{"title":"住房优势,隐性课程,居住习惯:学生过去和未来的住房路径重新审视","authors":"Nick Revington","doi":"10.1080/13676261.2023.2271860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTWhile past research into young people’s transitions out of the parental home identified a distinct student housing pathway offering an institutionally supported ‘housing advantage’, more recently scholars have pointed to widespread housing precarity among university students, reconceptualising the housing challenges students face as a ‘hidden curriculum’ that reinforces inequalities. Meanwhile, time spent navigating this hidden curriculum in increasingly widespread purpose-built student accommodations (PBSA) has the potential to reshape the student habitus, fostering future preferences for the high-density, privatized urban space PBSA represents. This paper re-examines these notions, drawing on interviews with 27 students in Waterloo, Canada, regarding their past experiences and future expectations of housing. While the interviews reveal a multitude of pathways, concepts of housing advantage and hidden curriculum are not as contradictory as they may appear, with many students benefitting from supports offered by university residences before facing an expensive, discriminatory and predatory rental market. Although students’ experiences normalized high-density living, they did not necessarily supersede long-term preferences for detached home ownership, and access to amenities was more important than private space as such.KEYWORDS: Habitushousing pathwayshousing precaritypurpose-built student accommodationstudentificationuniversity AcknowledgementsThis article is an extension of work carried out during my doctorate at the University of Waterloo, completed in 2020. I would therefore like to thank my supervisor, Markus Moos, and committee, Martine August, Pierre Filion and Tara Vinodrai, for their guidance, although they should in no way be held responsible for any errors or omissions herein.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Not including students who live with parents or commute from elsewhere.2 The exception is Tiffany, who lived at home for the duration of her studies in Waterloo, excluding work terms in Toronto.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Department of Housing and Residences, University of Waterloo; Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant number: 767-2016-1258].","PeriodicalId":17574,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Youth Studies","volume":"193 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Housing advantage, hidden curriculum, habitus: students’ past and future housing pathways revisited\",\"authors\":\"Nick Revington\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13676261.2023.2271860\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTWhile past research into young people’s transitions out of the parental home identified a distinct student housing pathway offering an institutionally supported ‘housing advantage’, more recently scholars have pointed to widespread housing precarity among university students, reconceptualising the housing challenges students face as a ‘hidden curriculum’ that reinforces inequalities. Meanwhile, time spent navigating this hidden curriculum in increasingly widespread purpose-built student accommodations (PBSA) has the potential to reshape the student habitus, fostering future preferences for the high-density, privatized urban space PBSA represents. This paper re-examines these notions, drawing on interviews with 27 students in Waterloo, Canada, regarding their past experiences and future expectations of housing. While the interviews reveal a multitude of pathways, concepts of housing advantage and hidden curriculum are not as contradictory as they may appear, with many students benefitting from supports offered by university residences before facing an expensive, discriminatory and predatory rental market. Although students’ experiences normalized high-density living, they did not necessarily supersede long-term preferences for detached home ownership, and access to amenities was more important than private space as such.KEYWORDS: Habitushousing pathwayshousing precaritypurpose-built student accommodationstudentificationuniversity AcknowledgementsThis article is an extension of work carried out during my doctorate at the University of Waterloo, completed in 2020. I would therefore like to thank my supervisor, Markus Moos, and committee, Martine August, Pierre Filion and Tara Vinodrai, for their guidance, although they should in no way be held responsible for any errors or omissions herein.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Not including students who live with parents or commute from elsewhere.2 The exception is Tiffany, who lived at home for the duration of her studies in Waterloo, excluding work terms in Toronto.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Department of Housing and Residences, University of Waterloo; Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant number: 767-2016-1258].\",\"PeriodicalId\":17574,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Youth Studies\",\"volume\":\"193 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Youth Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2023.2271860\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Youth Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2023.2271860","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要虽然过去对年轻人从父母家中过渡的研究发现了一条独特的学生住房途径,提供了制度支持的“住房优势”,但最近学者们指出,大学生中普遍存在住房不稳定性,将学生面临的住房挑战重新定义为强化不平等的“隐藏课程”。与此同时,在越来越普遍的专用学生宿舍(PBSA)中,花时间在这个隐藏的课程中,有可能重塑学生的习惯,培养未来对PBSA所代表的高密度、私有化城市空间的偏好。本文通过对加拿大滑铁卢的27名学生的采访,重新审视了这些观念,了解了他们过去的经历和对住房的未来期望。虽然面试揭示了多种途径,但住房优势和隐性课程的概念并不像表面上那样矛盾,许多学生在面临昂贵、歧视性和掠夺性的租赁市场之前,都受益于大学宿舍提供的支持。虽然学生们的高密度生活经历正常化了,但他们并不一定取代对独立住宅所有权的长期偏好,而且获得便利设施比私人空间更重要。本文是我在滑铁卢大学攻读博士学位期间所做工作的延伸,该工作于2020年完成。因此,我要感谢我的导师Markus Moos和委员会Martine August, Pierre Filion和Tara Vinodrai的指导,尽管他们不应对本文中的任何错误或遗漏负责。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1不包括与父母同住或从其他地方通勤的学生蒂芙尼是个例外,她在滑铁卢学习期间住在家里,不包括在多伦多的工作学期。本研究得到了滑铁卢大学住房与住宿部的支持;加拿大社会科学与人文研究理事会[资助号:767-2016-1258]。
Housing advantage, hidden curriculum, habitus: students’ past and future housing pathways revisited
ABSTRACTWhile past research into young people’s transitions out of the parental home identified a distinct student housing pathway offering an institutionally supported ‘housing advantage’, more recently scholars have pointed to widespread housing precarity among university students, reconceptualising the housing challenges students face as a ‘hidden curriculum’ that reinforces inequalities. Meanwhile, time spent navigating this hidden curriculum in increasingly widespread purpose-built student accommodations (PBSA) has the potential to reshape the student habitus, fostering future preferences for the high-density, privatized urban space PBSA represents. This paper re-examines these notions, drawing on interviews with 27 students in Waterloo, Canada, regarding their past experiences and future expectations of housing. While the interviews reveal a multitude of pathways, concepts of housing advantage and hidden curriculum are not as contradictory as they may appear, with many students benefitting from supports offered by university residences before facing an expensive, discriminatory and predatory rental market. Although students’ experiences normalized high-density living, they did not necessarily supersede long-term preferences for detached home ownership, and access to amenities was more important than private space as such.KEYWORDS: Habitushousing pathwayshousing precaritypurpose-built student accommodationstudentificationuniversity AcknowledgementsThis article is an extension of work carried out during my doctorate at the University of Waterloo, completed in 2020. I would therefore like to thank my supervisor, Markus Moos, and committee, Martine August, Pierre Filion and Tara Vinodrai, for their guidance, although they should in no way be held responsible for any errors or omissions herein.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Not including students who live with parents or commute from elsewhere.2 The exception is Tiffany, who lived at home for the duration of her studies in Waterloo, excluding work terms in Toronto.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Department of Housing and Residences, University of Waterloo; Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant number: 767-2016-1258].
期刊介绍:
Journal of Youth Studies is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of young people"s experiences and life contexts. Over the last decade, changing socio-economic circumstances have had important implications for young people: new opportunities have been created, but the risks of marginalisation and exclusion have also become significant. This is the background against which Journal of Youth Studies has been launched, with the aim of becoming the key multidisciplinary journal for academics with interests relating to youth and adolescence.