Including and excluding. Schools’ reputations: students, families and choices

Including and excluding. Schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices Ma ia Manuel Viei a Ana Nunes de Almeida Ana So ia Ribei o 16. 384 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in in oduc ion Schools a e key ins i u ions in shaping inclusion and exclusion p ocesses impac ing on indi idual iden i y and social mobili y. I he p omise o widening pa icipa ion in educa ion has b ough educa ional oppo uni ies o almos all, i is no ue ha hose educa ional oppo uni ies a e he same. Inc easingly, he quali y o educa ion ma e s mo e as a ma k o dis inc ion, and choosing a school ha b ings success has eplaced he ques o access in he new educa ional ma ke s. A ending a ce ain school can lead o good g ades, ins il app op ia e alues, allow en ance o o main enance o desi ed social ci cles and os e li e p ojec s en isioned by many amilies. School choice (and, in pa icula , uppe seconda y school choice) is a decision based on se e al ac o s. Ra ional c i e ia, such as geog aphical p oximi y and a o dabili y, a e ce ainly weigh y amily conce ns. Subjec i e aspec s, howe e , such as school leade ship, sa e y and ailo ed educa ional p ojec s, also ca y inc easing alue among amilies o all backg ounds. While choosing a school is cu en ly a decision mo e in he hands o amilies, gi en he Po uguese demog aphic down u n and he excessi e school supply, policies d i en by e i o ialisa ion and e alua ion ha e led schools o a ge speci ic audiences and o de elop dis inc i e p o iles ha help pa en s ecognise a school as a pe ec ma ch. We he e o e a gue ha epu a ion, a concep eme ging om he sociology o a , can make a use ul con ibu ion in un angling he di e se c i e ia ha guide educa ional op ions o pa en s and child en. Based on six case s udies o s a e and p i a e schools, ca ied ou in h ee con as ing se ings, we p o ide an accoun o objec i e and subjec i e mo i a ions leading o a gi en school p e e ence in Po ugal. The chap e begins wi h a con ex ualisa ion o educa ional policies in he global and na ional sphe e; i hen mo es o a ca e ul heo e ical ou line o he epu a ion cons uc , ollowed by an applica ion o i s ea u es o he educa ional sec o . A e a b ie me hodological sec ion, we illumina e he consensus and dissensus behind pa en s and child en’s mo i es, highligh ing inclusion and exclusion p ocesses. Concluding ema ks hen ocus on he alue o epu a ion in iden i ying gene a ional gaps among amilies. schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 385 ecen ends in educa ion In con empo a y Wes e n socie ies, he ex ension o compulso y schooling o highe le els o educa ion o e ecen decades e lec s a poli ical consensus abou he bene i s o p o iding ad anced aining o all. Mo e educa ion would con ibu e o mo e inclusi e and less unequal socie ies. Uni e sal schooling means elimina ing ba ie s when en e ing he sys em. Bu he li e a u e has shown ha massi e access goes hand in hand wi h mo e sophis ica ed di ides, now placed inside ha same sys em. Di e ences be ween schools and hei communi ies in oduce di e si y in a he e ogeneous landscape and hie a chies o p es ige and epu a ion eme ge. No all s uden s ha e access o all schools, s a e o p i a e. Inclusion and exclusion p ocesses a e a play and challenge democ a ic ideals on equi y and equal oppo uni ies. On he o he hand, he long- e m en olmen o a la ge numbe o s uden s wi h di e en needs and expec a ions b ings new challenges o schools, now acing con as ing demands. Wi h he inc eased di e si y o s uden s, managing a a dis ance complex social spaces, such as oday’s schools, has become mo e di icul in cen alised educa ion sys ems (among which is he Po uguese). Te i o ialisa ion appea s as a new pa adigm in educa ional policies ( an Zan en 2004; Ba è e 2006). I means ans e ing highe le els o au onomy and managemen esponsibili y o he local scale, based on he assump ion ha s akeholde s gene a e be e solu ions o p oblems di ec ly a ec ing hem. Thus, each school acqui es an unp eceden ed ele ance by becoming he co e managemen pilla o he educa ional sys em. The ele ance o he local e i o y in educa ional policies is one o he ac o s ha p omo es he di e en ia ion o he school wo ld. I each school is supposed o deal wi h speci ic challenges, i s educa ional p ojec should be dis inc om all he o he s. This s uc u al change pu s schools unde p essu e. How o combine educa ion o all wi h he need o mee he singula i y o each one? In ac , he ex ension o compulso y educa ion has widened he school wo ld’s “p inciples o jus i ica ion” (De oue 2000). In addi ion o hose associa ed wi h he “ci ic wo ld” (equal oppo uni ies, educa ion o all), which inspi ed he de elopmen o s a e educa ion sys ems, o he p inciples based on alues such as exp essi eness, e ec i eness, and ma ke ha e eme ged in ecen decades ( an Zan en 2004, 51-52). 