Back to school: From dropout to Second Chance Schools

Abstract

In this article, we explore the reasons why individuals who have dropped out of compulsory education in Greece return as adults to the educational system, particularly to Second Chance Schools. Second Chance Schools were planned and funded by the European Union two decades ago so that member states could offset the consequences of student dropout rates and counter social exclusion. In order to answer the question, during the school year 2018–1019, we carried out 23 semi-structured interviews with individuals who were attending Second Chance Schools in the prefecture of Eleia (Western Greece) or had graduated in previous years. The interviews were analysed using the Qualitative Content Analysis method. Four categories of reasons emerged from the analysis (instrumental reasons, inner needs, combined reasons and the influence of ‘significant others’) which reflect the varied ways of perceiving and utilizing Second Chance Schools. Although the majority of the participants belong to financially and socially impoverished strata, they do not face unemployment or marginalization. The use of the institution of Second Chance Schools in this particular area seems to be moving from reasons associated with social exclusion towards the fulfilment of other needs that were created by dropping out of compulsory education.

Keywords

Second Chance Schools student dropout adult education reasons for participation Qualitative Content Analysis

Introduction

Several terms and definitions are used in international bibliography to describe students who drop out of school before graduating (Lamb & Markussen, 2011). The term student dropout as used in this article refers to individuals who have not finished Greece’s nine-year compulsory education. That is, it refers to individuals who dropped out of the six-year primary school or three-year secondary school after 1981 when compulsory education was established in secondary education. It is the official term used by the Institute of Educational Policy of Greece which is implemented at a national level in order to capture student dropout rates. In the framework of the European Union (EU), Greece uses Eurostat’s term Early School Leaving (ESL) which refers to individuals aged 18–24 whose education and training are below secondary education or lower (ISCED 0, 1 and 2) and who have not participated in educational or training programmes during the last four weeks of the research (European Commission, 2013).

This paper analyses the reasons why dropouts participate in the Second Chance Schools (SCSs), i.e. innovative schools established more than 20 years ago in EU member states aimed at giving a ‘second chance’ to those who, by dropping out of school, missed the ‘first chance’ (European Commission, 1995, p. 46).

The problem of student dropout and the policies of the EU

Student dropout is considered a significant personal and social problem, as it is connected with the financial status of the individual, their health and wellbeing, the financial state of the country, the status of being a civilian as well as social cohesion (European Commission, 2013, 2016; Lamb & Markussen, 2011; Rumberger, 2011). States and supranational organizations have made it a priority to drastically reduce the phenomenon of student dropout, as education is considered a fundamental human right, which is necessary for the exercise of all the other rights (UNESCO, 2016).

The most obvious and long-term consequence of student dropout concerns difficulty in entering the job market¹ and low professional and financial prospects. Individuals who prematurely drop out of school usually have a difficult time finding gainful employment. Even when student dropouts are able to find employment, the jobs generally have poor working conditions (Rumberger, 2011; Vallejo & Dooly, 2013). For example, student dropouts often have jobs with high deductible health insurance or their pay is below the poverty line.

The consequences of student dropout are not only limited to the individual. They concern society in general. It is claimed that, not only does student dropout increase poverty and social exclusion but it also forms an obstacle to the economic development of states and employment (European Commission, 2016). Education and training are considered by the EU critical factors for the development of productivity and competitiveness as well as social cohesion (Council of the European Union, 2006).

Since the mid-90s, student dropout holds a prime position in EU policy. In the White Paper on Education and Training (1995), the European Commission set five general aims for the member states of the EU. The third aim involved the fight against social exclusion through education and training. The White Paper emphasizes the negative impact of high student dropout rates² in member states because of the aforementioned social consequences, such as unemployment:³ ‘the high number of young people leaving education without qualifications (…) who are consequently vulnerable on the employment market through the total lack of any recognized skills’ (European Commission, 1995, p. 15). Student dropout leads to higher levels of unemployment, lower incomes in an individual’s working life and to a large fiscal and social cost. The cost is a result of lower tax revenues, higher expenditure on health care, the judicial system and social benefits (European Commission, 2013). To curb the impact of student dropout, increased European funds were allocated to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The most significant of the compensation measures was the institution of SCSs (European Commission, 1995).

In the following decade (2000–2009), the issue of student dropout continued to be of high importance to EU policy and particular goals were set. In 2000 in Lisbon, the European Council adopted a strategy for employment, economic reform and social cohesion in the EU. This strategy, known as ‘the Lisbon strategy’, called for actions in several sectors so as to make the EU by 2010 ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion’ (European Council, 2000, p. 1). The actions in the domain of research and education were specified in 2002 in the programme ‘Education and Training 2010’. One of the goals of the programme was to cut by half the number of early leavers in state-members, so that the EU average in 2010 would be less than 10%. The extension of SCSs and their (co)funding became an EU priority (Council of the European Union, 2009; European Council, 2000).

The target of 10% was not achieved in 2010 and was moved to 2020. According to Lastra-Bravo et al. (2013), the main reason for this underachievement was the linearity of the target for all member states without taking into account the different characteristics of the member states’ ESL and their starting situation.

In the new strategy ‘Europe 2020’ the framework ‘Education and Training 2020’ was adopted for European cooperation in the sector of education and training. The framework comprises four targets. The third involves ‘promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizenship’ (Council of the European Union, 2009, p. 13). In order to attain the goal, among other things, it is recommended that member states continue their efforts to ‘remove barriers for drop-outs to return to education and training’ (p. 13), so that in 2020 early school dropouts would be below 10%. In particular, preventative, interventional and compensatory measures are recommended (Council of the European Union, 2011), so that ‘all learners -including those from disadvantaged backgrounds, those with special needs and migrants -complete their education, including, where appropriate, through second-chance education’ (Council of the European Union, 2009, p. 4). It goes without saying that the institution of SCSs has remained for over 20 years now one of the basic tools of the EU in its policy against student dropout.

