Sample Political science Research paper Assignment on Companies in International Environmental Policy: The Example of Climate Protection ( the title )

Companies in International Environmental Policy: The Example of Climate Protection ( the title )

International environmental policy ( the name of the course )

I need a project of 2000 words on this title, but unfortunately, the doctor did not attach any requirements or instructions to us, but I will attach to you, dear writer, previous research I did for the same doctor, and please follow the same steps, but at this title

Classism and Solidarity in the Context of Higher Education

Introduction to Classism and Solidarity

Classism refers to prejudice directed against people of a particular class. Classism fosters negative implications on minority groups and lower socio-economic students in higher learning institutions. Higher institutions’ structures and policies promote classism among learners. Social classes within institutions trigger inequalities and discrimination. Conversely, solidarity entails the unanimity of actions and thinking by people with shared interests. Classism and solidarity in higher education entail collective thinking, activities, and behaviors by students belonging to particular social classes. Previous research findings portray solidarity’s significance in promoting students’ social cohesion. Similarly, solidarity helps reduces cases of discrimination and inequalities in higher education. As a result, scholars advocate for the embracement of policies promoting solidarity in higher education. However, the socio-economic disparities in society have influenced inequality in higher learning institutions. The discussion on classism and solidarity in higher education explores the theoretical contribution of solidarity and classism and inequalities in higher education.

Theoretical Contributions of Classism and Solidarity 

Classism and solidarity are vital in higher education. Various theories guide these ideologies to ensure their proponents act within universal models (Probst, 2017). Higher education institutions provide the opportunity for students to acquire knowledge and skills and change their thinking perspectives. In addition, the institutions expect individuals to employ skills gained to contribute to the well-being of society. Different sociological theories elaborate on the impact of solidarity and classism in higher education. Modernity has promoted significant changes in the perception and goals of higher education. Individual accomplishments such as economic goals, labor market gaps, and university pursuit of greatness have negatively impacted aspects of cooperation, inclusivity, and solidarity in higher learning institutions. Nonetheless, learning institutions such as university acts as cultural centers of modern society due to diversity and should focus on enlightening individuals on being responsible and autonomous. According to Probst, higher education should foster students’ engagement in practices developing their critical capacities, professional identity, and sense of citizenship. Such attributes are key to promoting solidarity in higher education.

Solidarity fosters the recognition of other people’s rights and criticizes any form of rights violation and discrimination. Mendes describes solidarity in terms of social cohesion due to its significance in shaping an individual’s perception of worldview (Probst, 2017). Higher education attracts individuals from different backgrounds and offers a platform to share ideas and interact. The shared space among strangers in heterogenous and unequal community influence solidarity action. Mendes’s concept of education as a freedom model insists on the need for higher learning institutions to accommodate marginalized and minority groups, promote solidarity education and action research and support cultural diversity and democracy (Probst, 2017). As such, institutions should promote social responsibility and develop a strong democratic community. Similarly, Emile Durkheim’s theory of social solidarity emphasizes cohesion among individuals in a society to enhance social stability and order (Suwidiyanti & Anshori, 2021). The theory underlines the significance of interdependence in enhancing individuals’ feelings of improving each other.

Higher education classism triggers sexist, racial, and ethnic harassment and sexual discrimination. According to Smith et al., the ability of higher education to incorporate individuals from working class and poor backgrounds aiming at changing their class status triggers an increase in classism. As a result, the institution facilitates harmful stereotypes among the minority and poor. Consequently, education roles in society facilitate the formation of social classes in higher education. Regardless of diversity in enrolments in higher education institutions, the different social classes may fail to influence cross-class integration. Compared to middle-class students, students from lower socio-economic classes tend to be less socially integrated into universities (Álvarez-Rivadulla et al., 2022). The negative impacts of performance, determination, and subjective well-being trigger lower levels of integration. Different scholars support classism and its importance in students’ experiences. However, classism defiles the theories of solidarity on their emphasis on social cohesion and equality. Hence, higher education promotes social classes, and the institution’s role is to foster solidarity.