386 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in Following a la ge in e na ional end, ma ke -based alues ha e also pene a ed he Po uguese educa ional sys em, p omo ing compe i ion be ween schools (A onso 2010; Almeida e al., 2017; An unes 2008; Qua esma and Villalobos 2016). Two se s o condi ions a ou compe i ion, acco ding o an Zan en (2005): he dec ease in he demand o educa ion (ei he due o demog aphic ac o s, o o a sudden lack o in e es in a speci ic educa ional o e ); and he e o s, made by schools, o a ac “ he bes ” s uden s (bo h academically and socially) ( an Zan en 2005, 569). These wo se s o condi ions a e no only p esen bu in e wined in Po uguese socie y. The sha p d op in e ili y a es ha e a ec ed he dynamics o he demand (Almeida 2005). Wi h he s uden popula ion dec easing, some au ho s a gue ha he o me p e ailing coo dina ion o s uden lows h ough supply is now con on ed wi h he g owing in luence o demand ( Ba oso and Viseu 2003; An unes and Sá 2010). In u n, pa en s (seen as educa ion “consume s”), a e now mo e challenging. Since 2001, he annual elease o school ankings, based on he s uden s’ pe o mance in he na ional exams became, o pa en s and s uden s, an impo an na iga ion ool in he inc easingly mo e complex educa ion sys em and a s a egic ins umen o compa ison and compe i ion be ween schools (Melo 2009). Good g ades ob ained in a school a e a majo ac o in a ac ing s uden s (Gou eia 2017). La gely emphasised by con empo a y educa ional policies, he p inciple o e alua ion (o schools, o he quali y o lea ning, o eache s’ pe o mance, e c.) appea s hus as he o he side o he au onomy coin ( an Zan en 2004; Palha es 2014). Fu he mo e, e alua ion is s ongly linked o epu a ion, a wo d de i ing om he -La in epu a io, which means ponde ing, medi a ing, examining. “De ined in a minimal way, epu a ion is he esul o a se o e alua ions” (Chau in 2013, 132). The concep is explo ed in he nex sec ion. epu a ion – some heo e ical ema ks The no ion o epu a ion is p esen in a ious social ields and is pa o he explana ions p oduced by he social sciences abou hem. Economics and managemen (Colonomos 2013; Fomb un 2015; Menge 2013; B own e al. 2006; Rao 1994), social psychology (G iske icius, Tybu and an den Be gh 2010), and communica ion sciences (Ca don 2013), apply he no ion o epu a ion o s udy such di e en subjec s as he inancial ac i i y o S a es, schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 387 he e alua ion o companies and p oduc s, o he p ac ices o consume s and In e ne use s. In sociology, epu a ion has been adi ionally s udied in associa ion wi h he wo ld o a s, cul u e and hei indus ies (Becke 1982). In his pionee ing wo k, Becke ques ions he app oach o epu a ion as de i ed om inna e cha ac e is ics o he a is , opposing i o he idea o epu a ion as a social cons uc and p ocess. This heo e ical assump ion b ings new insigh s. Fi s ly, epu a ions a e he p oduc o he collec i e ac i i y o each speci ic ne wo k o in e dependencies (social wo lds) in which hey ac . Secondly, hey depend on c i e ia es ablished by c i ics/expe s, by which he epu ed en i y can be dis inguished and iden i ied. Thi dly, being a social p oduc – no a c ys allised ea u e o he epu ed en i y – epu a ion has a his o ical and a si ua ed dimension: i a ies om ime o ime and om place o place. Las ly, isibili y is an impo an aspec o epu a ion. In line wi h he same heo e ical app oach, poli ical sociologis s such as Ga y A. Fine (2007) ha e also explo ed he concep , namely wi hin he analysis o poli ical epu a ion. Beyond he social psychological claim ha “ epu a ion cons i u es a mo al ges al ha is linked o a pe son” Fine (2007, 3886) poin s ou ha hey a e also collec i e ep esen a ions, enac ed in ela ionships. His de ini ion o epu a ion b ings along he idea o ecogni ion: i e e s “ o he exis ence o a socially ecognised pe sona: an o ganising p inciple by which ac ions o a pe son (o g oup, o ganisa ion, o collec i es) a e linked in o a common assessmen (Fine 2007, 3886). In addi ion o “ ecogni ion” (conce ning he compe ence exhibi ed unde a commonly sha ed con en ion), i is impo an o s ess ha he epu a ion- making p ocess also includes he communica ional manu ac u e o a name, “ enown” ( e e ing o he public isibili y ob ained by he epu ed en i y) (Bo ges 2014). These wo aspec s a e well condensed in Chau in’s de ini ion o he concep : “Repu a ion can be de ined as a sha ed, p o isional and loca ed social ep esen a ion, associa ed wi h a name and esul ing om mo e o less powe ul and o malised social e alua ions” (Chau in 2013, 132). Embedded in social ela ions, epu a ion-making p ocesses hus in ol e e alua ion, judgemen s and communica ion. In e es ingly, he deba e on his opic may bene i om some o he a gumen s p oposed by p agma ic sociologis s. Bol anski and Thé eno ’s app oach o he way indi iduals jus i y hei ac ions o o he s, conside s se e al logics (“ci és”) as poin s o suppo o “jus i ica ion egimes”; ha is, g