Alla har inte samma tillgång till den akademiska världen. De som kommer från akademisk bakgrund har både lättare att söka sig till och större chans att klara av och trivas i högre studier. Som ett svar på detta arbetar högskolorna och universiteten med breddat deltagande. ​Breddat deltagande är ett komplext begrepp som rymmer drivkrafter som spänner över ekonomi, utbildningskvalitet och social rättvisa. Studievägledarens yrkesroll och uppdrag är nära kopplat till arbetet med breddat deltagande, ändå har studievägledares upplevelser av begreppet inte undersökts. Syftet med den här uppsatsen har varit att nå ökad förståelse för hur gruppen studievägledare på Humanistiska fakulteten vid Göteborgs universitet förstår begreppet breddat deltagande. Detta genom att titta på hur studievägledargruppen använder begreppet, hur de konstruerar breddat deltagande som viktigt och hur de konstruerar det som problematiskt. Undersökningen har en socialkonstruktivistisk utgångspunkt och som teoretiskt och metodologiskt ramverk används diskursanalys. Två intervjuer med en och samma fokusgrupp om sju studievägledare har genomförts för att samla in data. Datan har sedan analyserats med diskursanalytiska begrepp. Undersökningen visar att studievägledargruppen kopplar begreppet breddat deltagande tätt till den egna yrkesrollen och förstår det som mycket viktigt men svårdefinierat, som en central del i ett demokratiskt samhälle och som inkluderingsarbete. Begreppet förstås som studievägledares, andra yrkesgruppers, universitetets och samhällets arbete med olika insatser för att studenter ska känna till, kunna välja och vara kvar i eller avsluta studier – utifrån den egna viljan. Å ena sidan förstår gruppen breddat deltagande som positivt för både individer, universiteten, arbetsmarknaden och samhället i stort. Samtidigt framkommer en rad olika konflikter och svårigheter i studievägledargruppens förståelser av begreppet.

AbstractDue to widening participation in higher education, so-called språkverkstäder (academic writing centers) have been founded and are now present at most of the larger Swedish universities. The main activity at writing centers are individual tutorials in academic writing, reading and study skills. At most of the writing centers, tutors also give lectures and workshops in general academics, sometimes in cooperation with the university teachers at the departments. The aim of this study is to broaden the knowledge about a group of tutors who work with students in study difficulties in extended tutorials. Research questions are asked about what jurisdiction the tutors have over the professional work with the students, both in the individual tutorials and in other work tasks at the writing centers. Through interviews with eight tutors, data were collected and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Based on the theoretical approach of critical pragmatism, democratic goals like inclusion of all, are associated with the tutors’ descriptions of what in this study is regarded as a special educational work at the academic writing centers. As an analytical and interpretive frame categorial and relational perspectives together with Abbott’s theory about jurisdictional control over expert labor are used. The result shows that the tutors’ claim over their professional work with students in study difficulties vary. The jurisdictional claim depends upon the tutors’ educational background, on how the area of work and knowledge are defined and on how it is described, understood and negotiated by other professionals at the university. In the struggle about who should do what to whom the students in study difficulties are at risk to becoming invisible. Further, the jurisdiction depends upon how the tutors perceives their democratic mission within the reality of widening participation. Overall, the result shows a weak jurisdiction for the tutors at the academic writing center regarding their work with students in study difficulties. The study draws the conclusions that work with students in study difficulties needs more attention at writing centers, and that tutors need more knowledge about teaching a diverse student body with different learning realities. In this context, special educational expertise and special educational perspectives can be of use for the development of both writing center practice and theory. Futhermore, a professionalization of the writing tutor work is crucial for writing centers in order to contribute to the inclusion work in higher education and truly become a writing center for all. Finally, the question of support for students in study difficulties needs to be regarded as a matter for all professions in higher education.

The following study categorises, summarises and analyses research on unequal participation of social groups in Nordic higher education. While it does not give an exhaustive account of all research, the ambition has been to capture the main strands of contemporary literature and its results. I categorise the literature into three main research traditions, as well as into studies that may best be characterised by their object of study. This typology forms the structure in which research is presented in the study. The summary of research results show that in parallel with the efforts to expand higher education and include larger parts of the population, the relationship between family background and children’s years of education has weakened and the rate of participation in higher education has increased among underrepresented groups. At the same time, however, patterns where students tend to study different study programmes or at different higher education institutions depending on gender and social or national background have remained largely intact, and in some cases even grown stronger. These differences in participation rates and enrolment patterns can be traced to inequalities in school achievement, unequal access to knowledge and information, differences in family support and expectations from the social environment, different horizons of opportunities, as well as different preferences regarding the length of the study programme, its degree of labour market connection and the importance placed on the geographical proximity to family and friends. One of the contributions of the analysis is showing how questions and methods in different research traditions generate different types of results, which at first glance may seem incompatible. Upon closer inspection, however, the research results in fact paint a highly congruent picture. A consistent theme throughout is how more detailed, multidimensional or intersectional indicators and classifications of education, social background or other social groupings often reveal important differences and inequalities that are invisible in studies that use more aggregated or linear indicators and groupings. / <p>Uppsatsen skrevs ursprungligen i rapportform på uppdrag av Universitetskanslersämbetet (UKÄ) och publicerades 2021 inom ramen för UKÄ:s regeringsuppdrag att utvärdera lärosätenas arbete med breddad rekrytering. Texten har nu när den läggs fram som uppsats på några ställen omarbetats eller justerats, men är i stora drag identisk med uppdragsrapporten, där professor Mikael Börjesson som uppsatshandledare stod som garant för studiens kvalitet gentemot UKÄ.</p><p>Bryntesson, A., &amp; Börjesson, M. (2021). <em>Forskning om rekrytering till högre utbildning i de nordiska länderna, 2010–2021. En kunskapsöversikt</em> (Rapporter från Forskningsgruppen för utbildnings- och kultursociologi Nr 64). SEC, Uppsala universitet</p>