Theoretical framework

The institution of SCSs

SCSs constitute a measure of positive discrimination to counter the consequences of student dropout and their main aim is ‘social reintegration and employment’ (European Commission, 1999, p. 6). They were first recommended by the EU in 1995 and were piloted during 1997–1999 in six European cities that suffered acute socioeconomic problems and high unemployment rates. (European Commission, 1997). When establishing them, EU took into account: (a) ‘accelerated schools’, developed in the USA in the 1980s to deal with the problem of early school dropout in secondary education by students ‘at risk’ and (b) the educational approach ‘village of the young’ run by the Alyat Hanoar Institute for the assimilation of adolescent immigrants in Israel (European Commission, 1995, pp. 63–66).

SCSs are schools that aim to offer a second chance to adults who did not complete the three years of junior high school to gain knowledge, skills and an equivalent diploma that would allow them to integrate more easily into economic and social life. It offers afternoon lessons and lasts two years. The curriculum is based on principles of multiliteracies according to which literacy is not just the ability to read but the ability to control our lives and our environment and deal with our problems in a rational way.

SCSs are governed by five fundamental principles: (a) they are aimed at people lacking formal qualifications who seek social and professional integration, (b) their objective is to help those people to find an occupation, (c) they are established in urban areas with major socioeconomic problems, (d) they apply teaching methods that focus on the needs of the learners, utilize new technologies, offer qualifications that are linked to the local market and are staffed by teachers with appropriate qualifications and (e) they work together with local bodies and employers (European Commission, 1999, pp. 5–9).

In Greece, SCSs were established in 1997 and the first SCS opened in Athens in 2000–2001. It was funded by the European Social Fund and the Hellenic state and within a decade it had expanded to nearly all the prefectures in three forms: ‘regular’ SCSs, prison SCSs and clerical (religious) SCS. In the 2019–2020 school year, there are 99 SCSs in total, including 12 prison SCSs, 76 ‘regular’ SCSs and 3 clerical SCSs.

In contrast to other educational institutions for dealing with student dropout (i.e. all-day schools) which are declining in Greece, SCSs maintain their dynamic and are increasing in number. It is worth mentioning that despite the reduction in school dropout rates after 2000, SCSs are increasing in number. However, what needs do adults learners meet through attending SCSs? How do they see this institution?

This article investigates the reasons why student dropouts return to education as adults via ‘regular’ SCSs. By investigating the reasons why the learners participated in the ‘regular’ SCSs, we will be able to interpret the demand for the institution. In addition, we will observe whether the institution is utilized for the purpose it was established. In that way, we hope that our research will contribute, through its proposals, to the improvement and more effective utilization of these schools.

Motives for participation

SCSs are schools for formal adult education which are aimed at adults (Kokkos, 2005) making use of the principles of Adult Education. Adult learners have particular characteristics that differentiate their learning form that of young pupils: (a) they have a wide range of experiences and knowledge, (b) they have already shaped ways of learning, (c) they come to learning with given intentions and goals, (d) they have competitive interests and (e) they seek active participation (Jarvis, 2004; Knowles et al., 2015; Kokkos, 2005; Rogers & Horrocks, 2010; Rothes et al., 2017).

Adult education theories converge on the importance of experience in adult learning, propose methods that favour active learning and want the teacher to be team coordinator and not transmitter of knowledge (Kokkos, 2005). They recognize that the adult learns more effectively when the learning process answers his problems or needs (Jarvis, 2004). SCSs adopt teaching methods that take into account the learner’s experiences, place emphasis on his needs and approach him ‘as a whole with all his talents and failings’ (European Commission, 1999, p. 7). They use teaching methods that promote active participation, such as team and collaborative teaching and the project method. SCSs make use of the learners’ experiences from the social surroundings and seek to link them to the job market.

The main factor that differentiates adult learners from young learners is the degree of intentional participation in activities (Karalis, 2017b; Rothes et al., 2017). Adults participate in educational programmes, largely voluntarily, when they understand that they have some particular needs in terms of knowledge or skills that will allow them to achieve particular goals. The motives or the other reasons for participation are seen as so important that they have been investigated perhaps more than any other aspect of adult education. The result was the development of typologies and scales, such as Houle’s typology and Boshier’s scale.

Houle’s typology represents the adult learners’ motives as a continuum on which three types of leaners can be distinguished. At one end are ‘the instrumental or goal-oriented’ learners, those who use education to achieve a particular, external goal such as the acquisition of a certificate and professional development. At the other end are the ‘process or activity-oriented’ learners. These participate in an educational programme for social or personal reasons or from an unspecified desire. They like the atmosphere of the teaching group, independent of the content of the programme. In the middle are ‘the subject or learning-oriented’ learners. These come to education to learn a ‘subject’ in so far as they desire knowledge or a skill (Rogers & Horrocks, 2010, pp. 86–97).

Boshier used Houle’s typology to create the Educational Participation Scale (EPS) with seven groups (factors) of participation motives: communication improvement, social contact, educational preparation, professional advancement, family togetherness, social stimulation and cognitive interest (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 64).

This research starts out with the view that learners at the SCSs choose to study in these schools because they are driven by certain reasons.