amma s used by indi iduals bo h o 388 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in jus i ica ion and o c i ical pu poses (Bol anski and Thé eno 1991). Those g amma s, connec ed o epe o ies o pe inen objec s o each “ci é”, cons i u e di e en “wo lds”. One o hese – he “wo ld o ame” – main ains a close p oximi y o he phenomena o epu a ion. Acco ding o he au ho s, his is a “wo ld” whose g ea ness (celeb i y) depends on he opinions o o he s – ha is o say, i depends on he numbe o people who awa d hei alue and es eem o a pe son, g oup, o o ganisa ion. Howe e , beings in he “wo ld o ame” a e “big” inso a as hey di e ” (Bol anski and Thé eno 1991, 223). This is why communica ion is so impo an : in o de o become enowned, you ha e o make you sel known, ha e a name o , in he case o p oduc s, a ma k (Bol anski and Thé eno 1991, 225). In o he wo ds, beings only a ain g ea ness i g ea ness is made isible, i i can be iewed and compa ed by o he s. One impo an poin mus be unde lined. Wi h communica ion being a c ucial dimension o epu a ions, unequal access o isibili y may p omo e inclusion-exclusion dynamics. As Becke cau ions, no all po en ial epu ed en i ies (in his analysis, a is ic wo ks) ha e he same isibili y condi ions is- à- is po en ial audiences, which a ec s he (di e en ial) possibili y o access epu a ion (Becke 1982, 362-364). The e o e, “ he la ge p oblem has o do no wi h wha he epu a ion-making p ocess selec s, bu a he wi h wha i lea es ou ” (Becke 1982, 367). In sum, wo king on epu a ion in sociology means add essing a se o di e en bu complemen a y issues. I means accep ing he social and ela ional na u e o epu a ions, ha is, o e use essen ialis app oaches. I means iden i ying he c i e ia ( he o ganising p inciples) o e alua ing he compe ence wi h which a gi en epu a ion is associa ed ( Ca don 2013). Mo eo e , i equi es un a elling he “ epu a ional wo k” ha indi iduals, g oups, o ganisa ions o collec i es de elop o c ea e, main ain and ex end con ol o e hei epu a ion – which can be manipula ed (Colonomos 2013; Go man 1982). Las , bu no leas , his heo e ical cons uc implies de e mining he ime and he spaces/a enas o a gi en epu a ion’s ci cula ion, namely he ans e abili y o epu a ion associa ed wi h a name o o he en i ies/con ex s (Chau in 2013). schools and hei epu a ions The leading ole o educa ion in con empo a y socie ies makes i ele an o ex end he analysis o epu a ional p ocesses o he school wo ld i sel . schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 389 Po ugal is a pa icula ly in e es ing case: he educa ional sys em displays a qui e signi ican libe alisa ion o selec ion and admission p ocedu es (excep a highe educa ion le el), and “school ma ke ”/ compe i ion be ween schools seems o be aking impo an s eps (Lima and Melo 2016; Ta a es and Ca doso 2013). Fu he mo e, he annual elease o ankings – hie a chy o schools based on he s uden s’ pe o mance in he na ional exams – p oduced con as ed images: “ endy schools”, on he one hand; “junk schools”, on he o he ; he as majo i y o schools in in e media e posi ions would be ela i ely un ouched as a as hei image is conce ned (An unes and Sá 2010, 106). This hie a chy gi es mos schools a ma gin o image imp o emen , bu may also p o oke c i icism and esis ance eac ions o his kind o e alua ion c i e ia (accused o no being uly “objec i e”) – and epu a ion making (Ba è e 2006; Melo 2009; Zoia 2009). As s a ed be o e, epu a ions a e a collec i e ac i i y enac ed in ela ionships. The e o e, he epu a ion o a school is a social p ocess in which a la ge communi y (school au ho i ies, eache s, s a , s uden s, amilies, educa ional expe s, and media) pa icipa es. Al hough he epu a ion-making p ocess in ol es se e al scales o ac ion, in a complex ne wo k o social ela ions – om he mac o le el (e. g. public policies, educa ion expe s) o he mic o le el (namely, schools, pa en s and s uden s) – he la e is he one ha bes illus a es hese complex dynamics. Ac ing in an in e connec ed local ne wo k o schools in compa ison wi h each o he (Ba oso and Viseu 2003), he demand (unde s ood as he numbe and he social a ibu es o pa en s and s uden s) exe s a clea in luence on he epu a ion o each o hem. Howe e , i is impo an o ealise ha his demand has a sha ed na u e (be ween s uden s and pa en s) and, in uppe le els o he educa ion sys em, pa en s and adolescen s do no always ag ee in hei assessmen s ( an Zan en 2004). I epu a ion is de ined as he a ac i e di e en ial o a school (Cos a and Koslinski 2011), he c i e ia and p inciples on which i is based a y – namely, acco ding o he pa en s’ educa ional p io i ies. The e o e, hose c i e ia a e plu al, complex and di e se; and ambi alen , as hey o en in ol e objec i e and subjec i e dimensions. Al hough a school epu a ion is composed o mo e han one a ibu e, using “school choice” c i e ia as a p oxy o epu a ion c i e ia is a way o iden i y he main a ac i e di e en ial e ealed by