264
| ID | 264 |
|---|---|
| Original Title | Discovering attitudes towards prejudices among youth in Poland: Perspective of professionals working with youth |
| Sanitized Title | discoveringattitudestowardsprejudicesamongyouthinpolandperspectiveofprofessionalsworkingwithyouth |
| Clean Title | Discovering Attitudes Towards Prejudices Among Youth In Poland: Perspective Of Professionals Working With Youth |
| Source ID | 2 |
| Article Id01 | 616568293 |
| Article Id02 | oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/31959 |
| Corpus ID | (not set) |
| Dup | (not set) |
| Dup ID | (not set) |
| Url | https://core.ac.uk/outputs/616568293 |
| Publication Url | (not set) |
| Download Url | https://core.ac.uk/download/616568293.pdf |
| Original Abstract | The aim of the thesis is to analyze the attitudes on prejudices and discrimination among Polish high school students. It investigates reasons for negative perceptions against minority groups and the role that social work could play in promoting inclusivity. The empirical research, which drew on social identity theory, oppression theory and critical pedagogy investigate the prevalence of prejudices among young people as well as the obstacles that professionals working in both formal and non-formal education encounter. It highlights the role of schools in changing young people's viewpoints and fostering inclusive environments. The research questions focus on the extent of prejudices among students, the experiences and perspectives of professionals, and the potential of Paulo Freire's "Pedagogy of the oppressed" in addressing these issues in Polish educational settings. The study uses a mixed method research design that allows both quantitative and qualitative data analysis. The research identifies key areas of prejudices, expresses the viewpoints of professionals on mitigating prejudices, and investigates the efficacy of current initiatives. The research tests the intergroup contact hypothesis and rejects its efficacy in the Polish educational setting. In conclusion the research presents the guidelines for social workers and educators to combat prejudice and encourage critical thinking among Polish youths |
| Clean Abstract | (not set) |
| Tags | (not set) |
| Original Full Text | ESWOCHYErasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Social Work with Children and YouthDiscovering attitudes towards prejudices among youth in Poland:perspective of professionals working with youth.Author: Wiktoria WilkSupervisor: Anna Broka, Riga Stradins University, RigaISCTE - Technology Institute of Lisbon,May, 20241ABSTRACTTITLE: Discovering attitudes towards prejudices among youth in Poland:perspective of professionals working with youth.Keywords: Prejudices, Social Work, Education, Anti-Oppressive FrameworkThe aim of the thesis is to analyze the attitudes on prejudices and discrimination among Polish highschool students. It investigates reasons for negative perceptions against minority groups and the role thatsocial work could play in promoting inclusivity. The empirical research, which drew on social identitytheory, oppression theory and critical pedagogy investigate the prevalence of prejudices among youngpeople as well as the obstacles that professionals working in both formal and non-formal educationencounter. It highlights the role of schools in changing young people's viewpoints and fostering inclusiveenvironments. The research questions focus on the extent of prejudices among students, the experiencesand perspectives of professionals, and the potential of Paulo Freire's "Pedagogy of the oppressed" inaddressing these issues in Polish educational settings. The study uses a mixed method research design thatallows both quantitative and qualitative data analysis. The research identifies key areas of prejudices,expresses the viewpoints of professionals on mitigating prejudices, and investigates the efficacy ofcurrent initiatives. The research tests the intergroup contact hypothesis and rejects its efficacy in thePolish educational setting. In conclusion the research presents the guidelines for social workers andeducators to combat prejudice and encourage critical thinking among Polish youths.2ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:This effort would not have been possible without the support and assistance of all the beautiful people inmy life.First and foremost, I would like to thank my mom and my brother who have always been there for me.I am extremely grateful to my supervisor, professor Anna Broka, whose brilliant advice and endless beliefin my abilities brought my work to its full potential. Her precise revisions, invaluable recommendations,and constant availability during long calls and regular interactions helped shape this thesis.I am deeply grateful to the ESWOCHY family, as well as each individual member, for enriching the pasttwo years with joy, friendship, and all the unique memories. A special mention goes to my closestroommate and friend, Maral, whose presence has brought equilibrium, laughter, and love to my life. Shehas been the yin to my yang, a constant source of support, and a reason why returning home has alwaysfelt safe and relaxing.I also want to express my heartfelt gratitude to everyone who provided great support and understandingduring the difficult stages of thesis writing. You believed in me and your positive remarks providedongoing drive.Furthermore, I thank all of the interview participants and survey respondents for their significantcontributions, which have greatly enriched this study.Last, but not least I would like to express my gratitude towards all the consortium universities, all theprofessors and all persons who were involved in coordination of the ESWOCHY program for making thisexperience possible.Thank you!3TABLE OF CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................... 71.1. BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................................. 71.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SIGNIFICANCE......................................................................... 71.3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS.............................................................................................................. 92. FROM PREJUDICE TO OPPRESSION............................................................................................ 102.1. DEFINING THE COMPLEXITY OF PREJUDICES....................................................................102.2. DISCRIMINATION, OPPRESSION AND PREJUDICE IN SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT......... 162.3. ANTI-OPPRESSIVE SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE AND YOUTH WORK............................... 243. ANTI-OPPRESSIVE POLICIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (EU) AFFECTINGPREJUDICES IN POLAND..................................................................................................................... 283.1. PREJUDICE LEADING TO DISCRIMINATION IN POLAND.................................................. 303.1.1. “People on the move” - attitudes towards refugees............................................................... 333.1.2. LGBTQ+ community.............................................................................................................343.2. PREJUDICE AMONGST YOUTH IN POLAND......................................................................... 364. METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................ 394.1. QUESTIONNAIRE........................................................................................................................ 394.1.2. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE SURVEY........................404.2. QUALITATIVE STUDY................................................................................................................ 414.2.1. THE ANALYSIS................................................................................................................... 424.2.2. CODING................................................................................................................................424.2.3. LIMITATIONS OF THE SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS.........................................434.2.4. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION............................................................................................. 435. RESULTS................................................................................................................................................445.1. GENERALIZED PREJUDICES AMONG YOUTH IN POLAND...............................................455.2. COMBATING DISCRIMINATION AND PREJUDICE IN POLAND.........................................485.2.1. Anti-discrimination initiatives and programs........................................................................ 495.3. PERSPECTIVE OF PROFESSIONALS WORKING WITH YOUTH......................................... 515.4 MANAGING PREJUDICE IN THE SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT................................................605.5. ANTI PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION PROGRAMS...................................................... 705.5.1. Implementation of the pedagogy of the oppressed................................................................ 746. DISCUSSION......................................................................................................................................... 797. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................. 887.1. POLICY AND PRACTICE............................................................................................................ 907.2. FUTURE RESEARCH................................................................................................................... 91References...................................................................................................................................................93APPENDICES..........................................................................................................................................103APPENDIX A......................................................................................................................................103APPENDIX B...................................................................................................................................... 104APPENDIX C...................................................................................................................................... 109APPENDIX D...................................................................................................................................... 1104APPENDIX E...................................................................................................................................... 112APPENDIX F.......................................................................................................................................113APPENDIX G...................................................................................................................................... 115APPENDIX H...................................................................................................................................... 116LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURESFigure 1. The Framework - from prejudices to structural oppression.Figure 2. The vicious circle of prejudices and negative attitudes towards LGBTQ in Poland.Figure 3. The roots of the prejudices.Table 1. European Union Strategy for Fundamental Rights (2020).Table 2. Descriptive Analysis. The Median Sum of the Attitudes towards Prejudice in three differentdimensions: Public Media, Social media and generally amongst the population.Table 3. The Experience of Prejudice and Discrimination based on the Rural vs Urban area.Table 4: Cronbach Alpha for reliability of the ScaleFigure 4. Pie Chart: Perspective of Youth about the government’s actions to tackle prejudices.Figure 5. Pie Chart: Perception of Youth about the school curriculum and education about diversity.Figure 6: Implicit/Explicit bias among S (students) and P(professionals) within formal and non-formaleducational settings based on the interviews.Figure 7. Wordcloud: Suggestions of Professionals to address the topic of prejudices.Figure 8. Exaggerate Use of Technology and its consequences on Youth.51. INTRODUCTION1.1. BACKGROUNDThroughout history, many terrible conflicts have arisen as a result of differences between two groups thatare rooted in intergroup divisions. Whether it is the racial divides, the class disparities or the religiousconflicts, the intergroup tensions have fueled some of history's most tragic events (Duckitt, 2006). Theseconflicts often manifest as favoritism towards one's in-group and derogation of out-groups, defined byfactors like nationality, religion, ethnicity, or ideology (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Tajfel and Turner (1979)in their social identity theory underscore how individuals derive part of their self-concept from groupmemberships, leading to in-group pride and potentially negative attitudes towards out-groups. Thecomplexity of intergroup relations lies in assessing whether sentiments like favoritism or derogation arethe primary drivers. Prejudice, rooted in false beliefs and negative attitudes often leads to discriminatoryacts and oppression (Mackie & Smith, 1998).Despite strides towards inclusivity and globalization, prejudices persist, preserving discrimination andoppression. The European Union's (EU) commitment to prohibiting discrimination based on variousgrounds reflects broader efforts towards a more equitable society. However, the implementation ofanti-discriminatory regulations in Poland highlights a gap between theory and practice, prompting theneed for further research. Social psychology warns against assuming freedom from prejudices,particularly those that remain subtle and ingrained (Duckitt, 2006). Understanding the historical contextand psychological mechanisms behind intergroup relations and prejudices is essential for addressingsystemic oppression and fostering inclusivity. This background information provides the foundation forinvestigating particular types and consequences of prejudices in Poland, as well as the role of social workand other professionals in the school environment in addressing it.1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SIGNIFICANCEStructural oppression, which includes the constraints and systemic violence that marginalized groupsface, has an impact on many social and economic settings, showing itself in power relations that spanfrom family homes to the national levels. This widespread issue, based on historical patterns and societalnorms, shapes the experiences of ethnic minorities and other marginalized communities around the world(Kolluri & Tichavakunda, 2022). Despite worldwide initiatives by organizations such as the UnitedNations (UN) and the EU to address these disparities, significant progress remains unclear demonstratedby the situation in Poland.6Poland represents the widespread struggle against oppression, as evidenced by the systematicdiscrimination and violence faced by minority groups such as LGBTQ+ community, women, migrants,and refugees. The recent war in Ukraine highlights both humanitarian gestures and systemic shortcomingswithin Poland's response. Although the government facilitates the entry of Ukrainian refugees, there areconcerns about discriminatory practices against non-Ukrainian groups, LGBTQ+ community, Roma,stateless people and persons with disabilities (the Fundamental Rights Report 2023). Furthermore,instances of hate speech and racially motivated violence on the Ukrainian border emphasize the persistentchallenges faced by minority communities (Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, 2023).Within this context, understanding prejudices and its manifestations is of great importance. Poland'shomogeneity, combined with societal dynamics shaped by factors like religion, history, and mediainfluences, provides perfect circumstances for prejudices to grow stronger (Boguszewski et al., 2020;Żemojtel-Piotrowska, 2021; Bandura, 1977). These prejudices, whether directed towards refugees,LGBTQ+ community, or women, contribute to a hostile social environment with far-reachingimplications for mental health and social cohesion (Meyer, 2003; Fenteng, 2023). The necessity formacro-level measures for combating prejudices that take into account regional nuances and culturaldynamics is becoming more widely recognised (Malcolm et al., 2023).Social work emerges as a critical player in this arena, tasked with advocating for social justice andinclusivity (Meyer, 2003). Understanding the regional variations in prejudices within Polish high schoolsand the perspectives of professionals working with youth is essential to inform targeted interventions(Piekut & Valentine, 2021). Furthermore, viewing schools as instruments for positive change stresses theimportance of educational environments in encouraging acceptance and addressing discriminatoryattitudes (Zirkel, 2008; Andreouli & Sonn, 2013). Integrating theories such as Oppression Theory, SocialLearning Theory and Critical Pedagogy offers a framework for promoting critical consciousness andtransformative education among youth (Bandura, 1977; Freire, 1970). Thus, the theoretical part of thethesis lays the foundation for a thorough examination of prejudices, discrimination, and the role of socialwork and education in tackling these serious social problems. By examining the specific context ofPoland, this study hopes to shed light on general patterns of discrimination and develop measures forcreating a more inclusive and equitable society, particularly in education.Schools have an important role in influencing young people's perspectives and can help to minimizeprejudices. Working with youngsters is essential for creating a more inclusive society in the future.Schools often mirror greater societal concerns, making them places to research prejudices.7The overall objective of the study is:1. Investigating prevalent prejudices among high school students in Poland to identify key areas ofbias and analyze the perspective of professionals working with youth in both, formal andnon-formal settings.The specific objectives of the study are:1. Exploring the Youth’s perception regarding prejudices in the socio-cultural context of Poland.2. Discovering the main challenges encountered by professionals when addressing prejudicessswithin formal and non-formal educational contexts with Youth in Poland.3. Discovering the main suggestions that professionals from formal and non-formal educationalsettings believe are effective for tackling the prejudices.This research study will assess factors influencing attitudes towards prejudices, evaluate existingprograms and initiatives in the school environment, and emphasize the importance of creating inclusiveenvironments through empirical data analysis.1.3. RESEARCH QUESTIONSIn order to stay focused on the objectives, the study addresses the following research questions. The threeresearch questions are identified to explore the perspectives of students and professionals on the topic ofprejudices in Poland. They also serve as a point of discussion for the implementation of the elements ofthe Pedagogy of the Oppressed when working with youth in Poland to tackle the prejudices.1. What is the prevalence of prejudicial attitudes towards out-group members among high-schoolyouth aged 14-21 in Poland?2. What are the perspectives of professionals engaged in youth work regarding the prevalence andmanifestations of prejudices within their respective working school environments?3. To what extent can the principle of ‘Critical Consciousness’ outlined in Paulo Freire's "Pedagogyof the Oppressed" be utilized by professionals working with youth in Poland as a framework foraddressing and mitigating prejudices?The thesis presents a theoretical framework, exploring oppressive theory and Tajfel and Turner's (1979)social identity and categorization theory, which delve into intergroup contact processes. This frameworkthoroughly explains the progression from prejudices (affect) to discrimination (behavior) and structural8oppression. The