Review of research about SCSs in Greece

In Greece, participation in adult education remains generally low and the country is ranked in the last places among EU member states (Boeren, 2017; Karalis, 2017b). Although the ‘“disadvantaged” individuals can benefit more from adult education courses’ (Panitsides, 2013, p. 616), research shows that those not favoured by formal education and the job market participate less in adult education than those who have a higher level of education, a higher salary and employment (Karalis, 2017a). The main reasons for participation are ‘interest in learning’ and ‘professional growth’ (Karalis, 2017b, p. 44). As far as participation in ‘regular’ SCSs is concerned, research in Greece revealed that the learners come to these schools with the expectation of meeting a wide range of needs, as will be apparent from the following.

The assessment⁴ of the SCSs’ operation during the first two years (2001–2003) showed that the majority of students attended especially for reasons associated with finding a job or improving their professional position (Iliopoulou, 2019). Research carried out in four SCSs in Macedonia in 2005–2006 (152 individuals) revealed a variety of reasons for attendance: acquisition of skills in order to find employment or to improve professional development, personal aims, extension of social contacts, a new career or escaping routine (Zotou, 2006). Research among 232 students in three SCSs in the prefectures of Eleia, Achaia and Aetoloakarnania (Western Greece) in 2005–2006 revealed that their education was associated with the following expectations: finding a job, improving current employment position, continuation of studies and the acquisition of knowledge (Landritsi, 2007).

However, research among students and graduates carried out at the SCS of Thessaly revealed that their expectations were primarily associated with inner needs (development of cultural level, succeeding in what they had failed as young pupils and improvement of self-confidence) and secondarily with professional or financial expectations (Prigou, 2008). Similar findings were revealed by 16 graduates of the SCS in Giannitsa (Macedonia) during 2010–2011, as their reasons for studying proved to be feelings of unfulfilment and a desire for knowledge (Pavlidou, 2012). Research among 16 students at the SCS of Agioi Anargyroi (Attiki) showed that the main expectation among students was finding a job or improving their current employment position. Nevertheless, some would take advantage of the cultural capital that they acquired in order to further their education, as well as to improve their communication skills at a personal level or when having dealings with pubic services (Kiriazopoulou, 2015).

In research carried out in 2014–2015 with 26 students from the SCS of Patras (Western Greece), participants mentioned reasons associated with the realization of the importance of certification and employment opportunities, the difficulties involved in job hunting, dealing with functional illiteracy and the improvement of their job position (Papachristopoulou et al., 2018). Finally, research carried out in 2015–2016 with the participation of nine women attending an SCS revealed that the motives were both personal and professional. That is, unfulfilled aspirations, the need for professional and personal development and improvement of knowledge (Manousou & Linardatou, 2017).

From the aforementioned findings it could be inferred that SCS students in various parts of Greece use the institution for a variety of reasons such as finding a job, inner needs, educational and social reasons. However, the prime reasons are associated with finding a job and improving their current job position.

Methodology

Research question

The survey aims to answer the following research question:

What motivates individuals who have dropped out of school in Greece to attend SCSs?

The answer to this question is important, since participation in SCSs is voluntary. Knowledge of who uses the institution and for what reasons, beyond the official rhetoric, will be useful for the authorities who oversee the institution, so as to better meet the needs of adults who drop out of compulsory education.

Research tool and research sample

Data were collected using the interview technique, which is considered an effective means of collecting information, when the researcher is interested in understanding the perceptions of the participants (Lune & Berg, 2017). In particular, the semi-structured interview was chosen since it gives the researcher greater freedom – in relation to the structured interview – to follow up aspects of the topic that the interviewee considers important, while it allows him or her – more than the unstructured interview does – to focus on the research questions (Brinkmann, 2018).

We carried out the interviews during the school year of 2018–1019 in the framework of a wider survey researching the various aspects of student dropout. The interview guidelines included five areas: (a) demographics, (b) school background, (c) reasons for dropping out of compulsory education, (d) career path and (e) reasons for returning, or not, to school.

The population of the aforementioned research comprised individuals between 18 and 50 years old who had dropped out of primary or secondary school in the prefecture of Eleia between 1980–1981 and 2013–2014. We chose this particular prefecture as over time it has had a high percentage of school dropout rates. In order to choose the participants, we implemented theoretical sampling. It is a repeated procedure of simultaneous gathering and analysis of data in cycles which end when a theoretical saturation has been achieved (Creswell, 2012).

We carried out 62 semi-structured interviews in 10 cycles of sampling. The duration of the recorded interviews was between 25 and 56 minutes (on average 32 minutes). The participants of each cycle were chosen based on theoretical criteria which arose from the analysis of the previous cycle’s interviews. To identify the participants, we utilized the ‘personal network’ and ‘snowball’ techniques (Roulston, 2010), since we did not have a list of dropouts.

The sample of this study is 23 individuals who graduated from ‘regular’ SCSs in the prefecture of Eleia or attended lessons during the year 2018–2019, as there aren’t any prison or clerical SCSs in the prefecture, and it can be characterized as a homogenous sample. These particular samples are usually small and are used for an in-depth description of a sub-group whose members share a common characteristic (Creswell, 2012; Patton, 2015). In the survey, homogeneity is geographic, however, it also concerns a life story as the participants while students, experienced dropping out of school and as adults they share their experience of attending SCSs.

The characteristics of the participants and their families are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1.

Profile of 23 participants.