pa en s o s uden s. Some con ibu ions o his opic, p i ileging adul s’ pe spec i es, ha e been pu o wa d in he 390 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in li e a u e. The pe cep ion o a sa e and pleasan lea ning en i onmen appea s o be a key quali y (ma k) pa en s ecognise in a “good school” (oecd 2015). Academic excellence (based on objec i e c i e ia, such as school pe o mance and s uden s’ esul s) is o many pa en s ano he c ucial aspec in building a school’s epu a ion (An unes and Sá 2010). The educa ional alues p omo ed – ei he eligion-cen ed, o secula , non-denomina ional inspi ed – a e ano he ac o (Qua esma 2014). Besides, c i e ia o assessing he a ac i eness o a school a y acco ding o speci ic eaching cycles. In p ima y schools, he p inciple o exp essi i y (meaning an indi idualised pedagogy, an en iched cu icula o e allowing s uden s’ exploi a ion o skills), may be an impo an ac o in pa en s’ judgemen ; whe eas in seconda y schools, academic esul s can be a mo e alued p inciple ( an Zan en 2009). Ye , esea ch also poin s ou ha no all pa en s assign p io i y o ele ance o he epu a ional e alua ion when choosing a gi en school o hei child en (An unes and Sá 2010); o he p agma ic c i e ia such as home/school dis ance o he exis ence o collec i e anspo a ion o school ake he lead (Co dei o 2014). The dis inc i e quali y (ma k) ha makes a school epu a ion also a ies acco ding o he s uden ’s pe spec i e. Less explo ed in academic li e a u e, he c i e ia and p inciples mobilised by s uden s o assessing a school’s epu a ion may ma ch pa en al c i e ia bu also di e ge in dimensions no e en conside ed by adul s. Recen esea ch on highly academic achie ing s uden s a ending a local well-known seconda y s a e school, e ealed ha he main easons o choosing ha pa icula school ma ched hose hei pa en s would p esumably ad oca e – “demanding and quali y eaching”, “school p epa es well o highe educa ion” and “good lea ning en i onmen ” (To es 2014, 37). Howe e , aking in o accoun sociological li e a u e on adolescen s ( B e iglie i and Cicchelli 2007; Ca alli, Cicchelli and Galland 2008; Pappámikail 2013), o he kinds o easons may also be en isaged. F iends mo ing o he same school, “you h ibes” p esen a a gi en school, o he deg ee o au onomy and eedom o ci cula ion awa ded may be impo an c i e ia o assessing a pa icula school’s a ac i eness. In any case, closely linked o e alua ion, epu a ion leads o classi ica ion – and hus, o a hie a chy o beings, objec s o ins i u ions. In he case o schools, di e en ia ed epu a ions p omo e, simul aneously, in eg a ion and exclusion. In ac , he highe he school’s a ac i eness, he g ea e he abili y o selec and exclude candida es. Exclusion ba ie s a he en ance ein o ce, o he elec ed ones, he sense o belonging o a p i ileged lea ning communi y. schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 391 This chap e discusses “school epu a ion”, by explo ing school ac o s’ na a i es abou he subjec . Con as ing he oices o s uden s wi h hose o pa en s, an in-dep h analysis o he c i e ia o e alua ing he compe ence a gi en epu a ion is associa ed wi h is ca ied ou . Wha is he o ganising p inciple ha unde lies he iden i ica ion o a school’s “ epu a ion”? Wha (in o ma ional) esou ces do indi iduals use o access he epu a ion o a school? Gi en he sha ed na u e o demand, do adul s (pa en s) and adolescen s (s uden s) choose he same c i e ia in es ablishing a school’s epu a ion? Do he same epu a ional c i e ia mean he same o e e yone? These a e he heo e ical ques ions guiding he empi ical analysis unde aken in he nex pa s o he chap e . me hodology Conside ing he ela ional, con ingen (in ime and space) and la gely subjec i e dimensions o epu a ion, an induc i e app oach and a quali a i e me hodology a e he mos app op ia e ways o empi ically app oach he c i e ia and p inciples behind i . Da a p esen ed in his chap e is d awn om in e iews conduc ed wi h pa en s and om ocus g oups o ganised wi h s uden s1 o six Po uguese seconda y schools. They a e pa o a la ge esea ch p ojec commissioned by he Gulbenkian Founda ion ca ied ou by a eam a he ics/ulisboa (2014- -2016) (Almeida e al. 2017). Agains he backd op o a se ious inancial c isis and he ex e nal in e en ion o he so-called T oika (a g oup o med by he Eu opean Commission, he Eu opean Cen al Bank, and he In e na ional Mone a y Fund), his s udy aimed a answe ing a ques ion: how we e non- highe educa ion schools managed and who paid o hem in Po ugal? This chap e is based on he quali a i e phase o he p ojec , gi ing pa en and s uden oices a p ominen place. Six schools, publicly o p i a ely un, o e ing seconda y educa ion we e selec ed in he con inen al pa o he coun y, illus a ing dis inc educa ional con empo a y endencies in he Po uguese sys em. I ’s wo h men ioning ha 3 ypes o school a e a ailable in Po ugal: s a e, p i a e and cha e 1 Focus g oup s uden s we e appoin ed by he school di ec