became even more selective. Together with a small group of non-profit independent schools, they now represent the elite segment of post-16 schools. With exceptions, the same segment also constitutes the recognised inner-city schools.
The particularity of the recognised ‘inner-city school’ could be located in what some scholars call ‘circuits of schooling’ or ‘circuits of education’ (Ball et al, 1995; Butler and Robson, 2003; Popeau et al, 2007; Gamsu, 2017). More specifically, they represent the demarcated school choices students or families consider. In this study, circuits of schooling refer to the numerical order that students with different social and educational backgrounds use to classify their choices of schools and educational programmes.14 With number one being the preferable option, most students attending post-16 elite schools choose from a limited segment of characteristically similar institutions. However, students from higher social classes and/or those who have attended prestigious secondary schools, are more often familiar with and aware of the norms regarding post-16 elite schools. This is also the reason why these schools could rely on a low-key profile and still attract the ‘right’ social and academic clientele; in a sense, making it harder for those less familiar to notice, recognise and identify them in the same way, even if they have grades that are good enough. Thus, these circuits create boundaries of belonging and exclusion. As one student describes: “I mean the big inner-city schools, the classics. Kungsholmen, Östra Real, Norra Real and Södra Latin. And there are some others who are quite popular, for example EG [Enskilda gymnasiet] or Viktor Rydberg, who just got bigger. They are very popular” (male, upper middle class). A second but related indication is the limited circuits of rivals and collaborators that elite schools have. In other words, there are schools that both compete for the same students and at the same time share commonalities. One example is that students who transfer between schools during the first year often change to other schools within the elite circuit (Larsson, 2019). Another is collaboration is the different sports events and contests that are engaged in by similar schools.
The elite segment of inner-city schools could be described by a spectrum of characteristics. Geographical location is only one such feature. First, for students attending these schools, the term ‘inner-city school’ represents selectivity and legacy. Thus, composition, or the social and academic configuration of former and contemporary students, are crucial. To simplify it further, it is important to be part of a collective that has similar ambitions and skills, or to put it in the vocabulary of Bourdieu, symbolic assets. Additionally, it includes lifestyle choices and educational achievements. This is also why merits or grades from secondary school become an important measure. When students argue for plurality and diversity, they do it in the name of being chosen. In other words, as a statement of equal opportunity and that privilege has little to do with educational success.
‘Well, I think it’s very important, especially with free choice. So, there is some talk about not being allowed to go to inner-city schools, if you do not live in the inner-city and I think that is bad, since I would not have the opportunity attend this school then. Because I do not live in Stockholm County … So, I think it is great that you have the chance to choose for yourself and because it creates a competition that makes the best students get in … from all over Stockholm.’ [Female, lower middle class]
Hence, middle-class, upper middle-class and upper-class students celebrate the possibilities of school choice, since it enables geographical mobility. For them, it usually means mobility due to academic ability even though social class differences remain a strong influence due to different opportunities at home and in secondary school. As one upper-class student argues, concerning possibilities of limiting school choice in Stockholm, “It would only contribute more to this kind of segregation and such things, as if not everyone is allowed ‘to show their feet’ kind of.” He continues “But in any case, I think [school choice] is great for post-16 schools, because it is an awakening for some as well, that you have to take school seriously. If you do not [take school seriously] then sorry, but then, you just have to learn [it] the hard way.”
As discussed before, new schools can also become accepted as inner-city schools. It is typically a question of being able to recruit students from higher social classes and/or with certain academic abilities. However, it also depends on the ability to mobilise enough other institutional assets. One such asset is legacy. Legacy does not necessarily mean a heritage, although recently established elite schools try to construct an authentic feeling of historical belonging. Rather, it means the possibility to create linage. A school needs to be up to date and continue to deliver knowledgeable students to high-status positions. One such way is to deliver students to prestigious universities. For students, this offers what Larsson (2019) has called ‘exchange potential’ or a hypothetical future. Bourdieu (1996) correspondingly describes how relationships between successful alumni and hypothetical futures foster a collective belief and therefore become an asset. This collective belief is important to be able to preserve the boundaries and hierarchies between inner-city schools. It provides a feeling of entitlement and more importantly, distinctively not being one among the others.
Conclusion
Educational marketisation is a significant part of Swedish society and is often taken for granted, especially in metropolitan regions such as Stockholm. This also means that the educational market is constantly changing and developing, and that there are continuous hierarchical struggles between schools. As new schools emerge, others change direction, re-locate, upscale, downsize or in some cases become obsolete. In this context, students and parents/guardians orientate between the different options and possibilities. They visit open houses and school fairs, gather information, consult friends, read webpages and are approached with marketing pamphlets containing a diverse array of promises. The latter might include offers to go abroad during the school year, gifts and prospects which have little to do with formal education. Prestigious schools often do the opposite and maintain a low-key profile with little explicit promotion. To navigate the educational market, students deploy various sets of strategies. These strategies are not rationally intentional (Bourdieu, 1990), rather class-based and governed by social factors such as familiarity, networks and lifestyle preferences. Schools on the other hand deploy strategies to attract students. This is done to keep up with competitors and avoid financial struggles. Except for the immediate marketing, schools compete by the means of institutional assets. Such assets include student group composition, respected teachers, specific educational programmes and successful alumni. Additionally, institutional assets could be related to the geography of the school. That is to say, where the school is situated, the history of the school and the architectural outline of the building.
This chapter has explored the phenomenon of post-16 inner-city schools. More specifically, how the uneven geography of the Stockholm region affects the strategies deployed by schools and students. The main theme has been related to the gentrified and wealthier inner-city of Stockholm and how it is used as a symbolic asset in the competition between schools. Our analysis shows that there are several hierarchies to account for. First of all, the socio-symbolic (Wacquant, 2015) boundaries that separates geographical regions and provides relational advantages for schools located in wealthier areas. Thus, schools placed in the inner-city profit from the locational setting. This is one significant reason for the growing number of inner-city schools since 1992. The same goes for the increasing number of students attending inner-city schools.
Besides the possibilities of public transport, inner-city schools profit from the proximity to a range of characteristics. Similar to what
