Tinka Maria Greve, Institutes of Sociology and Cultural Organisation, Leuphana University Lüneburg

Abstract

The present article brings together the topics of school education and racism research. Looking at the transition from primary to the first level of secondary school (Sekundarstufe I) in Germany's selective school system, the phenomenon of institutional discrimination is examined from a sociological and philosophical perspective. The research addresses the way in which the structural disadvantages affecting children with a history of migration are (re)produced at this transitional point in their school education. It thus aims to make a theoretical contribution to the recognition and challenging of discriminatory patterns.

The article consists of a critical, theory-driven analysis of teachers' practice of making recommendations for students' future school careers. Drawing on the theories of Judith Butler and Pierre Bourdieu, it enquires to what extent teachers' culturalising assumptions and ascriptions constitute particular subjects (such as the 'Hauptschule student', studying at the type of secondary school for students with the lowest level of academic achievement) and which power structures are at work in this process. The article shows that teachers' recommendations can be interpreted not just as subject interpellations and performative acts, but – where children with a history of migration are concerned – as relevant to racism. The abovementioned theories are used to demonstrate that teachers' practice constitutes symbolic violence and is influenced by dominant social discourse. Furthermore, the article shows that teachers possess individual agency despite their structural determination, which means that they are able to change social practice.

Keywords: Structural racism in schools, racism criticism, school transition, subjectivation, institutional discrimination, symbolic violence.

Introduction

Even though equality of opportunity is formally in place in Germany,^[1] various studies (such as the PISA studies from 2000 onwards)^[2] have shown that children and teenagers from particular social and ethnic backgrounds continue to experience structural discrimination in the German school system. This includes children and adolescents with a history of migration,^[3] who immigrated to Germany themselves or whose parents immigrated to Germany. This institutional discrimination remains invisible, as it usually does not manifest in individual actions but instead forms an implicit, inherent part of the school system. Furthermore, academic failure is rarely attributed directly to children's ethnicity, but to their individual school performance. Despite this, some children with a history of migration experience discrimination even when they perform as well as their peers (Rose, 2012a: 33). This becomes particularly evident in the transition from primary to secondary school (Ditton, 2008: 250). As teachers produce transition recommendations that have a significant impact upon which type of secondary school a child will attend, they hold enormous power of definition within this transitional process.

In the following, we will thus focus upon the transition from primary to secondary school, enquiring into the criteria upon which teachers base their transition recommendations and analysing the extent to which this causes institutional discrimination. Furthermore, this article will investigate whether the subjects^[4] involved in the transition process (teachers and students) possess autonomous decision-making power or whether their actions are more strongly determined by the structures and norms of the school institution. Even though other actors (such as parents or political actors who create certain conditions) are involved in the transition process, the present article will focus mainly upon the role played by teachers and their decision-making patterns.

Accordingly, the question guiding this article is: To what extent do teachers' ascriptions during the transition to the first level of secondary school lead to the constitution of subjects, and which power structures affect this process?

Judith Butler's theory of subjectivation (1997a) and Pierre Bourdieu's theory of symbolic violence (2005) will form the article's theoretical framework. Following a discussion of the research question within the context of these theories, the main results will be summarised and possible courses of action suggested.

State of research and disciplinary categorisation

Even though it has been statistically proven that children with a history of migration experience significant disadvantages when transitioning to the first level of secondary education (Sekundarstufe I) even when basic conditions are the same as for non-migrant children (Rose, 2012a: 33), very little research has been carried out on the mechanisms of this educational discrimination. Besides differing levels of competency and families' social situations, which are generally seen as having a limiting effect on educational performance, there are further disadvantaging effects^[5] that cannot be attributed to differences in performance alone (ibid.: 32). In Germany, attempts to explain the educational disadvantage of migrant children that take account of potential institutional discrimination and seek to examine it are a relatively recent phenomenon (ibid.: 39).

One of the few such studies was produced by Gomolla and Radtke (2009, orig. 2002). Their research on institutional discrimination in the German school system differs from other explanatory approaches in that it adopts a comprehensive perspective informed by the sociology of education, looking at the school institution's inherent organisational logic (Rose, 2012a: 39). The study's main finding is that teachers interpret school performance in reference to culture. Recommendations on which type of secondary school to attend are then made on the basis of this interpretation. Overall, the study concludes that as an institution, school creates structural discrimination against children with a migrant background, and that ethnic and cultural ascriptions are used to legitimate this discrimination (Yildiz, 2010: 68). The present article takes up this finding, investigating the social (power) structures that influence teachers' decision-making processes and the impact that these decisions have on the subjects (in this case, primary-school students).