o . Fo e hical easons, we do no indica e hei school o o igin o gua an ee hei absolu e anonymi y. 398 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in The school/home dis ance. The e is anspo , he e a e connec ions o his school [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Mon ado (s a e) School] I chose his school because i was close o my house. I li e wi hin i een minu es’ walk om he e. [João, s a e school] Rega ding ime ables, one o he schools in ou s udy e en es ablished special ime ables o allow p o essional spo s’ p ac ice, show a willingness o ca e o pa icula s uden needs. On he o he hand, a g owing cause o conce n o amilies is hei child en’s sa e y. The school is hei main socialising space and all so s o encoun e s a e possible inside i . The e o e, he school en i onmen mus eassu e pa en s: Pa en s pu hei child en he e because hey look o secu i y. My pe sonal in e es is also he collec i e in e es o he school, which is, o know who my child en a e wi h… [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Whi e (p i a e) School] We ha e child en ha come om p i a e schools. They ge ou o hose schools, some o economic easons, and look o his school because i is clea ly he mos simila o wha hey a e used o. They don’ go o o he schools, hey wan o come he e. The social class ha you see he e is highe han in o he schools, igh ? And ha makes all he di e ence. [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Tejo (s a e) School] Rega ding secu i y, p i a e schools (a leas , hose included in his esea ch) seem o o e addi ional con olling ules posi i ely e alua ed by pa en s, as e e ed o by s uden s My pa en s pu us he e mainly o sa e y easons. I has secu i y sys ems, i has locks… hey ind a way o con ol us he e. [João M., p i a e school] We a e in a dome he e…no, inside a bubble! [Manuel, p i a e school] The pa en al demand o secu i y and sa e y is hen cons i u ed as an a gumen o exclude many o he s, conside ed “undesi able” in he school en i onmen , due o hei di e en socio-economic s a us, beha iou o alues. Pa en s wan o keep hei child en sa e om a p esumably dange ous schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 399 wo ld. No su p isingly, he secu i y issue is no sha ed by pupils, who label i as “con olling” and e en “imp isoning”. In ac , young s uden s show qui e ambi alen eelings owa ds con ol: on he one hand, hey ag ee ha i is a legi ima e pa en al conce n; on he o he hand, hey eel ha his aspec limi s hei willingness o explo e ou side spaces wi hou adul con ol, as a legi ima e adolescen aspi a ion: No, ha ’s he way i is… I hink ha , o example, he younges , he li le ones (…) canno go ou alone, bu we hink we ( he eldes ) could ha e a li le mo e eedom. [Tiago, p i a e school] Anyway, i was a change o scene y ( om p i a e school o his s a e school) and i ’s impo an , because I was always in an en i onmen ha I hink was a bi closed. We used o say we we e in a bubble. And i was a bi ue. We did no ha e much eedom, e en a school, and some imes we we e a li le disgus ed by i . Because some imes, in adolescence, we wan … o be ou sel es. [Tomás, s a e school] Schools can be spaces o social igilance and exclusion, as Foucaul once ad oca ed (Foucaul 1975). Howe e , as much as s a e schools a e pe cei ed as mo e inclusi e, hey can also exclude s uden s by no paying a en ion o hei pa icula educa ional needs – a key a ibu e in p ima y educa ion o mos pa en s. Repu a ion c i e ia can be hus iden i ied in con as o wha a school should no be, as exp essed by he ollowing mo he : [In his i s yea ], my son wen o a s a e school, bu a e h ee mon hs, he esul was e ible. He had a eache ha a Ch is mas s ill didn’ know his name, didn’ know his ace, and he e we e good eache s in ha school. And so, a he end o he i s e m, my son was cha ac e ized as someone ha ing lea ning di icul ies by no being able o coun o en, when he had le kinde ga en knowing all he basic numbe s. [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Whi e (p i a e) School] Al hough he s a e schools mission is o p o ide educa ion o all, hey canno gua an ee pe sonal a en ion o e e y pupil and, in ce ain cases, p i a e educa ion appea s as a mo e inclusi e op ion. In u al en i onmen s, howe e , some small size s a e schools ac simila ly o p i a e ones, in p o iding close a en ion o i s popula ion’s indi idualised needs. F om he pa en s’ pe spec i e, his capaci y may well compensa e o he lack o o he 400 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in asse s (e. g. good acili ies, di e si y o educa ional o e ) ela ed o he absence o a local school ma ke : Wha de ines success, nowadays, a e esul s, un o una ely – o o una ely o some hings (…) -, bu o cou se, his school has a g ea ad an age: i is a small school, compa ed o many o he s. As i is a small school, ob iously, he eaching s a is s able; i has been he e o many yea s (…). O cou se, no e e y hing is pe ec , bu he e a e many good