Belonging as situated practice

Abstract

This article offers a rethinking of a fundamental area of higher education research and practice: the concept of belonging. Extending the considerable international research attending to belonging, we suggest that normative narratives often contain a number of omissions. Such omissions include a consideration of the experiences of those students who may not wish to, or who cannot, belong, as well as a questioning of the very boundaries of belonging. Crucially, our reconceptualisation occurs within the context of the post-Covid-19 times in which we now live. Such times have seen a rapid move to emergency remote teaching, and, we suggest, offer an opening in which belonging can no longer be taken-for-granted as uniform and, as located within fixed times and spaces. Engaging generative concepts from the work of Massey, and Braidotti, and drawing upon Adam's notion of timescapes, we propose a reframing of belonging as situated, relational and processual. Within this lens, belonging can be understood as a sociomaterial practice that shifts within, across and beyond online and face to face timespaces. At the end of this article, we examine the implications of such a reframing for educators seeking to develop belonging, and we also offer suggestions for further research.

‘I’m not sure where home is’: narratives of student mobilities into and through higher education

“…This supports the idea that moving away causes a sense of living in 'in-between-ness' (38), so the notion of liminality is particularly useful for understanding these experiences (Palmer, O'Kane, and Owens 2009). This also resonates with Gravett and Ajjawi's (2021) conception of belonging as situated, where belonging is presented as an evolving process and not as something fixed or achievable. Students were very conscious of the fact they would only be staying in their university residence for a short amount of time.…”

Politicising inclusive learning environments: how to foster belonging and challenge ableism?

“…To answer their call, we take a socio-political approach to disabled students' belonging (Pesonen et al, 2020). While we recognise the situated, sociomaterial aspect of belonging (Gravett & Ajjawi, 2021), above all, our approach is humanistic. Our analytical focus is on stabilised and strong exclusionary discourses of ableism that overshadow disabled students' situated belonging (Nieminen, 2021;Dolmage, 2017;Slee, 2019).…”

“…The role of place for students' belonging emphasises the experiences of one's surroundings (Antonsich, 2010;Yuval-Davis, 2006) in physical and digital environments (Gravett & Ajjawi, 2021). The importance of students' living space and geographical and cultural location has been emphasised (Ahn & Davis, 2020), as well as the significance of embodied experiences of touch, sight, sounds, smell and taste (May, 2011).…”

“…Future studies could bring forth the disciplinary nuances of belonging in various contexts. Finally, research could focus on the affordances of technology to support belonging, especially in digital settings (Gravett & Ajjawi, 2021).…”

“…Situating our study in the recent socio-political uprise in HE (Pesonen et al, 2020) and in STEM research (Adiredja & Andrews-Larson, 2017), we note that fostering disabled students' belonging is not possible merely through pedagogical practices. Instead, political actions are needed to challenge systemic ableism, as belonging of marginalized student groups is never just 'complex' or 'situated' (see Gravett & Ajjawi, 2021) but inherently political. Thus, inclusive learning environment design cannot be a responsibility of individual teachers practicing 'pedagogies of care', as structural ableism needs to be challenged through systemic solutions from HE institutions (see Puro's story about helpful, individual teachers).…”