Judith Butler's theories have only been adapted by the educational and pedagogical sciences in German-speaking countries since 2014, and their use is thus a fairly recent phenomenon, as Bettina Kleiner and Nadine Rose show (2014). However, a range of authors have already attempted to use Butler's philosophical and political theory on subject formation in the context of educational work on racism; they include Paul Mecheril (2014), Charlotte Chadderton (2012), Nadine Rose (2012a), Norbert Ricken (2014) and Karen Geipel (2014). The present article takes these works as its starting point, aiming to relate Butler's theory to institutional discrimination in the context of transition recommendations. Accordingly, it touches upon topics dealt with in the sociology of education, in research on racism, in educational science and in research on social inequality.

Theoretical background

The two theorists Pierre Bourdieu and Judith Butler have been selected, as their work illustrates the dichotomy between actions and structure (Schäfer, 2013: 52), revealing a range of perspectives on how social practice is produced. This means that contextualising these theories with the research object can show to what extent the school transition under study here takes place within the tension between the actors' confinement within the existing structure and their individual agency. Furthermore, Bourdieu and Butler's diverse views on the repetition of social practice offer new perspectives for the analysis of the transition phenomenon.

Of Bourdieu's vast oeuvre, the present article concentrates upon his concept of symbolic violence. This theory adopts a sociological perspective on structures of power and society, focusing on the legitimation of power in and through institutions. This allows us to place the school institution within the context of society as a whole, examining the hidden power structures at work within this institution. Bourdieu's theory can help us to understand that the actions of school actors can always be seen as stabilising authority and embedded in existing structures. There are only a few instances where Bourdieu refers explicitly to racism (e.g. Bourdieu, 1983: 192, in Weiß, 2001a: 84). However, his concept of symbolic violence, for example, can be generalised and applied to the specifics of racist power, as Anja Weiß^[6] (2001a) has shown.

Judith Butler's concept of subjectivation serves as the article's second theoretical basis. The article draws upon Rose's (2012a) discussion, which also includes a critical appraisal of Bourdieu's theory. Butler's theory focuses more strongly on the performative shifts that are possible in everyday practice, expanding Bourdieu's theory. The adaptation of her theory draws attention to the consequences that recommendations have for students' subject and identity constitution on the one hand. On the other hand, her theory makes it possible to see school practice as precisely that: a practice, which can undergo change. We can use the theory of subjectivation to enquire into the influence that socially constructed difference and dominant discourses exert upon teachers' decisions.

Institutional discrimination: institutional racism

The concept of institutionalised racism – unlike individual discriminatory acts – refers to a structural disadvantage caused by the organisational actions of social institutions (Gomolla, 2006: 98). It manifests in 'formal rights and organisational structures, programmes, rules and routines in key social institutions' (Gomolla, 2012: 43),^[7] giving rise to the routine production and reproduction of social inequality (Flam, 2009: 239f.). Furthermore, it describes all kinds of institutional measures, the negative consequences of which affect a certain group with disproportionate frequency (Gomolla, 2012: 43). Often institutional discrimination is the result of the application of the same rules and standards to groups who have fundamentally unequal chances of complying with and fulfilling them, as can be seen in the example discussed in the present article (Gomolla, 2006: 98).

Accordingly, teachers' decisions concerning transition recommendations constitute a form of indirect institutional discrimination (Gomolla and Radtke 2009: 19). They are an everyday process that usually does not involve intentional discrimination against children with a history of migration. However, the existence of this effect can be proven statistically and is evident, for example, in the fact that children with a migrant background who perform at the same level as non-migrant children score lower than the other children (Rose, 2012a: 32).

As the kind of discrimination under examination here concerns the criterion 'with a history of migration' – that is, a person's ethnic/cultural/national origins – we can also speak of racial discrimination. The concept of 'racism' does not shift the problem of racism to individual (marginal) groups, but also includes a structural level, drawing attention to socially dominant power imbalances. Racism is not constructed primarily as an individual phenomenon characteristic only of certain persons and groups, but as a comprehensive 'structuring principle of social reality' (Scharathow et al., 2009: 10).^[8] It functions as a social matrix and construction inherent in the existing order and its power relations. These constructions are like 'ushers' (Mecheril and Melter, 2009: 16),^[9] determining social groups' and individuals' place and position within the social sphere.