empirical section presents quantitative questionnaire results on high school students'attitudes toward prejudices in Poland. Additionally, qualitative data from semi-structured interviews withyouth professionals in Poland enriches understanding of prejudices in school environments. Theconclusion offers key recommendations for youth professionals, emphasizing revised intergroup contact,parental influence, and fostering critical approaches to oppression. This work strengthens the role ofsocial work in Poland by using it as the core to anti-oppressive practices. It also offers insights forenhancing the role of social workers in Polish schools.2. FROM PREJUDICE TO OPPRESSIONA theory is a fundamental ground for the understanding of the phenomenological concept in the socialwork field. It is used as a collection of coherent ideas that direct the social work practice (Poulter, 2005).While the concepts provide a measurement framework for understanding and addressing complex issuesin society and social work practice. Structural or systemic oppression is defined as limitations andsystemic abuse that marginalized groups experience as a result of social institutions, laws, and powerdynamics (Moreau, 1979). It is a problem faced by minority groups in almost every setting, starting frompower dynamics between parents and children, through oppression towards LGBTQ+ communities,women’s rights, elderly or children, people with disabilities and so on. Historical settings, laws, andcustoms that consistently harm some groups—especially ethnic minorities—are the foundation ofstructural oppression (Kolluri & Tichavakunda, 2022). This chapter aims to understand the nuances ofprejudices and to explain the difference between prejudices and discrimination, and to analyze howoppression is derived from discrimination. Focus of this study is an examination of prevalent prejudicesamong youth. It sheds light on the various forms they take and the impact they have on individuals in theschool environment. As a result, the strategies used in social work and education to combat discriminationand promote inclusion and diversity will be evaluated.2.1. DEFINING THE COMPLEXITY OF PREJUDICESPrejudices are a common, yet complex social issue. The complexity is composed of three main reasons:(1) diversity of different types of prejudices; (2) the common generalization based on the false beliefs thatspread the negative attitudes, and (3) the fact that it might lead to oppressive or even violentdiscriminatory acts. Allport´s The Nature of Prejudice (1954) has served as one of the mostcomprehensive frameworks for the existence of prejudices. Initially, the main belief about prejudices put9in Allport’s words was: “A person’s prejudices is unlikely to be merely a specific attitude toward aspecific group; it is more likely to be a reflection of his whole habit of thinking about the world” (p. 175);and “the style of thinking that is characteristic of prejudices is a reflection, by and large, of the prejudicedperson’s way of thinking about anything” (p. 400). Allport (1954) pointed out that the intergroup relationsare characterized as an out-group hater and/or an in-group favoritism that are reciprocally connected.Social psychology explains the concepts of in-groups and out-groups. An in-group refers to the group towhich one belongs and others who are considered to belong to it, too. In-group members have positiveattitudes towards one another and provide each other preferential treatment. An out-group refers toindividuals who do not belong to your group. In-group individuals are usually treated better thanout-group members, who are often perceived unfavorably. Lambert (1995) and Linville & Fischer (1996)found that in-group members are seen as diverse and containing favorable characteristics. Out-groupmembers are stereotyped as "all the same," homogeneous, and negative. Nevertheless, as human beingswe interact with each other on a daily basis and as a result intergroup relations are a survival strategy.Social identity theory, introduced by Tajfel (1978) and further developed by Tajfel and Turner (1979),suggests that people see themselves as part of various groups, for instance, those having children versusthose not having children. As mentioned, people also judge these groups, both the ones they are part of(in-groups) and the ones they are not (out-groups). To analyze and decide how good these groups are,people compare them and their value. This process of sorting, judging, and comparing contributes tocreating a person's social identity. Therefore if a person holds prejudices towards one out-group, they willmost likely have prejudices towards different out-groups, too.In social psychology, differences in people's group memberships correspond with both the social identitytheory and the social categorization perspective, according to Tajful and Turner's (1979) results. Having apositive social identity makes people feel good about themselves, while a negative one might lead totrying to improve the group's image through competition or other strategies (Trepte and Loy, 2017). Selfcategorization, proposed by Turner presents two kinds of identity: social and personal. The social identityis about the groups “we” belong to, while personal identity is more about who “we” are as individuals.Depending on what is important in a situation, we might act based on our group identity or our personalidentity, or both. The distinction between self-categorization theory and social identity theory is thatsocial identity theory focuses on how we act in groups compared to individually; self-categorizationtheory says both group and individual identities can influence our behavior at the same time (Trepte andLoy, 2017). The discussion on social psychology and the two theories sheds light on how prejudicesmight arise from how people perceive and categorize themselves and others into different groups.10Intergroup relations can be developed in three stages. The first stage is a social categorization” whenindividuals recognize the world as a collection of different social groups based on nationality, gender,social class, religion and other characteristics. In the second stage referred to as "social identification,"individuals connect with each other using the categories such as the same nationality, the same ethnicity,the same skin color or the same religion. Consequently, in the final stage, called "social comparison,"individuals commence comparing oneself to members of the same group, favorising the in-groupcharacteristics, while emphasizing the distinctions from members in out-groups (Leonardelli and Toh,2015) (Figure 1).Figure 1. The Framework - from prejudices to structural oppression. Author's created.As presented above, it is still not very clear where favoritism towards in-groups and degradation towardsout-groups come from and how they are related (Everett et al., 2015). It is not always apparent if treatingpeople differently based on their group identity is a sign of hatred towards the out-group or a preferencefor one's own group. Understanding the intergroup bias can be challenging and demands an11interdisciplinary approach because it is often linked simultaneously to cultural, historical, social, andpolitical factors (Grigoryan et al. 2020).Abbink (2019) differentiates between two sets of "others": rival and non-rival (or neutral). While it maybe simple to identify in-group favoritism, when members of the in-group receive preferential treatmentover members of the other group, hatred or prejudices towards members of the other group may differdepending on the "type" of the out-group. To explain it differently, there is a belief that there existsinconsistency in the way out-groups are viewed. Members of a rival out-group are treated worse thanmembers of a non-rival out-group because the first group is seen as hostile and as the one posing a threatto the members of the in-group. For instance, in Poland findings about intergroup relations stresses thatJewish minority is considered an “especially dangerous” minority because they are perceived as aminority that is secretly wanting to rule the world and posing a threat to the in-group members (Golec deZavala and Cichocka 2011).Prejudice can be both conscious - explicit, and subconscious - implicit, which complicates its nature(Greenwald and Banaji, 1994). Implicit attitudes are automatically activated by simply being aware of theattitude or object and typically function without a person's full awareness or control. In contrast, explicitattitudes are reflected by measurable attitudes (Dovidio et al., 2002). Simply said, subconscious (implicit)prejudices function without our knowledge or consent, whereas conscious (explicit) bias refers toprejudices and ideas that we are aware of. Since explicit bias is more obvious it is typically simpler torecognise. Contrary to it, implicit prejudices are more subtle and may be in contradiction with anindividual's publicly expressed opinions. McConahay (1986) distinguishes between traditional andmodern prejudices. The traditional prejudices towards women (sexism) is characterized by endorsementof traditional gender roles, a belief in the inferiority of women's abilities and a differential treatment ofmen and women. Modern prejudices towards women, however, are characterized by the denial ofcontinued discrimination, denial of women's demands and lack of policies supporting women's rights suchas education, work and health. Even though, in his study, the division of the prejudices referred solely toracial and sexist prejudice, the model can be applied towards the prejudices against LGBTQ+ community,too. The explicit and implicit prejudices can be related to the traditional and modern prejudices in a waythey are being expressed. Modern prejudices is subtle, sometimes hidden, or even rejected (implicit andconscious, however often subconscious), in contrast to traditional prejudices, which is morestraightforward and open (explicit and conscious). It is crucial to emphasize here that modern prejudicestend to be implicit (Figure 1). Nevertheless, usually prejudice is defined in negative terms, but it can alsomanifest a positive form.12The term “positive prejudice” is not common in the literature to the same extent as the “negativeprejudices”. However, it needs to be acknowledged that characteristics such as gender, race, religion,nationality, ethnicity, age are not only they causes of negative attitudes and oppressions, but might serveto the privilege of others too (Shaikh et al., 2022).The positive approach to prejudice recognizes thecreation of multi-ethnic communities and fostering social inclusion (Nagda et al., 2006). This approachsuggests that there is a positive aspect to prejudices, which is often missed in discussions dominated bynegative connotations of prejudices. In this context, "positive prejudice" refers to attitudes or beliefs that,instead of leading to discrimination or exclusion, contribute to the creation of diverse communities andpromote social inclusion.The term “positive prejudice”is often linked to the actions for social desirabilityconnected with personal traits, especially in the context of racial and ethnic prejudices (Dienstbier, 1970).In this study, the term “positive prejudice” is used as a link to reduce prejudices by claiming that it is notenough solely to stop the prejudices, but it is required to create interventions for social inclusion in thecontext of a different today's world.After analyzing different types of prejudices, the second factor contributing to the complexity ofprejudices as a social issue is a propagation of false beliefs. In the world people are characterized byimmense diversity, and these present differences are the potential for the unjust treatment as it creates thepossibility of identifying particular groups or individuals as “different” and having opposed traits to“ours”. Additionally, the generalization process is applied too, assuming that all members of the othergroup are the same (Linville & Fischer, 1996). Prejudices stand as a barrier to social harmony and byspreading the negative beliefs and unconfirmed misconception about minority groups, it consequentlymight lead to discrimination, violence, social exclusion of individuals and structural oppression. Prejudiceis an incorrect belief made up of two unfavorable components—false information that lacks sufficientevidence and justification and hostility. Prejudice may manifest as a propensity to keep social distance(Allport, 1954; Pettigrew, 1998; Bogardus, 1928; Makashvili et al., 2018; Weaver, 2008). Brown (2010)adds that prejudices based on negative and unsubstantiated information refers to negative views towardsindividuals based on their membership in a specific social group, referring to the generalization process. Itis believed that the generalization process takes place, unifying the belief and applying it towards thewhole group while disregarding individual behaviors. As an example, having prejudices towards Polishpeople can lead to discriminatory acts or even the violence towards other nationalities. From this point ofdeparture, the prejudices are usually based on imaginative beliefs about the particular minority group. Theaffected minority groups are defined as the groups that differ from what is accepted by the normativemajority of the population due to such factors as race, ethnicity, religion, gender, social standing, physicalappearance, and numerous other factors that are the main subject of prejudices.13Third factor contributing to the complexity of prejudices is the cause of discriminatory and violentbehavior, as well as social exclusion and oppression. Etymologically, “to discriminate” is to identify thedifference, in Latin “discriminant” - “ to distinguish from each other”, and as such this is not a negativeterm. However, when used in the legal, academic or scientific way, the term usually refers to an unfairdiscrimination. Meaning, that it is a process of first identifying the difference, and then using thedifference as a basis for the unfair treatment as supported by the Social Identity Theory. Becausediscrimination, as an action, is based on prejudices, a thought, it is necessary to first identify prejudiceswithin ourselves and then in the environment in which we interact in order to lessen the conscious andunconscious negative opinions and convictions we have about members of other groups to avoid thenegative affect convert into a negative behavior. Consequently, having a thorough understanding ofprejudices and its types, together with application of focused interventions and changes in legislation, canhelp to create a more accepting and more accepting environment.In fact, the Common Ingroup Identity Model suggested by Gaertner and Dovidio (1993) introduces theidea that the prejudices can be reduced using factors that change the perspective between in-group andou-group members from “us” and “they” into more inclusive “we”. The model originates from the socialcategorisation approach to intergroup behavior (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). According to the in-groupidentification framework, intergroup bias can be minimized by replacing the traditional "us" versus"them" group boundaries with a more inclusive "we" that involves all members of the in-group andout-group. People give positive ratings to all members of the redefined in-group, which consists of boththe former in-group and the former out-group members as a part of the bigger in-group. Stereotypes, bias,and discrimination against the former out-group will consequently decline.The authors, Gaertner and Dovidio (1993) connect their findings of creating a common identity to theContact Hypothesis (Allport, 1954) which was and still is the method central for creating a moreharmonious society if used under the optimal conditions such as (a) common goals, (b) equal status, (c)intergroup cooperation (i.e., the absence of competition), and (d) authority sanction (i.e., support fromsocietal customs and/or authorities) and additionally, when used all together and not as separate parts(Gaertner and Dovidio, 1993). The Common Ingroup Identity Model (CIIM), in fact, has been provedeffective in various contexts, including racial and ethnic groups, where cultivating a common identityenhances intergroup interactions and attitudes (West et al., 2009). For example, Andrighetto et al. (2012)adapted the model among Kosovar Albanian students, showing that shared in-group identification andextended contact with out-group members decreased competitive victimization. This highlights howfostering a sense of common identity facilitates understanding and trust among different groups. In14summary, the CIIM offers a valuable framework for recognizing and addressing intergroup prejudices,promoting more inclusive social relationships.Next more in detail, I will explain the concepts of discrimination and oppression, presenting theirinterrelation with prejudices. The definitions will undergo a comprehensive examination to describe themechanisms of discrimination. Finally the framework explaining the presence of structural oppressionwill be outlined.2.2. DISCRIMINATION, OPPRESSION AND PREJUDICE IN SCHOOLENVIRONMENTOne might think that discrimination and oppression are closely related, but these are distinct concepts.Discrimination occurs when people are treated unfairly or unjustly because of certain characteristics andbeliefs like race, age, nationality, religion they have, or gender. It involves making unfair distinctionsbetween individuals or groups, which leads to unequal treatment. Allport (1954) defines discrimination asdenying individuals or groups fair treatment. According to Jones (1972), discrimination is defined asactivities that favor one's own group over the out-group, while as explained before prejudice refers to theattitudes based on the false information and misconceptions that have no actual confirmation in reality.On the contrary, oppression goes beyond individual acts of unfairness to describe the widespread andsystemic nature of discrimination. According to a general critical science approach, oppression originatesfrom inequalities created by ruling elites, and sees many excluded groups as influenced by similar socialprocesses (Payne, p. 272). According to Donna Baines and Natalie Clark's definition of oppression intheir book Doing Anti-Oppressive Work (2017), oppression occurs when a person or policy behavesunfairly against an individual or group because of their affiliation with another group and stronger powerposition. This at the same time involves depriving people from the opportunities, freedom as well as basichuman rights and strengthens the division of individuals into two groups, the more powerful one and theless privileged one. At the same time it might also involve imposing on people their beliefs, values,systems and laws though both, peaceful and violent means (Baines & Clark, 2017).Kumashiro (2000) adds that oppression occurs when certain identities are valued in society while othersare disadvantaged. Oppression is a systematic act of placing severe restrictions on an individual, group, orinstitution. It is not just a casual occurrence, but happening systemically, because of how societies andpeople think. Once it is part of how the system works and into society’s consciousness, it affects almostall relations. Depending on the situation, anyone can end up being oppressed or oppressing others.Systemic oppression can manifest in different ways, such as providing people with bad housing15conditions, giving people of color demeaning jobs, or spreading negative information about them. It canstop groups of people from being able to express themselves and meet their needs, which can harm theirphysical and mental health. It is not always obvious and can be part of the way society is organized or therules that govern it. Discrimination, on the contrary, can be more direct and intentional. In fact,discrimination, too can cause a lot of stress and mental health problems, especially for groups of peoplewho already face a lot of unfair treatment, like LGBTQ+ community and people of color (Tang andBrowne, 2008).Prejudice and discrimination often lead to structural oppression, affecting various groups in society (Jostet al., 2004; Kolluri & Tichavakunda, 2022). Allport (1954) emphasizes that one prejudices might beaffecting the attitudes and behavior towards all