Template-Type: ReDIF-Article 1.0 Title: Early Career Researchers as Stakeholders in University Decision‐Making in Europe: Comparative Perspectives File-URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/9683 File-Format: text/html DOI: 10.17645/si.9683 Journal: Social Inclusion Volume: 14 Year: 2026 Number: 9683 Author-Name: Liudvika Leišytė Author-Workplace-Name: Center for Higher Education, TU Dortmund University, Germany Author-Name: Ivana Načinović Braje Author-Workplace-Name: Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Zagreb, Croatia Author-Name: Shulamit Almog Author-Workplace-Name: Faculty of Law, University of Haifa, Israel Author-Name: Sultan Baysan Author-Workplace-Name: Department of Social Studies Education, Aydın Adnan Menderes University, Türkiye Author-Name: Teresa Carvalho Author-Workplace-Name: University of Aveiro, Portugal / CIPES, Portugal Author-Name: Dovilė Daunoraitė Author-Workplace-Name: Institute of Biotechnology, Vilnius University, Lithuania Author-Name: Sara Diogo Author-Workplace-Name: University of Aveiro, Portugal / CIPES, Portugal Author-Name: Panourgias Papaioannou Author-Workplace-Name: Center for Higher Education, TU Dortmund University, Germany Author-Name: Anna Farmaki Author-Workplace-Name: Cyprus University of Technology, Cyprus Author-Name: Shlomit Feldman Author-Workplace-Name: Faculty of Law, University of Haifa, Israel Author-Name: Rakibe Külcür Author-Workplace-Name: University College London, UK Author-Name: Inga Matijošytė Author-Workplace-Name: Institute of Biotechnology, Vilnius University, Lithuania Author-Name: Sandra Pralgauskaitė Author-Workplace-Name: Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astronomy, Vilnius University, Lithuania Author-Name: Vanya Rangelova Author-Workplace-Name: Department of Epidemiology and Disaster Medicine, Medical University Plovdiv, Bulgaria Author-Name: Dalia Šatkovskienė Author-Workplace-Name: Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astronomy, Vilnius University, Lithuania Abstract: The voices of academics have traditionally been strong in university decision‐making bodies, where they participated in the shared governance of the university. It has been customary for senior academics to be represented in managing bodies and to exercise control over the key areas of strategy, finance, quality assurance, study programs, and/or human resources. With the new public management reforms that have swept through higher education (HE) systems, the power of academics has been reduced, while managerial guidance has increased, alongside the fostering of universities’ institutional autonomy. At the same time, the power of other stakeholders, such as students or industry representatives, has also been increasing as part and parcel of the governance reforms, albeit to different degrees and at different paces across various HE systems. In this context, this article seeks to examine the role that early career researchers (ECRs) play in university decision‐making bodies across different countries as internal stakeholders. The research is based on seven case studies from seven European and East Mediterranean countries drawing on documentary data and 55 semi‐structured interviews with ECRs and 14 managers, carried out in 2023–2024. Following stakeholder categories distinguished on the basis of their legitimacy, urgency, and power, this article investigates the extent to which ECRs perceive their voices to be heard. The findings show variance between the case studies regarding formal representation, with most universities in the study having limited representation of ECRs in university and faculty/school‐level decision‐making bodies. The voices of ECRs, however, are heard in informal ways. Keywords: decision‐making; early career researchers; power; representation; stakeholders; university governance; university; voice Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v14:y:2026:a:9683 Template-Type: ReDIF-Article 1.0 Title: Embracing Paradox Realities: Racially Minoritised Women and Gender‐Based Violence in Higher Education File-URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/9825 File-Format: text/html DOI: 10.17645/si.9825 Journal: Social Inclusion Volume: 14 Year: 2026 Number: 9825 Author-Name: Anke Lipinsky Author-Workplace-Name: Department of Data and Research on Society, GESIS‐Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Germany Author-Name: Bruna Cristina Jaquetto Pereira Author-Workplace-Name: Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain Author-Name: Vilana Pilinkaitė Sotirovič Author-Workplace-Name: Institute of Sociology, Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences, Lithuania Abstract: Although universities often adopt diversity and inclusion policies, the everyday experience of employees indicates multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination. This article discusses how institutional norms and practices reinforce power structures and stop those experiencing intersectional discrimination from voicing their experiences of gender‐based violence in higher education. We employ the frameworks of “everyday racism” and “network silence” to analyse 12 interviews with racially minoritised women who experienced gender‐based violence in academia and one bystander. Our findings challenge the assumption of universities that gender‐based violence and racial discrimination are marginal concerns. The interviews point to institutional factors that generate, coerce, and support silence. They reveal a paradox combination of dynamics of hypervisibility and invisibility, structural barriers, institutional practices, discriminatory attitudes, stereotypes, and prejudices as factors contributing to silencing, othering, and marginalisation within academia. Women from