Executive Summary
- The report presents an analysis of how European countries have adopted different types of educational reforms, ranging from universal reforms targeting the wider student population to targeted interventions supporting specific groups of disadvantaged learners and reducing inequalities, while also identifying areas that remain unaddressed in current reform agendas.
- Ethnic diversity in Europe and varying levels of migration is addressed in a number of education policies and interventions. Shared features across several countries in Europe identified in this study pertain to national policy efforts and specific interventions that target language acquisition, preparatory classes, intercultural mediation, and tailored educational support to promote inclusion and academic success.
- Many countries emphasise early and structured language programmes, supplementary instruction, and linguistic assessments to ensure integration and equitable access to education: e.g. Germany’s Sprach-Kitas programme that seeks to enhance ongoing exposure to German in everyday activities in kindergartens; Finland’s National Core Curriculum Instruction Preparing for Basic Education allows for instruction in native languages; and Denmark’s universal language assessment regime at the beginning of primary school. Early childhood education is a key focus, with policies expanding access, lowering entry ages, providing financial support, and enhancing curriculum quality, for instance Romania’s Law 56/2019 made the last year of Early Childhood Education compulsory and free, while enhancing access to childhood care in rural areas.
- A number of measures focus on ensuring children start school in good physical and mental condition, including meals, uniforms, extracurricular access, and family engagement; for instance, England’s Pupil Premium reform.
- Many EU countries including, but not limited to, Finland, Norway and Hungary address challenges faced by Roma populations by implementing measures that aim to reduce segregation, enhance early childhood and compulsory education participation, improve language and cultural support, and involve families and communities. Programmes range from financial bursaries, mentoring, preparatory classes, inclusive curricula, to tertiary education initiatives, e.g. Hungary’s On the Road provides both accommodation, stipends, extracurricular activities, and mentoring for Roma students.
- Students in the upper secondary level are increasingly offered tailored learning paths, elective modules, mentors, and differentiated study programs to accommodate diverse needs and aspirations. This is oftentimes coupled with a modernisation of vocational education to align with labour market demands, including flexible pathways between academic and vocational tracks. Portugal’s reform of VET upper secondary syllabus is an example of the attempt to align with labour market demands specifically through increasing work-based learning opportunities.
- Reforms at the level of tertiary education across Europe target improved access for students with disabilities, special educational needs (SEN), and disadvantaged groups, for instance Slovenia’s Placement of Children with Special Needs that was aimed at all levels of education above primary school.
- Some countries have introduced region-specific programs to reduce disparities, addressing early school leaving, ECEC access, infrastructure, and administrative capacity. For instance, Italy’s National Operational Programme 2014–2020 has aimed to lower regional disparities especially targeting early school leaving. Many European countries have dedicated effort to address early school leaving with strategies that include tailored preparatory programmes, early warning systems, individualized mentoring, inclusive curricula, and cross-sector collaboration between schools, social services, and employment agencies, e.g. Slovenia’s CroCoos – Prevent Dropout that have institutionalised an early warning system or Denmark’s Preparatory Basic Education that targets students in risk of permanent exclusion from education or the labour market. Although the LGBTQIA+ population1 receive sustained attention at a wider EU level, overall, findings from this study show that specific reforms targeting LGBTQIA+ minorities are scarce. Ireland was notably the first country to promulgate an action plan in mitigating the experiences of this group. This report showcases that many reforms appear to be unevaluated. This underscores the potential in harnessing the benefits of systematic and publicly available evaluation practices of national reform initiatives, which will allow for longitudinal comparative research to better understand potential benefits of policy efforts and interventions across countries in Europe. Cross-country analysis and comparison of experiences and data can be used for developing both shared regional as well as country specific efforts to advance equity and inclusion to benefit sustainable lifelong learning in Democratic Europe.