For example, teachers' generally (overly) low expectations of children with a migrant background constitute a kind of institutional racism, as they have a cumulative effect on the lives of the individuals affected (Chadderton, 2012: 7). As a result, it is significantly more difficult for children with a history of migration to achieve academic success, which denies them access to certain resources from the very start (Rommelspacher, 2009: 31). Accordingly, the education system is understood – to quote Chadderton (2012: 6) – as shaped by a 'white supremacy which defines roles, identities, interaction and policy'. In this system, people of colour are defined as 'Other', diverging from the norm of 'middle-class children whose socialisation has been Christian in the widest possible sense of the word' (Gomolla, 2006: 101).^[10] Seen from this angle, school practice is imbued with racism on a structural, individual and institutional level, just like every other area of society. The actors working within schools are thus influenced by the dominant discourse and practices, which always also draw on racist knowledge (Scharathow, 2011: 16).

Discussion

The following section will present and discuss the results of the analysis. The discussion will be structured by four propositions that emerged during the process of analysis.

Every recommendation is a subject interpellation and a performative act

Social practices of distinction are at work within the transition context. In general, while these practices precede the institution of school as such, they are taken up and confirmed in schools (Mecheril, 2014: 18). The academic selection into Hauptschule, Realschule and Gymnasium students linguistically assigns children to positions that will have a decisive impact on their later status in society. Each recommendation, each address is also always an ascription of value that can show or deny appreciation (Ricken, 2014: 126).

Furthermore, each transition recommendation can be interpreted as a performative speech act. According to Judith Butler, this kind of speech act not only makes a statement but also does something (Rose, 2012a: 122); that is, an action is performed through the means of language itself. The fact that the speech act (in our case: the school recommendation) is firmly anchored in the institution and is continually repeated endows it with vast assertive power (Schmidt and Woltersdorff, 2008: 13). Butler describes performative acts as the 'reiterative and citational practice through which discourse produces the effects that it names' (Butler, 1993: 2). Transferring this to our context, this would mean that a single transition recommendation without any contextualisation would have no effect. Only by virtue of the fact that recommendations are an institutionalised part of everyday school life – that is, have made into a reiteratable sign – do they take on a performative character.

Accordingly, the performative power of statements on students' abilities is produced by a 'derived, hidden power' (Rose, 2012a: 123)^[11] that is only realised through reiteration and institutionalisation. This reiteration and institutionalisation strengthens the speakers' positions and solidifies the speech act (ibid.). If teachers' positions as speakers were not acknowledged, the reports they produce would have no consequences for the subjects affected.

Every recommendation issued by the teachers can thus also be seen as a subject interpellation. Children are assigned a certain identity within a certain order through the transition recommendations' linguistic determination of what they are, whether they are a 'future Hauptschule student' or a 'future student at the Gymnasium'.

Recommendations for children with a history of migration can be interpreted as relevant to racism.

Like any other social sphere, schools are not free of racist structures or of constructed difference. When producing transition recommendations, teachers within the school context are always also subject to the norms dominant in the institution and their actions are influenced by the dominant discourses.

Each recommendation refers to pre-existing categories of order and identity. To become subjects in the first place, human beings refer to pre-existing social categories such as 'race' and 'gender', only establishing a 'self' within this context (Ludwig, 2012: 33). Accordingly, categorisations are key to that which determines the subject, as power and norms are absorbed and incorporated into the self (Ludwig, 2012: 33). When children become certain subjects ('problem child', 'special school student', etc.) as the result of such categorisations, they incorporate the powerful norms of the discourse into their selves. Accordingly, each interpellation by the teachers – and thus each subjectivation – also has an effect upon students' self-perceptions and self-identifications.

This is particularly problematic when we consider the fact that transition recommendations involve not only performance criteria, but ascriptive traits of ethnic origin (Gomolla, 2012: 44). This affects children with a history of migration in particular, as Terkessidis shows in his 2004 study. In this context, interpellations can thus also be seem as 'relevant to racism'.^[12] When students repeatedly experience disadvantage based on their national/ethnic/cultural identity and this identity becomes part of the reason they are recommended for a certain school, this leaves a mark on their subject constitution (Geipel and Mecheril, 2014: 49).

Recommendations as exercising symbolic power

Not only are subjects positioned within a certain symbolic order within the transition context, but this positioning also reproduces a certain (social) order. Education institutions are thus directly involved in upholding conditions of symbolic violence (Alkemeyer and Rieger-Ladich, 2008: 105). In pedagogic work, knowledge is conveyed through symbolic violence; 'arbitrary cultural power' presents this knowledge as the only legitimate knowledge. For example, distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate language skills and continuously devaluing the language of children with a history of migration can be seen as a form of institutional discrimination.