Demographic characteristics	Profile	n
Gender	Male	8
Gender	Female	15
Roma (self-identified)	Male	1
	Female	3
Age groups	20–25	4
	32–39	8
	41–45	11
Attending SCSs	Male	7
Attending SCSs	Female	10
Graduated from SCSs	Male	1
Graduated from SCSs	Female	5
Occupation	Freelance	4
	Short term employees (cleaners or seasonal labourers)	5
	Worked for the local council	2
	Pensioner	1
	Employee of a private company	1
	Self-employed	2
	Fisherman	1
	Labourers	2
	Unemployed	3
	Housewives (women)	2
Financial state	‘Very tough’, ‘tough’ or ‘terrible’	9
	‘Average’ or ‘good’	10
	‘Comfortable’ or ‘very good’	4

Table 2.

Profile of families.

Demographic characteristics	Profile	n
Family size	4–10 children	18
	2–3 children	5
Fathers’ educational level	ISCED 0	7
	ISCED 1	13
	ISCED 2	1
	ISCED 3	1
	ISCED 5	1
Mothers’ educational level	ISCED 0	12
	ISCED 1	9
	ISCED 2	2
Fathers’ occupation	Farmers-breeders	8
	Construction workers	4
	Labourers	3
	Fishermen	2
	Self-employed	3
	Civil engineer	1
	Public sector employees	2
Financial state	‘Very difficult’, ‘difficult’, ‘poor’ or ‘terrible’	15
	‘Average’ or ‘good’	5
	‘Comfortable’ or ‘very good’	3

Research ethics

In order to inform the participants and receive their consent to be interviewed, an informed consent form (Denscombe, 2014) was used. In order to safeguard anonymity and confidentiality, the participants’ names and other details, which could lead to their identity being revealed, have been encoded (P-1 to P-23).

Method

Qualitative Content Analysis (QCA) was used, as it allows the researcher to comprehend social reality in a subjective but systematic way. QCA examines meanings and motive which could be obvious or latent in the text and it does not aim at quantifying or drawing objective substance (Devi Prasad, 2019).

According to Schreier’s (2014) definition, QCA ‘is a method for systematically describing the meaning of qualitative data’ (p. 170). The material to be researched is divided and distributed into categories and subcategories⁵ of a coding frame. This is achieved by choice of a criterion that defines where each unit starts and ends. The coding frame is at the heart of the method and comprises all the aspects that hold a significant position in the description and the interpretation of the data. The categories and subcategories are created productively (‘concept driven’) or inductively (‘data driven’) but also with the combination of both (Schreier, 2014, p. 171).

In our research, we built the coding frame following an inductive approach, as it is considered more efficient and of higher significance in qualitative approaches (Mayring, 2010). For the segmentation of the research material, we selected thematic criterion which is more effective than formal criteria in cases where the material does not have standard structure (Schreier, 2012). That is, the coding unit is the theme developed in one or more sentences and paragraphs of the interview transcripts.

To sum up, QCA could be described as the procedure of coding the data which is achieved through a coding frame which comprises the main body of the analysis. The research data are divided according to a criterion and codified, that is the divided data are split into categories. We applied QCA following four steps:

First, we transcribed all interviews and we transferred them to the NVivo software with which we conducted the analysis.

Second, we highlighted the sections of the interviews that are relevant to our research question, as the participants referred to the SCSs at various points in the interview and not only when they were asked about these schools.

Third, we created the coding frame from the data using the ‘successive summarizing technique’ paraphrasing the relevant extracts and summarizing similar paraphrased results in categories and subcategories (Schreier, 2014, p. 176). Initially, we paraphrased all the material we highlighted. Then, we compared all the paraphrases and we paraphrased again those of similar content. Repeating the process a few times, we reached a higher level of abstraction by reducing the number of paraphrases. We grouped the similar paraphrases under higher abstraction concepts and we created and defined four categories and six subcategories (Schreier, 2012).

Fourth, we segmented the interview material into coding units based on the thematic criterion. We were looking for the theme, the ‘main idea’, the ‘substance of the message’ (Kiriazi, 2002, p. 291; Schreier, 2012, p. 137), which the participants expressed in a small or larger part of the text in relation to their attendance at SCSs. The coding units (themes) were assigned to the (sub)categories. In a few cases the subcategories needed to be adjusted so that all the themes fall into a (sub)category of the coding frame. Next, we examined all the themes assigned to the (sub)categories to find inconsistencies and have an overview of the themes by (sub)category which will help us in interpreting the findings.

Criteria of trustworthiness

We assessed the quality of the survey, using two criteria of trustworthiness: credibility and dependability. Trustworthiness concerns how a researcher can persuade others that the research findings ‘are worth paying attention to’ (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 290). Credibility refers to the extent to which the researcher could substantiate that the version of the description they are presenting is feasible and convincing. Dependability refers to the researcher adopting an ‘“auditing” approach’ (Bryman, 2012, p. 390–392).

The first technique that we applied to ensure credibility in the current survey was respondent validation. That is, we presented the ‘results’ of the survey (excluding extracts from the interviews) to three participants and we asked them to place themselves in the (sub)category that they felt represented them most. All three ‘placed’ themselves in the same categories we had assigned them to. The other 20 participants were not willing to take part in this process. To further improve credibility, we used a control list of 29 check questions, formed by Elo et al. (2014), for every step of the survey. The questions concern the ‘preparation phase’ (data collection method, sampling strategy, unit of analysis), the ‘organization phase’ (categorization, abstraction, interpretation) and the ‘reporting phase’ (reporting results, reporting analysis process) (Elo et al., 2014, p. 3).

As for the dependability, our presentation is analytical and we have justified our methodological choices. We have not asked other researchers to assess; however, our findings are compatible with those of the retrospective survey.

