错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Beyond the Binary: Non-binary Students in a European Country Comparison and Methodological Considerations on Surveying Gender

  • Johanna Dau

摘要

Gender is a complex variable that is no longer understood as a binary construct. It is a constant task of social science to critically question variables and survey instruments and to close the gap between theory and empiricism. Thus, higher education research must also design the measurement of gender in such a way that gender-inclusive and theoretically valid results can be gained. To date, trans and inter students have hardly been included in the analyses of European higher education research. This paper presents the first European comparative analysis of non-binary students based on the EUROSTUDENT VII microdata set published in 2023 (Cuppen, 2023). This dataset covers 17 countries of which eight include information on more than fe(male) students. Bivariate-descriptive as well as multivariate analyses based on these eight countries show that students with a non-binary gender indication are more likely to be affected by psychological stress and financial difficulties across countries and are more often considering dropping out of their studies. Thus, non-binary students belong to the group of vulnerable and disadvantaged students whose inclusion is claimed to be essential in the “Principles and Guidelines to Strengthen the Social Dimension of Higher Education” (Advisory Group 1 on Social Dimension, 2020) for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). The methodological obstacles encountered during the research process are used to reify the criticism of the operationalisation of gender in quantitative research. Finally, possibilities for improved gender measurement are discussed. Accordingly, the paper provides answers to two research questions: (1) In which aspects does the study and life situation differ between students with a non-binary gender indication and those with a female or male gender indication in an international comparison? (2) How can a gender-sensitive and research-practical set of gender questions be implemented in student surveys?