The practice of transition recommendations can also be seen as exercising symbolic violence, as teachers position subjects within an arbitrary cultural order through this practice. This positioning seemingly corresponds to students' objective capabilities – to their school performance alone. Teachers' decisions are thus justified by 'sound common sense' (Schmidt and Woltersdorff 2008: 8),^[13] which in turn upholds the myth of meritocracy (Melter and Karayaz, 2013: 251). Teachers are in a recognised speaker's position that is institutionalised within the school context.

According to Wacquant (2008: 289), Bourdieu's theory represents 'a potent tool for uncovering the typical logic of ethno-'racial' power'.^[14] For even though we can assume that schools as organisations follow their own inherent logic, they nevertheless adapt and (re)produce socially dominant categories of difference (Kleiner and Rose, 2014: 81). As noted in the previous section of this article, the impact of racism as an influential matrix is also evident in the school context. This means that racism – whether overtly or covertly – 'guides the perception, feelings and actions of social actors and forms the network of material and symbolic relations' (ibid.).¹⁵ Accordingly, when teachers exercise symbolic violence by producing a recommendation, they reproduce a system that draws upon racist knowledge and discourses. The category of 'race', which today is often replaced by 'culture', provides an instrument of power that, through the exercising of symbolic violence, contributes to upholding the privileges of those ruling and attributes the educational failure of those ruled to the ruled themselves (Wacquant, 2008: 290).

Throughout this process, a mantle of neutrality (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1973, in Kalthoff, 2004: 121) maintains the 'ethnic order and subordination' (Diehm and Radtke 1999: 85).^[16] It cloaks the structural creation of ethnic difference that frequently occurs within the context of transition recommendations (Gomolla and Radtke 2009). Instead, teachers see legitimising patterns – even if these are based on culturalising assumptions – as 'natural', and 'objective performance' is given as the only evaluative category.

School transition as a subjectivation process

If we assume that racism as a category of difference functions as an effective subjectivation matrix (Kleiner and Rose, 2014: 79), then structural racism functions as a symbolic order in the school context, too, just as in other social spheres. If individuals become subjects within this context, their individual subject constitutions will inevitably also be marked by this category of difference. In this deficit perspective, students with a history of migration are continuously constructed by teachers as 'Others' unable to adapt to the norms prevailing at school. They represent a 'deviation' from what is 'normal', which subsequently leads to poorer recommendations. For example, the norm of perfect knowledge of the German language plays a key role in the transition context (Gomolla and Radtke, 2009; Terkessidis, 2004). Thus children with a history of migration are often positioned as having 'limited language skills' and are measured against what is considered to be normal for German native speakers. Over the course of their school careers, they learn that they are 'language limited' and begin to see themselves this way (Mecheril, 2014: 18). When students incorporate these negative ascriptions into their own self-perception, a new reproduction of their position takes place.

Then again, the exercising of discursive agency (in this case, that of the teachers) always needs to be seen within the limits of subjectivation, which makes a more complex understanding of resistance to dominant discourses possible (Chadderton, 2012: 11). Thus resistance does not always necessarily need to be conscious or explicit, as seen in the academic failure or refusal to perform of children with a history of migration (ibid.). As Terkessidis's study (2004) shows, this student behaviour can be interpreted as a form of resistance to teachers' dominant practices and ascriptions.

Unlike Bourdieu, in whose oeuvre actors/subjects are primarily determined by the dominant structure, Butler attributes a certain agency to the subject, despite his or her dependence on the discourse (Butler, 1997a, in Chadderton, 2012: 11). Here, Butler points out that the norm can be repeated in a form that does not correspond to the rules of the given order, for example in 'practices of resignification, understood as practices of appropriation, re-evaluation, subversion or transgression of sedimented meanings, of norms that restrict the constitution of the subject' (Rose, 2012a: 143).^[17] Only in this way can powerful discourses be interrupted and hegemonic meanings shifted (Chadderton, 2012: 13). Furthermore, this has an effect on the subjects constituted by the transition recommendations: 'If the student were designated differently, she would be different' (Youdell, 2006: 519, in Chadderton, 2012: 13).

