (Coord.). (2011). ‘Diagnóstico social de la comunidad gitana en España’. http:​//www​.msss​i.gob​.es/s​si/fa​milia​sInfa​ncia/​inclu​sionS​ocial​/pobl​acion​Gitan​a/do Mate, D. (2017). ‘The First Sparks of Romani LGBTQ’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​ am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​heim-​resea​rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-de​zso-m​ate-t​he-fi​rst-s​parks​ -of-r​omani​-lgbt​q.pdf​&site​=41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Matthews, D. (2016). ‘Roma: the UK’s Forgotten Higher Education Minority’. https​:// ww​w.tim​eshig​hered​ucati​on.co​m/new​s/rom​a-the​-uks-​forgo​tten-​highe​r-edu​catio​nmin​ority​. Accessed 12 March 2018. Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality. (2010). ‘Action Plan for the Development of the Roma Population’. https​://ww​w.mss​si.go​b.es/​ssi/f​amili​asInf​ancia​/Pobl​acion​ Gitan​a/doc​s/ING​LES_A​CCESI​BLE.p​df. Accessed 23 March 2015. Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality. (2011). ‘National Roma Integration Strategy in Spain, 2012-2020’. http:​//ec.​europ​a.eu/​justi​ce/di​scrim​inati​on/fi​les/ r​oma_s​pain_​strat​egy_e​n.pdf​. Accessed 23 March 2015. Morley, L., Alexiadou, N. Garaz, S. González-Monteagudo, J. and Taba, M. (2018). ‘Internationalisation and Migrant Academics: The Hidden Narratives of Mobility’. Higher Education, 76(3), 537–54. Mulcahy, E., Baars, S., Bowen-Viner, K. and Menzies, L. (2017). ‘The Underrepresentation of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Pupils in higher Education: A Report on Barriers from Early Years to Secondary and Beyond London’. https​:// cd​n.lkm​co.or​g/wp-​conte​nt/up​loads​/2017​/07/K​INGWI​DE_28​494_b​rief_​proof​2.pdf​. Accessed 2 March 2018. Nagy, A. and Olahova, B. (2018). ‘Guidelines for Reflexive Internationalisation in Higher Education’. http:​//www​.suss​ex.ac​.uk/e​ducat​ion/c​heer/​resea​rchpr​oject​s/ris​e/ out​puts.​Accessed 14 March 2018. OFFA (2016). Strategic Guidance: Developing Your 2017-18 Access Agreement. Bristol: Office for Fair Access. Office for National Statistics (2014). ‘What Does the 2011 Census Tell Us About the Characteristics of Gypsy or Irish Travellers in England and Wales?’ [Online]. http:​// www​.ons.​gov.u​k/ons​/rel/​censu​s/201​1-cen​sus-a​nalys​is/wh​at-do​es-th​e-201​1-cen​sust​ell-u​s-abo​ut-th​e-cha​racte​risti​cs-of​-gyps​y-or-​irish​-trav​eller​s-ine​nglan​d-and​-wale​s-/ in​fo-gy​psy-o​r-iri​sh-tr​avell​ers.h​tml. Accessed 14 May 2018. Office for National Statistics. (2017). ‘UK Population Data’. https​://ww​w.ons​.gov.​uk/pe​ oplep​opula​tiona​ndcom​munit​y/pop​ulati​onand​migra​tion/​popul​ation​estim​ates/​times​ eries​/ukpo​p/pop​. Accessed 20 January 2017. Padilla-Carmona, M. T. and Soria Vilchez, A. (2015). ‘Good Practice for Widening the Participation of Roma in Spanish Higher Education’.http​s://w​ww.su​ssex.​ac.uk​/ webt​eam/g​atewa​y/fil​e.php​?name​=repo​rt-go​od-pr​actic​e-for​-wide​ning-​the-

14

The Roma in European Higher Education

p​artic​ipati​on-of​-roma​-in-s​panis​h-hig​her-e​ducat​ion.p​df&si​te=41​. Accessed 16 May 2018. Padilla-Carmona, M.T., González-Monteagudo, J. and Soria Vilchez, A. (2017). ‘Los gitanos en la universidad española: Un estudio de caso de trayectorias de éxito [Roma Students in Higher Education: A Qualitative Research on Successful Trajectories]’. Revista de Educación, 377 (July–September), 187–211. Pantea, M. (2015). ‘Persuading Others: Young Roma Women Negotiating Access to University’. Education as Change, 19(3), 91–112. DOI: 10.1080/16823206.2015.1024151. Roberts, P. (2020). ‘Capability-Strengthening: Roma as Knowledge Producers’. In L. Morley, A. Mirga and N. Redzepi (eds), The Roma in European Higher Education: Recasting Identities, Re-imagining Futures. London: Bloomsbury Press. Scottish Government (2013). Gypsies/Travellers in Scotland: Summary of the Evidence Base. http:​//www​.gov.​scot/​resou​rce/0​043/0​04308​06.pd​f Accessed 15 May 2018. UCAS. (no date). ‘Definitions’ [Online]. https​://ww​w.uca​s.com​/site​s/def​ault/​files​/defi​ nitio​ns.pd​f. Accessed 12 March 2018.

Part One

Theories, Resources, Policy and Professional Interventions for Challenging Roma Exclusion from Higher Education

16

1

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education Beyond Sex, Slums and Special Schools, and Towards Epistemic Inclusion Louise Morley

Getting Beyond Sex, Slums and Special Schools! How does one begin to write about the Roma1 in higher education without degenerating into racially objectifying discourses, hyperbole and sensationalism about material, economic, social and affective disadvantage and deprivation? The endless repetitions and the relentless production and reproduction of marginality and fragility are predictable and tiresome. So, where does education in general, and higher education, in particular, feature in recasting identities and life chances? How can Roma communities be included in epistemic justice? How can we start to think differently in a non-binaried, less dramatic way that lets some light, air and creativity into the semiotics of abjection? The default position for the social construction of Roma communities is a problematic precarity (Vincze, 2015: 16). There is an ever-present vulnerability to destruction by others that produces social and political precarity (Butler, 2012). The story of the Roma is one of spatial segregation, symbolic and actual ghettoization and the racialization of poverty and social exclusion (Redzepi, 2013). It is easy to reel off a stream of shocking statistics (i.e. when data sets exist) about how most of the 10–12 million Roma people in Europe live in abject poverty, with the children segregated into special schools (Albert et al., 2015; Brüggemann, 2014; Messing, 2017; O’Hanlon, 2016; Rostas, Rom is the singular noun, Roma is plural and Romani is the adjective. The term Roma encompasses diverse groups, including Gypsies, Travellers, Manouches, Ashkali, Sinti and Boyash. We are aware that while the term, Gypsy, has been reclaimed with pride in the UK, in many countries in Central and Eastern Europe, it is still a pejorative label.

1

18

The Roma in European Higher Education

2012; Taba and Ryder, 2012). Or how many Roma communities live without running water, stable employment, health and citizenship rights and safe, secure environments, birth certificates or passports (Cemlyn et al., 2010). To be Roma, it seems, is to be discursively constructed within assigned categories, permanently accused of an assemblage of wrongdoing, for example trespass, violence, psychic charlatanism, tax evasion, theft, prostitution, nomadism, welfare dependency, fecklessness. Anyone who has ever searched visual images on the internet knows what it is like to be drenched in racialized poverty porn (BBC, 2015). Yuval-Davis et al. (2017: 1161) report how the UK’s Sun newspaper’s ‘crude representations of Roma portray them as fairy tale villains, swarthy child snatchers who force children to dance for money and enter into forced marriages’. This could be seen as a strategy to divide and rule communities within the political economy of neoliberalism in which poverty is understood as individual or collective, rather than systemic, failure (Morley, 2018). The ‘unchosen cohabitation’ (Butler, 2012: 145) raises questions about plurality, heterogeneity and equal rights to inhabit the earth. When one part of the population claims the earth, the state or neighbourhood for itself, whole populations can be dispossessed. The multifarious insinuations and imagery of Roma alterity have been historically entangled with discrimination, slavery, hate crimes and genocide such as the Romani holocaust, or porajmos in which Roma were put to death alongside Jews, homosexuals and disabled people in Nazi Germany (Kendrick and Puxon, 2009). When Roma are not being vilified, some (especially the women) are being exoticized and eroticized, as objects of desire representing sexual freedom and licentiousness. Happily, understandings of sexuality are now broadening away from heteronormative asymmetrical power relations, and new knowledge is being created on LGBTQAI+ issues in Roma communities (Baker, 2015; Fremlova, Georgescu and Hera, 2014; Kutic, 2013; Mate, 2017). The other side of the representation of victimology is folklorization and multiculturalism. There is a ubiquitous aesthetic of Roma cultures as a happiness formula – dancing, singing, performing music – entertaining the non-Roma with embodied presentations – exuberance in the face of adversity (Leblon, 2003). It would be an enormous relief to periodize the actual and symbolic violence, Romaphobia (McGarry, 2017) and anti-Gypsyism (Izsák, 2015), and reassure ourselves that this was all in the past and that today’s diverse Roma communities enjoy the benefits of European Union (EU) citizenship, equity and human rights legislation and effective policy interventions (Klímová-Alexander, 2017). Today, more than half of the 10–12 million Roma living in Europe, live in EU countries, comprising Europe’s largest ethnic minority. However, Roma are

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

19

a global people, and Brooks (2012) reports that over a million Roma live in the United States. Romani communities live throughout the Americas, for example in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru (Human Rights Council, 2016). Roma were also included in deportations to Australia in the late 1700s, and in later migration waves from Europe in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and now 100,000 live there (Sayer, 2017). We are reminded that the 2008 global economic crisis and the rise of the alt-right is once again mobilizing anti-Roma attitudes throughout Europe (Mirga, 2009; Oprea, 2004, 2012; Stewart, 2012). Hate speech and vilification have been strengthened by the rise of neo-fascism in Europe that is driving ‘forced evictions and displacements, anti-Romani marches’ (Brooks, 2012: 1). The Roma seem to continue to fulfil the homogenized role of despised or fetishized ‘other’ in Europe, onto which nonRoma populations project their anger, fears and anxieties. The combination of cohabitation proximity and distance creates a complex affective entanglement of discomfort, degradation, dehumanization and disparagement. Butler (2012: 134) talks about: various moments of geographical proximity – what we might call ‘up againstness’ – the result of populations living in conditions of unwilled adjacency.

The ‘unwilled adjacency’ and process of homogenization not only collapse difference within Roma communities but also serve to strengthen ‘us’ and ‘them’ racialized discourses (Tremlett, 2009, 2013, 2014; Yuval-Davis et al., 2017). The essentialized and putative cultural difference of the Roma becomes an argument for alterity (Yıldız and De Genova, 2017). Roma represent a form of racialized ‘other’ or ‘stranger danger’ (Ahmed, 2000), disrupting cultural coherence, and a separate nation threatening nation states (Vermeersch, 2012). Fear of free movement of people within the expanded EU and alleged Romani migrations from poorer EU Member States into richer ones contributed to racialized Brexit discourses in the UK (Balch, Balabanova and Trandafoiu, 2014; Mirga, 2016). EU enlargement has been represented as an opportunity for Roma, conceptualized as non-productive immigrants, to enjoy freedom of movement and welfare benefits in Europe in a period of austerity. Immigration is pitted in opposition to the politics of belonging, with indigenous versus migrant Roma (Mirga, 2016; Yuval-Davis et al., 2017). The depiction of Roma as an alien menace justifies deportability and evictability, for example for threatening security in France and Italy (Kóczé, 2017). Is there a way to inhabit responsive and responsible action, fight discrimination and racism and redistribute higher educational opportunities without further objectifying and misrecognizing the Roma?

20

The Roma in European Higher Education

Higher Education: A Luxury Product? Only 1 per cent of Roma enter higher education in Europe (Brüggemann, 2012). This suggests that there are approximately 10,000 Roma students in higher education in Europe (Lacatus, 2017). Higher education can seem like a luxury product when so many Roma young people do not complete primary or secondary education, and therefore inhabit deficit and oppositional educational identities. There has been an explosion in studies on the challenges of encouraging and keeping Roma in school-sector education in diverse national locations (Bhopal and Myers, 2016; Peček and Munda, 2015; O’Hanlon, 2016). Another political struggle has been the segregation of Roma in special schools, or in separate classes (Albert et al., 2015; Gkofa, 2016; O’Higgins and Brüggemann, 2014; Rostas, 2012). By the end of 2015, only one in ten Roma had completed secondary school in the twelve countries in the Roma Decade policy initiative (Jovanovic, 2015). A predicable, stigmatizing and unacceptable explanation for the attrition rate is the argument that formal education is in opposition to and threatens the traditional Romani cultures (Brüggemann, 2014; Matras, 2013). In this analysis, Roma are unhelpfully constructed as transgressives or ‘cultural deviants’ refusing to comply and conform to state legislation for school attendance. This biased generalization means that the Roma, as a group, get blamed for creating their social disadvantage, and that structural inequalities can be reduced to cognitive and cultural deficit. Another explanatory variable is that Roma children and their families face overt racism, discrimination and bullying when they enter mainstream education (Bhopal, 2011; D’Arcy, 2014). A further controversial explanation is that it is in the interests of capitalism to keep the Roma as an uneducated underclass, providing cheap and disposable labour (Vincze, 2015). The Roma embody the precariat, or the losers in neoliberalized market and austerity economies. Whereas there has been extensive research about the Roma in compulsory school-level education, there has been very little about higher education (Rostas and Torotcoi, 2020). Some valuable, insightful and original, but often smallscale, single location studies, sometimes in the grey literature of doctoral or masters’ theses, or organizational research have been conducted. Brüggemann (2014) studied Roma students in Spain, Garaz (2014) investigated students on the Roma Education Fund (REF) scholarship programme in Central and Eastern Europe, Gkofa (2016) researched Roma students in Greece, Jovanovic (2018) explored Roma students’ experiences in Serbia, and Kende (2007) reported the

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

21

success stories of Hungarian Roma university students. Pantea (2014, 2015) researched affirmative action programmes and also Roma women’s access in Romania, and Torotcoi (2013) analysed widening participation initiatives for Roma students in Romania. An overarching question posed in all these studies is: What part can higher education play in interrupting the inferiorization of Roma, either in terms of counting more Roma in as knowledge producers and consumers and enabling the development of a professional class or in relation to epistemic inclusion and the construction of knowledge itself about the Roma? There are some obvious arguments. For example, higher education is often positioned as a major pathway out of poverty and into social mobility (Morley, 2012). Employment rates tend to be higher for people with higher education qualifications than among those with lower-education levels (OECD, 2015). However, graduate earnings and employability can also relate to the discipline studied, students’ socio-economic background and the status of the university attended (Purcell and Tzanakou, 2016). Garaz and Torotcoi (2017) found that not only are Roma under-represented in higher education; they are also under-represented in the STEM disciplines (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), and, on the rare occasion when they do enter higher education, they are more likely to study the arts and social sciences. Garaz (2014) reported that the Roma university students in her study of the REF scholarship programme, tended to come from more affluent socio-economic backgrounds than the average Roma. Brüggemann (2014), Gkofa (2016), Kende (2007) and Jovanovic (2018) all report success stories of Roma university students who navigated the contradictory and hybridized educational identities of being constructed as socio-economically disadvantaged Roma while being intellectually and professionally aspirational. The burden of being so few and first-generation scholars can also mean that Roma students feel the obligation, and are expected to use their education for the benefit of the wider Roma community, a type of multiplier or payback to justify investment in them. Issues of belonging and social-class identification can also mean that successful Roma, like many working-class students, feel that they have to distance themselves from their culture and community in order to credentialize themselves as knowers (Pantea, 2015; Walkerdine, 2011). There have been interventions to promote Roma participation in higher education (Mirga and Redzepi, 2020). Founded as a partnership between the Open Society Foundation (OSF) and the World Bank, the REF originated in 2005 and one of its goals, in addition to access to preschool education, school desegregation, and improved quality of primary education, and training teachers

22

The Roma in European Higher Education

about multicultural education and Roma culture, is to provide support to Roma in higher education in order to: substantially contribute to the emergence of a generation of intellectual and skillful young Roma with higher education degrees, confident about their Roma identity, having on the one hand considerable market prospects, and on the other hand being prepared and motivated to become agents for positive change for the Romani community, as well as for wider society, nationally and internationally. (Roma Education Fund Annual Report, 2014: 28)

Each year the organization receives around 2,500 applications and accepts up to 1,500 individuals for scholarship support for bachelor’s, master’s or doctorate degrees (Brüggemann and Friedman, 2017; Garaz, 2014). It has played a major role in internationalizing Roma policy issues and covers not only the twelve Decade countries of the region (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain) but also four non-Decade countries (Moldova, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine) (Marc and Bercus, 2007). Affirmative action programmes, which include quotas or reserved places, exist in some national locations including Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania and Serbia (Bojinca et al., 2009; Garaz, 2014; Pantea, 2014; Rakovic, 2009). Affirmative action is highly controversial, and there can be animosity to those groups who are constructed as vulnerable (Butler, Gambetti and Sabsay, 2016). For some, it represents a form of reverse discrimination and any support for the Roma is often viewed as hostile and discriminatory to nonRoma. In some cases, as there is no perfect mechanism to establish ethnic identity, non-Roma go so far as to feign Roma identity in order to apply for reserved places or REF scholarships. Another argument is that affirmative action fails to meet the most socially disadvantaged groups and that it is invariably accessed by the elite (Morley, 2012), or that it demands particular subject positions that expect gratitude, humility and assimilation into dominant cultures (Leyton, 2018, 2020). Access and support programmes are provided by some universities such as the Central European University in Budapest. Their successful Roma Access Program expanded into the Romani Studies Program (RSP) in 2017 encompassing the Roma Graduate Preparation Program (RGPP) and Roma in European Societies (RES) initiative. Romaversitas is a university scholarship programme founded by the Roma Civil Rights’ Foundation in 1996, and supported by the REF, offering tutoring, study halls and other opportunities for Roma university students. It began in Hungary in 1997, before expanding to Macedonia and Serbia, and then to Moldova, Albania, Romania, Bulgaria and Kosovo. It supports Roma students throughout

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

23

their academic studies, to successfully graduate and become professionals in their chosen field (Kende, 2007). Certain countries also provide targeted access and support programmes for the Roma including Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia (Garaz and Torotcoi, 2017). Roma women, it seems, have represented a success story in terms of higher education participation, and this could be attributed to the rise and strength of Roma feminism.

Roma Women: Feminists, not Femme Fatales! At an Open Society Institute forum in 1999, founder George Soros asked Romani feminist Nicoleta Bitu, ‘Why Roma women?’ (Schultz, 2012). It was in response to this question that the Roma Women’s Initiative was initiated. Roma feminism is now flourishing (Bitu and Vincze, 2012; Brooks, 2012; Jovanovic, 2018; Oprea, 2004, 2012, Vincze, 2014), and some powerful coalitions between Roma and non-Roma feminists have been formed to ‘deconstruct nationalist and racist regimes and patriarchal gender orders within and outside minority communities’ (Bitu and Vincze, 2012: 45). As Bitu and Vincze (2012) state, Roma feminists are working towards the construction of a modern Roma identity. Roma women can often find themselves positioned within the clichéd tension between feminism and multiculturalism (Ilisei, 2012). Romani feminism faces the dilemma about whether it is safe to talk about gender issues without activating yet more unhelpful negative stereotyping, that is, women as victims of ‘traditions’, of the Roma community. Roma feminists are navigating a skilful path between the politics of recognition and ensuring that Roma women are included in international feminist movements while at the same time confronting manifestations of patriarchy that exist in Roma communities (ERTF, 2014; Schultz, 2012). Roma women can also face problems in higher education. Covert’s (2015) thesis on Romani women in US education found that the majority of the stories of discrimination in education came from higher education. Indeed, getting Roma women onto the political agenda has been challenging, and risked accusations of divisiveness within the community. One of the challenges is that by naming the problems, Roma women become the problems As Ahmed (2014: np) suggests, ‘When you expose a problem you pose a problem.’ Drawing attention to the prevalence of hegemonic masculinities in Roma communities carries the risk of being constructed as a ‘primitive culture’ and disloyal to one’s ethnic group (Andrei, Martinidis and Tkadlecova, 2014; Oprea, 2004).

24

The Roma in European Higher Education

Gender equality and women’s empowerment have also featured in the European policy architecture of Roma inclusion (Crowley et al., 2013). The European Parliament has included the Empowerment of Roma Women within the European Framework of National Roma Inclusion Strategies. The Council of Europe established the Roma Women’s Conference (CoE, 2017). Though formally recognized on the policy level, gender-based analysis is not always applied in Roma studies (Martsenyuk, 2015). However, gendered analysis of the Regional Roma Survey data (Cukrowska and Kóczé, 2013) reported that Romani women do not have significantly different aspirations and do not assign significantly different values to education than Romani men, and that the ethnicity gap is wider in education than the gender gap. Pantea’s (2015) study with thirtyseven young Roma women reported that they were ‘playing at the border’, in between their subjective aspirations and the structural constraints. Drawing on interviews with five Roma women students, Hinton-Smith and Danvers (2016; Hinton-Smith and Danvers and Jovanovic 2017), in the HEIM project, explored the contradictions between desiring access to higher education for individual self-betterment and concurrent pulls towards education for the wider benefit of ‘improving’ and developing Roma communities, and how ‘doubly’ marginalized bodies are positioned as outsiders, in receipt of an educational gift. Romani women, despite lagging behind men in basic education (Romani males spent on average 6.71 years in education, and Romani women 5.66 years), appear to be flourishing in higher education, and in some countries including Albania, Moldova, Slovakia, there are more Romani women than men aged twenty to twenty-four completing post-secondary education (bachelor’s, master’s degree, PhD) (UNDP et al., 2011) The intersectionality of gender and Romani ethnicity is still a barrier to higher education, but this is very slowly changing.

Roma Academics in the Global Knowledge Economy Roma academics are still few in number. However, HEIM’s interest in internationalization included research with fourteen migrant academics of whom four were from Roma communities in Europe and the United States. Drawing on the theoretical framings of the new mobility paradigm and cognitive and epistemic justice, we explored the hidden narratives of migrant academics’ engagements with mobility in the global knowledge economy (Morley et al., 2018). The Roma participants represented major academic achievement and social and international mobility, and provided considerable insights into the

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

25

Roma as knowledge producers. Participants narrated the positive influence of international mobility on professional development including the expansion and diversification of professional networks and soft power. To counter underrepresentation, Roma participation in higher education and student and faculty mobility have been promoted by organizations including the Central European University and the REF. The HEIM project’s partnership between universities and the REF is an example of how knowledge can be created and exchanged for Roma participation in internationalization. However, internationalization for marginalized groups can sometimes exacerbate exclusion and lack of belonging. Roma participants often identified more with their transnational ethnic group than with their countries of origin. However, international mobility for Roma academics was seen as an epistemic as well as a social opportunity. It enabled the creation and advancement of knowledge of Roma issues and the countering of negative labelling and categorization processes. It marked the Roma as knowledge producers, or subjects, rather than objects of inquiry. In the 1970s, there were around thirty researchers in the field of Romani Studies, but the European Academic Network on Romani Studies, when established in 2011, achieved a membership in excess of 350 academics (mainly non-Roma) from 70 different universities and research institutions in more than 20 different countries (Stewart, 2012). As Roberts (2020) suggests, a question remains as to how to ensure that more Roma are included as knowledge producers – something that the HEIM project attempted to address (Matache, 2016, 2017). One advantage of mobility was that this connected individual Roma academics with an international Roma community. The issue of accountability also suggests that some migrant academics – especially those from socially excluded groups – are not self-contained, free-floating, capital accumulating agents and entities, but are in circular relation to their wider communities. This multiplier effect, that is, getting in a better position for developing or influencing one’s own community, or challenging stereotypes, was also seen as important for Roma participants. Spatial mobility also enabled Roma academics to recast negative and stigmatized identities in their countries of origin to that of global citizenship.

Concluding Comments The issue of the Roma in higher education is not simply a linear narrative of social mobility but more concerned with epistemic justice. The Roma need to be recast as knowledge producers, rather than simply as objects of inquiry. Vulnerability,

26

The Roma in European Higher Education

injury and exclusion are based on social relations, and can be context dependent, but can be reversed. Roma scholars and their allies have developed theories and concepts to critique the production of marginalization and exclusion. Critical thinkers have moved the debate from evangelical zeal and philanthropy to a radical agenda for social and epistemic inclusion (Morley et al., 2018). Higher education has played a pivotal role in this process by strengthening capacity and internationalizing thinking, networks and movements. Throughout Europe, the policy attention is usually focused on GRT access to primary and secondary rather than to higher education. The entanglement of Roma and higher education is not just about access but also about knowledge itself. Higher education can play a major role in forging new ethics and aesthetics, creating new narratives, images and accounts that promise different futures for a minority group that has been traditionally characterized by poverty pornography and precarity.

References Ahmed, S. (2000). Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality. London: Routledge. Ahmed, S. (2014). ‘The Problem of Perception’. https​://fe​minis​tkill​joys.​com/2​014/0​2/17/​ the-p​roble​m-of-​perce​ption​/. Accessed 17 March 2018. Albert, G., Matache, M., Taba, M. and Zimová, A. (2015). Segregation of Roma Children in Education: Successes and Challenges. Budapest: Roma Education Fund. Retrieved from http:​//www​.roma​educa​tionf​und.h​u/sit​es/de​fault​/file​s/doc​ument​s/seg​regat​ion_ o​f_rom​a_chi​ldren​_in_e​ducat​ion_-​_succ​esses​_and_​chall​enges​_-_fi​nal.p​df. Andrei, R., Martinidis, G. and Tkadlecova, T. (2014). ‘Challenges Faced by Roma Women in Europe on Education, Employment, Health and Housing - Focus on Czech Republic, Romania and Greece’. Balkan Social Science Review, 4 (December), 323–51. Baker, D. (2015). ‘The Queer Gypsy ERRC’, Vol. 2. http:​//www​.errc​.org/​artic​le/ro​mari​ghts-​2-201​5- nothi​ng-ab​out-u​s-wit​hout-​us-ro​ma-pa​rtici​patio​n-in-​polic​ymak​ing-a​nd-kn​owled​ge- production/4433/14. Accessed 15 March 2018. Balch, A., Balabanova, E. and Trandafoiu, R. (2014). ‘A Europe of Rights and Values? Public Debates on Sarkozy’s Roma Affair in France, Bulgaria and Romania’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(8), 1154–74. BBC. (2015). ‘In Pictures: Roma Slums in Romania and Slovakia’. http:​//www​.bbc.​co.uk​/ news​/in-p​ictur​es-34​51545​1. Accessed 26 March 2018. Bhopal, K. (2011). ‘“What About Us?’ Gypsies, Travellers and “White Racism” in Secondary Schools in England’. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 21(4), 315–29.

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

27

Bhopal, K. and Myers, M. (2016). ‘Marginal Groups in Marginal Times: Gypsy and Traveller Parents and Home Education in England, UK’. British Educational Research Journal. 42(1), 5–20. DOI: 10.1002/berj.3198. Bitu, N. and Vincze, E. (2012). ‘Personal Encounters and Parallel Paths Toward Romani Feminism’. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(1), 44–6. Bojinca, M., Munteanu, D., Toth, A., Surdu, M. and Szira, J. (2009). Analysis of the Impact of Affirmative Action for Roma in High Schools, Vocational Schools and Universities. Budapest: Roma Education Fund & Gallup. Brooks, E. C. (2012). ‘The Possibilities of Romani Feminism’. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(1), 1-11. Brüggemann, C. (2012). ‘Roma Education in Comparative Perspective. Analysis of the UNDP/World Bank/EC Regional Roma Survey 2011’. Roma Inclusion Working Papers. Bratislava: UNDP. Brüggemann, C. (2014). ‘Romani Culture and Academic Success: Arguments Against the Belief in a Contradiction’. Intercultural Education, 25(6), 439–52. Brüggemann, C. and Friedman, E. (2017). ‘The Decade of Roma Inclusion: Origins, Actors, and Legacies’. European Education, 49(1), 1–9. Butler, J. (2012). ‘Precarious Life, Vulnerability, and the Ethics of Cohabitation’. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 26(2), 134–51. Butler, J., Gambetti, Z. and Sabsay, L. (eds). (2016). Vulnerability in Resistance. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Cemlyn, S., Greenfields, M., Burnett, S., Matthews, Z. and Whitwell, C. (2010). ‘Inequalities Experienced by Gypsy and Traveller Communities: A Review’. Research Report 12. Manchester: Equality and Human Rights Commission. Available at: http:​// www​.equa​lityh​umanr​ights​.com/​sites​/defa​ult/f​i les/​docum​ents/​resea​rch/1​2ineq​ualit​ies_ e​x perie​nced_​by_gy​psy_a​nd_tr​avell​er_co​mmuni​ties_​a_rev​iew.p​df. Accessed 1 March 2018. CoE. (2017). ‘Pledge on Political Representation of Roma and Traveller Women’. https​:// rm​.coe.​int/p​ledge​-with​-sign​ature​s-/16​80764​c40. Accessed 7 March 2018. Covert, M. (2015). ‘The Role of Education in the Assimilation of Romani Women in the United States’. http:​//sch​olarw​orks.​gsu.e​du/cg​i/vie​wcont​ent.c​gi?ar​ticle​=1055​&​ conte​xt=so​ciolo​gy_th​eses.​ Accessed 17 March 2018. Crowley, N., Genova, A. and Sansonetti, S. (2013). ‘Empowerment of Roma Women within the European Framework of National Roma Inclusion Strategies’. Strasbourg: European Parliament. http:​//www​.euro​parl.​europ​a.eu/​RegDa​ta/et​udes/​etude​s/joi​ n/201​3/493​019/I​POL-F​EMM_E​T(201​3)493​019_E​N.pdf​. Accessed 7 March 2018. Cukrowska, E. and Kóczé, A. (2013). ‘Interplay Between Gender and Ethnicity: Exposing Structural Disparities of Romani Women, Analysis of the UNDP/World Bank/EC Regional Roma Survey Data’. https​://ww​w.scr​ibd.c​om/do​cumen​t/207​56720​ 2/Exp​osing​-stru​ctura​l-dis​parit​ies-o​f-Rom​ani-w​omen.​ Accessed 17 March 2015. D’Arcy, K. (2014). Travellers and Home Education: Safe Spaces and Inequality. London: Trentham/IOE Press.

28

The Roma in European Higher Education

European Roma and Travellers Forum (ERTF). (2014). ‘Making Early Marriage in Roma Communities a Global Concern’. Romani Women Informal Platform “Phenjalipe”. http://www. ertf.​org/i​mages​/Repo​rts/M​aking​_Earl​y_Mar​riage​_in_ R​oma_C​ommun​ities​_a_gl​obal_​con- cern.pdf . Accessed 20 August 2019. Fremlova, L., Georgescu, M. and Hera, G. (2014). ‘Barabaripen - Young Roma Speak About Discrimination’. http:​//www​.coe.​int/e​n/web​/yout​h-rom​a/bar​abari​pen. Accessed 17 March 2018. Garaz, S. (2014). ‘Helping the Marginalised or Supporting the Elite? Affirmative Action as a Tool for Increasing Access to Higher Education for Ethnic Roma’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 295–311. Garaz, S. and Torotcoi, S. (2017). ‘Access to Higher Education and the Reproduction of Social Inequalities: The Case of Roma University Students in Eastern and SouthEastern Europe’. European Education, 49(1), 10–35. Gkofa, P. (2016). ‘Greek Roma in Higher Education: A Qualitative Investigation of Educational Success. School of Social Science and Public Policy’. Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education Research, Department of Education and Professional Studies School of Social Science and Public Policy King’s College London. https​://kc​lpure​.kcl.​ac.uk​/port​al/fi​les/5​16192​14/20​16_Gk​ofa_P​anagi​ ota_1​22336​3_eth​esis.​pdf. Accessed 12 March 2018. Hinton-Smith, T. and Danvers, E. (2016). ‘Exploring Identity and Belonging for Roma Women Students in International Higher Education’. In L. Morley (ed.), The Europa World of Learning Essays 2017: Gender and Access to and Participation in Higher Education. London: Routledge. Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E. and Jovanovic, T. (2017). ‘Roma Women’s Higher Education Participation: Whose Responsibility?’ Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–28. Human Rights Council. (2016). ‘Regional Workshop on the Situation of Roma in the Americas’. http:​//www​.ohch​r.org​/EN/I​ssues​/Mino​ritie​s/SRM​inori​ties/​Pages​/ Thes​ituat​ionof​Romai​ntheA​meric​as.as​px. Accessed 14 March 2018. Ilisei, I. (2012). ‘Education of Roma Women Between Feminism and Multiculturalism Study Case: Roma Women in Romania’. JSSE-Journal of Social Science Education, 12(1), 67–74. Izsák, R. (2015). ‘Comprehensive Study of the Human Rights Situation of Roma Worldwide, with a Particular Focus on the Phenomenon of Anti-Gypsyism’. Report to the Human Rights Council, United Nations General Assembly, June. Jovanovic, T. (2018). ‘Roma Student Access to Higher Education in Serbia: Challenges and Promises’. PhD thesis, University of Sussex. Jovanovic, Z. (2015). ‘Why Europe’s “Roma Decade” Didn’t Lead to Inclusion’. Open Society Foundation. Retrieved from https​://ww​w.ope​nsoci​etyfo​undat​ions.​org/v​oices​ /why-​europ​e-s-r​oma-d​ecade​didn-​t-lea​d-inc​lusio​n. Accessed 9 March 2018. Kende, A. (2007). ‘Success Stories? Roma University Students Overcoming Social Exclusion in Hungary’. In H. Colley (ed.), Social Inclusion for Young People: Breaking Down the Barriers, 133–44. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

29

Kendrick, D. and Puxon, G. (2009). Gypsies Under the Swastika. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press. Klímová-Alexander, I. (2017). The Romani Voice in World Politics: The United Nations and Non-State Actors. London: Routledge. Kóczé, A. (2017). ‘Race, Migration and Neoliberalism: Distorted Notions of Romani Migration in European Public Discourses’. Social Identities, DOI: 10.1080/13504630.2017.1335827. Kutic, V. (2013). ‘Roma Lesbian Existence – Džuvljarke’. ERRC. http:​//www​.errc​.org/​cms/ u​pload​/file​/dzuv​ljark​e-rom​a-les​bian-​exist​ence.​pdf. Accessed 20 February 2018. Lacatus, R. (2017). ‘Mind the Gap: Promoting Social Inclusion in Higher Education at the International Level’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​ heim-​resea​rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-ra​du-la​catus​-prom​oting​-soci​al-in​clusi​on.pd​f&site​ =41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Leblon, B. (2003). Gypsies and Flamenco:The Emergence of the Art of Flamenco in Andalusia. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press. Leyton, D. (2018). ‘Affective Governmentality, Ordo-Liberalism, and the Affirmative Action Policy in Higher Education in Chile’. PhD thesis, University of Sussex. Leyton, D. (2020). ‘The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies for Roma in Higher Education: Racialised Neoliberal Governmentality in Semi-Peripheral Europe’. In L. Morley, A. Mirga and N. Redzepi (eds), The Roma in European Higher Education: Recasting Identities, Re-imagining Futures. London: Bloomsbury Press. Marc, A. and Bercus, C. (2007). ‘The Roma Education Fund: A New Tool for Roma Inclusion’. European Education, 39(1), 64–80. Martsenyuk, T. (2015). ‘Early Marriage in Roma Communities in Ukraine: Cultural and Socioeconomic Factors’. Emecon: Employment and Economy in Central and Eastern Europe. http:​//www​.emec​on.eu​/file​admin​/arti​cles/​1_201​5/MAR​TSENY​UK.pd​f. Accessed 7 March 2018. Matache, M. (2016). ‘The Legacy of Gypsy Studies in Modern Romani Scholarship’. https​://fx​b.har​vard.​edu/2​016/1​1/14/​the-l​egacy​-of-g​ypsy-​studi​es-in​-mode​rnro​mani-​schol​arshi​p/. Accessed 15 May 2018. Matache, M. (2017). ‘Word, Image and Thought: Creating the Romani Other’. https​://fx​ b.har​vard.​edu/w​ord-i​mage-​and-t​hough​t-cre​ating​-the-​roman​i-oth​er/. Accessed 14 March 2018. Mate, D. (2017). ‘The First Sparks of Romani LGBTQ’. https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​heim-​resea​rcher​-thin​k-pie​ce-de​zso-m​ate-t​he-fi​rst-s​parks​-ofr​omani​-lgbt​q.pdf​&​site=​41. Accessed 14 March 2018. Matras, Y. (2013). ‘Scholarship and the Politics of Romani Identity: Strategic and Conceptual Issues’. RomIdent Working Papers, No. 1. http://romani. human​ities​. manc​heste​r.ac.​uk/vi​rtual​libra​ry/li​brary​db//w​eb/fi​les/p​dfs/3​54/Pa​per1.​pdf. Accessed 20 August 2013. McGarry, A. (2017). Romaphobia: The Last Acceptable Form of Racism. London: Zed Books.

30

The Roma in European Higher Education

Messing, V. (2017). ‘Differentiation in the Making: Consequences of School Segregation of Roma in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Slovakia’. European Education, 49(1), 89–103. Mirga, A. (2009). ‘The Extreme Right and Roma and Sinti in Europe: A New Phase in the Use of Hate Speech and Violence?’ Roma Rights Journal, 1, 5–9. Mirga, A. (2016). ‘Why Are Roma Blamed for Europe's Rejection of Refugees?’ The Failed Integration of Roma Is Not the Reason Why Europeans Fear Refugees, Racism Is. https​://ww​w.alj​azeer​a.com​/inde​pth/o​pinio​n/201​6/12/​roma-​blame​-euro​pe-re​jecti​onre​fugee​s-161​21408​21113​42.ht​ml. Accessed 15 March 2018. Mirga, A. and Redzepi, N. (2020). ‘The Roma in European Higher Education Explaining the Educational Gap of Roma in Higher Education’. In L. Morley, A. Mirga and N. Redzepi (eds), The Roma in European Higher Education: Recasting Identities, Re-imagining Futures. London: Bloomsbury Press. Morley, L. (2012). ‘Researching Absences and Silences in Higher Education: Data for Democratisation’. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(3), 353–68. Morley, L. (2018). ‘Gender in the Neoliberal Research Economy: An Enervating and Exclusionary Entanglement?’ In H. Kahlert (ed.), Gender Studies and the New Academic Governance: Global Challenges, Glocal Dynamics, and Local Impacts, 15–40. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Morley, L., Alexiadou, N. Garaz, S. González-Monteagudo, J. and Taba, M. (2018). ‘Internationalisation and Migrant Academics: The Hidden Narratives of Mobility’. Higher Education, 76(3), 537–54. O’Hanlon, C. (2016). ‘The European Struggle to Educate and Include Roma People: A Critique of Differences in Policy and Practice in Western and Eastern EU Countries’. Social Inclusion, 4(1), 1–10. O’Higgins, N. and Bruggemann, C. (2014). ‘The Consequences of Cumulative Discrimination: How Special Schooling Influences Employment and Wages of Roma in the Czech Republic’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 282–94. Oprea, A. (2004). ‘Re-envisioning Social Justice from Ground Up: Including the Experiences of Romani Women’. Essex Human Rights Review, 1(1), 29–39. Oprea, A. (2012). ‘Romani Feminism in Reactionary Times’. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(1), 11–21. Organisation for Economic Cooperation, & Development (OECD). (2015). ‘How Does Educational Attainment Affect Participation in the Labour Market? In Education at a Glance Interim Report: Update of Employment and Educational Attainment Indicators’. http:​//www​.oecd​.org/​edu/E​AG-In​terim​-repo​rt-Ch​apter​2.pdf​. Accessed 12 March 2018. Pantea, M. (2014). ‘Affirmative Action in Romania’s Higher Education: Roma Students’ Perceived Meanings and Dilemmas’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(6), 896–914, DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2013.869172. Pantea, M. (2015). ‘Persuading Others: Young Roma Women Negotiating Access to University’. Education as Change, 19(3), 91–112, DOI: 10.1080/16823206.2015.1024151.

Thinking Differently about the Roma in Higher Education

31

Peček, M. and Munda, M. (2015). ‘Roma Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Education – A Case Study’. Intercultural Education, 26(5), 425–43. DOI: 10.1080/14675986.2015.1091237. Purcell, K. and Tzanakou, C. (2016). ‘Life after Higher Education: The Diversity of Opportunities and Obstacles in a Changing Graduate Labour Market’. In J. Cote and A. Furlong (eds), Handbook of the Sociology of Higher Education. London: Routledge. Rakovic, S. (2009). ‘Affirmative Action as a Policy Answer to Roma Inclusion in Secondary and Tertiary Public Education in Serbia’. In J. Lozanoska and S. Slavco Dimitrov (eds), Integrating Differences: Human Rights, Social Inclusion and Social Cohesion in the Balkans on Its Road to the EU, 181–99. Skopje: Euro-Balkan Institute. Redzepi, N. (2013). ‘Relations with the Mainstream’. In W. Guy (ed.), From Victimhood to Citizenship: The Path of Roma Integration, 162. Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó. Roberts, P. (2020). ‘Capability Strengthening: Roma as Knowledge Producers’. In L. Morley, A. Mirga and N. Redzepi (eds), The Roma in European Higher Education: Recasting Identities, Re-imagining Futures. London: Bloomsbury Press. Roma Education Fund. (2014). ‘Roma Education Fund Annual Report 2014’. http:​// www​.roma​educa​tionf​und.h​u/sit​es/de​fault​/file​s/pub​licat​ions/​ref_a​nnual​_2014​_web_​ singl​epage​s-mod​.pdf.​ Accessed 1 March 2018. Rostas, I. (ed). (2012). Ten Years After - A History of Roma School Desegregation in Central and Eastern Europe. Budapest and New York: REF & CEU Press. Rostas, I. and Torotcoi, S. (2020). ‘Creating Knowledge About the Roma in Higher Education’. In L. Morley, A. Mirga and N. Redzepi (eds), The Roma in European Higher Education: Recasting Identities, Re-Imagining Futures. London: Bloomsbury Press. Sayer, M. (2017). Australian Gypsies: Their Secret History. Sydney: NewSouth Publishing. Schultz, D. L. (2012). ‘Translating Intersectionality Theory into Practice: A Tale of Romani-Gadzˇe Feminist Alliance’. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(1), 37–43. Stewart, M. (ed.). (2012). The Gypsy “Menace”: Populism and the New Anti-Gypsy Politics. London: Hurst Publishers. Taba, M. and Ryder, A. (2012). ‘An Overview of Roma School Segregation’. In I. Rostas (ed.), Ten Years After: A History of Roma School Desegregation in Central and Eastern Europe, 7–48. Budapest: Central European University and Roma Education Fund. Torotcoi, S. (2013). ‘Widening Participation: Romanian Roma Participation in Higher Education’. CEU ETD dissertations. www.etd.ceu.hu/2013/torotcoi_simona.pdf. Accessed 10 March 2018. Tremlett, A. (2009). ‘Bringing Hybridity to Heterogeneity in Romani Studies’. Romani Studies, 19(2), 147–68. Tremlett, A. (2013). ‘“Here Are the Gypsies!” The Importance of Self-Representations and How to Question Prominent Images of Gypsy Minorities’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(11), 1706–25. Tremlett, A. (2014). ‘Making a Difference Without Creating a Difference: SuperDiversity as a New for Research on Roma Minorities’. Ethnicities, 14(6), 830–48.

32

The Roma in European Higher Education

UNDP/World Bank/EC Regional Roma Survey. (2011). https​://cp​s.ceu​.edu/​artic​le/20​ 12-10​-16/u​ndpwo​rld-b​ankec​-regi​onal-​roma-​surve​y-201​1. Accessed 16 May 2018. Vermeersch, P. (2012). ‘Reframing the Roma: EU Initiatives and the Politics of Reinterpretation’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38, 8. Vincze, E. (2014). ‘The Racialization of Roma in the “New” Europe and the Political Potential of Romani Women’. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 21, 435–42. Vincze, E. (2015). ‘Adverse Incorporation of the Roma and the Formation of Capitalism in Romania’. Intersections: East European Journal of Society and Politics, 1(4), 14–37. Walkerdine, V. (2011). ‘Neoliberalism, Working-Class Subjects and Higher Education’. Contemporary Social Science, 6(2), 255–71. Yıldız, C. and De Genova, N. (2017). ‘Un/Free Mobility: Roma Migrants in the European Union’. Social Identities. DOI: 10.1080/13504630.2017.1335819. Yuval-Davis, N., Varjú, V., Tervonen, M., Hakim, J. and Fathi, M. (2017). ‘Press Discourses on Roma in the UK, Finland and Hungary’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(7), 1151–69. DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2017.1267379.

2

The Roma in European Higher Education Explaining the Educational Gap of Roma in Higher Education Andrzej Mirga and Nadir Redzepi

Introduction – Towards a balanced approach to Roma education By failing to acknowledge that these Roma children are products of their culture and backgrounds, the states in question are ultimately presenting them with an impossible choice to either assimilate within the mainstream or be abandoned on the periphery of society. (Uzunova, 2015: 32) The case of the Roma in Norway by Engebrigtsen (2015) illustrates the dynamic of these two opposing perspectives in approaching education of Roma children: it refers to a community of Roma (accounted up to 700 persons), and it indicates steps undertaken under influence of international community (in that case under the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for Protection of National Minorities). It depicts how the state has been moving from recognition of cultural rights (politics of recognition) within the framework of multiculturalism (allowing some Roma mothers to teach Romani language in Roma schools just to comfort/accommodate school requirements to their wishes) to the opposite – asserting individuals’ rights to education in integrated classrooms and demanding all children without differentiation to follow the majority’s requirements. The Norwegian state and Oslo authorities have not managed to raise the level of education among Roma in either of these approaches. As a result, there have been no success stories to report regarding social inclusion or

The Roma in European Higher Education

34

entering the labour market, instead, numerous inhibitions were quoted, both of external and of internal nature present in these processes (2015).1 We consider this example as a kind of extreme case against which a more balanced approach shall be worked out combining expectations of the majority and demands of the Romani movement. With regard to the latter, we consider it a factor at the community level and in inter-ethnic relations with the majority: it is complex and evolving, with factions and various interests; nevertheless, is present and visible in social and political life of Roma in Europe (Vermeersch 2006; Matras. 2013; Stewart, 2017; Marushiakova and Popov, 2017a).2 Similarly, with the issue of anti-Gypsyism, the EU and some governments in last several years have recognized it (e.g. Germany) and arrived at the conclusion that without addressing it no much progress in social inclusion and integration of Roma can be reached (FRA, 2018).3 This phenomenon impacts in many ways the situation of Roma in given society, not the least, in area of education. This can be seen especially in post-ethnic conflict areas (i.e. in ex-Yugoslavia in Balkans), where ‘separate but equal’4 education policy is being applied in societies divided along ethnic lines (Puljek-Shank and Fritsch, 2018).5 Roma For example, the author is writing:

1

Based on my argument of Rom culture as habitus, the nature of this contradiction becomes rather obvious. In order to respond to the intentions of the integration/inclusion programs, the Norwegian Rom population will have to change their way of life, their collective and personal identity and culture. I am not implying that Rom habitus and culture is unchangeable, only that change that attack their core institutions triggers gut reactions; more or less intended resistance. And further: The results have been much the same; whatever educational model the Roma have been subjected to, they have done what they generally do; consent orally and resist in practice. As long as the Norwegian Roma see their own way of life, social organization and value systems as preferable to that of the non-Rom, formal education will not become a resource that can be converted as it will not become capital. (p. 10). We assert that the movement is a reality, though, it is complex and dynamic, with a number of competing factions and interest groups at its core; however, it works to mobilize various Romani civil society and leaders. Whether the movement is mature, strong and politically significant, analysts differ on, but it is clear that the movement is present, especially, since the fall of communism and has contributed to the development of Roma policy in Europe. Many leaders of Roma organizations and parties and Romani intellectuals are part of the Romani movement across Europe. 3 More on it discussed later in the text. We follow here on the report of European Union Agency for Fundamental Agency (2018a), ‘A Persisting Concern: Anti-Gypsyism as a Barrier to Roma Inclusion’. 4 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court in which the court ruled that American state laws establishing racial segregation in public schools are unconstitutional, even if the segregated schools are otherwise equal in quality. Available at: https​://su​preme​.just​ia.co​m/cas​es/fe​deral​/us/3​47/48​3/ 5 To counter it, for example, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, some organizations develop alternatives to it. The authors follow on this development and write: ‘Exploration of the bottom-up potential within conditions of dual hegemony has utility for explaining the emergence of what we term “local first” 2

The Roma in European Higher Education

35

minorities, in this context, are in a disadvantaged situation as nowhere they are ‘equal’ to ‘hegemonic’ nations of Serbs, Croats or Bosnians. As a result, depending on the Roma’s place of residence they have to adjust to the ‘dominant’ nation regarding curricula. We recognize similar patterns in work in most of societies in Europe where Roma community is present – anti-Gypsyism causes to see it as partly ‘divided’ with a similar effect regarding education in public institutions (Ringelheim, 2013).6 We are aware of the danger of generalization; we see and recognize the difference in the majority’s policy approach towards the Roma in, let’s say, Spain (the Gitanos population) and Slovakia (Kostka, 2015).7 This is not to say that we are not conscious of the similarities and efforts to build unity8 among various groups of Roma population dispersed among many states, nations and their ‘dominant’ cultures. We consider both the difference and unity among Roma communities as part of the Roma’s historic and present-day experiences and, in this sense, we are far from mystifying or being obsessed with either of them (Marushiakova and Popov, 2017).9

approaches to activism since 2014. By “local first” we mean a strategy of pursuing geographically local action with explicitly political strategies. “Local first” can be understood as a means to become political by building popular legitimacy in opposition to “dual hegemony” … Our research on “local first” approaches thus nuances academic debates about the alternatives to the predominant “antipolitics,” characterized by phrases such as “reclaiming the political” and “alter-politics”.’ For more see Puljek-Shank and Fritsch (2018). 6 In the abstract the author writes: While the objective of equal opportunities seems to be best served by promoting identical and integrated education for all children, this entails a risk of eroding minorities’ specificities and furthering assimilation. Conversely, whereas separate schooling in the minority language or religion may appear as the best way to protect minorities’ distinct identity, it jeopardizes their integration in the broader society. But integrated education may also reveal ambivalent from the viewpoint of equal opportunities: Where a minority is especially disadvantaged, children may experience difficulties in competing with other children in a common education system. This may compromise the actual benefit they draw from education and eventually their integration in society. The author compares the Roma population in these two countries and state policies, the one in Spain being mainstreamed while the other in Slovakia targeted, advocating in favour of the first one; however, the comparison itself might be troubling if certain differences such as the fact that nearly all Gitanos population in Spain do not speak or communicate in Romanes while the majority in Slovakia still speak this language, or that in Spain recognition of Roma as ethnic or national minority is nor foreseen because of the danger of precedence, whereas in Slovakia Roma benefited from existence of strong Hungarian minority demanding such rights, and so on are overlooked. 8 In this regard and being part of the Romani movement, we see it as an effort and path for promoting political identity of Roma despite all of differences among various groups and factions present among them. We see here a need for more comparative perspectives to be used and applied to Roma mobilization as it may share some similarities, even if delayed, with other ethnic movements. 9 Marushiakova and Popov especially dedicate a lot of energy and time to underline how Roma are different and how many categories and different subgroup identities can be registered among them. See, for example, Marushiakova and Popov (2017). 7

36

The Roma in European Higher Education

Education and Social Mobility – Roma Tertiary Students Studying Abroad and at Home Education determines upward social mobility of an individual. Education and upward social mobility are considered necessary in all integration policies with regard to disadvantaged communities. Facilitating access to and participation in higher education and its internationalization through mobility of students, teaching staff and curricula have been considered by policy makers and universities as a necessary and welcome development in the globalizing world. Such beliefs were at the background of so-called Bologna process10 and the EU’s Lisbon Strategy objectives11 and helped to establish the European Higher Education Area.12 Its major tool became the ERASMUS inaugurated in 1987. It has been envisioned by the commission that up to 10 per cent of students could enjoy the opportunity of studying in another country. ERASMUS provides support ‘for less than 1 % of eligible students in a given year’ (de Wit et al., 2015).13 For nearly thirty years, through ERASMUS, the EU has enabled over 3 million European students’ studies at another higher education institution in Europe.14 Globally however, the United States remains the country of choice for the largest number of international students, hosting about 1.1 million of the 4.6 million enrolled worldwide in 2017 (Zong and Batalova, 2018). The HEIM project with Sussex University and REF inscribes into these global and EU trends, though the share of Roma students who benefited from it remains It is named after the University of Bologna where so-called Bologna Declaration was adopted by education ministers from twenty-nine European countries in 1999. Available at: http:​//www​.ehea​ .info​/pid3​4248/​histo​ry.ht​ml. See also Curaj, Matei, Pricopie, Salmi and Scott (2015). 11 It rests on three pillars: An economic pillar laying the groundwork for the transition to a competitive, dynamic, knowledge-based economy. There is a strong emphasis on adapting quickly to changes in the information society and to investing in research and development. A social pillar designed to modernize the European social model by investing in human resources and combating social exclusion. The Member States are expected to invest in education and training, and to conduct an active policy for employment, making it easier to move to a knowledge economy. An environmental pillar, added at the Göteborg European Council in June 2001, which urges a decoupling of economic growth from the use of natural resources. For more see at: https​://ec​.euro​pa.eu​/euro​stat/​stati​stics​ -expl​ained​/inde​x.php​/Glos​sary:​Lisbo​n_Str​ategy​ 12 Available at: http:​//www​.ehea​.info​/pid3​4248/​histo​ry.ht​ml 13 The authors wrote: ‘[ERASMUS] paved the way for the Bologna Process and the realization of the European Higher Education area, which in turn has generated the European Commission’s first comprehensive internationalization strategy: European Higher Education in the World (2013)’ and further ‘Horizon 2020, the framework programmes and their predecessors over the last 35 years have also had an impact on the international and European dimension of higher education, as have the collaborative programmes with the rest of the world, such as TEMPUS, ALFA and ALBAN, ATLANTIS and others, now brought together with the European mobility schemes in the new Erasmus+ programme’ (p. 56); Available at: http:​//www​.euro​parl.​europ​a.eu/​RegDa​ta/et​udes/​STUD/​ 2015/​54037​0/IPO​L_STU​(2015​)5403​70_EN​.pdf.​See also, Gérard and Sanna (2017). 14 For more see https​://ec​.euro​pa.eu​/prog​ramme​s/era​smus-​plus/​oppor​tunit​ies/o​vervi​ew_en​ 10

The Roma in European Higher Education

37

minimal. Several other initiatives should be mentioned here: Summer School at Central European University or CEU in Budapest by Roma Information Office at the Open Society Foundations;15 Roma Graduate Preparation Program or RGPP (by REF and RIO) at CEU;16 and Roma in European Societies and Roma Chair at CEU.17 Last but not least, the REF’s Roma International Scholarship Program (RISP) (see the following paragraph). The common feature of all of them is that they target Roma students and provide them with opportunities of studying at international setting. REF has been playing important role in most of these initiatives. The RISP is designed to provide partial support to Roma students for pursuing bachelor, master, doctorate or postdoctoral education outside their home country or country of residence. Since 2007, REF has supported 149 RISP students and granted 265 scholarships out of 497 applications. The gender ratio of supported students is 52.3 per cent female to 47.6 per cent male. The average age of students is thirty-two years. In this period seventy-three students have successfully graduated their studies, fifty-five failed graduation while the rest are still pursuing their studies. The Figures 2.1 and 2.2 indicate the home country of the students vis-à-vis destination country of studies, as a choice of Roma students. Bulgaria

60

Romania

54

Hungary

41

Macedonia

31

Slovakia

23

Field 1

Moldova

17

Serbia

15

Croatia

5

Russia

4

Ukraine

4

Kosovo

4

Czech republic

4

Bosnia

2

Turkey

1 0

10

20

30

40

Figure 2.1  Student’s home country. https​://su​mmeru​niver​sity.​ceu.e​du/ro​mani-​2019 https​://ro​manis​tudie​s.ceu​.edu/​roma-​gradu​ate-p​repar​ation​-prog​ram 17 https​://ro​manis​tudie​s.ceu​.edu/​roma-​europ​ean-s​ociet​ies 15 16

50

60

70

The Roma in European Higher Education

Field 1

38 UK USA France Romania Hungary Holland Austria Germany Bulgaria Italy Czech republic Denmark Russia Serbia Ukraine Wales Turkey Spain Croatia Slovenia Estonia Belgium Switzerland Sweden Ireland Japan Malaysia Macedonia Portugal Cyprus Liechtenstein

1 1 1 1 1 0

2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5

6 6

7

9 9

10

11

14 13

18 17

20

20

58

30

30

40

50

60

70

Figure 2.2  Destination country of studies.