Research limitations

This survey explored the opinions of individuals who have graduated from or are attending ‘regular’ SCSs in the prefecture of Eleia, consequently, our conclusions apply to the particular population of the prefecture and maybe other prefectures with similar characteristics. Students or graduates of other kinds of SCSs (prison or clerical) may have expressed different opinions. Ιn addition, our findings are limited by subjectivity in determining of themes and the relatively small sample size.

Results

Coding frame

The inductive coding frame comprises four categories and six subcategories: the first category ‘instrumental reasons’ consists of three subcategories: ‘to have options’, ‘to find a good job’ and ‘the diploma above all’. The second category ‘inner needs’ has three subcategories: ‘for my gaps’, ‘I’ve always wanted to’ and ‘self-development reasons’. The third category ‘multiple reasons’ and the fourth category ‘urging of “significant others”’ do not have subcategories. Figure 1 depicts the participants in categories and subcategories.

Figure 1.

The coding frame and the participants: code (gender, age).

Presentation of the findings according to category and subcategory

First category: ‘Instrumental reasons’

The first category comprises reasons which reveal an instrumental perception of the institution. It includes participants – five males and four females, between 20 and 45 years old – that categorically mention that the basic reason for attending an SCS is to gain a high school diploma in order to reap some benefits. They invest in a two-year education in order to acquire a diploma that they did not obtain as pupils, in order to use it for their own reasons. The reasons fall into three subcategories depending on when or how they plan to use the diploma.

First subcategory: ‘To have options’

Two participants from the youngest age group (P-3, P-4) who are employed and are financially comfortable see earning a diploma as a future investment, as they did not mention a particular reason:

I came to this school to obtain the paper [diploma] (…) I may need it one day. (P-3, female, 22 years old, manicurist, comfortable financial situation)

I want a high school paper [diploma], because you never know what could happen (…) it will offer options. (P-4, 25-year-old male, Roma, merchant, comfortable financial situation)

Second subcategory: ‘To find a good job’

For four participants, three male (P-2, P-8 and P-11) and one female (P-13), the reason for attending an SCS is to find a good job. All aim to be appointed to the public sector. Three of them⁶ hope to find a job immediately, as they have the necessary requirements (belonging to large families or previous employment) and the only thing they need is the diploma:

I was seeking the opportunity to be hired by the local council (….) and we have been given an opportunity now. (P-8, 37-year-old male, Roma, greengrocer vendor, terrible financial state)

I applied, as I have a large family (…) I was accepted but it didn’t go through because I didn’t have a diploma. (P-11, 43-year-old male, seasonal worker, average financial state)

[I need it] to get a job, to work for the public sector (…) to have a job and raise my children. (P-13, 41-year-old female, Roma, worker, very difficult financial state)

Third subcategory: ‘The diploma above all’

For one male (P-10) and two females (P-18, P-22), the diploma is an end in itself. All three mentioned that they are attending an SCS to pursue the diploma without mentioning any other reasons. Although they mentioned that during their studies they gained knowledge, the usefulness and value of the diploma had to do with status in social contexts rather than education itself.

The discussion with P-10 (36-year-old male, shop-owner, comfortable financial situation) is indicative of this:

Interviewer: Why are you in this school?

P-10: For the diploma, above all.

Interviewer: The diploma above all?

P-10: Yes! Anything after that is welcome. It makes me happy.

Graduates P-22 and P-18, when asked the following ‘Why did you go to an SCS?’, answered:

To say that I’ve got a high school diploma. This is a strong document (….) Similar to a gymnasium diploma of the past. (P-22, 45-year-old female, state employee, difficult financial state)

Yes, I went for the diploma. But there I found things for myself. (P-18, 34-year-old female, cleaning lady, average financial situation)

The learners in this category fall into the first type on Houle’s typology (‘goal-oriented’). Their reasons for participation could be integrated into the grouping ‘professional advancement’ in Boshier’s EPS.

Second category: ‘Inner needs’

This category includes reasons associated with the inner needs of the participants – one male and seven females between 20 and 50 years old – which pushed them to attend an SCS and fall into three subcategories.

First subcategory: ‘For my gaps’

Three participants (P-1, P-6 and P-15) mentioned that the reason they are attending the SCS is to fill ‘gaps’ they felt they had due to their lack of formal education.

I felt a gap as I lacked knowledge. Now that I’ve started again, I feel I’m making a new start. (P-1, 20-year-old female, unemployed, very difficult financial situation)

I’m doing this just for myself (…) I want to fill this gap. (P-6, 32-year-old female, cleaning lady, average financial situation)

What brought me here? No, I don’t need a job. I want to fill my own gaps. My own lack of knowledge, it’s as I say it (….) And these are the reasons I’ve come, to cover things I want for myself. (P-15, 50-year-old female, housewife, very good financial state)

Second subcategory: ‘I’ve always wanted to’

Three females, two students (P-14, P-17) and one graduate (P-20), mentioned that returning to school was something ‘they had always wanted to do’ but were inhibited by their parents’ beliefs towards gender roles and moral values:

I had always wanted to and I said to myself ‘I’ll seize the first chance and go to continue my education’. (P-14, 50-year-old female, shop-owner, good financial state)

I had always wanted it (a formal education), I remember (…) it frustrated me, I was sad. (P-17, 50-year-old female, cleaning lady, difficult financial situation)

I wanted to jump at the first opportunity and to finish school. I had always… wanted it, since I was a child I wanted it. (P-20, 50-year-old female, council employee, average financial state)

Third subcategory: ‘Self-development reasons’

The desire for personal fulfilment and improvement of self-respect led student P-12 and graduate P-21 to an SCS:

No, I don’t need the diploma. I simply think that whoever hasn’t got a high school diploma isn’t a full person. (P-12, 50-year-old female, retired, average financial state)

I wanted to enroll, to earn a diploma, a high school diploma, so that I could say I graduated and that I wasn’t a total idiot. (P-21, 43-year-old, male, labourer, difficult financial situation)

The learners in the second category correspond to a large degree to the ‘activity-oriented’ type in Houle’s typology, although not absolutely. Their motives could be integrated into the group ‘educational preparation’ in Boshier’s EPS, since these learners want to meet internal needs with ‘remediation of past educational deficiencies’ (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 84).

