Editorial

International research in sociology of education provides many opportunities to look at realities of education through a critical lens, revealing what may be hidden in the shadows and often giving voice to those who are frequently silenced and inaudible, whose difficulties are sometimes invisible to the public and sometimes explained by personal and deficit-oriented factors. Sociological approaches to education allow us to unveil the context and to identify the mechanisms of discrimination and social reproduction, thus provoking a discussion of the need for education policy and practice changes at the local, national, regional or global levels that will support social mobility and social transformation. The collection of articles on this issue demonstrates the diversity and depth of discussions in the field of sociology of education, with reference to different national contexts. This issue includes studies dealing with the populations of Finland, Israel, Denmark, Taiwan, India and Sweden. In each of the national contexts, there is an emphasis on a different population and exposure to various social structures at play in education, from those that contribute to the exclusion and discrimination of underprivileged populations to those that allow for agency and change. The first article in this collection by Katariina Mertanenhttps, Kalle Mäkelä, and Kristiina Brunila analyzes youth policies as governed by a framing of the problematisation of young people in Finland today. Based on their analysis, the authors argue that such a framing of the ‘youth problem’ is produced through two conflicting rationalities: neoliberalism and paternalism. What can, however, be seen as a shared view in both modes of governing is the perception of young people as a group whose members have seemingly similar characteristics of immaturity, vulnerability and dependence, which makes them different from the rest of society. The authors show that in Finnish education policies, young people are expected to be proactive and responsible for their own future and if they fail to do so, they are directed to various education and training programmes, unpaid work internships, and other forms of engagement. In the second article, Ruo-Fan Lui describes how the Taiwanese college admission system is not understood similarly by students from various social classes. It is argued that cultural knowledge employed by middleclass youth provides them with chances to interpret the seemly transparent admission criteria and therefore obtain an advantage in college applications. INTERNATIONAL STUDIES IN SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATION 2022, VOL. 31, NO. 3, 261–263 https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2022.2094616