ABSTRACT
Hard to reach groups constitute large educational sectors, encompassing wide varieties of student cohorts and social groups. However, the notion of a ‘hard to reach’ group works only in that most groups would be ‘easy to reach’ and that people, in some way, coalesce into a tangible, easily understood locus of social identity and educational setting, shaped by dominant groups of practitioners and educational subjectivities (Vincent 2001). At interviews, art students are often quizzed about whether they think they would ‘fi t in’ to the ethos of a course; and in turn, may be judged by admission tutors as to whether they subscribe to course values, before they even become students. This displacement occurs in many fi elds of education, whereby social values and identities are associated with course identities, some prized over others. The negative impact of this attitudinal process, both on the curriculum and on excluded students, creates long-term educational effects, and has been noted within practices of art education (Atkinson 2002; Hatton 2012).