The Roma Graduate Preparation Program (formerly known as the Roma Access Programs) at the CEU supported by the OSF is another initiative at HEIM for Roma students. The programme aims to prepare Roma university graduates across Europe to compete for master’s programmes either at CEU or at other university in Europe. Besides financial support REF contributes to outreach and selection elements of the programme. Since 2004, when it was founded, to 2014, the programme has enrolled 222 Roma students from across Europe.18 A historic position of Roma Chairs has been established in 2016 at the CEU within Roma in European Societies or RES19 programme which the REF also supports financially.20 In 2018, the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University https​://ro​manis​tudie​s.ceu​.edu/​rap-a​lumni​-2004​-2014​-fact​s https​://ro​manis​tudie​s.ceu​.edu/​roma-​europ​ean-s​ociet​ies 20 More on RES launching and program, available at: https​://ww​w.ceu​.edu/​artic​le/20​16-06​-23/c​eu-pa​ rtner​s-lau​nch-r​oma-e​urope​an-so​cieti​es-in​itiat​ive 18 19

The Roma in European Higher Education

39

and the Roma Education Fund Scholarship Program announced a seven-year scholarship scheme that will support one Roma student per year to study for their Master of Public Policy programme. The first Romani student will be starting this academic year (i.e. 2019).21 Finally, we observe that very few Roma individuals used ERASMUS, a main vehicle for higher education students and to date we have one student who finished MA and get PhD at Barcelona Autonomous University.22 Young Roma studying in their home countries represent the main cohort of students. To understand their numbers, we will present first the situation in one country – Hungary, after which we will turn to various scholarship programmes of the Roma Education Fund for Roma in the former Decade of Social Inclusion countries (Brüggemann and Friedman, 2017; Curcic et al., 2014). Finally, we will outline some data for the Roma students at the EU based on surveys conducted mainly by Agency for Fundamental Rights Fundamental or FRA of the EU. As early as 1995, the Kurt Lewin Foundation (KLF) began providing services to Roma students and closed it in 2007. The initiative had two parts: a preparatory course facilitating entrance to higher education and the so-called Szocháló Project. The latter was aimed to compensate through mentoring programme ‘for the professional and cultural deficiencies of students from disadvantaged family backgrounds’ (Rostas, 2012: 230–4; Nyírő and Durst 2018: 93–4). In 1996, the Roma Civil Rights’ Foundation established its Romaversitas program, including its Romaversitas Invisible College23 to support outstanding young Roma studying in higher education. It offered to Roma students training and coaching together with financial, psychological, professional and ethical support24 for smoothing their transition into positions typical of middle-class intellectuals. The programme’s goal was to create an autonomous ‘intellectual elite of Roma origin which will contribute to the creation of a Roma middle class through fostering a feeling of responsibility for and commitment to the advancement of this ethnic group’ (Nyírő and Durst, 2018: 94). Until 2012, annually approximately fifty Roma students were supported through Romaversitas in Hungary (Miskovic, 2013: 153).25 Collectively, in the past twenty years Romaversitas has supported over 300 Roma students throughout their academic studies. More on see at: http:​//www​.roma​versi​tas.o​rg/20​18/04​/16/n​ew-sc​holar​ship-​with-​roma-​educa​tion-​ fund/​ 22 Anna Mirga Krszelnicka, a Deputy Director of ERIAC benefited from ERASMUS and defended her PhD at Autonomous University of Barcelona. For more see: https://eriac.org/about-eriac/ 23 See more on at http:​//civ​icedu​catio​nproj​ect.o​rg/le​gacy/​count​ries/​hunga​ry/ro​maver​sitas​.html​ 24 Some of these functions are continued by current RomaVersitas which continue its activities supported this time by REF and also in several other Decade countries. 25 Romaversitas variant supported by the OSF was also active in Macedonia, for more see Miskovic (2013). 21

40

The Roma in European Higher Education

A new initiative called the Charter of the Roma College of Advanced Studies (Roma szakkollégiumok) and associated with Hungarian Cristian Roma C olleges started in 2012 with an aim ‘to educate, train and organize … Roma intellectuals … capable of a responsible social dialogue … [who] can serve as a role model of successful cohabitation in our society’ (Nyírő and Durst, 2018: 100).26 There were also strong efforts to train future journalists and media personnel from among Roma students. In 1998, the Roma Press Centre (Roma Sajtóközpont) established the journalist internship programme realized by the Center for Independent Journalism (Független Médiaközpont). It operated until 2012, during which 110 students completed it (p. 95).27 In comparison the REF’s scholarship programmes provided support to much larger cohorts of Romani students.28 Besides RISP scholarship programme, REF have developed three other programmes: Roma Memorial University Scholarship Program (RMUSP), Roma Health Scholarship Program and Law and Humanity Program. RMUSP, is the largest scholarship scheme, enabling 5.127 female students and 3.707 male students to pursue BA, MA and PhD studies in thirteen countries in Central Europe (CE) and South East Europe (SEE) region. Through these programmes REF has distributed 18.719 scholarships to approximately 8.834 students in the period 2005–2018.29 The Figures 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 provide a general overview about the REF’s scholarships beneficiaries’ access and progress achieved per level of studies. Just to set up a counterpoint: in 2018, more than 40 per cent of people aged between thirty and thirty-four years in the EU had completed tertiary education, and 81 per cent of those aged 25–54 years had completed at least an upper secondary level of education (EUROSTA, 2019). The FRA in mentioned surveys is applying a formula of ‘completed at least upper secondary education’ and does not indicate directly the percentage of Roma Contrary to authors we do see the difference between the Charter of Roma Colleges and other initiatives at that level in Hungary as both the used concepts and activities clearly aim at some sort of assimilation. 27 The authors mentioned (on the same page) also the other media internship programme – Roma Scholarship Media Program (Roma Ösztöndíjas Médiaprogram) at the broadcaster Hungarian Television. The programme operated in 2006 and 2007 and seven students completed it. 28 REF is currently supporting six RomaVersitas projects, out of which five are implemented by RomaVersitas organizations in Albania, Hungary, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Serbia and one is implemented by REF Romania (REF 2019, p. 20). Available at: https​://ww​w.rom​aeduc​ation​fund.​ org/w​p-con​tent/​uploa​ds/20​19/05​/REF-​AR-20​18-1.​pdf 29 REF data. 26

The Roma in European Higher Education

PhD 2%

41

Vocational 5%

MA 24%

Vocational BA MA PhD

BA 69%

Figure 2.3  Distribution of scholarships by level of studies 2005–18. REF data.

1029 802 572

535

563

998 843

886

626

969 859

860

805 561

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 2.4  BA scholarship grants 2005–18. REF data.

who participate or complete tertiary education. Despite efforts such as of REF and other organizations dedicated to support Roma tertiary education both in HEIM and at home, including government’s initiative (OSCE ODIHR, 2013),30

The report’s chapter 6 ‘Improving Access to Education’ (pp. 43–51) elaborates on the state’s initiatives in higher education. For more see OSCE ODIHR (2013).

30

The Roma in European Higher Education

42

363

344

368

357

378 330

334

292 233

118

136

225

149

71

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 2.5  MA scholarship grants 2005–18. REF data.

50

29 18 0

1

7

30

34

50

39 30

32

20

9

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 2.6  PhD scholarship grants 2005–18. REF data.

in comparison with the majority, progress reached at that level remains insignificant. Obviously, this has most direct impact on the Roma’s participation at job markets and on the level of integration and social inclusion in society.

Theoretical Perspective: Social Capital, Social Inclusion and Anti-Gypsyism We consider it important to use the notion of social capital in relation to Roma, in particular in relation to their low level of access and participation in tertiary education, both internationally and in their home countries. We are following here on Coleman’s view that social capital represents ‘a particular kind of

The Roma in European Higher Education

43

resource available to an actor’ and that ‘social capital inheres in the structure of relations between actors and among actors’ (Coleman, 1988: 98). It represents resources ‘available to an individual and existing in various social networks’ (p. 98). More specifically, ‘it is the value of these aspects of social structure to actors as resources that they can use to achieve their interests’ (p. 101). The other important aspect of Coleman’s assertion refers to ‘trust’ in interpersonal relations. He asserts that ‘a group within which there is extensive trustworthiness … is able to accomplish much more than a comparable group without that trustworthiness and trust’ (p. 101).31 For Coleman ‘one effect of social capital … is especially important: its effect on the creation of human capital in the next generation’, that is, ‘family background’. It includes financial capital ‘measured by the family’s wealth or income’, human capital ‘measured by parents’ education’ that determines ‘the potential for a cognitive environment for the child that aids learning’ and ‘social capital’ that within the family is different from either of these that is ‘the relations between children and parents’ (p. 109).32 He adds that ‘if the human capital possessed by parents is not complemented by social capital embodied in family relations, it is irrelevant to the child’s educational growth that the parent has a great deal, or a small amount, of human capital’ (p. 110).33

In this process Coleman points to ‘effective norms’ constituting ‘a powerful form of social capital’ which depend on, what he calls, ‘closure’ (p. 105). He explains it by recalling that ‘norms arise as attempts to limit negative external effects or encourage positive ones. But, in many social structures where these conditions exist, norms do not come into existence. The reason is what can be described as lack of closure of the social structure’ (p. 105). The consequence of it is ‘a set of effective sanctions that can monitor and guide behavior’ (p. 107). Explaining the issue of ‘trust’ he provides several examples, including the one that refers to diamond dealers in New York, who are mostly Jewish, family-connected, operating multimillion businesses without any formal contract but based on trusting each other. For more see Coleman (1988). 32 An example: 31

In one public school district in the United States where texts for school use were purchased by children’s families, school authorities were puzzled to discover that a number of Asian immigrant families purchased two copies of each textbook needed by the child. Investigation revealed that the family purchased the second copy for the mother to study in order to help her child do well in school. Here is a case in which the human capital of the parents, at least as measured traditionally by years of schooling, is low, but the social capital in the family available for the child's education is extremely high. (p. 110) Interestingly, Coleman notices: ‘For families that have moved often, the social relations that constitute social capital are broken at each move’, therefore, ‘is not available to parents in mobile families’ (p. 113). Coleman consider also ‘variation among the schools … a useful indicator of social capital’, in his example, between ‘religiously based private high schools, and non-religiously based private high schools’ and ‘it is the independent private schools that are typically least surrounded by a community, for their student bodies are collections of students, most of whose families have no contact’ (p. 114). In effect, ‘dropout rates between sophomore and senior years are 14.4% in public schools, 3.4% in Catholic schools, and 11.9% in other private schools. What is most striking is the low dropout rate in Catholic schools’ (p. 114).

33

44

The Roma in European Higher Education

Coleman also stresses that while physical or human capital can bring to a person ‘benefits in the form of a higher-paying job, more satisfying or higher-status work, or even the pleasure of greater understanding of the surrounding world … most forms of social capital are not like this’ because benefits are brought to ‘all those who are part of such a structure’ (p. 116) or ‘it is a public good’ aspect of social capital.34 We complete Coleman’s notion of social capital with the Putman’s (2000).35 He sees ‘social capital’ as ‘features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit’.36 For Davis (2013), ‘trust and cooperative relationships in social networks operate through two main types of channels … bridging and bonding social capital’ (Davis, 2013: 2). According to Claridge (2018: 2), Putnam described bonding social capital as ‘inward looking’, reinforcing exclusive identities and promoting homogeneity; whereas bridging social capital as ‘outward looking’, promoting links between diverse individuals.37 Schooling is one of major networks that builds up social capital – a key for other forms of capital (human or economic) main factors of educational achievements of a child.38 Before we try to indicate how social capital and its bonding and bridging capitals operate among Roma, however, we will look at the notion of social inclusion39 as promoted in all EU policies targeting Roma. The notion of ‘social inclusion’ became a buzzword for current EU Roma policies

Meaning that ‘social structures that make possible social norms and the sanctions that enforce them do not benefit primarily the person or persons whose efforts would be necessary to bring them about, but benefit all those who are part of such a structure’ (p. 116). 35 Putnam (2001). 36 Putnam (1995). Putnam writes: 34

Networks of civic engagement foster sturdy norms of generalized reciprocity and encourage the emergence of social trust. Such networks facilitate coordination and communication, amplify reputations, and thus allow dilemmas of collective action to be resolved. When economic and political negotiation is embedded in dense networks of social interaction, incentives for opportunism are reduced. At the same time, networks of civic engagement embody past success at collaboration, which can serve as a cultural template for future collaboration. Finally, dense networks of interaction probably broaden the participants’ sense of self, developing the ‘I’ into the ‘we’, or (in the language of rational-choice theorists) enhancing the participants’ ‘taste’ for collective benefits. Claridge (2018) Dika and Singh (2002). 39 Social inclusion is a comparatively new arena for the EU, as its competence in social policy was severely circumscribed until the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997. The Open Method of Coordination (OMC) places the obligation to address social inclusion on the national governments in a dialogical relationship. It is the function of the OMC to assist states in identifying problems and appropriate solutions, but they retain the ultimate responsibility for levels of poverty and social exclusion. For more details see O’Nions (2015). Also, see, for example, Amstrong, Amstrong and Spandagou (2011); see also Friedman (2015). 37 38

The Roma in European Higher Education

45

and in all governmental policy measures that aim at Roma integration. Rarely however is anyone questioning the concept itself, including looking at what it requires or implies. In our view, two aspects are important here: the notion of power (Dika and Singh, 2002: 44)40 and conditions. The former determines the majority’s power position in all social encounters, especially, with the minority and the latter specified under which conditions social inclusion takes place. In other words, the majority that holds the power determines the conditions of social inclusion. Often, we do not consider it relevant to question or debate it, however, ‘social inclusion’ may have different meanings41 for disadvantaged and stigmatized minorities. To make it clear, we believe social inclusion policy, especially, in area of education, is still preferable and advantageous in comparison with segregated policy that many disadvantaged Roma children and families are facing. What are we arguing here is for uncovering the often hidden42 assumptions associated with this notion and make the majority aware of it. The power issue exposes the tension between the interest of government and society (to have Roma problem solved by making Roma more alike to majority, that is, through education) and that of the Romani movement. In this latter case, the objective is to have the Roma ethnic community evolving and The authors write: ‘These theories based on Coleman’s are faulted primarily because they obscure issues of power and domination; that is, they do not address links between lack of ties to institutional agents, macro forces, and institutional-discriminatory patterns.’ 41 Uzunova, I. (2015) advocates, for ‘moderate multiculturalism’, ‘Moderate multiculturalism flows from the belief that a flourishing culture is a key element of an individual’s wellbeing and so each individual’s culture should be given some degree of official recognition and support’(p. 37). She also argues that (p. 89) ‘the current liberal democratic model followed by most of Europe is insufficient to guarantee rights protection for the Roma since a “neutral” state which focuses on equal citizenship fails to take into account the importance of, and difficulties associated with, an individual’s culture’. A move towards liberal multiculturalism is recommended. However, after migration crisis and increase in nationalist tendencies in Europe multi-culti as a concept is compromised. She holds however, that (p. 148) ‘formal education is not viewed as particularly important by the majority of the Roma population and so making both primary and secondary education compulsory might be the only way to ensure that Roma pupils complete all school levels’. This assertion raises doubts as it may be due to prejudice, not reality. 42 Nyírő, Z. and Durst, J. (2018) write: 40

‘Hidden costs’, of upward mobility. Still, apart from a few inspiring exceptions, there is a lack of empirical studies, especially in Hungary, that explore the personal experiences of the impact of moving class through educational mobility. Academic literature about stigmatized, disadvantaged minorities such as Afro-Americans and Mexicans in the U.S or the Roma in Europe suggests that the professional middle class of these groups – those who have demonstrated an exceptional range of intergenerational mobility – have adopted a distinctive upward mobility strategy to overcome the challenges that are unique to them. These challenges emerge from the difficulties of maintaining intra-class relations with poorer ‘co-ethnics’ (people from the communities they were brought up in), but also managing interethnic relations with the ‘white’ (non-Black in the U.S, non-Roma in East-Central Europe) majority. As part of this minority culture of mobility, the Roma, as with other stigmatized minority groups, create and join ethnic professional organizations to enable them to culturally navigate both worlds. (p. 88)

46

The Roma in European Higher Education

becoming a political player or, as McGarry and Agarin suggest, reaching the level of participation as influence (2015). Nowhere is this more evident than in education: teaching and learning are organized according to the majority’s curricula and according to its cultural idioms and traditions in all levels of education, from nursery to tertiary education. It is in this area that ‘adaptation’ to mainstream that is ‘dominant majority’ standards is demanded. However, more or less direct demands for ‘adaptation’ should not mean ‘assimilation’ or uprooting Roma ethnics. In fact, these requirements need to be associated with recognition of Romani culture and identity and with a redistribution policy that puts Roma on more equal footing with the majority (1996).43 Finally, we want to ascertain whether the Romani movement is able and under what conditions to reach effective political participation in its development. We follow here McGarry and Agarin’s distinction. In their view ‘participation as presence is but the first building block for effective participation, leading to participation as voice, whilst only with participation as influence does a minority group ensure a degree of control over institutions and policies which affect them’ (2015: 5; emphasis in original) or putting it in different way, ‘influence allows minorities to enjoy substantive voice as agents of policymaking’ (p. 7). This means the ‘ability to influence the state or majority’s policy makers and Roma policy outcomes’ (p. 7). They maintain that ‘the role and input of Roma civil society is vital but does not adequately address the participation of “ordinary” people’. They insist, therefore, on effective participation of ‘ordinary’ Roma and claim that ‘if attention is not given to the participation of ordinary Roma then efforts to address central issues of concern for Roma can at best achieve partial success or be futile altogether’ (p. 16). McGarry and Agarin also state that ‘minority groups need to have guaranteed presence, voice and influence in political decision-making processes, especially when decisions affect them directly’ (p. 2). Groups such as the Roma need ‘structural support to assert their interests vis-à-vis structurally more empowered majorities’ (p. 5). Finally, however, they notice that ‘the institutional framework for enhancing Roma political participation appears to be fundamentally inadequate. If Roma are unable to exert an influence in majority-dominated institutions and discourses, then negative perceptions of Roma will remain in the ascendency’ (p. 23).

Fraser’s powerful text regarding recognition and redistribution policies suffer because of one missing thing: the power issue. In our view the both recognition and redistribution depend much on the issue of power. In this sense, any social justice’s claim that interaction should follow the pattern of participatory parity remains idealistic or wish-full thinking. For more see Fraser (1996).

43

The Roma in European Higher Education

47

They see such a possibility evolving at the EU, that is in the EU Framework for National Roma Strategies adopted in 2011. We consider these distinctions relevant for our discussion but not fully adequate, as there are questions that are remain unanswered. We find it especially difficult to realize ‘empowerment as influence’ among ‘ordinary’ Roma of whom 80 per cent are living in risk of poverty (2018a: 12) and only 3 per cent of young Roma aged twenty to twenty-four are still completing education (2018). Such ‘ordinary’ Roma are far from daily politics; similarly, it is illusory to expect they will challenge negative group ascription. For us, effective participation as influence is concomitant with more numerous and well-educated strata of Roma communities who can exercise various intellectual roles in society and in the movement (leadership or expert’s roles). We believe that a few well-educated Roma individuals or skilful Roma in civil society organizations still can do a lot in terms of ‘influencing’ policy makers and policy outcomes.44 The Roma community’s effective participation and even more, the Romani movement’s quality, depend much on those who complete higher education.

Explicating Theoretical Framework: Research and Survey Data on Roma Roma possess, like any social group, various capitals depending on their level of exclusion and marginalization or level of integration. From the point of view of the majority, or state and the EU’s inclusion policy it is important to know the kind of social capitals these bodies intend to support and facilitate. We can assert that investing in and developing ‘bridging’ capital would be optimal as the most promising strategy for effective social inclusion policy for the Roma. Based on the data and identified trends the question that arises is: Why all of this is not happening, or its realization meets with many difficulties? In evaluating how ‘social capital’ works we will try first to assert it in relation to the EU’s ‘social inclusion’ policy. We will refer specifically to those data that assert the level of education among Roma,45 that is key to defining social capital,

According to FRA nine EU Member States surveyed, ‘allocated €1.4 billion for the 2014–2020 programming period (i.e. 7.5 % of the total allocation for social inclusion under thematic objective, ‘Promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination … explicitly referring to Roma’ (EU MIDI II, p. 6). 45 Though, we are conscious that socio-economic or socio-demographic data are all relevant and interconnected for determining Roma social capital and achievement level in education. 44

48

The Roma in European Higher Education

and will link them with some more data (income or employment level, risk of poverty, engagement and trust in social networks or level of participation). We will make use of some the data collected in 2011 and 2016 in those Member States where the majority of Roma live.46 Of the nine countries in EU-MIDIS II, eight were studied in the 2011 Roma Survey. The data are comparable. Putting aside concerns regarding data, and the methodology of their collection, the issue of the fragmentation of data or whether to trust these results (OSI, 2010; Brueggemann, 2012), the FRA’s data allow also to identify some evolving trends in the situation of Roma in Europe. Moreover, linking some data from surveys can bring us closer to what kind of capital Roma possess and what is the required policy. In the area of education both FRA data and the European Commission assessment noted some progress reached between 2011 and 2016, though only in the areas of early and compulsory education. In the latter, it grew up from 86 per cent in 2011 to 90 per cent in the 2016. Similarly, the early dropout rate from education and training has decreased from 87 per cent in 2011 to 68 per cent in 2016 (The European Commission, 2018). The EU-MIDIS II survey finds slightly higher enrolment rates in compulsory schooling in most countries – with the exception of Romania and Slovakia, where there are no substantial changes (2018: 24).47 However, in 2018 report the European Commission concludes that ‘substantial gaps remain both between Roma and the general population and between countries (ranging from a 28 % participation rate of Roma children in Greece to 94 % in Spain’ (2018). In this context, it is critical to note that school segregation, in general, is not decreasing but on the contrary is increasing. According to FRA data, the share of Roma attending classes where ‘all classmates are Roma’ on average increased from 10 per cent in 2011 to 15 per cent in 2016. Data refer here to ECEC and

In 2008, FRA surveyed Roma in seven EU Member States (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia) in the context of the first European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS I). In 2011 – FRA together with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank – a second survey on Roma in eleven EU Member States plus six non-EU countries. The survey collected data on their socio-economic situation in employment, education, housing and health, on experiences of discrimination and on rights awareness. In 2016, FRA surveyed Roma for a third time: as part of EU-MIDIS II, to assess progress over time, reflecting the impact of legal and policy developments in nine EU Member States (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, Croatia, Hungary, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia). 47 However, ‘half of the Roma between 6 and 24 years of age do not attend school. Of those who do, only 1 % attend school at a higher level than the one corresponding to their age; 18 % attend at an educational level lower than the one corresponding to their age, either because they repeated classes, started school later, or both. This share is highest (20 %) among Roma of the age for upper secondary education’ (p. 25). 46

The Roma in European Higher Education

49

compulsory education, as well as lower secondary or vocational schooling. Despite efforts prioritizing education in many EU states and civil societies’ activities to support education and its outcomes this worrying trend continues.48 FRA is not referring in this context to the issue of overrepresentation of Roma children in special education institutions; it did this earlier in its report on Roma education published in 2014, through analysing data gathered during 2011 survey. According to this report, data provided add significant percentage to those already facing disadvantage due to segregation in all-Roma classes or schools.49 FRA is applying a formula of ‘completed at least upper secondary education’ and does not indicate directly the percentage of Roma who participate in or completed tertiary education. In its report on Roma transition from education to employment (FRA, 2018),50 the FRA compares two younger cohorts of people aged sixteen to twenty-four and twenty-five to forty-four, respectively, who have completed ‘at least upper secondary education’ with the cohort of people aged forty-five to sixty-four, among which similar education achievement was reached. Data indicate that younger generations were doing better in this regard reaching respectively 23 per cent and 22 per cent against the older generation that reached only 14 per cent (2018: 9). Furthermore, the FRA is asserting that significant proportion of young Roma aged 16–24 is still in education – 18 per cent of those who have completed at least upper secondary education and 19 FRA, in addition to findings from the survey, also presents its opinions and recommended action mainly to Member States and to the Commission. Some of them are, however, wishful thinking as the recommendations are far from ground reality (e.g. FRA Opinion 5): ‘EU Member States should prioritize measures to combat anti-Gypsyism in education by eliminating any form of school or class segregation of Roma’ (p. 11). FRA Opinion 8 states: ‘EU Member States should adopt concrete measures to tackle early school leaving by Roma students’ (p. 11). FRA Opinion 9 requests ‘measures that compensate, at least partially, for the legacy of historical deprivation that Roma children experience even today. Such measures could include individualised social and learning support at school and at home to offset the multiple disadvantages affecting Roma children and to boost their opportunities for an equal start; as well as providing educational scholarships through grant schemes explicitly targeting Roma students, or other forms of targeted support’ (p. 11). FRA Opinion 10 recommends: ‘EU Member States should integrate modules on Roma history and culture in teaching programmes in mainstream secondary education. This would not just boost Roma children and youngsters’ self-esteem but would also be key to tackling anti-Gypsyism’ (p. 11). 49 FRA (2014). FRA is concluding: 48

The percentage of children up to the age of 15 reported as having attended a special school or class, which was organized ‘mainly for Roma’, varied by Member State (Figure 22). The highest values are observed in the Czech Republic, where 23 % of children were reported as having attended special schools or classes. Slovakia (20 %), Greece (15 %) and Bulgaria (14 %) followed. In France, the relatively high share (18 %) could correspond to the mobile school units or other specific structures attending to the needs of gens du voyage. While this finding highlights that Roma children in these countries often attend special schools or classes, it does not say anything about the objective or the quality of these institutions. (p. 48) EU MIDI II (2018).

50

50

The Roma in European Higher Education

per cent of those who have completed at most lower secondary education (p. 10). However, a clearer picture is provided by data indicating how many Roma between twenty and twenty-four years are still in education. According to this, only 3 per cent of Roma aged twenty to twenty-four are still in education (p. 10). It means a huge drop among those who continue education after their twenties. As we already explained, the earlier data showing the number of Roma students aged twenty to twenty-four still continuing education is more telling – according to FRA, only 3 per cent of Roma students after their twenties continue education and that shows a dramatic drop (2018). Even more troubling is the data related to young Roma aged sixteen to twenty-four years who are ‘neither in employment, education or training (abbreviated as NEET)’ as against those have completed their education and are transitioning into employment. According to FRA surveys, the percentage of former NEET ‘have increased from 56 % in 2011 to 63 % in 2016’. That means that there is a negative trend and that various support programmes in the area of education and employment do not work well or are ineffective. In comparison, the proportion of young people aged fifteen to twenty-four from the majority (the age group observed by Eurostat data) who are NEET does not exceed 18 per cent. FRA also observed that the ‘main concern is not just the low proportion of young people in employment (which would be desirable if they were still in education), but the high proportion of young Roma who leave education early … majority of young Roma leave school before having completed at least upper secondary education’ (2018: 12). Regarding employment and income, FRA’s data show that ‘between 2011 and 2016 there was no change in the proportion of Roma who indicated their main activity as paid work, though, there was an important gender gap’ (2018: 6). Further the FRA report notices: ‘On average, across the nine Member States surveyed, 19% of young Roma aged 16–24 identified their main activity as being in employment (i.e. in paid work, self-employed, helping in the family business (unpaid) or in the military/other community service)’ (2018: 14). In most Member States, the number of Roma who were unemployed is at least double than the number of non-Roma; in Italy, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, up to four to five times more Roma than non-Roma were unemployed (2018: 17). In its EU MIDI II report, the FRA’s noted that ‘in stark contrast to the values on which the EU is founded, an unacceptably high proportion of Roma live at risk of poverty’, though, there has been a slight drop in the percentage, on average, down from 86 per cent in 2011 to 80 per cent in 2016 (2018: 6). Three

The Roma in European Higher Education

51

countries included in the FRA survey from 2016 registered some improvements in comparison with the previous survey from 2011: the Czech Republic, Romania and Hungary, with 22 per cent, 8 per cent and 5 per cent, respectively, showed decrease in the at-risk-of-poverty rates for their Roma populations. This rate however increased by 13 per cent in Greece and 8 per cent in Spain. No changes were observed in Bulgaria, Croatia and Slovakia (2018b: 32). The FRA also asserts that almost two-thirds (63 per cent) of young Roma aged sixteen to twenty-four are neither in work nor in education or training, with the remaining one-third either in school or in employment (Figure 6). Although there is some variation, this is the case for more than half of young Roma across all Member States surveyed. The disparity between the Roma and the general population is particularly striking: the proportion of young people aged fifteen to twenty-four (the age group observed by Eurostat data) who are neither in employment nor in education or training does not exceed 18 per cent (Figure 7) in any of the surveyed Member States (2018b: 32). Finally, FRA is considering anti-Gypsyism ‘a key structural driver of Roma exclusion’ (2018b: 6). It makes clear that ‘unless tackled explicitly, antiGypsyism waters down the measures adopted in the specific thematic areas and dramatically reduces the prospect of improving outcomes in various areas of life (education, employment, healthcare, or housing)’ (2018b: 8). Further, FRA indicates that ‘the most heinous forms of anti-Gypsyism, hate-motivated crime and harassment, continue to hamper Roma inclusion ’ and further, ‘on average, one out of three Roma surveyed had experienced some form of harassment’ (2018b: 10). Practically, in every area of social life the impact and imprint of anti-Gypsyism is made visible. Data quoted tackle issues central to our theoretical perspective that is the Roma’s social capital and inclusion policies. The kind of social capital Roma develop or possess and the conditions that the dominant group imposes upon them, and on other hand, factors that impact inter-ethnic interaction, determine the level of the Roma community’ exclusion or integration or as McGarry and Agarin suggest, the level of their participation as influence. Neither the ‘family background’ of those who live in at-risk-of-poverty (some 80 per cent) nor income (only small percentage have stable jobs) nor participation in ‘social networks’ (in school or outside of it) enable members of these communities (as poor and excluded) gain higher ‘social capital’. As FRA puts it: ‘Those living at risk of poverty after social transfers, in rural areas, in overcrowded households, in ethnically segregated areas or in neighborhoods where all residents are Roma are also less likely to complete upper secondary education or higher’

52

The Roma in European Higher Education

(2018a: p. 11). This has been apparent: those in HEIM or HE are very few in comparison to the majorities. The findings of the FRA surveys indicate stronger links between some factors: for example, the poverty rates effectively limit the chances of developing ‘bridging’ capital. The FRA survey on anti-Gypsyism, the first of this kind, clearly indicates the negative impact of commonly held prejudices and stereotypes by the majority on the Roma’s social capital. On the other hand, it clearly indicates those who possess the power in inter-ethnic encounters, that is, the potential to impose segregation or held stigmatizing views about Roma. Poverty rates coupled with the predominance of the anti-Gypsyism among majority in a more direct way limit opportunities of social inclusion in all areas of life. There is no other way out than widening participation of those in HE since higher education can protect an individual against social stigma more effectively than anything else. We believe that participation as influence will not happen until we will significantly raise higher education participation rates. Furthermore, increases in segregation, despite all the efforts to desegregate schools, are a worrying development and eventually contribute to ‘bonding’ capital (in group orientation) and effectively weaken the ‘bridging’ one conductive to the child’s higher achievements rates in education. Paradoxically, the majority is eager to keep segregation, display weak or no commitment to disrupt it that is investing in and developing ‘bridging’ capital in integrated classrooms or schools. It is a paradox because the ‘bridging’ capital can work in the interests of the majority, that is, making Roma, especially children and youth, more like the majority. The FRA data indicate that segregation and overrepresentation of Roma children in special education combined do not tell the whole truth about why Roma are doing so badly regarding school achievements. Partly, a study of Echenique and Fryer (2007) explain it. They write: ‘When black students are relatively scarce in a school, their friendship networks tend to be integrated. As their share of the student population increases, segregation increases dramatically, plateauing when blacks comprise roughly twenty-five per cent of the student population. Schools that have twenty-five per cent or more black students exhibit severe within school racial segregation of social interactions.’ They conclude: ‘This phenomenon undermines the intuition that a school that has equal shares of black and white students is well integrated’ (2007). The same can be said about Roma in integrated classrooms or schools. This is especially relevant in the context of the REF’s new strategy. It makes clear that REF wants to invest more in tertiary education to enlarge the strata of Roma

The Roma in European Higher Education

53

intellectuals and professionals. Those educated Roma conscious of their roots and identity and proud of being Roma can be also promoters and game changers in boosting education and achievements in the Roma community. In pursuing this goal, we do not see an opposition between stated goals (empowerment and influence through education) and the objectives of ‘social inclusion’. What we argue for, though, is that inherent ‘costs’ in the form of ‘assimilative pressure’ associated eventually with social inclusion should be uncovered. We believe that the politics of distribution and merit-based education aiming at effective social inclusion of Roma must be combined with politics of recognition that encourages ethnic pride, belonging and identity (i.e. activities of ERIAC).51 We assert that education and social capital can serve social mobility and inclusion’s objectives and the Roma community and Romani movement. We believe that participation as influence will not happen until we raise higher education participation rates significantly. For us, education means empowerment and, as a result, influence.

References Amstrong, D., Amstrong, A. C. and Spandagou, I. (2011). ‘Inclusion: By Choice or by Chance?’ International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(1), 29–39. Available at: http:​//dx.​doi.o​rg/10​.1080​/1360​3116.​2010.​49619​2 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Available at: https​://su​ preme​.just​ia.co​m/cas​es/fe​deral​/us/3​47/48​3/ Brueggemann, C. (2012). ‘Roma Education in Comparative Perspective’. Roma Inclusion Working Papers, UNDP. Available at: https​://ww​w.res​earch​gate.​net/p​ublic​ation​/2564​ 97194​_Roma​_Educ​ation​_in_C​ompar​ative​_Pers​pecti​ve/li​nk/00​b7d52​321b9​b3b22​ d0000​00/do​wnloa​d Brüggemann, C. and Friedman, E. (2017). ‘The Decade of Roma Inclusion: Origins, Actors, and Legacies Christian’. Journal European Education, 49, 1–9. Available at: https​://ww​w.tan​dfonl​ine.c​om/do​i/ful​l/10.​1080/​10564​934.2​017.1​29042​2 Claridge, T. (2018). ‘Functions of Social Capital – Bonding, Bridging, Linking’. Social Capital Research. Available at: https​://d1​fs2th​61pid​ml.cl​oudfr​ont.n​et/wp​-cont​ent/ u​pload​s/201​8/11/​Funct​ions-​of-So​cial-​Capit​al.pd​f ?x91​095 Coleman, J. S. (1988). ‘Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital’. The American Journal of Sociology, 94. Available at: https​://ww​w.beb​r.ufl​.edu/​sites​/defa​ult/f​i les/​ Colem​an%20​J.%20​(1988​)%20S​ocial​%20Ca​pital​%20in​%20th​e%20C​ratio​n%20o​ f%20H​uman%​20Cap​ital.​pdf.

https://eriac.org/

51

54

The Roma in European Higher Education

Curaj, A., Matei, L. Pricopie, R., Salmi, J. and Scott, P. (eds). (2015). Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies. Cham: Springer. Available at: http:​//era​smusp​lusri​esal.​org/ s​ites/​defau​lt/fi​les/1​8._th​e_ehe​a_bet​ween_​criti​cal_r​elect​ions_​and_f​uture​_poli​cies.​pdf Curcic, S., Miskovic, M., Plaut, S. and Ceobanu, C. (2014). ‘Inclusion, Integration or Perpetual Exclusion? A Critical Examination of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2005–2015’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3). Available at: https​://jo​ urnal​s.sag​epub.​com/d​oi/pd​f/10.​2304/​eerj.​2014.​13.3.​257 Davis, J. B. (2013). ‘Social Capital and Social Identity: Trust and Conflict’. In A. Christoforou and J. Davis (eds), Social Capital and Economics: Social Values, Power, and Identity. London: Routledge, 2014. Available at: https​://ww​w.joh​nbrya​ndavi​s.net​ /uplo​ads/2​/2/7/​3/227​34340​/davi​s_soc​ial_c​apita​l_and​_soci​al_id​entit​y.pdf​ Decade of Roma Inclusion. Available at: https​://ww​w.rcc​.int/​romai​ntegr​ation​2020/​ romad​ecade​_p/17​/deca​de-of​-roma​-incl​usion​-2005​-2015​. De Wit, H., Hunter, F., Howard, L. and Egron-Polak, E. (2015). ‘Internationalization of Higher Education’. Available at: http:​//www​.euro​parl.​europ​a.eu/​RegDa​ta/et​udes/​ STUD/​2015/​54037​0/IPO​L_STU​(2015​)5403​70_EN​.pdf Dika, S. and Singh, K. (2002). ‘Applications of Social Capital in Educational Literature: A Critical Synthesis’. Review of Educational Research. Available at: http://rer.sagepub. com/content/72/1/31 Echenique, F. and Fryer, R. G. (2207). ‘A Measure of Segregation Based on Social Interaction’. Quarterly Journal of Economics Volume, 122(2), 441–85. Available at: http:​//www​.its.​calte​ch.ed​u/~fe​de/pu​blish​ed/ec​heniq​ue-fr​yer-q​je.pd​f. Engebrigtsen, A. I. (2015). ‘Educating the Roma: The Struggle for Cultural Autonomy in a Seminomadic Group in Norway’. Available at: https​://od​a.hio​a.no/​nb/ed​ucati​ngth​e-rom​a-the​-stru​ggle-​for-c​ultur​al-au​tonom​y-in-​a-sem​i-nom​adic-​group​-in-o​slo/ a​sset/​dspac​e:891​7/127​6047.​pdf. EUROSTAT. (2019), ‘Educational Attainment Statistics’. Available at: https​://ec​.euro​ pa.eu​/euro​stat/​stati​stics​-expl​ained​/inde​x.php​/Educ​ation​al_at​tainm​ent_s​tatis​tics.​ European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2014). ‘Roma Survey – Data in Focus Education: The Situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States’. Available at: https​:// fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/sit​es/de​fault​/file​s/fra​-2014​_roma​-surv​ey_ed​ucati​on_tk​01137​48enc​.pdf.​ European Commission. (2018). ‘COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’, Brussels, 4.12.2018 SWD(2018) 480 final. Available at: https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​ pa.eu​/lega​l-con​tent/​EN/TX​T/PDF​/?uri​=CELE​X:520​18SC0​480&a​mp;fr​om=EN​ European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2018a). ‘EU MIDI II. Transition from Education to Employment of Young Roma in Nine EU Member States’. Available at: https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/sit​es/de​fault​/file​s/fra​_uplo​ads/f​ra-20​18-eu​-midi​ s-ii-​roma-​trans​ition​-educ​ation​-empl​oymen​t_en.​pdf. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2018b). ‘A Persisting Concern: AntiGypsyism as a Barrier to Roma Inclusion’. Available at: https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/sit​es/ de​fault​/file​s/fra​_uplo​ads/f​ra-20​18-an​ti-gy​psyis​m-bar​rier-​roma-​inclu​sion_​en.pd​f

The Roma in European Higher Education

55

Fraser, N. (1996). ‘Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics: Redistribution, Recognition, and Participation’. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values Delivered at Stanford University 30 April–2 May. Available at: https​://ww​w.int​ellig​encei​spowe​r. com​/Impo​rtant​%20E-​mails​%20Se​nt%20​attac​hment​s/Soc​ial%2​0Just​ice%2​0in%2​ 0the%​20Age​%20of​%20Id​entit​y%20P​oliti​cs.pd​f Friedman, E. (ed.). (2015). (2015). ‘Talking About Roma: Implications for Social Inclusion’. Social Inclusion Open Access Journal, 3(5), Special Issue. Available at: https​://ww​w.cog​itati​opres​s.com​/soci​alinc​lusio​n/art​icle/​view/​450/4​50 Gérard, M. and Sanna, A. (2017) ‘Students’ Mobility at a Glance: Efficiency and Fairness When Brain Drain and Brain Gain’. Journal of international Mobility, 1(5), 43–74. Available at: https​://ww​w.cai​rn.in​fo/re​vue-j​ourna​l-of-​inter​natio​nal-m​obili​ty-20​17-1-​ page-​43.ht​m Kostka, J. (2015). ‘Implementation of Roma Inclusion Policies: Why Defining the Problem Matters’. Social Inclusion, (3/5), 78–89. Available at: https://doi. org/10.17645/s.v3i5.231 Marushiakova-Popova, E. and Popov, V. (2017a). ‘Orientalism in Romani Studies: The Case of Eastern Europe’. In H. Kyuchukov and W. New (eds), Languages of Resistance: Ian Hancock’s Contribution to Romani Studies. Lincom Europa. Available at: https​://ww​w.aca​demia​.edu/​35446​214/O​rient​alism​_in_R​omani​_Stud​ies_T​h e_Ca​se_ of​_East​ern_E​urope​ Marushiakova-Popova, E. and Popov, V. (2017b). ‘Roma Labelling: Policy and Academia’. Slovenski Národopis, 66(4), 385–418. Matras, Y. (2013). ‘Scholarship and the Politics of Romani Identity: Strategic and Conceptual Issues’. In S. Spiliopoulou Åkermark, A. Bloed, R. Hofmann, T.H. Malloy, J. Marko, J. Packer, and M. Weller (eds), European Yearbook of Minority Issues: 10 BRILL/Martinus Nijhoff, 209–245. Available at: http://romani.humanities. manchester.ac.uk/virtuallibraryRomIdent Working Papers​ McGarry, A. and Agarin, T. (2015). ‘Unpacking the Roma Participation Puzzle: Presence, Voice and Influence’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(12), 1972–90. Miskovic, M. (ed.). (2013). Roma Education in Europe: Practices, Policies and Politics. New York: Routledge. No Data—No Progress Data Collection in Countries Participating in the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005–2015. (2010). Open Society Institute. Available at: https​://ww​ w.ope​nsoci​etyfo​undat​ions.​org/u​pload​s/165​c9e47​-6056​-4abf​-97fb​-4fa2​d67f6​95c/n​ o-dat​a-no-​progr​ess-2​01006​28.pd​f Nyiro, Z. and Durst, J. (2018). ‘Soul Work and Giving Back: Ethnic Support Groups and the Hidden Costs of Social Mobility. Lessons from Hungarian Roma Graduates’. Available at: https​://ww​w.res​earch​gate.​net/p​ublic​ation​/3239​64820​_ Soul​_work​_and_​givin​g_bac​k_Eth​nic_S​uppor​t_Gro​ups_a​nd_th​e_Hid​den_C​osts_​ of_So​cial_​Mobil​ity

56

The Roma in European Higher Education

O’Nions, H. (2015). ‘Narratives of Social Inclusion in the Context of Roma School Segregation’. Social Inclusion, 3(5), 103–14. Available at: https​://ww​w.res​earch​gate.​ net/p​ublic​ation​/2824​50963​_Narr​ative​s_of_​Socia​l_Inc​lusio​n_in_​the_C​ontex​t_of_​ Roma_​Schoo​l_Seg​regat​ion OSCE ODIHR. (2013). ‘Implementation of the Action Plan on Improving the Situation of Roma and Sinti Within the OSCE Area Renewed Commitments’. Continued Challenges Status Report. Available at: https​://ww​w.osc​e.org​/odih​r/107​406? d​ownlo​ad=tr​ue Puljek-Shank, R. and Fritsch, F. (2018). ‘Activism in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Struggles Against Dual Hegemony and the Emergence of “Local First”’. East European Politics and Societies and Cultures, 33(1), 135–56. Available at: https​://ww​w.ncb​i.nlm​.nih.​ gov/p​mc/ar​ticle​s/PMC​63804​58/ Putnam, R. D. (1995). ‘Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital’. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78. Available at: https​://ww​w.his​toryo​fsoci​alwor​k.org​/1995​_ Putn​am/19​95,%2​0Putn​am,%2​0bowl​ing%2​0alon​e.pdf​ Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon Schuster Paperbacks Ringelheim, J. (2013). ‘Between Identity Transmission and Equal Opportunities. The Two Dimensions of Minorities’ Right to Education’. CRIDHO Working Paper 4. Available at: https​://si​tes.u​clouv​ain.b​e/cri​dho/d​ocume​nts/W​orkin​g.Pap​ers/C​RIDHO​ -WP-2​013-4​-JRin​gelhe​im-Ed​ucati​onand​Minor​ities​.pdf Rostas, I. (ed.). (2012). ‘Ten Years After: A History of Roma School Desegregation in Central and Eastern Europe’. Stewart, M. (2017). ‘Nothing About Us Without Us, or the Dangers of a Closed-Society Research Paradigm’. Romani Studies, 5, 27(2), 125–46. https​://mu​se.jh​u.edu​/arti​cle/ 6​79441​/summ​ary Teichler, U. (2017). ‘International Trends in Higher Education and the Challenging Role of International Students Mobility’. Journal of international Mobility, 1(5). Available at: https​://ww​w.cai​rn.in​fo/re​vue-j​ourna​l-of-​inter​natio​nal-m​obili​ty-20​17-1-​page-​177. h​tm Uzunova, I. (2015). ‘Roma Integration in Europe: Why Minority Rights Are Failing’. Available at: http:​//ari​zonaj​ourna​l.org​/wp-c​onten​t/upl​oads/​2015/​10/8.​27.1 U​zunov​a.pdf​ Vermeersch, P. (2006). The Romani Movement: Minority Politics and Ethnic Mobilization in Contemporary Europe. New York: Berghahn Books. Zong, J. and Batalova, J. (2018). ‘International Students in the United States’. Spotlight, May 9. Available at: https​://ww​w.mig​ratio​npoli​cy.or​g/art​icle/​inter​natio​nal-s​tuden​tsun​ited-​state​s

3

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies for Roma in Higher Education Racialized Neoliberal Governmentality in Semi-Peripheral Europe Daniel Leyton

Introduction Etienne Balibar begins the foreword of the book Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilization, and the Neoliberal Order (2009), edited by Nando Sigona and Nidhi Trehan, by stating that the story of Roma people addressed in the book is one of the ‘oldest’, ‘brutal’, ‘vicious’ and ‘sad’ ‘patterns of exclusion in Europe today, with its consequences of prejudice, stigmatisation, discrimination, and overt or covert violence’. An experience that is, Balibar states, ‘vital for the future of the European continent’ (2009: viii). Roma experiences problematized as issues of exclusion were brought about within the processes of accession of Eastern nations into the governmentalities of the European Union (EU). In spite of institutional efforts of European integration of Roma’s populations, the Roma are not seen, spoken about and felt as with the right of fully belonging to those territories, but rather as the most unwanted, repudiated, abject guest, deviant and dangerous subject for the development of capitalist states (van Baar, Ivasiuc and Kreide, 2019). Balibar’s comments resonate even more strongly nowadays where the exclusionary practices over refugees, the never-ending economic crisis under the violent rationality of austerity, the concomitant rise of xenophobia, racism, neofascist groups and political parties, and increasing legitimation of nationalism forcing evictions, forced nomadism, racial reversibility are backgrounding the deteriorating conditions of the Roma in Europe: scapegoating, rising hate speech, crimes and stigmatization are nowadays the enduring violations they

58

The Roma in European Higher Education

are forced to face. The Council of Europe, in its Congress of Regional and Local Authorities in October 2016, argues: Roma and Traveller inclusion policies that were already affected by the financial and economic crises are now even more at risk of being demoted and losing the priority status that these inclusion policies for Europe’s largest minority enjoyed … There is a risk that political commitment [for their inclusion] … might be regarded as secondary, and Roma and Travellers discarded in the current context of rising racism and xenophobia. This risk of … persists in spite of international commitment for their inclusion. (p. 2)

The EU recognizes the deteriorating conditions of the Roma people and relates it to what it sees as the risk of losing the consensual grip of the inclusion policy agenda driven in the last twenty years (Council of Europe, 2016: 2). Nonetheless, this is precisely the insisting and defensive frame that I think deserves a wider problematization. In this EU diagnosis of the Roma actual unliveable situation, the discourse of inclusion is located outside the problematics of exclusion. Rather than being problematized and rethought, it is fixed as an approach that is immune and in opposition to the reproduction of structural exclusions and inequalities. To understand inclusion differently, and its relationship with exclusion and racism, it is important to think about the understandings, functions and interests entangled in the modes of doing ‘inclusion’ when it comes to dealing with Roma’s issues, as well as about its different and even unforeseen effects. Within this mode of analysis, much more important than embracing inclusion in the first place, is to ask how the Roma come to be inscribed in the grid of inclusion and to explore how this framing has contributed to exclusions and reinforced or left unaddressed abjection over Roma subjects (see for this analytic position Youdell 2006, 2011). It is within this set of questions that we can test the assumed place of HE to counter intense racism and neoliberalism when addressing the Roma’s exclusion. The intention of this chapter is to show some of the critical analytical rendering of this analytical thinking by locating the issue of Roma exclusion from HE in a wider web of European problematizations, and not isolate the analysis within the boundaries of HE institutions. In what follows, I, first, develop my main approach through the concepts of governmentality and biopolitics. Second, I draw on academic literature using this approach to describe racism and neoliberalism as central to the exclusionary dynamics affecting the Roma in Europe today. Then, I focus on the main discourse of inclusion of the Roma in the European HE

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

59

based on selected problematics highlighted by research, through the lenses of responsibilization and Otherness. And finally, I conclude with a brief synthesis and a modest proposal.

Approaching the European Discourse of Inclusion towards the Roma through the lenses of Governmentality and Biopolitics European inclusion policy discourses are produced in transnational government networks such as the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 and ‘The Decade of Roma Inclusion’ (2005–2015).1 Through these spaces Roma’s lives and identities have been problematized through notions of inclusion, rights, citizenship, security and development, and linked to neoliberal economic ambitions expected to be incorporated by peripheral European national states, Roma NGOs and subjects. In these intersections, knowledges, institutional frameworks and diverse proposals for transforming subjective dispositions constitute one of the important focal points to explore the experience of Roma people in Europe (see Foucault, 2010: 3). These transnational spaces condition opportunities for civil society – philanthropy, NGOs and activism – to influence policy directions regarding the Roma exclusion and oppressions. The construction of Romani lives as Europe’s problem is marked with the signature of a dangerous ambivalence. On the one hand, the European integration of the Eastern countries has opened new opportunities for voice and rights that can be channelled through the existent policy frameworks, but on the other hand, those very existent institutional moorings do not question nor change the basic diagram of violence, persecution, exploitation, expulsion and disposability. To think further on this claim, I draw on Roma governmentality scholarship that also pays attention to centre–periphery relationships. These analyses, while emerging in studies of Roma’s exclusions, have been largely ignored by research inclusion of Roma in (higher) education. Governmentality refers to the forms of authorities’ thinking and practical programmes associated with questions of how to govern diverse subjects and populations. It is deployed through specific modes of constructing and tackling problems deemed important to manage in order to An initiative where twelve peripheral European countries came together to tackle the Roma exclusion and status, and multiple corporate and non-corporate transnational governance organizations took part as funding bodies such as the World Bank, Open Society Foundation, the Council of Europe and the United Nations (UN), among others. The participant countries were Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Montenegro, Slovakia, Serbia and Spain.

1

60

The Roma in European Higher Education

achieve specific sociopolitical aims – for example, the maintenance of an identity, economic prosperity, integration and security, among others (Foucault, 2008). Linked to governmentality is the notion of ‘biopolitics’. It points out to the management of ‘life’ – its perceived dangers, excesses, lacking, capacities – as well as the management of lifestyles and modes of bio-social reproduction of different groups. This notion entails, first, that policies developed for and over different groups, mobilize meanings, values and problems towards different modes of existence. For instance, some lives can be deemed a threat to others and to the economic system, or to an imagined community like ‘Europe’, and/ or an opportunity and a contribution to economic development and political order. Second, it calls attention to the relationship between the economic and political interests, authorities and knowledges, on the one hand, and the norms, assumptions and consensus over what modalities of life and subjective dispositions to live specific forms of life are to be valued and fostered, on the other hand. And third, it questions the dominant systems of valuation – for example economic performance, human rights criteria – within which those lives are to be measured (Foucault, 2003, 2007; see also Lemke, 2011). A further two points from biopolitical logic are important for this chapter. On the one hand, the promotion of particular modes of life, for instance, through showing that the life of a Roma person is suitable and valuable for the economy as far as s/he proves to have an entrepreneurial spirit, produces also ‘other’ abject lives if they do not conform to the modes of lives fostered. On the other hand, biopolitics problematizes primarily culture and subjectivity at the expense of the overall structural dynamics of exclusion and abjection. This approach allows us to examine the limits of inclusion framing where HE policies for Roma in Europe are placed. It makes inclusion discourse thinkable within a wider web of power relations between core and peripheral countries, economic interests and other intersecting discourses problematizing the Roma within the EU. And it makes it possible to analyse HE inclusion policy in its concrete instantiation across neoliberalization and racism.