eache s he e in his school. [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Mon ado (s a e) School] Al hough pa en s and child en iden i y mos ly he same c i e ia as pieces o he school epu a ion puzzle (con enience, secu i y, quali y o con en and alues), hey can ake on di e en meanings, and/o p o oke di e gen in e gene a ional a i udes. As no iced be o e, a epu a ion has a ela ional dimension, in he sense ha wo d o mou h and pe cep ion o pee s coun s a lo in he judgemen s uden s hemsel es make abou hei own choices. Bu epu a ion is also posi ional, an a ibu e ha is mo e isible in ankings, which s uden s in e p e as solid e idence o he quali y o a school, when compa ed o o he s. Howe e , pa en s in ou s udy endo se a mo e c i ical opinion on hese esul s, e en ques ioning he c i e ia used in da a collec ion: Some schools ha e a enewed in as uc u e and appea in ankings wi h g ea esul s, bu we know ha hei s uden s ha e a lo o p i a e u o ing ou side he school [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Mondego (s a e) School] The ankings, you know, compa e a s uden om one social backg ound wi h a s uden om a di e en social backg ound… They compa e a school ha has Ma hs, Po uguese and F ench wi h ano he school ha has Ma hs, English and Japanese (…). Some include he se en disciplines ha s uden s a end, o he s jus include he h ee speci ic ones ha allow hem o en e highe educa ion…all newspape s g ab he same da a and use hem applying o ally di e en me hodologies (…) bu in he end, he message ha comes ou is he message ha emains, do you unde s and? [Pa en s’ associa ion ep esen a i e, Whi e (p i a e) School] Al hough he Minis y o Educa ion does no publish o icial league ables, he p ess p oduces ankings based on he esul s o school exams and o he da a (such as he socio-economic s a us o pupils and e en ion a es). They p o ide a quick o e iew o wha a success ul school is, as i he “ quan i ica ion” o schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 401 such a subjec i e and shi ing a iable as epu a ion was he decisi e elemen ha appeals o s uden s (and o he o he audiences as well). Being a he op necessa ily excludes hose ha a e a he bo om, and ankings ope a ionalise he hie a chy e e y e alua ion p ocess en ails. inal ema ks Uni e sal educa ion and longe schooling ajec o ies o all a e main gains in Wes e n socie ies. They a e a igh o all. Meanwhile, he democ a ic openness o he sys em a he en ance has been associa ed wi h an enla gemen o he social o cul u al ange o child en and young people now a ending school. The inne di e si y o pupils poses a new ques ion o schools: how o deal wi h i ? Two endencies ha e been a ou ed by na ional policies. Te i o ialisa ion, on he one hand, has ans e ed a numbe o a eas and managemen au ho i y om he cen al S a e o schools, embedded in ce ain social con ex s and now bene i ing om some deg ees o au onomy. Placed a he cen e o he sys em, schools ace he injunc ion o become pa icula and unique, o disco e and e eal hei a ac i e di e en ial, a shi indeed ein o ced by he inc easing impo ance o ma ke alues and he eme gence o compe i i e scena ios. Agains he backd op o a se e e e ili y d op, unde p essu e o main ain o o enla ge hei popula ion, compe i ion be ween hem is c i ical. On he o he hand, quali y e alua ion p ocedu es (unde public sc u iny) ha e been imposed as common ou ines. Building a epu a ion has u ned ou o be a p io i y. This concep , adi ionally used by sociology in e e ence o he wo ld o a s and cul u al indus ies, can be an in e es ing ool o explo e e i o ial and social dynamics in he school sys em. School choice is e y o en dependen on he epu a ion a school is able o gain in a e i o ial ec ui men a ea. Wi h Becke (1982), we ad oca ed ha epu a ion, applied o schools, is a social and ela ional cons uc , engaging ne wo ks o ac o s such as amilies, pee s and media embedded in local se ings. Mo e quali ied and in o med pa en s, he in luence o pee g oups and o wo d o mou h o ms o communica ion allied o he annual display o na ional ankings by he media pu p essu e on schools o s and ou om he whole. Following p agma ic sociologis s (Bol anski and Thé eno 1991), we en e he “wo ld o ame” in 402 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in ull, as epu a ion mos ly in ol es in o ma ion and subjec i e judgemen s, expec a ions o ideals. Bu amilies a e no homogeneous. We can an icipa e ha hei capaci y o be in o med and o engage success ully in he school game, closely associa ed wi h hei social o igins, is e y di e en . Te i o ialisa ion, he e o e, has ce ainly con ibu ed o ein o ce social inequali ies be ween hose who ha e and hose who ha e no he needed in o ma ional esou ces and a wide ange o educa ional o e s o choose om. Meanwhile, e en i school choice seems o p oceed om a sha ed decision be ween pa en s and hei child en, hey e y o en di e ge in he p io i isa ion o c i e ia ha de ine a “good school”. Gi ing oice