other groups. From the social psychology perspective,discrimination is a composition of three aspects of cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. Itbegins with the stereotype, the unconfirmed component of information, which, when confirmed, maydevelop into prejudices, the component of the attitude, and finally into discrimination, the behavioralcomponent (Sheppard, 2023). Cognitive refers to what we think about it, affective expresses how we feelabout the source of our attitude whereas behavioral relates to the acts we do in response to our feelingsand ideas regarding the attitude's source. For instance, if one thinks they would like to help refugees at theborder (cognitive), one begins to feel empathy (affect) towards people on the move who are attempting tocross country borders when escaping a war affected country. As a result, the individual decides to raisefunds for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that help people on the move (behavior). Whileaffective and cognitive aspects refer to stereotypes and prejudices, the behavioral component, refers todiscrimination. The three components explain the way from stereotype to discrimination. A reduction ofprejudices that serves as a motor to discrimination will likely contribute to a greater social inclusion,reduced hostility and improved mental health of the marginalized groups. People who experiencediscrimination on a regular basis may internalize prejudices or discrimination that is aimed at them, whichcan result in negative outcomes such as poor health, low self-esteem, anxiety, and shame (UN 2018).When it comes to the educational institutional environment, Kumashiro (2000) points out that theoppression can take two forms: action and inaction by peers, educators and other professionals.Researchers (Pittman, 2010; Tran & Guzey, 2023; Muller & Boutte, 2023, Kelly, 2022, Thomas, 2020)point out the various prejudices and stereotypes, such as gender bias, racism, classism and heterosexismthat professionals and teachers have that affect their performance and contact with students. Andreouli(2013) argues that schools play a vital role in promoting inclusive communities in diverse contexts,emphasizing the need for a contextual and political model to address prejudice and promote inclusivity.16Paluck and Green (2008) note the vast theoretical perspectives on prejudice reduction. Garpin (2019)highlights increasing research on its causes, effects on marginalized groups, and relevance in classrooms.What follows explores approaches to reducing prejudice in social work practice and education.One of the most influential theories in the field of education and social work is the oppressive theory,which focuses on the school environment. The main notion is to change the perception of the school as aharmful place for the students into a notion that the school is a safe space. When speaking about thesafety on the school level, Kumashiro (2000) divides the safety space into two levels. Firstly, the schoolshould provide a safe, free of oppression space for all the students, including the marginalized groups.This includes protection from verbal, physical, institutional, and cultural harm. The school should be anenvironment that embraces the otherness, and does not assume what is “normal”, allowing the studentsthe self-expression and providing role models (Asante, 1991; Malinowitz, 1995). Second, schools shouldprovide safe therapeutic, supportive and empowering spaces where the students can go when they feelthey need help, support, advocacy or advice. This theory represents such topics as power, domination,privilege, stratification, structural inequality and discrimination. However, Baines (2017) emphasizes thedifferentiation of different types of oppressions faced by minority groups presented by differentoppressive theories. As an example, sociology and social work evolves such oppressive theories asconflict theory, Marxist theory, critical theory, feminist theory, and empowerment approach, because theyall relate to power and inequality concepts. These theories show that anti-oppressive social work isconcerned with political, social and cultural structures and psychological processes that maintainoppression in the society. Accordingly, the theory serves a foundation for understanding the relationshipbetween prejudice and oppression in a broader context.In the relation between education and social work fields the most prominent theoretical foundations wereintroduced by Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the oppressed. Pedagogy of the oppressed emphasizesquestioning and combating oppressive structures in education and society. Critical pedagogy, as promotedby Paulo Freire, recommends educators to engage students in critical thinking and reflection on socialnorms and power structures. It argues that education should not only provide information, but also enablepeople to critically analyze and change their social circumstances. It places a strong focus on liberation,critical consciousness, and transformative education that are crucial when discussing the topic ofprejudices and the reduction of prejudice. Paulo Freire's critical pedagogy and its main element, criticalconsciousness have been identified as an antidote to oppression (Jemen, 2018). Paulo Freire's criticalpedagogy is an educational method that opposes standard institutional frameworks of education, focusingon conscientization (PT., “conscientizacao”), which means fostering critical consciousness andknowledge of oppressive social structures. This critical consciousness helps people recognize and tackle17oppressive structures. The value of dialogue and praxis (action), or in other words, the integration oftheory and action to bring about social change, is central to Freire's education. Through discussion, botheducators and students participate in mutual learning and reflection, promoting a democratic andparticipatory educational atmosphere. Furthermore, Freire's pedagogy emphasizes the necessity ofunderstanding the political, social, and economic contexts which influence educational experiences.Freire's framework of critical education provides an understanding of the personal and societal deeplyrooted issues. When applied to the educational system, it provides the answers for tackling the prejudicesin the school environment and contributing to social inclusion .Moreover, to support the discussion on prejudice amongst youth in high schools within educational andsocial work framework, this study will use the Social Identity Theory (Tajful and Turner 1989) thatexplains the division between “us” - the members of the in-group, vs. the members of the out-group-“them”. This psychological theory serves as a basis to understanding the intergroup conflicts (Tajful andTurner 1989). Additionally, the study will apply the Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) because itemphasizes the role of observational learning and modeling when shaping the behavior and attitudes ofyouth which is significant when analyzing the prejudices in a school environment where Youth spendsmost of their day time. The other theoretical aspects include the anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatorypractice to overview the existent intervention models.Anti-oppressive practices in social work emerged as a key approach to address the issue of powerdynamics, empower marginalized individuals and promote social inclusion (Collins & Wilkie, 2010). Itrecognizes the oppressions in the society such as classism, racism, ageism are interconnected, andhighlights the importance of working with all the topics interconnectedly. Social work practitioners beingat the core of societal oppressions and societal changes can incorporate the anti-oppressive practices intotheir daily social work routine. By applying the “conscientizacao” into the work with clients, socialworkers have the power to bring awareness about societal oppression. This has led to the development ofsocial justice social work practice, where the main concern is how society's rich and powerful define andcontrol the weaker and poorer members of society (Moreau, 1979). Anti-oppressive theory influencesboth social work practice and social work education by supporting investigations on the application ofpractices among minority groups. Furthermore, by including anti-oppressive practice, social workpractitioners and educators will be more qualified to recognise and address societal oppressions.Critical consciousness allows the service users to critically evaluate the issue of social oppression andrespond to it through voicing out their experience and knowledge. Freire (2013) argues that these viewsshould be a part of every program, policy, effort and part of a larger society. Participatory forms of18helping, that is, those where the participants have a full influence on the outcome, tend to be those thatoffer most self-worth as well as far reaching and lasting impacts (Moreau, 1981). Contrary, it ishighlighted by researchers that participatory acts might in fact influence and strengthen the status quomaintaining inequality (Carey, 2013a). To avoid it to happen the Anti Oppressive Practice andparticipatory approach needs to be carefully thought through and challenged by holistic approaches thataim at empowerment, social justice and inclusion.Fostering critical consciousness, promoting critical action and empowering individuals from the minoritygroups are the central points of the critical consciousness theory that when applied in work with youngpeople addresses marginalization and oppression (Diemer et al., 2016). The multiple sources ofoppression interventions can assist youth with identifying and recognizing the existing forms ofoppression and consequently resist the prejudices that come from these oppressions (Grapin, 2019).Nevertheless, the theory of the oppressed based on critical consciousness emphasizes the need for youthto be part of the spaces where they can engage in actions against oppression. Therefore, it is critical toprovide young people with an environment where they can confront oppression and advocate for socialchange, and consequently challenging the oppressive system and developing a culture of activism that inthe future can lead to social change (Martinez et al, 2019). As the Figure 1. represents, the criticalconsciousness aims at combating the systemic oppression present in the society. Understanding theprocess of transferring from prejudices to oppression is important in addressing it properly. Theprejudices manifested in an explicit or implicit way are interconnected with the intergroup relations.Based on interactions with others, the in-group favoritism and out-group derogation take place whichcontributes to keeping the social distance between groups. Finally the spread of false informationcontributes to the behavioral part of individuals, causing discrimination and often violence. When thisframework is accepted in the society and normalized by institutions, it becomes an oppression.In reference to the social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) youth learn about interacting with othersthrough observation and peers in a school environment. The assumption is that educational programsaimed at educating participants about concepts such as bias, multiculturalism, and democratic values mayeventually enhance out-group views and lower prejudices (Beelmann & Heinemann, 2014; Paluck &Green, 2009). Moreover, according to Albarello et al. (2022) interventions targeting the classroom contextcan help to hinder prejudices in adolescence at the class level. FitzGerald et al. (2019) distinguishescategories for activities reducing prejudices in the real-life context, that can be applied in the classroomenvironment as well as in a non-formal educational setting.191. The category of engaging with others’ perspective, consciousness-raising or imagining contactwith an out-group: Imagined positive contact with an out-group, Imagined negative contact withan in-group, Educational films to induce empathy with out-group, Perspective taking /imagination, Empathy training. In Social work this concept is often called: Verstehen, contact withothers through experiential learning and getting into someone else's shoes.2. Exposure to counter stereotypical exemplars: Exposure to admired “black” exemplars, Vividcounter stereotypic scenario.3. Identifying the self with the out-group: “Embodiment in black avatars”, Focusing on whatmembers of out-group and in-group have in common.4. Inducing emotion: Mood inducing via Music, Inducing moral elevation.To reduce prejudices, interventions such as increasing intergroup engagement, inclusive commonidentities, social norms, socio-cognitive skill training, moral reasoning, and tolerance show to be partiallyuseful. Still, the results were not fully confirmative. Many of those interventions either have no effect atall or worsened unconscious biases. Methods that seek to reduce biases should be used carefully. Muchmore research is required to determine the long-term impacts of the interventions.Non-formal education comes as a response to limitations faced by formal education and the difficulties itposes to the development of communities and social inclusion (Almeida & Morais, 2024). Non-formaleducation can be viewed as an alternative and/or supplement to formal education in people's continuinglearning processes, and more importantly creating a supportive environment for addressing the topic ofprejudice. Because it is based on the participatory technique - defined as the methodology that gives theparticipants the choice and rights to decide on the outcome of the activity - it involves students more.Giving the participants a certain level of responsibility and freedom contributes to the level ofinvolvement. Souto-Otero (2021) suggests that individuals accumulate knowledge throughout life frompersonal experiences, social interactions, family, and both formal and non-formal education, which issupported by Bandura's Social Learning Theory (1977). Non-formal education, as outlined by thisperspective, emphasizes learning outside of traditional schooling addressing social issues such asprejudices and discrimination, as noted by Dean (2021) and Rose (2010).Based on the critical consciousness emerging from the Pedagogy of the oppressed (Freire, 1970), thepedagogical methodology of the theater of the oppressed (TO) was developed by Augusto Boal. Thepotential of the theater of the oppressed in social work and educational contexts is well proved. Throughparticipatory theater approach, this methodology aims at empowering individuals to explore and addresssystemic concerns and reinforce the sense of self-agency. The work of Boal (2019) emphasizes the20significance of involving participants in critical discussion and action to challenge oppressive structures,which aligns with previously mentioned statements and theoretical framework.Although TO has been commended for its capacity to promote empathy and transformative learningexperiences (Giesler, 2017), there have also been criticisms about its efficacy in addressing the complexsocial and political circumstances that marginalized communities must face (Opfermann, 2019). Eventhough, there are critiques to the methodology, it has demonstrated efficacy in diverse settings, such asfamily therapy (Proctor et al., 2008), mental health services amidst the COVID-19 pandemic (Alizadeh &Jiang, 2022), and legislative processes aimed at giving voices to the marginalized perspectives (Saeed,2015). According to Kina and Fernandes (2017), TO is a tool for social change and democratizes art forsocial reform in addition to being a means of empowering individuals. People can question establishedpower relations and seek to overthrow oppressive structures by participating in participatory theatertechniques (Cole et al., 2023). According to Kina and Fernandes (2017), this strategy calls onpractitioners to work in collaboration with service users, encouraging sincere communication and groupinitiatives. TOhas been used in social work to address gender-based violence (Crozier, 2023), investigatedangerous youth experiences (Conrad, 2004), and advance critical pedagogy in a politicized public space(Denzin, 2019). Social workers can improve their capacity to address structural challenges in theircommunities and radicalize the practice classroom by including TO into their curriculum (Giesler, 2017).All things considered, TO offers a methodology to the social work practice by giving voice tounderrepresented groups, encouraging critical conversation, and promoting educational opportunities.Social workers as well as teachers can actively address structural problems and try to create moreinclusive and equitable societies by finding ways to adopt this practice into the curriculum.Within the non-formal educational setting, there have been several approaches applied in the efforts toreduce prejudices. They are, however, mostly based on the Contact Hypothesis (Allport,1954),emphasizing that the contact with members of the out-group happens under the optimal conditions: (a)common goals, (b) equal status, (c) intergroup cooperation (i.e., the absence of competition), and (d)authority sanction (i.e., support from societal customs and/or authorities). In fact, multicultural educationhas been identified as an effective strategy for strengthening intergroup relations and decreasingprejudices (Verkuyten & Thijs, 2013). In education, contact with various groups, and more precisely,combining both contact with education have all been proven in studies to have a medium-sized effect onprejudices reduction (Bartoş et al., 2014). Furthermore, training programs that strengthen connectionsbetween individuals and groups they may have prejudices against have been shown to diminish implicitprejudices (Phillips et al., 2011). Furthermore, similarly to already mentioned video games,21entertainment-education has been recognized as an excellent strategy for bias reduction, outperformingvarious known strategies (Murrar & Bräuer, 2017). Murrar (2017) through an experiment showed howeducational TV comedy can reduce both explicit and implicit bias amongst participants. Individualsexposed to an educational television comedy with varied, yet relatable Arab/Muslim characters scoredlower on implicit and explicit measures of bias than those exposed to a control sitcom with anall-Caucasian cast. The prejudice-reduction impact lasted four weeks following exposure. Furthermore, ithas been discovered that only the knowledge about our friends having a direct contact with the membersof the out-group helps in reducing prejudices (Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe, Tropp, 1997).FitzGerald et al. (2019) also points out that imagined positive contact with an out-group or imaginednegative contact with an in-group contribute to reduced prejudices in the classroom environment.Similarly, Lai and colleagues (2016) found that when people imagine themselves being helped bysomeone from a different group, they tend to have better opinions about that group.It has also beenclaimed that education on historical and current injustices, individual racism, and structural racism canhelp to combat anti-Indigenous racism (Efimoff, 2023). This is an important aspect of non-formaleducation, very often omitted in the classroom environment. Additionally, the research underlines thenecessity of engaging with parents and networking with other institutions in the context of non-formaleducation as essential areas for development (Kirsch & Seele, 2020).To summarize, a mix of theories such as the Common Ingroup Identity Model, Intergroup ContactTheory, practical school-based interventions and parents’ involvement can provide a complete strategy toeliminate bias among high school students. Significant progress can be made in promoting inclusion andlowering prejudices among adolescents by encouraging positive intergroup relationships, increasingempathy and awareness about out-groups, and adopting tailored interventions in the school. Many studiescombine different methods and theories for optimizing the results (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006).Additionally, a mix of intercultural education, interaction with various groups, specialized trainingprograms, entertainment-education, and education about historical injustices can all help to reduceprejudices through non-formal