“Witch doctors” or professionals? The graduates of Mexico´s first intercultural university and the struggle for legitimacy

Since 2003, the Mexican government has opened 11 intercultural universities serving a total of 15,000 students, a majority of whom are members of Mexico´s Indigenous minority. While there is a growing body of work analyzing the intercultural model from public policy and theoretical perspectives, few studies focus on the experiences of the students and graduates of these institutions. In this article, I share the findings of one such study of the Intercultural University of Mexico State, the pioneer of the intercultural universities. Through interviews with graduates, students, and deans of three undergraduate intercultural programs, I seek to answer a central question, which is rooted in critical and decolonial theory: To what degree does the intercultural model achieve its stated mission of empowering Indigenous students and to what degree does it contribute to the reproduction of inequality? In general, the findings are mixed. While many students share experiences of discrimination in the workplace, and even being derided as “witch-doctors,” they argue that attending an institution with a critical mass of Indigenous students has empowered them personally and professionally, transformed their cultural identities, and given them a new appreciation for their Indigenous roots.

Dignity in Red Envelopes: Disreputable Exchange and Cultural Reproduction of Inequality in Informal Medical Payment

Disreputable exchanges are morally disapproved and often legally prohibited exchanges that exacerbate and reproduce social inequality but remain ubiquitous. Although previous literature explains the phenomenon by material interests and structural relations, we propose a cultural approach based on three major conceptions of culture: culture in relations, culture in interactions, and culture in inequality. We illustrate this approach by a case study of China’s hongbao (the red envelope) exchange, a typical disreputable exchange through informal medical payment. Drawing on interviews with doctors and patients, we find that participants of the exchange mobilize items from their cultural repertoires, such as professional ethics, face, power, fairness, and affection, to redefine different situations of interactions and project positive self–images to render their problematic exchanges morally acceptable to each other. Moreover, as the participants’ responses to our vignettes show, they negatively evaluate the exchanges in general moral terms, such as equality and fairness, but culturally justify their own involvement. This discrepancy between saying and doing tends to legitimize the disreputable exchange amid enduring public outrage and institutional prohibition. These cultural processes contribute to the reproduction of unequal access to scarce health care resources. Findings of this research not only offer insights into understanding disreputable exchanges but also contribute to research on other cases of social problems in which deviant behaviors are morally and culturally justified.

Students’ Differences, Societal Expectations, and the Discursive Construction of (De)Legitimate Students in Germany

At higher education institutions (HEI), which for centuries served only to educate the elite, the composition of the student body is increasingly changing towards greater social and cultural diversity. Students’ differences are also the focus of this article, but not with a specific emphasis on preselected categories. Instead, the article asks how students in teaching in higher education (HE) are represented in the print media and professional discourse in Germany, i.e., which categories of difference are constructed as relevant in HE teaching contexts, which are normalized and (de)legitimized, and what is expected of HEI concerning these differences. Second, to what extent does this change over time, particularly concerning the new circumstances of Corona‐based digital teaching in 2020? The contribution is based on a combination of discourse theory and neo‐institutional organizational sociology. Discourses are a place where social expectations towards organizations are negotiated and constructed. Simultaneously, the discourses construct a specific understanding of HE, making visible openings and closures concerning different groups of students. Which students are constructed as legitimate, desirable, at risk of dropping out, or a risk for HE quality? Based on qualitative content analysis, the article shows that it is less the traditional socio‐structural categories such as gender, social or ethnic origin, or impairments, that are discussed to be relevant in HE teaching contexts. The reproduction of inequality and the associated discrimination is hardly discussed. The focus is instead on the students’ differences concerning individualizable characteristics, competencies, or study practices. Even though many of these individualized differences are conveyed via socio‐structural categories, this connection is often not considered in the discourses.

Colorblind Spots in Qualitative Methods Training

Academia, like many other institutions, is experiencing a racial reckoning. As part of this reckoning, members of institutions of higher education are reflecting on how their structures and cultures reproduce racial inequality and how to disrupt the cycle. One aspect of this conversation that has escaped scrutiny has been methodological training, which can be central to the reproduction of inequality via the marginalization of researchers of color. Qualitive methods guidance and instruction has been criticized for leaving scholars of color unprepared to navigate the complex racial dynamics they confront in the field. In this article we build on these conversations by discussing colorblind spots that surfaced in our graduate-level qualitative methods course in Sociology related to one-time field exercises and fieldwork in a continuous site. We conclude with reflections and recommendations for ethnographic training courses.

Inequality across Three Generations under Pressure from Sovietization Policies

This article explores the multigenerational impact of Sovietization policies on the reproduction of educational inequalities in Estonia. Estonia provides an opportunity to assess the multigenerational effect under conditions of regime changes after transitioning from the independent Estonian Republic to Soviet Estonia and thence to the newly independent post-Soviet Estonia. During Sovietization, a wide range of measures involving repressions and positive discrimination were applied to abruptly hinder intergenerational continuity. Analysis based on retrospective data from the Estonian Family and Fertility Survey 2004 indicates grandparents’ social positions are associated with grandchildren’s attainment of higher education. Their influence is only partially mediated through the parental generation. Overall, the Sovietization policies have not reduced either the two or three-generational reproduction of inequality. Moreover, these policies produced unintended consequences, facilitating the transmission of advantage in three generational perspectives. Our findings argue in favour of the importance of contextual sensitivity and a multigenerational perspective in research of social stratification.