The European Strategy of Inclusion of Roma: Neoliberal Biopolitics of Racism and Securitization The taking up of ‘inclusion’ to construct policies for Roma populations in Europe was triggered by the criticism of the negative effects of the transition from socialist regimes to neoliberal capitalism on the Roma (Sigona and Trehan,

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

61

2009). Paradoxically, that criticism came from some of the most relevant transnational stakeholders in that transition, such as the World Bank (WB) and the Open Society Foundation (OSF). Arguably, they are some of the most influential agents in the promotion of development and inclusion in harmony with neoliberal capitalism, as well as in the financing and dispositioning of Roma advocacy NGOs at European level (Ivasiuc, 2014). In that context, they launched The Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–2015) programme. Then, after an upsurge of violent attacks in different countries against the Roma communities, and inspired by The Decade, the European Parliament installed in 2008 the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020. But this urgency to tackle the Roma exclusion is at odds with the defence of the already existing policy instruments deemed suitable for addressing the exclusion of the Roma (EU, 2010). The European Commission discourse was framed in optimism ‘suggesting that existing structures were fundamentally sound and, together with certain modifications, were sufficient for achieving the desired, long-term [inclusion] policy aims’ (Guy, 2009: 26). Even before the strategy of inclusion was delivered, inclusion was the keyword for other programmes aiming to include social policies for Roma such as PHARE and then the Lisbon Strategy (Guy, 2009). Those initiatives brought the issues of Roma exclusion into national politics and conduct the development of the Roma civil society and NGOs leading them to a stronger involvement in EU policies and advocacy matters. Those initiatives were and are depicted as failure, illsuited, disappointing and/or depressing attempts of tackling Roma unliveable conditions (Iusmen, 2018; Guy, 2009). The endurance of those policy frames amidst unsuccessful attempts demonstrates the centrality of the neoliberal dispositif and its embeddedness within the EU for the self-constitution of Europe. Inclusion, as it is framed in these transnational strategies, rather than being problematized, shows its recalcitrant strength in the framing of Roma lives as inclusion problems. This is the case because it is a discourse that has proved functional for the maintenance of the overall neoliberal rationality of governing that articulates what we know as the EU mode of governance as well as the very sense of its identity ongoing construction. In fact, accession to the EU for Eastern and Central European countries such as Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic was conditional on further privatizations and liberalization of strategic areas such as land, capital, trade and prices for the establishing of the financial system, as well as the privatization of energy, telecommunication, pharmaceutical industry and shipping, among others. This process helped to

62

The Roma in European Higher Education

accelerate and deepen previous Washington Consensus structural adjustment measures adopted in those countries (Appel and Orenstein, 2016). The peripheral neoliberal integration into the EU has failed to address important issues affecting the Roma population. According to the Roma Inclusion Index (2015), during the time frame of The Decade, in the Central and Eastern European countries taking part report no significant improvement, and in some cases a worsened situation in the areas of employment, education, health, housing and poverty.2 In tertiary education specifically, the gap between Roma and non-Roma population has remained the same or increased (in significant ways in some cases) in Albania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Slovakia and Romania, the exception being the Czech Republic with a slightly gap reduction.3 Alongside this, during the last years an increasing change in the mode of governmentality started to emerge in Europe. From a dominant biopolitics, understood as the power of making live and letting die (Foucault, 2003: 242–7), where the Roma living population is to be included within several competitive market fields, to a parallel one operating under the logic of letting live and making die known as necropolitics (Mbembe, 2003). This latter is evidenced in the increasing refugee extermination by European countries’ decisions and in the increasing racism and its logics of expulsion, forced mobility, violent mob attacks and hate crimes against Roma communities in countries such as Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Italy, Hungary, Slovenia, Ukraine, UK, Sweden, Romania, Serbia, among others.4 Some authors have argued that this intense racist scenario is based on a historical insistence over the construction of a European identity that composes and circulates practices and imaginaries of the Roma as a threatening other to European modern values and national interests and identities, thus framing them as an in-security and underdeveloped problem (McGarry, 2017; van Baar, Ivasiuc and Kreide, 2019). Following Balibar (2009), I pose that racism cannot be reduced to a mere prejudice. It needs to be understood as a moving and triggering chain of multiple lines of visceralities and phantasies, power and knowledge circulating in statements and visualities

See also European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2018) A persisting concern: anti-Gypsyism as a barrier to Roma inclusion. 3 Bulgaria, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia are part of the European Union. Joining members are Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia, and potential candidate for membership is Bosnia and Herzegovina. 4 See reports on violent attacks and hate crimes against the Roma in Europe made by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights at http://hatecrime.osce.org/ 2

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

63

clustering specific groups as the Others deemed outside normative patterns of conducts, active subjects of threats and passive objects of representation. Several empirical investigations underline how some policies problematize Romani people in the intersections of developmental, neoliberalization and security discourses (e.g. Ivasiuc, 2014; Timmer, 2015; Kóczé, 2019; van Baar and Vermeersch, 2017). These framings reinforce understanding of policy failures as technical and as the ‘as the result of a target population that cannot do what they need to do to help themselves’. This has helped ‘to reinforce stereotypes [about Roma populations] held by researchers, policymakers, and the general public’ (Timmer, 2015: 307). Moreover, European policies have infused inclusion and cohesion with security readings of Roma populations from the central countries of the EU (Ivasiuc, 2014). Roma issues get caught up in this centre–periphery relationship within Europe, and indicate the emerging and increasing racial biopolitical nexus between development, security and neoliberalization in EU policies towards the construction of the Roma as policy targets. All these features express a racial biopolitics that designate the regulation of populations on the basis on health, wealth, productivity and security of societies, introducing breaks into modalities of life defining what must live and what must die (Foucault, 2003: 254). This racial biopolitics problematizes Romani populations having as its priority the foster of such aims and values, and acts on them accordingly ‘through the use of ambiguous development programmes; programmes to improve the “social inclusion” of an allegedly underdeveloped, unproductive, passive or dependent population such as the Roma, for example, as classified in development discourses’ (Kóczé, 2019: 192). As van Baar et al. (2019) asserts, Roma populations are increasingly addressed in policy discourse in biopolitical terms by intervening in their ways of life and conditioning ‘support’ for Roma depending on how their lives are carried out by themselves in contrast to interventions oriented to change economic, political and material structures maintaining their exclusion (van Baar et al., 2019: 173). The point here is not to check if Roma subjects ‘are’ productive or unproductive, developed or underdeveloped, but rather to question these sacred values by exploring how do they, and their associated policies, contribute to render a ‘gaze’ that locates Roma subjects, territories and groups ultimately in the opposite site of those values. The racial biopolitics over Roma populations thus operates through culturalization (van Baar et al., 2019). That is, it positions Roma lives and exclusion as cultural problems, bypassing the structural racism that the neoliberalization process connects with security and development. Neoliberalization policies, alongside impulsing and extending market regulations, accept the given socio-

64

The Roma in European Higher Education

economic structures based on market principles, privileging the supposedly technical and neutral over the political, thus ‘de-politicizing the complex socioeconomic, political, and historical causes behind these problems’ (van Baar et al., 2019: 173–4). Neoliberal culturalization makes imperative that ‘collective representations’ of the structural causes of inequality were transformed’ and reinscribed as a ‘consequence of individual choices [where] wealth is “earned” and poverty is “deserved”’ (Tyler, 2015: 505–6). This ultimately contributes to the invisibilization of racism and when coupled with security discourses to a racial reversibility where racism against the targets of racism becomes reasonable, institutionalized, and even positions them responsible for any racist perpetration against them (Powell and van Baar, 2019: 94–6). Taking into account this complex picture, we can ask if the role given to HE within the inclusion discourse is helping to overcome and challenge structural neoliberal racism or if it is rooted in it. As far as neoliberal governmentality and racial biopolitics are intertwined through discourses of security and development, and by a culturalization of inequalities, it is also important to test HE inclusion attempts by examining the extent to which it is caught up in neoliberal and racist lines.

The European Discourse of Roma Inclusion in HE: Racialized Neoliberal Governmentality through Responsibilization and Otherness In the construction of inclusion in HE, there are multiple actors and stakeholders including central and peripheral states, corporate, philanthropic, international organizations, social movements, activists and academics and knowledges configuring the field of struggles over what can be made visible, valuable, doable and acceptable in strategies of inclusion and problematization of the Roma exclusion from HE. In this section, based on scholarly discourses of knowledge about the situation of the Roma in HE (Marc and Bercus, 2007; Miskovic and Curcic, 2016; Alexiadou, 2017; Garaz, 2014; Garaz and Torotcoi, 2017; Pantea, 2015; New, Kyuchukov and Samko, 2018; Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic, 2018; Nyírő and Durst, 2018), I analyse what we can read as the experiences of racialized and neoliberal governmentalities in relation to HE, as these discourses lay out the effects and articulation of important topologies of the European biopolitical logics described earlier. I refer centrally to (1) responsibilization for Roma exclusion and (2) Otherness as racism – or the constitution of the abject Other of Europe.

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

65

Some scholarly discourses show that the practices of inclusion of Roma in HE are sustained through responsibilization (see Pantea, 2015; HintonSmith, Danvers and Jovanovic, 2018; Nyírő and Durst, 2018). In these works, responsibilization is generally understood as the process of making subjects responsible for their own inclusion and for the structural exclusion of other Roma communities, thus transferring responsibilities for securing the right to HE from the state to individual citizens. In this sense, it is connected to culturalization as its fails to address wider structural racial inequalities and problematizes the moral duties of those upward mobile Roma HE students and professionals. REF [Roma Education Fund] supports annually a significant number of Roma students at universities; they in principle should be a resource both for the Roma community and for REF and other Roma-related institutions and offices … Engaging with Roma students who are beneficiaries of REF programs and scholarships to work with the Roma community is a priority, and it could be a future requirement for these scholarship students to serve for a given period of time in Roma communities, whether in education institutions, community centers or civil society. (Mirga, 2016: n/p)

In the context of the inclusion discourse shaping the Roma’s relationship with HE, responsibilization is reworked and extended to the field of corporate responsibility. This is deployed in the practices of moral duties coming from financial and corporate organizations such as the WB or the OSF. Responsibilization is not just about being responsible for others, yourself and being aware or committed to broader societal issues affecting Roma communities. It is a technology of governing that connects the assumptions, provocations, demands and practices of moral reflexivity and capacities of some actors interpellated by policy discourses with ideals of market governance. Responsibilization is … fundamentally premised on the construction of moral agency as the necessary ontological condition for ensuring an entrepreneurial disposition in the case of individuals and socio-moral authority in the case of institutions. (Shamir, 2008: 7)

The entrepreneurial morality of governance through institutional responsibilization enables the production of a seemingly necessary link between Roma inclusion struggles with economic growth in order to secure acceptance and support of the states (Marc and Bercus, 2007: 67). This is extended to the visions of human rights that The Decade was thought to advocate: a human right discourse in synergy with economic efficiency and responsible Roma

66

The Roma in European Higher Education

citizens, accepting forcefully neoliberal abjections of social dependency, a basic recognition for a society to be sustained. In the case of Roma inclusion in education, it is essential to ensure that arguments supporting human rights and economic efficiency are closely linked. Using only the human rights argument can be very counterproductive, especially if it generates a perception that the Roma need special rights or a special interpretation of their rights, at the same time as they are often perceived as not accepting all their obligations as citizens (Marc and Bercus, 2007: 72). But this positioning comes from the unequal forces between donors and Roma NGOs, where the first ones delineate the limits of the possible, and importantly, the possibilities of thinking inclusion and Roma rights within the boundaries and dominance of neoliberal economic governance (see Marc and Bercus, 2007: 72–3). The relationship between the Roma and HE through responsibilization is anchored in a series of tropes of the exceptional self: aspiration, motivation, interior strength and empowerment (see Ivasiuc, 2014; Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic, 2018; Nyírő and Durst, 2018). I argue that these tropes of the self are linked to forms of articulation that dissolve dichotomies between the individual and the social. What is managed is a profound misrecognition of the structural by the psychologization of the social as a motor of transformation of oppressions. It is within this operation that Roma students and professionals have reported the experience of responsibilization as a burden given the inflation of the self as role models and ambassadors (Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic, 2018: 818). This burden is tied to both the injuries of being a Roma, and to the impossible task of taking effective actions for their communities within the frameworks of racist neoliberal governmentalities. Responsibilization, as an effect of HE and inclusion policies, is a modality which holds in place HE-Roma subjects, not in places of exclusion but in places of ‘good’ debtors, and universities as benevolent creditors of elite constructions – benevolent as it does not address racism within European HE itself. Through it, racialized neoliberalization is secured, and moreover, rearticulated in its necessary legitimacy – nonetheless/because its crisis – as ‘the’ way to move forward in its pendular movements between the promise of inclusive market governing and the governing practices through venturing in crisis and disorder (Jessop, 2019). Responsibilization is also associated with a pervasive epistemic tendency in the field of knowledge production on Roma and education in Europe. Within this scholarly field the Roma are positioned as different from an imagined superior European subjectivity, and their situation is problematized as a matter of cultural

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

67

distance from education (Lauritzen and Nodeland, 2018). Thus, knowledge here tends to disembed Roma exclusion from the structural contexts of its production (Lauritzen and Nodeland, 2018).5 This cul-de-sac is based on binaried depictions of the Roma as either outcast or notable exceptions. These are categories of exclusion. They reject value to the multiplicity of Roma lives by stressing their cultural particularity as different from and/or against a supposedly hegemonic European set of values, and they highlight a normative disposition of upward mobility through HE which sustains both: effects of shame and repudiation for the social location of the Roma and a naturalization of unliveable conditions of Roma from poor and working-class backgrounds. Walkerdine (2011) argues that in a meritocratic regime stressing social mobility, the self is recognized and valued in so far as it conducts its life with a permanent entrepreneurial disposition to escape from naturalized diminished social backgrounds. An affective biopolitics here is established, surfacing primarily from the desires of developing the subjects’ potentialities to become the enterprising self. This can be thought of as the expression of a will to know and govern driven by fear and abjection over those positions deemed deviant agencies, no agencies or hidden agencies. Popkewitz (2007: 70) talks about those scientific notions such as personality, attitude, motivation and achievement, that emphasize the work of the self as a pathway of improvement and social progress, and which operate as embodied and normative ‘inscriptions about the possibilities and characteristics of who is and who is not agential’. Finally, regarding responsibilization, Ivasiuc (2014) identifies in The Decade a linked empowerment approach. She states that empowerment through HE leads to a spatial and subjective distancing from Roma ethnic groups by constructing ‘a discourse of exceptionalism around their own trajectory and affirm themselves as exceptions’ (p. 141). She links this subjectification regime with two central strategies: an individual strategy of negotiation with and fit in dominant groups which is associated with a naturalization of the negative regimes of visibility and valuation of the Roma populations, described earlier, and with a political strategy of turning exceptionality into value by positioning it as role model for ‘attempting to change the perceptions of the majority through its sheer presence’ (p. 143) (see for the origin of this strategy in Marc and Bercus, 2007). Regarding Otherness as a racial biopolitics, we can see how it operates as an affective imaginary projection of a feared and repudiated Other subjected also The authors made a systematic review of published research papers about Roma and education between 1997 and 2016 and analyse the dominant problematizations produced by this body of knowledge production.

5

68

The Roma in European Higher Education

as an object of domination and to discourses of undesirability that make the circulation of that Roma identity difficult, painful or impossible to accept. These forces play their part in the process for Roma HE graduates or students of taking up an identity and value always in relationship with the circulation of those affects and truths. As Balibar (2005) argues when theorizing racism, Otherness operates through a feedback effect projecting the figure of a reified and threatening alien individual or collective over the self that receives that identity, and thus refusing it (resisting it) by constituting it-self as the other’s other. The experience of this racial neoliberal governmentality is expressed in many of Pantea’s Roma interviewees studying in Romania’s HE. On this, she comments that their main anxiety is not as much being perceived as violating the meritocratic principles, but being perceived as ‘a Roma’. The notion of being othered is thus, instrumental in understanding the experiences of young Roma, as well as the social environment that ‘reinforces and reproduces positions of domination and subordination’. (Pantea, 2015: 907)

It is important to highlight that the operation of Otherness in governing the life of Roma subjects seems more acute than contesting the meritocratic values. Policy research agendas here tend to take at face value key categories such as meritocracy, social mobility, inclusion, leadership, competitiveness and empowerment. These categories form the contours of inclusion and have traction because they promise and entice not to alter the desired social harmonies, visions and ambitions of social order, promises that are at the same time, their very shortcomings. In this sense, Berrey (2011) argues that inclusion in affirmative actions in HE functions like a win-win category where excluded communities, middle classes and elites benefit. In this scenario, inclusion works as a dispositif able to temper debates, struggles and problematizations over power relations and their resulting structures of inequalities. Within this discourse the delineated space of struggle has been limited to reconfigure what constitutes merit in HE and the ways in which policies can make visible wider constituencies of merit, thus overcoming visions and approaches underpinning the discourse of deficit over the Roma. This is realized by showing evidence of the capacities and achievements that Roma students are capable of performing against the odds. This politics of evidence is connected with a politics of recognition as they are oriented to problematize and invert low value and stigmatizing categories over misrecognized groups hurt by the exclusionary dynamics of society and HE. This strategy can reconfigure the ‘sense of how society should apportion respect and esteem, the moral marks of membership

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

69

and belonging … [and] the status order of society’ (Fraser, 2017: 48). Yet, this framework does not change the dynamics of racial and class inequalities, leaving ‘intact the deep political-economic structures that generate injustice’, thus constantly making ‘surface reallocations again and again’ (Fraser, 1996: 45–6). In this sense, these policies aiming to improve educational opportunities for racialized and subaltern groups by leading some of them to pathways towards elite positions ‘neither challenges the hierarchy of economic [and racialized] classes under capitalism nor the hierarchy of educational institutions’ (Anderson, 2008: 164). This rationality of inclusion subscribes to the dominant strategies of government over HE and gives the elite space to further accommodate within the neoliberal and nationalistic political rationalities informing HE nowadays. It is perhaps through the dominance and opportunity given by these performative notions – inclusion, exceptions, role models, development, empowerment – as well as other technical repertories mobilized by governance bodies such as the World Bank, United Nations Development Programme, the OSF and the Council of Europe, that the Roma political elite senses its possibility of being heard and effectuating change over the living conditions of their communities. But it is also through the incorporation of these frameworks that their endeavours towards social justice have been hijacked by the racist and neoliberal biopolitics implemented at the transnational European-donors’ level. As Ivasiuc (2014: 59) points out, within the pressures coming from the EU central countries towards the peripheral EU members and candidates to undertake decisive actions for the inclusion of the Roma, the Roma civil society and elite have incorporated EU policy jargon in order to participate in the pushing for the materialization of inclusion. This becomes even more complex when making visible the elitist field of Roma activism in Eastern and Central Europe (see Sigona and Trehan, 2009; Ivasiuc, 2014). This field is intimately linked to the discourse of inclusion in HE as the construction of a representative voice and elite for Roma communities (see Marc and Bercus, 2007; Garaz, 2014; Mirga, 2016).6 This HE imaginary has been infused also by the structural necessity for professional advocacy. As such, it is an understandable strategic use of HE that may deliver institutional changes and a The REF in its web page (www.​romae​ducat​ionfu​nd.hu​/scho​larsh​ip-pr​ogram​-tert​iary-​educa​tion)​ informing about its scholarship programme in HE states:

6

The main goal of Roma Education Fund’s Scholarship Program (REF SP) is to contribute to the emergence of a critical mass of Roma, higher education graduates, confident and proud of their Roma identity, academically and socially adept, equipped with skills and competences that enable them to become professionals in their fields, as well as remain solidly connected to the Roma community and support its further advancement and inclusion into the wider society.

70

The Roma in European Higher Education

sense of much-needed leadership. Yet, I would like to problematize it also, given the fixation of HE as space for elite formation. When discourses of inclusion are put in practices emphasizing the creation of an elite as necessity and/or main advantage which can be gained from HE, the closure of democratization and just HE is at stake. Attachment to elite formation through HE is a powerful contingent discourse and force that aligns us all involved in HE matters to a hierarchical structure of rights, entitlements and capacities. Yet, elitism is always a closed, minority space sustaining its identity and structural solidarity on class-patterned reproduction, shared interests and spaces, no matter how multifarious it may be inside. Thus, when inclusion in HE is conducted towards and shaped by a desire to become elite, inclusion runs the risk of becoming a politics of exceptions. Ivasiuc (2014: 141) in this regard, states: Disconnection from the grassroots level of Roma activism can perhaps be largely imputed to the fact that the movement is essentially a middle class activism, lacking the transformative component of grassroots power shifts. Also, this explains partly why the language of the Romani movement has followed so closely the liberal paradigm and has failed to incorporate in its strategic positions the fact that the ‘biggest losers’ of the fall of socialist economies and simultaneously of the advent of the capitalist order were the Roma.

To be clear, the consensus towards inclusion and the EU’s will of not recognizing the multiplicity of communities constituting the Roma does not express an inherent vice of Roma leaders and advocates, but rather highly unequal power relations between centres and peripheries and non-Roma and Roma actors that pave the way to the reinforcing of a racialized neoliberalism (Kóczé and Trehan 2009; Ivasiuc, 2014). Here, it is all the more important to analyse the structure of interests making the epistemic and political field of inclusion. These interests can be followed in the transnational organizations and central countries’ intervention over the field of financial capitalism, structural adjustments impositions and over what they called underdeveloped European countries. Through such a political economy we can also grasp some of the structural limits of inclusion coming from and supported by those transnational governance organizations.

Final Open Remarks In this chapter, I deployed a governmentality approach through the notion of biopolitics to illuminate the wider web of relationships between racism and

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

71

neoliberalism where the discourse of inclusion of the Roma in HE is caught up. I attempted to demonstrate that the European discourse of inclusion in HE must be situated alongside the biopolitical logics of security and development. These logics position the Roma as a threat and the Other of Europe and fail to address and problematize the racist structures of exclusion by the unfolding of a culturalization strategy that holds back Roma populations and subjects from recognition, human rights and equality. I explored if HE inclusion framework was outside this racialized and neoliberal deadlock. I traced the working of inclusion through two main axes: responsibilization and Otherness. They are one of the main devices through which a racist biopolitics and neoliberalization meet for the discursive constitution of inclusion of Roma people in HE. They are located and produced within the ambiguities of multiple games: elitist politics of representation linked to HE imaginaries; the conjunction of individualizing and institutional corporate responsibilization associated with a neoliberal mode of European governance; and the unequal relations of power between central states, transnational financial organizations and the post-socialist European countries placed at the peripheries. Through operations of responsibilization and Otherness as tactics of inclusion, I made visible the salience of neoliberal moral regulations of conducts and subjectivities of HE Romani subjects associated with some burdening experiences of racialized and neoliberal governmentalities produced by the intensification and inflation of the self through the policy rendering of aspiration, motivation and empowerment. These subjectifying devices misrecognize structural racism by a psychologization and a culturalization of the social. Within these operations I identified an elitist imaginary in the inclusion discourse constituting HE-Roma relationships. To broader access and ‘voice’, I think it is central to denaturalize and destabilize the given consensual place of HE as elite-producer by recasting both, HE elitist imaginaries and inscribed abject identities of most of the Roma living at the margins of Europe, in nonhierarchical connection. Through this imagination, we can begin to envision a committed and attuned HE with the majority of Roma people’s daily struggles against European politics of racial securitization, stigmatization, development, Otherness and responsibilization. Opening HE for alliances with non-consensual struggles within and beyond the Roma institutional territories may contribute to the creation of new subaltern counterpublics (Fraser, 1990: 61–8) as they can offset exclusionary biopolitical dynamics over the Roma, and within practices of policy and HE.

72

The Roma in European Higher Education

References Alexiadou, N. (2017). ‘Equality and Education Policy in the European Union—An Example from the Case of Roma’. In Stephen Parker, Kalervo Gulson and Trevor Gale (eds), Policy and Inequality in Education. Education Policy & Social Inequality, Vol. 1, 111–31. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4039-9. Anderson, E. (2008). ‘Affirmative Action and Fraser’s Redistribution-Recognition Dilemma’. In Kevin Olson (ed.), Adding Insult to Injury: Nancy Fraser Debates Her Critics, 164–75. London and New York: Verso. Appel, H. and Orenstein, M. A. (2016). ‘Why Did Neoliberalism Triumph and Endure in the Post-Communist World?’. Comparative Politics, 48(3), 313–31. Balibar, E. (2005). ‘Difference, Otherness, Exclusion’, Parallax 11(1), 19–34. https://doi. org/10.1080/1353464052000321074. Balibar, E. (2009). ‘Forward’. In N. Sigona and N. Trehan (eds), Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilization, and the Neoliberal Order, viii–xiii. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230281165. Berrey, E. (2011). ‘Why Diversity Became Orthodox in Higher Education, and How It Changed the Meaning of Race on Campus’. Critical Sociology, 37(5), 573–96. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0896920510380069. Council of Europe. (2016). ‘The Situation of Roma and Travellers in the Context of Rising Extremism, Xenophobia and the Refugee Crisis in Europe’. Vol. 31st Session. Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. (2015). ‘Roma Inclusion Index’. Available at: https​://ww​w.rcc​.int/​romai​ntegr​ation​2020/​files​/user​/docs​/Roma​%20In​ clusi​on%20​Index​%2020​15.pd​f European Commission. (2010). ‘The 10 Common Basic Principles on Roma Inclusion’. Available at: https​://pu​blica​tions​.euro​pa.eu​/en/p​ublic​ation​-deta​il/-/​publi​catio​n/757​ 3706d​-e7c4​-4ece​-ae59​-2b36​1246a​7b0 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2018). A Persisting Concern: AntiGypsyism as a Barrier to Roma Inclusion. Available at: https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/en/​publi​ catio​n/201​8/rom​aFoucault, M. (2003). ‘Society Must Be Defended’: Lectures at the College de France, 197576, ed. Mauro Bertani and Alessandro Fontana. New York: St Martin Press. Foucault, M. (2007). Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France, 1977–78. Edited by Michel Senellart. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Foucault, M. (2008). The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978– 1979. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Foucault, M. (2010). The Government of Self and Others: Lectures at the Collège de France 1982–1983, ed. François Ewald, Alessandro Fontana and Arnold I. Davidson. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Fraser, N. (1990). ‘Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy’. Social Text, (25/26), 56–80. doi: 10.1016/j. ocecoaman.2011.01.001.

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

73

Fraser, N. (1996). ‘Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics: Redistribution, Recognition, and Participation’. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 3–67. https​:// do​i.org​/10.1​111/j​.1365​-2648​.2011​.0585​6.x. Fraser, N. (2017). ‘From Progressive Neoliberalism to Trump—and Beyond’. American Affairs, 1(4), 46–64. https​://am​erica​naffa​irsjo​urnal​.org/​2017/​11/pr​ogres​sive-​ neoli​beral​ism-t​rump-​beyon​d/. Garaz, S. and Torotcoi, S. (2017). ‘Increasing Access to Higher Education and the Reproduction of Social Inequalities: The Case of Roma University Students in Eastern and Southeastern Europe’. European Education, 49(1), 10–35. https​://do​i.org​ /10.1​080/1​05649​34.20​17.12​80334​. Garaz, S. (2014). ‘Helping the Marginalised or Supporting the Elite? Affirmative Action as a Tool for Increasing Access to Higher Education for Ethnic Roma’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 295–311. https​://do​i.org​/10.2​304/e​erj.2​014.1​ 3.3.2​95. Guy, W. (2009). ‘EU Initiatives on Roma: Limitations and Ways Forward’. In Nando Sigona and Nidhi Trehan (eds), Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilization, and the Neoliberal Order, 23–50. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E. and Jovanovic, T. (2018). ‘Roma Women’s Higher Education Participation: Whose Responsibility?’ Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–28. https​://do​i.org​/10.1​080/0​95402​53.20​16.12​74386​. Iusmen, I. (2018). ‘“Non Multa, Sed Multum”: EU Roma Policy and the Challenges of Roma Inclusion’. Journal of European Integration, 40(4), 427–41. https​://do​i.org​/10.1​ 080/0​70363​37.20​18.14​62803​. Ivasiuc, A. (2014). ‘Empowering the Roma: Lessons from the Development Practice’. National School of Political Science and Public Administration. PhD thesis, University of Bucharest. Jessop, B. (2019). ‘Ordoliberalism and Neoliberalization: Governing Through Order or Disorder’. Critical Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920519834068. Kóczé, A. (2019). ‘Illusionary Inclusion of Roma Through Intercultural Mediation’. In Huub van Baar, Ana Ivasiuc and Regina Kreide (eds), The Securitization of the Roma in Europe, 183–206. Standford, CA: Palgrave Macmillan. Kóczé, A. and Trehan, N. (2009). ‘Postcolonial Racism and Social Justice: The Struggle for the Soul of the Romani Civil Rights Movement in the “New Europe”’. In G. Huggan (ed.), Racism, Postcolonialism, Europe, 50–77. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Lauritzen, S. and Nodeland, T. (2018). ‘“What Is the Problem Represented to Be?” Two Decades of Research on Roma and Education in Europe’. Educational Research Review, 24, 148–69. https​://do​i.org​/10.1​016/j​.edur​ev.20​18.04​.002. Lemke, T. (2011). Biopolitics: An Advanced Introduction. New York and London: New York University Press. Marc, A. and Bercus, C. (2007). ‘The Roma Education Fund: A New Tool for Roma Inclusion’. European Education, 39(1), 64–80. https​://do​i.org​/10.2​753/e​ue105​6-493​ 43901​04.

74

The Roma in European Higher Education

Mbembé, A. (2003). ‘Necropolitics’. Public Culture, 15(1), 11–40. https://doi. org/10.1215/08992363-15-1-11. McGarry, A. (2017). Romaphobia: The Last Acceptable Form of Racism. London: Zed Books. Miskovic, M. and Curcic, S. (2016). ‘Beyond Inclusion: Reconsidering Policies, Curriculum, and Pedagogy for Roma Students’. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 18(2), 1–14. Mirga, A. (2016). ‘Roma Social Inclusion and Higher Education: Lessons Learned and Future Priorities’. University of Sussex, Brighton. Available at: https​://ww​w.rom​aeduc​ ation​fund.​org/r​oma-s​ocial​-incl​usion​-and-​highe​r-edu​catio​n-les​sons-​learn​ed-an​dfut​ure-p​riori​ties/​. New, W., Kyuchukov, H. and Samko, M. (2018). ‘Histories of Romani Education in Slovakia: A Kazamian Perspective’. European Education, 50(2), 185–200. https​://do​i. org​/10.1​080/1​05649​34.20​18.14​58322​. Nyírő, Z., and Durst, J. (2018). ‘Soul Work and Giving Back. Ethnic Support Groups and the Hidden Costs of Social Mobility’. Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 4(1), 88–108. https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v4i1.406. Pantea, M. C. (2015). ‘Affirmative Action in Romania’s Higher Education: Roma Students’ Perceived Meanings and Dilemmas’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(6), 896–914. https​://do​i.org​/10.1​080/0​14256​92.20​13.86​9172. Popkewitz, T. (2007). ‘Alchemies and Governing: Or, Questions About the Questions We Ask’. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(1), 64–83. https​://do​i.org​/10.1​111/ j​.1469​-5812​.2007​.0024​0.x. Powell, R. and van Baar, H. (2019). ‘The Invisibilization of Anti-Roma Racisms’. In Huub van Baar, Ana Ivasiuc and Regina Kreide (eds), The Securitization of the Roma in Europe, 91–114. Standford, CA: Palgrave Macmillan. Shamir, R. (2008). ‘The Age of Responsibilization: On Market-Embedded Morality’. Economy and Society, 37(1), 1–19. doi: 10.1080/03085140701760833. Sigona, N. and Trehan, N. (2009). ‘Introduction: Romani Politics in Neoliberal Europe’. In Nando Sigona and Nidhi Trehan (eds), Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilization, and the Neoliberal Order, 51–71. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Timmer, A. (2015). ‘Working with “Problem Populations”: Participatory Interventions for the Roma in Hungary.’ Human Organization, 72(4), 302–11. Tyler, I. (2015). ‘Classificatory Struggles: Class, Culture and Inequality in Neoliberal Times’. Sociological Review, 63(2), 493–511. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467954X.12296. Van Baar, H. and Vermeersch, P. (2017). ‘The Limits of Operational Representations: Ways of Seeing Roma Beyond the Recognition-Redistribution Paradigm’. Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 3(4), 120–39. https://doi. org/10.17356/ieejsp.v3i4.412.

The European Discourse of Inclusion Policies

75

Van Baar, H., Ivasiuc, A. and Kreide, R. (2019). ‘The European Roma and Their Securitization: Contexts, Junctures, Challenges.’ In Huub van Baar, Ana Ivasiuc and Regina Kreide (eds), The Securitization of the Roma in Europe, 1–25. Standford, CA: Palgrave Macmillan. Walkerdine, V. (2011). ‘Neoliberalism, Working-Class Subjects and Higher Education’. Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy of Social Sciences, 6(2), 255–71. https​://do​i.org​/10.1​080/2​15820​41.20​11.58​0621. Youdell, D. (2006). ‘Diversity, Inequality, and a Post-structural Politics for Education’. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 27(1), 33–42. doi: 10.1080/01596300500510252. Youdell, D. (2011). School Trouble: Identity, Power and Politics in Education. London and New York: Routledge.

4

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters) Higher Education Expansion, Roma Access and Neoliberal Globalization Spyros Themelis

Introduction Globalization is often understood through its ability to involve action at a distance, compress space and time and accelerate interdependence (Held and McGrew, 2000). Albeit this understanding has some descriptive power, it is devoid of any analytical strength as it cannot explain these self same processes (Themelis, forthcoming). In order to add conceptual ballast to globalization, we need to take two further steps: first, we need to avoid approaching it only as an ideology, as this might conceal unequal power relationships and development differentials between nation states or regions, relationships of domination that lurk therein and the existence of the imperialist chain (Poulantzas, 1975). Second, globalization needs to be understood as an historical process that takes a particular social form (Rikowski, 2002). Nowadays, this form is characterized by the expansion of capital and its dominance over labour. This totalizing social reality of capital is what we call neoliberalism or neoliberal globalization. In this chapter, I argue that higher education has been propped up as a private commodity that incurs leverage to individuals in a global game of competition. I highlight the renewed expectations associated with tertiary credentials from the point of view of the most marginalized group in Europe, namely the Roma. I focus the discussion on the EU in reshaping higher education as a means for succeeding within an increasingly competitive global environment. My analysis suggests that the EU needs to be approached as an actor in its own right who actively intervenes in the distribution of opportunities, power and wealth

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

77

between individuals and nation states. At the same time, I show that policies aimed at the widening participation of higher education generally and of Roma people more specifically are secondary to the economic and market integration priority the EU had set from its inception and has since consistently attempted to defend. I conclude by discussing some of the implications of globalization on Roma access to European higher education.

Markets versus Social Cohesion: The EU Dilemma That Never Was Arguably, we live in a world of institutions, many of which operate across borders (Sen, 1999). The rise in influence and power of international organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the OECD and the EU, has exacerbated the pressures on states to reform along neoliberal lines. In this chapter, I chart the rise of the EU in the context of receding state power over policies that aim to support Roma participation in higher education. I discuss the key role the EU plays as a promoter of Roma interests, owing to the absence of a single state to do so on behalf of the European Roma. I argue that the economic integration that is championed by the EU is an aspect of globalization. Specifically, the financial architecture that was put in place with the unification of the global financial markets in 1986 enabled the shock waves of capitalist rigidity, failure or malfunctioning in one place to be felt everywhere else in the world. This new phase of capitalism seriously eroded the relationship between corporations and their territories of origin. The weakening of this relationship led the EU to respond by channelling ‘these processes of globalization by increasing the degree of economic and financial integration’ (Dunford, 2010: 159). This type of integration is the European version of globalization, and it is evident both in the type of labour market that has been created and in the integration strategies in relation to the Roma through higher education and more generally. From its inception, the European Economic Community and, later, the European Community aimed at creating a common market for its Member States. When the EU emerged, its founding principles, namely economic and social cohesion, had become crystallized and were eventually enshrined in the Treaty on the European Union (aka the Maastricht Treaty). The latter is founded ‘on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons

78

The Roma in European Higher Education

belonging to minorities’ (European Union, 1992: 17). From this commitment, a set of policies, recommendations and communications have since flowed into the EU Member States, which seek to address the Roma situation in Europe. For example, the Council of Europe Declaration on Roma (2010) sought to galvanize the EU Member States and their governments into action on a set of issues including empowerment and access to justice, discrimination, citizenship, the rights of children and women within Roma communities as well as inclusion into employment, healthcare, housing and education. Other policy documents, such as the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Council of Europe, 1995), made more direct links between integration and education as the EU sought to create some momentum for redressing chronic discrimination and exclusion of Roma people from various key institutions, such as education. However, the Maastricht Treaty (European Union, 1992: 17) sought at the same time to ‘establish an internal market’ which was expected to ‘work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment’ (1992: 17). One of the key provisions of the Treaty is that it offers the free hand to the EU – ‘exclusive competence’ is the technical term – to shape customs union, competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market, monetary policy for the Eurozone members and common commercial policy (European Union, 1992). By contrast, in relation to the social cohesion principle of the Treaty, the EU only has ‘shared competence’ with its Member States. This means that the EU’s role in bolstering economic competitiveness is a lot stronger than its commitment to the protection of its citizens’ rights. I argue that the prioritization of economic interests at the expense of social ones is at the heart of globalization à la EU. While during Fordism the state was promoting political integration through socio-economic inclusion based on structures supported by a Keynesian welfare state, in the age of neoliberal globalization, the emphasis is on the promotion of ‘national competition states’ (Jessop, 1993). This model has necessitated a move of social policy away from redistributive concerns based on expanding welfare rights, educational and labour market opportunities within a nation state towards more costsaving concerns in an open economy. Nation states, which are now in bitter competition with each other for talent, services and goods, are more committed to international agreements, such as trade agreements, rather than national

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

79

legislation, such as equality legislation. The signing of the GATT (and later GATS) agreement is such an example. Its implications for education, such as the promotion of the marketization, privatization and deregulation agenda, are well documented but equally so naturalized, that is to say accepted as if by fiat (Rikowski, 2001; Robertson, Bonal and Dale, 2002). However, this and similar developments are not totally unproblematic. Traditionally, policies – like the promotion of social inclusion, the opening of higher education and the reduction of poverty – are implemented by nation states. Yet, they are increasingly agreed upon and shaped as a consequence of the compromise of domestic and foreign capital, which have to be treated equally. This modus operandi, though, comes with some pitfalls. Olivet and Eberhardt (2014) found that several EU countries struck by the 2008 economic crisis are in a compromising position as they are dragged to court battles by private corporations and speculative investors who strive to protect their interests against the people of such countries (which include Spain, Greece, Belgium and Spain). The EU instead of protecting its citizens seems to be ‘willing to grant corporations even more tools to rein in democracy and raid public treasuries’ (2014: 9). This calls into question the EU’s commitment to its social charter as the EU consistently shows a greater zeal to protect its corporations and banks and due ‘reluctance to support binding and enforceable rights for [its] citizens’ (Friends of the Earth, 2018: 1). Therefore, it is not hard to understand why poverty in the EU has been on the rise while European corporations’ and banks’ profitability has been steadily improving: ‘Ten years after the financial crisis, European banks appear to be in their most resilient position ever’ (Zeb, 2018: 7). In 2018 alone, they saw a sharp rise in their profits (Schildbach, 2019). Likewise, transnational corporations (TNCs) saw their share of profits as a part of global GDP rise by 30 per cent between 1980 and 2013 (Friends of the Earth, 2018). By contrast, in 2016, the risk of poverty or social exclusion affected 118 million people or 23.5 per cent of the entire EU28 population, and it was higher than it stood in 2008 (European Union, 2018). In relation to the European Roma, I have documented elsewhere (Themelis, 2016) how they have been unfavourably affected by the crisis in a manifold manner: first, through a rise in racism and anti-Gypsyism which led to increased Roma expulsions, discrimination, hostility and violence (Ferreira, 2019). Second, through a rise in social and educational exclusions as well as in a denial of their rights in housing, education, access to the labour market and health. Third, by making the Roma pay a disproportionate price for the economic downturn as in many contexts they played the role of the convenient scapegoat.

80

The Roma in European Higher Education

What is more, after the collapse of the state in the ex-socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the ability of domestic capital to implement social policies for the promotion of social inclusion and poverty reduction in these countries was hampered (Flamm, 2012). With the capitalist reintegration of this area, the Roma and other sections of the population were left without state support and the socio-economic position of the majority of Roma people deteriorated sharply. This is not to say that life for all Roma during socialism was ideal or that there were no Roma beneficiaries from the transition of these countries into the market economy system. Rather, the point I am making is that the way globalization operates is contributing to the still unacceptably high levels of poverty among Roma people in these countries. However, given the lack of a single nation state as a point of reference the onus of promoting the interests of Roma has fallen onto the EU. In the next section, I explore some implications of this development.

The New Political Economy of Higher Education: Surviving Globalization According to Lauder et al. (2006: 32–3), ‘The creation of a global market for ideas, jobs, goods, services, and capital has been made possible both as an outcome of a neo-liberal political project and because of the revolution in information technologies. The global wiring of the world’s leading economies has led to the transformation of national into global capital.’ For Jessop (1993), this transition involved the slow replacement of the Keynesian Welfare State and concomitant policies which ‘were shaped by the Fordist paradigm with its emphasis on economies of scale, big science, and productivity growth’ with what he calls the Schumpeterian Workfare State and its ‘supply-side policies [which] are oriented to permanent innovation, economies of scope, and structural competitiveness’. The emphasis now for nation states is on economic regeneration as well as on ‘how state institutions can shape regional economies to make them more competitive in the new world economy’ (Fosler, 1988: 5). The effects of this zeitgeist are also palpable in higher education in a twofold manner: first, competition is the driver of institutional and individual success and, second, qualifications are the key for the entry into the labour market and concomitant socio-economic success (Brown, Lauder and Ashton, 2010). This process creates a set of expectations that feed into individual aspirations and labour market expectations. In short, a global ‘war for talent’ (Michaels, Handfield-Jones and

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

81

Axelrod, 2001) is fashioned, which creates winners and losers, at the individual, social and institutional levels. Traditional modalities, such as centralized, free and public education, are being overtaken by new ones, whereby the private returns to education are stressed over and above public and collective ones (Blundell et al., 2000; Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 2018). This shift has led to a reduction in state participation, mainly through decreased funding, as well as through decentralization. Progressively, higher education is treated as a human capital provider (Schultz, 1971; Psacharopoulos and Woodhall, 1985) and attendant qualifications as private benefits ‘in part to provide rhetorical support for a shift from taxpayer financing to student fees’ (Marginson, 2007: 322). However, if globalization ‘has propelled higher education into open global competition between nations and individual higher education institutions as actors in their own right’ (EPRS, 2015: 23), how can we understand the expansion of higher education in Europe, more generally, and in relation to the European Roma, more specifically? The role of higher education in giving nations a competitive edge over other individuals and nations is paramount (EPRS, 2015). For example, a survey of twelve OECD countries found that ‘unemployment rates are nearly three times higher among individuals who do not have an upper secondary education (13%) than among those who have higher education (5%). Similarly, over 80% of people holding higher education degrees were employed compared with less than 60% of people with below upper secondary education’ (EPRS, 2015: 5). Furthermore, higher education qualifications are not only a good insurance against unemployment; they are also an effective lever for increasing one’s earnings: ‘On average, the relative earnings of adults holding a higher education degree are over 1.5 times that of adults with upper secondary education, while individuals without upper secondary education earn 25% less, on average, than their peers who have attained that level of education’ (EPRS, 2015: 5). Similarly, low-skilled and low-educated workers are more exposed to unemployment, and they earn lower wages than their more educated counterparts (Abrassart, 2015; Blanchflower and Freeman, 2000). In this context, the EU has developed various initiatives over the years that seek to address ‘social protection and education as well as access to goods and services, including housing … [by targeting] the coordination of Member States’ policies on education, employment and social inclusion … [in order] to provide for a framework for mutual learning and the identification of good practice’ (European Commission, 2009: 2–3). Aligned with an emphasis on education as the vehicle for employability, which we saw earlier, is paramount in the

82

The Roma in European Higher Education

successful navigation of the circuits of globalization, a significant proportion of EU money, such as from the European Social Fund, was directed to projects aimed at offering opportunities for vocational training of Roma people and enhancing employability (European Commission, 2009).1 These funds aim to promote the social inclusion of Roma people, but more often act to alleviate the negative consequences of globalization. The task of higher education, then, is a crucial one given its employability potential and its role in the global race for success. In the early 1990s, the committee of ministers of the EU Member States issued one of the first sets of recommendations to Member States and European higher education institutions to widen participation and take steps for all social groups to access higher education and complete their studies (Council of Europe, 1998). Even more drastic changes started with the Bologna Declaration (1999), which set the competitiveness of European higher education and student mobility and employability as its cornerstones. While the Declaration also acknowledged the ‘public good’ character of higher education, it is uncertain how it sought to safeguard it. The establishment, for example, of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA, 2010) sought not only to create ‘comparable, compatible and coherent systems of higher education in Europe’ (European Union, 2015) but also to set European higher education systems on a more competitive footing with universities from the rest of the world. Effectively, the EHEA paved the way for the ‘Europe of Knowledge’ agenda, which can be understood as a common market within higher education. As a result, higher education access substantially increased, even during times of economic crisis and in countries severely affected by it (Themelis, 2017). Indicatively, in the EU28 group, participation among the thirty- to thirty-four-year-old group, increased from 23.6 per cent in 2002 to 31.1 per cent in 2008 (the year the crisis started), to 40.7 per cent in 2018,2 thus exceeding the 40 per cent benchmark the EU had set.3 Interestingly, ‘educational Between 2000 and 2006 alone, €1 billion from ESF was targeted at vulnerable groups. Between, 2007 and 2013 the EU made available €26.5 billion for the improvement of the lives of vulnerable groups, including the Roma. The majority of this money (€16.8 billion) came from the European Regional Development Fund and the rest (€9.6 billion) from the European Social Fund (Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies) (European Commission, 2011). From 2014 to 2020, levels of funding were set to increase substantially (only the European Social Fund allocation was expected to reach €16 billion). However, not all of this money is allocated to Roma. 2 Compared to a participation rate of 49 per cent for the sixteen- to thirty-four-year-old group (Bohonnek et al., 2010). 3 Indubitably, this rise hides big disparities across countries, as some of them still display very low percentages of higher education participation (e.g. Romania, 24.6 per cent; Italy, 27.8 per cent; Turkey, 28.8 per cent), while others very high ones (e.g. Ireland, 56.3 per cent; Cyprus, 57.1 per cent; Lithuania, 57.6 per cent) (Eurostat, 2019). At any rate, ‘the chances of the educationally most underprivileged to graduate from Higher Education have increased over time’ (Bohonnek et al., 1

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

83

expansion has helped reducing inequity. At the European level, the chances of the educationally most underprivileged to graduate from higher education have increased over time. In the group aged 55-64 only 13% of all persons with a low educational background attained higher education. Among those aged 25-34 this share increases to 23%’ (Bohonnek et al., 2010: 46). In relation to higher education access of Roma people, the EU started taking this seriously after the new millennium. For example, the Council of Europe (2014) noted that ‘educated citizenry is a major pillar of democratic security. At the same time, it is very important that no group (minorities or other) is excluded from wider access to higher education.’ However, results have been modest given the state of education of many European Roma groups. Indicatively, Roma participation dramatically decreases after compulsory education: only 15 per cent of young Roma adults surveyed by FRA (2014) had completed upper secondary general or vocational education. In southeast Europe only 18 per cent of Roma children attend secondary school and less than 1 per cent go to university (UNDP, World Bank and European Commission, 2011). By contrast, 75 per cent of the wider school-age population are in secondary school and at least 15 per cent in higher education (with some countries showing much higher rates). While precise data are not available to allow for extensive cross-European comparisons, existing figures indicate wide cross-country variations. For example, 20 per cent of Roma in the Czech Republic complete secondary or higher education compared to 8 per cent of Roma in Romania (UNDP, World Bank and European Commission, 2011). Likewise, a survey analysis showed that the number of Roma aged fourteen to twenty years who completed upper-secondary education ranges from 23 per cent in Hungary to 7 per cent in Montenegro and 3 per cent in Albania (Brüggemann, 2012). In addition, less than 1 per cent of Roma completed higher education in a host of European countries (UNDP, World Bank and European Commission, 2011). For example, in Croatia, only 1 per cent and 0 per cent4 of twenty- to twentyfour-year-old Roma men and women, respectively, completed post-secondary education (i.e. bachelor’s, master’s or PhD), compared to 8 per cent men and 3 per cent women of non-Roma origin in the same age group. In Moldova, the respective percentages for Roma men (1 per cent) and women (1 per cent) were far lower than those for non-Roma men and women (34 per cent and 10 per 2010: 46), especially in Spain, UK and France, as well as in a host of other countries, such as Cyprus, Luxemburg, Ireland, Poland, Greece, Sweden, Austria and Denmark (Bohonnek et al., 2010). 4 0 per cent does not mean that no Roma women are in higher education; rather, that numbers are very small to allow researchers to round them up rather than down.

84

The Roma in European Higher Education

cent respectively). In the UK, it is estimated that only 3–4 per cent of people from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller background aged eighteen to thirty years access higher education as opposed to 43 per cent of non-Roma (Mulcahy et al., 2017). Various affirmative action policies and dedicated organizations, such as the Roma Education Fund (itself part of a coordinated initiative, namely The Decade of Roma Inclusion), have had some success in increasing higher education participation of Roma people. For example, in 2014, 441 tertiary education students were given scholarships, while 2,410 applied, suggesting the numbers are significant (REF, 2014). However, as a whole, the progress to date is slower for Roma people than for the wider population. In higher education, Roma students continue to experience educational disadvantage in comparison to their nonRoma counterparts (Danvers, 2015). While exceptions to the rule exist (e.g. Poland, Finland and Sweden), ‘in most Member States, similar measures are rather sporadic, mainly consisting of scholarships for talented students’ (2014: 6). Additionally, not all higher education routes are equally taken up by Roma students, as the latter tend to ‘enroll more frequently in humanities and social sciences and less frequently in science, technology, engineering or mathematics, as compared to the mainstream students’. However, ‘the higher concentration on humanities and social sciences is often correlated with weaker success in the labour market for Roma graduates’ (Alexiadou and Norberg, 2015: 13). In addition, findings from various European countries (Albert, 2000; Crawford, 2012; Osborne, 2003) show that widening participation policies tend to benefit students from higher socio-economic backgrounds more than those from lower ones. Likewise, Roma students in higher education tend to come from more privileged socio-economic backgrounds in comparison to the average Roma, though from less affluent backgrounds in comparison to non-Roma ones (Garaz, 2014). However, it is worthwhile noting that under-reporting of Roma student numbers in higher education, mainly for fear of discrimination (Mulcahy et al., 2017), is quite common and leads to a misrepresentation of their issues. This is confounded by barriers to accessing higher education, which include ‘complex, and often precarious factors structuring the under-representation of Roma students within higher education including structural disadvantage (e.g. poverty and lack of access to quality education) and social exclusion (e.g. racism and discrimination)’ (Danvers, 2015: 16). Even where participation in higher education is increased, there is no guarantee that an ‘ethnic penalty’ will not be paid in the labour market and all destinations will be equally open to Roma graduates: ‘This is particularly detrimental to Roma integration and makes a difference in the labour market

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

85

as the lack of professional skills and qualifications prevents Roma adults from accessing quality employment’ (European Commission, 2014: 6). What is more, credentials are necessary but not sufficient in themselves to secure success in the labour market. For as Brown (2013) observed ‘as opportunities for education increase, they are harder to cash in’. Furthermore, the possession of cultural capital, such as familiarity with the ethos and ‘language’ of higher education and the labour market, and the necessity of combining this with other forms of capital, such as social and economic, is paramount in successfully competing within the labour market.

Discussion Higher Education: The Trojan Horse of Globalization? As states become more concerned with ‘international competitiveness’, they redesign their higher education systems to fit their renewed priorities. This development has some profound ramifications: on the one hand, the globalized neoliberal logic entails the privatization of so-called returns to education through the reduction in funding for higher education institutions, the rise in tuition fees and other costs directly or indirectly associated with higher education. On the other hand, the global nature of capitalism incentivizes individuals’ participation into higher education as a prerequisite for their labour market and socioeconomic success. Viewed in this manner, higher education has become another product, a commodity, which is marketed to individuals and families alike. While this is consistent with the internal logic of neoliberal globalization, the increased requirement and, in some cases, pressure on higher education institutions to admit students from Roma and other under-represented backgrounds seems to make things more complicated. As Alexiadou and Norberg (2015: 12) pointed out, ‘One of the main problems with this discourse is that Higher Education policy has been assigned a central role in the improvement of European economies, with knowledge production and research activities viewed primarily (if not exclusively) as economic investment and economic assets.’ However, this comes at the cost of compromising the social and cultural role of higher education and its potential in promoting democratization, equality and equity. As a first step in explaining this trend, I framed the discourse on widening participation in higher education in the discussion of globalization. The argument I propounded is that processes of higher education expansion are part

86

The Roma in European Higher Education

of the globalization agenda. Specifically, I approached the EU as a key player in globalization and concomitant expansion of European capital. This approach allowed me to view the internationalization of skilled labour and the expansion of higher education as key levers in the global race for talent. Specifically, the EU participates in the global competition through a concerted set of strategies that involve the single market which ‘is premised on a neoliberal approach to competitiveness – [hence] creating a European-wide market through liberalization, deregulation, and internationalization’ (Jessop, 1993: 32). This framework has resulted in new models of funding for higher education, higher numbers of students as well as to the marketization of services and functions of higher education. Furthermore, the EU has become a powerful actor who coordinates ‘networks linking different levels of government in different states as well as semi-public and private agencies ranging from educational institutions, research institutes, enterprises, and banks in order to promote new technologies, technology transfer, etc.’ (Jessop, 1993: 32). At the same time, the EU has adopted ‘a neo-corporatist strategy oriented to a Social Charter that will prevent “social dumping” and thereby underpin attempts to re-skill and retrain workers in the interests of more flexible, responsible work’ (Jessop, 1993: 32). I gleaned this third aspect through access to higher education, which, instead of taking a holistic approach in relation to challenges, needs, skills, qualification, aspirations and opportunities of the various European Roma groups function as a prevention mechanism of ‘social dumping’. That is to say, while the promotion on behalf of the EU of higher education expansion policies generally and in relation to the Roma people is a step in the right direction, it is not enough to redress the inequalities and inequities incurred by globalization and fervently supported by the EU. This particular model of social inclusion and the assorted policies of higher education expansion which express it have acted primarily towards reshaping individual strategies rather than on limiting the impact of the restructuring of social and economic opportunities, which are reinforced with globalization.

Higher Education and the Individualization of Success The rise in the importance of higher education within the context of global competition has been a major contributor to the way higher education and attendant success are approached. However, one of the most pertinent questions that need to be asked is at what cost has this new normative frame of reference helped create the atomized individual who exits the ‘Roma plight’ (FRA, 2019) as

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

87

a lone fighter owing to her ability, prowess, resilience and academic competences? Has it bolstered community values, family ties and group belongingness? Some theorizations of globalization seem to converge with what Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (2006: 144) call ‘processes of individualisation’ whereby ‘a tendency to individualized lifestyles and life situations forces people –for the sake of material survival- to make themselves the centre of their own life plans and conduct’. As a process, individualization can be understood if juxtaposed to that of socialization. Historically, the former, processes of individualization, have led to a short-circuiting of social relations, collective experiences and socially produced understandings of values, beliefs and ideals (Beck and BeckGernsheim, 2006). Individualization processes consist of ‘wide-ranging social and cultural processes of erosion and evolution [which] tend to bring about a change in the social meaning and pattern of such central lifeworld structures as the family (marriage, parenthood), gender roles, community relations, labour relations and party affiliations’ (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2006: 144). In the context of globalization, ‘individualisation is a product of the labour market and manifests itself in the acquisition, proferring and application of a variety of work skills’ (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2006: 145). As noted earlier, currently, the pinnacle of labour market skills is those acquired through higher education qualifications. It is, therefore, necessary to question if higher education is the royal avenue to individualization or a mechanism for community and social cohesion. Of course, this is the case for all individuals, Roma and non-Roma alike. However, higher education expansion has been increasingly affecting the Roma people over the last twenty years. During this time, socio-economic inequalities have also increased. It is inevitable, therefore, for us to ask: If success is individualized and naturalized, are social inequalities to be subjected to the same treatment? Labour market outcomes are approached as the results of choices individuals make. The success of those individuals is measured against the outcomes of fellow-competitors for the same positions. The effect, this approach has, is to portray members of society in a decontextualized manner, as singular entities, who navigate the markets in the pursuit of the maximization of their material and personal gains. What such accounts fail to explain is a plethora of issues that relate to the focus of this chapter: the persistence of class inequalities as well as labour market discrimination, especially pronounced among the Roma (Themelis, 2013); the structural determinants of educational and labour markets success and the strengthening of socio-economic inequalities owing to the globalization of the European political economy.

88

The Roma in European Higher Education

Conclusion In this chapter, I argued that globalization is intrinsic to the functioning of neoliberalism, and I discussed some of its salient aspects. First, globalization obeys and relays the class dynamics of the current social, political and economic order. Second, it increasingly blurs the boundaries between traditional entities, such as the nation state, and new ones, such as supranational organizations. The EU was the example I used of such an organization. Third, widening participation policies in European higher education are an instantiation of globalization. Fourth, increased participation of Roma and other under-represented groups in higher education is part of the fusion of social with economic policies that underpin the EU. These observations are of some importance, so let me elaborate. Higher education expansion was purported to be a socio-economic win-win, a twin strategy aiming both at the promotion of economic competitiveness and the enhancement of social inclusion. However, the prioritization of monetary integration and the common market over social cohesion undermines the latter in favour of the former. Viewed in this light, policies of widening participation in higher education have had some profound implications. First, they have instrumentalized society’s relationship with higher education as expansion coincided with the increasing commodification of the latter. Second, they have enhanced the individualization of success at the expense of processes of socialization. Third, they have had no impact on the reduction of inequalities of access to higher education of Roma candidates in comparison to non-Roma ones. What is more, the focus on the integration of Roma into the labour market through the avenue of higher education, which is viewed as the most important precondition for social inclusion, has aborted the implementation of holistic and sustainable approaches, which are necessary when working with historically marginalized communities. More alarmingly, equality seems to be decoupled from a collective understanding of inclusion and is, instead, attached to individuals. However, measures developed as ‘ideologies of individual equality’ have proved inadequate to ensure inclusion, because they ‘bracket out the structurally determined features at the heart of the exclusionary practices’ (Agarin, 2014: 748) that many Roma face. As an example, I discussed the increase in poverty and social exclusion owing to the economic crisis and the disproportionate price many European Roma people have paid because of it. This outcome is not spurious but integral to the design of the EU. Specifically, it is the outcome of the prioritization of economic

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

89

over social interests, which is part of the EU strategy in order to navigate globalization successfully. In other words, the crisis has exacerbated the socioeconomic situation of a sizeable part of the EU citizenry and even more so of many Roma people. As I showed, the banking sector which has been integral to the creation of the crisis is steadily recovering, while the same is not evident for the most vulnerable people in Europe. Arguably, the creation of a unified economic space can be approached as an attempt to reinforce European companies, that is to say capital, onto European and global markets rather than to create a set of alternative mediation mechanisms capable of channelling wealth and opportunities in directions compatible with universal social progress and to the Roma who have remained the most marginalized social group in Europe (Dunford, 2010). This is an important tension and a cardinal shortcoming as far as the EU is concerned because it shapes the way the latter responds to crises, such as the one that started in 2008. At the same time, it shapes the EU’s social and educational policies vis-à-vis the Roma and other social groups. As globalization advances, inequalities are deepening. It is perhaps apropos that the EU shows a commitment to its citizens over and above any concern for the markets. That would require the redrawing of its founding principles so that the promotion of social cohesion would be given priority over the economic and market integration. In such a context, the pursuit of the social inclusion of the European Roma through policies of widening participation would be at the top of the EU agenda instead of the profitability of its banks and corporations.