education practices.These methods emphasize the importance of bothformal and informal educational tactics in overcoming stereotypes and developing constructive intergroupconnections.It is important to take into account the complex nature of intergroup interactions in order to understandhow negative contact might increase prejudices. Negative intergroup contact may result in generalizedout-group avoidance, which could jeopardize future interactions with diversity and possibly increaseprejudices, as well as prevent members of the out-group from interacting with each other, therefore22maintaining negative attitudes (Meleady & Forder, 2018). In their research, they find that unfavorableinteractions with European immigrants in Britain are linked to both an increase in prejudices and a desireto avoid such interactions in the future. It was discovered that having a bad experience with an out-groupmember but not an in-group member decreased the intention to interact with the out-group in the future.Additionally, further research showed that the impact of negative contact on out-group avoidance extendsbeyond that out-group and is linked to lower desire to interact with other out-groups as well—aphenomenon known as the avoidance generalization effect. According to the phenomena, negativecontacts with members of the out-group may cause people to avoid the group as a whole more broadly,which may increase prejudices (Arnaudova et.al, 2016). Additionally, research by Kunstman et al. (2013)shows that prejudices can be sustained, intercultural partnerships can be discouraged, and intergroupanxiety can be increased by social standards against intergroup contact. Intergroup acceptance and thelevel of intergroup communication might be impacted by the internalization of motives to respondwithout prejudices (Kunstman et al., 2013). Additionally, research by Berge et al. (2017) and othersshows that unfavorable intergroup interactions might amplify prejudices by reinforcing prejudices andhostility towards members of the out-group. Negative contact is predicted to enhance prejudices, despitethe fact that positive contact typically lessens prejudices (Berge et al., 2017). This highlights the harmfulimpacts of negative contacts on intergroup attitudes. Negative contact experiences can intensify negativeintergroup feelings and the desire for social distancing, which can result in a rise in prejudices andnegative intergroup attitudes (Vezzali & Stathi, 2020).Finally, it should be noted that unfavorable intergroup interactions may worsen prejudices by encouragingavoidance, feeding preconceptions, and intensifying negative feelings towards members of the out-group.In order to develop interventions that promote positive intergroup relations and reduce the possibility ofincreased prejudices coming from negative encounters, it is essential to comprehend the mechanisms viawhich negative contact promotes prejudices. In the next sub-chapter presented the anti-oppressive socialwork practice will enlighten the institutional framework in tackling prejudices in the school environment.2.3. ANTI-OPPRESSIVE SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE AND YOUTHWORKThe anti oppressive practice (AOP) intends to transform social attitudes based on the experiences ofindividuals that are centered on elements of oppression and discrimination. These practices come from“the analysis that oppression comes from inequalities arising from the power of ruling elites and seesvarious excluded groups as affected by similar social processes” (Payne, 2002, p.272). To work against23oppression, social work adapts the direction of social justice oriented social work with an aim oftransforming reality, instead of only reacting to the victims. Transformation in the contest of social workfocused on social justice refers to ways in which the profession can help individuals and groups to revealtheir emotional pain and at the same time work to change the structural forces such as racism, sexism etc.that are causing the inequality and social injustice. AOP in social work aims at addressing the issuesthrough direct practices that incorporate approaches aiming at liberation of people from oppression, aswell as at macro and structural levels with large actions such as activism, research, advocacy and othermass actions. AOP practice is used in the social work field as one of the main approaches to addressingsocial justice. Rather than an angle approach, it is rather an umbrella of methods and approaches thatdraw on social activism and the understanding that the social services can be provided as a way ofworking with people towards liberation and social change. There are several fields in which social justiceoriented AOP find their use. Here, some of the examples will be presented in the field of child protection,community building with the focus on disabled people, the AOP in working with older adults, as well aspresenting the examples of radicalizing both, social work and education with AOP.In fact, AOP with marginalized groups such as children and youth, elderly adults, and disabled people hasbeen increasingly highlighted by scholars in recent years (Pon et al., 2011; Dettlaff & Boyd, 2020;Merkel-Holguin et al., 2022). With respect to child welfare it underlines the relationship between childrenand parents and then addresses the power relations of superiority over children, which can beinstitutionalized and systemic, and result in its normalization. In AOP social work, the importance isgiven to empathy-the acknowledgement and understanding of what another person is feeling (Slote,2007). Empathy in social workers with marginalized families is necessary in order to acknowledge thetypes of oppression that families are facing, e.g., classism, heterosexism, Islamophobia, or racism. Eventhough the types of oppression might be different, the experience is still marginalized.Empathy and sensitivity are crucial components of AOP practice in addressing social and culturaldifferences. Lai and colleagues (2016) discovered that visualizing oneself being helped by an out-groupmember led to positive views towards that out-group. The example points to the fact that imaginativecontact and imagining ourselves taking an identity or characteristic of a different out-group through theempathetic lens, might decrease the level of prejudices toward that out-group and consequently andpotentially towards other groups. Additionally, taking the perspective of a “black character” in a computergame reduced unconscious racial prejudices more than reading about it in narrative (Unzueta et al., 2014),which adds to the theory of empathy serving as a tool in decreasing prejudices toward out-groupmembers. Anthropologists use "Verstehen" called an "emic" perspective to grasp another person's24definition of a situation based on their own experiences (Schwandt, 1994). Contrary, Lai et al. (2014) didnot find evidence that taking an out-group member's perspective decreased prejudices towards that group.Empathy and AOP is not the panacea in case of oppression. There are findings suggesting that parentshave an impact on their children's intergroup attitudes, prejudices, and discriminatory behaviors (Degner& Dalege 2013). The study indicates a strong correlation between parental opinion and child attitudestowards the out-groups, indicating that parental attitudes may affect child intergroup bias. Miklikowska(2017) confirms that parents' socioeconomic status and education level can impact youth's levels ofprejudices. The wealthier and better-educated parents are associated with decreased prejudices amongyouth. Finally, Pirchio (2018) identifies the effect of parenting on forming children's attitudes and beliefsregarding the people of different ethnic backgrounds. High impact of familyhood and parenting gives anew perspective about how prejudice can be tackled in a school environment.When referring to AOP in relation to ageism which is visible both among older and younger generationsthe social work practice is related to empowerment of individuals, promoting social justice anddeconstruction of repressive discourses (Kjellberg, 2022). AOP has demonstrated its importance in socialwork with disabled people. According to the social disability model it is assumed that barriers exist due tosocial structures, norms and systemic practices and not due to the disability itself (Meekosha and Dowse,2007).De-stigmatization of disability gives people agency over their lives, and makes sure that all facets ofsocial work practice are accessible. Practitioners constantly have to consider how their privilege andpower dynamics may prevent oppression. Social work education being part of Community-BasedResearch practice (CBR) stresses the preparedness of social work students to face oppressive structuresand advance social justice in their research (Kumashiro, 2000).Working with vulnerable groups, particularly youth in high school, presents several challenges, primarilyrelated to prejudices, discrimination and oppression. These challenges can be categorized into two mainareas. First, there are concerns regarding youth well-being and mental health. Vulnerable youth,especially transgender and gender-diverse individuals, are at a high risk of mental health issues (Hawke etal., 2021). This vulnerability is compounded by factors such as lack of family support, risks of sexualexploitation, and the threat of homelessness (Bounds et al., 2020). Socially disadvantaged youth oftenface extra stressors in their daily lives, necessitating effective coping mechanisms for their personalgrowth and development (Super et al., 2016). Secondly, there is a challenge to address the sensitive topicsin the formal educational system. One of the most difficult issues is openly discussing and effectively25challenging prejudices, discrimination, and oppression. In order to ensure the complex diversity issues,youth work is highlighted as an important field of interaction where young people are viewed asco-creators. This evolves the meaning of critical pedagogy proposed by Freire and the principle ofparticipatory engagement (Elsen & Ord 2021). Educators and social workers play pivotal roles inaddressing sensitive topics like prejudices and discrimination in a manner that is both respectful andconstructive.As emphasized by Elaen and Ord (2021), understanding and appropriately responding to young people'sexperiences are critical aspects of effective practice. Educators must recognize that, as Kumashiro (2000)argues, anti-oppressive education can reinforce an "us" versus "them" mentality. When solely focusing onmarginalized groups, it may reinforce the privileged position of the normative group. Althuser (1971)adds that schools are institutions that legitimize and transmit governing beliefs that contribute to systemicoppression while refusing to question the existing status quo. To effectively engage with youth, it'sessential to employ dynamic and updated approaches. Besic (2020) emphasizes that anti-oppressiveeducation should address both marginalized individuals and those deemed 'normal' in society. Throughfostering critical consciousness, both groups can reflect on their societal positioning. Maher and Kay(2001) describe the "pedagogy of positionality," wherein students and teachers analyze their roles withinsocial institutions, enhancing understanding of privilege and prejudices among all involved. Suzina(2020) argues that combining knowledge and critical consciousness is crucial for opposing oppression,whether in classrooms or in everyday life. Britzmann (1998) emphasizes the need of unlearning for bothstudents and teachers in improving anti-oppressive education, whereas Luhmann (1998) believes thatresistance to knowledge, rather than a lack of it, is a major barrier to change. These findings emphasizethe importance of critically assessing oppression and engaging with multiple perspectives, particularlywithin the complex environment of schools, where adolescents are influenced by a variety of stakeholderssuch as teachers, parents, and governmental bodies. Navigating power dynamics and problems in schoolsrequires educators and social workers to find a balance between anti-oppressive approaches and studentwell-being. Though these are not cure-all solutions, they have the potential to improve minority inclusionand the general environment, despite systemic constraints.Concluding remarks about the complexity of prejudices, the differentiation between discrimination andoppression and the framework explaining how prejudices lead to structural oppression. The understandingof prejudices in the school environment is complex. The prevalence of prejudices in the classroom leadsto decreased well-being of students, depression and social exclusion. Existence of prejudice is often26related to the family environment, but social work, youth work and education environments are ofimportance in working to tackle them and addressing their presence.It is clear that structures, institutions and government are of importance in combating structuraloppression. The social work and education practices are affected by anti-oppressive policies that areadvocated for in the EU. The chapter that follows will delve into the anti-oppressive policies that areimpacting the prejudices in Poland.3. ANTI-OPPRESSIVE POLICIES OF THE EUROPEANUNION (EU) AFFECTING PREJUDICES IN POLANDPoland, as a member country of the EU since 2004, is a beneficiary of the initiatives and EU programsaiming to “promote peace, its values and the well-being of its citizens” (European Union, 2024) as statedin the Article 3 of the Treaty of Lisbon (2008) EU member state “shall combat social exclusion anddiscrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men,solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child.” According to the EU valuesdifferent institutional bodies are working with the topic of prejudice and discrimination on the Europeanlevel. Each form of discrimination is an act against the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EuropeanUnion, as well as the Human Rights Declaration of the United Nations. Accordingly, the European lawsshould be adopted and transposed into national laws and documents such as the constitution to ensure theuniformity of the member states.The Constitution of the Republic of Poland of April 2, 1997 in Article 32 defines two principles: equaltreatment (Article 32(1)) and non-discrimination (Article 32(2)). Additionally, the principles of equaltreatment and the principle of non-discrimination are interpreted in accordance with art. 30 of theConstitution of the Republic of Poland, which confirms the dignity of every human being: "The inherentand inalienable dignity of humans is the source of freedom and rights of human and citizen. It isinviolable, and its respect and protection is the responsibility of public authorities.” Every human beinghas an equal birthright and inalienable dignity, which constitutes the equality of all people and equalitybefore the law (Constitution of the Republic of Poland, 1997). Additionally, the principle of genderequality is enshrined in the European Union treaties as a fundamental right. In line with the EUrecommendations, Poland’s government committed to take the actions against discrimination and in favorof equal treatment through the “National Action Program for Equal Treatment for the years 2022-203027(hereafter NAP for Equal Treatment 2022-2030)” The program is based on the initiatives of the EU andthe foundation of the Polish Constitution.The Polish state theoretically ensures equality between women and men within the Polish national legalsystem in accordance with international human rights treaties and within the framework of thefundamental values and principles of the EU. The NAP for Equal Treatment 2022-2030 evolvesanti-discrimination policy, work and social security, education, health, access to goods and services,building awareness, data collection and research, coordination.The European Commission, a body under the European Union, invests into non-governmentalorganizations working against discrimination in countries all around the European Union. The mainorganizations working towards greater social inclusion are: Age Platform Union (NGOs working withelderly and promoting a social inclusion of elderly people, working with the generational gap and ageism;European Network Against Racism that address issues of prejudice and discrimination based on racism,xenophobia and antisemitism; European Disability Forum that defends the rights of over 100 milliondisabled individuals across the EU; European Network of Equality Bodies that promotes equality andtackles discrimination; International Lesbian and Gay Association as well as International Lesbian andGay Youth Organisation that advocate for people from LGBTQ+ community; and Transgender Europe.Each of the organizations has members in all the European member countries. The non-governmentalorganizations, however, are not working with the governments of the countries, and therefore have limitedpossibilities of providing training to teachers, trainers and professionals working with youth about theprejudices. (European Commission, n.d.)Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Poland employ various methodologies aimed at reducingprejudices, discrimination, and oppression. These include initiatives for addressing the structuraloppression such as international scientific conferences on men's rights and addressing wage gaps fordisabled individuals, as well as promoting tools to measure wage disparities in businesses. Efforts alsofocus on addressing the discrimination present in the society by supporting migrant integration into thelabor market and facilitating regular meetings involving representatives of national and ethnic minorities.Suggestions for combating hate speech involve establishing a monitoring team, conducting research on itsprevalence and nature, launching media campaigns, and providing educational resources for mediaprofessionals. Collaborative models for equal treatment coordination between regional authorities andministries are proposed, along with initiatives like establishing state sign language interpreters andintroducing a certificate for leaders committed to equal treatment. Groyecka et al. (2019) investigates theimpact of the Human Library method in Wrocław, Poland, demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing28prejudices and social distance towards marginalized groups through dispelling myths and fosteringcompassion and understanding.As shown, non-governmental organizations in Poland are actively involved in using various approachesto combat prejudices, discrimination, and oppression. Their activities, which range from promotingworkplace equality to combating hate speech, show an effort to create a more inclusive society. Thispreventive approach is especially important given the current news context, which frequently emphasizescases of prejudices leading to discrimination in Poland.3.1. PREJUDICE LEADING TO DISCRIMINATION IN POLANDAs discussed, the reasons for the existence of prejudices are complex. Nevertheless, when understandingthe causes of prejudices, it is equally important to understand how to measure the prejudices, thereforecertain indicators are necessary. Researchers agree that the main indicators of prejudices that need to bemeasured are: (1) religiosity and the collectivistic narcissism (Żemojtel-Piotrowska et al., 2023), (2) theright-wing authoritarianism (Golec de Zavala, 2021), (3) the social dominance orientation (Pratto, 1999),the intergroup contact (Allport, 1954), (4) the social distance (Stefaniak & Witkowska, 2015) and the (5)identity with the own group (Bennett et al., 1998; Dunham, 2018).(3) Social dominance orientation (SDO) contributes to the existence of prejudice in Poland. Essentially,SDO is the belief that a hierarchical structure should exist within society, where certain social groups areto hold dominance over others. At the same time, these societies usually go opposed to the equality andegalitarian structures and prefer their own group to rule. Moreover, the SDO has been associated with theacceptance of hate speech and the rejection of the hate-speech prohibition (Bilewicz, 2015). Duckitt(2006) explains that this idea comes from psychology and is a result of growing up without emotionalwarmth from parents. Consequently, this fosters a mindset in which individuals perceive the social worldas a hostile environment where one must continuously struggle for survival. This belief is a root for theprejudices towards members of the out-group whose presence might be related to, for instance,difficulties in finding a job. Moreover, higher SDO is typically connected with more conservative viewsand beliefs, more prejudices against marginalized or stigmatized social groups, and more sociallyundesirable personality traits, for instance high psychopathy, and low agreeableness (La Macchia andRadke, 2017).