Promoting inclusive school cultures and, more specifically, addressing inequality of opportunity is high on the European education agenda. Equipping teachers to be able to identify and address inequality of opportunity requires them to develop sensitivity, multi-perspectivity and agency, and these are complex attributes that require personal experiences and deep reflection. Following the principles of design research, five Dutch teacher-researchers developed IQ110 - a game that does just that. It helps both beginning and experienced teachers reflect on the hidden mechanisms of inequality, particularly on the effects of socio-economic status (SES), and it stimulates them to ad-dress these mechanisms. In the card game, that is played by 3-5 teachers, each teacher first draws a persona card: each player becomes a pupil with a given SES-background. Then the players, in turn, draw situation cards. These situations have three possible outcomes, each resulting in getting green (positive) or red (negative) chips. For each situation the other players discuss the most likely scenario and thus determine the pupil’s score. The persona cards are based on Bourdieu’s ideas on economic, cultural and social capital. The situation cards and scores are informed by SES research.The impact of the card game, both in terms of outcomes and its driving mechanisms, is now the subject of a study, funded by the Centre of Expertise Urban Education of the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences. To this end, the canvasses on which the individual participants record their learning outcomes are analyzed, and there is a retrospective questionnaire that is filled in after having played the game.The preliminary results are promising: especially identifying with low SES pupils and feeling the accu-mulation of negative experiences raises teachers’ awareness. The participants report that through the individual and collective reflections afterwards they are better equipped to address the issue.In our presentation we would first like to briefly demonstrate the game and then discuss the results and possible implications and applications. As we are now working on an international version of the game, we would also like to discuss with you the game’s potential outside of the Dutch context.
Cooperation is more likely when individuals can choose their interaction partner. However, partner choice may be detrimental in unequal societies, in which individuals differ in available resources and productivity, and thus in their attractiveness as interaction partners. Here we experimentally examine this conjecture in a repeated public goods game. Individuals (n = 336), participating in groups of eight participants, are assigned a high or low endowment and a high or low productivity factor (the value that their cooperation generates), creating four unique participant types. On each round, individuals are either assigned a partner (assigned partner condition) or paired based on their self-indicated preference for a partner type (partner choice condition). Results show that under partner choice, individuals who were assigned a high endowment and high productivity almost exclusively interact with each other, forcing other individuals into less valuable pairs. Consequently, pre-existing resource differences between individuals increase. These findings show how partner choice in social dilemmas can amplify resource inequality.
MULTIFILE
The field of applied linguistics is increasingly adopting open science practices. As open access publication gains traction, ethical issues emerge that need to be addressed by the field. This viewpoint paper addresses the concern that open science is not equally open for everyone. This paper describes how open access publication is increasingly being commercialized and explains how open access publication coincides with systemic inequality. We offer the following viewpoints for the field to consider:1.) We are morally obligated to make our research output accessible.2.) Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publishing lead to systemic inequality in open access publishing, benefiting commercial publishers and those working in research-intensive universities and rich countries.3.)Diamond open access publication removes the systemic inequalities; hence, Diamond open access should be prioritized over Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publication models.4.)We should move away from publish-and-read agreements and Green open access publishing, because they prevent system change.5.)Through our choices in our work as researchers, editors, reviewers, authors and teachers, we can contribute to the transition towards truly equitable open access publishing practices.6.)Senior researchers are in the position and have the moral obligation to be drivers of these changes.