o s uden s e idenced gene a ional di e ences. O e all, complex and sub le inclusion/exclusion p ocesses a e deployed a he local le el, be ween di e en ly epu ed p i a e and s a e schools, and e en be ween s a e schools hemsel es. The exclusion endency is a i s peak in densely popula ed u ban cen es whe e a school ma ke uly exis s ( he cases o Lisbon and Coimb a in ou sample). And i eaches i s minimum in he depopula ed ageing coun yside ( he case o he sou he n Cen al Alen ejo). The school epu a ion analysis in his chap e aimed a answe ing wo main ques ions: how is ele an in o ma ion ga he ed by pa en s and s uden s? And which c i e ia makes a school’s epu a ion? Using school choice a ionales as a p oxy o epu a ion c i e ia led us o ou line he s anda ds ha make schools isible o hei audiences. Fo pa en s, i ’s he scien i ic and pedagogical quali y, along wi h a s able and a ailable eaching body, ha ounds a school’s ecogni ion. The iden i ica ion o a di e en ia ed school p ojec is a c i e ion ha is used o selec , mo e han o a ac , as p i a e school cases ha e illus a ed, in con as o s a e schools ha a e cons ained o ollow widening pa icipa ion alues ha sui a as majo i y o social g oups. Fo pupils, a speci ic educa ional p ojec is no men ioned as a p emise o epu a ion, al hough eaching quali y is a mus . Logis ical conce ns a e also sha ed by pa en s and s uden s, since hey enable he pe o mance o complemen a y educa ional and leisu e ac i i ies ha would o he wise be impossible. The g ea es in e gene a ional clea age eme ges a ound he secu i y issue, ega ded as a p io i y o pa en s bu conside ed as a cons ain o young people, who eel dep i ed o hei au onomy (pa en in he daily libe y o lea ing school una ended, o ins ance). Finally, while pa en s occasionally e e o ankings, bu in a a he c i ical way, ecalling ha p i a e u o ing and di e se me hodologies make hei esul s no so schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 403 us wo hy, ankings a e pe cei ed by young people as isible e idence o he quali y o a school. Uni e sal school access would appa en ly depic an equali a ian landscape. Howe e , e en i social di ides a e no so sha p a he main en ance ga e, ine clea ages a e p og essi ely in oduced inside he sys em, wi h ins i u ional di e en ia ion ope a ing as a seg ega ion ool. As shown, “school choice” (ce ainly limi ed o ce ain e i o ies and g oups) based on school epu a ion se es as a s a egic obse a o y o desc ibe and explain inclusion/exclusion phenomena, which shape con empo a y socie ies. ____________________________________ ma ia manuel iei a Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal mm o[email p o ec ed]oa.p o cid.o g/0000-0002-2544-9694 ____________________________________ ana nunes de almeida Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa ana.n[email p o ec ed]lisboa.p o cid.o g/0000-0003-3174-3870 ____________________________________ ana so ia ibei o Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa [email p o ec ed] o cid.o g/0000-0001-6648-611x ____________________________________ e e ences a onso, A. J. 2010. “Ges ão, au onomia e accoun abili y na escola pública po uguesa: b e e diac onia”. Re is a B asilei a de Polí ica e Adminis ação da Educação, 26 (1): 13-30. almeida, A. N., e al. 2017. Ges ão e Financiamen o das Escolas em Po ugal. Indicado es, Polí icas e A o es. Lisbon: Fundação Calous e Gulbenkian. almeida, A. N. 2005. “O que as amílias azem à escola… pis as pa a um deba e”. Análise Social, 176, xl (3): 579-593. an unes, F. 2008. A No a O dem Educacional. Espaço Eu opeu de Educação e Ap endizagem ao Longo da Vida. Coimb a: Almedina. an unes, F., V. Sá. 2010. Públicos Escola es e Regulação da Educação. Lu as Conco enciais na A ena Educa i a. Vila No a de Gaia: Fundação Manuel Leão. ba è e, A. 2006. Sociologie des che s d’ é ablissemen s. Les manage s de la République. Pa is: pu . 404 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in ba oso, J., V. S. Viseu. 2003. “A eme gência de um me cado educa i o no planejamen o da ede escola : de uma egulação pela o e a a uma egulação pela p ocu a”. Educação & Sociedade, Re is a de Ciências da Educação, 24 (84): 897-921. becke , H. 1982. A Wo lds. Be keley: Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. bol anski, L., L. Thé eno . 1991. De la jus i ica ion. Les économies de la g andeu . Pa is: Édi ions Gallima d. bo ges, V. 2014. “Repu ação, me cado e e i ó io. O caso dos a qui e os”. Sociologia, P oblemas e P á icas, 74: 73-92. b e iglie i, M., V. Cicchelli, o g. 2007. Adolescences médi e anéennes. Pa is: L’ Ha ma an. b own, T. J., e al. 2006. “Iden i y, in ended image, cons ued image, and epu a ion: an in e disciplina y amewo k and sugges ed e minology”. Jou nal o he Academy o Ma ke ing Science, 34: 99-106. ca don, D. 2013. “Du lien au like su In e ne . Deux mesu es de la épu a ion”. Communica ions, 2 (93): 173-186. ca alli, A., V. Cicchelli, and O. Galland, o g. 2008. Deux pays, deux jeunesses? Rennes: P esses Uni e si ai es de Rennes. chau in, P.