(2) The right wing authoritarianism is the second, after the SDO concept contributing to the existence ofprejudices (Duckitt, 2006). It is a tendency to follow the rules of the authorities as well as the willingness of29following the traditions and customs. There are three components of this aspect: submission to theauthorities, submission to the conventional rules and authoritarian aggression (Altemeyer, 1998). It is thebelief that individuals who are the “issue” in society should be punished. It confirms the belief in theindividuals that the world is a dangerous place. Researchers claim it is related to prejudices because of thegeneralized fear (Altemeyer, 1998). In order to deal with this fear, authoritarian personalities typically turn toeither God and deep faith or strong political leaders (usually of the right party), who better suppress feelingsof fear and uncertainty about the future than those of the left, who might be suggesting the change (Soral,Wiśniewski, 2017). Moreover, according to Duckitt (2006) such a personality is rooted in fear, which canalso be the source of prejudice, particularly directed towards groups that are seen as posing a danger to thestatus quo in society. Therefore there is a hypothesis that there is a correlation between the influence of theauthorities (the government, the religion) with fear towards the members of the out-group and prejudice.As previously mentioned, to identify and assess prejudices, it is essential to understand a historical andcultural context of a place, establish indicators that can assist in identifying prejudices, and identify themost oppressed groups in a specific setting. Poland is historically a traditional, largely homogenous andheterosexual country with the majority of people classified as Christian Catholic and with a conservativepolitical culture (Boguszewski et al. 2020).The traditional family values have been additionally influenced by the previous ruling party, Law andJustice representing conservative ideology that were explicitly affecting the minority groups such aswomen, LGBTQ+ community or people on the move called refugees. Moreover, the conservative politicaldiscourse of the previous government had a significant impact on attitudes towards immigration,nationalism and populism. The public media discourse effectively worked against other Eastern culturesand religions affecting the attitudes and perceptions of Polish people towards migrants and refugees. Theperception about immigrants has been shaped especially in the context of complex political discourse onthe European migration crisis in 2015 (Krzyżanowska & Krzyżanowski, 2018) and the crisis on theBelarussian - EU border in 2021. Additionally, there is evidence of prejudice towards refugees, sexualminorities and transgender individuals in Poland (Żemojtel-Piotrowska et. al,, 2023; Nowicka et. al,2017) with the “LGBTQ-free zones'' as examples of oppression in the country. The party’santi-immigration, anti-european and anti-LGBTQ+ community agenda has shaped the attitudes of peopleafter its victory in 2015 and throughout the eight years of ruling (Krzyżanowski & Krzyżanowska, 2018;Polynczuk-Alenius, 2020).Nevertheless, the political party is not the only reason for the existence of prejudice in Polish society. Thereasons for the existence of prejudices are historical, cultural, societal, as well as religious. The influence30of social and public media discourse is crucial in a comprehensive analysis of Poles’ attitudes towards theminority groups in the country. Indicators such as a strong trust in the government officials, the amount ofintergroup contact between in-group and out-group, social distance towards members of the out-group ina close relation proximity as well the strength of identifying oneself with being Polish are all elementsaffecting the level of prejudices and consequently, leading to discrimination and oppression in the society.Understanding the main prejudices in Poland’s general public, as well as their causes and effects isimportant in order to understand the perspective of the society, but more importantly, for the purpose ofthis research, of the generation of teachers, professionals, and parents that might have influence on youthattitudes through the contact in their daily environment.(3) Intergroup contact is considered to be one of the most important aspects in reducing prejudice.Intergroup contact, defined as interactions between members of various groups, has received substantialattention in psychology and social sciences. According to the literature, intergroup engagement andcontact hypothesis can decrease intergroup bias, boost intergroup trust, and foster intergrouprelationships. It means that individual contact between the members of two different groups - under theoptimal conditions - improves the relationships and contact between them (Tropp & Pettigrew, 2006,Allport 1954). In the research, the questions asking about the friendship with individuals of the out-groupwere used in order to analyze the frequency of the contact between Polish high-school students andminority group members.(4) Social distance is characterized by the preferences of the individuals engaging into relationships withthe members of the out-groups. The method to measure the Social Distance was initiated by Bogardus(1925) who wanted to identify the point of breaking the contact with the members of the out-groupdiscovered through the series of questions: “Would you accept X as a …?” The general idea was thatdifferent people differ in terms of feeling comfortable with members of different out-groups in settingsrepresenting different levels of proximity. In Poland, a social distance has been studied by researchers andthe statistics as a phenomenon that took a ride especially in 2015, when the right-wing political party, Lawand Justice took power in the government. The negative messages about refugees sent by the authorities,raised numbers on the scale of xenophobia and racism, as well as the negative attitudes and unwillingnessto accept refugees in Poland were common. Currently, social distance has been studied concerningprejudice towards refugees and sexual minorities, indicating a link between religiosity, spirituality,national narcissism, and social distance towards these groups (Żemojtel‐Piotrowska et al., 2023).(5) Identity with your own group, often combined in Polish literature with Collective narcissism. Identitywith one’s group is part of the Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Whether based on gender,31ethnicity, race or religion the identity is an important aspect of one's identity. This aspect is usually thecentral point when we think of ourselves and helps us to identify with the same members of the in-group.Collective Narcissism is the false belief that the greatness and importance of the individual's own group(members of the in-group) is not recognized and admitted by the members of the out-group (Golec deZavala 2011, 2023). It is a composed belief of the vulnerability of the in-group members and the hostilityof the out-group members (Golec de Zavala & Cichocka, 2011). However, mostly it applies only to thecertain social groups such as Jewish or Arabic religious minorities about whom people do not possessenough knowledge and use the opinions coming from the public media, which are often manipulated.Moreover Żemojtel-Piotrowska (2023) discovered a connection between religiosity and the collectivenarcissism and their impact on the negative prejudice amongst the Polish population, especially towardspeople on the move and the sexual minorities in Poland.The Research Center on Prejudice in Poland (2017) utilized indicators to measure levels of prejudiceamong Polish people, identifying the main oppressed minority groups in both 2017 and the most recentstudy.3.1.1. “People on the move” - attitudes towards refugeesAccording to the Geneva Convention (1951), the refugee is “someone who is unable or unwilling toreturn to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race,religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion”(UNHCR, 1951).According to the United Nation Higher Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) by the end of 2017, therewere 25.4 million refugee men, women and children registered across the world (UNHCR). Among 44most developed countries, Poland is not the main one where the refugees go, unless people are comingfrom neighboring countries such as Belarus or Ukraine. Poland is a major country in accepting therefugees from the former USSR, however it is observed that the attitudes towards refugees are negative.Based on the research it is caused by right-wing authoritarianism, orientation towards social dominance,strong nationalism, insecurity about the social position, negative attitudes towards refugees as a normativebehavior, support for the status quo of the refugees, and lack of empathy resulting from the negativeattitudes (Hartley & Pedersen, 2007; Nickerson & Louis, 2008).According to Krakiewczyk-Krawczyk et al. (2022) Polish people show openness and willingness to help,especially the refugees coming from the territory of Ukraine affected by the Russian invasion. However,Pszczółkowska (2022) highlights the dichotomy of the policies present not only in Poland, but in allEuropean Union. The Ukrainian Union in Poland says: “It amazes us that Poland, the same country whichhelps Ukrainian refugees in such a wonderful way, shamelessly and with cruelty drives families from32outside of Europe into the forest and kicks them out to Belarus''. Poland has been an actor in acomplicated political game. The country was affected by the power play that uses refugees, people tryingto escape wars and discrimination, for political reasons. Additionally, Bansak et al. (2016) found out thatvoters prefer applicants who will benefit the recipient country's economy, have experienced severemedical or mental pain rather than economic hardship, and are Christian rather than Muslim. Thesefindings showed that public attitudes towards asylum seekers are influenced by assessments of theirpotential economic contributions, humanitarian concerns about the legitimacy of their applications, andanti-Muslim prejudices, which is largely caused by the public media and political discourse. Thesepreferences are consistent among respondents of all ages, education levels, incomes, and political beliefsacross the examined nations in the Polish Prejudice Survey (2017).3.1.2. LGBTQ+ communityThe negative attitudes towards other genders and sexualities are spoken openly in Polish media and thepublic arena. Polish identity is strongly based on heterosexism that comes from the traditional andconservative approach rooted in the religion and history of the country. Therefore, the rise of openlyanti-LGBTQ+ political parties has taken place which has affected the Polishness of individuals (Szulc,2021). According to Szulc (2021), Polishness, a strong Polish identity, is built on feelings of bothsuperiority over and affinity with the Slavic culture, usually related to Orthodox Europe in general andRussia in particular (Janion, 2010). Nevertheless, the rise of the conservative political parties in Poland,resulted in visible discrimination towards the individuals by, for instance, creating “LGBTQ-free zones”across Poland. Sadly, it is openly believed that there is no discrimination towards LGBTQ+ community inPoland, but rather it is their fault for acting “too much”. Therefore, according to that understanding, it isnot gender nor sexuality being a problem, but the actions of LGBTQ+ community such as equalityparades. The framework for differentiation of the traditional and modern prejudices introduced byMcConahay (1986) will be used here to describe the current attitudes of Poland society, that can bedescribed as subtle and hidden, which aligns with the theory of modern prejudices.Modern prejudices is a negative reaction to political proposals introduced by the members of theminorities, in this case LGBTQ+ community. It is a belief that discrimination of the minority group doesnot take place any longer, and the demands towards equality for them are unjustified. An importantelement of the modern prejudices is the accusation that it is the minority that provokes further isolationand it is then responsible for their marginalization (Brown, 2011; Nelson, 2003; Stephan, Stephan, 2000).Traditional prejudices towards sexual orientation in Poland are expressed on the basis of ethical andreligious hostility to homosexuality that is based on moral and religious objections to homosexuality. This33kind of prejudices is associated with three beliefs: (1) that homosexuality is an abnormality, and oftenlinked to pedophilia; (2) that interactions between persons of the same sex are against nature and religion;and (3) that homosexuals should be avoided. In response, modern prejudices against LGBTQ+community reflects hostility to the individuals' demands as well as a desire to keep this group out ofpublic view. This type of prejudice consists of the three beliefs listed below: (1) Homosexuals are nolonger discriminated against; (2) societal improvements for more equality are not required; and (3) bydisplaying their sexual orientation, the LGBTQ+ community accepts responsibility for the criticismsdirected at them and the situations that occur.The Polish Centre for Research on Prejudice’s study from 2017 concluded that contact with the LGBTQ+community in Poland is limited. Only 25% of Poles know at least one homosexual person. In relation tothe Contact Theory, the lack of contact with the members of the out-group might contribute to thenegative attitudes. According to the previous analysis, we know that direct contact with the members ofthe minority group is beneficial for reducing prejudice and increasing inclusion under the right conditions.Although the relationship between intergroup contact and attitudes towards the out-group members areworking two-way, that is contact improves attitudes, but friendly attitudes also increase the quantity andquality of contact (Pettigrew, Tropp, 2011). It can be assumed that a significant improvement in attitudestowards homosexual people will not be possible until the percentage of Poles who personally know amember of the mentioned community. However, in order for the LGBTQ+ community to “come out” andstart speaking publicly about their gender/orientation, there needs to be a safe environment in the countrythey live in (Figure 2.).Figure 2. The vicious circle of prejudices and negative attitudes towards LGBTQ+ in Poland.McConahay (1986).34The minority groups such as people on the move and LGBTQ+ community are one of the most oppressedas identified by the Research Center on Prejudice in Poland (2017). There are examples of prejudices,such as negative attitudes and subtle rejection of the existence of the issue, discrimination, such as violentacts and hate-speech, and finally structural oppression, all contributing to the decreased levels of securityand a general well-being of the individuals living in Poland. The structural oppression comes from theprejudices that are influenced by various factors (See Figure 3).Understanding the roots of oppression is crucial in being able to address the issue amongst youth inPoland. The part that follows will introduce the issue of prejudices among youth in Poland and theapproaches to address it in polish high-schools.Figure 3. The roots of the prejudices. Author’s created.3.2. PREJUDICE AMONGST YOUTH IN POLANDIt is important to analyze the prejudices amongst youth in Poland for several reasons including the effectsof globalization, migration, and raising awareness about sexuality and gender. These are contributing to achanging environment and the situations where youth are most likely to encounter the members of theout-group in their environment. Poland, as a fairly homogeneous, heterosexual and religiously unitedcountry, tends to hold to the traditional values and views, however the observed openness of the youth ischanging this reality (Boguszewski et al., 2020). As a result, youth are more likely to question different35values and beliefs that are transmitted to them from different sources (Furlong & Harris, 2017). Sourcessuch as the news, social media, peers, teachers or parents play a vital role in shaping minds and attitudesamong individuals (Vervaet et Al., 2018). Research shows that teachers have a big influence on howyoung people think and act, especially when it comes to prejudices. Studies show that teachers' attitudeson discrimination have a big influence on teenagers. Research indicates that educators who providesupport to their pupils can prevent bias from growing and promote social trust in teenagers (Miklikowskaet al., 2019). Additionally, the closeness of the teacher-student bond may be able to lessen the associationbetween bullying and ethnic prejudices, highlighting the importance of a positive and supportiveteacher-student relationship in lowering prejudices towards ethnicities (Iannello et al., 2021). Any type ofprejudices, whether based on ethnicity, religion, gender, etc develops in childhood and adolescence(Raabe & Beelman, 2011). Therefore high school, the place where youth spends majority of their time isthe place where they are mostly exposed to these differences, and additionally through their behavior aremost likely to show them towards others. There is existing data showing that prejudice has negativeeffects on mental health and as a result leads to depression and lowered self-esteem (Wilson, 2016; Major& Vick, 2005), which when experienced in a school environment, consequently might lead to theworsened academic performance, social isolation and other mental health issues. The existing data onprejudices in Poland amongst youth shows that it has been discovered an existing religious prejudice andprejudices towards the LGBTQ+ community (Zemojtel-Piotrowska, 2023). Not only the prejudices, butthe discriminatory acts in forms of hate speech are present in the public media. The Warsaw District Courtfound Polish Television (TVP) guilty of violating the rights of several individuals and breachingjournalistic standards by airing a documentary called "Invasion," which targeted the LGBT community inPoland. Seven people initially sued TVP for defamation, leading to a court ruling on June 21, 2022.Additionally, the NGO ''Kampania Przeciw Homofobii'' also sued TVP. The court ordered a prime timeapology on TV, banned further broadcasts of the documentary, and awarded PLN 10,000 for a specifiedcommunal purpose as requested by one of the plaintiffs (European Committee of Social Rights, 2020).It is important to compare the statistics of discrimination towards LGBTQ+ youth community in Polandwith those in Europe. In fact, the specific emphasis is put on the LGBTQ+ community while analyzingthe European Survey from 2020 conducted in 28 states of the European Union. The results compare thesituation of LGBTQ+ community in Poland compared with the European average (Table 1).36BEHAVIOUR/ ATTITUDE POLAND EU-28 AVERAGEAvoiding holding hands with the same partner (%) 83 61Avoid certain locations due to fear and insecurity (%) 51 33Often/Always being open about LGBTQ+ (%) 27 47Experienced harassment within the last year (%) 42 38Believe in the governmental actions towards reducingprejudices (%)4 33Youth (15-17) hiding being LGBTQ+ 39 30Table 1. European Union Strategy for Fundamental Rights (2020)These findings highlight a concerning fear in Poland and suggest a significant gap in government effortsto combat discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community compared to the broader European context.The data highlights the need for improved measures to tackle the prejudices and discrimination towardsnot only the LGBTQ+ community, but towards all the minority groups facing discrimination andstructural oppressions