1. Introduction
Education can play a key role in building societies based on equality, social justice, and inclusion, as highlighted by sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. Bourdieu emphasised that education systems have the potential to reproduce or mitigate social inequalities depending on their structure and accessibility (Bourdieu 1977). Inequalities in the societal context of education systems affect access to quality learning and students’ life chances. Societal inequalities are categorised by factors such as the socioeconomic status of families, cultural capital (Bourdieu 1977), health capital (Cockerham 2013), ethnicity, race (FRA, 2023), gender, sexuality, place of residence, and migration status. In response to these challenges, governments are implementing educational reforms to address barriers to equal access to inclusive education. Based on the literature review this study identifies key policy actions: financial support for schools and pupils with disadvantaged background; promoting early education; changing the structure of educational systems; support for students with disabilities and learning conditions; support for students from migrant communities.
Responsiveness to migration and ethnic diversity, for instance, often requires that existing inequalities due to language barriers, systemic biases, or limited access to resources are recognised (Valenzuela 1999). Recognising and explicitly addressing the educational needs of historically disadvantaged social groups is necessary for successful education efforts that seek to engage all students (Stromquist, 2013, 2015).
This report presents findings from a comparative international research study in which we have analysed educational reforms in Europe, over the last 25 years, that address the problem of inequality. The current research on Strategies for achieving Equity and Inclusion in Education, Training and Learning in Democratic Europe (STRIDE) was carried out as a study of policy and education reforms in Europe (27 EU countries plus Norway and England2) for advancing inclusion and equity. The research study contributes with analyses of secondary data collected from various databases and online repositories (see chapter 2 for a detailed description of research materials). This report summarises findings from the STRIDE research carried out with support of EU (Horizon Europe) and UKRI funding. Specifically, the report provides an overview of significant national and regional education reforms aimed at rectifying inequalities in education and learning outcomes and to promote equity and inclusion in Europe.
Equality is understood in different ways depending on the social, political, and cultural context. Usually, equity and equality are discussed together. In the context of education, it is important to emphasise that equality means providing the same resources and opportunities and supporting the general needs necessary for success of the student population, regardless of their social, cultural, economic and ethnic background (UNESCO, 2020). To remain committed to equality is therefore also to remain within a formal concept of equality that does not take into account how systemic barriers can influence how educational support systems benefit diverse students differently. Achieving true equality necessitates measures that extend beyond providing identical resources as it also requires addressing systemic and intersectional disparities to allow all students to achieve comparable outcomes. While this interpretation of equality reflects certain perspectives in research and activist literature, it does not always correspond to the terminology used in the reforms analysed in this report. In fact, the term equality is employed for different purposes across the twenty-nine countries on which research was carried out in this study—sometimes in a formal sense of providing identical resources, and at other times in a broader sense of addressing systemic intersectional disparities.
Equity, in contrast, emphasises fairness by providing differentiated support to meet the unique needs of individual students from diverse backgrounds. This tailored approach acknowledges that some students face additional barriers due to factors such as socioeconomic status, disability, ethnicity, gender, or geographic location. Equity thus aims to level the playing field by addressing these structural disadvantages (OECD, 2018). Recent studies, such as Reardon’s (2019) research on income-based achievement gaps, emphasise that equity-focused interventions, such as targeted funding and early childhood education, are critical for reducing disparities in educational outcomes.
The World Bank (2021) highlights that while equality ensures uniform inputs, equity prioritises outcomes by recognising and addressing the root causes of inequality. This distinction has become central in recent global education reforms, which aim to close achievement gaps through policies that are sensitive to the diverse needs of learners.