Inequalities in Higher Education 

Classism entails prejudice against certain people belonging to a particular class. In higher education, inequalities form the basis of classism as people of a particular class face discrimination, unfair treatment, and unequal resource exposure (Álvarez-Rivadulla et al., 2022). As a result, the prejudiced individuals form classes or groups they use to express their frustrations. Such groups enable people to act in solidarity as they are victims of common transgression. Nonetheless, unity and social cohesion among students in higher education will help eliminate inequalities and discrimination. Common educational inequalities depend on students’ background, economic status, and accommodation. The factors influence students’ performance, social interaction, and well-being.

Student’s background

Students’ backgrounds based on ethnicity, age, caste, gender, and social-economic background foster inequalities. For instance, students from lower-socioeconomic classes may be subjected to abuse and harassment in school. Consequently, minority groups such as African Americans are subject to racism and discrimination from dominant whites. Socioeconomic status also influences inequalities in higher education. Socioeconomic status often influences the enrolment process and educational qualifications in institutions (Kapur, 2019). The marketization and privatization of higher education systems have promoted inequalities. The poor and minority groups lack the opportunity to pursue better courses due to financial shortages. Social integration is crucial for students’ well-being and academic performance in higher education. However, the student’s background impacts their level of integration and promotes inequalities. Previous research depicts students from lower socio-economic backgrounds have fewer interactions with their professors and peers. The students find it difficult to navigate the school environment compared to upper-class peers. Various aspirational and cultural factors and high school experiences such as racism and harassment trigger social integration difficulties. Similarly, social capital and culture disparities promote feelings of isolation and inadequacy among lower-class students. Contrary, the institution environment fosters values on culture and social capital friendly and customary to upper-class students (Álvarez-Rivadulla et al., 2022). The latter promotes inequality since lower-class students feel estranged and discriminated against. Hence, students’ culture and economic backgrounds foster inequality in higher education.

The lack of effective policies in higher education triggers the prevalence of social inequalities. The increased enrolment rates and policies on expanding higher education access promote diversity in higher education institutions. However, the population heterogeneity challenges policymakers in designing a framework capable of enhancing openness in higher education (Kromydas, 2017). The differences in socio-economic, talent orientation, demographics, ethnicity, social commitments, vested interests, and innate ability among the groups promote contradiction and render policy-making difficult. As a result, the institutions reinforce education inequalities rather than reduce them. Students’ religious backgrounds also influence inequalities in education institutions. For instance, religious beliefs in Islam require Muslim women to put a veil on their faces and cover their heads. However, various policies, such as Canada’s Quebec province, banned women from wearing niqab. As such, the discriminative policies trigger inequalities in higher education institutions.

Economic Status 

Economic power within a society promotes cultural, political, and social powers. The economic variances trigger various forms of discrimination corresponding to the power differential accrued to a different position in the social hierarchy. Discrimination and class-based attitudes influenced by economic differences promote classism. The oppression of poor individuals based on behavior, attitudes, institutional policies, and assumptions has intensified in higher education (Smith et al., 2016). Classism also fosters harm among people at the bottom social class spectrum. For instance, disparities in the distribution of resources also promote inequalities in higher education. Minority and ethnic groups lack essential technology resources to facilitate their education programs. According to Kapur, various university departments experience shortages in technological resources paramount in academics. As such, unequal distribution of resources in higher education promotes unfair competition in the job market and broadens social inequality gaps.

The economic status of students in higher education influences intake processes and academic outcomes. Students from poor backgrounds face obstacles in raising funds necessary for higher education. The material constraints affect students’ academic outcomes due to dropouts or part-time jobs. In addition, the prevalence of classism in higher education attributed to socio-economic gaps promotes feelings of isolation and exclusion among poor students (Stephens et al., 2019). According to Smith et al. findings on undergraduates, most women from poor socioeconomic backgrounds and minority ethnic groups experienced high-stress levels and had low educational aspirations. Such feelings negatively affect their academic performances. Consequently, socio-economic status influences the enrolment process in higher learning institutions. Regardless of the enactment of policies promoting diversity in higher learning enrolment, cases of discrimination are rampant in the process. Students of high social status have a high privilege in undertaking competitive courses compared to those of lower status. The number of students from poor economic backgrounds enrolled for higher learning in the U.S. has increased in recent years. Nonetheless, the social class gap impacts students’ persistence in completing their education program, with only 25 percent graduating compared to 90 percent of higher social backgrounds (Estep, 2016). Hence, students’ economic background triggers inequalities in higher learning institutions. Students from poor socio-economic backgrounds face discrimination in enrolment and school environment, triggering negative educational performance implications.