to reduce the amount of fear amongst youth in Poland (European Union Strategyfor Fundamental Rights, 2020).Piekut (2021) shows that prejudices towards the minority groups amongst the older generation is highercompared to youth which leads to the conclusion that adults and professionals working with Youth aremore likely to expose their prejudices on youth if they are not aware of them. There is a general narrativegiving an explanation about generational differences in the attitudes towards the out-group members inPoland. It states that people that have been raised before 1989 but after the Second World War are lessopen-minded and less willing to accept changes in the society because of the authoritarian regime andlack of out-group contact they grew up in. At the same time, on the contrary there is a narrative ofyounger generations, born after 1989 that they are open minded and carry less prejudices. After theSecond World War due to the changes in borders and replacements, the country became homogeneous,both ethnicity and religiously (white and Chrstian catholic). From 1952-1989 when Poland became thePSL (Polish People’s Party), homogeneity was the main aim of the country that caused all the members ofthe minority groups such as Jewish minority and LGBTQ+ community to disappear from public life(Heinen, 2009). After 1989, the freedom of movement was larger and then, in 2004 Poland entered theEuropean Union which provides legislative power to policies against discrimination on the basis ofethnicity, nationality, gender and sexual orientation (Bojarski, 2011). Despite the legislative changes and37changes in the political systems, the rise of the Catholic Church, anti-gender and anti-immigrationmovements were aiming for popularity. According to Bilewicz and Winiewski (2015), younger Poles tendto be a combination of conservative and liberal beliefs, with a conservative view on family life, lowacceptance of minorities, and a preference for a strong leader, yet liberal views on the economy and labormarket. Through the in-depth interviews organized with thirty participants in Warsaw, Poland about howGenerational perspectives shape the attitudes towards the cultural diversity in Poland it was claimed thatlimited exposure to ethnic and religious minorities during socialism, both at home and abroad, couldcontribute to differing perspectives among generations. This argument agrees with the theory that moreexposure to non-Polish individuals has resulted in more positive attitudes towards minorities amongyoung Poles. A study of project participants found that having more encounters with persons fromdifferent ethnic backgrounds leads to more tolerant attitudes towards them as suggested by the contacthypothesis (Allport, 1954). This hypothesis can be used to describe the dynamics between generationsraised before 1989 in the communist era and those raised after 1989 in a non-authoritarian system.Moreover, Piekut and Valentine (2021) also found out that more everyday interactions with people whoare perceived to be of a dissimilar ethnic background are associated with more tolerant attitudes to them.It is important, however, to mention that the conditioning must happen under the optimal conditions, andthat the exposure solely is not a solution to increased openness towards diversity. Therefore, thedifferences between generations in perspectives towards the members of the out-group are not causedonly because of the authoritarian regime, but mostly because of the lack of exposure to the members ofthe out-group early in their lives. The issue of generational differences in the attitudes towards membersof the out-group is important to be addressed, because in parallel it points to the generations of studentsand teachers who hold different beliefs about the world and the society.Generational differences in prejudices towards minority groups in Poland are expressed. It indicates thatolder generations exhibit higher levels of prejudices compared to youth. The following chapter onmethodology details a mixed-method design conducted in Poland with high-school students andprofessionals, exploring how generational perspectives shape attitudes towards cultural diversity.4. METHODOLOGYThe research utilizes a mixed methods approach, integrating both quantitative and qualitativemethodologies to comprehensively explore research questions. This combination is justified by its abilityto provide a more nuanced understanding than either method alone (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). Theadvantage of qualitative research is the opportunity to focus on real-world challenges and to obtain deeperunderstanding about values and beliefs, while quantitative research analyzes the representative data from38a larger population (Bryman, 2016; Tenny, 2022). Quantitative method was used to study prejudicesamong high-school students in Poland, while the qualitative method was used to obtain the perspectivesof professionals working with youth. The research was conducted from December 2023 to March 2024 intwo stages.4.1. QUESTIONNAIREAn online anonymous survey of high school students in Poland was distributed during IT lessons. Thesurvey underwent a pilot test with 5 participants to refine the questionnaire's usability and coherence. Thevoluntary participation was ensured. Based on Kothari (2014), the pilot test helped identify limitationsand refine the questionnaire. Questions were initially developed in English and adapted on prejudicesindicators from Eurobarometer and the Polish Prejudice Research Study (Bilinski, 2015). The languagewas simplified for student understanding and translated.Survey was conducted in three schools in the Mazovian and Lubelskie regions of Poland, encompassingvarious urban and rural areas settings to capture diverse perspectives from students. Twenty schools in theregion were contacted but only three schools responded to participate. The heterogeneity of schoolsprofile was ensured with representation of a private Catholic institution in Radom, which has a ratherhomogenous sample of students by ethnic background and religion, while others represent heterogeneousstudents sample, including Roma students and individuals of diverse sexual orientations, students ofUkrainian nationality, students with disability etc. After excluding the responses outside of the criteriaand missing,, the valid answers are n=275 high school students aged 14-21.Question sequence, influenced by Kothari (2014), progressed from general to personal perspectives onprejudice, concluding with demographics. Accordingly, the questionnaire consists of 17 closed endedquestions including demographics (Attachment).After cleaning and modifying the data, including labelingvariables and checking for errors, analysis was conducted using SPSS ensuring accuracy and reliability(Pallant, 2016).A total of n=201 (72%) Polish, and n=3 (1,1%) Ukranians, and n=1 Russian, Georgian, and a Romaethnicity and one is half Polish-half German. From the total sample n=275 172 (61,6%) were women andn=69 (24,7%) were men, and n=38 (13,6%) were missing. The gender imbalance is the limitation of thestudy. There were 188 respondents (67,4%) aged between 14-17, 57 (20,4%) respondents aged 18-21, and30 answers were missing. For the further analysis all respondents in age group 14-21 of total 275 =(100%), representing 132 (47,3%) rural area of less than 50 000 inhabitants and 133 respondents (47,7%)representing larger cities with >50.000 inhabitants (See Table 8 in attachment).394.1.2. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE SURVEYThe high school youngsters who completed the questionnaire are underage and are considered membersof the vulnerable group that need special protection. As a result, during the selection procedure, thesupervisor authorized the letter of consent (see Attachment A). With the involvement of the principals ofthe schools, the parents were notified. All respondents were informed of the study's purpose, anonymityand confidentiality, and the fact that they were participating voluntarily. The research questions weretranslated and modified according to the educational level and respect for diversity. The study's reliability,objectivity, and integrity are all ensured in accordance with the general academic and ethical principles ofISCTE and ESWOCHY.Significant attempts were made to assure variety by involving schools from various socioeconomicbackgrounds and places throughout Poland (contacted via email, visits, and phone calls). More than 17 ofthe selected 20 schools did not respond, resulting in a smaller sample size. As a result, all participatingschools were concentrated in a single city with a population of more than 300,000 people, albeitrepresenting diverse profiles.4.2. QUALITATIVE STUDYThe semi-structured interviews with professionals actively working with youth were conducted in Polishlanguage. All of them were audio-recorded, translated to English and transcribed to serve as the basis forthe data analysis. The following explain the interview process and the selection criteria for the particularstudy.Empirical data for this study was gathered through online semi-structured interviews with Polishprofessionals working with youth, reflecting the exploratory nature of the research. Semi-structuredinterviews, as advocated by Creswell & Plano Clark (2011) facilitate open-ended questioning to explorepersonal experiences and offer flexibility in adapting questions as new themes emerge. All interviewerswho agreed to participate in the semi-structured interview were 7 (See Table 6 in Attachments). Purposivesampling through snowball sampling was used to recruit participants. Bryman (2016) suggests thatsnowball sampling happens when one participant suggests other potential candidates with the samecharacteristics for the research. The participants were contacted and invited to book the interview viaCalendly to choose the most appropriate time and day for the interview. After registering, the email withthe consent form and question guide was distributed to the participants of the study. All the interviewswere conducted in Polish, audio-recorded via Google Meet and then transcribed and translated to Englishusing TurboScribe, making sure that the translation reflects what the participants meant. One interview40guide was employed for both formal and non-formal education teachers. Language of the professionalswas analyzed to uncover biases, values, and beliefs concerning youth. Table 5 (in attachment) representsthe connection between the research Questions, objectives and the semi-structured interview guide.The rationale behind selecting the professionals from two different fields is because they utilize differenteducational methods to work with youth and more importantly the environments differ in the aspect ofvoluntary participation of youth, which contributes to the effectiveness of learning when compared withthe formal education (Affeldt et al. 2017; Benkova et al., 2020; Morciano, 2015). According to Treadwell(2017), participants of the qualitative research are named Respondent A, B, C, etc. to ensureconfidentiality. Hence, in the transcription and in the analysis of the data, participants will be named asFI# (Formal [education] Interviewer) and NFI#(Non-Formal [education] Interviewer.The following criteria are used in selecting the participants:● Participants can be either men or women.● The participant should be a professional working actively with Youth in Poland (teachers, socialworkers, social pedagogues, youth psychologists, NGO activists, youth workers).● The participant can be either from formal or non-formal educational institutions (public school,private school, NGO).● The participant should be currently working in the field with youth.4.2.1. THE ANALYSISThematic analysis method was used in order to notice emerging patterns and provide empiricalconclusions. Information obtained from the participants (audio-recorded n=7 interviews) provided newin-depth insights on the subject of prejudices in the working environment. The TurboScribe was used totranscribe and translate the interviews from Polish to to English. The coding was ensured by labelingparts of the transcript into one concept and by application of qualitative content analysis (Flick, 2013).Interviews were coding with MAXQDA data analysis tool that ensures the logical understanding of theconnections between the codes and use them for the visual representation of data. Initially, there were 670codes that were created out of the seven interviews. Consequently, based on the 4 main researchquestions, the 6 main themes were identified, 19 subthemes and 57 emerging themes out of 670 codes.(Table 7 in attachment). In reference to Holsti (1969) thematic analysis was analyzed objectively andsystematically identifying specified characteristics of messages.414.2.2. CODINGIn the coding process, I focused on the content of the all interviews from the transcripts that can bebeneficial for discovering the emerging themes and concepts from the participants. Coding is the labelingof parts of the transcript into one concept and an effective method in qualitative content analysis with bigdata sets (Flick, 2013). Flick (2013) points out that it is not beneficial to the researcher to code all the textdue to extra time put into coding, but instead to focus on the most relevant part of the transcripts thatanswer the research question.4.2.3. LIMITATIONS OF THE SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEWSIn online interview process videos were not used due to participant comfort and technological limitations,which might impact the analysis of the data because the body-movement was not observed, and theey-contact was not maintained. Additionally, as Bryman (2016) indicates, the qualitative study often lacksgeneralizability. He states that the collected data is not generalized and therefore the biased opinionsmight result. The regional level analysis cannot be generalized to the country level, which is one of thestudy limitations.4.2.4. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONAll interviewees in the study were asked to digitally sign the consent form. confirming that they had readthe purpose of this study, their participation was fully voluntary and confidentiality will be ensured (SeeAppendix C). Participants gave consent to audio/video recording for the purpose of transcription, and willbe deleted after completing the study. Researcher acknowledges the self-determination and thecommitment to the meticulous analysis of the data ensuring the reliability and objectivity and integrity ofthe study in accordance with the ISCTE general principles.425. RESULTSAccording to Allport (1954) an attitude is “a mental and neural state of readiness, organized throughexperience, exerting a directive and dynamic influence upon the individual's response to all objects andsituations with which it is related” (p.810).First, it is crucial to present the results of the prevailing attitudes of youth towards prejudices byunderstanding their perceptions of the most prevalent biases across Poland, including prejudices presentedin public and social media. The results of the questionnaire (n=275) confirm the prevalence of variousforms of prejudices among youth in Poland towards Roma minority, Jewish minority, Muslims,Ukrainians, individuals of non-white ethnicities, individuals with different sexual orientations thanheterosexuality, transgender individuals, people with physical disabilities, the elderly (aged 75+), as wellas minors, men, women, physically fit individuals, and individuals who are obese. These assessmentsincluded three distinct spheres: the broader national context, representation of prejudices in public media,and representation of prejudices in social media platforms. The answers were measured using the LikertScale from 1 (Definitely do not agree) to 5 (Definitely Agree) for all three questions. Polish Youthbelieves that the main prejudices that exist in all three dimensions are towards transgender individuals,towards different than hetero sexual orientations, towards Ukranian individuals and towards obese people.The groups about which there is little prejudice are thin People and Male (Table 2).Table 2. Descriptive Analysis. The Median Sum of the Attitudes towards Prejudice in three different dimensions: Public Media,Social media and generally amongst the population.Second, the attitudes of youth towards prejudices are captured by analyzing their experience of prejudiceand discrimination. The students were asked two questions if they experienced prejudice and/or43discrimination towards themselves based on factors such as: age, gender, nationality, religion, sexualorientation, skin color, ethnicity, ideology, disability and weight (See Table 3).The most common reasonfor experiencing prejudices is weight, age, gender and religion of respondents, which is experiencedequality distributed across urban and rural areas. Additionally, there was a correlation found across theprejudices experienced on the basis of weight and gender (r. 0.335, p.<0.001), as well as on the basis ofweight and ideologies such as veganism (r.0.313, p.<0.001) (See Table 15 in attachments). The resultssuggest that individuals who experience prejudice based on their weight may also face discriminationrelated to their gender or ideology suggesting that various traits of one’s identity intersect and contributeto the experience of prejudice. The results confirm the research about the prejudices on the basis ofphysical appearance (O’Brien et al., 2013), however there are few studies referring to the analysis of thisissue in Poland suggesting an area for further research. Comprehending these relationships is crucial inorder to confront societal prejudices related to physical appearance in Poland.Table 3. The Experience of Prejudice and Discrimination based on the Rural vs Urban area.5.1. GENERALIZED PREJUDICES AMONG YOUTH IN POLANDGiven the connections among ageism, classism, sexism, racism, sexual prejudices, and religiousintolerance, researchers seldom look into these intolerable viewpoints at the same time. The developmentof the Intolerant Schema Measure (Aosved, Long, Voller, 2009) aimed to create a concise, and validmeasure1 of intolerance that took into account these six dimensions at the same time. There are Polishversions of the scale that include either 48, 36 or 12 items adapted from the original version, while in thisstudy the 10-point scale was included in analysis of prejudices towards other ethnicities, LGBTQ+1 It was created by the authors using data from several samples collected from existing measures such as the Attitudes TowardWomen Scale, Neosexism Scale, Modern and Old-Fashioned Racism Scale, Modern Homophobia Scale, Fraboni Scale ofAgeism, Economic Beliefs Scale, and M-GRISM.44community, gender, religion, age and physical appearance (see Table 9 in attachment). The questionscreated for the purpose of analyzing this concept were in a way so that the answers show that if the higherthe Mean, then lower the generalized prejudice. Questions number 9, 11 and 12 were formulatednegatively, therefore the coding was reversed before conducting the analysis. The reliability of theinstrument was measured and proved. The Cronbach's α for ISM (General Prejudice Scale) in my sampleis 0.749 and moderately acceptable (Table 4). In other words, it indicates that the items in the scale havemoderate, but acceptable internal consistency and the results are consistent with the original version ofthe Intolerant Schema Measure (α= .85) (Aosved & Long, 2006).Table 4. Cronbach Alpha for reliability of the ScaleThe Pearson correlation was used in order to measure the attitudes of youth in Polish high schoolsregarding prejudice, first, to analyze the normal distribution of the data. The primary hypothesissuggested that intergroup contact would decrease general prejudices levels, however the findings rejectedthis notion. In addition, the attitudes of the sampled youth are captured by presenting the percentage ofexperienced prejudice and discrimination based on nationality, gender, age, nationality, religion, sexualorientation, skin color, ethnicity, ideology, disability, weight within the last school year, additionallydivided. Relevant to the research question are the findings presenting the attitudes of youth towards themost prevailing prejudices in Polish society which will be presented in the frequency table, as the Meanof the sum of the responses to three questions. Of significant relevance to the findings was the Pearsoncorrelation between parental viewpoints and the prevalence of general prejudices among youth. Thecorrelational tables are presented in the Appendix Table 11, Table 12, Table 13 and Table 14. Lastly, theattitudes of youth towards prejudices are analyzed by understanding what they believe are the efforts ofthe government and schools done in order to tackle prejudices, raise empathy and promote diversity.H1: Youth having more friends from the out-group has lower general prejudices levels.45The study investigated the contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954), positing that increased contact without-group members could reduce prejudices towards all other groups. Correlation analysis betweenparticipants' intergroup contact and their general prejudices levels revealed a negative correlationcoefficient (r = -0.200, p < 0.018), contradicting the hypothesis. Surprisingly, the findings suggest thathigher intergroup contact is associated with higher levels of prejudices among youth. The negativecoefficient indicates an inverse relationship, implying that as intergroup relations increase, prejudiceslevels also rise. While the correlation is statistically significant (p < 0.019), it is only moderately negative,suggesting a meaningful yet not extremely strong association between the variables. These results rejectH1, indicating the negative correlation between intergroup contact and prejudices levels among youth.