Categorisations of care: Exploring representations of care leavers in higher education through critical praxis

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the critical praxis approach of an equity initiative with students who have left care. We contend that ‘praxis’ (International Studies in Widening Participation, 2018, 5: 10–20) – understood here as the close, dialogic and iterative relationship between research and practice, can be a powerful tool for approaching ordinarily rigid equity categorisations as a means for interrogating their conceptual efficacy while simultaneously creating more exploratory approaches to equity populations and initiatives. We examine how unproblematised notions of care leavers migrate between fields and institutions, arguing for a more robust and rigorous interrogation of the salience of the concept of a care leaver as it is integrated into the field of higher education. We contend that rigid definitions of care that narrowly define people only through their relationship to formalised state‐legitimated forms of welfare intervention risk making ‘absent’ (Epistemologies of the south: Justice against Epistemicide, 2014; Routledge) the substantial population of people nearby this experience of care. This includes people who have escaped official definitions as policies change, circumstances that are similar or identical to people placed in care that have not been included in the official definition of care, or the overlapping and intersecting conditions of marginality that often shape the conditions for being removed into state care. Critical praxis is offered here as providing the basis for allowing the category of ‘care leaver’ or ‘care experienced’ to become an in‐road for expanding practice initiatives and research understandings to further dimensions of marginalisation and social vulnerability.

Theorising educational engagement, transitions and outcomes for care‐experienced people: Introduction to the special issue

“…While the papers within this special issue cover an interesting variety of topics individually, when taken together, the commonalities between them highlight pertinent issues experienced by those with a background of care across educational settings and national contexts. These include inclusivity and recognition in the definitions used to identify someone as 'care-experienced' (Brown & Shelton, 2024;Bunn & Fuller, 2024;Child & Marvell, 2024), the importance of relationships for educational success (Brown & Shelton, 2024;Collins et al, 2024;Marion & Tchuindibi, 2024;Matchett & Appleton, 2024;Sandford et al, 2024) and the risk-laden nature of transitions through education for those with an absence of support (Melkman, 2024;Mølholt et al, 2024).…”

“…The recognition of someone as having experience of care, whether this is through definitions such as 'care-experienced', 'care leaver', or 'out of home care' (to provide a few examples) typically forms the basis of whether they are included or excluded from the receipt of support in educational contexts. Bunn and Fuller's (2024) contribution to the special issue challenges the rigidity in definitions in the Australian Higher Education sector. They explain that when such definitions are adopted, others who 'share similar experiences and social positions nearby' such as those estranged from their families, will not be formally recognised in institutional equity policies and initiatives and are therefore excluded from support.…”

“…Child and Marvell's (2024) research complements these observations: using figured worlds (Holland et al, 1998) as a conceptual lens, they argue how reductionist thinking about care experience in the UK's higher education sector can alienate and exclude care-experienced students. Bunn and Fuller (2024) argue for a more contextualised 'critical praxis' approach that reflexively works with students to identify 'the ways that people from within a category intersect with other experiences'. Such an approach would also help to recognise those who fall outside of definitions but still require support.…”

“…He proposes that there is a need to support care-experienced school pupils through 'strong, caring relationships built upon trust and respect between school staff and students' to fulfil children's attachment needs; these relationships can provide a buffer against the negative consequences of insecure parent-child attachments and subsequently enhance their learning and well-being. In identifying who would benefit from such proposals though, it is important to consider the earlier points raised by Bunn and Fuller (2024), Child and Marvell (2024) and Brown and Shelton (2024)-that rigid definitions can exclude those who have encountered circumstances that intersect with care experience. Brown and Shelton's ( 2024) work provides an excellent example of this, where those who are adopted from care are often no longer recognised as needing support; their care-experience becomes 'hidden' once they move into family contexts deemed as stable.…”