References Abrassart, A. (2015). ‘Low-Skill Jobs or Jobs for Low-Skilled Workers? An Analysis of the Institutional Determinants of the Employment Rates of Low- Educated Workers in 19 OECD Countries, 1997–2010’. Journal of European Social Policy, 25(2), 225–41. Agarin, T. (2014). ‘Travelling Without Moving? Limits of European Governance for Romani Inclusion’. Ethnicities, 14(6), 737–55. Albert, C. (2000). ‘Higher Education Demand in Spain: The Influence of Labour Market Signals and Family Background’. Higher Education, 40(2), 147–62. Alexiadou, N. and Norberg, A. (2015). ‘Roma, Education, and Higher Education policies: The International Context & and the Case of Sweden’. Report as part of the Higher Education Internationalisation and Mobility: Inclusion, Equalities and Innovation Project. Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, Research and Innovation Staff Exchange, Horizon 2020. Grant agreement No. 643739. http://www.sussex.ac.uk/ education/cheer/researchprojects/rise/outputs. Accessed 17 April 2020.

90

The Roma in European Higher Education

Beck, U. and Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2006). ‘Beyond Status and Class’. In H. Lauder, P. Brown, J. A. Dillabough and A. H. Halsey (eds), Education, Globalization and Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Blanchflower, D. G. and Freeman, R. B. (2000). ‘The Declining Economic Status of Young Workers in OECD Countries’. In D. G. Blanchflower and R. B. Freeman (eds), Youth Employment and Joblessness in Advanced Countries. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Blundell, R., Dearden, L., Goodman, A. and Reed, H. (2000). ‘The Returns to Higher Education in Britain: Evidence from a British Cohort’. Economic Journal, 110, 82–99. Bohonnek, A., Camilleri, A. F., Griga, D., Mühleck, M., Miklavič, K. and Orr, D. (2010). ‘Evolving Diversity. An Overview of Equitable Access to HE in Europe’. Brussels: EquNet. http:​//www​.eura​she.e​u/lib​rary/​equne​t_rep​ort_1​_evol​ving-​diver​sity_​overv​ iew-p​df/. Accessed 12 July 2019. Bologna Process Committee. (1999). ‘Joint Declaration of the European Ministers of Education Convened in Bologna on 19 June 1999’. The Bologna Declaration. https:// www.eurashe.eu/library/bologna_1999_bologna-declaration-pdf/​. Brown, P. (2013). ‘Education, Opportunity and the Prospects for Social Mobility’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(5(6)), 678–700. Brown, P., Lauder, H. and Ashton, D. (2010). The Global Auction: The Broken Promises of Education, Jobs, and Incomes. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Brüggemann, C. (2012). ‘Roma Education in Comparative Perspective. Analysis of the UNDP/World Bank/EC Regional Roma Survey 2011’. Roma Inclusion Working Papers. Bratislava: United Nations Development Programme. Council of Europe. (1995). ‘Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities’, 1 February, ETS 157. Available at: https​://ww​w.ref​world​.org/​docid​/3ae6​ b3621​0.htm​l. Accessed 21 August 2019. Council of Europe [Committee of Ministers]. (1998). ‘Recommendation No. R (98) 3 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on Access to Higher Education’. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https​://rm​.coe.​int/C​oERMP​ublic​Commo​nSear​chSer​ vices​/Disp​layDC​TMCon​tent?​docum​entId​=0900​00168​04f71​25. Accessed 12 July 2019. Council of Europe. (2010). ‘Declaration on Roma’. Strasbourg. http://goo.gl/UXo0f. Accessed 18 August 2019. Council of Europe. (2014). ‘Access to Higher Education’. https​://ww​w.coe​.int/​t/dg4​/ high​eredu​catio​n/Com​plete​dActi​vitie​s/Acc​ess_E​N.asp​ Date accessed? Accessed 18 August 2019. Crawford, C. (2012). ‘Socio-Economic Gaps in HE Participation: How Have They Changed over Time?’ IFS Briefing Note BN133. https://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn133. pdf. Accessed 4 Febraury 2020. Danvers, E. (2015). ‘Supporting Roma Students in Higher Education’. Briefing. Report on Higher Education, Internationalisation and Roma in the UK [Online].

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

91

http:​//www​.suss​ex.ac​.uk/e​ducat​ion/c​heer/​resea​rchpr​oject​s/ris​e/out​puts.​ Accessed 18 August 2019. Dunford, M. (2010). 'Globalization and Theories of Regulation’. In R. P. Palan (ed.), Global Political Economy. London: Routledge. European Commission. (2009). ‘EU Platform for Roma Inclusion’. Brussels, 28 September. MEMO/09/419. Brussels: European Commission. https​://eu​ropa.​eu/ra​ pid/p​ress-​relea​se_ME​MO-09​-419_​en.ht​m. Accessed 8 August 2019. European Commission. (2011). COM(2011)73. ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’. Brussels: European Commission. https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/lega​lcon​tent/​EN/TX​T/?ur​i=cel​ex%3A​52011​DC017​3. Accessed 10 July 2019. European Commission. (2014). ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Report on the Implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (COM(2014) 209 final)’. Brussels: European Commission. Accessed 18 August 2019. European Higher Educational Area EHEA. (2010). ‘Declaration on the European Higher Education Area’. Budapest and Vienna. http:​//www​.ehea​.info​/Uplo​ad/do​ cumen​t/min​ister​ial_d​eclar​ation​s/Bud​apest​_Vien​na_De​clara​tion_​59864​0.pdf​. Accessed 20 August 2019. European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS). (2015). Higher Education in the EU Approaches, Issues and Trends. Brussels: European Parliamentary Research Service, European Union. European Union. (1992). ‘Treaty on European Union (Consolidated Version), Treaty of Maastricht’. Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/5. https​://ww​w.ref​ world​.org/​docid​/3ae6​b3921​8.htm​l. Accessed 18 August 2019. European Union. (2015). ‘The Bologna Process: Setting Up the European Higher Education Area’. https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/lega​l-con​tent/​EN/TX​T/?ur​i=LEG​ISSUM​ %3Ac1​1088.​Accessed 20 August 2019. European Union. (2018). ‘Living Conditions in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union’. https​://ec​.euro​pa.eu​/euro​stat/​docum​ents/​32174​94/90​ 79352​/KS-D​Z-18-​001-E​N-N.p​df/88​4f6fe​c-245​0-430​a-b68​d-f12​c3012​f4d0.​ Accessed 20 August 2019. Eurostat. (2019). ‘Tertiary Education Statistics’. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Tertiary_education_statistics. Accessed 6 February 2020. Ferreira, N. (2019). ‘A Roma European Crisis Road-Map: A Holistic Answer to a Complex Problem’. In T. Magazzini and S. Piemontese (eds), Constructing Roma Migrants. IMISCOE Research Series. Cham: Springer. Flamm, L. (2012). ‘The Crisis and Eurosceptism in Central and Eastern Europe’. Centre International de formation européenne (ed.), L'Europe en Formation: Revue d'études sur la construction européenne et le fédéralisme, 2(364), 305–21.

92

The Roma in European Higher Education

Fosler, R. S. (ed.) (1988). The New Economic Role of American States. New York: Oxford University Press. FRA. (2014). Roma Survey – Data in Focus. Education: the Situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Vienna: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. FRA. (2019). ‘The Plight of Roma Sees Little Change. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights’. https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/en/​publi​catio​ns-an​d-res​ource​s/inf​ograp​ hics/​pligh​t-rom​a-see​s-lit​tle-c​hange​#info​graph​ics-b​ody Date accessed? Accessed 7 July 2019. Friends of the Earth. (2018). ‘The EU’s Double Agenda on Globalisation: Corporate Rights Vs People’s Rights’. http:​//www​.foee​urope​.org/​sites​/defa​ult/f​i les/​corpo​rate_​ accou​ntabi​lity/​2018/​un_tr​eaty_​repor​t_v5_​scree​n.pdf​. Accessed 16 August 2019. Garaz, S. (2014). ‘Helping the Marginalised or Supporting the Elite? Affirmative Action as a Tool for Increasing Access to Higher Education for Ethnic Roma’. European Educational Research Journal 13(3), 295–311. Held, D. and McGrew, A. (eds). (2000). The Global Transformations Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization Debate. Malden, MA: Polity Press. Jessop, B. (1993). ‘Towards a Schumpeterian Workfare State? Preliminary Remarks on Post-Fordist Political Economy’. Studies in Political Economy, 40, 7–39. https​:// bo​bjess​op.wo​rdpre​ss.co​m/201​4/05/​06/to​wards​-a-sc​humpe​teria​n-wor​kfare​-stat​epre​limin​ary-r​emark​s-on-​post-​fordi​st-po​litic​al-ec​onomy​/. Accessed 12 June 2019. Lauder, H., Brown, P., Dillabough, J.-A. and Halsey, A. (2006). ‘Introduction: The prospects for Education: Individualization, Globalization and Social Change’. In H. Lauder, P. Brown, J. A. Dillabough and A. H. Halsey (eds), Education, Globalization and Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Marginson, S. (2007). ‘The Public/Private Divide in Higher Education: A Global Revision’. Higher Education, 53(3), 307–33. Michaels, E., Handfield-Jones, H. and Axelrod, B. (2001). The War for Talent. McKinsey & Company, Inc. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Mulcahy, E., Baars, S., Bowen-Viner, K. and Menzies, L. (2017). ‘The Underrepresentation of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Pupils in Higher Education (Research Brief)’. A Report on Barriers from Early Years to Secondary and Beyond. https​://cd​n.lkm​co.or​g/wp-​conte​nt/up​loads​/2017​/07/K​INGWI​DE_28​494_F​INAL.​ pdf. Accessed 12 June 2019. Olivet, C. and Eberhardt, P. (2014). ‘Profiting from Crisis: How Corporations and Lawyers are Scavenging Profits from Europe’s Crisis Countries’. Amsterdam and Brussels: Transnational Institute and Corporate Europe. https​://co​rpora​teeur​ope.o​ rg/si​tes/d​efaul​t/fil​es/pr​ofiti​ng-fr​om-cr​isis_​0.pdf​. Accessed 15 June 2019. Osborne, M. (2003). ‘Increasing or Widening Participation in Higher Education? A European Overview’. European Journal of Education, 38(1), 5–24. Poulantzas, N. (1975). Classes in Contemporary Capitalism. London: New Left Books. Psacharopoulos, G. and Woodhall, M. (1985). Education for Development: An Analysis of Investment Choices. Washington, DC: Oxford University Press.

Phaori si duje xulajenqe te keres buti (Nobody Can Serve Two Masters)

93

Psacharopoulos, G. and Patrinos, H. A. (2018). ‘Returns to Investment in Education: A Decennial Review of the Global Literature’. Education Economics, 26(5), 445–58. REF. (2014). Annual Report. Budapest, Hungary: Roma Education Fund. Rikowski, G. (2001). The Battle in Seattle: Its Significance for Education. London: The Tufnell Press. Rikowski, G. (2002). ‘Globalisation and Education: A Paper Prepared for the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs, Inquiry into the Global Economy’. http:​//www​.leed​s.ac.​uk/ed​ucol/​docum​ents/​00001​941.h​tm Date accessed? Accessed 2 June 2019. Robertson, S., Bonal, X. and Dale, R. (2002). ‘GATS and the Education Service Industry: The Politics of Scale and Global Territorialisation’. Comparative Education Review, 46(4), 472–96. Schildbach, J. (2019). ‘European Bank Profits Rise to Post-Crisis Peak Despite Lower Revenues in 2018 - Capital Ratios Down for the First Time’. Deutsche Bank Research. https​://ww​w.dbr​esear​ch.co​m/PRO​D/RPS​_EN-P​ROD/P​ROD00​00000​ 00048​8361/​Europ​ean_b​ank_p​rofit​s_ris​e_to_​post-​crisi​s_pea​k_des​.PDF.​ Accessed 20 August 2019. Schultz, T. W. (1971). Investment in Human Capital: The Role of Education and of Research. New York: The Free Press. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred Knopf. Themelis, S. (2013). ‘Social Class and Education in Modern Britain: Why Inequalities Persist and How We Can Explain Them’. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 11(1): 49–94. Themelis, S. (2016). ‘The Time of the Roma in Times of Crisis: Where Has European Neoliberal Capitalism Failed?’ Ethnicities, 16(3) (June), 432–51, Printed version. Themelis, S. (2017). ‘Degrees of Precariousness: The Problematic Transition into the Labour Market of Greek Higher Education Graduates’. Forum Sociologico, 31, 53–62. Themelis, S. (ed.). (forthcoming). ‘Neoliberal Globalisation’. In S. Themelis (ed.), Dangerous Words: Education, Politics and Language in Late Capitalism. New York: Peter Lang. United Nations Development Programme, World Bank and European Commission. (2011). ‘Roma Data’. http:​//www​.eura​sia.u​ndp.o​rg/co​ntent​/rbec​/en/h​ome/o​urwor​k/ sus​taina​blede​velop​ment/​devel​opmen​t-pla​nning​-and-​inclu​sive-​susta​inabl​e-gro​wth/ r​omain​-cent​ral-a​nd-so​uthea​st-eu​rope/​roma-​data.​html.​ Accessed 12 June 2019. Zeb. (2018). ‘European Banking Study. Navigating the Road Ahead – Market Trends & Strategic Options’. Münster: Germany. https​://ww​w.ebf​.eu/w​p-con​tent/​uploa​ds/20​ 18/11​/ZEB-​Europ​ean-B​ankin​g-Stu​dy-20​18.pd​f. Accessed 18 August 2019.

5

Capability Strengthening Roma as Knowledge Producers Paul Roberts

Introduction On 24 July 2019, Dr Tanja Jovanovic became the first female Serbian Roma to gain a PhD from a UK university. In order to complete her doctorate from the Centre of Higher Education and Equity Research (CHEER) at the University of Sussex, Tanja explained the prejudice and harassment she had to overcome (Times Higher Education, 2016). Furthermore, she challenged her fellow researchers to collaborate and bring Roma issues into the mainstream of higher education policy and practice. The Roma issue has to come, not just in the Roma movement, but out of the Roma movement to get into academia to get more involved, more academics to have more people in different spheres like politics diplomacy, in every sphere of the society. (Tanja Jovanovic; July 2017)

So how can we strengthen the capability of higher education to create more Roma ‘knowledge producers’ like Tanja? The need to do so is clear: health and social problems are worse in unequal societies (Wilkinson and Pickett, 2011) and the situation of the Roma has ‘been repeatedly identified as very serious in human rights and human development terms, particularly in Europe’ (UN, 2013: 1). As I look to strengthen capability, I draw on the work of Sen (1992, 1999, 2002) who defined the concept of capability as freedom for people to be and do. In the capability-based assessment of justice, individual claims are not to be assessed in terms of the resources or primary goods the persons respectively

Capability Strengthening

95

hold, but by the freedoms they actually enjoy to choose the lives that they have reason to value. (Sen, 1992: 81)

To address this challenge, in particular, requires collective countercultural action. A premise of this chapter is that Western European higher education systems, and increasingly beyond, are negatively impacted by neoliberal reason. Wendy Brown (2015) identified multiple signifiers of this reason. Brown argued that ‘all conduct is economic conduct; all spheres of existence are framed and measured by economic terms and metrics, even when those spheres are not directly monetized’ (Brown, 2015: 10), that ‘market principles frame every sphere and activity’ (Brown, 2015: 67) and that this has resulted in ‘a normative order of reason developed over three decades into a widely and deeply disseminated governing rationality’ (Brown, 2015: 9). Modern neoliberalized society encourages us to behave in an individualist way (Bowser, 2015). Foucault was prescient in his reading of Baudelaire’s modern man as being not the man who goes off to discover himself, his secrets and his hidden truth but the man who tries to invent himself. This modernity does not ‘liberate man in his own being’; it compels him to face the task of producing himself (Foucault, 1984: 42). Although Foucault’s selection of Baudelaire as the spokesman of modernity is problematic in that it is clearly gendered, the apparent desire to focus on and/ or maximize oneself appears to be impacting all gender regimes. While these desires cannot be said to be new, the concern is that these selfish reflexes have become the reflexes of an entire society (Roberts, 2014) creating a culture of narcissism (Lasch, 2001), wherein individuals are afflicted with a bottomless appetite for recognition, attention, glory and rewards (Kluger, 2014). Against this appetite, faculty and managers of higher education institutions must take on the same duty to resist as Philippe Meirieu (2007) claimed for schools. They must navigate contradictions of neoliberal reason, wherein institutions are simultaneously striving for the prestige of exceptional performance in league tables measuring Millennium Development Goals and Sustainable Development Goals yet not engaging with Roma capacity – or capability – building at a time when Roma exclusion has been at the heart of concerns about inequality in MDG implementation (UN, 2013). If we are to make a substantive difference we need to challenge the existing educational order and create a ‘counter practice’ (Biesta, 1998). The difference resistance can make is clear, for many Roma college students en route to becoming knowledge producers in their own right, ‘a non-Roma ally – peer or a teacher – helped them to persevere in the face of discrimination’ (Harvard FXB, 2018).

96

The Roma in European Higher Education

The challenge of Roma students reaching higher education is not to be underestimated. Roma communities have experienced long histories of social exclusion (Kolev et al., 2013), especially in Europe, following their migration from northern India during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Even now, only 1 per cent of Roma beat the odds to enter any university (Harvard FXB, 2018; UNDP et al., 2011), often overcoming the intersection of multiple oppressions (Crenshaw, 1991, 2003) such as ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic background and the complex relationships between them. This chapter argues that in order to build capability of the Roma as knowledge producers we must recognize that the pursuit of knowledge is intertwined with issues of power. So, how do we create a counterculture of practice to support an increase in successful female knowledge producers like Tanja? What role should the academy play in strengthening the freedom of Roma – and in particular Romani women – to organize themselves, access economic opportunities, and take part in local, regional, national and international decision-making? The need is for Roma to become recognized as knowledge producers. I argue that the award of doctorate remains the key societal signal of an individual moving from being a recipient of knowledge to a knowledge producer. Chapter B11 of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education describes doctoral degrees as ‘qualifications rooted in original research: the creation of new knowledge or originality in the application of knowledge’ (QAA, 2014), and the first Salzburg Principle states that ‘the core component of doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through original research’ (EUA, 2005). During their degrees, students undergo a metamorphosis from knowledge consumers into knowledge producers. We recognize this is a simplistic distinction, especially in contemporary academia where the moment of ‘becoming’ or ‘arriving’ as an academic is hard to pinpoint and can even feel as though it has been permanently deferred (Taylor, 2014). Nevertheless, the award of a PhD can be seen as a point of academic success and a form of arrival (Breeze and Taylor, 2018). The award of a Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie funded HEIM project (Ref: EU project 643739) to the CHEER allowed an initial exploration of the implications for the academy in embracing the challenge to develop future Roma knowledge producers. This chapter draws on ten semi-structured interviews with early stage researchers (defined by the EU Horizon 2020 programme as having less than four years research experience1) who participated in secondments funded by the project. The secondments took place from 2015 to http:​//ec.​europ​a.eu/​resea​rch/m​ariec​uriea​ction​s/abo​ut-ms​ca/qu​ick-g​uide/​index​_en.h​tm#fn​ote-1​

1

Capability Strengthening

97

2017 at the University of Sussex (UK), University of Seville (Spain), University of Umea (Sweden) and the Roma Education Fund, Budapest, Hungary. Seven of the researchers were Roma (of which three were female and four were male) and three were non-Roma (including two males and one female). At this point, it is important to acknowledge that we recognize this binary definition of Roma and non-Roma is problematic. Not least because ‘Roma’ continues to be used to account for a heterogeneous minority ethnic group with considerable debate over categorization and naming. The participants on the secondments were drawn from eight different countries (Chile, Hungary, Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Sweden and the UK) and all had spent at least one month working collaboratively in a Roma/non-Roma team. They were asked about how they had been able to transfer the knowledge that they gained on secondment to their careers, knowledge and professional development. Participants were interviewed from February to April 2018. An important feature of the secondments was that they took place between the three universities and a major NGO – Roma Education Fund – and provided rich opportunities to exchange knowledge across different sectors, countries and career stages. The main objective of the research was to understand how participation in HEIM secondments developed the skills, knowledge and capability of early stage researchers. Overall, participants found their experiences to be positive and rewarding. The HEIM Project brought together researchers and policy workers from across Europe, at different career stages to develop, transfer and exchange knowledge about how access to studying and working in an increasingly internationalized higher education sector is marked by particular exclusions for marginalized groups. The project was also seen as instrumental in developing the research capabilities required by early stage researchers, and extending their networks and resources. The secondments, in addition to enhancing professional and academic skills and knowledge also produced concrete outputs to be used in diverse contexts. For instance, the training module Internationalisation in Higher Education: Practical Guidance, which is now available in English, Spanish and Japanese, is being piloted with Departments of Human Resources, equality and diversity personnel and managers in Sussex, Seville and Japanese universities. The creation of a Facebook group to support the Roma early stage researcher community, linked to CHEER web communications now has 203 current members from countries including Kosovo, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine – all of which are linked to the REF Scholarship Programme and/or the HEIM project. The production of countrybased research reports, written collaboratively by each university’s established

98

The Roma in European Higher Education

researcher and early stage researcher teams, relate to specific national contexts and contain guidelines for good practice. The HEIM film Gypsy, Roma and Travellers’ Experiences of Higher Education in English and Spanish2 is also being used extensively with policy makers and trainee teachers in the participating countries to raise consciousness about barriers to Roma participation in higher education. A range of co-authored academic publications have also been produced across the teams and participating countries. In summary, the HEIM secondments produced academic and applied knowledge and learning tools while also developing capability, skills and knowledge. While the overall outcomes of the project were positive, the evaluation interviews were re-analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2013) six steps to identify implications for developing future Roma knowledge producers. The transcripts were read and re-read to increase familiarity; identifying in each transcript words and phrases pertinent to the research questions (Braun and Clarke, 2013; Clarke and Braun, 2017). We reviewed them for patterns within and across the interview data to identify shared themes (Clarke and Braun, 2017). The contribution of this small-scale qualitative study lies ‘not in the hope of proving anything, but rather in the hope of learning something’ (Flyvbjerg, 2006: 224). The rich qualitative data provided a number of key insights into how we can strengthen the capability of higher education to create more Roma knowledge producers. First, there is a need to recognize inequity. None of our participants spoke directly of a lack of equity during their higher education experiences. This is not unusual, since, as demonstrated by Reclaiming Adolescence, Romani youth tend to normalize and internalize discrimination (Bhabha et al., 2017). Just because things are unspoken it does not mean they don’t exist. Across Europe, almost 90 per cent of Roma are left in poverty, and 40 per cent of Romani children struggle with malnutrition and hunger (FRA, 2014). There is an ethnic penalty of being Roma, which several authors (Hancock, 2002; Achim, 2004) have demonstrated is a long-standing political, socio-economic and historical phenomenon. Rather than talk of inequity per se, our Roma participants were generous and quick to identify the benefits of being seconded to prestigious Western universities. One Roma doctoral researcher to the UK emphasized the library facilities of the university allowed access to literature, ‘which is almost unavailable here [their home institution], which I cannot achieve because it’s kind of unachievable’. To strengthen capability requires access to the resources of knowledge too often https://youtu.be/8In83QdJQzs

2

Capability Strengthening

99

limited to or horded by privileged groups. To create Roma knowledge producers means inclusion in high-ranking institutions with progressive, unbiased faculty. Being ‘unbiased’ in relation to Roma is exceptionally challenging due not just to the complexities of this heterogeneous minority, but that it is a minority beset by ‘easy narratives’. For example, in One in One Hundred (Harvard, 2018) the data clearly demonstrated that Romani parents valued education for their children. This finding is in stark contrast with dominant discourses and related policies that portray Roma parents and their Roma culture more broadly as being indifferent or even hostile to education. The challenge is that these ‘cultural incompatibility’ discourses are powerful, encompassing not just the language that is used to constitute knowledge about a particular topic but also the practices that are associated with it (Dunne, Pryor and Yates, 2005). They position and shape what and how we experience the world and we are constituted in the language of the discourse (Usher, 1996). In short, they can shape what it is possible to do and say, in this case impacting on the treatment of Roma scholars and their parents. Given this context, it is unsurprising that knowledge acquisition was highlighted by non-Roma participants who reported developing a clearer and better understanding of the situation of Roma students in higher education within a European perspective. For example, one participant explained their motives to take part in the programme: ‘It was for getting to know these problems with Romany minority and their education in the European perspective but starting with Budapest’ and that they ‘learned how difficult it is to navigate those different cultures, how important it is anyway to respect what they are doing’. The experience sensitized academics to the complexities of researching marginalized groups, as one participant observed: What I learned for example as a researcher is that it is not so easy nowadays to decide to research the voices of inner experience, the beliefs and experiences of excluded people, groups – working class, minority races or whatever.

Another participant commented on the benefits of gaining comparative knowledge: I did not come to have a totally other kind of understanding but a much more nuanced understanding of things and especially when we came back to Sweden and kind of compared what we had learned about this general European situation and Roma Decade and things like that.

In this analysis, knowledge gained in Central and Eastern Europe enabled the participant to interrogate policies and practices in their own country. They gained

100

The Roma in European Higher Education

familiarity with the policy architecture for Roma inclusion in Europe and learned about the appropriate questions to ask in Sweden. If we are seeking to produce new knowledge producers, we too must be seeking to acquire new knowledge. The secondments enabled researchers to question not just the organizations they were seconded to and from but also themselves. It allowed me to take a step back and reflect on how the issues that I was coming across might be understood in a broader context. When you are doing PhD research, you should have, you must have actually, that space and time to not feel the pressure, to as I said, to think critically for different perspective of the situation.

This reflexivity revealed things that were present and absent; they allowed participants to highlight the silences and gaps in knowledge about Roma in higher education. One participant was adamant of the importance of ‘expanding the literature, especially because the literature on Roma in higher education is very much missing’. Knowledge creation was key to all the secondments. Developing Roma voice and agency were highly valued since non-Roma researchers frequently create knowledge about Roma communities. Claiming epistemic authority and finding ways of communicating concerns without invoking ‘misery narratives’ was seen as a major part of skill development for Roma researchers: Because we are Romany researchers so it’s also quite challenging to tell our own perspective like involving current position like our experience let’s say like how we live our daily lives to involve to the research, academic life. It’s quite challenging for them because they call it suffering discourse.

The Roma participants were keen to explore co-authorship. As a result of participating in the programme, one Roma participant proudly announced they would be writing with non-Roma colleagues they had met: Now we are going to write a book with other people regarding Roma higher education.

Writing alongside Roma scholars to develop this literature is an opportunity and collaborative writing itself can be a method of inquiry in its own right (Handforth and Taylor, 2016). Such methods of inquiry are invaluable at a time when ‘the experiences of academics have somehow largely escaped critical attention’ (Gill, 2010: 229) since they require reflection on our own privilege (McIntosch, 1988; Rothenberg, 2000). Capability strengthening requires co-authorship, which is

Capability Strengthening

101

an opportunity that should be embraced. The benefits of collaboration for nonRoma participants in secondments were apparent in the transcripts: It was really an important learning curve for me, and that’s had a huge impact later on in my professional role.

Researchers who had intellectual interests in social identity were able to deepen their awareness by working in a collaborative environment where Roma identity was constantly interrogated and analysed in relation to policy and practices: I suppose I had thought about identity a lot, and the complexities of it. It gave me an opportunity to think about it again, and to a different depth, and with a different kind of example to work through.

Yet acquiring new knowledge can be challenging and new forms of knowledge can be disruptive. One Roma participant highlighted access to new forms of knowledge, ‘great resources about LGBT and queer feminisms’. Developing a repertoire of skills, strategies and resources for researching sensitive issues in hostile environments was seen as very important especially when one was a minority within a minority, for example Roma and LGBTQAI+: I’m writing about Romany LGBT issues and all of my articles are kind of censored here so I cannot publish it. Everything that I’m sending to the Hungarian scientific journals let’s say because I would like that I want publishing in Hungarian as well because I want to tell people what I’m talking about so more people will understand much more about themselves as well.

Some participants felt that there was more discursive and ontological space for social difference in universities in Western Europe. This enabled racism, homophobia, sexism and so on to be contradicted. One participant explained how the more liberal environment enabled him to challenge his colleagues: Look guys, we are now in Sussex University or whatever in the UK, which is accepting the differences, accepting the different values and they’re valuing it. You cannot be homophobic, transphobic, or whatever racist in this place.

To absorb new knowledge and ways of thinking the secondees often highlighted the benefits of networking and peer-to-peer support. One participant who had worked on the creation of the Facebook Page for Roma students explained the community-building included in his secondment task: Building this platform in order to connect different intellectuals and Roma scholars who were working in different countries, mainly from the East and Central Europe.

102

The Roma in European Higher Education

The platform was an immediate success, rapidly growing to over two hundred members. Mentorship was not only mentioned by the participants but has been also identified as a key component in the retention and success of minorities as they address occupational stressors and under-representation (Davis, 2008a, 2008b; Owens, 2004). Such mentorship, whether peer-to-peer or established Roma scholar to emergent scholar or Roma scholar to non-Roma scholar, was framed as a means of addressing some of the challenges of identity posed by doctoral research. Bourdieu (1998) highlighted the challenge of ‘double isolation’ from both origin and destination in relation to class. Cole and Omari (2003) noted the affect caused by success: emotional difficulties, such as dealing with the stress and frustration of perceived tokenism and creating a ‘hidden cost of upward mobility’ (Cole and Omari, 2003: 794). Roma students and researchers face several challenges regarding access, participation, belonging and institutional pressures of giving something back and being models for their communities (Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic, 2018; Kolev et al., 2013; McGarry, and Agarin, 2014; Mohanty, 2003). Our participants reported, in keeping with other research (Nyirõ and Durst, 2018) that supportive groups helped to manage their identity and mental well-being. It is important to be cognisant of ‘affect’, by which I mean the emotions, responses, reactions and feelings that are cultural practices and not individual psychological states (Wetherall, 2012), especially since emotional exhaustion has been identified as a key reason for doctoral students leaving academia (Devine and Hunter, 2016). Finally, the secondments raised the importance of the social. New sociopolitical, social and community experiences were seen as enriching and enjoyable. For instance, one participant reported: I saw during the Trans Pride I was there so I went with my friends and it was a really nice experience. I really loved it. Of course I went to different social events, I went on different walks like tours. I went on a walk it was really nice but then I really like in that time when we were there, there was a Trans Pride and I could go.

While this may seem of limited consequence, Peltonen et al. (2017) have demonstrated the importance of doctoral students’ social support profiles and their relationships to burnout, dropout intentions and time to candidacy.

Conclusion The HEIM secondments were a form of capability strengthening in themselves, designed to provide not only training and research experience but also new

Capability Strengthening

103

ways of understanding and knowing. They provided a useful insight into how the academy should consider capability strengthening. First, while recognizing the long-standing inequity experienced by the Roma, it is not about ‘fixing’ the Roma. We need a theory of privilege as well as a theory of disadvantage. Within the academy, including professional services staff, we should be seeking to continually develop the reflexivity to recognize bias. We must be willing to take action and not be swayed by prevalent discourses, whether it be the insipid ‘termite-like’ neoliberalization of higher education (Brown, 2015) or discourses ascribed to the Roma. If we are to commit to capability strengthening, we must be knowledge acquirers ourselves. The secondments indicated the rewards of such purposeful collaboration were significant. Despite the pleasure and academic possibilities of such collaboration, they remain subject to the ‘hyper-competitive world of higher education’ (Hey, 2004: 33) and the expectations to publish and generate income. Yet, we should be cautious about overselling the redemptive power of higher education. We have seen before how new constituencies in higher education can be conceptualized as pollutants, with accompanying anxieties about contamination (Douglas, 1966). In her analysis of contamination, Douglas (1966) talks about ‘dirt’ and that this is matter out of place. In addition, entering higher education systems wherein institutions construct academic identities via metrics and manage by numbers (Ozga, 2008) place students within a system of accounts (McGettigan, 2013) and chase after the prestige economy (Blackmore, 2015) is, in of itself, challenging. Psychosocial support is needed to produce future Roma knowledge producers. While some of this can be provided by established NGOs, such as the REF, Kóczé (2010) emphasized the importance of family and micro-community. Yet, as Nyirõ and Durst (2018) highlight, several studies have revealed negative impacts, with individuals feeling indebted to their families or communities that supported them during their higher education studies. Given this, there should be an onus on institutions receiving Roma doctoral candidates to ensure there are suitable networks at institutional level. The secondments suggested this should involve, at the least, an established system of mentoring to support Roma scholars. The supervisory relationship remains a key component of doctoral education (Lee, 2012). When considering supervision in the context of capability building it should be understood as diversity work. Work which Ahmed (2012) identifies as a phenomenological practice that produces knowledge not only about institutions but also of those institutions, knowledge that is situated and

104

The Roma in European Higher Education

contextual and that surfaces tensions between policy and practice, and between individual and institution. This provides an additional emotional labour to supervision, a practice where there is already an overarching tension between the professional and the personal which surfaces in an academic’s role as a supervisor (Lee, 2012). An ethics of care for both supervisors and students is needed and further research should be undertaken to explore what good doctoral supervision looks like for Roma scholars and their supervisors. For supervision to be truly effective, an ‘emotionally-intelligent relationship’ between supervisor and student is needed’ (Lee, 2012: 13). If all these factors are in place, there is the potential to grow the number of Roma knowledge producers with the freedom to choose lives they value.

References Achim, V. (2004). The Roma in Romanian History. Budapest: Central European University Press. Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Durham and London: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822395324. Biesta, J. J. (1998). ‘“Say You Want a Revolution…” Suggestions for the Impossible Future of Critical Pedagogy’. Educational Theory, 48(4), 499–510. Bhabha, J., Fuller, A., Matache, M., Vranješević, J., Chernoff, M. C., Spasić, B. and Ivanis, J. (2017). ‘Reclaiming Adolescence: A Roma Youth Perspective’. Harvard Educational Review, 87(2) (Summer), 186–224. Blackmore, P. (2015). Prestige in Academic Life: Excellence and Exclusion. London: Routledge. Bourdieu, P. (1998). The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Bowser, J. (2015). ‘Another Speculation? Michel Feher on Neoliberalism and Resistance’. https​://bl​ogs.n​ottin​gham.​ac.uk​/crit​icalm​oment​/2015​/07/2​2/ano​ther-​specu​latio​nmic​hel-f​eher-​on-ne​olibe​ralis​m-and​-resi​stanc​e/ Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: Sage Publications. Breeze, M. and Tayloe, Y. (2018). ‘Feminist Collaborations in Higher Education: Stretched Across Career Stages’. Gender and Education. DOI: 10.1080/09540253.2018.1471197. Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism's Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books. Clarke, V. and Braun, V. (2017). ‘Thematic Analysis’. The Journal of Positive Psychology 12 (3), 297–8. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613.

Capability Strengthening

105

Cole, E. R. and Omari, S. R. (2003). ‘Race, Class and the Dilemmas of Upward Mobility for African Americans’. Journal of Social Issues, 59(4), 785–802. Crenshaw, K. (1991). ‘Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics and Violence Against Women of Color’. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–99. Crenshaw, K. (2003). ‘Traffic at the Crossroads: Multiple Oppressions’. In R. Morgan (ed.), Sisterhood Is Forever: The Women’s Anthology for a New Millennium, 43–57. Washington, DC: Washington Square Press. Davis, D. J. (2008a). ‘Access to Academe: The Importance of Mentoring to Black Students’. The Negro Educational Review, 58(3–4), 217–31. Davis, D. J. (2008b). ‘The Mentorship of a Sharecropper’s Daughter: Being Young, Gifted, and Black in Academe’. In C. A. Mullen (ed.), The Handbook of Formal Mentoring in Higher Education: A Case Study Approach, 73–83. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon. Devine, K. and Hunter, K. (2016). ‘Doctoral Students’ Emotional Exhaustion and Intentions to Leave Academia’. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 35–61. https://doi.org/10.28945/3396 Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Dunne, M., Pryor, J. and Yates, P. (2005). Becoming a Researcher: A Research Companion for the Social Sciences. Maidenhead: Open University Press. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights [FRA]. (2014). ‘Roma Survey-Data in Focus’. Retrieved from: https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/en/​news/​2014/​educa​tion-​emplo​yment​ -and-​gende​r-rom​a-sur​vey-r​esult​s-foc​us. Accessed 29 August 2019. European Universities Association. (2005). ‘The Salzburg Principles for Doctoral Training’. Available at: https​://ww​w.eua​-cde.​org/d​ownlo​ads/p​ublic​ation​s/201​0_ eua​cde-u​niver​sitie​s-ach​ievme​nts-s​alzbu​rg-pr​incip​les.p​df Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). ‘Five Misunderstandings About Case Study Research’. Qualitative Enquiry 12 (2), 219–45. Foucault, M. (1984). ‘What Is Enlightenment?’ In Paul Rabinow (ed.) and Catherine Porter (trans.), The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books. Gill, R. (2010). ‘Breaking the Silence Hidden Injuries of Neo-Liberal Academia’. In R. Flood and R. Gill (eds), Secrecy and Silence in the Research Process: Feminist Reflections, 228–44. London: Routledge. Hancock, I. (2002). We Are the Romani People. Hatfield, UK: University of Hertfordshire Press. Handforth, R. and Taylor, C. A. (2016). ‘Doing Academic Writing Differently: A Feminist Bricolage’. Gender and Education, 28 (5), 627–43. Harvard FXB Centre for Health and Human Rights. (2018). ‘Harvard University One in One Hundred: Drivers of Success and Resilience among College-Educated Romani Adolescents in Serbia’. https​://cd​n2.sp​h.har​vard.​edu/w​p-con​tent/​uploa​ds/si​tes/1​ 14/20​18/12​/Onei​nOneH​undre​d.pdf​ Hey, V. (2004). ‘Perverse Pleasures – Identity Work and the Paradoxes of Greedy Institutions’. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 5(3), 33–43.

106

The Roma in European Higher Education

Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E. and Jovanovic, T. (2018). ‘Roma Women’s Higher Education Participation: Whose Responsibility?’ Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–28. DOI: 10.1080/09540253.2016.1274386. Jovanovic, T. (2017). ‘Speaking in “Gypsy, Roma and Travellers’ Experiences of Higher Education”’. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCSNLm_5OKY Kolev, D., Krumova, T., Pamporov, A., Radulescu, D., van der Zwaan, S. and Balcik, T. (2013). Beyond Anti-Roma Stereotypes: The World Is Not Just White and Black. Plovdiv: BuAstartalgaria. Kluger, J. (2014). The Narcissist Next Door: Understanding the Monster in Your Family, in Your Office, in Your Bed--In Your World. New York, NY: Riverhead Books/Penguin Putnam. Kóczé, A. (2010). ‘“She Who Understands the Voice of the World Must Speak It.” Roma Women on the Path of Political Success’. In M. Feischmidt (ed.), Ethnicity, DifferenceCreating Society, 208–24. Budapest: Gondolat. Lasch, C. (2001). The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. New York, NY: London: W. W. Norton. Lee, A. (2012). Successful Research Supervision: Advising Students Doing Research. Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203816844. McGarry, A. and Agarin, T. (2014). ‘Unpacking the Roma Participation Puzzle: Presence, Voice and Influence’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(12), 1972–90. McGettigan, A. (2013). The Great University Gamble: Money, Markets and the Future of Higher Education. London: Pluto Press. McIntosh, P. (1988). ‘White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondence Through Work in Women’s Studies’. Working Paper 189, 1–20. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley Center for Research on Women. Meirieu, P. (2007). Pédagogie: Le devoir de resister. Issy-les-Moulineaux: ESF éditeur. Mohanty, C. (2003). Feminism Without Borders: Decolonising Theory, Practicing Solidarity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Nyirõ, Z. and Durst, J. (2018). ‘Soul Work and Giving Back: Ethnic Support Groups and the Hidden Costs of Social Mobility. Lessons from Hungarian Roma Graduates’. Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 1, 88–108. Owens, D. L. (2004). ‘Black Women in Higher Education: Negotiation the Cultural Workplace’. In C. Y. Battle and C. M. Doswell (eds), Building Bridges for Women of Color in Higher Education, 76–90. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Ozga, J. (2008). ‘Governing Knowledge: Research Steering and Research Quality’. European Educational Research Journal, 7(3), 261–72. Peltonen, J., Vekkaila, J., Rautio, P., Haverinen, K. and Pyhältö, K. (2017). ‘Doctoral Students’ Social Support Pro- Files and Their Relationship to Burnout, Drop-Out Intentions, and Time to Candidacy’. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 157–73. https://doi.org/10.28945/3792

Capability Strengthening

107

QAA (Quality Assurance Agency). (2014). ‘Code of Practice Chapter B11. Part B: Assuring and Enhancing Academic Quality Research Degrees’. https​://ww​w.qaa​.ac. u​k/doc​s/qaa​/qual​ity-c​ode/c​hapte​r-b11​_-res​earch​-degr​ees.p​df. Accessed 29 August 2019. Roberts, P. (2014). The Impulse Society: America in the Age of Instant Gratification. New York, NY: Bloomsbury. Rothenberg, P. (2000). Invisible Privilege. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Sen, A. (1992). Inequity Re-examined. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf. Sen, A. (2002). Rationality and Freedom. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. Taylor, Y. (2014). The Entrepreneurial University: Engaging Publics, Intersecting Impacts. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Times Higher Education. (2016). ‘Higher Education Must Not Exclude Roma Communities’. https​://ww​w.tim​eshig​hered​ucati​on.co​m/blo​g/hig​her-e​ducat​ionmust-n​ot-ex​clude​-roma​-comm​uniti​es United Nations Development Group. (2013). ‘The Role of the United Nations in Advancing Roma Inclusion’. https​://eu​rope.​ohchr​.org/​Docum​ents/​Publi​catio​ns/ Ro​maInc​lusio​n.pdf​ United Nations Development Programme, World Bank and European Commission. (2011). ‘The Situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States’ [Online]. http:​//iss​uu.co​m/ und​p_in_​europ​e_cis​/docs​/_rom​a_at_​a_gla​nce_w​eb/1#​downl​oad. Usher, R. (1996). ‘A Critique of the Neglected Epistemological Assumptions of Educational Research’. In D. Scott and R. Usher (eds), Understanding Educational Research. London: Routledge. Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and Emotion: A New Social Science Understanding. London: Sage. Wilkinson, R. and Pickett, K. (2011). The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger (Revised and updated edn). New York, NY and London: Bloomsbury.

6

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education Iulius Rostas and Simona Torotcoi

Introduction This chapter aims to collect, document, scrutinize and critically analyse the current research literature on Roma in higher education (HE) and academia, and at the same time, to identify gaps and make recommendations for further research. The approach for this entailed extensive searches of comprehensive education databases such as the Educational Resources Information Center – the world’s largest educational database and the most frequently used index for carrying out educational research. Article abstracts in this database were searched for a combination of keywords related to ‘Roma’ ‘in/or/and’ ‘higher education’, ‘tertiary education’ or ‘universities’ complemented by our knowledge on studies on Roma in academia. A total of forty-two publications (empirical and theoretical) were identified for the current review.1 The chapter is divided into two sections: the first section focuses on some of the current aspects regarding the Roma in academia and knowledge production and co-production. The second section analyses the situation of the Roma in HE as learners. We argue that the position of the Roma in HE in Europe is marginal, reproducing the general position of the Roma in society in European countries. The marginal position of Roma in HE is reflected in the very low number of Roma The review considered publications in the English language, mainly from Europe. The search was not limited to specific publication periods; however, we could observe stand-alone research pieces on the topic after the year 2000. To be considered for inclusion in this review, the publications had to satisfy one main criterion: Roma in HE and academia had to be the focus of the publication. A number of exclusionary criteria were designed in order to reduce the pool of publications to the most relevant ones for the subject at hand. These criteria aimed to exclude publications that (1) were not related to Roma in HE but superficially referred to it, (2) were not in English and (3) were focused on Roma education but were very narrow in scope. First, a selection was made based on the title of the publications and their abstracts, followed by a thorough reading of the publication.

1

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

109

employed within universities, the status of Romani Studies as a field of study, the limited number of Roma students and the knowledge produced on Roma in HE. The marginal position of the Roma in HE enables the exercise of different forms of violence against Roma: from depicting and manipulating images of Roma in the same cultural register dominated by biases, oversimplifications and prejudicial representation of Roma in society and HE curriculum, to silencing of Roma scholars within academia. The chapter proceeds with a section on the Roma in academia and the current development of Romani Studies, and then goes on to a thematic analysis and a deeper engagement with a smaller number of the most pertinent texts in each of the identified themes. The final section concentrates on a discussion on the need for future research.

Roma, Academia and Knowledge (Co)Production Studies that applied scientific methods to studying the Roma (by non-Roma scholars, most of them sociologists and anthropologists) can be traced back to the seventeenth century (Mirga-Kruszelnicka, 2018; Matache, 2016; Willems, 1997). The scientific approaches portrayed, most of the times, a distorted, stereo­ typical image of Roma. The first scientific body to promote the study of Roma communities – the Gypsy Lore Society – established in 1888, has played a major role in the negative portrayal of Roma, including its scientific racism which served as a basis for the Nazi’s proposed final solution for Roma (Selling, 2018; Acton, 2016). As such, Rostas (2017) contends that academics and higher education institutions (HEIs) have played a major role in reproducing the non-identity assumption of Roma (e.g. as people without roots, lacking a territory and living in the present). Moreover, he argues that the ‘stigmatisation of Roma identity within the education systems happened through failing to include within the mainstream curricula any information on Roma history, arts and culture’ (Rostas, 2017: 761). Likewise, Mirga-Kruszelnicka (2018) claims that academia has a crucial role when it comes to maintaining and stabilizing the dominant essentialized representations of Roma. The idea is that academia ‘is inherently hierarchical and imposes scientific knowledge as authoritative and superior to other ways and spaces of knowledge-production’ (Mirga-Kruszelnicka, 2018: 13), and with few exceptions, lacksing Romani voices and a meaningful involvement of the Roma. Romani Studies have been dominated by non-Roma both in terms of knowledge production and institutions. For example, the European Academic Network on Romani Studies had no Roma in its scientific committee, while

110

The Roma in European Higher Education

the Gypsy Lore Society has only recently managed to elect a Roma within its leadership structures (Ryder, 2015). Only in the past seven years a group of Roma and non-Roma scholars started challenging the status quo by promoting an alternative discourse on Roma focusing on broader issues of identity, racism and structural discrimination, gender inequalities and social justice. The establishment in 2016 of a position of Chair of Romani Studies at the Central European University (CEU) as part of the Roma in European Society initiative has galvanized a larger group of scholars using critical social theories in their approach to Roma. They established the Critical Romani Studies journal as a platform to advance their work and are organizing an annual conference on Romani Studies which became the largest academic event in the field.2 Currently, there are five journals on Romani Studies,3 twelve Romani Studies programmes at different universities,4 including two in North America (at Harvard and Columbia) and several courses on Roma taught at universities in Central and Eastern Europe, Sweden and Finland. Among the criticisms the critical Romani Studies scholars have made was the folklorization of Romani culture, the continuing portrayal of Roma in the same cultural register dominated by biases, oversimplifications and prejudicial representation of Roma in society, and the objectification of Roma through research and knowledge production (Bogdan et al., 2018; Carmona, 2018).5 For example, until recently, antigypsyism as a specific form of racism towards the Roma has not been a widely addressed topic within academia and knowledge production institutions. However, with a growing number of critical Romani Studies scholars, a counter-narrative and a more critical reflection on the contribution of academia in fostering negative attitudes towards Roma emerged, questioning the role of academia in policy making and its responsibility for the

Some names that are part of this group of critical scholars are Ethel Brooks, Colin Clark, Angela Kocze, Andrew Ryder, Timea Junghaus, Marton Rovid, Anna Mirga-Kruszelnicka, Maria Bogdan, Katya Dunajeva, Marek Szilvasi and others. 3 Besides the Romani Studies, the renamed journal of the Gypsy Lore Society, there is Dzanipe at the Charles University in Prague, Journal of Gypsy Studies, initiated by a group of Turkish scholars, the International Journal of Roma Studies at the University of Barcelona, and the Critical Romani Studies at Central European University in Budapest. 4 The following universities have established Romani Studies programmes: the University of Bucharest Faculty of Foreign Languages, National School of Political Science and Administration in Bucharest, Romania; Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic; Sodertorn University in Stockholm, Sweden; Helsinki University, Finland; University of Szeged and University of Pecs in Hungary, University of Zagreb, Croatia; University of Nitra, Slovakia; Harvard University, Columbia University and Central European University. 5 For a comprehensive view on the criticism of Romani Studies development, one might see the ‘Roma Rights 2/2015 Nothing about us without us?’ Roma participation in knowledge production and policy making or the two issues of the Critical Romani Studies journal. 2

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

111

current difficult situation of Roma communities all over Europe (Bogdán, Ryder and Taba, 2015; Mirga-Kruszelnicka, 2015; Stenroos, 2018). Another topic of criticism of the critical Romani scholars was the relationship between the researchers and the Roma communities being researched, and the positionality of the researcher. Some studies talk about the Roma activistresearchers (Bogdán, Ryder and Taba, 2015; Ryder, 2015), the Roma ‘halfies’ or those researchers whose national or cultural identity is mixed, and move between Romani and gadje worlds (Brooks, 2015) – the relationship between Roma, most of the times not perceived as authentic scholars, and non-Roma researchers (Fremlova, 2018; Dunajeva, 2018; Mirga-Kruszelnicka, 2015), or the issue of ‘critical whiteness’ in Romani Studies (Silverman, 2018; Vajda, 2015). For example, Morley et al. (2018) explore some of the hidden narratives of migrant academics’ engagements with international mobility. Among the Roma academics – still few in number – participating in the research, mobility was from lower-income to higher-income European countries. For them international mobility was seen ‘as an epistemic as well as a social opportunity. It enabled them to create and advance knowledge of Roma issues and counter negative labelling and categorisation processes’ (Morley et al., 2018: 8). The study showed that Roma academics encountered prejudice in their academic communities: they are confronted with an attitude through which they are reminded that they need to professionalize not only on Roma Issues but also on mainstream academic topics. The more senior scholars in Romani Studies reacted to these challenges by dismissing the value of the knowledge produced by Roma as biased, and labelled it as ‘native science’ or ‘NGO science’ (Marushiakova and Popov, 2017: 202). Other scholars went even further and talked about the danger of promoting a closed society or silencing the opponents when Roma and non-Roma scholars claimed a shift in the knowledge production by using the slogan ‘nothing about us without us’ (Stewart, 2017; Matras, 2017). Experiential knowledge based on the lived experiences of oppressed groups is not considered knowledge by the adepts of ‘scientism’ as it is neither neutral nor objective. A Roma scholar sharing her or his direct experiences is often not considered a knower; rather s/he is labelled as being ‘emotional’, ‘biased’ or an ‘activist’ as opposed to a scholar/academic.6 Any challenge to the power holders, including to the gatekeepers in Romani Stewart makes a clear distinction between academics, in his view anthropologists being at top, and Romani scholars: ‘While there is enormous potential for young Romani scholars to enter the academy and make contributions to academic knowledge, we should not be too romantic about the potential of the activist contribution. Even if activist and scholar can collaborate in research, the opposition between us will never entirely disappear, probably because we are dealing with different paradigms’ (Stewart, 2017: 142).

6

112

The Roma in European Higher Education

Studies by a Roma scholar makes her/him an ‘activist’, a ‘radical’, a ‘nationalist’ or an ‘extremist’, while indeed the Roma speaks truth to power and claims justice. The use of critical social theories in analysing the situation of Roma, what we call Critical Romani Studies, is regarded by the adepts of scientism as non-scientific, not original, importing or reproducing a type of discourse that has no relevance for the Roma realities: Furthermore, the inclusion of Gypsies as co-authors of NGO-sector publications (with claims to be scientific research) is a symptom of the de-facto public recognition of the right of Gypsies to be researchers (or ‘experts’ according to the accepted NGO terminology) only by virtue of their origin and not according to their qualification. That approach is indeed an introduction into Eastern European academic research of Gypsies of the principles from the so-called ‘Native/Indigenous science’. Native/ Indigenous science is currently an expanding research field in the U.S., Canada and Australia that arose to describe the local native population, as well as the ‘aborigines’ in Australia. To participate in ‘native’ or ‘indigenous science’, one must have been born into the ethnic groups. This because the object of the study is the ethnic culture from an internal perspective that cannot be acquired by outsiders. (Marushiakova and Popov, 2011: 93)

The struggle between these positionalities in Romani Studies is a struggle for recognition but also for status and power that comes with positions within academia. In their struggle for a paradigm shift in Romani Studies, the critical scholars have challenged the positions of senior scholars and their teachings. Contesting the summer course on Romani Studies at CEU in 2012 opened the door for a deeper criticism of the curriculum at CEU. For example, in 2014 there were eight courses on the Roma taught at CEU, all by non-Roma scholars and without any critical review of the content of such courses. Such practices of exclusion of Roma in academia were seen not only as reflecting power relations but also as an exercise of the cultural domination, as students had been subjected to specific topics – poverty, education, unemployment and so on – that were presented as legitimate from an academic point of view while other topics – racism, inequalities, identity and so on – were dismissed as irrelevant. Thus, one should not be surprised that often Roma subjects in HE find themselves in these tensions between different types of knowledge and meaning provided by educational curricula, family and adult socialization. The recent developments in Romani Studies are encouraging besides institutional building through establishing Romani Studies programmes and increasing number of publications, the cross-fertilization with other fields of studies and disciplines opened the potential for a more inclusive research agenda

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

113

and for an innovative social agenda. However, considering the current state of affairs, we see the status of Romani Studies as still marginal within academia in Europe. This situation, as we have shown earlier, still facilitates the subjection of Roma to different forms of violence through the imposition of specific cultural meaning as legitimate, without bringing into discussion the power relations between social groups in the form of symbolic violence (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1990), as well as through silencing the Roma in academia, a set of practices for which Gayatri Spivak has used the concept of ‘epistemic violence’ (Spivak, 1988).

Creating Knowledge about the Roma as Learners in Higher Education Besides engaging in a discussion on knowledge production on Roma, one of the main aims of this chapter is to reflect on how the HE systems and academia research the participation of groups such as the Roma, who have not been part until recently of establishing and producing knowledge, academic structures, norms and discourses. Based on their content and focus, seven broad themes and sometimes sub-themes emerged from the identified publications on Roma in HE: access and participation, antigypsyism and academic experiences, Romani culture and identity, Romani women, resilience and success, and graduation and employability. The following sections analyse these themes.