Third category: ‘Multiple reasons’

For four participants – one male, and three females between 32 and 44 years old – the reason behind returning to school was two-fold: primarily to be educated but also to take advantage of the diploma. The profound reason may be instrumental. However, the participants themselves claim their need to be educated though they do not hide that they expect other benefits too. Three participants are students (P-5, P-7 and P-9) and one is a graduate (P-23).

It was something I had always wanted, to go to school (….) And through doing so, I found my job. (P-23, 44-year-old female, council employee, good financial state)

Mostly for educational reasons … but as I was here to learn, I wanted to graduate too, to be able to obtain a license [He means a driving license for a truck]. (P-9, 36-year-old male, Roma, private employee, average financial state)

I want to be educated and to find a better job. (P-7, 32-year-old female, unemployed, difficult financial state)

Since I got pregnant, I wanted to return to school (…) I want to graduate in order to continue by training as a chef or a pastry chef. (P-5, 34-year-old female, housewife, difficult financial state)

The learners in the third category don’t fall exclusively within one of Houle’s types. In any case, the boundaries between the three types aren’t always distinct (Rogers & Horrocks, 2010, p. 87). In Boshier’s EPS their reasons for participation are integrated into the ‘professional advancement’ and ‘educational preparation’ groups.

Fourth category: ‘Urging of “significant others”’

One graduate (P-19) and one student (P-16) fell into this category, as they mentioned that others, friends or relatives urged them:

I went to the SCS with a friend (….) She finally persuaded me and I said ‘ok, let’s go’. That’s how I started attending. (P-19, 39-year-old female, cleaning lady, average financial state)

I hadn’t thought about it. Mostly my children urged me. (P-16, 44-year-old male, fisherman, good financial state)

The reason for participation for the learners in this category doesn’t fall within either Houle’s typology or Boshier’s EPS. Nevertheless, Rogers and Horrocks (2010) point out that learners don’t always mention the real reasons.

Discussion

The participants mostly come from poor families and their parents are mainly manual workers. The maintenance of family poverty is obvious, however, the participants are in a better financial state than their parents and they do not seem to be experiencing unemployment, social isolation and marginalization. Compared to their parents’ occupations, there seems to be a shift from manual work to salaried work and trade. The vast majority of the participants come from families with many children and have parents of low educational level (lower than ISCED 0–2). The size of the family and the educational level of the parents had a negative impact on their educational course, as social disadvantages cumulatively affect the course of education and the cultural life of children (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1979; Lamb & Markussen, 2011; Milonas, 2004; Siraj & Mayo, 2014). Most participants have low financial, social and cultural capital and this lack seems to have urged them to study at an SCS.

For the majority of the participants, the decision to return to education was a long-term process which was affected by objective factors (family, occupation, financial state, job market at the particular place and time) and subjective ones (perceptions of the particular institution and education at large). Despite having similar socioeconomic characteristics, the participants dropped out of school for different reasons and re-entered education for various reasons which have been divided into four categories: (a) ‘instrumental reasons’, (b) ‘inner needs’, (c) ‘multiple reasons’ and (d) ‘urging of “significant others”’.

The first category also represented the largest category as the majority of participants expressed an instrumental perception about the institution and attend SCSs because they aim to benefit. They invest in a two-year education in order to attain an ‘institutionalized’ cultural capital that they were deprived of as students, in order to convert it into other forms of capital, i.e. financial or social (Bourdieu, 2004; Broer et al., 2019; Lareau & Weininger, 2005). Most males fall into this category. The way they view the investment responds to their professional, financial situation and age and is expressed through three viewpoints. As Rogers and Horrocks (2010, p. 86) put it, ‘even those who come to adult education classes in search of a qualification rather than new learning may be there for different motives’.

For the younger ones, this investment is for the future and is non-specific ‘to have options’. Some who are in a difficult financial situation, mainly male, have a particular goal, to be immediately hired in a state job. They have all the rest of the prerequisite qualifications but they lack a diploma in order to transform the factors that deprived them from a formal education (e.g. belonging to large families) into an advantage in order to ‘find a good job’. Some who have salaried employment (even if they are on short term contracts) or are self-employed, financially successful, explicitly claim that they are mainly interested in the ‘diploma’ and secondarily in knowledge. It seems that for them the diploma is important for their social associations. All three viewpoints expressed by the participants are supported by a functional perception of the institution. As adults, they realized the significance of the diploma and they aim to obtain it in order to transform the institutionalized cultural capital that the diploma represents into a mainly financial capital (Bourdieu, 2004, 2013; Broer et al., 2019). For these particular adults, education is a means of social mobility which allows them ‘to “transform” and/or improve their position in the social field’ (Spiliopoulou et al., 2017, p. 109). This is confirmed by the findings of research carried out by Landritsi (2007), Papachristopoulou et al. (2018) and Kiriazopoulou (2015) that showed that the basic reasons for attending SCSs were professional.