-M. 2013. “La sociologie des épu a ions. Une dé ini ion e cinq ques ions”. Communica ions, 93: 131-145. colonomos, A. 2013. “La no a ion inanciè e des é a s. Une ques ion de épu a ion”. Communica ions, 93: 187-202. co dei o, A. M. R. 2014. “O luga dos municípios no planeamen o e ges ão da ede escola em Po ugal”. In 40 Anos de Polí icas de Educação em Po ugal, olume ii, ed. M. de Lu des Rod igues. Coimb a: Almedina, 421-444. cos a, M. da, M. C. Koslinski. 2011. “Quase-me cado ocul o: dispu a po escolas ‘comuns’ no Rio de Janei o”. Cade nos de Pesquisa, 41 (142): 246-266. de oue , J.-L. 2000. “Plu ali é des mondes e coo dina ion de l’ ac ion: l’ exemple des é ablissemen s scolai es”. In L’ école dans plusieu s mondes, ed. J. L. Dé oue . Pa is, B uxelles: De Boeck & La cie . ine, G. A. 2007. “Repu a ion”. In Blackwell Encyclopedia o Sociology, ed. G. Ri ze . Camb idge: Blackwell. omb un, C. 2015. “Repu a ion”. Wiley Encyclopedia o Managemen , 11: 1-3. oucaul , M. 1975. Su eille e puni . Pa is: Gallima d. go man, E. 1982. Es igma – No as Sob e a Manipulação da Iden idade De e io ada. Rio de Janei o: Zaha . gou eia, L. 2017. Po que Se Mobilizam os P o esso es? Rep esen ações Cole i as e Coo denações de Ações Públicas dos P o esso es do Ensino Básico e Secundá io em Função dos Juízos Plu ais Sob e o Que É um Bom P o esso num Con ex o de Ince eza. Disse ação de Dou o amen o em Sociologia. Lisbon: Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas – Uni e sidade No a de Lisboa. g iske icius, V., J. M. Tybu , and B. Van Den Be gh. 2010. “Going g een o be seen: S a us, epu a ion, and conspicuous conse a ion”. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 98 (3): 392-404. lima, J. Á., A. C. Melo. 2016. “As escolas p i adas e os seus clien es: es a égias o ganizacionais de p omoção da o e a e de egulação das admissões”. Fo um Sociológico, ii, 29: 75-83. melo, M. B. P. 2009. Os P o esso es do Ensino Secundá io e os Rankings Escola es. Vila No a de Gaia: Fundação Manuel Leão. schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices 405 menge , P.-M. 2013. “Valeu s ince aines, ma chés aux puces, en es en ligne: commen s’assu e de la quali é?” Communica ions, 2 (93): 147-172. palha es, J. 2014. “A excelência académica na escola pública. Quo idianos escola es e não escola es de jo ens enquan o alunos”. In En e Mais e Melho Escola em Democ acia. Inclusão e Excelência no Sis ema Educa i o Po uguês, o gs. L. L. To es and J. A. Palha es. Lisbon: Edi o a Mundos Sociais, 5-26. pappámikail, L. 2013. Adolescência e Au onomia. Negociações Familia es e Cons ução de Si. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais. qua esma, L. 2014. “O nome de ba ismo, o nome do colégio: coo denadas de uma e lexão sociológica”. Análise Social, 212, xlix (3): 676-699. qua esma, L., C. Villalobos. 2016. “Me can ilização, compe i i idade e accoun abili y no sis ema de ensino em Po ugal: o que se pode ap ende da expe iência chilena”. Re is a Lusó ona de Educação, 32: 31-47. ao, H. 1994. “The social cons uc ion o epu a ion: ce i ica ion con es s, legi ima ion, and he su i al o o ganiza ions in he Ame ican au omobile indus y: 1895-1912”. S a egic Managemen Jou nal, 15: 29-44. s a hdee, R. 2009. “Repu a ion in he sociology o educa ion”. B i ish Jou nal o Sociology o Educa ion, 30 (1): 83-96. a a es, O., S. Ca doso. 2013. “En olmen choices in Po uguese highe educa ion: do s uden s beha e as consume s?”. Highe Educa ion, 66 (3): 297-309. o es, L. L. 2014. “A i ualização da dis inção académica. O e ei o cul u a de escola”. In En e Mais e Melho Escola em Democ acia. Inclusão e Excelência no Sis ema Educa i o Po uguês, o gs. L. L. To es and J. A. Palha es. Lisbon: Edi o a Mundos Sociais, 27-47. an zan en, A. 2004. Les poli iques d’ éduca ion. Pa is: pu . an zan en, A. 2005. “E ei os da conco ência sob e a a i idade dos es abelecimen os escola es”. Cade nos de Pesquisa, 35 (126): 565-593. an zan en, A. 2009. Choisi son école. S a égies amiliales e média ions locales. Pa is: pu . zoia, G. 2009. “Mixi é sociale e choix du collège”. In Les sen imen s de jus ice à e su l’école, o gs. M. D. Bella and D. Meu e . B uxelles: De Boeck, 159-170. documen s oecd. 2013. pisa 2012 Resul s: Wha makes schools success ul? Resou ces, policies and p ac ices ( olume i ). Pa is: oecd Publishing. oecd. 2015. “Wha do pa en s look o in hei child’s school?”. pisa in Focus, 51: 1-4. ci e his chap e as: iei a, M. M., A. N. de Almeida, A. S. Ribei o.2018. “Including and excluding. Schools’ epu a ions: s uden s, amilies and choices”. In Changing Socie ies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. i. Ambiguous Inclusions: Inside Ou , Inside In, eds. S. Aboim, P. G anjo, A. Ramos. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais, 383-405. h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715030.16