ethnic minorities and marginalised groups demonstrate both self‐silencing and the deprivation of their agency and voice due to cultural normative expectations. We conclude by exploring alternatives to promote transformational change that considers intersectional and multiple forms of discrimination. We suggest what change agents in higher education institutions can do to hear unheard voices and reduce the long‐standing multiple disadvantages faced by intersectionally marginalised groups. Keywords: diversity; everyday racism; gender‐based violence; higher education; intersectionality; silence; transformational change Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v14:y:2026:a:9825 Template-Type: ReDIF-Article 1.0 Title: Intersectionality at German Universities: Empowering Teaching Staff as Change Agents With Higher Education Didactic Workshops File-URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/9829 File-Format: text/html DOI: 10.17645/si.9829 Journal: Social Inclusion Volume: 14 Year: 2026 Number: 9829 Author-Name: Julia Mergner Author-Workplace-Name: Center for Higher Education, TU Dortmund University, Germany Author-Name: Sude Pekşen Author-Workplace-Name: Center for Higher Education, TU Dortmund University, Germany Author-Name: Liudvika Leišytė Author-Workplace-Name: Center for Higher Education, TU Dortmund University, Germany Abstract: The increasing diversity at German universities has been accompanied by the demand to widen participation among all groups of students. This challenges higher education teaching, requiring learning environments that acknowledge diverse experiences and needs. While diversity‐sensitive approaches have been the dominant response, they often address single diversity dimensions in isolation, neglecting intersectional interdependencies and structural power relations. An intersectional perspective, however, shifts the focus to power dynamics, knowledge production, and inclusive educational practices. This article argues that such an approach has a good potential to enable lecturers and students to become change agents by fostering critical thinking, reflective agency, and ethical commitment to dismantling systemic inequalities. This is particularly challenging in the German higher education system, where critical, antidiscriminatory pedagogical perspectives are mostly limited to certain disciplines. At the same time, the teaching staff enjoy extensive teaching autonomy, which provides them with freedom for individual engagement in this area. Therefore, implementing intersectional approaches in teaching requires targeted educational interventions that support teaching staff. Building on the concept of intersectional pedagogy, we introduce a case study of a higher education didactic workshop that was designed to raise awareness of intersectional perspectives in teaching. The findings highlight the potential of such workshops to influence teaching practices and promote the engagement of disciplinary teaching communities with intersectionality. This article concludes by discussing the implications for further developing workshop concepts and empowering teaching staff and students as agents of change within the German higher education system. Keywords: change agents; German higher education; intersectionality; teaching students; university didactics Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v14:y:2026:a:9829 Template-Type: ReDIF-Article 1.0 Title: Achieving Inclusion: University Staff Working in Third Space Between Academic and Professional Spheres of Activity File-URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/9596 File-Format: text/html DOI: 10.17645/si.9596 Journal: Social Inclusion Volume: 14 Year: 2026 Number: 9596 Author-Name: Celia Whitchurch Author-Workplace-Name: Faculty of Education, University College London, UK Abstract: The article reflects on the case of staff employed on academic and professional contracts in UK universities who work in areas of activity that are not aligned precisely to either domain, sometimes referred to as “third space.” Examples are given of academic staff on teaching‐only contracts and people employed on professional contracts in educational and research development roles. Although such individuals are likely to be highly qualified, with a master’s or doctoral qualification, teach and, in some cases, undertake research, they occupy territory in the university that often lacks formal recognition. This is particularly so in relation to the legitimacy of their roles and parity with academic colleagues who undertake mainstream teaching and research and contribute to the UK Research Excellence Framework. Despite increasing commentary on the existence of these roles by practitioners themselves, institutions have been slow to accord them legitimacy in terms of, for example, dedicated space in institutional structures, appropriate professional development opportunities, career paths, or promotion and assessment criteria. Such individuals are therefore liable to feel excluded from the mainstream, even though they may be making a significant contribution to academic endeavours. Examples are offered of the extent to which individuals are able to achieve recognition at both a personal and collective level, and suggestions are made as to practical ways in which universities might accord this group of staff greater visibility, and thereby reduce the cultural, and implicitly hierarchical, divide between them and academic colleagues with an extended teaching and research profile. Keywords: academic careers; academic staff; educational development; higher education; professional staff; professional careers; research management; third space; UK; work in academia Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v14:y:2026:a:9596