The participants in the second category chose to attend SCSs due to inner needs which are expressed in three versions. Some participants describe their needs as a ‘void’ due to their lack of an education. Some females (all of them 50 years old) said that they felt an ‘urge’ to finish compulsory education. Finally, some participants take advantage of the institution in order to cover the ‘self-development needs’ of fulfilment and self-esteem. This category includes the oldest individuals and most females (seven). Most had to give up school because of their parents’ perceptions. This category is compatible with Pavlidou (2012) and Prigou’s (2008) findings when they concluded that students primarily covered inner needs.

The four participants in the third category have a ‘multiple’ logic: they primarily see SCSs as an educational institution and they expect to take advantage of the diploma. Two of them are not in employment, one of them works and hopes to improve their working conditions, while one participant took advantage of the diploma. The findings of Zotou (2006) and Manousou and Linardatou (2017) also indicate a combination of inner and professional needs.

The two participants of the fourth category, employees with mid-range incomes, were influenced by ‘significant others’ in order to attend an SCS. Both mention that the students were shy and had negative experiences from school. Rogers and Horrocks (2010) remind us that ‘sometimes the reason is not related to learning at all but more towards social contact, or getting out of the house, or to please some third person’ (p. 85).

Conclusions

The institution of ‘regular’ SCSs is mainly used by individuals who come from non-privileged social strata. Despite the fact that their financial, social and cultural capital is low, they are not socially marginalized or excluded. Over a period of time, by recognizing their shortfalls and experiencing the consequences of dropping out of school, they realized that ‘the school remains the one and only path to culture’ (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1979, p. 21). In their case, the path is SCSs that offer them a second chance to acquire the ‘institutionalized’ capital that they were deprived of (Bourdieu, 2004; Broer et al., 2019; Lareau & Weininger, 2005).

The acquisition of the diploma is a common goal for all, however, the expectations from its utilization differentiate and reflect the various ways this institution is seen. Age and gender seem to play a role in this. The younger and middle-aged participants – mainly male – are those who have an instrumental perception of the institution, expecting benefits and especially job opportunities. On the other hand, older participants, mostly females, see SCSs as an educational institution which would cover their inner needs. A third way of seeing the institution, mainly by middle-aged females, combines both aforementioned approaches, with the educational role being more prominent. Finally, a few participants have no expectations as their motives are not associated with the institution but with ‘significant others’.

To conclude, there seems to be a shift in the way SCSs are seen, from an institution offering qualifications necessary for the job market – which is their main aim – to an educational institution that covers inner needs. The individual participants who exploit the SCSs’ compensatory services to cover higher needs as they are presented in the hierarchy of needs by Maslow (as cited in Rogers & Horrocks, 2010) are more or less as many as the individuals who utilize the institution for professional reasons. We do hope that the SCSs will take this shift into consideration in the elaboration of their strategy. For instance, the curriculum could place more emphasis on learners’ personal development. Future research should investigate the reasons for attendance at all three types of SCSs, as well as the long-term impact of attendance at them.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Pandelis Kiprianos

Notes

References

Boeren

(2017). Understanding adult lifelong learning participation as a layered problem. Studies in Continuing Education, 39(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2017.1310096

Bourdieu

(2004). The forms of capital. In Ball

S. J.

(Ed.), The Routledge Falmer reader in sociology of education (pp. 15–29). Routledge Falmer.

Bourdieu

(2013). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu

Passeron

J.-C.

(1979). The inheritors: French students and their relations to culture (R. Nice, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.

Brinkmann

(2018). Interview. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 997–1038). Sage.

Broer

Bai

Fonseca

(2019). Socioeconomic inequality and educational outcomes: Evidence from twenty years of TIMSS. Springer.

Bryman

(2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Corbin

Strauss

(2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Sage.

Council of the European Union. (2006). Presidency conclusions of the Brussels European Council, 23/24 March 2006 (7775/1/06 REV1). https://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%207775%202006%20REV%201

10.

Council of the European Union. (2009). Council conclusions on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (“ET 2020”). https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/107622.pdf

11.

Council of the European Union. (2011). Council recommendation of 28 June 2011 on policies to reduce early school leaving (2011/C/191/01). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:191:0001:0006:EN:PDF

12.

Creswell

J. W.

(2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.

13.

Denscombe

(2014). The good research guide for small-scale social research projects (5th ed.). Open University Press.

14.

Devi Prasad

(2019). Qualitative content analysis: Why is it still a path less taken? Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 20(3), 36. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3392

15.

Elo

Kääriäinen

Kanste

Pölkki

Utriainen

Kyngäs

(2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 4(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633

16.

European Commission. (1995). White Paper on education and training. Teaching and learning towards the learning society. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d0a8aa7a-5311-4eee-904c-98fa541108d8/language-en

17.

European Commission. (1997). White Paper on “Teaching and Learning” transformed into action [IP/97/457/, 29-5-1997]. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-97-457_en.htm

18.

European Commission. (1999). Second Chance Schools: Guide for setting up a Second Chance School.

19.

European Commission. (2013). Reducing early school leaving: Key messages and policy support. Final report of the Thematic Working Group on early school leaving. https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/education/files/early-school-leaving-group2013-report_en.pdf

20.

European Commission. (2016). Early leavers from education and training. European semester thematic fiche. https://tinyurl.com/y5on9fbz

21.

European Council. (2000). Presidency conclusions. Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March 2000. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/21038/lisbon-european-council-presidency-conclusions.pdf

22.

Iliopoulou

(2019). Participation incentives, perceptions and attitudes of Second Chance School learners. Academy of Social Science Journal, 4(7), 1341–1345.

23.

Jarvis

(2004). Adult education and lifelong learning: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Routledge Falmer.

