Gender inequality within the university is well documented but proposals to tackle it tend to focus on the higher ranks, ignoring how it manifests within precarious work. Based on data collected as part of a broader participatory action research project on casual academic labour in Irish higher education, the article focuses on the intersection of precarious work and gender in academia. We argue that precarious female academics are non‐citizens of the academy, a status that is reproduced through exploitative gendered practices and evident in formal/legal recognition (staff status, rights and entitlements, pay and valuing of work) as well as in informal dimensions (social and decision‐making power). We, therefore, conclude that any attempts to challenge gender inequality in academia must look downward, not upward, to the ranks of the precarious academics.

Our paper examines the opening of branches overseas ('satellite colleges') by elite private schools mainly located in England ('founding colleges'), largely in emerging economies of the Middle East and South East Asia. We trace the development of these 'satellite colleges' over three successive waves of growth, from opportunistic venturing in Thailand in the late-1990s to their recent rapid growth in numbers in a phase characterized by the market entry of new actors and geographic diversification. We argue that the emergence of these schools occurs in line with the continued intensification and diversification of the GEI. This implies a significant shift in the modes of legitimation on which British elite schools typically rely. This desire to pragmatically seek out a reliable, low-cost alternative revenue stream 'back home' is still driving the supply but does not on its own explain the unprecedented growth of activity characterizing the current 'third wave'. Further, a number of new school openings is already planned (Phillips, 2017), pointing towards a possible 'fourth wave' emerging in the near future.Despite its current rapid upward growth slope, and the involvement of 'icons of elite education' (Bow, 2017), the 'satellite college model' has attracted very little attention beyond the British-based trade press, as well as a single piece of sustained analysis by Bunnell (2008) when the phenomenon was in its infancy. 1 While in higher education, the 'International Branch Campus' (IBC) phenomenon is relatively well researched (e.g. Kosmützky, 2018;Liu and Lin, 2017), its school-level counterpart is still largely ignored by academic comment or research, and remains almost entirely under-theorized.This paper is based on data collated from publicly available data sources including the trade press, school websites, and industry reports. It charts and analyses the emergence of the 'satellite college model' as part of the trend of marketization and globalization of education.More specifically, we locate this phenomenon at the intersection of two significant trends typically analyzed separately. On the one hand, there is the enduring appeal of an exclusive, British 'elite' education for the aspiring middle classes worldwide (Kenway and McCarthy, 2014;Ayling 2019;Brooks and Waters, 2015), and on the other, there is the remarkable expansion of the 'global education industry' (GEI) (Ball, 2012;Parreira do Amaral et al., 2019;

Drawing on the concept of hypermobility, the paper examines a case of studyabroad mobility from a governmentality perspective. Based on a critical analysis of policy texts and interviews with Irish students who have taken part in the Erasmus exchange programme, it argues that under the conditions of neoliberal globalisation, the normalisation of study abroad aims to produce self-governing practices that align with dominant discourses promoting voluntarist attitudes to labour mobility. These dispositions, described as hypermobility, are an additional dimension of the flexible, entrepreneurial subject imagined in neoliberal societies. The paper examines the discourses and practices at state and institutional levels and how they circulate and impact on students' subjectivitiesanalysing affective detachment from home and cosmopolitan sociability as selfdisciplining practices that align with the production of neoliberal hypermobile subjectivities.

The paper suggests that a process of de-academisation is discernible in the way the Erasmus year abroad is promoted, organised, supervised and evaluated. It argues that rather than being a product of students' consumerist rationalities, this process is produced within the conditions of the managerialised and under-resourced university. This process is underpinned by institutional discourses and practices that devalue academic capital, in line with the employability agenda and the corporate critique of higher education as outdated and too abstract for the real world. Based on a qualitative study conducted in Ireland, the article uses a Bourdieusian lens to examine the deacademisation of study abroad and the field-habitus clash experienced by participants.Finally it draws attention to the implications of this neutralisation of academic capital in a context where academic credentials are increasingly devalued on the labour market.

It doesn't really matter which university you attend or which subject you study while abroad." The Massification of Student Mobility Programmes and its Implications for Equality in Irish Higher Education.Based on documentary analysis and interviews, the article examines the current practices of Irish universities in their efforts to increase their students' participation in international exchange programmes. It argues that increased participation, while a positive outcome, obscures a growing differentiation in the types of exchange programmes and destinations. This emerging stratification leads to differentiated experiences and outcomes, which may amplify other forms of stratification pervading the higher education sector. In particular, we look at the emergence of different models of exchange, that have moved away from an academic focus towards a more easily manageable model better suited to the massification underway. We suggest that Irish higher education institutions contribute to making credit mobility a space, where students can deploy socially unequal strategies and where the more vulnerable remain either excluded, or limited to 'second best' programmes, devalued academically or where pedagogic opportunities are lost. This is one of the manifestations of the production of internationalisation under the pressures of cost-saving, corporatisation and the employability discourse.