(See Table 12 in Appendix for details.)H2: Youth having a more positive attitude about the proximity towards the minority groups has lowergeneral prejudices levels.The correlation coefficient of 0.465 indicates a "moderate significance," suggesting that the relationshipbetween General prejudices and the Social Distance scale is meaningful. Moreover, the p-value associatedwith this correlation is reported to be <0.001, signifying statistical significance at the conventional valueof 0.05. This supports H2, indicating a correlation between General prejudices levels with Social Distancescale. In essence, as levels of the social distance scale towards certain minority groups increase (reflectingpositive attitudes), the general prejudices scale decreases (meaning, the prejudices level is lower). Thisimplies a link between attitudes of Youth related to prejudicial behaviors and attitudes (See Table 13 fordetails in attachments).H3: Youth having a negative attitude towards one minority group has a negative attitude towards anotherminority group.Strong correlations were found, particularly noteworthy are those exceeding 0.85, such as betweentransgender and different than hetero sexual orientation (r=0.931), Jewish and Roma minorities (r=0.915),and Muslim and Jewish minority individuals (r=0.902). Additionally, strong correlations were observedbetween thin people and women (r=0.880), Muslim and Roma (r=0.890), while the lowest correlations,exceeding 0.2, were found between obese and children (r=0.140), and all categories correlated withchildren scored below r=0.2, contrasting with physical disability (r=0.248) and elderly (r=0.413) (SeeTable 14 in attachments for details).H4: Youth that have more similar views to their parents have more general prejudices levels.46The hypothesis was indicated that people who have similar views to both of their parents have higherGeneral Prejudice levels. The reported correlation coefficient (r) between similarity of views to bothparents and general prejudices levels is -0.173 (See Table 11 in attachments). This negative correlationcoefficient suggests an inverse relationship between the two variables. In simpler terms, as the degree ofsimilarity of views to both parents increases, general prejudices levels tend to decrease (the level ofprejudices decreases). The correlation coefficient of -0.173 indicates a relatively weak negativecorrelation between the variables. Although the correlation is not very strong, it is still statisticallysignificant. Additionally, the p-value associated with the correlation coefficient is reported at 0.001 whichis less than 0.05, indicating statistical significance. There is indeed a correlation between similarity ofviews to both parents and general prejudices levels.5.2. COMBATING DISCRIMINATION AND PREJUDICE IN POLANDPrejudice in Poland is a multifaceted issue influenced by various factors such as social media discourse,cultural values, historical context, and intergroup dynamics (See Figure 3). These interconnectedphenomena contribute to negative attitudes towards marginalized groups. To effectively addressprejudices, employing anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatory practices when working with young peopleis essential. Understanding youth attitudes and perceptions regarding the presence of such programs inPolish schools is crucial.According to social work's Oppressive Theory, oppression arises from societal power imbalances.Examining anti-prejudice initiatives in Polish schools necessitates considering power dynamics amongstudents, teachers, and authorities. The student-teacher relationship significantly impacts youthdevelopment, as research demonstrates how professionals' biases affect interactions, creating oppressiveenvironments for minority youth (Pittman, 2010; Tran & Guzey, 2023; Muller & Boutte, 2023; Kelly,2022; Thomas, 2020). Thus, anti-oppressive programs benefit all, teachers, marginalized and normativeyouth groups. Understanding their availability and youth attitudes creates effective response strategies.However, despite efforts by the European Union and the Polish government, only 4% of youth (see Table1) express satisfaction with government actions to address prejudices and discrimination in Poland(European Union Strategy for Fundamental Rights, 2020). Many youth lack awareness or willingness toengage with available initiatives.475.2.1. Anti-discrimination initiatives and programsLastly, the results present the attitudes of youth towards prejudices reduction and programs offered by theformal and non-formal educational institutions to tackle prejudices, increase empathy, and work withdiversity in Poland and in the schools.The question was asked to understand the attitudes of youth and levels of their awareness about theactions taken by the government in reducing prejudices and discrimination in the country. Findings fromthe question indicate a notable difference between the perception of the availability of these programs andtheir actual presence in Poland. Firstly, the low (10,62%) percentage of youth that thinks that enough hasbeen done in Poland to combat prejudices and discrimination matches the studies conducted by theEuropean Union (2020). This raises concerns regarding the effectiveness and extent to whichanti-prejudice programmes are present in Poland and to what extent youth notices its effectiveness in thesociety. It means that either these programmes are insufficiently addressing the problem, and the actionsare not satisfactory with the results or the information about their existence is not reaching a largeproportion of the student population. The large number (48%) of students who responded that suchprogrammes do not exist in Poland confirms and demonstrates a gap in the implementation ofanti-prejudicess measures. This finding raises the need for better strategies in promoting such programsand increasing youth’s awareness. The data raises concerns about the transparency of the programs on thenational level. Despite the information that the anti-prejudice and anti-discriminatory programs areoffered through NAP for Equal Treatment 2022-2030, and European Commission’s investments in thenon-governmental organizations, the awareness amongst youth in Poland is very low.48Figure 4.. Pie Chart: Perspective of Youth about the government’s actions to tackle prejudices.In the second questions, students were asked about anti-oppressive initiatives included in the schoolcurriculum to understand their awareness of such initiatives and compare it with the perspectives ofprofessionals working in the schools. A large percent (58%) expressed that there are no such initiatives inthe curriculum indicating a possible gap in the educational system's efforts to introduce anti-prejudicematerial into formal learning environments. It raises questions about how much emphasis schools placeon teaching about diversity and prejudices reduction, as well as if there are systemic obstacles inincluding topics like these into curricula. The relatively low number (11,3%) of students confirmed thepresence of anti-prejudice programmes in their school curriculum. It suggests that, if such programmesexist, they may not reach a major section of the student body. In fact, this raises questions about theaccessibility and inclusivity of such programmes, as well as their ability to engage students from variedbackgrounds. The passivity of students, lack of motivation and engagement - themes that emerged in thequalitative analysis of data with professionals - are in line with the findings. It is possible that theseprogrammes take place after school, causing youth to view them as an extra time commitment that theymay not prioritize. Furthermore, the restricted curriculum and extensive programme requirements maycause teachers to prioritize other subjects above the implementation of anti-oppressive efforts, limitingstudents exposure to such content during formal learning hours.49Figure 5. Pie Chart: Perception of Youth about the school curriculum and education about diversity.5.3. PERSPECTIVE OF PROFESSIONALS WORKINGWITH YOUTHSocial work emerges as a critical player in this arena offering a framework of anti-oppressive methods totackle prejudices and discrimination. Social work is resolving prejudices by conducting interventions thataim to reduce biased attitudes and promote inclusion. Research has demonstrated the effectiveness oftechniques such as interacting with various groups, and implementing anti-bias training programmes(Palluck & Greene, 2009; Amodio & Cikara, 2020). These programmes aim not only to reduce prejudicesimmediately, but also to build long-term attitudes towards marginalized populations. Additionally, thesocial work oppression theory lays the foundation and the core of the issue of oppression. The broad AOPframework can be applied in educational settings in Poland as a method for addressing prejudices andtackling discrimination in the schools. Critical Consciousness (CC) offered as an element of Pedagogy ofthe Oppressed (Freire, 1970) - that finds its use in social work - can be applied as an effective tool to raisecritical awareness amongst youth about the presence of oppression in the society and address its roots -prejudices - to tackle them. Social work’s role is not addressed enough in the Polish educational system,therefore there is a call for reinforcement of the school’s pedagogue role in applying the AOP frameworkwhen working with youth in Poland. Social work then serves as a platform for the users working withyouth offering to utilize the AOP to foster environments that inhibit bias and encourage acceptance andunderstanding.School-environment. The participants’ workplaces appear to be characterized mostly by tolerance withcertain challenges faced by professionals working in the formal education environment. Bothinterviewees from formal and non-formal educational settings such as teachers, psychologists and youth50workers are working with teenagers and other young people of mostly Polish background with a fewexamples of diversity amongst youth such as individuals with various identities and origins.“To be honest, our work atmosphere is [...] assessed as good. [..] Well, there are people who aredissatisfied. [...] Teachers, this is a specific environment. But in general, the atmosphere at mywork is rated very good.”(FI2)The participants from the non- formal educational setting have mostly a left-leaning political affiliation,and there's a significant emphasis on being secular and apolitical as two basic values of the places. Theorganizations place a high priority on adaptation and inclusion, working to modernize customs such aschanging the words of the scouts’ oath to make it more inclusive and consistent with their beliefs. Ingeneral, the atmosphere in a non-formal educational setting seems to be encouraging, forward-thinking,and centered on the growth and well-being of the youth they work with.“We're apolitical and religious, we love everyone [...] We can't afford to support a church. Itseems to me that this sphere of mental health in the center of children's help and influence onchildren makes us apolitical. Most of us are left-wing, almost all of us are left-wing liberals in thisfoundation. But we're not talking about this.” (NFI2)Contrary to the non-formal education, the formal educational working environment in the public schoolsrepresent different realities. The respondents' workplaces are composed of a mix of formal guidelines anda few initiatives to promote diversity. Restrictions about attendance and behaviour are enforced, andthere's a feeling that these requirements occasionally cross the line between home and school life.“For example, it would be appropriate not to eat, not to get up, not to go out at any time, and toask for permission. I'm not talking about any kind of incapacitation. But it's getting out of control.What I do at home, I do at school. I don't see the difference between home and school.” (FI2)“Well, in school they explain that you have to be tolerant, that it's not our thing to judge someone[...]”Religious influences can be found in schools with religious profiles, though accommodations are madefor pupils of other religions or non-religious backgrounds.“I work in a Catholic high school, so when it comes to, for example, faith, everything is based onCatholic faith. It is not imposed in this school. The only thing is that there are certain things thatare mandatory, even if you are a non-believer, you can sign up for our high school. The only thing51is that you have to participate in retreats, there is also a school mass once a week, for which thereare, for example, shifts, and then a particular class must come to this mass.” (FI2)Some initiatives are taken to assist people with impairments. Nevertheless, students are expected to keeptheir emotions under control, and although social dynamics can be difficult at times, the environment isgenerally kind. In general, the educational environment in both educational settings shapes a diverse andoccasionally difficult workplace dynamic by trying to balance inclusivity, and cultural nuances from whatis observed in the responses.Needs and challenges. The exploration of the subtheme "Needs and challenges of youth" revealsinsights through formal and non-formal education settings.In a formal education, there's a spotlight on the shifting world dynamics impacting youth, expressingconcerns over declining mental resilience and the necessity for psychological support."Everyone says it's getting like that after the pandemic. But I think it's not just the fault of thepandemic and the isolation that everyone is blaming everything on. Just a changing world." (FI4)"And yes, it's a generation that is very weak mentally. In fact, a large part of our youth needspsychological help." (FI2)Similarly, in non-formal education, there's a parallel concern about weakened mental strength andincreased sensitivity, with one participant stating,“This is also a very more and more common topic, mental health and the fact that more and moreyoung people, as you said earlier, experience such moods, not only moods, but just mental healthproblems”. (NFI1)Regarding digital citizenship and safety, both groups acknowledge the overstimulation from social mediaand lack of critical thinking skills among youth, leading to vulnerability to misinformation and negativeinfluences online.“Yes, the more that now, I say, new techniques, I don't know, VR, for example, I know that nowsome school has boasted, even in the messages it was that they introduce it to the lesson, but dearGod, is it good for little children who already have so many of these gods and still introducingthem just in such fantasy in the lessons?” (FI3)“Young people also spend a lot of time on social media, where there are these informationbubbles and it is very difficult”. (NFI3)52In formal education, there's a recognition of the youth's ability to search but not sift through informationeffectively. The focus is on the detrimental impact of social media on mental health and theoverwhelming amount of information available, which young people struggle to process. In terms ofeducation and development, formal education highlights challenges in traditional learning methods, suchas concentration issues, boredom, motivation, and procrastination.“Let me put it this way, [...] what appears first is considered the ultimate truth [...]” (FI3)“That we sit and do in the book, we sit and talk or we solve tasks in turn, that it's just boring forthem and they can't focus.” (FI3)“(Young people) are limited to computers, phones, games.” (FI1)However, formal education advocates for diversified teaching methods to prevent monotony andstimulate learning, emphasizing practical engagement and experiential learning.“We have a few multimedia tablets in classes, I don't know, for example in tourist servicesclasses, they very often play ping-pong, walk around, ask questions, they have additionalattractions that on the one hand, broaden their horizons, and [...] they prevent such monotony, Iwould say.” (FI3)In conclusion, while both groups acknowledge the evolving challenges faced by youth, formal educationleans towards mental health issues and the changing world's impact compared to the school environmentof teachers, while non-formal education emphasizes innovative teaching methods and challenges indigital literacy, focusing on activities that could empower youth. Moreover, formal educators emphasizeconcerns about digital citizenship and safety, noting issues such as technology addiction, media illiteracy,and a lack of critical thinking regarding online information. Additionally, they highlight the persistence oftraditional gender roles and polarization in society. In contrast, non-formal educators underscore theimportance of mental health and well-being, addressing topics like emotional expression, self-esteem, andsocietal norms. They also discuss challenges related to social inclusion and discrimination, recognizingthe need to promote equality and combat stereotypes.Strengths and Capabilities.While examining the strengths and capabilities of today's youth in both formaland non-formal education settings, it is observable that within both settings, interviewees emphasize theenergetic and passionate disposition of young people. They speak about diverse interests of youth and awillingness to engage deeply in the chosen passion, whether it be discussing cars or delving into varioushobbies that are not as common and casual. Additionally, their openness and readiness to communicateare highlighted, indicating a generation unafraid to express themselves and engage in dialogue.53Additionally, insights from non-formal education interviews point to the receptiveness of youth towardsknowledge acquisition and their adaptability in forming opinions based on new information underscoringthe youth's openness and tolerance, evident in their environmentally conscious practices and acceptanceof diverse gender identities.“Because they also give a lot, a lot, a lot of such energy here. You have to keep up with somethings to understand them.” (FI4)“They have passions. They actually have things they are passionate about. And they are muchstronger in these passions than, for example, my generation when I was in this age.” (FI2)“So it's like young people are great and it's like it's very easy to influence, educate, change theseviews.” (NFI3)“I'm impressed. They know a hundred times more than I do.” (NFI2)“They have passions. It is definitely often a choice based on one's interests, [...]” (FI4)Overall, both formal and non-formal education environments illustrate the strengths and capabilities oftoday's youth, showcasing their energy, passion, openness, and readiness to absorb knowledge andembrace progressive attitudes.Engagement and Communication.The analysis of engagement and communication among youth withinboth formal and non-formal education points to motivation and participation of Youth in the samplegroup, which is a crucial aspect when discussing the perception of professionals towards the attitudes ofyouth. Formal education interviews, such as those conducted with FI4, highlight prevalent issues of lackof motivation towards education, often stemming from a desire to avoid overexertion or academicchallenges.