Access and participation Most of the existent studies under the current review have been focusing on issues related to access and participation – with low percentages of access and participation as one of the topics widely referred to in most studies on Roma education. As shown in Table 6.1, within this category three main sub-themes were the most researched ones: the existing affirmative action programmes and quotas for Roma in different countries; the variety of policy approaches taken by governments, HEIs or NGOs to increase access and participation rates; and, last but not least, the factors that contributed in affecting the level of educational access and progress. As far as the first sub-theme is concerned, with the exception of Garaz’s (2014) study which looks at the characteristics of the Roma students making use of the affirmative action programmes and scholarships, all the studies reviewed the way in which the affirmative action programme have been implemented (or not) and what impact these have for increasing access. Most of the studies in

114

The Roma in European Higher Education

Table 6.1  Access and Participation Sub-theme

Author(s)

Affirmative action programmes and quotas for Roma in different countries

Bojinca et al. (2009)

Approach and focus

Explore the effects of the implementation of the affirmative action mechanisms and their impact upon beneficiaries. Cili (2013) Assesses the impact of the Albanian financial aid policies for Roma students. Idrizi (2014) Reviews how the affirmative action is implemented in the practice in Macedonia. Garaz (2014) Reveals that REF scholarship beneficiaries come from better-off environments than the mainstream Roma communities. Rakovic (2009) Presents the Serbian experience in the implementation of affirmative action for Roma students. Buţiu (2014) Explores how inclusion of Roma in Romania takes place through affirmative action in HE.

Policy Alexiadou approaches (2019) taken by governments, Cismaru, Fit higher and Gologan education (2015) institutions Friedman or NGOs and Garaz (2013) Marc and Bercus (2007)

Examines the key contexts that frame education policies and how such contexts create the necessary conditions for education transitions for Roma in Europe. Assess the extent to which governmental policies for Roma have led to an increase in Roma participation in HE. Examine how NGOs support has contributed to Roma inclusion in the societies by increasing participation and completion rates. Argue that scholarships have a strong impact on Roma school participation, but are more effective if mentoring is included and advisory services are available. Orosz (2010) Presents how the Hungarian government has resisted data gathering and monitoring of Roma students, and it has not encouraged programmes for equitable access. Yakimov (2018) Elaborates on the low level of enrolment and graduation of Roma in Bulgaria by emphasizing the state-civil society relations in the provision of education.

The factors that enhance access and progress

Gkofa (2017b)

Examines what Greek Roma who entered HE advocate for, in order to support the educational progression of the Roma in Greece. Morris, Ridge Examine the experience of one Roma student and Kirkley who has been able to progress through the (2005) Hungarian system and entered HE. Torotcoi (2013) Argues that Romanian Roma participation in HE is driven by universities, NGOs working on Roma education, including the REF.

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

115

this sub-theme have shown that the quota systems are being kept ‘low profile’, which has a serious impact not only on the outreach of the policy but also on the fields of study students can chose. Bojinca et al.’s (2009) study was one of the pioneering studies on the topic and one of the most cited. It provided an integrated view on the quota system in Romania for Roma students, including the socio-economic characteristics of the students benefiting from the programme, their academic achievement and social integration in the school system, as well as their attitudes towards contributing to the Roma communities. Essentially, this study has touched upon many of the upcoming researched topics. Nowadays, there is no comparative study which provides a deeper understanding on the different affirmative action programmes in Central Eastern Europe (CEE). The second sub-theme explores the different policy approaches taken by governments, educational institutions and NGOs in enhancing access and participation rates. A discussion without including the REF’s efforts would be incomplete. Friedman and Garaz (2013) and Marc and Bercus (2007) point out that the Romaversitas programmes and REF scholarships are some of the most efficient ways to support Roma through HE. Orosz (2010) shows the reluctance of the Hungarian government to increase Roma access, whereas Yakimov (2018) suggests that the roles, responsibilities and resources of institutions within the National Roma Integration Strategy should be revised to provide for the leading role of the state to initiate fruitful partnerships for Roma education in Bulgaria. Up to date, research which would identify what HE policies, projects, programmes or measures have been taken on board by universities, local governments, private and civil society actors and so on in order to widen access and participation among Roma students from CEE is missing. The factors that contributed to affecting the level of educational access and progress is the last sub-theme here. The rationale for these types of studies is largely driven by the low percentages of Roma in HE, with most of the studies providing recommendations on what works and what not. For example, Gkofa (2017b) reveals that supporting parenting and teacher mentoring made a significant difference for Roma students in accessing HE in Greece, whereas Torotcoi (2013) argues for that the role of policymakers, universities, scholarship providers and NGOs in shaping Romania Roma students’ aspirations and progression in HE. It is widely known that very few Roma have access and, therefore, successfully completed HE. The limited data that exists shows that there is significant gap when compared to mainstream societies. Despite different efforts across

116

The Roma in European Higher Education

countries, we can observe that Roma’s participation is still low. While scholars have been looking at the ‘cultural’, socio-economic situation of Roma families, there is little research if nothing which assesses the effectiveness and efficiency of these policies/measures, or the structural and institutional barriers Roma face in HE and academia.

Antigypsyism and Academic Experiences While the majority of research and discussion regarding antigypsyism in education is on segregation, teachers’ expectations and institutional discrimination (i.e. Rostas, 2017), research on the Roma in HE focuses on the one hand, on peers’ and teachers’ discrimination and on the other hand, on Romani students’ academic experiences (i.e. academic and social integration). Table 6.2 below illustrates some of the studies focusing on antigypsyism and Romani students academic experiences. For example, Kyuchukov and Balvín (2012) present shocking experiences as teachers in those institutions where they could witness skinhead students attacking Roma students in the dormitory, written slurs about Roma on the walls of different buildings of the university or silenced professors who did not react in the face of racism towards Roma or have themselves been racist towards Roma. Madrid (2011) explores how students and teachers perceive the treatment given by teachers to Roma students in Spain. The findings reveal that teachers admit that they practise some forms of social and racial discrimination in class. Moreover, it is shown that discrimination in universities is low because there is not much racial diversity or the perception of racial discrimination at the university level is much lower. In Greece, for example, Roma students are facing discriminatory educational experiences as they are being positioned as ‘being Roma’ and not ‘being Greek’ by their peers and teachers (Gkofa, 2016). Table 6.2  Antigypsyism and Academic Experiences Author(s)

Approach and focus

Kyuchukov and Balvín (2012)

Discuss the existent antigypsyism and discrimination in higher education in Bulgaria and Slovakia.

Madrid (2011)

Explores how students and teachers perceive the treatment given by teachers to Roma students.

Slobodnikova (2017)

Examines if stereotype threat has an influence on the academic performance of Roma in Slovakia.

Torotcoi and Pecak (2019)

Describe the antigypsyism Roma students face in the development of their higher educational aspirations and persistence.

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

117

Somewhat differently, Slobodnika’s study (2017) tests whether the threat of stereotyping has an influence on the academic performance of Roma in Slovakia and, if that is the case, how such a threat is moderated by social identification and academic self-efficacy. The findings show that there is a direct effect of stereotyping on academic performance as stereotyped participants perform significantly worse than participants under no threat of stereotyping. Similarly, Torotcoi and Pecak (2019) explored how Roma students’ progress despite the different obstacles in their pre-university educational career, and what makes them successful candidates and graduates of university studies. The findings are similar to previous studies conducted on Romani students’ experiences in Serbia (Bhabha et al., 2017). They emphasize the role of teachers, family members and friends in supporting students to persevere in the face of discrimination. To summarize, discrimination and antigypsyism are widespread practices in HEIs despite the fact that they are thought-out as the most progressive institutions considering the role they have in building new theories, presenting new research findings and so on. Universities are also places in which racism and discrimination coexist with outbreaking innovations for humanity. It is hard to believe that intellectuals – that is, the ones believed to be fighting for the human rights – participate in the oppression of others.

Romani Culture and Identity Romani culture and some of its traditions have been the source for many scholars to argue for its ‘incompatibility’ with education. As Table 6.3 shows, seven of the reviewed publications focused directly on Romani culture and identity, with Romani culture versus education as one of the most prominent sub-themes, along with mobility, identity and diversity. In analysing conflicts in HE, Bottyan (2014) identifies three main conflicts in relation to Roma students: the low value attached by the students’ community to HE, the contested meritocracy by their non-Roma peers based on affirmative action towards Roma, and ‘the cultural differences which are interpreted by some teachers as non-adequacy of the Roma students in the academic environment generating discriminative behaviour towards Roma students’ (2014: 17). Without realizing and or considering other possible causes of these conflicts, Bottyan exposes his own biased ideas regarding Romani identity, seen as the main source of the three types of conflicts he identifies. Several studies touched upon the relationship between HE and Roma identity. While some studies claim that Roma students who succeed in HE distance themselves from Romani culture and identity (i.e. Gkofa (2016) shows that for

118

The Roma in European Higher Education

Table 6.3  Romani Culture and Identity Sub-theme

Author(s)

Approach and focus

Romani culture vs education

Bottyan (2014) Brüggemann (2014) Gkofa (2017a)

Identifies conflict situations around Roma in HE. Proves that Romani cultural values are not incompatible with schooling. Challenges the idea that Roma low educational achievement is due to the Roma culture.

Mobility

Marcu (2019)

Analyses how the mobility process influences Eastern European Roma’s access to university.

Identity

Pantea (2014)

Looks into Romanian Roma students in HE and their experiences of self-identification as Roma. Examines the processes of identity negotiation involved when Roma students work out their status as ‘beneficiaries’ of affirmative action policies in an institutional environment permeated by mainstream values. Argues that access to HE should be accompanied by changes in the curricula and institutional changes to create a more inclusive environment.

Pantea (2015b)

Rostas (2017b)

Diversity

Petrova (2016)

Argues that by understanding the potential benefits for the diversity of a university’s student body which includes Roma students, one’s perspective is moved to an orientation of strength rather than one of disadvantage and deficiency.

some Greek Roma students it is easier to ‘pass’ in situations where to be Roma may pose the risk of discrimination), some other studies prove the contrary, claiming that through education Romani students strengthen their identity and develop a sense of belonging to the Roma community (especially through those programmes which have a Roma identity component or through Roma-related activities). Brüggemann (2014) argues that Romani students themselves challenge the assumption that educational success leads to cultural alienation. The study shows that Spanish Roma students’ educational success does not necessarily lead to cultural loss, rather to cultural change and reinterpretation. Similarly, Marcu (2019) reveals that Romanian and Bulgarian international Roma students (re) define their identity and utilize their skills to fight Roma discrimination. Being Roma in HE might not be an advantage. Pantea (2014, 2015a) has shown in her work – based on interviews with Roma students and graduates – that the ‘main anxiety [of Roma students] is not as much being perceived as violating

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

119

the meritocratic principles, but being perceived as “a Roma”’, emphasizing that ‘the notions of “being othered” and “otherness” is, thus, instrumental in understanding the experiences of young Roma, as well as the social environment that “reinforces and reproduces positions of domination and subordination”’ (2014: 907). Petrova (2016) emphasizes how diversity can be enhanced by having Roma within the student body, and how Roma students on the preparatory programme at CEU deal with their ethnic identity in an ethnically diverse space. While CEU is a very diverse space, issues of diversity should also cover Roma presence among the faculty.

Romani Women The topic of Roma women in HE has been a prominent research topic, especially the case of Romanian Roma women (Ilisei, 2014; Pantea 2015a). It is important to note here that several of the publications reflect the fact that knowledge on Roma in HE is shaped by the academic and political purposes of the projects which give rise to the texts. Some of them are the outcome of the HEIM project at Sussex University, which, among others, included the production of academic research on Roma in HE (i.e. Hinton-Smith and Danvers, 2016; Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic 2018); whereas other researchers like Pantea have an interest in intersectionality and HE. As shown in Table 6.4, the sub-themes identified in this category look, on the one hand, at Romani women’s access, progress and success in HE and, on the other hand, at the intersection between participation, Romani culture, gender roles and students’ identity. Based on interviews with three women of Roma, Sinti and Ashkali origin in Italy, Bolognesi (2010) identifies the paths and educational contexts that lead young Roma women to school success and professional achievement. The study concludes that educational achievements are partly based on variables such as a significant relationship with a teacher and the use of cooperative methodologies. The additional gender roles within Romani communities add an extra layer to the experiences of Romani women. Hinton-Smith and Danvers (2016) explore how discrimination, along with gendered traditional cultural values, poses particular tensions for Roma women in becoming international university students. The intersectional discrimination (where ‘gender’, ‘ethnicity’ and ‘age’ are the categories playing the biggest role) Roma women and girls face in their communities, schools or universities, is one of the main factors given for potential dropout rates.

120

The Roma in European Higher Education

Table 6.4  Romani Women Sub-theme

Author(s)

Approach and focus

Access progress Bolognesi and success (2010) Ilisei (2014)

Discusses that educational success of Roma women. Offers a clearer understanding of the interconnections between different factors in the decision-making of Romanian Roma women who seek a higher socio-economic status.

Romani culture, identity and gender roles

Explore how discrimination and gendered traditional cultural values create tensions for Roma women in becoming university students. Unpacks the contradictions between access to HE for individual self-betterment and for the wider benefit of ‘improving’ Roma communities. Studies the attitudes Roma communities hold regarding a Roma tradition and school attendance and success of Romani women. Explores how young Romanian Roma women negotiate access to university in family and community contexts shaped by gendered expectations and conflicting roles.

Hinton-Smith and Danvers (2016) Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic (2018) Kyuchukov (2011) Pantea (2015a)

Kyuchukov (2011) and Pantea (2015b) explore the potential clashes between Romani culture and tradition, and Romani women’s access and participation in HE. Based on a survey conducted among Roma boys, girls and parents throughout Bulgaria about the cultural practice among Roma to keep the girls at home in order to protect their virginity, Kyuchukov concludes that the majority of the parents would allow their girls to go to school in spite of such a tradition among some Roma subgroups. Along the same line, Pantea (2015b) shows that the decision to pursue a higher degree is based on social relationships in which young Roma women use different negotiation strategies that go from self-victimization, to assertiveness and intimidation, from resistance to compliance. Access to HE for Romani women is an opportunity to change the self through adopting attitudes towards learning, towards knowledge production, developing critical thinking, and a step to challenge the role of women in traditional societies. Moreover, Romani women students strengthen their knowledge, reconstruct their cultural and gender identities, acquire new friends and social networks and set different expectations compared to what the home community would expect.

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

121

Resilience and Success Resilience is crucial to understanding the situation of Roma in education, especially in HE. Resilience can also be seen as a neoliberal concept that places the burden on individuals rather than on wider social structures. It is often expected that students such as the Roma need to adapt to the system, embrace the inevitable danger, austerity and precarity, and that they could deal with all of the above if they have the right self-management strategies. Resilience therefore, does not put the burden on the social structures but on the individuals, who are in the position to adjust to such challenges and not in the position to challenge them. As shown in Table 6.5, five studies touched upon the issue of resilience and success. Bhabha and colleagues (2017) used participatory action-research techniques to give voice to youth, and to compare the impact of discriminatory practices in education on the Roma achievements and career opportunities. The group analysed the perception of Roma and non-Roma youth of hardships and obstacles in achieving their goals in life, equal chances, the significance of education and its importance for success in life. The qualitative and quantitative data show significant differences between Roma and non-Roma youth as regards these dimensions. The findings show that despite the fact that Roma students are resilient in the face of endemic discrimination, they become less confident as discrimination affects their life goals. While both Roma and non-Roma adolescents have the same educational aspirations, they differ considerably in their career aspirations with Roma youngsters having lower career aspirations. Curcic et al. (2018) analysed the role of the teachers in creating a community outside of educational institutions through which students, parents, teaching Table 6.5  Resilience and Success Author(s)

Approach and focus

Bhabha et al. (2017)

Investigates the educational hardships of Roma youth by comparing their experiences with their non-Roma peers.

Curcic et al. (2018)

Examines some of the processes that took place in assisting Roma students pursue HE in Croatia.

Gkofa (2016)

Elicits Romani students’ experiences and their accounts of what contributed to their educational success.

Kende (2007)

Examines what made it possible for Roma students to overcome marginalization and social exclusion.

Padilla-Carmona, Emphasizes the successful trajectories of Roma in the González-Monteagudo university settings by questioning the widely extended and Soria-Vílchez idea of Roma culture as opposed to education. (2017)

122

The Roma in European Higher Education

assistants, and additional support from different donors could contribute to success in education As this study shows, for a successful programme, teachers engaged in examining their own cultural heritage and biases, reached out to Roma parents by visiting the community, and hired Roma teaching assistants. Gkofa investigated the perceptions and experiences of twenty Roma adults concerning their educational success in Greece (2017b). Gkofa sustains that class position had a higher impact on the education trajectories of her subjects than their ethnic belonging (2017b: 266). However, she did mention that ethnic belonging has the potential to create a disadvantage when coupled with poverty. Padilla-Carmona, González-Monteagudo and Soria-Vilchez, (2017) used biographical-narrative interviews to track the educational trajectories of six Roma at the University of Seville with a focus on (1) family background, (2) school experiences, (3) construction of identity and (4) experiences in HE. The findings show that for participants who attended non-segregated schools, their acceptance was based on similarity with their peers rather than on difference. Likewise, in analysing the difficulties of Roma youth in HE in Hungary, Kende identified three main issues: (1) difficulties of the firstgeneration intellectuals, (2) experience of discrimination and prejudice, and (3) belonging and identification as Roma and as intellectuals. Kende shows that even those students from better positioned families (in socio-economic terms) understand social exclusion in terms of prejudice and threatened identity. The lived experiences of Roma in HE is a topic for extensive research in order to understand the processes they are subject to, the mechanisms at place and the consequences these have on students’ experiences and their post graduation paths assimilation and traumas Roma are suffering within the system and how to reform the HE system.

Graduation and Employability While affirmative action programmes or quotas – as a tool for addressing past injustices and current inequalities – are the most known practices regarding Roma students’ progression towards HE, their effectiveness or students’ progress and/or tracking in these programmes remain unexplored areas. Despite increasing access to HE, there are different ways in which social privileges can be maintained and reproduced inside HE under conditions in which degrees become increasingly accessible. The choice of specific fields of study or universities is one way in which students with socio-economically

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

123

Table 6.6  Graduation and Employability Author(s)

Approach and focus

Cekota and Trentini (2015)

Investigates the educational attainment, employment and living conditions of young Roma adults in Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania.

Garaz and Torotcoi (2017)

Analyses whether the choice of field of study and Roma students’ chances of employability may be one of the elements through which elitist elements are preserved within an expanding HE.

Katz (2005)

Documents Roma graduates’ reflections on their experiences while attending a Roma only high school, but also their experiences during university and work workforce.

Lukács and Dávid (2016)

Describes the personal networks of Roma students in the process of college transition.

privileged backgrounds differentiate themselves from other university students, considering that different specializations may have different employability prospects upon graduation (Garaz and Torotcoi, 2017). Garaz and Torotcoi (2017) show that Roma students from CEE are over-represented in humanities and arts – the least competitive on the job market – and are significantly underrepresented in engineering, manufacturing, and construction – the most employable fields of study. Similarly, Cekota and Trentini (2015) show that despite the low increase in educational attainment for Roma, the employment gap has increased. Lukács and Dávid (2016) propose a causal mechanism through which Romani students’ employment chances could be increased: students’ personal networks or social capital. The authors analyse the Roma students’ networks at special colleges of religious denomination aiming to provide assistance and mentoring during their studies. Lukács and Dávid argue that personal networks become unstable in the process of college transition, and such networks provide different type of resources, including academic support in the adjustment process. They argued that for being successful minority students bonding and bridging ties have an equally important role in the successful college transition of students. This means that on the one hand Roma students have to ‘reinterpret their earlier bonding ties which had provided emotional stability; and on the other hand, they need to establish a considerable number of new bridging ties in the university environment’ (Lukács and Dávid, 2016: 77). In light of their findings, Lukács and Dávid concluded that the original goal of the special

124

The Roma in European Higher Education

religious denomination colleges to attain a double Roma-Hungarian identity for students should be reconsidered.

Conclusion The reviewed literature on Roma in HE, although scattered, provides the reader with an image of the challenges Roma face as students and academics. Most of these writings were part of projects looking at the Roma in education (i.e. the HEIM project at Sussex University, PhD dissertations). Thus, the knowledge about the Roma in HE is shaped by the academic and political purposes of the projects which give rise to the texts. There is a need for comprehensive research documenting Roma experiences in HE that goes beyond the mere limited scope of an intervention of the project and focuses on the lived experiences of Roma, including countering racism, sexism, patriarchy, class discrimination and other forms of oppression. We reflected on the recent developments in Romani Studies, pinpointing the institutional building processes, the struggles for recognition and power dynamics in academia and the positionality of critical and more established scholars in the field. In spite of the recent developments, more needs to be done with regard to the institutionalization of Romani Studies programmes at different universities, courses taught, including in Western European universities, and the knowledge produced on Roma in HE. The current marginal position of the Roma in HE enables the exercise of different forms of violence on Roma: from depicting and manipulating images of Roma in the same cultural register dominated by biases, oversimplifications and prejudicial representation of Roma in society and HE curriculum to silencing of Roma scholars within academia.

References Acton, T. A. (2016). ‘Scientific Racism, Popular Racism and the Discourse of the Gypsy Lore Society’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39 (7), 1187–204. Alexiadou, N. (2019). ‘Framing Education Policies and Transitions of Roma Students in Europe’. Comparative Education, 55(3), 422–42. Bhabha, J., Fuller, A., Matache, M., Vranjesevic, J., Chernoff, M., Spasic, B. and Ivanis, J. (2017). ‘Reclaiming Adolescence: A Roma Youth Perspective’. Harvard Educational Review, 87(2), 186–224.

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

125

Bogdán, M., Ryder, A. and Taba, M. (2015). ‘The Roma Spring: Knowledge Production and the Search for a New Humanity’. Roma Rights: Journal of European Roma Rights Centre, 20(2), 33–8. Bogdan, M., Dunajeva, J., Junghaus, T., Kóczé, A., Rostas, I., Rövid, M., and Szilvasi, M. (2018). ‘Introducing the New Journal Critical Romani Studies’. Critical Romani Studies 1 (1), 2–7. Bojinca, M., Munteanu, D., Toth, A., Surdu, M. and Szira, J. (2009). Analysis of the Impact of Affirmative Action for Roma in High Schools, Vocational Schools and Universities. Budapest: Roma Education Fund & Gallup. Bolognesi, I. (2010). ‘School Success and Professional Achievement of Three Women of Serbian‐Rom, Italian‐Sinti and Albanian‐Ashkali Origin’. Intercultural Education, 21(5), 443–7. Bottyan, Z. (2014). ‘Social Conflict in Higher Education: Theoretical Considerations. Study Case of Roma Students in the University of Oradea – A Qualitative Analysis’. Philosophy & Social Work, (13), 5–18. Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (2nd edn). London: Sage. Brooks, E. (2015). ‘The Importance of Feminists and “Halfies” in Romani Studies: New Epistemological Possibilities’. Roma Rights: Journal of European Roma Rights Centre, 20(2), 57–62. Brüggemann, C. (2014). ‘Romani Culture and Academic Success: Arguments Against the Belief in a Contradiction’. Intercultural Education, 25(6), 439–52. Buţiu, C. A. (2014). ‘Roma Social Inclusion Through Higher Education’. Journal of Linguistic Intercultural Education, (7), 55–68. Carmona, S. (2018). ‘Decolonizing the Arts’. Critical Romani Studies, 1(2), 144–67. Cekota, J. and Trentini, C. (2015). ‘The Educational Achievement and Employment of Young Roma in Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania: Increasing Gaps and Policy Challenges’. Europe-Asia Studies, 67(4), 540–78. Cili, O. (2013). ‘Scholarships for Roma Students in Albania: A Public Policy Matter’. MA, Central European University. Available at: http:​//www​.etd.​ceu.h​u/201​3/cil​i_ ole​sja.p​df. Accessed 3 August 2019. Cismaru, D. M., Fiţ, C. and Gologan, D. (2015). ‘Premises of Inclusive Access and Success of Roma People in the Romanian Higher Education’. In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi and P. Scott (eds), The European Higher Education Area Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies, 521–38. London: Springer. Curcic, S., Goran, L., Susec, B. and Ignac, B. (2018). ‘From Past Aspirations to Present Achievements: A Case Study of Three K-8 Schools Successfully Educating Roma Students’. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 20(2), 24–41. Dunajeva, J. (2018). ‘Power Hierarchies Between the Researcher and Informants’. Critical Romani Studies, 1(2), 124–43. Fremlova, L. (2018). ‘Non-Romani Researcher Positionality and Reflexivity’. Critical Romani Studies, 1(2), 98–123.

126

The Roma in European Higher Education

Friedman, E. and Garaz, S. (2013). ‘Support for Roma in Tertiary Education and Social Cohesion’. In M. Miskovic (ed.), Roma Education in Europe Practices, Policies. New York: Routledge. Garaz, S. (2014). ‘Helping the Marginalised or Supporting the Elite? Affirmative Action as a Tool for Increasing Access to Higher Education for Ethnic Roma’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 295–311. Garaz, S. and Torotcoi, S. (2017). ‘Increasing Access to Higher Education and the Reproduction of Social Inequalities: The Case of Roma University Students in Eastern and Southeastern Europe’. European Education, 49(1), 10–35. Gkofa, P. (2016). ‘Greek Roma in Higher Education a Qualitative Investigation of Educational Success’. PhD, King’s College London. Available at: https​://kc​lpure​.kcl.​ac.uk​/port​al/fi​les/ 5​16192​14/20​16_Gk​ofa_P​anagi​ota_1​22336​3_eth​esis.​pdf. Accessed 3 August 2019. Gkofa, P. (2017a). ‘Being Roma – Being Greek: Academically Successful Greek Romas’ Identity Constructions’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(5), 624–35. Gkofa, P. (2017b). ‘Promoting Social Justice and Enhancing Educational Success: Suggestions from Twenty Educationally Successful Roma in Greece’. The Urban Review, 49(3), 443–62. Hinton-Smith, T. and Danvers, E. (2016). ‘Exploring Identity and Belonging for Roma Women Students in International Higher Education’. In L. Morley (ed.), The Europa World of Learning 2017: Gender and Access to and Participation in Higher Education, 12–18. London: Routledge. Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E., and Jovanovic, T. (2018). ‘Roma Women’s Higher Education Participation: Whose Responsibility?’ Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–28. Idrizi, M. (2014). ‘Quota for Minority Communities in Higher Education in the Republic of Macedonia’. MA, Central European University. Available at: http:​//www​ .etd.​ceu.h​u/201​4/idr​izi_m​erzih​a.pdf​. Accessed 3 August 2019. Ilisei, I. (2014). ‘Upward Social Mobility of Individuals from Minority Groups: A Case Study of Roma Women in Higher Education’. Romanian Journal of Society and Politics, 9(1), 75–86. Katz, S. R. (2005). ‘Emerging from the Cocoon of Romani Pride: The First Graduates of the Gandhi Secondary School in Hungary’. Intercultural Education, 16(3), 247–61. Kende, A. (2007). ‘Success Stories? Roma University Students Overcoming Social Exclusion in Hungary’. In H. Colley, P. Boetzelen, B. Hoskins and T. Parveva (eds), Social Inclusion for Young People: Breaking Down the Barriers, 133–44. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Kyuchukov, H. (2011). ‘Roma Girls: Between Traditional Values and Educational Aspirations’. Intercultural Education, 22(1), 97–104. Kyuchukov, H. and Balvín, J. (2012). ‘Antigypsyism and University Education’. In H. Kyuchukov (ed.), Faces of Antigypsyism in Modern Europe, 41–9. Prague: Slovo 21. Lukács, J. and Dávid, B. (2019). ‘Roma Undergraduates' Personal Network in the Process of College Transition: A Social Capital Approach’. Research in Higher Education, 60(1), 64–82.

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

127

Madrid, D. (2011). ‘Racial and Social Discrimination in the EFL Class: The Case of the Roma Minority’. Porta Linguarum, 15, 71–91. Marc, A. and Bercus, C. (2007). ‘The Roma Education Fund: A New Tool for Roma Inclusion’. European Education, 39(1), 64–80. Marcu, S. (2019). ‘Mobility as a Learning Tool: Educational Experiences Among Eastern European Roma Undergraduates in the European Union’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 22, 1–17. Marushiakova, E. and Popov, V. (2011). ‘Between Exoticization and Marginalization. Current Problems of Gypsy Studies’. BEHEMOTH A Journal on Civilisation, 4(1), 86–105. Marushiakova, E. and Popov, V. (2017). ‘Orientalism in Romani Studies: The Case of Eastern Europe’. In H. Kyuchukov and W. New (eds), Languages of Resistance: Ian Hancock’s Contribution to Romani Studies. Lincom Europa. Matache, M. (2016). ‘The Legacy of Gypsy Studies in Modern Romani Scholarship’. FXB Center for Health & Human Rights, Harvard University. Available at: https​://fx​b. har​vard.​edu/t​he-le​gacy-​of-gy​psy-s​tudie​s-in-​moder​n-rom​ani-s​chola​rship​. Accessed 20 August 2019. Matras, Y. (2017). ‘From Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society to Romani Studies: Purpose and Essence of a Modern Academic Platform’. Romani Studies, 27(2), 113–23. Mirga-Kruszelnicka, A. (2015). ‘Romani Studies and Emerging Romani Scholarship’. Roma Rights: Journal of European Roma Rights Centre, 20(2), 39–46. Mirga-Kruszelnicka, A. (2018). ‘Challenging Anti-gypsyism in Academia: The Role of Romani Scholars’. Critical Romani Studies, 1(2), 8–28. Morley, L., Alexiadou, N., Garaz, S., González-Monteagudo, J. and Taba, M. (2018). ‘Internationalisation and Migrant Academics: The Hidden Narratives of Mobility’. Higher Education, 76(3), 537–54. Morris, J., Ridge, M. and Kirkley, I. (2005). ‘The Role of Self-Efficacy in a Hungarian Roma Student’s Journey into Higher Education: A Qualitative Exploration’. Widening Participation & Lifelong Learning, 7(2), 18–27. Orosz, M. (2010). ‘Government Resistance Towards Equal Access to Higher Education for Romas in Hungary’. MA, Cenetral European University. Available at: http:​//www​ .etd.​ceu.h​u/201​0/oro​sz_ma​riann​.pdf.​  Accessed 3 August 2019. Padilla Carmona, T., Gonzalez-Monteagudo, J. and Soria-Vilchez, A. (2017). ‘Roma in Higher Education: A Case Study of Successful Trajectories in the University of Seville’. Revista De Educacion, 377, 187–211. Pantea, M. C. (2014). ‘On Pride, Shame, Passing and Avoidance: An Inquiry into Roma Young People’s Relationship with Their Ethnicity’. Identities, 21(5), 604–22. Pantea, M. C. (2015a). ‘Affirmative Action in Romania’s Higher Education: Roma Students’ Perceived Meanings and Dilemmas’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(6), 896–914. Pantea, M. C. (2015b). ‘Persuading Others: Young Roma Women Negotiating Access to University’. Education as Change, 19(3), 91–112.

128

The Roma in European Higher Education

Petrova, B. (2016). ‘Diversity in Higher Education: The Case of the Roma Access Programs (RAP) at the Central European University (CEU)’. MA, Central European University. Available at: http:​//www​.etd.​ceu.e​du/20​16/pe​trova​_barb​ora.p​df. Accessed 3 August 2019. Rakovic, S. (2009). ‘Affirmative Action as a Policy Answer to Roma Inclusion in Secondary and Tertiary Public Education in Serbia’. In J. Lozanoska and S. Dimitrov (eds), Integrating Differences: Human Rights, Social Inclusion and Social Cohesion in the Balkans on Its Road to the EU, 181–99. Skopje: Euro-Balkan Institute. Rostas, I. (2017a). ‘Antigypsyism, Education and the Media: Ways Forward’. Identities, 24(6), 760–8. Rostas, I. (2017b). ‘Get Roma Education to Do Better: Identity and Leadership in Higher Education’. Journal of the European Higher Education Area, 74, 1–17. Ryder, A. (2015). ‘Co-producing Knowledge with Below the Radar Communities: Factionalism, Commodification or Partnership? A Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Case Study’. Third Sector Research Centre Working Paper, University of Birmingham. Ryder, A. (2018). ‘Paradigm Shift and Romani Studies: Research “on” or “for” and “with” the Roma’. In S. Beck and A. Ivasiuc (eds), Roma Activism Reimagining Power and Knowledge, 91–110. New York: Berhahn. Selling, J. (2018). ‘Assessing the Historical Irresponsibility of the Gypsy Lore Society in Light of Romani Subaltern Challenges’. Critical Romani Studies, 1(1), 44–61. Silverman, C. (2018). ‘From Reflexivity to Collaboration’. Critical Romani Studies, 1(2), 76–97. Slobodnikova, A. (2017). ‘The Effects of Stereotype Threat on Roma Academic Performance in Slovakia: Moderating Role of Academic Self-Efficacy and Social Identity’. Available at: https​://se​arch.​proqu​est.c​om/do​cview​/2022​34056​3. Accessed 3 August 2019. Spivak, G. (1988). ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’ In C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. London: Macmillan. Stenroos, M. (2018). ‘Power and Hierarchy Among Finnish Kaale Roma: Insights on Integration and Inclusion Processes’. Critical Romani Studies, 1 (2), 6–23. Stewart, M. (2017). ‘Nothing About Us Without Us, or the Dangers of a Closed-Society Research Paradigm’. Romani Studies, 27(2), 125–46. Torotcoi, S. (2013). ‘Widening Participation: Romanian Roma Participation in Higher Education’. MA, Central European University. Available at: http:​//www​.etd.​ceu.h​ u/201​3/tor​otcoi​_simo​na.pd​f. Accessed 3 August 2019. Torotcoi, S. and Pecak, M. (2019). ‘Path to Higher Education: Combating Antigypsyism Building Roma Students’ Aspirations and Resilience’. In I. Cortés Gómez and M. End (eds), Dimensions of Antigypsyism in Europe, 301–21. Brussels: ENAR & Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma. Vajda, V. (2015). ‘Towards “Critical Whiteness” in Romani Studies’. Roma Rights: Journal of European Roma Rights Centre, 20(2), 47–56.

Creating Knowledge about the Roma in Higher Education

129

Willems, W. (1997). In Search of the True Gypsy: From Enlightenment to Final Solution. London: Routledge. Yakimov, D. B. (2018). ‘Roma Integration in Secondary and Tertiary Education in Bulgaria: Evaluating State Capacity for Future Partnerships with Roma, Pro- Roma NGOs and Donors’. MA, Central European University. Available at: http:​//www​.etd.​ ceu.e​du/20​18/ya​kimov​_danc​ho.pd​f. Accessed 3 August 2019.

130

Part Two

Focus on Europe Examples of What is going on in Greece, the Nordic Countries, Serbia and Spain

132

7

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education Lights and Shades after Three Decades of National Plans for Roma Inclusion Teresa Padilla-Carmona, José González-Monteagudo, and Sandra Heredia-Fernández

Introduction The Spanish Roma population is unofficially estimated to be made up of 725,000 to 750,000 people, of which 40 per cent live in Andalusia, although there is also a significant percentage of the Roma community in Madrid, Valencia and Barcelona (Laparra, 2007).1 In recent years, however, there has been an increase of Roma from Bulgaria and Romania, as these countries entered the European Union in 2007. Despite their long history in Spain, the Roma continue to be a disadvantaged group, influenced by negative stereotypes and prejudices. Focusing exclusively on education, numerous gaps persist between Roma and non-Roma populations, with high dropout rates being the main problem affecting the first group. In this chapter, we focus on the field of higher education, a level at which the greatest inequalities between the Roma and the general population are observed. In the first part, we address the situation of the Roma at different educational stages. A review of the scarce statistics, as well as of different research studies, allows us to identify a structural inequality between the Roma population and the gadjo/paya (non-Roma) population. This inequality has been the subject of several action plans of the Spanish government for more than thirty years, plans that have gained international recognition for The terms ‘Gitano’ (masculine) or ‘Gitana’ (feminine) are predominant in Spain and, although they may have pejorative connotations, they are used by the Spanish Gitanos/as to describe themselves. Here we preferably use the term Roma, in accordance with the international convention, which highlights the commonalities of all Roma groups. This does not prevent us from recognizing the great diversity between these groups, nor the idiosyncrasy of the Spanish Gitanos/as.

1

134

The Roma in European Higher Education

their inclusive perspective. It is for this reason that the analysis and assessment of the different objectives and measures contemplated in the Spanish National Strategy, with a focus on university studies, constitutes the second part of this work. To conclude, in the third and final part, some ideas on recent debates, challenges and prospects in this area are presented.

The Roma in Spain: Analysis of Existing Information about Their Participation in Educational Programmes Stereotypes and Prejudices against the Roma Since the fifteenth century, there has been evidence of the existence of a Roma population in Spain, so its history in this country is long and extensive. Despite this, the Roma remain one of the most disadvantaged groups. Practically from their arrival, Roma people were persecuted, expelled, eliminated or assimilated. The situation only improved with the arrival of democracy which implied the suppression of various discriminatory laws and regulations. Nevertheless, an important sector of the Romani population continues to live in a situation of inequality and rather negative prejudices persist in the general Spanish population (CIS, 2007; Laparra, 2011). On the one hand, the non-Roma Spanish population has rather negative prejudices towards Roma. According to the CIS2 study from 2016, discrimination based on ethnic or racial origin is the most frequent in any field, over and above other factors such as mental disability and lack of economic resources.3 Additionally, the survey respondents considered Roma among the first three groups (of a total of twenty-three options which included women, foreigners, young people from other religions, disabled etc.) to be most negatively affected in legal procedures, in access to public services and housing, or in job recruitment and selection. Many non-Roma Spaniards would feel uneasy having Roma people as neighbours even when compared to other groups (LGBTQAI+, Muslims, the elderly etc). On the other hand, the Roma population also perceives itself as the most discriminated against, according to the study by the Consejo para la eliminación de la discriminación racial o étnica4 (2014). They perceive that the majority of Spaniards consider them thieves, vagrants Centre for Sociological Research. Result that coincides with those of the Eurobarometer surveys (e.g. TNS Opinion & Social, 2015). 4 Council for the Elimination of Racial or Ethnic Discrimination. 2 3

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

135

and bad people. Other ethnic groups included in the survey (Afro-Latinos, Andean, Oriental etc.) agree with this perception and believe that Roma are the worst treated by non-Roma: more than 40 per cent of respondents consider that Spanish Roma (50.1 per cent for Eastern Europe Roma) are treated badly or very badly. Moreover, an intersectional approach is key to understanding the situation of Romani women. The intersectional discrimination suffered by Romani women is mainly due to gender and ethnicity, the double fact of being a woman and being Romani. This implies that Romani women suffer specific discrimination, different from non-Romani women and from Romani men. This discrimination occurs in areas such as access to goods and services, health, education and employment (FSG, 2017). The Fundación Secretariado Gitano5 (FSG) analyses the complaints of discrimination received by this entity on an annual basis. According to its latest report (FSG, 2019), 232 complaints were filed in 2017, covering, inter alia, areas such as the media, employment and access to goods and services. It must be borne in mind that, according to the study Second European Union minorities and discrimination survey (EU-MIDIS II), approximately 90 per cent of people discriminated against do not report it, and there is a serious problem of underreporting, both nationally and at the European level. Despite this, more than 43 per cent of the complaints handled by FSG were motivated by discrimination in the media, warning of the power of the media to transmit stereotypes of Roma people. Civil society and Roma associations are developing numerous initiatives to fight prejudices and discrimination against the Roma population. An outstanding example is the Pact against Anti-Gypsyism, promoted by FAKALI, in collaboration with important actors from the public sector, associations and the media (FAKALI, 2016). In this sense, the vision offered by the media – recently reinforced by several TV reality-shows provide an example – contributes to an ‘extreme’ model of being a Roma (clan, travelling self-employment combined with a subsistence economy, etc.) to characterize cultural difference. The extreme type of Roma life would end up being transmuted into an immutable and determinant prototype of ‘Roma culture’ (Fernández Enguita, 1999). Laparra (2007) warns of the risk of falling into a stereotyping of Roma, derived from the cases of people in situations of deprivation being much more socially visible, despite constituting only 20 per cent of the Roma community. The EU Network of Independent Experts on Social Inclusion report (Frazer and Marlier, 2011) suggested that: Roma Secretariat Foundantion.

5

136

The Roma in European Higher Education

there are three main groups of Roma in Spain: first, a small group of those in stable professions and with high levels of income and education; secondly, a significant group who are living very precariously in segregated settlements; and, thirdly, the majority, those who live in large urban nuclei; they work in mobile trading but are slowly accessing to the labour market as salaried employees, accessing universal public services and attempting to gain training and integrate into education institutions. (p. 19)

Additionally, the ‘Study-Map on Housing and the Roma Population, 2015’ (Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare, 2018) indicates that 92.88 per cent of the identified Roma population reside in the urban framework and that only 2.78 per cent reside in segregated settlements. The reality is that many Roma people do not subsist in conditions of marginality and poverty and belong to different social sectors. Consequently, it is important to keep in mind that Spanish Roma do not constitute a homogeneous population, but they form groups with diverse features and belong to different socio-economic strata and to diverse religious beliefs.

What Happens with Roma Schooling before University? Existing statistical indicators report a systemic inequality between Roma and gadjo/paya6 populations with regard to participation and social inclusion. Despite education being the area where most of the progress has been achieved, there are still many gaps between groups. Thus, the progress has been quantitatively important in early years’ education, where the enrolment rate for Roma (95 per cent) was very similar to that of the general population (97 per cent) in 2016 (European Agency for Fundamental Rights, FRA, 2018). The same applied to Primary Compulsory Education: 99 per cent of Roma enrolment compared to 97 per cent of the general Spanish population. However, the study of FSG (2013) concludes that ‘Roma youth (12-24 years) are disadvantaged in terms of education and training when compared with the general population’ (p. 173). Early dropout is the main problem affecting the Roma: 70 per cent7 of Roma students (compared to 19 per cent of the general population) do not finish compulsory secondary education. In Spain, the compulsory education comprises six years of primary education as well as four years of lower secondary education. The transition to compulsory secondary ‘Payo/a’ is the word that Roma people use in Spain to refer to a non-Roma man (payo) or woman (paya). 7 Data for 2016 (FRA, 2018). 6

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

137

education usually involves a change from school to high school and takes place at the age of twelve. This is the critical moment when many Roma students are dropping out of education. Early dropout has been explained as a method of general resistance to policies that promote inclusion, since they are perceived as further assimilatory forces (Carrasco and Bereményi, 2011). In this sense, we can see how there is still a certain mistrust from some part of the Roma community of the school itself, which is perceived as alien to their own culture, as a space built on patterns of the cultural majority in which they do not feel represented or recognized (FAKALI, 2012). In a previous study (Padilla-Carmona, González-Monteagudo and Soria-Vilchez, 2017), we found that Roma university students reported having received numerous pressures from the community, exercised in the context of the extended family and, on many occasions, through their older members. These pressures were based on a supposed cultural alienation (apayamiento8) that would accompany the fact of receiving education. These pressures are also exerted because the Roma population does not always see itself reflected in the educational system. Therefore, the ignorance of both schools and Roma families produces this distancing and might contribute to the notion of education as assimilation. Nonetheless, some surveys (CIS, 2007; FSG, 2013) suggest that among the Roma the idea of education as being fairly or very important as a vehicle for success is widely accepted. Additionally, it is in the educational field where the Roma population shows lower levels of perceived discrimination (Panel on discrimination due to racial or ethnic origin, 2012). Similarly, education is the area in which the lowest volume of complaints of anti-Gypsyism is collected. Thus, of the total number of complaints received by FSG, only 7.33 per cent referred to discrimination in the educational environment, most of which reveal discriminatory treatment by peers and teachers (FSG, 2019). A key factor in early dropout is segregation. According to the FRA report (2018), the percentage of Roma children in schools where all children are Roma is only 4 per cent in Spain, well below countries such as Bulgaria (29 per cent), Slovakia (25 per cent) and Hungary (22 per cent). This is because the Spanish education system does not allow segregated schools. However, there is de facto segregation. In the first place, it is a question of residential segregation: a consequence of the existence of districts with a high concentration of Roma population – ghettoization. However, the report by Santiago and Ostalinda Apayamiento is a Roma expression to mean the process of becoming payo/a (non-Roma).

8

138

The Roma in European Higher Education

(2012) shows that in several Spanish cities the percentage of Roma in certain educational centres is higher than the percentage of Roma in the area in which they are located. The authors show the existence of informal mechanisms through which ‘ethnic’ selection takes place. Thus, schools with canteens, scholarships and other types of aid make it easier for the most disadvantaged populations to attend them, while other schools in the same area renounce these services and thus prevent certain students from enrolling in those centres. Once a school has a majority Roma or immigrant population, it is much more difficult to attract non-Roma students. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance report on Spain (2011) also highlights this phenomenon, stating that in schools there is manipulation in the procedure for admitting students. This generates ‘ghetto’ schools, in which students from immigrant and Roma families are disproportionately concentrated. Secondly, to this must be added the processes of intra-school segregation, which are produced as a negative side effect of compensation programmes for disadvantaged students (Salinas Catalá, 2009). These programmes offer an adapted curriculum and specialized teachers, developing the activities outside the ordinary classroom. Thus, Roma students are in the same school as non-Roma students, but they do not always share classrooms or curricula, which limits their full educational inclusion.

Roma and Higher Education: Still a Strange Combination Despite the high enrolment rates in early and compulsory education in Spain, the Roma’s participation in post-compulsory levels is really low, although related statistics are quite incomplete and not always updated. Especially in relation to higher education, we found a real problem to quantify how many Roma access and progress in higher education institutions. The general reference data are those provided by Laparra’s (2007) study based on different demographic studies which reported that only between 0.3 per cent (data from the study of CIS, 2007) and 1.2 per cent (data from FSG Edis, 2005) of the Roma population has a university degree. Likewise, between 3.1 per cent (data from the study of CIS, 2007) and 6.2 per cent (data from FSG/Edis, 2005) of Roma have completed non-university post-compulsory education (vocational training or high school). A more recent survey carried out by FSG (2013) focused on the Roma population aged twenty to twenty-four years. Its results provide a more optimistic estimate that would indicate that participation in post-compulsory education is increasing in recent years: 8.9 per cent of Roma (compared to 39.9 per cent of the general population) completed the vocational training or the

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

139

baccalaureate schooling; and 2.2 per cent of young Roma (21.5 per cent9 in the general population) graduated from university. This corresponds to the FAKALI report (2012) which states that there is a minority but growing group of young Roma who access and finish higher education. According to the latest follow-up report to the National Strategy (Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality, 2017), the presence (and graduation) of young Roma in post-compulsory studies is experiencing a progressive increase, both in the baccalaureate and in the higher vocational training. However, Roma are still the most under-represented group in HE and the gap with respect to the non-Roma population is still very wide. Laparra et al. (2013: 12) stated that ‘of the 1,633,183 university students in the academic year 2010-2011, no more than 200 would be of Roma origin, when the figure proportional to their demographic weight should be around 28,000’. These authors argue that, in addition to the absence of reliable information, existing data may be biased by the fact that many Roma students are ‘invisible’ and have no interest in being identified as Roma. In our study with university Roma (Padilla-Carmona, González-Monteagudo and Soria-Vilchez, 2017), we found the existence of this phenomenon of ethnic invisibility, also evidenced in the research of Abajo and Carrasco (2004) and Brüggeman (2014). Our analysis suggests that it is not a matter of hiding their Roma identity, but more of a cautious attitude about manifesting it openly, for fear of discrimination. More than a feeling of shame or inferiority, it seems to be a kind of coping strategy that avoids potential situations of exclusion and racism, or a constant process of constructing their own identity as Gitanos/as far away from existing models and stereotypes. However, this strategy, together with the absence of physical traits or clothing that invariably identifies them as Roma, entails the danger of being ‘assimilated’. At the same time, school success is explained by their teachers and classmates for ‘not being real Roma’ or for ‘not being like other Roma’ (Poveda and Martín, 2004). In this sense, the visibility of successful experiences of professional Roma that self-identify as Gitanos/as to generate references and positive models is one of the strategic lines followed by the main Roma associations in Spain, such as FSG (FSG, 2008) and FAKALI10 (FAKALI, 2018), as well as by the Ministry of Education itself (Gamella, 2011). Though there have been recent advances in widening participation in Spanish universities, factors such as ethnicity and social origin are not specifically addressed. As such, once a student of Roma origin (and, more generally, a According to the OECD report (2018), 30 per cent of Spanish adults aged 25 to 34 have completed a university diploma. 10 Andalusian Federation of Roma Women. 9

140

The Roma in European Higher Education

student hailing from a family with limited capital and cultural resources) has accessed university, they are assumed to operate under equal conditions to their non-Roma peers and if their difficulties are financial in nature, they may potentially be covered by the general system of scholarships. University students in Spain pay relatively low tuition fees, but only half of the students receive scholarships or grants: 47 per cent of students in Spain at this level benefit from these financial aids, while 27 per cent of them received scholarships or grants covering more than just the tuition fees (OECD, 2018).

National Plans for Roma Inclusion in Education: Critical Analysis of the Legal Initiatives Aimed at Roma Groups In Spain, there exists a political and institutional commitment to the inclusion of the Roma. The political and institutional commitment for the inclusion of Roma in Spain began in 1989 when the Plan for Roma Development was launched. This plan aimed at promoting social development and improving quality of life of Roma. In addition, Spain voluntarily and actively participated in The Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–15), the only country outside of Central and Eastern Europe to do so, and has more recently followed the recommendations of the European Commission11 that inspired the 2012-2020 National Strategy for the Social Inclusion of the Roma Population in Spain (Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality, 2011). In 2005, the Consejo Estatal del Pueblo Gitano12 was created. It is a cross-ministerial body that provides the institutional basis for the collaboration and cooperation of the Roma associations with the central government in order to develop the social welfare policies aiming at the integral promotion of the Roma community. Twenty of its forty members are occupied by the Roma associative movement, in addition to the second vice-presidency. Hence, there is representational participation of the Roma in the design, implementation and evaluation of Spanish policies. The National Strategy for Roma Inclusion (NRIS) deals with the four areas (education, employment, health and housing) suggested by the European Commission. It sets out quantitative goals scoring as percentages of population to be reached by 2020, as well as some intermediate goals for 2015. In addition, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (COM(2011)173 final). 12 State Council of the Roma. 11

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

141

the Spanish strategy establishes complementary lines of work in social action, participation, improvement in knowledge of Roma group, women’s equality, non-discrimination, promotion of culture and special attention to the Roma population from other countries. There are four NRIS goals in the field of education: increase in Roma preschool education completion; universal schooling and increasing academic success among Roma pupils in primary education; increase in completion of compulsory secondary education and increase in academic success of Roma pupils at this stage; and increase in the education level of the Roma adult. Hence, the overall objective related to higher education is number 4 which states the need to increase the educational level of the Roma population, and specifically target number 4.3 is the only one related to promoting the access to higher education. Table 7.1 presents the goal in quantitative terms. The monitoring of Operational Plan 2014/16 (Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare, 2017) highlights some positive achievements such as an adequate participation and coordination of public administrations (at national, regional and local levels) and good governance mechanisms (coordination, monitoring and evaluation). In this sense, the plan is funded13 with national, regional and local funds, in addition to the allocation of general European funds (ESF, ERDF), specifically for the Roma. Another noteworthy aspect is that a high Table 7.1  Spanish NRIS Target for Roma Access to Higher Education OBJECTIVE 4: Increasing educational attainment of the adult Roma

Specific target 4.3 Increasing the rate of Roma who have completed further education (%)

General population data

More recent data of Roma population

42.1 (2006, EPA)

2.6 (2007, CIS)

Goal for 2015

Goal for 2020

5

8

(1) National Statistics Institute: Active population survey 2006 (Annual data 2006). (2) Centre for Sociological Research (2007). Sociological survey in Roma population homes. Source:  Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality (2011).

It can be estimated at more than 50 million euros the funding allocated to the development of the National Strategy in the Operational Plan 14/16, adding national and regional funding and the ESP (European Social Fund). To this should be added the financing of local authorities and ERDF (European Regional Development Fund).

13

142

The Roma in European Higher Education

level of participation is being achieved by the entities of the Roma associative movement in the design, execution and evaluation of public policies. In this sense, three quarters of the actions have been carried out in coordination with Roma associations. The report also suggests that the actions carried out by these associations have had a good impact in terms of results and continuity. Concerning Roma access to university, it seems that there is no defined approach that advocates a greater presence of Roma at university. This objective is just part of the general idea of ‘increasing the level of education of Roma’. Hence, when it is specified in more concrete targets we find that all post-compulsory education levels (high school, middle and upper vocational training, higher education) are considered in the same way, failing to set out a specific focus on higher education. There are two strategic actions that should enable objective 4: the promotion of programmes for career guidance and for transition from lower secondary education to vocational training and measures to facilitate the access to university of Roma, including scholarship programmes (Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality, 2011). Among the specific actions listed in the Operational Plan 2014-16, only one is related to higher education, though not limited to it: activities to improve access and continuity of Roma young people in post-secondary education through individual and group support to the students themselves as well as their families. Furthermore, most of the measures for objective 4 are focused on reducing early dropout, compensating inequalities and promoting vocational training. That is, it seems that there is a greater tendency to promote vocational training rather than other post-compulsory options (high school and college). While we understand that the priority is, first, that Roma students complete the compulsory education and, secondly, to increase their presence in all post-secondary training options, higher education, as an ultimate goal, is the most overlooked in the Spanish plans and strategies for Roma inclusion. It can be said that no concrete measures leading to increasing the number of students in higher education are even listed; the number which, moreover, is unknown, as it is lost in the generic category of ‘further education’. In general, the promotion of vocational training in line with neoliberal perspectives can lead to higher education being considered as a luxury product, not necessary for disadvantaged contexts and groups. As a result, the NRIS is guided by the implicit assumption that vocational training is ‘sufficient’ for the Roma, thus limiting their opportunities. While it will contribute to the general purpose of ‘increasing the educational level of adult Roma’, it will keep on perpetuating Roma stereotypes by reducing their career options to low-skill occupations.

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

143

In addition, the follow-up carried out for the operational plan already executed (Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare, 2017) indicates that the current percentage of Roma who complete post-compulsory studies is 7.7 per cent (being 5 per cent the intermediate goal set for 2015). Curiously, this data come from the FSG study of 2013, so it is prior to the design and, of course, the execution of Operational Plan 2014–16. It can, therefore, be thought to be the result of the evolution of society itself and of the Roma community, or the product of previous development plans and not necessarily an achievement of the NRIS. Such inconsistency derives from the insufficient statistical information (based on 2006 and 2007 surveys) with which the NRIS is constructed. In the new Operational Plan 2018–20 (Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare n.d.), suggestions are made to improve the indicators in the specific objective 4.3: measures of access to university for the Roma population, including the promotion of scholarship programmes, which do not specify actions other than granting scholarships. International evaluations of the Spanish NRIS highlight some good practices, such as its ‘holistic approach to education as championed by the Learning Communities Programme’ (Bartlet, Gordon and Kamphuis, 2015: 51). Special recognition is given to its framing of social exclusion in terms of structural barriers that prompt the adoption of mainstreaming approaches to exclusion (Kostka, 2015), which generates ‘an array of anti-discrimination measures that directly and indirectly benefited Roma communities’ (p. 87). However, the analysis conducted by the EU (2019: 6) suggests that ‘while emphasis on primary and compulsory education is important, the education objectives lacked ambition, and would better correspond to the needs of the Roma if they addressed early childhood education and care (ECEC) as well as transition to secondary education and secondary education enrolment’.

