Producing Accessibility Through Discretionary Practices of Educational Professionals

Educational trajectories and the decision-making processes therein are filtered and mediated by intervening actors, most importantly – yet in different ways – parents and teachers. The chapter aims at exploring the point of views of parents and pupils in negotiating with school staff and the interactive processes in which practices unfold that can open up or close down access chances at micro-level and affect subjective perception of the accessibility of education. The focus of the chapter lays on informal daily – discretionary – practices in the context of local institutions that impact on access and accessibility of education, thus shaping educational trajectories differently – thus focusing on the interaction between institutional and individual levels. The analysis draws on both quantitative and qualitative data. The first section provides a background contextualization based on GOETE surveys with students and parents, especially highlighting the contrasting expectations of parents and pupils both in terms of daily management of educational activities and of future educational perspectives and on the different degrees and types of parental support. In the second section, mainly via the analysis of qualitative interview data, the chapter identifies different constellations of interaction among pupils/parents and educational professionals (teachers, guidance counsellors, psychologists, youth workers, among others). The chapter identifies discretion as a fundamental part of social and educational professions; and, the structure of the macro institutional frame highly influences the way in which this discretion is exercised. In the discussion of the empirical data mentioned above, by triangulating the different points of view the chapter focuses on the role of educational professionals in supporting access and transition after or outside their scheduled teaching hours in order to reveal how they may be relevant to successful or unsuccessful transitions. The analysis of case studies shows the existence, to different degrees, of different types of discretion that are used in different directions, proactively increasing access/ibility and defensively, closing doors and diminishing access/ibility for students.