24.

Karalis

(2017a). Shooting a moving target: The Sisyphus boulder of increasing participation in adult education during the period of economic crisis. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 23(1), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477971417691782

25.

Karalis

(2017b). Adult participation in lifelong learning: Obstacles and incentives for participation (2011–2016). INE GSSEE (in Greek).

26.

Kiriazi

(2002). Sociological research: Critical overview in its methods and techniques. Greek Letters (in Greek).

27.

Kiriazopoulou

(2015). The economic and cultural capital of SCS trainees and their expectations in the economic crisis. The case of the SCS of Ag. Anargiri [Master’s thesis]. University of Patras (in Greek). http://nemertes.lis.upatras.gr/jspui/bitstream/10889/8760/3/Kyriazopoulou%28ptde%29.pdf

28.

Knowles

M. S.

Holton

E. F.

III Swanson

R. A.

(2015). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (8th ed.). Rutledge.

29.

Kokkos

(2005). Adult education: Tracing the field. Metaixmio (in Greek).

30.

Lamb

Markussen

(2011). School dropout and completion: An international perspective. In Lamb

Markussen

Teese

Sandberg

Polesel

(Eds.), School dropout and completion. International comparative studies in theory and policy (pp. 1–18). Springer.

31.

Landritsi

(2007). Trainees of Second Chance Schools: Research on their characteristics and their cultural capital in the SCS of Patras, Pyrgos and Agriniο [Master’s thesis]. University of Patras (in Greek). http://nemertes.lis.upatras.gr/jspui/bitstream/10889/629/1/%CE%94%CE%99%CE%A0%CE%9B%CE%A9%CE%9C%CE%91%CE%A4%CE%99%CE%9A%CE%97%20%CE%95%CE%A1%CE%93%CE%91%CE%A3%CE%99%CE%91%20%CE%99%CE%A9%CE%91%CE%9D%CE%9D%CE%91%20%CE%9B%CE%91%CE%9D%CE%94%CE%A1%CE%99%CE%A4%CE%A3%CE%97.pdf

32.

Lareau

Weininger

(2005). Cultural capital in educational research a critical assessment. Theory and Society, 32, 567–606. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RYSO.0000004951.04408.b0

33.

Lastra-Bravo

X. B.

Tolón-Becerra

Salinas-Andújar

J. A.

(2013). Proposal for national targets in the framework of the European reduction goal for early school leaving. International Review of Education, 59(5), 569–601.

34.

Lincoln

Y. S.

Guba

E. G.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

35.

Lune

Berg

B. L.

(2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (9th ed.). Pearson.

36.

Manousou

Linardatou

(2017). The role and importance of the Second Chance Schools to female attendance: Views and perceptions of women trainees, opportunities and prospects. International Women Online Journal of Distance Education, 6(2), 8–21.

37.

Mayring

(2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (12., überarbeitete Auflage). Beltz.

38.

Merriam

S. B.

Caffarella

R. S.

Baumgartner

L. M.

(2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). John Wiley.

39.

Milonas

(2004). The reproduction of social classes through school mechanisms. Gutenberg (in Greek).

40.

Panitsides

E. A.

(2013). Researching returns emanating from participation in adult education courses: A quantitative approach. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32(5), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2012.753123

41.

Papachristopoulou

Ε.

Kiprianos

Christodoulou

(2018). Fulfilling a failed dream: School dropout and Second Chance Schools. Journal of Advances in Education Research, 3(2), 98–108. https://doi.org/10.22606/jaer.2018.32004

42.

Patton

M. Q.

(2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.

43.

Pavlidou

(2012). The numerical literacy in Second Chance Schools [Master’s thesis]. University of Macedonia (in Greek). https://dspace.lib.uom.gr/bitstream/2159/15256/3/PaulidouAthinaMsc2012.pdf

44.

Prigou

A. A.

(2008). Second Chance Schools. Expectations and vocational rehabilitation in the region of Thessaly. The gender dimension [Master’s thesis]. University of the Aegean (in Greek). http://hellanicus.lib.aegean.gr/bitstream/handle/11610/14088/file0.pdf?sequence=1

45.

Rogers

Horrocks

(2010). Teaching adults (4th ed.). Open University Press.

46.

Rothes

Lemos

M. S.

Gonçalves

(2017). Motivational profiles of adult learners. Adult Education Quarterly, 67(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713616669588

47.

Roulston

(2010). Reflective interviewing: A guide to theory and practice. Sage.

48.

Rumberger

(2011). Dropping out. Why students drop out of high school and what can be done about it. Harvard University Press.

49.

Schreier

(2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Sage.

50.

Schreier

(2014). Qualitative content analysis. In Flick

(Ed.), The Sage handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 170–183). Sage.

51.

Siraj

Mayo

(2014). Social class and educational inequality: The impact of parents and schools. Cambridge University Press.

52.

Spiliopoulou

Koustourakis

Asimaki

(2017). Educational aspirations and choices of people from differentiated national and cultural environments: A review of recent scientific literature. Educational Journal of the University of Patras UNESCO Chair, 4(2), 102–114. https://doi.org/10.26220/une.2842

53.

UNESCO. (2016). Education 2030: Incheon declaration for the implementation of sustainable development goal 4. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245656E.pdf

54.

Vallejo

Dooly

(2013). Early school leavers and social disadvantage in Spain: From books to bricks and vice-versa. European Journal of Education, 48(3), 390–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12037

55.

Zotou

(2006). Men’s and women’s profile at Second Chance Schools [Master’s thesis]. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (in Greek). http://ikee.lib.auth.gr/record/74594?ln=el