What’s Next: Pending Subjects, Challenges, Recommendations and Prospects? The following are important debates and issues for improving the design, development and effectiveness of inclusive Roma policies: (1) It seems appropriate to promote the visibility of Roma university students and graduates. We have already suggested that there is sometimes an ethnic invisibility, favoured by both the system and Roma students. But we think that

144

The Roma in European Higher Education

the visibility of success stories in different fields (education, culture, society, economy) can contribute to the fight against discrimination, as it could present and enhance other models of Roma, focused on positive aspects, which help both Roma and non-Roma to broaden their horizons and expectations. At European level, it is worth mentioning the PAL project, which has as its main objective the fight against discrimination, segregation and anti-Gypsyism, to promote social inclusion of the Roma community. This project has disseminated fortyfive cases of ‘Roma Success Stories’ from nine European countries, including Spain.14 We believe that such initiatives can be effective and appropriate, as they help to disseminate positive role models in social networks and the media. In addition, the success stories for the appreciation of the Romani culture should extend and diversify the proposed models, to go beyond the traditional cultural fields of the Roma, such as music or dance, including cases on entrepreneurship, work, research, social leadership, political participation, gender equality and education. Gamella (2011) emphasizes that the Roma are usually represented in many of the negative dimensions and that it is necessary to invest this in order to focus on positive dimensions. We need to overcome the deficit-based vision of the Roma community to focus on a positive and empowering approach. (2) Economic resources, measures and interventions should consider the plurality of economic and social profiles of the Roma. Priority must be given to those most in need, but it is also necessary to propose interventions aimed at other ‘models’ of Roma, who are not in a situation of exclusion. This would also help to see the Roma community as a diverse, plural and constantly evolving group. (3) Networking is essential, both nationally and internationally. We need to make a great deal of progress on this issue. The interventions in Spain on Roma inclusion are based on a mainstreaming approach, integrated and general, which is partly explained by the fact that in Spain it is not possible to identify people by ethnicity. This approach is different from that used in Central and Eastern European countries, which design and implement target policies, with very specific measures, directed at the Roma, based on scholarships, academic support, guidance, follow-up, work with families and linkage between school and family. Spanish policies can benefit from these experiences in Central and Eastern European countries. This is only one example, among others possible, of the benefits of networking and cooperation on an international scale. See http:​//pro​jectp​al.eu​/data​-plat​form/​roman​i-who​-coun​t/

14

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

145

(4) Identity and culture are important and deserve special attention. It is necessary to move from the singular to the plural, highlighting the variety of identities and subcultures within the global Roma culture. It is crucial to promote the recognition of the Roma population and the increase of knowledge and visibility of the positive contribution of the culture and history of the Roma population. This implies recognizing and celebrating the plurality of profiles and groups within this community. López-Rodríguez and Sanz-Hernández (2017) highlight the need to understand the complexity of constructing the personal, cultural and social identities of the Roma, including the different trajectories of Romani women in relation to the group, which fluctuate between continuity with respect to the group based on adaptation, the separation from the group guided by the ideal of individual emancipation and the return to the group after having gained distance. These trajectories show the plurality of perspectives within the Roma community as well as the deep social change that affects these identity processes. Among the important topics to be explored we highlight the cultural dissonance or discontinuity between schools and Roma families and communities, a matter that has an important research tradition in cultural and social anthropology (Álvarez-Roldán, Parra and Gamella, 2018 Bereményi and Carrasco, 2015). Berna-Serna (2010: 193) highlights the importance of the ‘homogenizing normative enculturation model for Spanish Roma’. This model is increasingly questioned, because ‘the geographical heterogeneity, of social class and degrees of interrelation with the non-Roma society draw a reality that does not fall within this picture’. Homosexuality appears as an issue that challenges this normative model. Here again the intersectional approach can help us to better understand the combined influence of discrimination and homophobia on gay men and women in the Roma community. The Spanish film Carmen y Lola, released in 2018 and directed by Arantxa Echevarría, tells the story of two Roma lesbians in a conservative environment. This film, which won two Goya awards in 2019 at the main national film competition, has provoked an important social debate. Part of the feminist movement has highlighted the need to overcome the taboo of diverse sexual orientations within the Roma community. On the other hand, some associations of Roma women have criticized this film, for offering a stereotyped and essentialist vision of Roma culture, based on the diffusion of racist, macho and oppressive stereotypes of Romani women.15 This film has been Diario Público, 5 June 2018, https​://ww​w.pub​lico.​es/cu​ltura​s/git​anas-​femin​istas​-dive​rsida​d-arr​ emete​-carm​en-lo​la-ve​rla.h​tml.

15

146

The Roma in European Higher Education

a good opportunity to initiate a social debate on homosexuality among Romani women and the need to challenge the conservative and patriarchal positions, both of a part of the Roma community and of Spanish society in general. (5) The field of educational inclusion of the Roma needs more research. There is a need for qualitative research that moves beyond numbers, as suggested by Curcic et al. (2014). Progress in social inclusion is slow, and numbers do not always account for the significant advances. In addition, a focus on just ‘reducing the gap’ between Roma and non-Roma populations could imply an assimilationist approach which advocates that Roma students have to perform in the same ways as the non-Roma. Qualitative research would help to lead the strategic actions not only based on what to increase but also in the sense of how to do it, considering those factors that are central for key actors and stakeholders when explaining the success of some actual cases of Roma people. We need to develop more complex and pluralistic research, to account for social and cultural processes of great complexity and which are subject to continuous change. For this reason, ethnographic, biographical, participatory and action-research studies are necessary, with interdisciplinary and intersectional approaches. Flecha and Soler (2013) offer some proposals for research based on participatory and dialogical methodologies, with a specific focus on Roma students. Factors that condition the educational performance of Roma include early marriage, school segregation, poor educational achievement, absenteeism, early dropout and gender inequality (Parra, Álvarez-Roldán and Gamella, 2017). Social and educational policies should pay attention to these factors, promoting measures to overcome these barriers that limit good educational performance and progress through the different stages of the educational system, including access to higher education and completion. In addition, research should problematize these issues, going beyond the homogeneous notion of Roma culture and paying attention to potential biases and to the dangers of essentializing and reifying Roma culture (Bereményi and Carrasco, 2015). Dialogical approaches seem appropriate to developing new research styles, promoting collaboration with the Roma as key actors of the research process. In this context, the voices and perspectives of the Roma should be central when discussing results and proposals from research activity (García-Espinel, 2015). Supporting Roma university students does not have to be all about economic issues. It is important to include other approaches and services that can support the progress in the university. The development of academic skills, the increase of international mobility, the career guidance and mentorship and so on, are some

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

147

of the aspects we should keep in mind. In addition, programmes and initiatives should be university-based, and have the support of Roma civil society since these programmes cannot be ‘external’ to this institution, which should be more proactive in including the Spanish Roma population. The policies referred to the Roma have passed in the recent history of Spain through three phases: a first stage of segregation, an intermediate phase of compensatory education based on the social and cultural deficit and, finally, the intercultural discourse that promotes inclusion, respect, tolerance and rights for all (Carrasco and Bereményi, 2013). It is now a question of deepening this intercultural discourse, to realize the right of Roma and other disadvantaged groups to access and succeed in university education.

References Abajo, J. E. and Carrasco, S. (2004). Trayectorias de éxito escolar de gitanas y gitanos en España: Encrucijadas sobre educación, género y cambio cultural. Madrid: Instituto de la Mujer/CIDE. Álvarez-Roldán, A., Parra, I. and Gamella, J. F. (2018). ‘Reasons for the Underachievement and School Drop-Out of Spanish Romani Adolescents: A Mixed Methods Participatory Study’. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 63, 113–27. Bartlett, W., Gordon, C. and Kamphuis, B. (2015). ‘Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies’. Available online: https​://ww​w.res​earch​ gate.​net/p​ublic​ation​/2909​82262​_Eval​uatio​n_of_​the_E​U_Fra​mewor​k_for​_Nati​onal_​ Roma_​Integ​ratio​n_Str​ategi​es. Accessed 17 July 2019. Bereményi, B. A. and Carrasco, S. (2015). ‘Interrupted Aspirations: Research and Policy on Gitano Education in a Time of Recession, in Spain’. Intercultural Education, 26(2), 153–64. Berna-Serna, D. (2010). ‘Diálogos identitarios desde la precariedad y la resistencia entre los adolescentes gitanos gays’. Revista de Estudios de Juventud, 89, 187–200. Brüggemann, C. (2014). ‘Romani Culture and Academic Success: Arguments Against the Belief in a Contradiction’. Intercultural Education, 25(6), 439–52. Carrasco, S. and Bereményi, B. A. (2011). ‘Roma Culture and Language: From Assimilation to “Additive Recognition”’. In K. Pietarinen (ed.), Roma and Traveller Inclusion in Europe: Green Questions and Answers, 67–73. Brussels: Green European Foundation and the Finnish Green Cultural and Educational Centre Viso. Carrasco, S. and Bereményi, B. A. (2013). ‘Gitans et école en Espagne. Entre progrès et régressions’. Diversité, 174, 186–94. CIS. (2007). Encuesta sociológica a hogares de la población gitana. Madrid: CIS.

148

The Roma in European Higher Education

CIS. (2016). ‘Percepción de la discriminación en España’. Available online: http:​//www​. cis.​es/ci​s/exp​ort/s​ites/​defau​lt/-A​rchiv​os/Ma​rgina​les/3​140_3​159/3​150/e​s3150​mar. p​df. Accessed 17 July 2019. Consejo para  la eliminación de la discriminación racial o étnica. (2014). ‘Percepción de la discriminación por el origen racial o étnico por parte de las potenciales víctimas en 2013’. Available online: http:​//www​.igua​ldady​nodis​crimi​nacio​n.igu​aldad​.mpr.​gob. e​s/rec​ursos​/publ​icaci​ones/​2015/​docum​entos​/2013​_Pane​l_v_f​.pdf.​ Accessed 17 July 2019. Curcic, S., Miskovic, M., Palut, S. and Ceobanu, C. (2014). ‘Inclusion, Integration or Perpetual Exclusion? A Critical Examination of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2005-2015’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 257–67. Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission. (2019). ‘MidTerm Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies Up to 2020’. Available online: https​://pu​blica​tions​.euro​pa.eu​/en/p​ublic​ation​-deta​il/-/​publi​ catio​n/a1e​33b4f​-17af​-11e9​-8d04​-01aa​75ed7​1a1/l​angua​ge-en​. Accessed 17 July 2019. ECRI. (2011). ‘ECRI Report on Spain’. Available online: http:​//www​.coe.​int/t​/dghl​/moni​ torin​g/ecr​i/Cou​ntry-​by-co​untry​/Spai​n/ESP​-CBC-​IV-20​11-00​4-ENG​.pdf.​ Accessed 17 July 2019. FAKALI. (2012). ‘Estrategias de cooperación con las mujeres gitanas’. Available on line: http:​//www​.educ​atole​ranci​a.com​/pdf/​Estra​tegia​s de Cooperacion con las Mujeres Gitanas.pdf. Accessed 17 July 2019. FAKALI. (2016). Pacto contra el antigitanismo. Protocolo de actuación. Sevilla: FAKALI. FAKALI. (2018). ‘Memoria de actividades 2017’. Available online: http:​//www​.faka​li.or​g/ fil​es/Me​moria​_anua​l_Fak​ali_2​017.p​df. Accessed 17 July 2019. Fernández Enguita, M. (1999). Alumnos gitanos en la escuela paya. Un estudio sobre las relaciones étnicas en el sistema educativo. Barcelona: Ariel. Flecha, R. and Soler, M. (2013). ‘Turning Difficulties into Possibilities: Engaging Roma Families and Students in School Through Dialogic Learning’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(4), 451–65. FRA. (2018). ‘A Persisting Concern: Anti-Gypsyism as a Barrier to Roma Inclusión’. Available online: https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/sit​es/de​fault​/file​s/fra​_uplo​ads/f​ra-20​18-an​ ti-gy​psyis​m-bar​rier-​roma-​inclu​sion_​en.pd​f. Accessed 17 July 2019. Frazer, H. and Marlier, E. (2011). ‘Promoting the Social Inclusion of Roma’. Available online: https​://ww​w.git​anos.​org/u​pload​/44/1​1/syn​thesi​s_rep​ort_2​011-2​_fina​l_3_1​ _.pdf​. Accessed 17 July 2019. FSG. (2008). Historia de vida de 50 estudiantes gitanos y gitanas. Madrid: Ministry of Education, Social Policy and Sports. FSG. (2013). El alumnado gitano en secundaria. Un estudio comparado. Madrid: Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports/Fundación Secretariado Gitano. FSG. (2017). Guía sobre la discriminación interseccional. El caso de las mujeres gitanas. Madrid: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation/Fundación Secretariado Gitano.

The Roma in Spanish Higher Education

149

FSG. (2019). ‘FSG Annual Report 2018. Discrimination and the Roma Community’. Available online: https​://ww​w.git​anos.​org/u​pload​/14/8​9/Inf​orme_​de_di​scrim​inaci​ on_20​18__i​ngles​_.pdf​. Accessed 17 July 2019. FSG/Edis. (2005). Población gitana y empleo: Un estudio comparado. Madrid: Fundación Secretariado Gitano. Gamella, J. F. (2011). Historias de éxito. Modelos para reducir el abandono escolar de la adolescencia gitana. Madrid: Ministry of Education. García-Espinel, T. (2015). ‘Contribuciones de la mujer gitana a la ciencia, a las políticas y a la mejora social’. Géneros – Multidisciplinary Journal of Gender Studies, 4(3), 832–55. Kostka, J. (2015). ‘Implementation of Roma Inclusion Policies: Why Defining the Problem Matters’. Social Inclusion, 3(5), 78–89. Laparra, M. (coord.). (2007). Situación social y tendencias de cambio en la población gitana. Pamplona: Universidad Pública de Navarra. Laparra, M. (coord.). (2011). ‘Diagnóstico social de la comunidad gitana en España’. Available online: http:​//www​.msss​i.gob​.es/s​si/fa​milia​sInfa​ncia/​inclu​sionS​ocial​/pobl​ acion​Gitan​a/doc​s/dia​gnost​icoso​cial_​autor​es.pd​f. Accessed 17 July 2019. Laparra, M., Fernández, C., Hernández, M., Salinas, J. and Tsolakis, A. (2013). ‘Civil Society Monitoring Report on the Implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategy and Decade Action Plan in 2012 in SPAIN’. Available online: https​://cp​s.ceu​ .edu/​sites​/cps.​ceu.e​du/fi​les/a​ttach​ment/​basic​page/​2924/​decad​e-mon​itori​ng-sp​ain-2​ 012.p​df. Accessed 17 July 2019. López-Rodríguez, M. A. and Sanz-Hernández, A. (2017). ‘Reflexión, acción, decisión: trayectorias en la construcción de la identidad de género en el patriarcado gitano’. EMPIRIA. Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales, 37, 41–62. Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare. (2017). ‘2012-2016 Evaluation: Summary of Progress and Proposals for Improvement’. Avalabile online: https​://ww​ w.msc​bs.go​b.es/​ssi/f​amili​asInf​ancia​/Pobl​acion​Gitan​a/doc​s/sum​mary_​evalu​ation​ _NRIS​_vf.p​df. Accessed 17 July 2019. Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare. (2018a). ‘Study-Map on Housing and the Roma Population 2015’. Avalaible online: https​://ww​w.msc​bs.go​b.es/​ssi/ f​amili​asInf​ancia​/Pobl​acion​Gitan​a/doc​s/R-E​-NGL-​_ESTU​DIO-M​APA_S​OBRE_​ VIVIE​NDA_Y​_P.G.​pdf. Accesed 17 July 2019. Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare. (n.d.). ‘Estrategia Nacional para la Inclusión Social de la Población Gitana 2012-2020 Plan Operativo 2014-2016’. Available online: https​://ww​w.msc​bs.go​b.es/​ssi/f​amili​asInf​ancia​/Pobl​ acion​Gitan​a/doc​s/Pla​nOper​ativo​Pobla​cionG​itana​2014-​2016.​pdf. Accessed 17 July 2019. Ministry of Health, Consumption and Social Welfare. (n.d.). ‘Estrategia Nacional para la Inclusión Social de la Población Gitana 2012-2020 Plan Operativo 2018-2020’. Available online: https​://ww​w.msc​bs.go​b.es/​ssi/f​amili​asInf​ancia​/Pobl​acion​Gitan​a/ doc​s/Pla​nOper​ativo​2018_​20PG.​pdf. Accessed 17 July 2019.

150

The Roma in European Higher Education

Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality. (2011). ‘National Roma Integration Strategy in Spain 2012-2020’. Available online: https​://ww​w.msc​bs.go​b.es/​ssi/ f​amili​asInf​ancia​/Pobl​acion​Gitan​a/doc​s/Spa​nishR​omaSt​rateg​y.pdf​. Accessed 17 July 2019. OECD. (2018), Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators. Available online: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en. Accessed 17 July 2019. Padilla-Carmona, T., González-Monteagudo, J. and Soria-Vílchez, A. (2017). ‘Roma in Higher Education: A Case Study of Successful Trajectories in the University of Seville’. Revista de Educación, 377, 187–211. Panel sobre  discriminación por origen racial o étnico. (2012). ‘Estudio anual sobre la discriminación por el origen racial o étnico: la percepción de las potenciales víctimas 2011’. Available online: http:​//www​.msss​i.gob​.es/s​si/ig​ualda​dOpor​tunid​ ades/​noDis​crimi​nacio​n/doc​ument​os/pa​nel_d​iscri​mi_20​11.pd​f. Accessed 17 July 2019. Parra Toro, I., Alvarez-Roldan, A. and Gamella, J. F. (2017). ‘Un conflicto silenciado: Procesos de segregación, retraso curricular y abandono escolar de los adolescentes gitanos’. Revista de Paz y Conflictos, 10(1), 35–60. Poveda, D. and Martín, B. (2004). ‘Looking for Cultural Congruence in the Education of Gitano Children’. Language and Education, 18(5), 413–34. Salinas Catalá, J. (2009). ‘Un viaje a través de la historia de la escolarización de las gitanas y gitanos españoles’. Anales de Historia Contemporánea, 25, 165–88. Santiago, C. and Ostalinda, M. (2012). ‘School Segregation of Romani Students in Spain’. Available online: http:​//fed​eraci​onkam​ira.e​s/wp-​conte​nt/up​loads​/2015​/11/S​chool​ -segr​egati​on-re​port-​EN-17​-Juli​o-201​2-FIN​AL-1.​pdf. Accessed 17 July 2019. TNS Opinion & Social. (2015). ‘Special Eurobarometer 437. Discrimination in the EU in 2015’. Available online: http:​//dat​a.eur​opa.e​u/euo​dp/en​/data​/data​set/S​2077_​83_4_​ 437_E​NG. Accessed 17 July 2019.

8

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents – Analysing Silences Jenni Helakorpi and Ulpukka Isopahkala-Bouret

Introduction The Nordic countries have national Roma and Traveller policies (MSAH, 2018; AID, 2009; MSAI, 2011; NOU, 2015; Skr., 2011), which are constituted in the interplay of national and international Roma policy processes and Nordic collaboration (see Helakorpi, Lappalainen and Mietola, 2020). However, in the Nordic countries there are no national statistics based on ethnic or racial identification since the population level statistics are based on register data in which information on ethnic and racial identification is not included. No censuses have been gathered in these countries in decades. Thus, the overall descriptions of the situation of Roma and Travellers are based on estimations and small-scale surveys. However, there are little or no reliable numerical population level estimations. Nevertheless, it is estimated that the completion of basic education and attainment to upper secondary education is distinctively lower in comparison with the rest of the population (Rajala et al., 2011; Hagatun, 2019; NOU, 2015; SOU, 2010; MSAI, 2011). In addition, the current view is that the number of Roma and Travellers participating or having completed higher education (HE) is significantly smaller than the national averages (Alexiadou and Norberg, 2015: 19–20; NOU, 2015; Hagatun, 2019; Rajala and Blomerus, 2015). The social dimension of HE has been firmly expressed in European policy declarations for over a decade. It rests on the idea that students accessing, participating in and completing HE at all levels should reflect the diversity of populations (London Communiqué, 2007). The main purpose of this social agenda is to make HE institutions more inclusive and to widen access to the social privileges that HE offers.

152

The Roma in European Higher Education

In this chapter, we analyse how under-representation in HE is discussed and problematized in the national Roma and Traveller policy documents in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Our approach is poststructural, and we analyse the policy documents discursively (Bacchi and Goodwin, 2016). We analyse the problem representations and how Roma and Travellers are constructed in the policy texts. Previous research has shown that Roma are often blamed in policy initiatives for their vulnerable social position or the achievement disparities in education (Matache, 2017a; Helakorpi, Lappalainen and Mietola, 2020; c.f., Gillborn, 2008). Furthermore, multiple studies construct ‘Roma culture’ as colliding with formal education (Brüggemann, 2014). Thus, public discourse address Roma identity as problematic, rather than addressing structural discrimination and racism (Araújo, 2016). Against this backdrop, we ask what is silenced and not problematized in the Nordic policy documents. In our analysis, it becomes apparent that through notions of equal opportunity and special support needed by Roma and Travellers, the Nordic policies rely on the framework of multiculturalism instead of anti-racism in education (Troyna, 1987; Gillborn, 2006).

Roma and Traveller Minorities in the Nordic Countries This chapter analyses policy documents that are directed to those Roma and Traveller groups who have national minority status in Finland, Sweden and Norway (MSAH, 2018; NOU, 2015; AID, 2009; Skr., 2011). The Danish Roma do not have a national minority position, but from Denmark we analyse the Danish Roma Integration Strategy (MSAI, 2011), which the European Union encourages its member countries to develop (European Commission, 2011). The history of the Nordic Roma and Travellers, and the policies considering these groups are interconnected in multiple ways although differences between and within countries are substantial1 (see, for example, Pulma, 2006; Montesino Parra, 2002; Helakorpi, forthcoming). Historically, Nordic policies towards Roma and Travellers have been based on assimilation and exclusion; the recent change in the political discourses emphasize human and cultural rights (Pulma, 2006).

Within the limits of this chapter we are not able to introduce the complex historical trajectories of different Nordic Roma and Traveller groups and the related policies. For an elaborate research about Nordic Roma policies from sixteenth century to EU, see Pulma (2006) (in Finnish).

1

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

153

The current national policy making and political discourses considering Roma and Travellers have been strongly impacted by international governmental organizations which pay special attention to Roma and Travellers both as a distinctive transnational group, and as national minorities in many European countries (see, for example, Vermeersch, 2006; van Baar, 2012). Thus, the national policies are impacted by both the internationalization of minority rights and European Roma inclusion/integration efforts. The EU members Finland, Sweden and Denmark have formulated NRIS (MSAI, 2011; MSAH, 2018; Skr. 2011) following the encouragement by the EU (European Commission, 2011). Finland, Sweden, and Norway have acknowledged particular Roma and Traveller groups as national minorities and their languages as minority languages according to the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (CoE Treaty 157) and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (CoE ETS No. 148).2 Historically, Danish deportation legislation and its execution since the sixteenth century has been fierce (Pulma, 2006), which has led to a situation where today Denmark will not grant the national minority status to Roma based on the argument that their presence in Denmark has been discontinuous (see, for example, MSAI, 2011). Denmark has been criticized by the European Community for not granting Roma national minority status (Lassen Olesen and Eklund Karlson, 2018). In Finland, the national Roma minority includes one Roma group: Finnish Roma. It is estimated that today approximately 9,000 to 10,000 Finnish Roma live in Finland (Rajala and Blomerus, 2015).3 The Finnish Roma generally speak Finnish as their mother tongue and the Finnish Romani language is endangered and requires revitalization measures (Hedman, 2015). In Sweden, the national Roma minority covers multiple Roma groups, which are usually categorized by the period of their arrival in Sweden: Travellers (resande), Swedish Roma, Finnish Roma, non-Nordic Roma and recently arrived Roma generally refugees and asylum seekers from the former Yugoslavia and Kosovo. These groups contain multiple subgroups. According to current estimations there are around 50,000 people who identify as Roma (or Travellers) in Sweden (SOU, 2010). Their mother tongue in Sweden varies from different Romani dialects to Swedish, Finnish, and even other languages (Bijvoet and Fraurud, 2007). In Norway, two different Each country defines its own national minorities. The groups and group related policies have different historical trajectories. For a comparative research considering the Nordic national minority groups, see for example edited book by P.A. Krauss and P. Kivistö (2015). 3 All the numbers from each of the countries are estimates since there are no statistics based on ethnicity in Nordic countries. 2

154

The Roma in European Higher Education

national minority Roma groups have been defined: Roma (Rom) and Travellers (Romanifolk/tatere). It is estimated that there are around 700 Norwegian Roma, and around 4,000 to 10,000 Norwegian Travellers in Norway (Engebrigtsen, 2015; Muižnieks, 2015). The mother tongue of the Norwegian Roma is usually a dialect of Romani (AID, 2009). Most people identifying as Travellers speak Norwegian as their mother tongue, but the language of Norwegian Travellers (Scandoromani/ Norwegian Romani) constitutes an important part of Traveller identity for many (NOU, 2015). In Denmark, the estimations vary from 2,000 to 10,000 people identifying as Roma (European Commission, 2014; Anker et al., 2011). The Roma in Denmark today have varying backgrounds and there is no clear picture of their situation (Busk Laursen and Muncan, 2004; Anker et al., 2011; MSAI, 2011).

The Nordic HE and Equality of Access Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, with populations of 5.5 million, 10 million, 5.25 million, and 5.7 million respectively, have experienced a massive increase in their HE participation. Participation to HE has expanded more than tenfold in a half a century (Börjesson et al., 2014). In the whole population, the number of young adults (twenty-five to thirty-four year olds) with HE in the Nordic countries is over 40 per cent: in Finland 41.3 per cent, in Denmark 46.6 per cent, in Sweden 47.4 per cent and in Norway 48.3 per cent in 2017 (OECD, 2019). The overall inequality in access opportunities has diminished as more students attain HE (Börjesson et al., 2014). However, the ongoing under-representation of minority groups such as Roma and Travellers indicate inequalities in access. The Nordic countries share common and globally unique features, such as education largely funded by the state, absence of (or low) tuition fees, and public grants or loans for students (Isopahkala-Bouret et al., 2018). Moreover, by educational law and policy, the opportunity to enter HE should be as equitable as possible so that every citizen may take full advantage of their educational potential (Isopahkala-Bouret et al., 2018). Egalitarian processes recognize individual talent through meritocratic selection irrespective of class, gender, race or ethnicity. Furthermore, there is a political consensus in the Nordic countries that because admissions are egalitarian and financial support for all HE students exists, there is no need for special initiatives, such as financial assistance/bursaries and affirmative action focusing on minority groups (cf. Thomsen et al., 2013).

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

155

On further reflection, a formal approach to equality, that is, procedural fairness in access to HE (Jacobs, 2013) is insufficient. It does not recognize how cultural and socio-economic differences create inequalities between individuals. To widen participation to HE, the playing field must be levelled by creating policy initiatives that remove barriers and compensate children coming from disadvantaged background (Bøyum, 2014; Jacobs, 2013). In addition, the social justice approach to widening participation claims that educational structures, systems, and cultures need to transform and turn into more inclusive contexts (Burke, 2012).

Methodology and Data In this chapter, we analyse how HE is discussed in the Nordic Roma and Traveller policy documents. We draw from Carol Bacchi’s poststructural What’s the problem represented to be? approach to policies (Bacchi, 2009; Bacchi and Goodwin, 2016) where policies are understood as discourses (see also Ball, 1993, 2015). Thus, policy documents are perceived as productions of power which shape and enable subjectivities and relations within nation states (Bacchi and Goodwin, 2016; Bacchi, 2009, 2000). The ways policies and policy measures are formulated are not understood as simply finding solutions to pre-existing problems but as formulating what is understood as problems. Thus, the policy as discourse approach emphasizes how policies enable and constrain ‘objects of thought’ (see Foucault, 1988: 257). Policies take part in enabling and constraining ‘what it is possible for people to become’ (Bacchi and Goodwin, 2016: 50). Our analysis is transnational, analysing the four national policies together and finding discursive tendencies. The policies are entangled with each other due to the long-rooted collaboration between the Nordic countries in the formulation of Roma policies (Pulma, 2006) and the internationalization of minority rights and Roma and Traveller policies as described in the previous section (see also Helakorpi et al., 2020). Our analytical approach is limited to the textual level of policy documents, and we do not consider the policy-making practices or implementation of policy. Our data do not permit us to say anything about the interest groups that took part in writing the policy documents, what their agendas were and what kind of negotiations and compromises they may have had. We have included in our data the national Roma strategies from Finland, Sweden and Denmark. The Finnish, Swedish and Danish strategies serve as NRIS following the European Union’s coordinated policy process ‘An EU Framework for

156

The Roma in European Higher Education

National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’. Member States are encouraged to develop, implement and monitor the NRISs (European Commission, 2011). In Finland, a second national Roma policy, ‘Finland’s National Roma Policy (ROMPO) 2018-2022’, was formulated in 2018 (MSAH, 2018); in Sweden, ‘The Coordinated Long-term Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2032’ is from 2011 (Skr., 2011); and in Denmark the national policy ‘Presentation to the European Commission of Denmark’s National Roma1 Inclusion Strategy’ is likewise from 2011 (MSAI, 2011). From Norway, which is not a member of the EU and does not have an NRIS, we have selected the white paper on national minorities, ‘National Minorities in Norway: About State Policy on Jews, Kvens, Roma, Travellers and Forest Finns’ (St. Meld, 2000), which is the steering policy document concerning Roma and Traveller national minorities. We have also included a local action plan about Roma, the ‘Action Plan for Improvement of the Living Conditions of Roma in Oslo’ (AID, 2009) from 20094 and a green paper about Travellers entitled ‘Assimilation and Resistance in Norwegian Policies towards Tater/ Romani People from 1850 to the Present’ (NOU, 2015). Thus, the Norwegian policy documents differ from the Finnish, Swedish and Danish ones. Although Denmark has a NRIS, the Danish policy differs from the others since Denmark has not acknowledged Roma as a national minority, which leads to a very different type of approach to Roma issues in Denmark. The Danish Roma strategy mostly refers to the general integration policies of Denmark. We began the analysis by reading through the Roma and Traveller policy documents and identifying the extracts that focus on HE. After this, we listed all the sections referring to HE and defined the topics in relation to which the Roma and Travellers are discussed. We especially wished to determine whether national policy documents suggested any concrete measures related to widening the participation of Roma and Travellers in HE. As we found out, HE is a marginalized topic in the Nordic policy documents concerning Roma and Travellers. In the Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian Roma and Traveller policies HE is scarcely mentioned; in the Danish Roma Integration Strategy it is not explicitly mentioned at all. Therefore, our research task is characterized as analysing silences in the policy discourse. We analysed the problem representations to which these specific minority policies are responding and found out that the presuppositions within these ‘problems’ discursively position the attainment of Roma and Travellers in HE as a marginal issue. Furthermore, we The action plan has been evaluated and strongly criticized (Tyldum and Friberg, 2014), but a new operative policy has not been written for the Roma (see also Hagatun, 2019).

4

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

157

identified two problem representations which construct problematic portrayals about Roma: Lack of academic capability and/or aspirations of Roma and Traveller children and Lack of research and teaching about Roma and Traveller culture and language at universities.

Silence about Higher Education of Roma and Travellers The Swedish, Norwegian and Danish Roma and Traveller policy documents do not contain any direct measures to promote widening access to HE. Sally Tomlinson (2008) has described from the British context that when it comes to policies about minoritized racial groups in education, the system ‘employs the rhetoric of meritocracy and equality of opportunity to disguise a system on increasing inequalities’ (Tomlinson, 2008: 176). In the next excerpt from the Swedish policy, we observe that the government made a decision not to include a clear goal and measure for HE participation. They left it out although the Roma Delegation suggested it in their green paper on Roma policy: The Roma delegation proposal: The Delegation proposed the following goals: … the same proportion of young Roma people as the national average should study at tertiary level and pass university exams. Government assessment: All children and school pupils should be given the chance to attain the national targets and develop their knowledge, skills and abilities as far as possible. This applies to the population as a whole, and thus also includes the Roma. (Skr., 2011: 24)

Whereas the Delegation proposed a goal which explicitly states that the relative number of Roma studying in HE should be the same as for the whole Swedish population, the government changed the goal. Thus, there is no specific target for HE attainment. The Swedish Roma policy relies on the generic discourse of providing pupils with ‘the chance to … develop their knowledge, skills and abilities as far as possible’ (Skr., 2011: 24). In the Danish Roma Inclusion Strategy, the same universalistic target setting is stated as follows: Goals for active inclusion, education level, employment rate and health in Denmark apply to Roma as well as to other groups with a minority ethnic background in Denmark. The Danish Government holds that equal opportunities are fundamental for the Danish society. (MSAI, 2011: 4)

Thus, Danish society, like the other Nordic societies, is based on the ideal of equal opportunities for everyone, which is why no special measures are introduced

158

The Roma in European Higher Education

for minority groups. Further, as HE is largely funded by the state and degree programmes are tuition-free or low-fee for students, a political consensus exists that there is no need for special widening participation initiatives (cf. Thomsen et al., 2013). The discourse conceals the inequalities embedded within the system (Tomlinson, 2008; Gillborn, 2014).

Problem Representation 1: Lack of Academic Capability and Aspiration The policy texts that we have analysed depict problems in basic education and secondary education in a way that constrains academic learner subjectivities for Roma and Travellers. A myriad of research has shown that the expectations set on pupils and students have an impact on their learning results accordingly, and in the case of minoritized students, the expectations tend to be lower (Gillborn, 2014). The Nordic ideal of equal opportunity is based on meritocratic selection. It frames access to HE by constructions of ‘capability’ that imply that intelligence, potential and ability is innate and detached from social, cultural and educational dis/advantage and inequalities (c.f., Burke et al., 2016; Morley and Lugg, 2009). We find that the analysed policy documents construct Roma and Traveller students as deemed to be lacking academic capability and potential. This representation is produced by the measures proposed in basic and upper secondary education and strengthened by the startling silence about HE in the policies. Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian policy documents represent Roma and Traveller pupils as in need of special support due to inadequate (learning) skills and lack of family support (Helakorpi, Lappalainen and Mietola, 2020).5 Although individual support would no doubt help individual pupils in school, the notion relies on an assumption that the current inequalities in schooling are consequences of Roma specific needs that the school institution has not met. This measure forgets historical injustices and makes Roma pupils the focus of attention instead of the structural issues in schools, such as racism (see Helakorpi, 2019). Likewise, the Danish strategy states that ‘the schools still find it difficult to integrate the [Roma] pupils into the ordinary classes’ (MSAI, 2011: 8). The notion of difficulty integrating Roma pupils also represents Roma The new Finnish Roma policy (MSAH, 2018) has been introduced after the analysis by Helakorpi et al. (2020), but the measures considering basic education have not drastically changed.

5

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

159

pupils as inadequate or somehow not fitting in to the school institution (see also Matache, 2017a). The Finnish Roma policy is the only example of introducing an explicit measure to promote the participation of Roma in HE, namely the establishment of a mentoring programme for Roma HE students by following examples from Hungary and Portugal (ROMPO, 2018: 30). Nevertheless, what is described as the problem in access to HE is again the lack of (co-)support and study skills of potential Roma HE students. As the only measure in HE it also strongly frames the problem to be the support need of Roma and follows the same lines of discourse as the problem representations in basic education – the strict focus on the capabilities of Roma. The goal of the programmes in question is to support the studies of students with Roma background through peer support and different forms of activities such as courses and education to develop learning abilities. (ROMPO, 2018: 85)

Simultaneously, as Roma and Travellers are represented as lacking adequate academic capability, they are also represented in policy documents as lacking motivation and not taking sufficient advantage of their academic potential. This resembles the ways minoritized ethnic groups are typically blamed in public discussions and policies for not being able or willing to integrate (Tomlinson, 2008; Araújo, 2016). According to the Danish Roma strategy, there is a need for ‘a special effort’ to ‘motivate’ bilingual pupils for further education (MSAI, 2011: 8). This suggests that the problem in further education is the lack of inner motivation of bilingual individuals rather than problems at the structural level. In the Swedish policy there is also concern about continuing to upper secondary education: In a labour market that demands higher and higher levels of education, it is crucial for Roma pupils to be challenged and encouraged to move on to upper secondary school and increase their chances of a job. (Skr., 2011: 32)

Just as the Danish policy depicts Roma pupils as in need of motivation, the Swedish policy text describes Roma pupils as in need of challenges and encouragement to attain upper secondary education. In this extract, however, the upper secondary education is anchored to work, leaving out discussion about the eligibility that upper secondary education could give to HE. This subtly represents a narrower horizon of choices for Roma and yet again detaches Roma from HE. As the only Nordic policy, the Finnish Roma policy points out the need to increase participation in the academic track in the upper secondary education.

160

The Roma in European Higher Education

Finnish Roma are under-represented especially in general upper secondary education and the attainment of the matriculation examination, which is the main route to HE. The problem is placed not only in the attitudes of Roma towards general upper secondary education but also to some extent in guidance practices: It is necessary to mould the attitudes towards general upper-secondary to be more positive among Roma population. … Also in the guidance counselling in basic education, attention needs to be paid to the underrepresentation of Roma students in general upper secondary education and to discussing with Roma pupils about general upper secondary education as an option. (ROMPO, 2018: 31)

‘Attitude formation’, ‘increasing motivation’, ‘challenging’ and ‘encouraging’ all refer to something that needs to change among Roma and Travellers. However, the notion that there is a need to have more guidance encouraging Roma to choose an academic track indicates that current guidance counselling practices possibly steer Roma pupils towards the vocational track and that such discriminatory practice needs to be changed.

Problem Representation 2: Lack of Research and Teaching about Roma Culture and Language at Universities As described at the outset, in Finland, Sweden and Norway, Roma and Travellers have national minority status and their languages are acknowledged as national minority languages. This creates an interesting tension concerning HE in the Roma and Traveller policies in these countries since research within universities is emphasized as a way to preserve and protect the national minority languages and cultures. This resembles the notions of multicultural education where adding knowledge about minoritized groups is expected in itself to lead to justice while neglecting structural barriers such as racism in the society (Troyna, 1987; Helakorpi, 2019). In the Finnish strategy it is suggested that the syllabus in Romani culture and language studies in the university should be expanded. The Finnish strategy also contains a measure about increasing the amount of research on Romani art (ROMPO, 2018: 55). In Sweden, the strategy mentions HE and research in relation to Romani language and national minorities. In the strategy, it is stated that to preserve and develop Romani language there is a need for ‘a higher level of training and research’ (Skr., 2011: 33). The Norwegian white paper also

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

161

mentions national minority languages as a subject for research and teaching at Norwegian universities (St. Meld., 2000: 27). This is also discussed in the green paper about Norwegian Travellers (NOU, 2015: 84–5). Sara Ahmed (2000) has written about how ‘the Other’ enter the epistemological community through knowledge production ‘about them’ and how their figure as strangers is maintained through knowledge production practices. When it comes to HE and especially research universities, the Nordic policies produce a tension: the importance of research about the language and culture within the universities is emphasized while the access of Roma and Travellers to universities and knowledge production, that is, conducting research, is not. Within the Roma studies there have been constant critiques about how those producing knowledge about Roma do not identify as Roma themselves and through research practices they often construct Roma as ‘the Other’ (e.g. Matache, 2017b).

Discussion: Silence about HE and Structural Racism In this chapter, we have analysed how HE is discussed in Nordic Roma and Traveller policy documents. We found that there is a discursive silence and a lack of systematic goal-setting related to widening the participation of Roma and Travellers in Nordic HE. Furthermore, we have identified two problem representations from the policies: (1) lack of academic capability and aspirations of Roma and Travellers and (2) lack of research and teaching about Roma culture and language at universities. The policies stem from the multicultural framework in education instead of anti-racism (Troyna, 1987; Gillborn, 2006). Thus, the policies rely on ‘support’ and adding knowledge about the groups, but they do not address structural problems such as racism in education. In the policy documents HE as a topic remains in silence, hence the underrepresentation in HE is not seen as a policy problem that needs specific goals and follow-up measures. By not making HE ‘an object of thought’ (Foucault, 1988: 257), the analysed Nordic policy documents limit the horizon of possibilities for Roma and Travellers. Furthermore, the analysed policies totally overlook those Roma and Traveller students who are today entering HE. However, Roma language and culture are emphasized as important subjects at universities, which results in Roma and Travellers being mostly objects of university teaching and research in the analysed policies. This does not strengthen the agency of Roma and Travellers with regard to knowledge production about their own culture and language (or any other research areas).

162

The Roma in European Higher Education

The silence about HE is repeatedly constructed through referencing how equal the Nordic education systems already are. These notions reinforce the discourse that everyone in the educational system gets as far as their potential carries them. Through references to universalism and already egalitarian systems, no clear subjectivity within HE is opened up for Roma and Travellers. The individualistic subjectivity of a pupil who has an opportunity to develop knowledge, skills and abilities as far as possible may not be sufficient to increase the participation in HE. On the contrary, this may put forth the idea that if individuals do not achieve HE, it is because they did not have the necessary potential. This conceals the structural barriers such as racism (Tomlinson, 2008; Gillborn, 2014). The subjectivities that are provided for Roma and Travellers by the policy problem representations are as those who are lacking academic potential and having special needs, as needing motivation and attitude change, and if they have aspirations to access and complete HE, as those who require extra mentoring. Thus, whereas the policies reinforce the notion of everyone getting as far as their potential carries them, implying that the reasons for under-representation can be found within the under-represented groups themselves, the potential and aspirations of Roma and Travellers become questioned in the analysed policy documents. In this way Roma and Travellers are constructed as responsible for their under-representation in HE instead of turning the gaze towards structural discrimination and racism (cf. Araújo, 2016). In this chapter, we have focused on the policy texts and the representations they produce. We have not followed up the implementation of the policies. Although we find that the policy texts are insufficient, in practice such policies have various consequences. For example, research and teaching on Romani language in Finland has led to Roma participating in non-degree level language courses. Similarly, in Sweden the non-degree level Roma mediator and mother tongue teacher training are connected to research on Romani language and culture and the students in these training are Roma themselves (Rodell-Olgaç and Dimitri-Taikon, 2016). Thus, strengthening research about Roma and Travellers in the universities has provided possibilities to include Roma and Travellers within HE communities. We find, however, that it is not enough that the policies may result in some type of participation of Roma and Travellers in HE. Instead, the policies should clearly state a goal to increase participation of Roma and Travellers in student and research communities and the completion of full HE degrees. The lack of political will to widening participation neglects the important role of HE for societal transformation.

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

163

References Ahmed, S. (2000). Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality. London and New York: Routledge. AID [Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepartementet]. (2009). ‘Action Plan for Improvement of the Living Conditions of Roma in Oslo’. Oslo: The Ministry for Work and Inclusion. Available online: https​://ww​w.reg​jerin​gen.n​o/glo​balas​sets/​uploa​d/fad​/vedl​egg/s​ami/ n​asjmi​n/han​dling​splan​_rom_​en.pd​f. Accessed 8 April 2019. Alexiadou, N. and Norberg, A. (2015). ‘Roma, Education, and Higher Education Policies: The International Context and the Case of Sweden’. Available online: http:​ //umu​.diva​-port​al.or​g/sma​sh/ge​t/div​a2:80​6117/​FULLT​EXT02​.pdf.​ Accessed 11 July 2019. Anker, J., Holch, J. A., Høwisch Kristensen, M. and Nielsen, T. A. (2011). ‘Denmark. Promoting Social Inclusion of Roma: A Study of National Policies’. European Commission. Available online: https​://ec​.euro​pa.eu​/soci​al/ma​in.js​p?pag​er.of​f set=​ 0&​;catI​d=89&​amp;l​angId​=en&a​mp;ne​wsId=​1407&​amp;t​ableN​ame=n​ews&a​ mp;mo​reDoc​ument​s=yes​ Araújo, M. (2016). ‘A Very “Prudent Integration”: White Flight, School Segregation and the Depoliticization of (Anti-)Racism’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19(2), 300–23. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing Policy: What’s the Problem Represented to Be?. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson. Bacchi, C. (2000). ‘Policy as Discourse: What Does It Mean? Where Does It Get Us?’ Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21 (1), 45–57. doi:10.1080/01596300050005493 Bacchi, C. and Goodwin, S. (2016). Poststructural Policy Analysis: A Guide to Practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Ball, S. J. (1993). ‘What Is Policy? Texts, Trajectories and Toolboxes’. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 13(2), 10–17. Ball, S. J. (2015). ‘What Is Policy? 21 Years Later: Reflections on the Possibilities of Policy Research’. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(3), 306–13. Bijvoet, E. and Fraurud, K. (2007). ‘Det romska språket och romsk språkvård i Sverige’. Available online: https​://ww​w.spr​akoch​folkm​innen​.se/d​ownlo​ad/18​.4aec​91b21​ 45652​40e19​1055/​13986​88312​019/D​et+ro​mska+​sprC3​A5ket​+och+​romsk​+sprC​ 3A5kv​C3A5r​d+i+S​verig​e+200​7.pdf​. Accessed 12 April 2019. Bøyum, S. (2014). ‘Fairness in Education – A Normative Analysis of OECD Policy Documents’. Journal of Education Policy, 29(6), 856–70. Brüggemann, C. (2014). ‘Romani Culture and Academic Success: Argument Against the Belief in a Contradiction’. Intercultural Education, 25, 439–52. Burke, P. J. (2012). The Right to Higher Education. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

164

The Roma in European Higher Education

Burke, P. J., Bennett, A., Burgess, A., Gray, K. and Southgate, E. (2016). ‘Capability, Belonging and Equity in Higher Education: Developing Inclusive Approaches’. The University of Newcastle, Australia. Available onlin​e: ht​tps:/​/www.​newca​stle.​edu. a​u/__d​ata/a​ssets​/pdf_​file/​0011/​24399​2/CAP​ABILI​TY-ON​LINE.​pdf Busk Laursen, J. and Muncan, B. (2004). ‘Danmark og romaerne’. romnet.dk. Available online: http://www.romnet.dk/romafolketdk.html. Accessed 11 July 2019. Börjesson M., Ahola, S., Helland, H. and Thomsen, J.-P. (eds). (2014). Enrollment Patterns in Nordic Higher Education, ca 1945 to 2010. Institutions, Types of Education and Fields of Study. Oslo: Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU). CoE [Council of Europe] Treaty 157. (n.d.). ‘Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities’. Available online: http:​//www​.coe.​int/e​n/web​/mino​ritie​s/ tex​t-of-​the-c​onven​tion.​ Accessed 12 April 2019. CoE [Council of Europe]. ETS No. 148. (n.d.). ‘European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages’. Available online: http:​//www​.coe.​int/e​n/web​/euro​pean-​chart​erre​giona​l-or-​minor​ity-l​angua​ges/t​ext-o​f-the​-char​ter. Accessed 12 April 2019. Engebrigtsen, A. I. (2015). ‘Educating the Roma: The Struggle for Cultural Autonomy in a Seminomadic Group in Norway’. Social Inclusion, 3(5), 115–25. European Commission. (2011). ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of the Regions an Eu Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies Up to 2020’. Available online: https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/lega​l-con​tent/​EN/TX​T/?qi​ d=144​49101​04414​&​uri=C​ELEX:​52011​DC017​3. Accessed 16 August 2019. European Commission. (2014). ‘The European Union and Roma – Factsheet Denmark’. Available online: https​://ec​.euro​pa.eu​/info​/site​s/inf​o/fil​es/fa​ctshe​et_4.​pdf. Accessed 11 July 2019. Foucault, M. (1988). ‘The Concern for Truth’. In Lawrence D. Kritzman (eds), Foucault: Politics, Philosophy and Culture: Interviews and Other Writings 1977–1984, 1st edn, 255–70. London: Routledge. Gillborn, D. (2014). ‘Racism as Policy: A Critical Race Analysis of Education Reforms in the United States and England’. The Educational Forum, 78(1): 26–41. Gillborn, D. (2006). ‘Critical Race Theory and Education: Racism and Antiracism in Educational Theory and Praxis’. Discourse, 27(1), 11–32. Gillborn, D. (2008). Racism and Education: Coincidence or Conspiracy? Abingdon Oxon and New York: Routledge. Hagatun, K. (2019). ‘The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway. A country study’. In A. Óhidy and K. R. Forray (eds), Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 91–112. UK: Emerald publishing. Hedman, H. (2015). ‘Suomen romanikielen asemaan ja säilymiseen vaikuttavia tekijöitä’. In M. Huhtanen and M. Puukko (eds), Romanikielen asema, opetus ja osaaminen: Romanikielen oppimistulokset perusopetuksen 7.-9. vuosiluokilla 2015, 21–37. Tampere: Kansallinen koulutuksen arviointikeskus.

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

165

Helakorpi, J. (2019). ‘Knowledge About Roma and Travellers in Nordic Schools: Paradoxes, Constraints and Possibilities’. In S. Keskinen, U.D. Skaptadóttir and M. Toivanen (eds), Undoing Homogeneity: Migration, Difference and the Politics of Solidarity, 69–87. Abingdon and New York: Routledge. Helakorpi, J. (forthcoming). ‘Innocence, Privilege and Responsibility: Power Relations in Policies and Practices on Roma, Travellers and Basic Education in Three Nordic Countries’. PhD, University of Helsinki. Helakorpi, J., Lappalainen, S. and Mietola, R. (2020). ‘Equality in the Making? Roma and Traveller Minority Policies and Basic Education in Three Nordic Countries’. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64, 1, s. 52–69. Isopahkala-Bouret, U., Börjesson, M., Beach, D., Haltia, N., Jónasson J. T., Jauhiainen, A., Jauhiainen, A., Kosunen, S., Nori, H. and Vabø, A. (2018). ‘Access and Stratification in Nordic Higher Education. A Review of Cross-Cutting Research Themes and Issues’. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 142–54, Jacobs, L. A. (2013). ‘A Vision of Equal Opportunities in Postsecondary Education’. In H.-D. Meyer, P. E. St. John, M. Chankseliani and L. Uribe (eds), Fairness in Access to Higher Educatino in a Global Perspective, 41–56. Rotterdam: Springer. Krauss, P. A. and Kivistö, P. (eds). (2015). The Challenge of Minority Integration Politics and Policies in the Nordic Nations. Berlin: DeGruyter. Lassen Olesen, C. and Eklund Karlsson, L. (2018). ‘Roma Representation in Danish Roma Policy and Public Discourse—A Critical Analysis’. Societies, 8(3), 1–11. London Communiqué. (2007). ‘Towards the European Higher Education Area: Responding to Challenges in a Globalised World’. Available online: http:​//www​.ehea​ .info​/Uplo​ad/do​cumen​t/min​ister​ial_d​eclar​ation​s/200​7_Lon​don_C​ommun​ique_​ Engli​sh_58​8697.​pdf. Accessed 10 July 2019. Matache, M. (2017a). ‘Biased Elites, Unfit Policies: Reflections on the Lacunae of Roma Integration Strategies’. European Review, 25 (4), 588–607. Matache, M. (2017b). ‘Dear Gadjo (non-Romani) Scholars…’ [Blog] Harvardfxb Center for Health and Human Rights. Available at: https​://fx​b.har​vard.​edu/2​017/0​6/19/​ dear-​gadje​-non-​roman​i-sch​olars​/. Accessed 12 April 2019. Ministry for Social Affairs and Integration (MSAI). (2011). ‘Presentation to the European Commission of Denmark’s National Roma Inclusion Strategy’. Available online: https​://ec​.euro​pa.eu​/info​/site​s/inf​o/fil​es/ro​ma_de​nmark​_stra​tegy_​en.pd​f. Accessed 10 July 2019. Montesino Parra, N. (2002). Zigenarfrågan: Intervention och romantik. PhD, Lunds Universitet. Morley, L. and Lugg, R. (2009). ‘Mapping Meritocracy: Intersecting Gender, Poverty, and Higher Educational Opportunity Structures’. Higher Education Policy, 22, 37–60. MSAH (Ministry of Social Affairs and Health). (2018). ‘Finland’s National Roma Policy (ROMPO) 2018-2022’. Helsinki: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. [online] Available at: http:​//jul​kaisu​t.val​tione​uvost​o.fi/​bitst​ream/​handl​e/100​24/16​0845/​03_18​

166

The Roma in European Higher Education

_Suom​en%20​roman​ipoli​ittin​en%20​ohjel​ma_20​18_20​22_we​b.pdf​?sequ​ence=​1&​ ;isAl​lowed​=y. Accessed 20 April 2019. Muižnieks, N. (2015). ‘Report by Nils Muižnieks Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe Following His Visit to Norway from 19 to 23 January 2015’. Available online: http://www. human​right​seuro​pe.or​g/201​6/04/​nils-​muizn​ieks-​ human​-righ​ts-an​nual-​repor​t-201​5/. Accessed 9 April 2019. Norges offentlige utredninger (NOU). (2015). ‘Assimilering og motstand Norsk politikk overfor taterne/romanifolket fra 1850 til i dag’ (NOU 2015:17). Available online: https​://ww​w.reg​jerin​gen.n​o/no/​dokum​enter​/nou-​2015-​7/id2​41431​6/. Accessed 10 July 2019. OECD. (2019). ‘Population with Tertiary Education (Indicator)’. doi: 10.1787/0b8f90e9-en. Accessed11 July 2019. Pulma, P. (2006). Suljetut ovet: Pohjoismaiden romanipolitiikka 1500-luvulta EU-aikaan. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Rajala, S. and Blomerus, S. (2015). Katsaus aikuisten romanien koulutustaustoihin. Helsinki: Finnish National Agency of Education. Rajala, S., Salonen, M., Blomerus, S. and Nissilä, L. (2011). Romanioppilaiden perusopetuksen tilannekatsaus 2010–2011 ja toimenpide-ehdotukset. Helsinki: National Agency of Education. Rodell Olgaç, C. and Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2016). Romsk brobyggarutbildning med inriktning mot skolan 2012-2015: Högre utbildning, social mobilitet och interkulturellt kapital. Södertörns: högskola. Skr. (2011). ‘Regeringens skrivelse 2011/12:56 En samordnad och långsiktig strategi för romsk inkludering 2012–2032’. Available at: https​://ww​w.reg​ering​en.se​/49ba​fe/co​ ntent​asset​s/4a3​df6c1​15584​78293​5d8d9​efa7a​b6e3/​en-sa​mordn​ad-oc​h-lan​gsikt​igst​rateg​i-for​-roms​k-ink​luder​ing-2​012-2​032-s​kr.-2​01112​56. Accessed 20 April 2019. SOU [Statens offentliga utredningar]. (2010). ‘Romers rätt – en strategi för romer i Sverige. [online] Stockholm’. Available online: http:​//www​.rege​ringe​n.se/​ratts​ dokum​ent/s​taten​s-off​entli​ga-ut​redni​ngar/​2010/​07/so​u-201​055/.​ Accessed 8 April 2019. St. Meld. (2000). St.meld.nr. 15 (2000–2001) Nasjonale minoritetar I Noreg – Om statleg politikk overfor jødar, kvener, rom, romanifolket og skogfinnar. Det Kongelege kommunal- og regionaldepartement. Available at: https​://ww​w.reg​jerin​gen. n​o/no/​dokum​enter​/stme​ld-nr​-15-2​000-2​001-/​id585​195/.​ Accessed 20 April 2019. Thomsen, J. P., Munk, M. D., Eiberg, M. and Hansen, G. I. (2013). ‘The Educational Strategies of Danish University Students from Professional and Working-Class Backgrounds’. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 457–80. Tomlinson, S. (2008). Race and Education: Policy and Politics in Britain. McGraw-Hill Education. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill. Troyna, B. (1987). ‘Beyond Multiculturalism: Towards the Enactment of Anti‐racist Education in Policy, Provision and Pedagogy’. Oxford Review of Education, 13(3), 307–20.

Higher Education in Nordic Roma and Traveller Policy Documents

167

Tyldum, G. and Friberg, J. H. (2014). Et skritt på veien: Evaluering av handlingsplan for å bedre levekårene blant rom i Oslo. [online] Oslo: Fafo. Available at: http:​//www​.fafo​.no/ i​ndex.​php/z​oo-pu​blika​sjone​r/faf​o-rap​porte​r/ite​m/et-​skrit​t-pa-​veien​. Accessed: 20 April 2019. van Baar, H. (2012). ‘Toward a Politics of Representation Beyond Hegemonic Neoliberalism: The European Romani Movement Revisited’. Citizenship Studies, 16 (2), 287–96. DOI: 10.1080/13621025.2012.667620 Vermeersch, P. (2006). The Romani Movement: Minority Politics and Ethnic Mobilization in Contemporary Central Europe. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.