Thus teachers can choose to repeatedly examine their own actions critically for racism-relevant designations and actions (Castro Varela, 2002: 42), reflecting upon their decision-making processes. However, the responsibility for changing current practice should not be placed on the teachers' shoulders alone. School as an institution needs to become aware of its role in the (re)production of racist social structures and work steadily on dismantling this role. Within the transition context, teacher recommendations could be subjected to an ongoing revision process, so that more than one person is involved in the decision on children's future school careers. Furthermore, schools could offer workshops on racism for teachers and empowerment workshops for students with a history of migration led by persons of colour. In this way, both sides could be sensitised to the topic of racism without any blanket allocations of blame.

Conclusion

The present article has highlighted that every transition recommendation can be seen as an ascription of value and a positioning. Whether this is intentional on the teachers' part or not, it has an impact upon students' subject formation. Recommendations can only have this impact upon the subjects as they are institutionalised – that is, they are constantly repeated. Using linguistic categories, they decide 'what someone has to be' and thus codetermine the subjects' self-image and their identity formation to a considerable extent.

Furthermore, the article has shown that teachers' practice cannot be seen in isolation from social discourses and matrixes. Teachers work within the school institution and are thus subject to the norms and orders that prevail within this institution. These norms and orders reflect the symbolic order of society as a whole, and according to Bourdieu school practice serves to legitimate and reproduce the existing relations of power. Thus transition recommendations can be interpreted as an act of symbolic violence, as teachers position subjects within an arbitrary order through these recommendations. The symbolic violence exercised here is hidden under a cloak of neutrality: it is claimed that the students' objective, individual performance is the only deciding factor. As the authority exercised always also draws on racist knowledge content, it is impossible for teachers' decisions to be free of this content.

As a result, ascriptive traits such as ethnic identity also influence the teachers' decisions. Whether consciously or unconsciously, this highlights differences between students based upon the constructed difference 'with or without a history of migration' that is active here. Drawing on Butler, we can conclude that the subjects constituted by transition recommendations necessarily bear the traces of this symbolic order. This reproduces the dominant system, whose discourses are always also shaped by racism-relevant actions and speech acts. In particular, structural disadvantage based upon ethnic identity leaves a mark upon the subjects.

Nevertheless, the article has claimed that both students and teachers have the opportunity to question and change the categorisations of the dominant discourse. One first step towards change is to recognise that teachers, too, are always part of a system in which racist structures (among others) are dominant (Castro Varela, 2002: 40). We need to break these structures if we are to combat the institutional discrimination of children with a history of migration. However, teachers should not be seen as the only ones responsible for this change: the institution itself and various political actors need to take responsibility for setting up structures in which teachers can be sensitised to racist constructs and conduct, for example through training on racism. Particularly the conditions created by political actors, for example in the field of education policy, have considerable influence on the extent to which discriminating school practices can be discussed and brought to a halt.

Overall, this article casts light on a point in the school system at which children with a history of migration are institutionally discriminated against, highlighting new ways of interpreting this that see teachers' behaviour as relevant to racism. However, aspects relevant to racism are found not only during the transition from primary to secondary school, but at many other points in everyday school life, as Terkissidis's study shows. This everyday practice is another interesting area at which research could take a closer look. Moreover, further research could focus more strongly on the other actors involved in the transition process, such as the students themselves.

---

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my proofreaders Meryem Choukri, Maren Stöber, Astrid Greve and Jannis Muser for patiently reading this article and for their helpful comments that have improved its clarity and structure. Furthermore, I would like to thank Simon Moebius and Anke Wischmann, who supported and encouraged me while I developed this article. I was delighted by Josefine Hintz's support, without which this article could not have been published.

Endnotes

[1] In political terms, equality of opportunity in Germany is already taken as given, as every individual is guaranteed equal access to the educational system and is theoretically able to gain academic qualifications, as these are based on objective performance criteria (Becker, 2011: 88). In practical terms, however, equality of opportunity does not automatically lead to a levelling of social inequality in the education system, or to a fair distribution of opportunity, as Bourdieu and Passeron (1971) have shown, for example. Rather, it increases phenomena such as the link between academic success and social background or institutional discrimination (Becker, 2011: 89).