Sociologists such as Bourdieu, Boudon, and Bernstein have provided critical insights into how education systems perpetuate or redress social inequalities. Bourdieu (1977) introduced the concept of cultural capital, arguing that students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds do better in school because their language and behaviour are valued by the education system. Students’ habitus plays an important role in reproducing the social system and is shaped by structural conditions that influence educational trajectories (Reay, 2004; Ball, 2003). The perspective thus outlined shows that educational inequalities are linked to social inequalities and should be considered in a broader context of symbolic power and social reproduction. Boudon (1974) emphasised the role of primary and secondary effects in educational inequality. Primary effects arise from differences in students’ skills, while secondary effects relate to the choices students make. Both primary and secondary effects are modelled by social background (Jackson 2003). In practice, this means that social origin is treated as a key explanatory factor for both types of effects. Family social status influences not only students’ academic performance but also their educational decisions. The theory has been revisited in later research on rational action theory and educational decision-making (Goldthorpe, 1996). Similarly, in Bernstein’s theory, the linguistic codes used by students that are the result of socialisation within specific social contexts, influence educational success. Bernstein (2000) distinguishes between restricted and elaborated codes, which schools privilege unequally, reinforcing historical advantages associated with social categories (such as socioeconomic status groups). These theoretical perspectives explain how social categories such as social class contribute to educational inequality. Other social categories for which research shows links to historical and persistent disadvantages in education across different country contexts include gender, age, race, ethnicity, migration status and first language (Alcántara et al., 2023; FRA, 2023; Hinton-Smith & Padilla-Carmona, 2021; Stromquist, 2013, 2015; Wiksten, 2023).
Educational policies aimed at achieving equity and addressing existing inequalities must move beyond the concept of formal equality, which often treats all students the same without considering the structural differences that may exist among them. Instead of focusing solely on formal equality, which guarantees identical legal or institutional access, policies should embrace equity-oriented approaches. Formal equality simply ensures that everyone has the same legal or institutional access to education, but it fails to account for the disparities in resources, opportunities, and support that students from different backgrounds may face (for example: economic status, health conditions, migrant background, living place). To create true equity in education, policies must actively target and dismantle the systemic barriers that contribute to social stratification, such as economic inequality, discrimination, or unequal access to quality resources and teaching. Scholars argue for multidimensional justice frameworks—redistribution, recognition, and representation—as essential for reducing educational disparities in globalised contexts (Francia & Åstrand, 2024). Furthermore, ecological approaches highlight the need to consider interconnected social, economic, and cultural conditions shaping educational outcomes (Bishop & Noguera, 2019).
1.1 Report Structure Overview
The report is structured in six main chapters, starting with this introduction. Then Chapter 2 sets out the foundation by outlining the methodology employed in the study. It explains the research design, data sources, and analytical strategies used to identify patterns and trends in educational reforms and policy measures. This methodological framework ensures transparency and rigor in the interpretation of findings.
Chapter 3 provides a comprehensive overview of key features of the 29 countries that we have reviewed (27 EU countries, plus Norway and England). It begins with a general description of structural elements such as compulsory education and tuition fees. The chapter then moves to an analysis of reforms, including their frequency, scope, and typology, as well as the identified evaluations of their effectiveness found by the research team. This section concludes with a summary of the most significant observations.
Chapter 4 focuses on policies designed to promote equity, equality, and inclusion within education in Europe. It examines measures implemented across different educational levels—from early childhood to tertiary education—and considers how these policies address the needs of diverse target groups. Special attention is given to socioeconomically disadvantaged students, marginalised regions, ethnic minorities, learners with special educational needs, and issues related to gender and sexual diversity. This chapter highlights both structural and programmatic approaches aimed at reducing disparities and fostering inclusive learning environments.
Chapter 5 offers a critical discussion on the increasing emphasis placed on inequality, equity, and social inclusion in educational policy. It reflects the progress achieved, evaluates the measures applied, and identifies gaps and areas that require further intervention. This discussion underscores the importance of continuous monitoring and evaluation as key tools for advancing policy goals and ensuring that educational systems contribute to greater social cohesion.
Finally, Chapter 6 presents conclusions and recommendations derived from the analysis. It synthesises the key findings and proposes actionable steps for policymakers, practitioners, and stakeholders to strengthen equity and inclusion in education. These recommendations aim to guide future reforms and support the development of more inclusive and resilient educational systems.
- Umbrella term used to denote individuals from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Queer/Questioning,
Intersex, and Asexual/Aromantic Community, with the + (plus) signifying other diverse sexual
orientations, gender identities, and romantic orientations, acting as an inclusive umbrella for all gender
and sexual minorities. ↩︎ - Focusing on England is a deliberate choice to maintain analytical consistency. Education is devolved in
the UK. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland implemented their own variations, each with different
funding structures and legislative frameworks. ↩︎