The socio-economic status of students in higher learning institutions affects accessibility to affordable accommodation. Students’ economic background triggers inequalities in school housing programs. For instance, students working and studying part-time do not strain to support their accommodation. However, individuals in full-time studies and low-income families struggle to afford accommodation fees. The disparities in socio-economic status in society have a significant impact on the education sector. Students from lower economic backgrounds experience financial constraints affecting their stay in college and the learning process. The inaccessibility to school accommodations affects students’ education outcomes. (Rubin & Wright, 2015) study on the influence of university accommodation on social students portrays its impact on social interactions and engagement. Students outside university premises lack the opportunity to meet and make new friends. As such, the latter affects students from poor backgrounds to develop solidarity attributes fostered by social interaction.

The inability to access accommodation within school premises negatively impacts students’ performance. Students from economically stable backgrounds easily afford their stay in school accommodation programs. In turn, the accommodation facilitates learning benefits as they may extend their studies beyond classrooms. The students also have an opportunity to participate in a wide range of activities and programs. The experiences equip students with different life skills essential for professional and personal growth (Rubin & Wright, 2015). Conversely, low socio-economic students lack such opportunities, impacting their educational outcomes and personal growth. Socioeconomic factors foster inequalities in the allocation of accommodation to students in higher learning and may impact their professional and individual growth.


Classism and solidarity in higher education entail the actions of students belonging to certain social classes. Inequalities in higher education mainly drive classism due to students’ financial status, backgrounds, and accommodation factors. The associated factors represent aspects of abundance or a lack among different social classes of students. The divisions in trigger solidarity among students with shared interests. Socioeconomic gaps among students influence classism among individuals from diverse backgrounds. Classism in higher education has negative implications on learners from poor backgrounds. The latter also promotes discrimination based on individual ethnicity, background, race, and economic status. In addition, classism affects the growth of solidarity aspects within the higher education environment. Various sociological theories elaborate on the significance of solidarity in the institution. Solidarity fosters social cohesion among students and helps the effects of classism, such as inequalities, racism, hatred, and discrimination. The changes in higher education policies to improve the enrolment of individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds and minority groups. However, socio-economic disparities affect their outcomes and completion of education. Hence, classism negatively affects social solidarity and equality in higher education. The learning institution should adopt policies and activities promoting social cohesion. Initiating programs responsible for creating awareness of the impact of classism and discrimination will help enhance solidarity. The rebuilding of trust between the public and the institution will promote stability and trigger positive feelings among students of all social classes.


Álvarez-Rivadulla, M. J., Jaramillo, A. M., Fajardo, F., Cely, L., Molano, A., & Montes, F. (2022). College integration and social class. Higher Education, 1-23.

Estep, T. (2016). The graduation gap and socio-economic status: Using stereotype threat to explain graduation rates. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from

Kapur, R. (2019). Inequality in higher educational institutions. ResearchGate.

Kromydas, T. (2017). Rethinking higher education and its relationship with social inequalities: past knowledge, present state, and future potential. Palgrave communications3(1), 1-12.

Probst, B. (2017). Higher Education Students’ Perception of Solidarity. A Case Study of Bachelor and Master Students at the University of Oslo (Master’s thesis).

Rubin, M., & Wright, C. L. (2015). Age differences explain social class differences in students’ friendship at university: Implications for transition and retention. Higher Education70(3), 427-439.

Smith, L., Mao, S., & Deshpande, A. (2016). “Talking across worlds”: Classist microaggressions and higher education. Journal of Poverty20(2), 127-151.

Stephens, N. M., Townsend, S. S., & Dittmann, A. G. (2019). Social-class disparities in higher education and professional workplaces: The role of cultural mismatch. Current Directions in Psychological Science28(1), 67-73.

Suwidiyanti, S., & Anshori, I. (2021). School Strategy to Build Students’ Social Solidarity During Online Learning. AL-TANZIM: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam5(1), 28-41.