[2] The 2000 PISA study was the first to provide differentiated information on students' 'migration background' and, like the 2004 IGLU study, referred to a 'strict connection between social background, migration background, inadequate school performance and formal academic success/failure' (Radtke, 2004: 635, in Wenzel, 2010: 65, orig. 'strikten Zusammenhang zwischen sozialer Herkunft, Migrationshintergrund, unzureichender Schülerleistung und formalen Bildungs(miss)erfolgen'). The 2004 IGLU study, for example, states: 'Even when controlling for social class [...] and reading competency, that is, even when comparing only children with the same social background and reading skills, children whose parents were born in Germany remain at an advantage – their chance of being recommended for the Realschule is 1.73 times as high, and their chance of being recommended for the Gymnasium 1.66 times as high' (Bos et al., 2004: 211f., in Rose, 2012a: 33; orig. 'Selbst unter Kontrolle von Sozialschicht […] und Lesekompetenz, d.h. wenn man nur Kinder gleicher sozialer Herkunft und Lesekompetenz miteinander vergleicht, bleiben die Kinder, deren Eltern in Deutschland geboren wurden, im Vorteil – ihre Chancen auf eine Realschulempfehlung ist auch dann noch 1,73mal so hoch, die auf eine Gymnasialempfehlung 1,66mal so hoch').

[3] The term 'persons with a history of migration' is used to refer to individuals who immigrated themselves or whose families immigrated; that is, persons in whose lives the migration from one state to another plays or has played a role (Treibel, 2008: 298).

[4] Here, the article uses the concept of 'subject' as defined by Judith Butler, which will be explained in greater detail below. In the context of school transition, this refers to primary-school students who are ascribed certain identity categories (e.g. 'with limited speaking skills'), turning them into certain subjects (e.g. 'Hauptschule student').

[5] For example, the 2004 IGLU study showed that teachers' recommendations and performance evaluations 'are worse on average for children with the indicator "migration background" even if their basic cognitive abilities and motivational personality traits' are the same (Bos et al., 2004: 211f., 219., 223f., in Rose, 2012a: 32; orig. 'kognitiver Grundfähigkeit und motivationalen Persönlichkeitsmerkmalen der Kinder für diejenigen mit dem Indikator 'Migrationshintergrund' durchschnittlich schlechter ausfallen').

[6] In her text 'Rassismus als symbolisch vermittelte Dimension sozialer Ungleichheit' ('Racism as a symbolically mediated dimension of social inequality', 2001a), Weiß describes how the constructed difference of 'race' solidifies into a specific kind of symbolic capital and becomes part of 'the structure of the social sphere as a symbolically mediated dimension of social inequality' (Weiß, 2001a: 80; orig. 'symbolisch vermittelte Dimension sozialer Ungleichheit in die Struktur des sozialen Raumes'). However, this dimension remains dependent upon cultural negotiation processes, that is, its reproduction always involves symbolic struggles and symbolic violence (ibid.).

[7] Orig. 'formalen Rechten und organisatorischen Strukturen, Programmen, Regeln und Routinen in zentralen sozialen Institutionen'.

[8] Orig. 'Strukturprinzip gesellschaftlicher Wirklichkeit'.

[9] Orig. 'Platzanweiser'.

[10] Orig. 'im weitesten Sinne christlich sozialisierten Mittelschicht-Kindern'.

[11] Orig. 'abgeleitete und verborgene Macht'.

[12] Anja Weiß's term 'relevant to racism' (orig. 'rassismusrelevant') attempts to avoid the moral undertone of the word 'racist' and instead invites a shared investigation of 'an act's relevance for the reproduction of racism' (Weiß, 2001b: 81, orig. 'Relevanz einer Handlung für die Reproduktion von Rassismus'; Rose, 2012b: 58).

[13] Orig. 'gesunden Menschenverstand'.

[14] Orig. 'ein leistungsfähiges Werkzeug zur Verfügung, um die charakteristische Logik ethno-"rassischer" Herrschaft aufzudecken'.

[15] Orig. 'Wahrnehmung, die Gefühle und Handlungen von sozialen Akteur, innen anleitet und das Netz materieller und symbolischer Beziehungen formt'.

[16] Orig. 'ethnische Ordnung und Subordination'.

[17] Orig. 'Praxen der Resignifizierung, verstanden als Praxen der Aneignung, Umwertung, Unterwanderung oder Überschreitung von sedimentierten Bedeutungen, von Normen, die Subjektkonstitutionen begrenzen […] sind'.

References

 

To cite this paper please use the following details: Greve, T.M. (2017), 'Institutional Discrimination against Children with a History of Migration in the Transition to Secondary Education ', Reinvention: an International Journal of Undergraduate Research, Volume 10 Issue 2: Featuring the Eramus+ BLASTER Project, https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/iatl/reinvention/archive/volume10issue2/blaster/greve. Date accessed [insert date]. If you cite this article or use it in any teaching or other related activities please let us know by e-mailing us at .