9

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy The Case of Serbia Tanja Jovanovic

Introduction Social exclusion, economic marginalization and poor educational opportunities experienced by the Roma minority in Serbia suggest a further level of exclusion from the ‘global knowledge economy’ (Morley, 2014). According to Roberts (2009: 299), the shift towards knowledge is a key economic resource; however, ‘there are some regions of the world that are so poor that their ability to participate in a global knowledge economy is very limited’. Furthermore, the efforts of those suffering economic exclusion to interact with the ‘global knowledge economy’ are often frustrated by ‘the strategies of knowledge accumulation pursued by corporations in the advanced world’ (Roberts, 2009: 299). In terms of education today, Roma people remain highly under-represented at HE level throughout Serbia, with less than 1 per cent from the total number of Roma population. More precisely, the participation of the Roma in the student population is sixteen times smaller than their peers in the total population of Serbia (EQUI-ED, 2012). In the light of this, there is an overwhelming case for the educational inclusion in terms of full equality of opportunity for Serbian’s Roma minority. Thus, research about improving the education of Roma have started gaining momentum and the discussion has started to include topics such as access and provision of education (Milivojevic, 2008; EQUI-ED, 2012). This chapter draws on the data from my PhD about experiences of Roma people in accessing HE in Serbia through qualitative feminist research. The study aimed to explore the journey of Roma students in succeeding to access HE in Serbia. This is important because it is integral in improving Roma people’s life chances and

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

169

employment opportunities, which subsequently affect their welfare, enabling social mobility (Morley et al., 2010).

Economic Argument of Widening Access of Roma in HE It is widely accepted that the main driver of economic growth is financial capital (Bassanini and Scarpetta, 2001). Capital is the accumulation of physical and financial assets used in the production of goods, services and information. An important factor of economic growth and development is human capital, and the dominant policy discourse views human capital investment – investing in education and health, to increase people’s productive capacity – as a significant factor for development. According to Reich (1983) investment in human resources occupies a very important place in today’s technology because ‘this new technology requires highly trained workers to rapidly shift tasks; indeed, some argue that knowledge is now the greatest component of competitive advantage’ (p. 236). Education is held to be a major stimulus for human development (Jalilian, 2012), and this means that investment in education is necessary, to overcome poverty. Economic development requires a greater number of educated people in society. Poverty in developing countries also influences the further development of developed countries because increased migration to Western countries/the Global North slows their economies and increases their costs. Therefore, poverty in developing countries is a problem for the entire global society, North and South. Thus, it is held that investing in human capital creates wealth that will benefit not only individuals but also society at the local, national, regional and global levels. In HE it has been argued that society has moved into what is sometimes referred to as the ‘global knowledge economy’ (Morley, 2014). This idea argues that knowledge is increasingly important to both economic output and social cohesion, with an increasing number of workers involved in ‘knowledge work’ (Roberts, 2009: 289; Morley, 2014). However, the participation of workers from historically marginalized communities in the ‘global knowledge economy’ is thought to be precarious when ‘the distribution of spending on education is … uneven’ (Roberts, 2009: 290), threatening to perpetuate historical patterns of social exclusion further into the globalized era. Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin American and the Caribbean are particularly threatened in this way, while North America and Europe are held to be ‘knowledge-privileged’. However, Serbia is among the least well-off parts of Europe due to recent experiences

170

The Roma in European Higher Education

of political transition and war; hence, the level of social exclusion, economic marginalization and poor educational opportunities experienced by the Roma minority in Serbia suggests a further levels of exclusion from the ‘global knowledge economy’ (RECI, 2012): Serbia is marginalized within Europe, the Roma are marginalized within Serbia, and Serbian women, as discussed earlier are doubly marginalized within Serbia and within their own communities. This has negative impacts, not only for the Roma themselves but also for Serbian European social cohesion because there is an imbalance in opportunities in accessing the knowledge. Investment in education is a long-term endeavour, although it has a net lasting impact on individuals, communities and the wider society. The return for the society or nation at large might be obvious – better educated people are at the same time a better skilled workforce, which further translates to a stronger economy and a wealthier and more stable society and nation. Systematic changes in production in the era of information technology require as highly educated a workforce as possible. The shift towards knowledge is thus a key economic resource; however, ‘there are some regions of the world that are so poor that their ability to participate in a global knowledge economy is very limited’ (Roberts, 2009: 299). Furthermore, Roberts stresses how the efforts of those suffering economic exclusion to interact with the ‘global knowledge economy’ are often frustrated because the focus of life priorities changes, it becomes a matter of existence and survival rather than aspiration. For the World Bank, increasing participation in HE is essential for economic growth, social justice and stability, and furthering this requires a range of measures such as increasing the quality of secondary education, preferential enrolment policies and the remission of fees aimed at increasing the participation of ‘low-income ethnic minority and female students’ in HE, since ‘equity cannot be achieved in higher education unless women, low-income youths and other disadvantaged subgroups of the population have access to good quality public education’ (p. 12). Thus, even the financially driven perspective of the World Bank suggests the importance of widening participation of Roma students in Serbian education, for the benefit of Serbia’s and the EU’s economic development, social justice and stability. According to the World Bank (2010, cited in Arandarenko, 2011), due to its financial crisis on the way into the EU, Serbia has faced very serious unemployment challenges that are closely connected to systemic education problems. With a severely devastated economy after the end of the Milosevic regime, the transition to a modern market economy has not been easy for the citizens of Serbia. The impact of the global financial-economic crisis beginning

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

171

in 2008 has worsened the situation by producing a steady increase in the unemployment rate in Serbia. World Bank records have shown an increase in Serbia’s unemployment rate from 13.6 per cent in 2008 to 19.2 per cent in 2010. The ratio between men and women losing jobs also shows a negative trend. In 2008, males suffered less unemployment (11.9 per cent) than females (15.8 per cent), while in 2010 that difference decreased to 18.4 against 20.2 per cent. Further, young people face more severe consequences due to the crisis in Serbia. Unemployment has been highest among the youngest age group (i.e. fifteen to twenty-four years). In 2010, it reached 46.1 per cent (Arandarenko, 2011). Records of the OECD (2011) show that the Serbian government has spent 5 per cent of its GDP in 2009, which is relatively close to the EU average of 5.41 per cent. Clearly, much of the EU is much wealthier than Serbia. Overall, the unemployment rate is more than double the 9.7 per cent rate in the EU average, presenting a precarious economic outlook for Serbia. Moreover, Vukovic and Perisic (2011b) describe an even more dramatic situation, with a third of the unemployed workforce having never worked. In other words, 266,148 Serbian citizens have not recorded a day of official employment. About half of these people belong to the category of youth while 158,593 are women. The main two reasons for this situation are low levels of education and skills incompatible with labour market demands. The authors also report that about 40 per cent of the unemployed do not have any formal educational qualifications, and only 2.8 per cent have graduated from a college or university, while more than half have completed secondary education. On the other hand, the requirements of the labour market in Serbia do not match the knowledge and skills of the never employed. For this reason, those have never been employed have been waiting for a job from four to five years on average, while more than 30,000 Serbian citizens have not found a job ten years after their graduation. These are devastating data for a country that is one of the biggest economies among the EU accession countries in the Balkans.

Institutions and Racial Discrimination in HE Discrimination includes the specific social attitudes of systematic racial discrimination within the institution and in the wider social and political structures. As Ahmed (2007, 2009) explained, physical or verbal violence towards those considered ‘other’ is not merely an individual act, but reflective of wider institutional attitudes of racism. My experience while conducting my

172

The Roma in European Higher Education

research was that it was common for participants to talk about experiencing discrimination as part of the educational system that negatively affected their experiences and contributed to a struggle throughout the educational process, including accessing HE. They talked about systematic exclusion based on their skin colour and ethnicity, and the effect of this on their experience of education and the learning process. My participant Milija stated that as a student in primary school he was labelled by ethnically ‘white’ children as being ‘disabled’ because of his Roma ethnicity: In primary school I remember going to a school with white children who considered me disabled; not because I was disabled, but because I was Roma and considered incapable of learning. (Milija) When I came to the professor to register my exam score – that I passed with nine out of ten – the professor asked me: ‘Sorry, where are you from?’ When I responded that I am from Novi Sad he said ‘Because you are dark skinned I thought you were from another country.’ I could see he was surprised that a Roma woman passed the exam with a nine and already finished the study. (Jagoda)

These quotations illustrate how ethnicity and skin colour can create prejudiced expectations of the capabilities of Roma students. They also provide examples of how racial discrimination can often be embedded in Serbia, via attitudes and practices. The Roma are often classified within the education systems in the region as being ‘disabled’ or having special needs because of their skin colour and ethnicity (O’Nions, 2010; Ilisei, 2012). There is often an assumption that all Roma children are remedial, for example (Telles and Steele, 2012). This seems to be in keeping with the Black feminist arguments regarding ‘pigmentocracy’. Pigmentocracy suggests that racism is based on the assumption that people with dark skins are incapable or less capable compared to people with white skins (McGarry, 2012, 2017; Telles, 2014; Lynn, 2008). In the Serbian context, it also illustrates how educational institutions, instead of challenging racism, become places where racism is nurtured and perpetuated. Official assumptions about Roma intelligence in the education and healthcare systems mean that they can end up in special needs or segregated schools with limited resources and support to help them progress through the education system (Shattuck, 2012). Regarding segregation, the Roma have been victims of assimilationist educational strategies, which promote one national vision for education while applying a deficit theory. The focus on deficit has also led to widespread educational segregation. This means that while segregation has now been prohibited across the EU (and

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

173

there for the new and aspirant EU states of the region), meaningful integration is proceeding at a very slow pace. Moreover, while separate schools for Roma and non-Roma children are now illegal, many institutions are resorting to internalized segregation, whereby Roma children are educated in the same building but not in the same classroom as non-Roma. The effects of segregation are significant, damaging career prospects through low attainment, limiting attainment, damaging ethnic relations and promoting intolerance and suspicion of the other. My data underline the ways in which the legacy of segregation and other forms of institutional education in the Serbian school system is perpetuated in HE, career and almost certainly throughout the lifespan. Roma drop out of school at an early age, reducing further the numbers who progress to higher levels of education. According to statistics by UNICEF (2010), only 4 per cent of Roma children population attended pre-primary school, compared with 33 per cent of non-Roma children in Serbia. Moreover, lack of attendance leads to high dropout rates, especially in HE. From my interviews, it emerged that institutional racism is apparent in more than just the recruitment process. It is also demonstrated in the actions of those in positions of relative power and authority over Roma students, such as lecturers, tutors and university administrators who casually draw on common social stereotypical views about Roma: The criminology class professor, there I had lot of problems. Actually not, actually yes … He is lecturing about stealing. In an amphitheater in front of 600 students he starts talking about how Gypsies stole his bike. Then in his next lecture about house burglary he again gives Gypsies as an example. In another lecture he is talking about a Gypsy drill for stealing. In fact, it is not called Gypsy. It is a hand drill. But he referred to the drill as a Gypsy drill because it was about burglary. (Milijan)

The word ‘Gypsy’ is translated as ‘chigani’, a highly pejorative and racist Serbian word for Roma comparable to the ‘n-word’ used for people of colour, or the English word ‘Pykie’ for ‘Gypsy’. This quote illustrates the extent to which racism is often embedded in Serbian institutions, and how it plays a role in shaping not only student participation in HE but also their experience of racism in general. In this context, stereotypical cultural views about the Roma as thieves, lazy, incapable or even congenitally ‘disabled’ are manifested and, ethically and professionally, are problematic for the institution if they are institutionally enabled rather than challenged. In his argument, individual prejudice and racialized discrimination are still a dominant ideology. These quotes show just how low Roma people

174

The Roma in European Higher Education

are regarded in society by some individuals, and the ways in which they are prejudicially criminalized and even pathologized. The data also demonstrate how individual acts of racial discrimination (the Criminology professor giving examples of Roma as thieves) cannot be considered as exceptional, but rather as a collective act if not punished by the institution and guarded against by its principles and mission. Phillips (2011) also asserts that institutional racialization gradually accepts the numerous disadvantages experienced across connected experiences, created through institutions’ regular operations, regardless of the intent of individual actors. In the case of Roma, being perceived as ‘other’ along racist lines has become so normalized that institutions do not recognize it as a problem. One classmate, Rista, was making very pejorative and bad jokes about gypsies in front of me and everybody was laughing in the class. I was always feeling embarrassed after that. Like I did something wrong.(Jela) Whenever they say something bad about Roma I can’t do anything. I think it is pointless. No-one thinks it’s wrong. And I don’t want to cause trouble for others or for myself by telling them it is not right. I have to live with it.(Jakov)

These students’ experiences show how acts and attitudes of racism are normalized in Serbian HE institutions, not only by academic staff but also by their ethnically Serb peers. Apparently, even today, despite the various initiatives outlined earlier, it is acceptable to publicly make racist jokes and derogatory comments about Roma in Serbian institutions of learning. Roma students are also expected not to respond to such discrimination. Their decision to remain silent not only illustrates a desire to not be perceived as a troublemaker but also demonstrates an acceptance that the expression of negative views about Roma is ‘normal’. Accusations of racism can damage the reputation of HE institutions if unacknowledged and not rigorously responded to. As creators and shapers of knowledge, such institutions have the power to normalize such racist and antisocial behaviours and attitudes such as racism. As Ahmed (2012) states, ‘Describing the problems of racism can mean being treated as if you have created the problems’ (p. 152). Endorsement of these views is not just about the individual but also about being widespread in society. My interviewee’s silence and feeling of wrongdoing, shows how she sees herself as an ‘outsider within’, as feminists of colour were considered within white middle-class feminism (Collins, 1998). Through a postcolonial, feminist lens we can see how experiences of oppression and marginalization based on skin colour intersect with patriarchal oppression,

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

175

and issues of identity and gender. The subordinate attitude of the interviewee is also linked to gendered cultures within a patriarchal society. When left unchallenged, acts of discrimination encourage others to behave in a similar way thereby perpetuating racism. This is demonstrated by the fact, according to my participant, that the professor does not expect to have his racist views challenged; apparently, nobody, apart from my interviewee, in the class expressed a view that his comments might be offensive. Within HE institutions, academics create and influence student behaviour and, as an authority figure, he might be said to reflect the collective attitude of the institution, if he goes unchallenged, the institution is complicit (Phillips, 2011). However, if identified and called by its name, institutional racism ‘becomes personalised’ because it becomes about the reputation of the institution (Ahmed, 2012: 146). And when it comes to reputation, the success of the individual is interpreted as a collective success while a failure remains that of the individual because an institution’s image – and its ‘whiteness’ – must be protected – ‘promoting diversity can be a method of protecting whiteness’ (p. 147). The ‘whiteness’ in my context is the majority white population of Serbia. So why is there this disparity in the interpretation of success versus failure and the collective versus the individual? It is the way in which HE institutions ‘allow racism and inequality to be overlooked’ (Ahmed, 2012: 14) while appropriating the ‘language of diversity’ when necessary: something similar is happening in Serbia, where, despite the anti-racist measures mentioned earlier and measures to promote Roma inclusion in Serbian HE, anti-Roma institutional racism within HE apparently continues with impunity. In this way, institutional racism not only affects the pre-existing values of the institution but also inhibits the new diversity agenda if individual attitudes are ignored by the institution or viewed as individual failures ‘bad apples’, ‘a rotten egg’, rather than institutional failures. It is also worth noting that it is difficult to hide a negative stereotypical attitude by an institution via its members when the focus of the racism is a visible difference, such as skin colour. In my research, it was interesting to see how the issue of skin colour appeared to shape my interviewees’ identities and sense of self. Whiteness is highly valued and is thus at the top of social hierarchy, while dark skin is at the bottom: Serbian national identity is predicated in a large part by whiteness. Of further interest is how the pigmentocratic racist hierarchy relates skin colour to intelligence (Lynn, 2008). Most of my research participants felt that their skin pigmentation had an impact on their learning experience at university. They described how experiences of racism led them to adopt a negative self-image and an acceptance that their skin

176

The Roma in European Higher Education

colour was problematic, ultimately developing a guilt about being dark-skinned. The majority also believed that if their skin were lighter, they would have received more favourable treatment and have access to more or better opportunities. The forming of a negative self-image is based on the preconceived ideas of others, a lack of confidence and fear of following a profession; not being accepted because of one’s skin colour has come to be perceived as ‘normal’ because it is no longer questioned in Serbian society – hence the ultimate futility of approaches to Roma inclusion based on enrolment and numbers. Clear divisions based on skin colour exist because of the assumption that skin colour determines personal character and ability. Harrison and Thomas (2009) asserted that race is still one of the most commonly used descriptors in modern society: ‘Skin colour is more salient and regarded more highly than one’s educational background and prior work experience’ (p. 1340). A sentiment reflected in the following quote from a Roma student participant: I do not know if it was luck or not that I did not have this problem because … I am not dark-skinned – it is not so obvious … My uncle has a lot of problems because he is very dark- skinned. (Borko)

Here, again, we see an example of self-subordination based on a lack of selfconfidence and internalized perceptions of inadequacy predicated upon on an arbitrary pigmentocratic set of prejudices on the part of the majority community.

Impact of Poverty on Roma Access to HE Access to education cannot be discussed divorced from consideration of the socio-economic contexts in which people live. Poor economic circumstances are widely agreed to play a significant role in undermining access to education (Ahmed and Sayed, 2009; Preece, 2006). Roma communities in Serbia are subject to intensive economic exclusion and related challenges. In the Central Eastern Europe region, for example, 71 per cent or more of Roma families live in relative poverty. In Serbia, 60.5 per cent of the Roma population are considered very poor, in comparison to just 6 per cent of the general Serbian population (World Bank, 2015; Tomovska, 2010). This means that we cannot talk about access to HE in the Serbian context without reference to the material and economic conditions in which people live. In this chapter, I consider poverty is to be more than just about financial power. I draw from Lister (2004) and Skeggs (2004) who conceptualize poverty

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

177

in a broader sense to include the non-material aspects of poverty such as shame, stigma, lack of dignity, voice and self-esteem, as well as denial of rights and diminished citizenship. This shows how lack of material and economic resources have a negative impact on non-material spheres of the society in terms of unequal access to citizens’ rights, including access to education. Further, poverty is related to deficiency of opportunities and vice versa, because even if you have opportunity you cannot use it without certain material and financial resources. Lack of money and opportunities leads therefore to limited choices and shortage of privileges. Also, the World Bank defines poverty as not only the problem of finances and earnings but also limited access to opportunities for human development that can be achieved through education (1994). Education has often been perceived as a policy response to poverty reduction in many political agendas and manifestos. In these contexts, a lack of education is perceived as the cause of many social problems such as poverty and exclusion. Thus, to address these issues, programmes aimed at increasing education have been implemented in many countries with the view that they will result in reduced poverty in society and increased wealth and stability. This view clearly sees close links between poverty and education. For example, the Serbian government designed a Strategy for Poverty Reduction (2010), aimed at addressing poverty as a social problem. Among the objectives of this strategy is education as a priority in reducing poverty in Serbia in general, and particularly the marginalization of the Roma people. Poverty reduction and inclusion has also been considered as being central to Serbia’s accession into the EU. In these policy debates, education and poverty are often taken to be inevitably related with the assumption that the higher the level of education of the population, the lower the proportion of poor people in the total population, as education impacts knowledge, skills and employability. The assumption here is that high skills are automatically associated with higher wages and earnings (Tilak, 2002), which leads to reduced poverty. However, the reality on the ground is more complex: because of the global market knowledge economy, the massification of HE increases competition in the job markets. In doing so it increases incomes and wages, and employers compete for better talents; widening participation therefore produces more knowledgeable and skilful people. Among these educated people there is a hierarchy of skills and reputations of institutions from which the skills are obtained. The implication for this is that widening participation does not help reduce poverty but emphasizes social inequality as more graduates from non-elite universities are not accessing employment, precisely the universities that Roma students are unlikely to enter due to the

178

The Roma in European Higher Education

prejudices and discrimination described at length earlier (Brown, 2007; Elias and Purcell, 2004). In countries where discrimination is culturally embedded in society, opportunities for marginalized groups become even more difficult. Due to poverty in marginalized groups, the barrier to education is exacerbated by the lack of information or even ability to make sense of information due to illiteracy. This is also related to a limitation of access to information that is applicable to students from disadvantaged backgrounds who have very limited options regarding which school to choose. This is not only because of financial barriers but also because of very limited information that students and their parents have, mostly due to lack of experience in HE in the family (Reay et al., 2005). Therefore, financial support within widening participation programmes has become a common strategy for enhancing access in HE of marginalized groups, but this is insufficient for a broader understanding of access where the aspect of prior preparation is involved. As Payne (2005: 1) explained, ‘Money makes human capital development easier, but money alone does not develop human capital.’ Further, this view adds credence to the proposition that widening participation focused on physical access into institution will not be effective if it does not account for the wider social inequalities experienced by marginalized groups. Other studies on the relationship between poverty and education have found that poverty in many poor communities is closely linked to low enrolment in schools and low completion levels, both factors that severely impact on Roma inclusion in Serbia. The reasons for children not being in school may range from demands for them to work as child labourers to provide for their families or work to pay for their education; however, generational poverty might mean that poor families might never be able to make adequate investments in education or even see education to be of value if their concern is simply how to bring food on the table for their families (Tilak, 2002). A notable consequence of poverty in the Roma population is readiness for school. Readiness for school education establishes a child’s ability to progress in academic and social contexts in educational environments. This preparedness involves proper cognitive development, emotional well-being, positive attitudes towards new experiences, and general knowledge and skills for the appropriate age group. Various studies have shown how poverty affects the readiness of a child for school in the dimensions of neighbourhoods, home life and health (BrooksGunn and Duncan, 1997; Ferguson, Bovaird and Mueller, 2007). Roma children who are brought up in poor settings are held back by social disorganization and limited resources for child development (Amnesty International, 2012). The influences of the neighbourhoods are concomitant with child and adolescent

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

179

outcomes (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997). The home environment involves variables such as learning opportunities, parent–child interactions, the warmth of family life and physical housing conditions. Longitudinal investigations for outcomes on the HOME scale – consisting of a myriad of factors assessing the home environment – revealed that there is significant correlation between the quality of living spaces and income ( Ferguson, Bovaird and Mueller, 2007). For most Roma populations in Serbia, living conditions are often bad (Joksic, 2015). Drawing from research findings by Ferguson, Bovaird and Mueller (2007), these conditions may well have a negative effect on the cognitive development of young Roma. The school environment is an amalgamation of factors affecting a child’s psychosocial development in the context of the educational environment (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997). Poor Roma children are not able to access quality education in Serbia due to the prevalence of discriminatory practices in schools (Rostas and Kostka, 2014). With a limited range of alternatives, parents opt to enrol their children in schools that suit their economic conditions. These schools often have administrations that do not have the human and material capacities to eliminate inequitable practices. For students wanting to do well at school, encountering barriers like this to their educational attainment can be very stressful. Poverty also affects the health of children and families. Parents who live in poverty are more likely to suffer from poor emotional and physical health than those in better income positions (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997), and record high levels of anxiety affecting their cognitive, social and emotional health (Ferguson, Bovaird and Mueller, 2007). If ill or injured, Roma most often visit doctors working in primary health care (62 per cent), where only 14 per cent are treated effectively. In many cases, serious health conditions remain untreated after diagnosis (Popovic and Stankovic, 2013). A study by the UNDP in Serbia found that the Roma population does not have access to quality health services while being more prone to chronic diseases than the majority population (UNDP Serbia, 2017). In search of evidence to support the correlation between school readiness and poverty, social scientists have carried out several studies. A study by Magnuson et al. (2005) found that children from low-income families had a much-reduced vocabulary in comparison to those from financially stable families. Ferguson, Bovaird and Mueller, (2007) also asserted that poor children are often enrolled at school at a cognitive and communicative disadvantage, and schools are rarely able to compensate adequately. The effects of poverty for children born into poor families can be analysed serially based on their level of educational attainment. In a study investigating

180

The Roma in European Higher Education

poorer children’s level of education, Chowdry, Crawford and Goodman, (2009) looked at the variables affecting children’s performance over several educational levels. They found that from birth to the age of five, children from poor backgrounds are already at a significant disadvantage in terms of emotional, social and cognitive development. Instead of levelling out over time, the gap between students from low and high-income families progressively widens as children grow and develop. Young Roma are also impacted by their social networks, their parents and their teachers who exert significant influence on their educational development (Chowdry et al., 2010). As a result, Roma children often lack the skills required to prepare them for learning in an educational institution, lack of proper role models and a lack of support (Chowdry et al., 2010). From birth through to primary school, the gap in educational achievement augments rapidly. By the age of eleven, almost 25 per cent of children from poor backgrounds drop out of the education system (Chowdry et al., 2010). In a longitudinal study conducted outside of the Roma context, Gregg and Washbrook (2009) found that poor children, who may have performed relatively well in primary school up to the age of seven, subsequently see their performance fall as they approach the age of eleven; moreover, their performance is less likely to improve over that period. Children are supposed to perform well if they are resolute, believe in the value of education, have a sense of self-control, have no behavioural problems and have not yet come into contact with discriminatory practices such as racist bullying or patriarchal marginalization of girls. However, most studies assert that students from indigenous backgrounds often lack these attributes that subsequently has a negative impact on their educational advancement (Guerrero et al., 2016). Psychological and social factors account for the biggest gaps between wealthy and poor students (Chowdry et al., 2010). Gaps in educational attainment in secondary schools follow a similar trend to that distorting early education and primary school. Studies by Chowdry, Crawford and Goodman (2009) suggested that gaps increase substantially between poor and relatively rich children; the author highlighted the importance of decisions made in early life in influencing achievement in the later teenage years. The researchers also noted differences in the families’ expectations of secondary education; poor parents often have poorer expectations of their children in comparison to richer parents. This is attributed to less family interaction, limited access to facilities at home such as computers and the internet, risky behaviour due to neighbourhood influences and bullying. Differences are most marked, however, in relation to the expectations of rich and poor with regard to HE.

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

181

Ferguson, Bovaird and Mueller (2007) advance a hypothesis that spans the contexts of students’ economic background and their social environments; they assert that children who lack consistent support from their families and communities have a higher probability of dropping out of or failing in HE. As discussed earlier, Roma populations are often treated with hostility by the mainstream population; therefore, educational stakeholders tend to be from mainstream society and treat those from minority populations as undeserving. Such is the environmental context into which most young Roma are born, and it is bound to negatively influence academic attainment as the student advances through the educational system. It has long been asserted that poverty has an overarching and persistent influence over the performance of children in schools (Sutton et al., 2007). The effects of poverty on behaviour are many, and come with additional socioemotional variables. Young Roma raised in poverty are marginalized in this way. They are also at higher risk of exposure to the risk factors resulting in failure than those from non-Roma backgrounds. Haveman and Wolfe (1994) assert, in a non-Roma context, that for every 10 per cent increase in family income, there is a 0.2–2 per cent increase in the number of school years completed by children and young people. Many longitudinal studies – carried out particularly in the United States and Europe – have confirmed the link between poverty and lower educational attainment. Although the methodologies used may differ, most studies in this area indicate that a reduction in poverty can increase levels of educational attainment (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997). Furthermore, a study by the Educational Testing Service in the United States in 2013 showed that increases in income for poor families had a positive relation to children’s educational outcomes (Coley, 2013). The logic may be expounded in economic or sociological terms: families with higher incomes are able to provide better learning environments, improved nutrition and safer living conditions for the development of their children. Equally, high-quality parental interactions linked with higher-income foster positive cognitive and communicative development in children. Overall, the influence of poverty on young Roma is far-reaching. They are early on exposed to multiple drivers of poverty as they navigate through the educational system. In most cases, these students’ studies are derailed due to influences from home and in the institutional environments themselves, which are host to various social and psychological factors negatively affecting their cognitive development and emotional well-being. Parents also play a pivotal role in the education of Roma children, and shape the home environment. To increase

182

The Roma in European Higher Education

educational attainment, academic educationalists and social scientists have advocated mechanisms that reduce children’s exposure to risk factors. Important among these strategies is reducing poverty through increases in income brought about by policies encouraging access to higher income for minority populations.

Conclusion This chapter has provided an overview of the socio-political and socio-economic contexts that form the background to Roma social exclusion in Serbia today, with a particular focus on Roma access to HE. Current intersection between racism and poverty is a key critical obstacle for Roma education in Serbian society. It is clear from the earlier discussion that Roma students experience a lot of challenges in accessing HE, ranging from wider social economic and political issues to personal circumstances that influence their education journeys. Improving access to HE requires addressing wider socio-economic and political issues. It is absolutely necessary that the shift moves away from ‘fix the Roma’ (Remedial Roma) to fix the institutions, fix civil society and fix the knowledge. To widen the participation to global knowledge economy for marginalized communities, there is need to consider the key critical issues such as poverty, the experience of discrimination and gender among others and how these impact on their potential to enter the education system.

References Ahmed, S. (2007). ‘A Phenomenology of Whiteness’. Feminist Theory, 8 (2), 149–68. Ahmed, S. (2009). ‘Embodying Diversity: Problems and Paradoxes for Black Feminists’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12 (1), 41–52. Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Durham: Duke University Press. Ahmed, R. and Sayed, Y. (2009). ‘Promoting Access and Enhancing Education Opportunities? The Case of ‘No‐Fees Schools’ in South Africa’. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39 (2), 203–18, DOI: 10.1080/03057920902750467. Arandarenko, M. (2011). Supporting Strategies to Recover from the Crisis in South Eastern Europe: Country Assessment: Serbia. International Labour Organisation (ILO). Bassanini, A. and Scarpetta, S. (2001). ‘Does Human Capital Matter for Growth in OECD Countries? Evidence from Pooled Mean-Group Estimates’. Paris: OECD Library.

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

183

Brooks-Gunn, J. and Duncan, G. J. (1997). ‘The Effects of Poverty on Children’. The Future of Children, 7 (2) (Summer–Autumn), 55–71. DOI: 10.2307/1602387. https:// www.jstor.org/stable/1602387 Brown, R. (2007). ‘Reeking hypocrisy? New Labour and widening participation in higher education’. perspectives, 11(4), 97–102. Chowdry, H., Crawford, C. and Goodman, A. (2009). Drivers and Barriers to Educational Success— Evidence from the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies/DCSF. Chowdry, H., Crawford, C., Dearden, L., Joyce, R., Sibieta, L., Sylva, K. and Washbrook, E. (2010). ‘Poorer Children’s Educational Attainment: How Important Are Attitudes and Behaviour’. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 1–72. Coley, R. J. and Baker, B. (2013). Poverty and Education: Finding the Way Forward. Educational Testing Service Center for Research on Human Capital and Education. Collins, P. H. (1998). Fighting Words: Black Women and the Search for Justice (Vol. 7). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Elias, P. and Purcell, K. (2004). ‘Is Mass Higher Education Working? Evidence from the Labour Market Experiences of Recent Graduates’. National Institute Economic Review, 190 (1), 60–74. EQUI-ED. (2012). ‘Socijalna dimenzija visokog obrazovanja u Srbiji’. Available at: www. e​quied​.ni.a​c.rs/​dokum​enti/​.../1​61-st​udija​-zate​cenog​-stan​ja.ht​ml. Last accessed 20th Jan 2015. Ferguson, H. B., Bovaird, S. and Mueller, M. P. (2007). ‘The Impact of Poverty on Educational Outcomes for Children’. Paediatrics & Child Health, 12(8), 701–6. Gregg, P. and Washbrook, E. (2009). ‘The Socioeconomic Gradient in Child Outcomes: The Role of Attitudes, Behaviours and Beliefs: The Primary School Years’. Report for the JRF. Bristol: CMPO, University of Bristol. Available at: www.b​risto​l.ac.​uk/cm​po/ pu​blica​tions​/othe​r/ Guerrero, G., C. Sugimaru, A. Cussianovich, B. De Fraine and S. Cueto., 2016. Education Aspirations Among Young People in Peru and their Perceptions of Barriers to Higher Education. Working Paper 148. Young Lives: Oxford. Harrison, M. S. and Thomas, K. M. (2009). ‘The Hidden Prejudice in Selection: A Research Investigation on Skin Color Bias’. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(1), 134–68. Haveman, R. and Wolfe, B. (1994). Succeeding Generations: On the Effects of Investments in Children. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Ilisei, I. (2012). ‘Education of Roma Women Between Feminism and Multiculturalism Study Case: Roma Women in Romania’. JSSE-Journal of Social Science Education, 12 (1), 67–74. Jalilian, P. (2012). ‘The Effect of Female Education on Human Development and Economic Growth: A Study of Human Capital Formation in Developing Countries’. Unpublished MA thesis, Sodertorn University, Sweden.

184

The Roma in European Higher Education

Joksic, T. (2015). ‘Discrimination of Roma in Serbia’. [online]. Available at: https​://ww​w. akt​ionbl​eiber​echt.​de/bl​og/wp​conte​nt/up​loads​/2014​/10/T​ijana​_Joks​ic_R oma_ Discrimantion-1.pdf. Accessed 23 June 2016. Lister, R. (2004). Poverty: Key Concepts. Cambridge: Polity. Lynn, R. (2008). ‘Pigmentocracy: Racial Hierarchies in the Caribbean and Latin America’. The Occidental Quarterly, 8 (2), 25–44. Magnuson, K., Meyers, M. K., Ruhm, C. J. and Waldfogel, J. (2005). ‘Inequality in Children’s School Readiness and Public Funding’. Focus, 24 (1), 12–18. McGarry, A. (2012). ‘The Dilemma of the European Union’s Roma Policy’. Critical Social Policy 32 (1), 126–36. McGarry, A. (2017). Romaphobia: The Last Acceptable Form of Racism. London: Zed Books. Milivojevic, Z. (2008). The Decade and Position of Roma in Serbia, 7. Serbia, Belgrade: Roma Centre for Democracy. Morley, L., Leach, F., Lussier, K., Lihamba, A., Mwaipopo, R., Forde, L. and Egbenya, G. (2010). Widening Participation in Higher Education in Ghana and Tanzania: Developing an Equity Scorecard. An ESRC/DFID Poverty Reduction Programme. Available at: http:​//www​.suss​ex.ac​.uk/e​ducat​ion/c​heer/​. Accessed: 12 December 2013. Morley, L. (2014). ‘Lost Leaders: Women in the Global Academy’. Higher Education Research & Development, 33 (1), 114–28. OECD. (2011). OECD Employment Outlook. Paris: OECD, 3-4. O’Nions, H. (2010). ‘Different and unequal: The Educational Segregation of Roma Pupils in Europe’. Intercultural Education, 21 (1), 1–13. Payne, R. K. (2005). A Framework for Understanding Poverty. Highlands, TX: Process. Phillips, C. (2011). ‘Institutional Racism and Ethnic Inequalities: An Expanded Multilevel Framework’. Journal of Social Policy, 40 (1), 173–92. Popovic, A. and Stankovic, J. (2013). Project FINNALY: Needs Assessment Report; Financial Literacy for the Roma;. [online] Lifelong Learning Programme. Available at: http:​//eko​nomsk​i-fak​ultet​.rs/d​l/FIN​ALLY/​Natio​nal-R​eport​-SERB​IA.pd​f. Accessed 17 February 2019. Preece, J. (2006). ‘Widening Participation for Social Justice: Poverty and Access to Education’. In A. Oduaran and H. S. Bhola (eds), Widening Access to Education as Social Justice. Dordrecht: Springer. Reay, D., David, M. E. and Ball, S. J. (2005). Degrees of Choice: Class, Race, Gender and Higher Education. Trent, UK and Sterling, USA: Trentham Books. RECI Bennett, J. (2012). Roma Early Childhood Inclusion Overview Report. [online] Open Society Fondation. Available at: https​://ww​w.ope​nsoci​etyfo​undat​ions.​org/r​ eport​s/rom​a-ear​ly-ch​ildho​od-in​clusi​on- overview-report. Accessed 23 October 2015. Reich, R. (1983). The Next American Frontier. New York: Time Books. Roberts, J. (2009). ‘The Global Knowledge Economy in Question’. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 5 (4), 285–303.

Widening Access of the Roma in the Global Knowledge Economy

185

Rostas, I. and Kostka, J. (2014). ‘Structural Dimensions of Roma School Desegregation Policies in Central and Eastern Europe’. European Educational Research Journal, 13 (3), 268–81. Scullion, LC. and Brown, P. (2016). ‘Understanding the Social Exclusion of Roma’. In: Working with Marginalised Groups, from Policy to Practice, Palgrave, 70–82. Shattuck, J. (2012). Ten Years After: A History of Roma School Desegregation in Central and Eastern Europe. In I. Rostas (ed.) (NED - New edition, 1). Budapest: Central European University Press. Skeggs, B. (2004). ‘Context and Background: Pierre Bourdieu’s Analysis of Class, Gender and Sexuality’. The Sociological Review, 52 (2), 19–33. Sutton, L., Smith, N., Dearden, C. and Middleton, S. (2007). A Child’s-Eye View of Social Difference. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Telles, E. (2014). Pigmentocracies: Ethnicity, Race, and Color in Latin America. Chapel Hill: UNC Press Books. Telles, E. and Steele, L. (2012). ‘Pigmentocracy in the Americas: How Is Educational Attainment Related to Skin Color?’ Americas Barometer Insights, 73, 1–9. Tilak, J. B. (2002). ‘Education and Poverty’. Journal of Human Development, 3(2), 191–207. Tomovska, I. (2010). ‘Poverty, Discrimination and the Roma: A Human Security Issue’. Human Security Perspectives, 73, 63–82. UNICEF. (2010). Progress for Children: Achieving the MDGs with Equity (No. 9). New York, USA: UNICEF. United Nations Development Programme. (2017). The Regional Survey on the SocioEconomic Position of Roma. [online report] Available at: http:​//www​.eura​sia.u​ndp. o​rg/co​ntent​/rbec​/en/h​ome/l​ibrar​y/rom​a/und​p-rom​a- survey--regional-brief-2017. html. Accessed: 10 February 2015. Vukovic, D. and Perisic, N. (2011a). ‘Pensions, Health Care and Long-term Care’, ASISP Annual National Report 2011 Republic of Serbia. Available at: http:​//www​.soci​alpro​ tecti​on.eu​/file​s_db/​1190/​asisp​_ANR1​1_Ser​bia.p​df. Accessed: 14 December 2015. Vuković, D. and Perišić, N. (2011b). ‘Social Security in Serbia -- Twenty Years Later’. Welfare states in transition, 20, 228–61. World Bank. (1994). Poverty Reduction in South Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank.

10

Greek Roma in Higher Education How Did They Get There? Panagiota Gkofa

Introduction Numerous European policies have targeted Roma’s education and inclusion, such as the Decade for Roma Inclusion, a policy initiative aimed at combating discrimination against the Roma in Europe, and the Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies, which established measures for Roma integration (Alexiadou, 2019). Despite some visible progress, Roma inclusion and quality education have not been ensured (Alexiadou, 2019). The Roma are one of the most disadvantaged groups throughout Europe (Iusmen, 2018; Alexiadou, 2017; Pantea, 2015; Macris, 2015; D’Arcy, 2014). Many Roma live in poverty and suffer from discrimination and prejudice driven by antigypsyism (e.g. difficulties in the transition from education to employment; high proportion of Roma experiencing discrimination in work-related situations – at work or while looking for work) (FRA, 2018). In the field of education, Roma occupy disadvantaged positions (Helakorpi, Lappalainen and Mietola, 2018), and perform lower than the average in many European countries (Alexiadou, 2017; Symeou, Luciak and Gobbo, 2009). In Greece, despite the implementation of state programmes which have targeted Roma’s schooling for the last two decades, Roma pupils’ erratic attendance, higher dropout rates and lower attainment as compared with non-Roma have been reported (Parthenis and Fragoulis, 2016; Dragonas, 2012; Kostouli and Mitakidou, 2009; Mavrommatis, 2008). In particular, according to FRA’s (2014) data for Greece, 43 per cent of Roma children of compulsory school age are not attending school (while the rate for non-Roma children is 3 per cent), while 44 per cent of Roma respondents aged sixteen and above said that they had never been to school.

Greek Roma in Higher Education

187

By contrast, drawing on a set of in-depth interviews conducted with twenty Greek Roma who have entered higher education in the context of my doctoral study (Gkofa, 2016), this chapter focuses on how these participants account for their educational success taking the Bourdieusian concepts of capital and habitus to frame this exploration (Bourdieu, 2006). Bourdieu (2004) was centrally concerned to explain how it was that societies reproduced themselves and sought to illustrate how it was that working-class children were unlikely to move out of their sociocultural contexts. Current studies on widening participation of nontraditional students in higher education are based on Bourdieusian concepts to understand students’ retention, such as Bradley’s (2017) study on the dilemmas of UK non-traditional undergraduate students in the UK and the study of NairzWirth, Feldmann and Spiegl (2017) on the obstacles non-traditional students confront during their undergraduate studies. As far as the Roma’s education at a higher level is concerned, Durst and Nyírő (2018) also draw on Bourdieu’s concepts to examine cases of twenty-five Roma graduates in Hungary who have been supported to study at university through organizations, ethnic support groups and Roma-related programmes. Similarly, in my doctoral study, Bourdieu’s concepts served as valuable theoretical resources for examining cases of Roma who progress in higher education in the Greek context. In my research, I take entrance to higher education as a marker of educational success because, as in many societies, in Greek society, higher education holds high symbolic and material value and is considered a lever of social mobility (Sianou‐Kyrgiou and Tsiplakides, 2011; Themelis, 2013). Moreover, only a few Roma appear to have entered higher education in Greece because, according to data coming from FRA (2014), more than 93  per cent of Roma in Greece aged eighteen to twenty-four did not complete upper secondary education. My argument here is that, rather than concentrating on reasons that influence disengagement from education, it may be useful to tease out what factors are involved in educational success for this community. This work may also be of interest for comparative analysis on Roma’s academic progression in different European contexts.

The Social Exclusion of the Roma in Greece The population of Roma in Greece is estimated to reach 265,000 people (Parthenis and Fragoulis, 2016) (about 3 per cent of the total population), although there is little data available about the Roma in Greece as some Roma are not registered

188

The Roma in European Higher Education

with the municipality rolls (Dragonas, 2012). Some general aspects are often attributed to Roma’s lifestyle in Greece (e.g. Romani language, traditional Roma lifestyle and culture) (Chatzisavvidis, 2007). However, it should be noted that heterogeneity characterizes the Roma (Markou, 2008; Nikolaou, 2009) in terms of language, religion, lifestyle, social and economic status and, finally, the degree of their acceptance from the dominant society (Trubeta, 2008). For example, when Markou (2008) described the Roma’s housing and living conditions in Greece, he noted that in some regions, such as in Agia Varvara (in Athens) and Dendropotamos (in Thessaloniki), the Roma, in general, live in good conditions while in other regions, such as Aspropyrgos and Zefyri (regions in Athens), the opposite is true (Markou, 2008). Zachos (2011) uses the term ‘Roma groups’ to avoid homogenization. The Roma in Greece hold Greek citizenship and, unlike what happens in most European countries, they do not officially hold a minority status (Kostadinova, 2011; Dragonas, 2012) – the Muslim minority in Thrace is the only officially recognized minority in Greece. Despite holding citizenship, as along with the fact that Greece, like all EU countries, has banned discrimination, the Roma experience prejudice and social exclusion in Greece (Macris, 2015; Georgiadis and Zisimos, 2012). Antigypsyism, a specific form of racism towards Roma, is one of the root causes of the social exclusion and inequality affecting them (EC, 2018b). Promoting Roma inclusion and fighting discrimination and intolerance towards the Roma has been a major concern at a European level (EC 2018b). According to the European Commission’s (2018b) paper ‘Antigypsyism: Increasing Its Recognition to Better Understand and Address Its Manifestations’, key EU legislative instruments have been adopted for providing for harmonized rules on tackling discrimination – for example, the Council Directive 2000/43/ EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (2000) and the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (2008) – as well as targeted European-level policy instruments and initiatives have been put in place against Roma’s discrimination – such as the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020, 2011) along with the implementation of the pilot project Roma Civil Monitor (Description of the EU pilot project for civil society capacity building and monitoring of the implementation of national

Greek Roma in Higher Education

189

Roma integration strategies, 2017). However, according to the European Roma Rights Centre (2003, cited in Themelis, 2009), in Greece, many Roma groups on the outskirts of Athens and elsewhere face residential segregation and sometimes systematic expulsion from their camps. Sardelić (2017) cites recent data coming from the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) in 2016, according to which 80 per cent of Roma live below the country-specific poverty line. The Roma face many problems in their daily living conditions, employment and education (Nikolaou, 2009). The situation appears to be more difficult for Roma women as they can sometimes face multiple forms of discrimination (such as underage and forced marriages, violence and trafficking) (Macris, 2015; Antonopoulou, 2011). FRA’s (2018) data show that the share of Roma men whose main activity is ‘in employment’ is consistently higher than that of Roma women, suggesting that young Roma women may face additional gendered barriers to employment. When examining the Greek case, this gender gap reaches 41 per cent (16 per cent of Roma women aged sixteen to twenty-four years are in employment while it is 57 per cent of Roma men of the same age). Moreover, a high gender gap is also reported in relation to the proportion of young Roma women who are neither in work nor in education nor training in Greece (81 per cent for Roma women and 38 per cent for Roma men). In this socio-economic context, it is unsurprising that Roma children experience inequalities and discrimination in their education.

The Education of the Roma in Greece The Greek state started to deal with Roma education in 1981, when the General Secretariat for Adult Education made efforts to address Roma adults’ illiteracy rates (Mavrommatis, 2008). After the official establishment of intercultural education in Greece (Law 2413/1996), specific programmes have been implemented to encourage the educational inclusion of target groups – Roma children included (Palaiologou and Faas, 2012). The programme ‘Education of Roma Children’ [Εκπαίδευση των παιδιών Ρομά] has been conducted for the last two decades by Greek universities.1 According to Varnava-Skoura, Vergidis and Kassimi (2012), the aforementioned programme has encouraged

The current websites of the programme are http://www.keda.uoa.gr/roma/ and http:​//per​oma.w​ eb.au​th.gr​/pero​ma/el​/node​/20

1

190

The Roma in European Higher Education

Roma’s school enrolment, their transition to secondary school and completion of compulsory education. Mainstream schooling is the current educational provision for the Greek Roma; however, practices of segregation and exclusion of Roma children at school have been reported (Nikolaou, 2009; Dragonas, 2012). Varnava-Skoura, Vergidis and Kassimi (2012) discuss active exclusion where Roma’s enrolment is refused and passive exclusion where Roma’s physical presence in class is tolerated but the Roma students are not actively involved in the educational process. These exclusions are evidenced by data which show that some Roma children are still in segregated types of schooling (Dragonas, 2012). The case of Aspropyrgos (area southwest of Athens) described by New (2013) illustrates that the active exclusion and segregation of Roma students is continued.2 In particular, in September 2004, local officials prevented Roma children’s enrolment at the local primary school in Aspropyrgos. In this area, Roma mainly live in settlements in poor conditions, with reduced access to water, sanitation and electricity. Signs such as No Roma child will enter this school. You are not going to have access here, that’s all! signalled the local non-Roma parents’ attitudes (New, 2013). After a court hearing to resolve this dispute, Roma students were able to attend the primary school; however, a segregated school was set up where only Roma students were registered (New, 2013). Despite the jurisprudence from the European Court of Human Rights against the Greek state, it seems that some more schools catering exclusively for Roma children exist in other areas of Greece, such as Achaea (Meganitis), Karditsa (Sofades), Corinthia (Zevgolatio) and Xanthi (Gkofa, 2011). Furthermore, even when Roma children attend mainstream schools, they are often taught outside the mainstream classrooms through programmes which address disadvantaged students. For instance, currently, the zones of educational priority (ZEP) run including Reception Classes (separate classes in mainstream school where the students attend some language courses outside the regular classroom) and Supportive Tutorial Classes (additional after school instructional support). ZEP zones do not target the Roma exclusively but refer to the Roma explicitly when stating that they address all students who face difficulties on the basis of their fluency in the Greek language or in terms of their achievement (Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs, 2016). According to the report on the implementation of the EU framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (EC, 2014), Greece is one of the Member States which needs to put For more, read about the case of Sampanis and Others v. Greece at https​://hu​doc.e​chr.c​oe.in​t/eng​ #{%22​itemi​d%22:​[%220​01-86​798%2​2]}

2

Greek Roma in Higher Education

191

desegregation measures in place so that Roma students do not attend segregated classes. Moreover, the report recommends that desegregation measures should be accompanied by awareness-raising activities among both Roma and nonRoma, ensuring access to quality-inclusive early childhood education and care, as well as preschool education. Proper monitoring of enrolment and attendance is also necessary (EC, 2014). A positive measure regarding the Roma’s education relates to the provision of specialized support to socially vulnerable groups from psychologists and social workers (not widely used in Greek mainstream schools) who were appointed during the academic year 2017/18 to work with students coming from socially vulnerable groups in schools in areas with high rates of Roma population (Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs 2017 – Decision no 142628/ΓΔ4, JO 3032).

Greek Roma in HE – A Qualitative Investigation of Factors Leading to Success Some studies have started to examine contexts where the Roma have experienced educational success such as Abajo and Carrasco’s study (2004, cited in Bereményi and Carrasco, 2015) on Roma students with successful educational pathways in Spain and studies on Roma women graduates (HintonSmith, Danvers and Jovanovic, 2018) and Roma university students in Romania (Pantea, 2015), Hungary (Óhidy, 2013; Kende, 2007) and Sweden (Alexiadou and Norberg, 2015). Moreover, recent studies shed light on aspects related to the Roma’s higher studies such as how affirmative action tools can benefit Roma communities (Garaz, 2014) and how elitist elements are preserved within an expanding higher education – focusing on Roma university students in Eastern and Southeastern Europe (Garaz and Torotcoi, 2017). My doctoral study focused on the Greek context to examine cases of Greek Roma who have ‘succeeded in education’ as they have all entered higher education. Passing or failing milestone exams is frequently a crucial marker in studies dealing with educational success (see Archer, 2008; Ingram, 2011). My description of success as access to higher education is informed by the aforementioned rationale; in Greece, the majority of students enter higher education on the basis of the results of the National (Panhellenic) Exams at the end of high school.3 In particular, There are special categories of students who enter higher education through distinct routes, such as participation in different exams (e.g. by Greek expatriates), being offered lower limit grades/special

3

192

The Roma in European Higher Education

students enter a specific university department on the basis of their performance in the National (Panhellenic) Exams although the standard required shifts according to the demand by students to enter the specific department. (There is a maximum of students that each university department can admit every year, determined by the Greek Ministry of Education.) Up to now, there are no positive discrimination measures in place in Greece addressing the Greek Roma. Drawing on a set of in-depth interviews with twenty Greek Roma who have entered higher education, this section examines how these participants account for their educational progression. Roma with successful educational paths in Greece are a ‘hard to access’ group (Trevor and Newburn, 2001), in part because Greek higher institutions do not collect disaggregated data on criteria such as being Roma. However, to an extent, they sometimes make statistical distinctions according to disability and minority status when these features have been used by undergraduates as a distinct way to enter university. Access to potential participants was facilita­ ted by gatekeepers, such as Professors at Greek Universities, Services at the Greek Ministry of Education and NGOs. Eventually, through various snowballing techniques (Flick, 2009), I conducted in-depth interviews with twenty Greek Roma – fourteen males and six females – who have entered higher education (seven participants are graduates and the others were undergraduate students at the time of the fieldwork). Table 10.1 presents the participants’ demographic characteristics – the names used are pseudonyms and the participants’ age is rounded off. My doctoral study investigated the participants’ accounts of success and the factors involved in their progression, their perceptions of success and their proposals for improving educational provision for the Roma in Greece. Taking into account the lack of data on Roma higher education students in Greece, it should be noted that there might be some other Roma students who have not been included in this study. The fact that, in Greece, the share of Roma completing upper secondary school is only 2 per cent (FRA, 2014) in combination with the wide gap of 61 percentage points between Roma and nonRoma who completed upper secondary education (2014) suggests that, most probably, very few Roma in Greece have accessed higher education compared to the total Roma population in Greece and that the Roma are still underrepresented in Greek higher education.

places (e.g. students belonging to the Muslim minority of Thrace) or having the Panhellenic Exams grade requirements waived (e.g. students who have achieved distinction in academic competitions and athletes who have achieved distinction in athletic competitions).

Table 10.1  Research Participants’ Demographic Characteristics Name

Gender

Age

Type of studies

Occupation

Electra

F

20

Student

25

Balkan, Slavic and Oriental Studies Philology

Alcmene

F

Ismene Antigone Athena Ifigeneia Paris Pylades Theagenes Demosthenes Hector Patroclus Pericles Iphicles Jason Laertes Theaetetus Miltiades Hippocrates Nestor

F F F F M M M M M M M M M M M M M M

25 25 35 35 20 20 20 20 25 25 25 25 30 30 35 40 50 55

Finance Political Sciences Nursing Law Accounting Social Anthropology Engineering Engineering Finance Accounting Social Administration Engineering Translation Law Theology Molecular Microbiology Medicine Sociology

She gives Greek language lessons – mediator (programme for Roma’s education) She works at an employment agency Mediator (programme for Roma’s education) Nurse Politician Student – Mediator (programme for Roma’s education) Student Student Student Student; Serving his military service Student Student Student Student – Mediator (programme for Roma’s education) Lawyer Priest-Monk, student of Theology He works for a pharmaceutical company abroad Doctor He is conducting his PhD in Roma issues; involved in Roma programmes

The Roma in European Higher Education

194

The audio-recorded interviews (average duration of each was two and a half hours) focused on the participants’ family background, their experiences at school and university and the forms of support which facilitated their access to higher education. The interviews were transcribed into text in Greek as all participants spoke Greek fluently, although most of them also speak Romani. ‘Being Greek’ emerged critical in making up the participants’ identity (see Gkofa, 2017). A process of thematic coding and analysis was followed (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). Finally, the work was translated into English as my doctoral study was conducted at a UK university, however ethical issues regarding language translation were not detected.

Key Findings: What Made the Difference? The participants described influences of family/home, school, community and locality as having significantly contributed to their educational success as follows:

A) Family/Home Almost all the participants attributed a great part of their educational success to their family’s economic capital and/or the familial attitudes towards education – their familial habitus. Economic Capital. ‘Economic capital’ refers to money and property rights (Bourdieu, 2004). Seven participants who described their families as wealthy recognized that their access to financial resources correlates with their trajectory of success to a certain degree. Access to money, living in a permanent residence (with water and electricity), not being in need to work, being able to ‘invest’ in education had facilitated these participants’ pathways. However, the cases of poorer participants indicate that any attempt to understand educational progression is complex. Indicatively, Hippocrates highlighted that traditional Roma customs, such as early marriages, continue to shape some younger Roma’s lives even when they come from families who possess economic capital. Therefore, economic capital cannot be understood in isolation from the other forms of capital as they ‘together constitute advantage and disadvantage in society’ (Reay, 2004a: 57); economic capital is only one type of a wider system of exchanges in which people are involved (Bourdieu, 2004). Familial Attitudes. Regardless of the participants’ financial situation, almost all (18/20) recognized that their progression was encouraged by positive familial dispositions towards education – their family habitus in Bourdieu’s (2006)

Greek Roma in Higher Education

195

theory. The participants’ habitus is primarily structured by early experiences in the family (Bourdieu, 2006), their past and present circumstances, such as family upbringing, educational experiences and tradition and also contributes to shape current and future practices in the field of education: ‘Agents who are equipped with it will behave in a certain way in certain circumstances’ (Bourdieu, 1990: 77). Receiving not only maternal but also paternal support was highlighted. In addition, some participants received support from their siblings. For example, Electra was inspired by her older sister who had entered university. At this point, it should be noted that, according to the research participants, traditional gendered regimes, according to which girls usually stay at home and are not expected to progress at school (Antonopoulou, 2011), still influence many Roma females’ trajectories, serving as an additional barrier to Roma females’ progression. Indicatively, Electra said: In the Roma community, there is a great difference between boys and girls. Girls are ‘devalued’ compared to boys. If a boy says ‘I want it’, then it is done; if a girl says so, her opinion does not count … And of course it has to do with each family, because if a girl learns from early on that ‘He is the man. You are a girl. Sh!’

However, a gradual change observed in Roma’s attitudes in relation to sex/ gender is reported by the participants – most argue that the gap related to sex/ gender differences is gradually being narrowed. This argument is consistent with data from FRA (2014) showing that women’s literacy rates in all countries are higher among the younger age groups. Moreover, Greece is one of the countries which has achieved the highest progress in that regard, although, in Greece, literacy rates remain low compared to other European countries (FRA, 2014). In the female participants’ cases, sex/gender had not served as a strong barrier against their educational progression despite the persistence of deep-rooted stereotypes and traditional gendered regimes reported in Greece (Dragonas, 2012). It seems that the families of those females who attained university education have been somehow adapted to a different model of family regime, closer to the majority’s. For example, Alcmene noted: In our family, we were all equal regardless of being girls or boys. However, my brother would never do the housework … My grandmother would ask me and not my brother to mop … However, we did not experience significant (genderbased) discriminations.

In Bourdieusian terms, the female participants’ ‘family habitus’ seems to have made a difference to their progression; their families’ positive attitudes towards

196

The Roma in European Higher Education

education ‘matched’ the field of education and enabled their progression. Even when gendered patterns of hierarchy and exclusion were evident in the surrounding Roma community, the community habitus had not proved strong enough to stem their educational progression: Ismene’s father’s positive attitude towards education predominated (over the patriarchal expectations of their relatives), while Electra avoided socializing with Roma girls who dropped out from school. Family was the core site for habitus formation for most participants (Bourdieu, 2006). It was inside the family that participants acquired positive dispositions towards education which supported later educational success. Thus, policy makers may need to promote greater involvement of Roma parents in their children’s schooling at an early point, a suggestion which is also recommended at a European level by the Council of the European Union (2013).

B) Influence of Teachers Seventeen participants attributed a key part of their educational success to in-school factors. Most participants emphasized the role of inspiring teachers who offered them advice to continue their schooling, choose non-vocational types of secondary school or specific field of studies and supported them when events of discrimination against them took place. Alcmene called her teachers her ‘second family’. In the participants’ stories, their teachers helped them ‘play the game’ and enhanced these students’ agency towards educational success. Evidence elsewhere suggests the important role of mentoring in pupils’ educational success (Byfield, 2008; Hoskins, 2012; Rhamie and Hallam, 2002). What makes the teacher’s role even more crucial for the progression of Roma is that ‘teachers were often the only educated people Roma students had met’, as Electra noted. Therefore, teachers served as sources of cultural and social capital for their Roma students contributing to the transformation of their habitus through schooling (mainly referring to mainstream non-segregated schooling in my study) (Bourdieu, 2006). The crucial influence that teachers had on the participants contradicts the teachers’ alleged lack of enthusiasm towards Roma students that is frequently reported in the Greek literature (e.g. Nikolaou, 2009). However, these caring teachers acted as individuals, indicating the need for systematic interventions which could promote the inclusion and educational progression of Roma in Greece where the level of Roma participation in education remains low (FRA, 2014) and discrimination of Roma students is reflected by events of exclusion and segregation such as the case of Aspropyrgos mentioned earlier. Moreover, there is a need for teacher training in Greece to take on the pedagogic implications

Greek Roma in Higher Education

197

of intercultural identity (Palaiologou and Faas, 2012). At a European level, reforming teacher training in this way is recommended by the Council of the European Union (2013) as a measure to support Roma progression. Training for educational staff that has an emphasis on equal treatment of Roma children is also suggested (FRA, 2014).

C) Influences of Community Aspects The relationships of ‘mutual acquaintance and recognition’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992: 119) that an individual or a group has with others are considered by Bourdieu, under the term ‘social capital’, as influencing educational progression. For the purposes of this study, social capital includes the (Roma and non-Roma) social networks of the participants and also the education values in circulation in these networks. In particular, all twenty participants recognized the influence of community aspects on their progression as follows: i) Role Models from the Roma Community: The influence of role models is often identified as a factor in educational success of members of disadvantaged groups (Rhamie and Hallam, 2002; Byfield, 2008). In this study, the term ‘role model’ is deployed to convey the ‘positive influence that Roma examples of success had on the participants’. Twelve participants referred to the influence of Roma role models on their educational progression. For instance, Antigone and Jason were inspired by their educated relatives. Pericles’s and Patroclus’s school attendance was boosted by older Roma students who were continuing into high school. Alcmene was also seeing older Roma in her area registering at the technical/ vocational high school (non-compulsory secondary education). Laertes was influenced to continue into higher education by some high-profile educated Roma he met at seminars for Roma adults; these people had not only inspired him but offered him encouragement, help and support to an extent that Laertes regarded them as his mentors. To sum up, educationally successful Roma have served as positive examples for younger Roma’s educational progression, to some extent. Indeed, some participants, such as Theagenes, Miltiades, Paris and Jason, suggested that the participation of educated Roma in educational interventions addressing Roma students could encourage young Roma’s progression. ii) Influences from the non-Roma Community ‘Significant Others’. ‘Significant others’ gave some participants guidance and practical help. For example, wealthy neighbours paid for Antigone’s extra private

198

The Roma in European Higher Education

lessons. Nestor’s neighbour had supported him with his homework and had always ‘been there’ to provide advice. Finally, Athena talked of a private English teacher in her locale who offered her free courses until she got her English diploma. Non-Roma Peers’ Influence. The non-Roma peer networks of the participants have been, in the main, considered significant for their educational success, as highlighted by Paris, Theagenes, Hippocrates and Miltiades. Electra and Alcmene avoided socializing with Roma peers who had left school. However, they both experienced this loss of Roma friends as the cost they paid for continuing their education. Lauglo’s (2000) claim that accessing certain forms of social capital can ‘trump’ the disadvantages of social class seems to be confirmed in cases where poor participants have participated in music and sports activities; participants’ social connections with non-Roma peers have contributed, up to a point, to their accumulation of cultural and social capital which was useful in the field of education (Bourdieu, 2006). For example, Pericles explained how his participation in the local football team helped his transition to the local high school from the segregated primary school he attended: I had many non-Roma team mates with whom we used to play together, travel and stay together during the football trips … This helped me when I entered lower high school.

Religion. Religious support was identified as having influenced six participants’ pathways. For example, the Greek Orthodox Church equipped Laertes with additional cultural capital as he used to read religious books and cultivate his linguistic skills in order to understand the religious readings (written in a more advanced and complex type of Greek language closer to Ancient Greek). Nestor was inspired to enter university by a theologian and his religious group; this religious group served as an additional source of social capital for Nestor. Theaetetus had decided to become a monk during his teenage years. His active involvement in the Christian Orthodox religion led him to study Theology. The impact of religion on educational success, especially through the students’ accumulation of social and cultural capital, echoes Byfield’s (2008) study. Byfield (2008), drawing on the Bourdieusian concepts of cultural and social capital, coined the term ‘Divine capital’ to describe the spiritual connection that Black boys in the United States and United Kingdom who entered elite universities had with God. The possession of Divine capital enhanced both the social and cultural capital of Black students (Byfield, 2008).

Greek Roma in Higher Education

199

Volunteers and Organizations. The influence of volunteers and organizations emerged as a key variable for Hector. Hector received practical help with homework and extra-curricular incentives by an NGO. This organization enhanced Hector’s cultural and social capital. Nowadays, Hector volunteers for this organization. The role that community aspects play in Roma progression is recognized at a European level as the Council of Europe attempts to facilitate communication between the Roma and state institutions – educational institutions included – through the employment of Roma mediators (Kyuchukov, 2012). However, this strategy will need to be fostered and extended if its positive outcomes are to continue.

D) Locality For Bourdieu (2004), the density and durability of ties are vital. It makes sense to expect that it is harder for Roma people who travel for trading reasons to create and preserve durable networks. The stability of living in a locality for a long period helps children do better in school (Israel, Beaulieu and Hartless, 2011). The participants’ families were settled in specific urban areas. Half of the participants (10/20) were raised in Roma areas (Roma camps or places with a high rate of Roma residents), six participants were raised in non-Roma areas and four participants have mixed experiences. Some participants who lived in non-Roma areas talked of the benefits of living away from Roma communities. For example, Paris argued that living in areas with non-Roma Greeks provided access to different forms of capital and experiences which enabled his progression. However, ten participants were brought up in Roma areas. Even in cases of Roma living in Roma areas, it is important to note that specific aspects enhanced the participants’ cultural and social capital (Bourdieu, 2006). For instance, in Alcmene’s and Electra’s Roma locale, a Roma Female Association is active in fighting for the education of Roma. Positive attitudes towards education and some small-scale educational interventions promoted an ‘ethos’ which facilitated academic progression in this locale. Hippocrates, who comes from a Roma area near Athens where most Roma are well off, reported that the good relationships between Roma and nonRoma facilitate Roma’s progression. Laertes, who also comes from this area, had been helped to continue his education through the support of some training opportunities which had targeted the Roma in his locale. The significance of locality is also revealed through Pericles’s and Patroclus’s stories as they encountered difficulties in progressing due to the adverse atmosphere against the Roma in their local area. They both faced difficulties

200

The Roma in European Higher Education

when entering the mainstream local lower high school because they had received knowledge of reduced level at the segregated Roma primary school they attended inside the Roma camp. Moreover, they had not felt discriminated against before as they did not have any non-Roma classmates at primary school. Nevertheless, they had both eventually progressed to higher education due to the impact of the aforementioned factors of family, teachers’ influence and community aspects. The influence of locality aspects on Roma’s progression highlights the need for locally oriented interventions. That is to say that, when targeting the Roma, wider policies (e.g. European policies) might need to be differentiated at a national (or even local) level because of the specific characteristics of some areas (e.g. the high levels of poverty of some Roma groups or hostility towards Roma).

E) Individual and Circumstantial Factors From a Bourdieusian perspective, school success tends to be explained more on the basis of familial cultural capital rather than by measures of individual talent (Reay, 2004b). However, in my study, some individual qualities were presented as having contributed to the participants’ educational success. Hard work, ‘patience’, ‘persistence’ and commitment were distinguished as features which influenced educational progression, according to my participants’ accounts. Another feature which appears to be involved in the participants’ progression is resilience. Rhamie (2007), in her study on the progression of African-Caribbean students in the UK, reported resilience as important in achieving success as her participants were able to ‘protect themselves from hardship and counteract the impact of negative school experiences in order to succeed’. Similarly, in my study, some participants have been reviled at school. However, these participants managed to overcome these negative events in a way which did not hinder their progression. For example, Athena argued that, through her educational progression, she was taking ‘revenge’ for the negative events she had experienced as a child, an argument confirming the existing discrimination experienced by the Roma in Greece (Macris, 2015; Dragonas, 2012). To some extent, circumstantial factors and serendipity were also involved in some participants’ educational progression. For example, it was by chance that some participants happened to meet significant others. One participant argued that his physical disability brought him ‘luck’ because it prevented him from getting married early and/or going to work, which in turn enabled him to continue with his schooling. Circumstances and luck have been reported by other studies (for serendipity, see Hoskins, 2012; for luck, see Gladwell, 2008)

Greek Roma in Higher Education

201

as success drivers. In Bourdieusian terms, practices are relations between one’s habitus and one’s current circumstances (Maton, 2008); thus, the relationship between a student’s habitus with some fortuitous circumstances may lead to certain practices that facilitate educational success. In the cases noted previously, specific circumstances facilitated the educational progression achieved by these participants.

Conclusion The situation of the Roma in Greece is different from other European countries at some levels, such as the absence of recognition of minority status (Kostadinova, 2011).This distinction might lead to less targeted attention to the Roma who are often taken as part of Greek citizenry. Although a strong commitment to the social inclusion of the Roma is demonstrated in Greece as in all Member States’ agendas (Farkas, 2014), further steps are required to tackle socio-economic exclusion of and discrimination against Roma (EC, 2018a). This chapter informs domestic and European discussions on factors facilitating the Roma’s academic progression, drawing on the accounts of twenty Greek Roma who entered higher education. In particular, the coding and analysis of the participants’ stories drew attention to key influences identified by them as contributing to their educational trajectories: (1) family/home; (2) teachers; (3) community aspects; (4) locality; (5) individual qualities and circumstances. Many participants’ pathways had been facilitated by their relatively ‘advantaged’ background because these participants appeared privileged in terms of their access to material and cultural goods and social connections and, additionally, their families held positive dispositions towards education. In these cases, educational success had been ‘thinkable’ and these participants felt like ‘fishes in water’ in the field of education (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992). These success stories can be explained in terms of Bourdieu’s social reproduction theory, where the role of education in reproducing class positions is emphasized (Bourdieu, 1990; Webb, Schirato and Danaher, 2002), that is to say, the educational success of some Roma participants can be explained by the amount and type of capital inherited from their family milieu. In contrast, and not unexpectedly, achieving educational success seemed more difficult for those Roma students who came from disadvantaged backgrounds (e.g. those who lived in camps, under poor conditions and/or in adverse locales). For those Roma participants lacking an adequate interplay between family habitus and

202

The Roma in European Higher Education

capital and the field of education, additional nurturing of habitus and capital was achieved through schooling, as well as access to community and locality aspects as explained earlier. In particular, out-of-home influences played a critical role in their educational trajectories, mainly by having enhanced their cultural and social capital. These participants’ individual habitus appears to have been transformed during their secondary socialization (e.g. in the field of school). A more generative understanding of Bourdieu’s concepts applies to these participants’ stories. These participants were active agents in deviating from the pathway which could have perhaps been somewhat stereotypically predicted for them on the basis of their family background and class positioning (i.e. practising itinerant trade instead of studying in higher education). Therefore, in these cases, social transformation was realized through education (Apple, 2008). In some of these cases, the participants also emphasized the role of individual characteristics in their educational progression (e.g. commitment for Laertes; resilience for Athena). The central role that certain factors play in educational progression, such as receiving familial support, mentoring by teachers, getting help from significant others and living in a tolerant locale, could helpfully inform policy discussions on how to improve future outcomes for the Roma wherever they are situated. Despite the use of the term ‘educational success’ (see Gkofa, 2018) for the Roma participants in this study, the participants’ stories highlight events of discrimination against them regardless of their academic progression. These events indicate how important it is to prioritize tackling anti-Gypsyism in the context of the implementation of the EU Framework and in the future post-2020 Roma Integration Strategy (EC, 2018b). Athena eloquently reflected that: if I had a second life, I do not know if I would study again … We, the Roma, do not only have to face the difficulties related to school and homework. In addition, we have to confront those ironic comments and contemptuous eyes; all these things that hurt.

Therefore, drawing on this study, it may be useful to tease out more cases of Roma who progress in education. Studies examining examples of Roma who succeed would offer an opportunity to listen to the voices of educationally successful Roma in various national settings and would contribute to transnational policy discussions regarding the factors involved in educational progression for this community as well as the improvement of the education provided to them.

Greek Roma in Higher Education

203

Funding This work is based on my doctoral study which was supported by the ‘Scholarships programme SSF (Greek State Scholarships Foundation/IKY) with an individualised assessment process of the academic year 2011-2012’ from resources of the Operational Programme ‘Education and Lifelong Learning’, of the European Social Fund (ESF), the NSRF 2007-2013.

Acknowledgements I thank Professor Louise Morley and Dr Andrzej Mirga for their helpful comments and suggestions.

Declaration of conflicting interests The Author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

References Alexiadou, N. (2017). ‘Equality and Education Policy in the European Union: An Example from the Case of Roma’. In S. Parker, K. N. Gulson and T. Gale (eds), Policy and Inequality in Education: Volume 1. Series: Education Policy and Social Inequality, 111–31. Singapore: Springer. Alexiadou, N. (2019). ‘Framing Education Policies and Transitions of Roma Students in Europe’. Comparative Education. 55(3), 422–42, DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2019.1619334. Alexiadou, N. and Norberg, A. (2015). ‘Roma, Education, and Higher Education Policies: The International Context and the Case of Sweden’. Report as part of the Higher Education Internationalisation and Mobility: Inclusion, Equalities and Innovation Project. Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, Research and Innovation Staff Exchange, Horizon 2020. Grant agreement No. 643739. Retrieved 15 May 2019 from https​://ww​w.sus​sex.a​c.uk/​webte​am/ga​teway​/file​.php?​name=​swedi​sh-re​port-​wp4-f​ inal1​.pdf&​amp;s​ite=4​1 Antonopoulou, V. (2011). ‘Study on “Combating the Isolation of Roma Women and Girls and Promoting Their Empowerment”’. Invisible Lives – Roma Women in Greece, Steering Committee for Equality Between Women and Men (CDEG).

204

The Roma in European Higher Education

Retrieved 13 May 2014 from http:​//www​.coe.​int/t​/DGHL​/STAN​DARDS​ETTIN​G/ EQU​ALITY​/03th​emes/​gende​r-equ​ality​/CDEG​_2011​_17_R​oma_e​n.pdf​ Apple, M. (2008). ‘Can Schooling Contribute to a More Just Society?’. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 3(3), 239–61. Archer, L. (2008). ‘The Impossibility of Minority Ethnic Educational “Success”? An Examination of the Discourses of Teachers and Pupils in British Secondary Schools’. European Educational Research Journal, 7(1), 89–107. Bereményi, B. Á. and Carrasco, S. (2015). ‘Interrupted Aspirations: Research and Policy on Gitano Education in a Time of Recession, in Spain’. Intercultural Education, 26(2), 1–12. Bourdieu, P. (2004/1986). ‘The Forms of Capital’. In S. Ball (ed.), The Routledge Falmer Reader in Sociology of Education, 15–29. London and New York: Routledge. Bourdieu, P. (2006/1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1990). In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology, trans. M. Adamson. Cambridge: Polity. Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. (1992). An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bradley, H. (2017). ‘“Should I Stay or Should I Go?”: Dilemmas and Decisions Among UK Undergraduates’. European Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 30–44. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1474904116669363 Byfield, C. (2008). Black Boys Can Make It: How They Overcome the Obstacles to University in the UK and USA. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books Limited. Chatzissavidis, S. (2007). ‘Οι Ρομ στην ιστορία της ανθρωπότητας και στην Ελλάδα [The Roma in the History of Humanity and Greece]’. In Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs – The University of Thessaly (eds), Ετερότητα στη Σχολική Τάξη και Διδασκαλία της Ελληνικής Γλώσσας και των Μαθηματικών: η περίπτωση των Τσιγγανοπαίδων, Πρόγραμμα: «Ένταξη Τσιγγανοπαίδων στο σχολείο», Επιμορφωτικός Οδηγός [Diversity in the Classroom and the Teaching of the Greek Language and Mathematics: The Case of Roma Children, Programme ‘Inclusion of Gypsy Children in School’, Training Guide], 39–64. Volos. Retrieved 18 July 2019 from http:​//ike​e.lib​.auth​.gr/r​ecord​/2651​36?ln​=el Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies Up to 2020. (2011). Retrieved 24 August 2018 from https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/lega​l-con​tent/​en/AL​L/? ur​i=CEL​EX%3A​52011​DC017​3 Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 Implementing the Principle of Equal Treatment Between Persons Irrespective of Racial or Ethnic Origin. (2000). Retrieved 24 August 2018 from https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/eli/​dir/2​000/4​3/oj Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on Combating Certain Forms and Expressions of Racism and Xenophobia by Means of Criminal Law.

Greek Roma in Higher Education

205

(2008). Retrieved 24 August 2018 from https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/eli/​dec_ f​ramw/​2008/​913/o​j Council of the European Union. (2013). ‘Council Recommendation on Effective Roma Integration Measures in the Member States.’ Retrieved 5 April 2015 from: http:​// www​.cons​ilium​.euro​pa.eu​/uedo​cs/cm​s_dat​a/doc​s/pre​ssdat​a/en/​lsa/1​39979​.pdf.​ D’Arcy, K. W. (2014). Travellers and Home Education: Safe Spaces and Inequality. London: Institute of Education Press. ‘Description of the EU Pilot Project for Civil Society Capacity Building and Monitoring of the Implementation of National Roma Integration Strategies’. (2017). Retrieved 24 August 2018 from https​://cp​s.ceu​.edu/​sites​/cps.​ceu.e​du/fi​les/a​ttach​ment/​proje​ct/28​ 42/ro​ma-ci​vil-m​onito​r-pro​ject-​descr​iptio​n.pdf​ Dragonas, T. (2012). Roma Mothers and Their Young Children. Country Report: Greece (Unpublished Report). Bernard Van Leer Foundation. Durst, J. and Nyírő, Z. (2018). ‘Soul Work and Giving Back’. Ethnic Support Groups and the Hidden Costs of Social Mobility. Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 4(1). doi:10.17356/ieejsp.v4i1.406 European Commission. (2014). ‘Report on the Implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies’. Retrieved 20 November 2017 from: http:​// ec.​europ​a.eu/​justi​ce/di​scrim​inati​on/fi​les/r​oma_i​mplem​ent_s​trate​gies2​014_e​n.pdf​ European Commission. (2018a). ‘Report on the Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies Up to 2020’. Retrieved 19 August 2019 from: https​://eu​r-lex​.euro​pa.eu​/lega​l-con​tent/​EN/TX​T/?qi​d=154​41120​37077​&​uri=C​ ELEX:​52018​DC078​5 European Commission. (2018b). ‘Antigypsyism: Increasing Its Recognition to Better Understand and Address Its Manifestations’. Retrieved 20 August 2019 from: file:​ ///C:​/User​s/use​r/Dow​nload​s/HLG​_Conc​lusio​nspap​erant​igyps​yism_​final​pdf.p​df Farkas, L. (2014). ‘Report on Discrimination of Roma Children in Education’. Brussels: EU. Retrieved 15 April 2015 from: http:​//ec.​europ​a.eu/​justi​ce/di​scrim​inati​on/fi​les/r​ oma_c​hildd​iscri​minat​ion_e​n.pdf​ Flick, U. (2009). An Introduction to Qualitative Research (4th edn). London: Sage. FRA. (2014). ‘Education: The Situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Roma Survey – Data in Focus’. Luxembourg: Publications Office. Retrieved 15 April 2015 from http:​//fra​.euro​pa.eu​/site​s/def​ault/​files​/fra-​2014_​roma-​surve​y_edu​catio​n_tk0​11374​ 8enc.​pdf FRA. (2018). ‘Transition from Education to Employment of Young Roma in 9 Member States’. Vienna: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Retrieved 10 July 2019 from: https​://fr​a.eur​opa.e​u/en/​publi​catio​n/201​8/rom​a-edu​catio​n-to-​emplo​ yment​ Garaz, S. (2014). ‘Helping the Marginalised or Supporting the Elite? Affirmative Action as a Tool for Increasing Access to Higher Education for Ethnic Roma’. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 295–311. https​://do​i.org​/10.2​304/e​erj.2​014.1​ 3.3.2​95

206

The Roma in European Higher Education

Garaz, S. and Torotcoi, S. (2017). ‘Increasing Access to Higher Education and the Reproduction of Social Inequalities: The Case of Roma University Students in Eastern and Southeastern Europe’. European Education, 49(1), 10–35. DOI: 10.1080/10564934.2017.1280334 Georgiadis, F. and Zisimos, A. (2012). ‘Teacher Training in Roma Education in Greece: Intercultural and Critical Educational Necessities’. Issues in Educational Research, 22(1), 47–59. Gkofa, P. (2011). ‘Diversity and Educational Practice -The Training Needs of Teachers Who Teach Roma Children – The Case Study of Zevgolatio Primary School [Ετερότητα και εκπαιδευτικές πρακτικές: διερεύνηση επιμορφωτικών αναγκών εκπαιδευτικών που διδάσκουν σε τσιγγανόπαιδα: η μελέτη περίπτωσης του 2ου Δημοτικού Σχολείου Ζευγολατιού]’. MA dissertation, University of Patras, Greece. Available (in Greek) at: http:​//nem​ertes​.lis.​upatr​as.gr​/jspu​i/han​dle/1​0889/​4546 Gkofa, P. (2016). ‘Greek Roma in Higher Education: A Qualitative Investigation of Educational Success’. PhD thesis, King’s College London, UK. Gkofa, P. (2017). ‘Being Roma – Being Greek: Academically Successful Greek Romas’ Identity Constructions’, Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(5), 624–35. DOI: 10.1080/13613324.2016.1191700 Gkofa, P. (2018). ‘Greek Roma in Higher Education: Perceptions and Experiences of Educational Success’. In R. Race (eds), Advancing Multicultural Dialogues in Education, 107–25. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success. New York and London: Little Brown. Helakorpi, J., Lappalainen, S. and Mietola, R. (2018). ‘Equality in the Making? Roma and Traveller Minority Policies and Basic Education in Three Nordic Countries’. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. 64(1), 52–69. DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2018.1485735 Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E. and Jovanovic, T. (2018). ‘Roma Women’s Higher Education Participation: Whose Responsibility?’ Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–28. DOI: 10.1080/09540253.2016.1274386 Hoskins, K. (2012). Women and Success: Professors in the UK Academy. Stoke on Trentham: Trentham. Ingram, N. (2011). ‘Within School and Beyond the Gate: The Complexities of Being Educationally Successful and Working Class’. Sociology, 45(2), 287–302. Israel, G. D., Beaulieu, L. J. and Hartless, G. (2011). ‘The Influence of Family and Community Social Capital on Educational Achievement’. Rural Sociology, 66, 43–68. Iusmen, I. (2018). ‘Non Multa, Sedmultum’: EU Roma Policy and the Challenges of Roma Inclusion’. Journal of European Integration, 40(4), 427–41. DOI: 10.1080/07036337.2018.1462803 Kende, A. (2007). ‘Success Stories? Roma University Students Overcoming Social Exclusion in Hungary’. In H. Colley (ed.), Social Inclusion for Young People: Breaking Down the Barriers, 133–44. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Greek Roma in Higher Education

207

Kostadinova, G. (2011). ‘Minority Rights as a Normative Framework for Addressing the Situation of Roma in Europe’. Oxford Development Studies, 39(2), 163–83. Kostouli, T. and Mitakidou, S. (2009). ‘Policies as Top-Down Structures Versus as Lived Realities: An Investigation of Literacy Policies in Greek Schools’. In S. Mitakidou, E. Tressou, B. B. Swadener and C. A. Grant (eds), Beyond Pedagogies of Exclusion in Diverse Childhood Contexts: Transnational Challenges, 47–63. New York: Macmillan. Kyuchukov, H. (2012). ‘Roma Mediators in Europe: A New Council of Europe Programme’. Intercultural Education, 23(4), 375–38. Lauglo, J. (2000). ‘Social Capital Trumping Class and Cultural Capital? Engagement with School Among Immigrant Youth’. In S. Baron, J. Field and T. Schuller (eds), Social Capital: Critical Perspectives, 142–67. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Law 2413/1996, JO A124. Η ελληνική παιδεία στο εξωτερικό, η διαπολιτισμική εκπαίδευση και άλλες διατάξεις [Greek Education Abroad, Intercultural Education and Other Directives]. Macris, V. (2015). ‘Romani Peoples’ Resistance to Mainstream Schooling: A Focus on Romani Woman and Girls’ Education and the Educational Policies, Barriers, and Practices in Greece’. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 61(4), 449–64. Markou, G. (2008). ‘Η προσπάθεια ανάπτυξης μιας εθνικής πολιτικής για την οικονομική και κοινωνική ένταξη των Τσιγγάνων [The Attempt to Develop a National Policy for Economic and Social Inclusion of the Roma]’. In S. Trubeta (ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ελληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσεις – Αναιρέσεις – Απουσίες [The Roma in the Modern Greek State: Symbiosis – Denegation –Absence], 153–88. Athens: Kritiki. Maton, K. (2008). ‘Habitus’. In M. Grenfell (ed.), Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, 49–65. Durham: Acumen Publishing. Mavrommatis, G. (2008). ‘Παιδιά Ρομά στο ελληνικό δημόσιο σχολείο [Roma Children in Greek Public School]’. In S. Trubeta (ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ελληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσεις – Αναιρέσεις – Απουσίες [The Roma in the Modern Greek State: Symbiosis – Denegation – Absence], 199–223. Athens: Kritiki. Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs. (2016). ‘Document «Οδηγίες και κατευθύνσεις για την ίδρυση και λειτουργία Τάξεων Υποδοχής (ΤΥ) ΖΕΠ για το σχολικό έτος 2016-2017 σε δημοτικά σχολεία της χώρας» [Guidelines for the Establishment and Operation of the ZEP Reception Classes in Greek Schools for the School Year 2016-2017]’. (Αρ.Πρωτ. 152029/Δ1/19-09-2016/ΥΠΑΙΘ, 7Ω764653ΠΣ69Ε). Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs. (2017). Decisionno 142628/ ΓΔ4, JO 3032 (4 September 2017). Καθήκοντα και αρμοδιότητες των κλάδων ΠΕ23 Ψυχολόγων και ΠΕ30 Κοινωνικών Λειτουργών στα σχολεία Πρωτοβάθμιας και Δευτεροβάθμιας Γενικής και Επαγγελματικής εκπαίδευσης. [Duties and Responsibilities of Psychologists (code 23) and Social Workers (code 30) Working in Primary Education and General and Vocational Secondary Education].

208

The Roma in European Higher Education

Nairz-Wirth, E., Feldmann, K. and Spiegl, J. (2017). ‘Habitus Conflicts and Experiences of Symbolic Violence as Obstacles for Non-traditional Students’. European Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 12–29. https://doi. org/10.1177/1474904116673644 New, W. (2013). ‘Litigating Exclusion, Inclusion and Separation: Dilemmas of Justice in Roma Education Reform’. In M. Miskovic (ed.), Roma Education in Europe: Practices, Policies and Politics, 181–91. New York: Routledge. Nikolaou, G. (2009). ‘Teacher Training on Roma Education in Greece: A Discussion About the Results of INSETRom Experience in Two Greek Schools’. Intercultural Education, 20(6), 549–57. Óhidy, A. (2013). ‘From Multiple Deprivation to Success: Educational Careers of Ten Roma and Gypsy Women’. Hungarian Educational Research Journal, 3(3), 1–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14413/herj2013.03.04 Palaiologou, N. and Faas, D. (2012). ‘How “Intercultural” Is Education in Greece? Insights from Policymakers and Educators’. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 42(4), 563–84. Pantea, M. C. (2015). ‘Affirmative Action in Romania’s Higher Education: Roma Students’ Perceived Meanings and Dilemmas’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(6), 896–914. DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2013.869172 Parthenis, C. and Fragoulis, G. (2016). ‘“Otherness” as Threat: Social and Educational Exclusion of Roma People in Greece’. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 18(2), 39–57. Reay, D. (2004a). ‘Gendering Bourdieu’s Concepts of Capitals? Emotional Capital, Women and Social Class’. The Sociological Review, 52, 57–74. Reay, D. (2004b). ‘Education and Cultural Capital: The Implications of Changing Trends in Education Policies’. Cultural Trends, 13(2), 73–86. Rhamie, J. (2007). Eagles Who Soar: How Black Learners Find the Path to Success. Stokeon-Trent: Trentham Books. Rhamie, J. and Hallam, S. (2002). ‘An Investigation into African-Caribbean Academic Success in the UK’. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 5(2), 151–70. Sardelić, J. (2017). ‘No Child Left Behind in the European Union?: The Position of Romani Children’. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 39(1), 140–7. DOI:10.10 80/09649069.2017.1291554. Sianou-Kyrgiou, E. and Tsiplakides, I. (2011). ‘Similar Performance, but Different Choices: Social Class and Higher Education Choice in Greece’. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 89–102. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA and London: Sage. Symeou, L., Luciak, M. and Gobbo, F. (2009). ‘Teacher Training for Roma Inclusion: Implementation, Outcomes and Reflections of the INSETRom Project’. Intercultural Education, 20(6), 493–96.

Greek Roma in Higher Education

209

Themelis, S. (2009). ‘Questioning Inclusion: The Education of Roma/Traveller Students and Young People in Europe and England – A Critical Examination’. Research in Comparative and International Education, 4(3), 262–75. Themelis, S. (2013). Social Change and Education in Greece: A Study in Class Struggle Dynamics. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Trevor, J. and Newburn, T. (2001). Widening Access: Improving Police Relations with Hard to Reach Groups. London: Home Office, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit. Trubeta, S. (2008). ‘Εισαγωγή: Η αναζήτηση των Ρομά στις υποσημειώσεις της Ιστορίας και στα πρωτοσέλιδα της Πολιτικής [Introduction: Searching the Roma in the Footnotes of History and the Headlines of Politics]’. In S. Trubeta (ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ελληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσεις – Αναιρέσεις – Απουσίες [The Roma in the Modern Greek State: Symbiosis – Denegation – Absence], 11–76. Athens: Kritiki. Varnava-Skoura, G., Vergidis, D. and Kassimi, C. (2012). ‘Greece: On Mechanisms and Successive Programmes Between Support and Innovation’. In M. Demeuse, D. Frandji, D. Greger and J. Y. Rochex (eds), Educational Policies and Inequalities in Europe, 127–54. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Webb, J., Schirato, T. and Danaher, G. (2002). Understanding Bourdieu. London: Sage. Zachos, D. (2011). ‘Sedentary Roma (Gypsies): The Case of Serres (Greece)’. Romani Studies, 21(1), 23–56.

210

Index academia and knowledge co-production  109–13 academic studies  23, 39 Access Agreements  5 ‘Action Plan for Improvement of the Living Conditions of Roma in Oslo’  156 Action Plan for the Development of the Roma Population  3 Advisory Council for the Education of Romany and other Travellers (ACERT)  6, 8 affirmative action programmes  3–5, 9, 21, 22, 113, 122 Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)  39, 40, 47 n.44, 48, 48 n.46, 49, 49 nn.48–52, 137, 195 Agnesberg Roma folk high school  4 Albania  24, 62, 83 All Party Parliamentary Groups  8 Amsterdam Treaty (1997)  44 n.39 Amuradi  3 Andalusian Federation of Roma Women (FAKALI)  3, 135, 139 anti-Gypsyism  18, 34, 35, 42–7, 49 n.48, 51, 52, 79, 110, 137, 144, 186, 202 and academic experiences  116–17 ‘Antigypsyism: Increasing Its Recognition to Better Understand and Address Its Manifestations’  188 anti-racism  152, 161 Argentina  19 arts  21, 123 ‘Assimilation and Resistance in Norwegian Policies towards Tater/ Romani People from 1850 to the Present’  156 Australia  19 baccalaureate schooling  139 Bacchi, Carol  155 Balibar, Etienne  57, 62, 68 banking sector  79, 89

Barcelona Autonomous University  39 Baudelaire, Charles  95 biopolitics  58–60, 62, 70 racial  63, 64, 71 Bitu, Nicoleta  23 black students  52 Blavatnik School of Government  38 Bologna Declaration (1999)  82 Bologna process  36, 36 nn.10, 13 Bosnia  22, 62 Brazil  19 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)  34 n.4 Bulgaria  2, 4, 23, 51, 61, 115, 120, 133, 137 bullying  5, 20 Canada  19 capability strengthening  100, 102–3 capital  25, 48, 61, 76, 79, 80, 81, 85, 86, 89, 140, 169, 194 bonding  44, 52 bridging  44, 47, 52 social  42–7, 43 nn.31, 33, 51–3, 123, 196–9, 202 capitalism  20, 85 career guidance  142, 146 Carmen y Lola (2018)  145 Center for Independent Journalism  40 Central European University (CEU)  22, 25, 37, 38, 110, 112, 119 Centre of Higher Education and Equity Research (CHEER)  94, 96, 97 Charter of the Roma College of Advanced Studies  40, 40 n.26 children in special education institutions  49, 52 Chile  19 citizenship  9, 25, 59, 78, 177, 188 civic engagement networks  44 n.36 civil society  46, 47, 49, 59, 61, 69, 135, 147, 182, 188 cognitive development  179–81

212

Index

cohabitation  18, 19 Colombia  19 commodification  88 compensation programmes  138 compulsory education  48, 49, 83, 136–8, 141–3 Congress of Regional and Local Authorities  58 Consejo Estatal del Pueblo Gitano  140 Consejo para la eliminación de la discriminación racial o étnica  134 ‘The Coordinated Long-term Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012-2032’  156 Council Directive 2000/43/EC  188 Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA  188 Council of Europe  5, 24, 33, 58, 69, 78, 83, 153, 199 Council of the European Union  197 crimes  18, 51, 57, 62 Critical Romani Studies (journal)  110 critical social theories  112 Croatia  22, 51, 83 culturalization  63–4, 65, 71 culture  60 aesthetics  18 alienation  118, 137 capital  85, 198, 199 difference  19, 135 dissonance  145 domination  112 ethnic  112 incompatibility  99 particularity  67 rights  33 Romani  20, 22, 34 n.1, 46, 110, 117–20, 144, 145, 152, 160–1 Czech Republic  23, 50, 51, 61, 62, 83 Danish Roma Inclusion Strategy  157, 159 Danish Roma Integration Strategy  152, 156 data  2, 6, 62, 98, 99, 121, 138, 143, 155–7, 168, 173, 174, 187, 189, 190, 195 ethnic  3, 5 survey  24, 47–53 The Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–15)  59, 61, 62, 65, 67, 84, 140, 186

decentralization  80 decision-making process  46 Declaration on Roma (2010)  78 democracy  134 democratization  70, 85 Denmark  10, 152, 154, 155, 156 Departments of Human Resources  97 discourse  99, 103, 110, 112, 157 intercultural  147 policy  169 political  153 racialized  19 discrimination  5, 9, 18–20, 22, 23, 78, 79, 84, 87, 98, 110, 116–18, 120, 122, 135, 137, 139, 144, 145, 152, 171–6, 178, 182, 186, 188, 189, 196, 200, 201 laws and regulations  134 practices  4, 121, 160, 179, 180 ‘Divine capital’  198 divisiveness  23 doctoral researcher  98, 102 doctoral students  102 ‘dominant majority’ standards  46 dropout rates  133, 136–7, 146, 173, 181, 186 early childhood education and care (ECEC)  48, 143 early stage researchers  96–8 Echevarría, Arantxa  145 economic capital  194 economic crisis  58, 82, 88 2008  19, 79, 170–1 economic development  60 economic efficiency  65, 66 economic growth  65, 78, 169, 170 Ecuador  19 education  81 access  113 achievements  120 development  4, 180 doctoral  96, 103–4 formal  20 identities  20, 21 inclusion  10, 138, 146, 168, 189 integrated  35 n.6, 52 intercultural  189 merit-based  53 mobility  45 n.42

Index model  34 n.1 multicultural  22 participation rates  2–4, 9, 10, 25, 52, 53 and poverty  177–8 preschool  21, 141 primary  20, 21, 26, 45 n.41, 136, 141, 143 process  2 public  80 secondary  2, 20, 26, 40, 45 n.41, 49–50, 51, 81, 83, 136–7, 141–3, 151, 158–60, 170, 187 structures  155 success  118, 122, 187, 191, 194–8, 200–2 systems  4 trajectories  122 educational gap in higher education  33–53, 180 anti-Gypsyism  42–7 balanced approach  33–5 research and survey data  47–53 social capital and social inclusion  42–7 social mobility and  36–40 Educational Resources Information Center  108 Educational Testing Service  181 ‘Education of Roma Children’ programme  189 egalitarian processes  154 elitism  70 emotional difficulties  102 employment  21, 49, 50, 51, 78, 81, 85, 123, 169, 189, 199. See also unemployment empowerment  47, 53, 66–9, 71, 78 Empowerment of Roma Women  24 enculturation model  145 England  5 enrolment  2, 48, 136, 138, 190, 191 epistemic justice  9, 17, 24, 25 equality/inequality  4, 6, 7, 9, 58, 64, 68, 69, 71, 79, 85, 88, 89, 97, 133, 136, 155, 175, 177, 178, 188, 189 racial  65 socio-economic  87 equity/inequity  1, 7, 18, 83, 85, 98 ERASMUS  36, 36 n.13, 39

213

ethnicity  3, 5, 24, 96, 122, 135, 172 EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020  3, 24, 47, 59, 61, 115, 156, 186, 188, 190 EU Network of Independent Experts on Social Inclusion  135 Europe  35, 36, 38, 66, 76, 98. See also individual entries anti-Roma attitudes  19 capital  86, 89 Central Eastern  2, 4, 7, 10, 20, 62, 80, 99, 110, 115, 123, 140, 144, 176 economies  85 ethnic minority group in  10, 18 Roma communities in  24, 58 Romani migrations  19 Southeastern  83, 191 underdeveloped countries  70 universities  1, 101, 110 western countries  6 European Academic Network on Romani Studies  25, 109 European Charter for Regional/Minority Languages  153 European Commission  3, 4, 36 n.13, 48, 61, 138, 140, 188 European Court of Human Rights  190 European Economic Community  77, 153 European Higher Education Area (EHEA)  36, 82 European inclusion policy discourse  57–71 governmentality and biopolitics  59–60 racial biopolitics and securitization  60–4 responsibilization and Otherness  64–70 European Parliament  24, 61 European Regional Development Fund  82 n.1 European Roma Rights Centre  189 European Social Fund  82, 82 n.1 European Union (EU)  2, 34, 36, 40, 48 n.46, 49, 58, 63, 76–81, 83, 88–9, 133, 152, 153, 155, 156, 171 citizenship  18 governmentalities of  57

214 Member States  77, 78, 82 policies  9, 44, 47 Roma students at  39 28 group  82 European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS)  48, 48 n.46, 50, 135 ‘Europe of Knowledge’ agenda  82 experiential knowledge  111 Experts’ Meeting  7, 8 Facebook  97, 101 familial attitudes  194–6 feminist movement  23, 145 feminists and feminism  1, 23, 174 financial capital  43, 70, 169 Finland  10, 110, 152–6, 160, 162 ‘Finland’s National Roma Policy (ROMPO) 2018-2022’  156 Finnish Roma  153 folklorization  18, 110 Fordism  78 Framework Convention for Protection of National Minorities  33, 78, 153 France  19, 62 Friends, Families and Travellers  6 Független Médiaközpont. See Center for Independent Journalism Fundación Secretariado Gitano (FSG)  135, 138, 139, 143 Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA)  189 funding  80, 86 gadjo/paya population. See non-Roma GATT/GATS agreement  79 gender  96, 135, 175, 182 equality  24 gap  189 identity  120 inequality  146 issues  23 roles  120 generalization  20, 35 genocide  18 ghettoization  17, 137 Gitanos/as  2, 35, 133, 133 n.1, 135, 136, 139, 145, 147 Gkofa, Panagiota  10, 20, 21, 115, 117, 122

Index globalization  9 global knowledge economy, Roma access in  24–5, 168–82 economic argument  169–71 impact of poverty  176–82 institutions and racial discrimination  171–6 global market  80, 89, 177 González-Monteagudo, José  10, 122 Göteborg European Council  36 n.11 governmentality  9, 57–60, 62, 64–70 Greece  9, 20, 51, 116, 122 Greek Orthodox Church  198 Greek Roma  186–202 education  189–91 in higher education and educational success  191–3 individual and circumstantial factors  200, 201 influence of community aspects  196–9, 201 influence of family/home  194–6, 202 influence of teachers  196–7, 201 locality  199–200, 201 social exclusion  187–9 Guidelines for Reflexive Internationalisation in Higher Education (Nagy and Olahova)  2 Gypsy, Roma and Travellers’ Experiences of Higher Education (film)  2, 98 Gypsy, Roma and Travellers (GRT)  4, 5, 9, 112 access to education  26 inclusion policies  58 issues  8, 10 students  5–8 Gypsy Lore Society  109, 110, 110 n.3 hate speech  19, 57 hegemony  67 dual  35 n.5 masculinities  23 Helakorpi, Jenni  4, 10 Heredia-Fernández, Sandra  10 Herzegovina  22, 62 heterogeneity  18, 188 higher education as luxury product  20–3 higher education institutions (HEIs)  36, 81, 82, 85, 95, 109, 113, 117, 138

Index Higher Education Internationalisation and Mobility (HEIM) project  1–5, 7–10, 24, 25, 36, 38, 41, 52, 96–8, 102, 119 Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA)  5 homogenization  19, 188 homophobia  101, 145 homosexuality  145 Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie  96 human capital  43–4, 43 n.32, 169, 178 humanities  84, 123 human rights  18, 60, 65, 66, 71, 77, 94 Hungarian Christian Roma Colleges  40 Hungary  21, 22, 39, 40 n.26, 45 n.42, 51, 61, 62, 83, 115, 122, 137, 159, 187 identity  10, 53, 60, 61, 71 academic  103 culture  111, 120 ethnic  22, 151 European  62 national  111, 175 Roma-Hungarian  124 Romani  22, 23, 46, 59, 68, 100, 109, 110, 117–19, 139, 145, 152 social  100, 145 stigmatized  25, 109 income  43, 48, 50, 103, 111, 136, 170, 177, 179–82 indigenous science. See native science individualization  86–7, 88 inferiorization  9, 21 information technologies  80, 170 inquiry, method of  100 institutional barriers  116 inter-ethnic relations  33, 45 n.42, 51 international competitiveness  85 Internationalisation in Higher Education: Practical Guidance  2, 97 internationalization  1, 10, 22, 24, 25, 36, 86, 97, 153, 155 international mobility  24–5, 111, 146 International Monetary Fund  77 intersectional approach  135, 145, 146 intersectionality  9, 24, 120, 135 Irish Traveller  5 Isopahkala-Bouret, Ulpukka  4, 10 Italy  19, 50

215

Jovanovic, Tanja  10, 20, 21, 94, 96 Keynesian Welfare State  80 King’s College  7 knowledge  10, 96 acquisition  99 production, co-production and academia  109–13, 161 and skills  7 knowledge creation  113–24 access and participation  113, 115–16 anti-Gypsyism and academic experiences  116–17 graduation and employability  122–4 resilience and success  121–2 Romani culture and identity  117–19 knowledge producers, Roma as  96–100, 104 Kurt Lewin Foundation (KLF)  39 labour market  33, 77, 79, 80, 84–5, 87, 88, 136, 159, 171 Law and Humanity Program  40 learning  10, 43, 46, 98, 101, 120, 158, 159, 172, 174, 175, 179, 180 Learning Communities Programme  143 Leyton, Daniel  9 LGBTQAI+ issues  18, 101, 134 liberalization  61, 86 licentiousness  18 lifestyles  60 Lisbon Strategy  36, 61 literacy rates  189, 195 Maastricht Treaty. See Treaty on the European Union Macedonia  22, 62, 97 marginality  17, 136 marginalization  10, 47, 168, 170, 174, 177, 181 marginalized groups  8, 25, 76, 97, 99, 169, 178 market economy  78, 80, 170 market governance  65 marketization  79 markets vs. social cohesion  77–80 Master of Public Policy programme  39 mentorship  102, 146 meritocracy  68, 117, 118, 154, 157

216 Millennium Development Goals (MDG)  95 Mirga, Andrzej  9 misogyny  10 modernity  95 Moldova  22, 24, 83, 97 Montenegro  22, 62, 83 moral duties  65 morality  65 Morley, Louise  9, 111 multiculturalism  18, 23, 33, 45 n.41, 152 National Association of Teachers of Travellers and Other Professionals  6 National Strategy for Roma Inclusion (NRIS)  140–3, 141 n.13, 153, 156 native science  111, 112 Nazi Germany  18 necropolitics  62 'neither in employment, education or training' (NEET)  50, 51 neo-fascism  19 neoliberal capitalism  60–4 neoliberal globalization  9, 18, 58, 70, 71, 76 markets vs. social cohesion  77–80 political economy of higher education  80–5 neoliberalization  60, 63, 66, 71, 103 networking and cooperation  3, 7, 101 NGOs  1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 59, 61, 66, 97, 103, 113, 115, 191, 199 non-Roma  50, 99, 109, 133, 136 feminists  23 peer networks  198 researchers  100, 111 scholars  102, 109, 110 society  145 Spaniards  134 Nordic Roma and Traveller policy documents  151–62 higher education and equality of access  154–5 lack of academic capability and aspiration  158–61 lack of research and teaching  160–1 methodology and data  155–6 overview  151–2

Index Roma and Traveller minorities  152–4 silence about higher education  157–8, 161–2 structural racism  161–2 Norway  10, 33, 152–4, 160 Norwegian Roma and Travellers  154 Office for Fair Access (OFFA)  5 One in One Hundred  99 Open Method of Coordination (OMC)  44 n.39 Open Society Foundation (OSF)  21, 37, 38, 61, 69 Open Society Institute  23 Operational Plan 2014–16  141, 141 n.13, 142, 143 2018–20  143 Organisation for Economic Cooperation, & Development (OECD)  77, 81 Otherness  59, 63–71, 119, 161 Oxford University  38 Pact against Anti-Gypsyism  135 Padilla-Carmona, Teresa  2, 10, 122 participation and empowerment as influence  46, 47, 51–3 as presence  46, 67, 119, 139, 142, 153, 190 as voice  46, 69, 71, 99, 100, 109, 121, 146, 177, 202 participatory action-research techniques  121 patriarchy  23, 124, 146, 174–5, 180, 196 peer-to-peer support  101 personal networks  123 Peru  19 PhD  40, 94, 96, 100 pigmentocracy  172, 175 Plan for Roma Development  140 plurality  18, 144, 145 Poland  23, 61 political economy  18, 70, 80–5 political issues  182 political structures  171 porajmos. See Romani holocaust Portugal  159 post-colonialism  9 poverty  2, 10, 17, 18, 21, 47, 50–2, 79, 80, 88, 136, 176–82, 186, 189

Index power  10, 52 issue  45 relations  60, 112, 113 prejudices  5, 52, 111, 122, 133–6, 173–4, 177, 186, 188 ‘Presentation to the European Commission of Denmark’s National Roma Inclusion Strategy’  156 Primary Compulsory Education  136 privatization  61, 79, 85 pro-Roma Associations  8 psychosocial support  103 quota systems  8, 22, 113, 115, 122 race identification  151 segregation  34 n.4, 52 racialization  17, 18 racism  9, 10, 19, 20, 58, 60–4, 68, 70, 71, 79, 101, 109, 110, 116, 139, 152, 160–2, 172–5, 188 rationality  57, 61, 69, 95 Reception Classes  190 ‘Reclaiming Adolescence: A Roma Youth Perspective’ (Bhabha et al.)  98 Redzepi, Nadir  9 REF Scholarship Programme  97 Regional Roma Survey  24 religious support  198 resilience  121–2, 200 responsibilization  64–70, 71 Roberts, Paul  9 role models  197 Roma academics  24–5 Roma Access Programs. See Roma Graduate Preparation Program Roma Chair  37, 38 Roma Civil Monitor pilot project  188 Roma Civil Rights’ Foundation  22, 39 Roma Decade of Inclusion  2, 10, 20 Roma Education Fund (REF)  9, 20–2, 25, 36–40, 40 n.28, 52, 65, 69 n.6, 83, 97, 103, 115 Roma Education Fund’s Scholarship Program (REF SP)  39, 69 n.6 Roma-Gadji solidarity  1 Roma Graduate Preparation Program (RGPP)  22, 37, 38

217

Roma ‘halfies’  111 Roma Health Scholarship Program  40 Roma Inclusion Index  62 Roma in European Societies (RES)  22, 37, 38, 110 Roma Information Office  37 Roma International Scholarship Program (RISP)  37, 40 Roma Memorial University Scholarship Program (RMUSP)  40 Romania  2, 4, 48, 51, 61, 62, 68, 83, 133, 191 Roma migration  6 Roma students in  21 Romani Chib  4 Romani holocaust  18 Romani language  33, 153, 160–2 Romani movement  34 n.2, 35 n.8, 45–7, 53, 70, 94 Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilization, and the Neoliberal Order (Balibar)  57 Romani Studies  110–13, 110 nn.4, 5, 124 Romani Studies Program (RSP)  22 Roma Ösztöndíjas Médiaprogram. See Roma Scholarship Media Program Romaphobia  18 Roma Press Centre  40 Roma Sajtóközpont. See Roma Press Centre Roma Scholarship Media Program  40 n.27 ‘Roma Success Stories’  144 Roma szakkollégiumok. See Charter of the Roma College of Advanced Studies Romaversitas Invisible College  39 Romaversitas program  22, 39, 40 n.28, 115 Roma women  21, 96, 135, 145–6. See also feminists and feminism in higher education  23–4, 119–20 students  24 Roma Women’s Conference  24 Roma Women’s Initiative  23 Rostas, Iulius  10 Salzburg Principle  96 scholarships  6, 10, 20, 21, 22, 37, 39, 40, 65, 84, 113, 115, 138, 140, 142–4

218

Index

school desegregation  21, 52 schooling  44, 48, 49, 136–8, 186, 190, 196 Schumpeterian Workfare State  80 scientism  111, 112 securitization  60–4 security  59, 60, 63, 64, 71 segregation  17, 20, 48, 52, 116, 137, 138, 144, 147, 172–3, 189 ‘separate but equal’ education policy  34 Serbia  9, 10, 20, 62, 117, 168–79, 182. See also global knowledge economy, Roma access in sexism  101, 124 sexual freedom  18 ‘significant others’  197 Sigona, Nando  57 skin colour  172, 174–6 slavery  18 Slovakia  23, 24, 35, 35 n.7, 48, 50, 51, 61, 62, 117, 137 social capital  42–7, 43 nn.31, 33, 51–3, 123, 196–9 Social Charter  86 social-class identification  21 social cohesion  87–9 social dumping  86 social exclusion  10, 17, 26, 47, 58–61, 59 n.1, 64, 66, 67, 78, 84, 96, 122, 139, 143, 168, 170, 182, 187–9, 201 social inclusion  1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 33, 34, 42–7, 44 n.39, 51–3, 81, 82, 86, 88, 89, 136, 144, 146, 201 socialism  80 socialization  88 social justice  69, 110, 155, 170 social mobility  1, 9, 21, 24, 25, 36–40, 53, 67, 68, 169, 187 social networks  197 social privileges  122, 151 social relations  26, 43 n.33, 87 social sciences  21, 84 social welfare policies  140 socio-economic background  21, 84, 96 socio-economic structures  63–4 socio-economic success  80, 85 Södertörns University College  4 Soros, George  23 Spain  2–3, 9, 10, 35, 35 n.7, 51, 116, 191 Spanish higher education, Roma in  133–47

debates and issues  143–7 national plans for Roma inclusion  140–3 participation in post-compulsory education  138–40 schooling  136–8 stereotypes and prejudices  134–6 Spanish National Strategy  134 Spanish Roma community. See Gitanos/as special religious denomination colleges  123, 124 stereotypes/stereotyping  23, 25, 52, 63, 117, 133–6, 142, 145, 173, 175 stigmatization  25, 57, 109 Strategy for Poverty Reduction  177 structural barriers  116, 143, 160, 162 ‘Study-Map on Housing and the Roma Population, 2015’  136 Summer School  37 Sun (newspaper)  18 Supportive Tutorial Classes  190 supranational organizations  88 Sustainable Development Goals  95 Sweden  2–4, 10, 100, 110, 152–6, 160, 191 Swedish Roma policy  157 Szocháló Project  39 teacher  116 education  4 mentoring  115 role in educational success  121–2, 196 training  21 tertiary education  36–42, 49, 52, 62, 84, 122 Themelis, Spyros  9 Torotcoi, Simona  10 trade agreements  78 transnational corporations (TNCs)  79 transnational governance organizations  70, 71 transnational government networks  59 transnational strategies  61 Treaty on the European Union  77, 78 Trehan, Nidhi  57 trust  43, 44 n.36 tuition fees  85, 140, 154 UK  2, 4–7, 19, 83, 98, 198 UK Quality Code for Higher Education  96

Index unemployment  2, 81, 170–1 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)  48 n.46, 69, 179 United States  24, 36, 181, 198 Romani communities in  19 Romani women in education  23 University and Colleges Application Service (UCAS)  5 University of Hertfordshire  6 University of Manchester  6 University of Seville  8, 97, 122 University of Sheffield  6 University of Sussex  7, 36, 94, 97, 101, 119 University of Umea  97 university students  21, 22, 65, 120, 137, 139, 140, 143, 146, 191 ‘unwilled adjacency’  19 US Supreme Court  34 n.4

219

victimology  18 vilification  18, 19 violence  18, 109, 113, 124 vocational education and training  82, 83, 138–9, 142 volunteers and organizations  199 Wales  5 Washington Consensus  62 Western Europe higher education systems  95 universities  124 What’s the Problem Represented to Be? (Bacchi)  155 Whitaker, Janet  9 World Bank (WB)  21, 48 n.46, 61, 65, 69, 77, 170, 171, 177 zones of educational priority (ZEP)  190

220