“[...] can't cope for various reasons, either intellectually, or they just don't want to do it and arecomfortable with it, or, for example, they start working , they go somewhere and the parents thinkthat they can [...] arrange individual teaching and then when they have individual teaching, it isknown that [...] he will not have to make much effort.” (FI4)The prevailing attitude suggests a tendency among youth to seek the path of least resistance, reflected intheir reluctance to engage deeply with educational tasks or to participate in extracurricular activities. Thissentiment is further expressed in observations regarding poor vocabulary and a general lack of interest inexpanding knowledge or participating actively in school-related endeavors.54“Well, I know it's ambitious, but I don't think it's about ambitious. No, no, the path of leastresistance, to make it easier.” (FI4)“Vocabulary, development, such, as I say, the questions are still closed, but if the questions areopen, it's best to at least put a word in, possibly a sentence, because if there was, for example, adescription, a process, then 90% of students don't even try to do it.” (FI3)Conversely, insights from non-formal education underscore similar patterns of disengagement,manifesting as a deficit of interest and a sense of being overwhelmed by academic and extracurricularcommitments.“There are people who are very involved and there are people who are not interested at all.”(NFI2)“I have the impression that this is the reason why they don't want to travel, because they just don'tfeel like they have time for it, or they have a lot of duties, they just very ambitiously enter certainthings and that's why they feel overwhelmed.” (NFI1)Despite some efforts of educators, mostly in non-formal educational settings to spark interest throughvarious means, such as introducing non-formal education techniques that are mostly based on experientiallearning and participatory activities, a significant portion of youth presents reluctance and apathy towardsinvolvement. The factors that contribute to such attitudes are overstimulation, having too many options,and a lack of interest in the methods. Both formal and non-formal education environments thus strugglewith the challenge of motivating and engaging youth, highlighting the need for innovative approaches tofoster meaningful communication and participation in educational activities.Contact with parents. One of the most appearing topics across the interviewers was: parents. In analyzingthe theme of contact with parents within the context of prejudices amongst youth, in both formal andnon-formal education settings there is information of how the relationship between youth and parentsaffects them and what influence it has on their prejudices as well as the importance of upbringing.In formal education interviews, one prevalent aspect is the lack of time between parents and youth,leading to a deficiency in communication about school-related matters and the life that students have inand outside of school. For instance,“So you can't be left behind with some facts and things that they like to talk about, or want to talkabout, or need to talk about, for example, because they have no one to talk to at home becausetheir parents don't have time.” (FI4)55“Because sometimes parents, they leave the house and parents spend very little time at home, theytalk little with this youth.” (FI1)Moreover, there's a recurring theme of over-caring parents who believe they know what's best for theirchildren, often disregarding teachers' perspectives. This suggests a disconnect between parents andeducational institutions, hindering effective collaboration and support for students.“These [extra lessons] are for the student, and for the parents. Sometimes a parent can appear,but very rarely.” (FI3)“The generation of parents is also quite different, so their parents are also a bit more caring,sometimes over-caring, a bit too much sometimes.” (FI2)“Parents believe students, not teachers, and little to the teachers. And, for example, it's hard [...]Because parents think that it's not a problem for the child, but sometimes, however, well, youknow, it is.” (FI2)“And the most sad thing is that in such situations it is difficult [...] to talk, if there is nocooperation with the parent and there is no two-sided support. Because we often say somethingdifferent, take actions that are not taken further, because the parent states that it is not needed bythe child, him or other peers. This is also a problem here.” (FI4)Conversely, non-formal education interviews shed light on parents' lack of resources and knowledge insupporting their children's education. While acknowledging parents' inherent care for their children, thereis an emphasis on their unfamiliarity with modern challenges faced by youth.“Parents also lack the ability to support young people, perhaps also the knowledge of how tosupport young people and in general what the world of young people looks like now. Becausethings are really changing very quickly, and parents sometimes just don't understand what'shappening to their children and what environments their children are in.” (NFI3)This lack of understanding of youth’s daily life, might lead to (un)intentional prejudices in youth, asparents may subconsciously pass on outdated beliefs or stereotypes to their children. Additionally, theinfluence of parental views on various aspects of life, including education and social interactions, ishighlighted. This suggests that prejudices amongst youth often comes from their home environment,where parental attitudes and beliefs play a significant role.56“I think that this is simply a matter of parents, parents are often very responsible for the children'sapproach to school and whether they will go to these studies and so on. This is one issue.” (NFI1).“I think that they are simply observing what is happening in Poland, they are also observing theirparents, how they are also talking at home all the time.” (NFI3)“And they repeat what they say at home.” (FI1)Both formal and non-formal education settings underline the importance of parental involvement andunderstanding in shaping youths' perspectives and behaviors. While formal education settings stress theneed for improved communication and collaboration between parents and schools, non-formal educationsettings emphasize the necessity of equipping parents with the knowledge and resources to support theirchildren effectively. Ultimately, bridging the gap between parents and educational institutions isrecommended in addressing prejudices amongst youth and fostering a more inclusive environment.Generational Bias.Interestingly, one of the common topics running through the interviews was related tothe generational bias based on negative attitudes towards distinguishably different age groups, bothelderly and children.In formal education settings, there's a prevalent concern about the lack of discipline and respect forauthority among students with the references to the past and emphasis on the rapid changes that happenedthroughout the years. For instance,“I think that young people have lost, so to speak, such a barrier between older people, betweenpeople who teach, and colleagues.” (FI3)“But in fact, they allow themselves more, when it comes to, for example, the younger generation tothe teacher, the older generation, simplifying the generation so much. But they are much morebrave when it comes to, for example, saying that they don't like something. They can alsocomplain more to the teacher, for example, if something is wrong.” (FI2)“I was just surprised by the behavior of the students towards the teachers and the lack of respecttowards you. First of all, you know, teachers are really for nothing. If you don't make good contactwith the student and with the students in general, they have you for nothing.” (FI1)57Moreover, technology use emerges as a significant point of contention, with concerns about excessivephone use and its impact on face-to-face interaction and teamwork skills. The pervasive presence ofphones during school breaks is highlighted as a barrier to social interaction and team-building activities,highlighting the difficulties in socializing. Additionally, there's a perception that younger generationsspend more time on their phones compared to previous generations, further worsening the issue.“They don’t talk much to each other [...]The best thing is for them to come, you know, open thecell and scroll.” (FI1)“Everything is about doing it in a group, because individually it can be a little different, but whenit comes to doing it in a group [...]this is a problem. This is a problem. How to work in a group.”(FI2)“[...] everyone actually has a phone with them all the time and looks at this phone, for example,during breaks, they don't get to know each other that well.” (FI3)“This applies to such relationships not only on the Internet, but also in the classroom: the stupiderI am, the more popular I am.” (FI4)Non-formal education interviews also shed light on generational biases, with observations of a negativeimage of children in public spaces. There is a narrative in Poland that older generations perceive youngerindividuals as lacking respect and discipline, contributing to tensions between different age groups(Siemienska, 2021). In the interviews, there's a perception that older adults are more traditional andresistant to change, creating a divide in values and attitudes towards societal issues such as environmentalconservation and mental well-being when holding onto the conservative beliefs. Additionally, the lack ofsupport from the older generation towards the younger generation and their ideas, might be interpretednegatively by youth, confirming the perception that older people are more traditional and conservative,maintaining or even creating a bigger gap between the two groups.“[...] but also big prejudices against children, younger people. It's like the prejudices towardschildren, young people, calling “kaszojady” (baby food eaters) that appears.” (NFI3)“There's less and less respect for older people. I was at school once and I was waiting for a classand there was one teacher and she said that being a teacher is like a “purgatory”. That it's really58hard. And when I talk to them, they say that it's hard, that kids... There's no respect for olderpeople.” (NFI2)“[...] these "konary" are already completely unstuck, because "konary" are such an olderinstructor circle, they are already typically 70 years old, for example, so it's such a hugegenerational gap, and that they are unstuck because they remember other times and now they aresmart and they don't know how it actually looks like now to act with children, and it comes outfrom the bottom.” (NFI1)“[...]that there is less understanding of the topic of some mental comfort, that we should ensure,there is less understanding of the pressure of this frame, as if they really don't have to go intowinter to some peak in the Tatras to prove that they are valuable hikers, and people of this age,they have such a look that no, only through such a difficult thing, they can prove it.” (NFI1)In conclusion, both formal and non-formal education settings reveal generational biases and prejudicesamongst youth, highlighting the need for greater understanding and communication between different agegroups to address these challenges effectively.5.4 MANAGING PREJUDICE IN THE SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTHigh school serves as the primary environment where young people spend a significant amount of timeand encounter diverse disparities. It is within this context that youth are most prone to demonstratingbehaviors influenced by these differences. The detrimental effects of prejudices on mental health includedepression and low self-esteem (Wilson, 2016; Major & Vick, 2005), and when experienced in a schoolsetting, they can lead to outcomes like poor academic performance, social isolation, and other mentalhealth challenges. Therefore, it's crucial to analyze the school environment and gain insight intoprofessionals' perspectives on addressing these issues.Identifying the diversity. Firstly, during the interviews the participants were asked about the diversity intheir working environment to understand the demographics of the groups. Interviews within both formaland non-formal educational settings reveal distinctive perspectives on various aspects of diversity,including nationality, ethnicity, disabilities, gender/sex orientation, and physical appearance. There was aparticular focus put on the language used by the professionals in order to identify the possible implicit orexplicit prejudices. In the formal education setting, there's a notable emphasis on nationality and ethnicity,with mentions of increasing diversity, such as Ukrainian students, and efforts to accommodate individuals59from different backgrounds. For instance, the interviewers notice the diversity highlighting the slowlygrowing presence of diverse nationalities within the formal institution."We even have Ukrainian citizens at the moment, one Italian, and I don't remember exactly, so asnot to lie, something, probably Bulgarian origins [...]" (FI3)“We even have Ukrainian citizens at the moment, maybe in the entire school, and we have about800 students. Well, it could be around, I don't know, 15 people maximum.” (FI4)“But when it comes to people of other cultures or origins, yes, we had people from Ukraine, wealso had people of a completely different nationality, but combined with Polish, I mean, speakingPolish, after all.” (FI2)Additionally, there's acknowledgment of mental disabilities, particularly learning disabilities andconditions like autism spectrum disorder with a commitment to inclusivity and support mechanisms.However, at the same time there is a denied presence of individuals with physical disabilities due to thetechnical profiles of the school.“[...]disabilities, due to the fact that the school is technical and teaches a profession, and heremedical examinations are needed, which our students undergo.” (FI4)“However, when it comes to such, I don't know if it can be called a disability and you also includesuch people, there are a lot of people on the autism spectrum.” (FI4)“We don't have any disabilities because it is a technical school, and gastronomic, so here it wouldexclude a little, some disabilities. We have children with disabilities, of course, but it's more interms of learning and dysfunctions to learn.” (FI3)“But when it comes to different nationalities or disabilities, I will also add that in fact, in highschool, people with disabilities are admitted. These disabilities are usually, for example, hearingimpairment or visual impairment.” (FI2)Conversely, in the non-formal education context, diversity discussions extend beyond nationality toencompass gender/sex orientation and religious diversity. The interviews emphasize a shift in societalattitudes towards recognition and acknowledgment of diverse sexual orientation, with instances oftransgender and non-binary individuals being recognized and respected. There's also an acknowledgmentof potential challenges, such as managing name changes and parental reactions, indicating a nuancedunderstanding of the intersectionality of identities. Furthermore, there's a notable acceptance of diverse60physical appearances, with examples like a male caretaker painting their nails being seen as a non-issue,reflecting a more inclusive and tolerant environment.“Yes, there have been times when we've had people in the group with orientations other thanheterosexual, as well as transgender and non-binary people.” (NFI3)“[...]more and more non-binary people.” (NFI2)“We definitely have them in school. But I don't know which specific people it was. I don't want toguess. I don't want to use stereotypes.” (NFI2)“Culturally it is also quite a homogeneous group, I mean, there are rather Poles here, for a whilewe had some kind of outburst in the teams, a few people of Ukrainian origin, but rather culturallyhomogenous” (NFI1)The formal educational setting does not mention the diversity in terms of different sexual orientation orgender usually by denying their presence, or if there is a mention, the language used is not inclusive.“Yes, unfortunately at our school there are couples, so to speak, one-way. And they are not wellreceived.” (FI3)In the formal settings, language used by interviewees reflects little awareness of diversity and noexamples of commitment to promoting inclusivity, while non-formal educational settings providesexamples of more inclusive language and greater awareness of diversities. While formal educationinterviews focus on representation of institutional efforts to accommodate diversity, non-formal educationinterviews delve into the lived experiences of individuals, highlighting personal narratives and societalattitudes with more understanding. Overall, these insights present the evolving and changing landscape ofdiversity and diversity management in educational contexts, emphasizing the importance of proactivemeasures to promote inclusivity and combat discrimination in 2024.Prevalence of prejudices. From analyzing the prevalence of prejudices in the context of professionalsworking with youth three main sub themes were created: neutral perception, recognized prejudices anddenial of prejudices. It analyzed how prejudices are perceived, managed, and acknowledged.Interestingly, throughout the interviews a similar pattern of speaking of prejudices would occur.1. Denial of prejudices (‘have not seen’, ‘there is none’)2. Continued discussion about the challenges of Youth3. Subtle prejudices and discrimination identified.614. Realization that discrimination is there.The pattern might lead the researcher to the question of what are the reasons for neglecting prejudices inthe first place. The potential reasons were not analyzed in the interviews, however it could be due to theofficial representation of the working environment during the interview, it could be due to lack ofknowledge about what prejudices and discrimination is, it could be a denial and not paying attention tosuch situations at work, or a true belief that the prejudices does not exist.In formal education settings, interviewees more often exhibit a tendency towards denial of prejudices orneutral perception, emphasizing the absence of overt discrimination based on gender, gender roles,nationality, or sexual orientation. The language used by interviewees in formal education settings tends todownplay the existence of prejudices, often framing it as isolated incidents or attributing it to individualpersonalities rather than systemic issues. Phrases such as "no big problems" or "haven't seen it" arerecurrent, suggesting a reluctance to confront underlying biases. The denial of prejudices within theformal setting can be divided into the emerging patterns:1. Recognition of Prejudice but Downplaying Severity: Professionals in formal education settingsoften do not acknowledge the existence of prejudiced behaviors, and when they do, they tend todownplay their severity. For example, one respondent mentions "unconscious comments" butportrays them as "thoughtless" and not malicious. They are expressed as the normalized behavior:"thoughtless statements," "normal, youthful testosterone" (FI4). Some professionals claim theyhave not witnessed prejudices and reject admitting it in a further conversation: "No, I haven't seenit", “No. There's no way there was anything like that here,” No, I haven't seed. In my classes, Ihaven't seen, I haven't heard anyone say that in general.”, “Probably not. Probably not. Youknow, such laughter between students has always occurred, but it's not in the background ofdiscrimination. It's more like someone will always find some of their scapegoat, so tospeak.”(FI1).2. Omnipresence of Prejudice: There's a tendency to normalize prejudices as part of youth behavior.They describe fights and other serious situations as common occurrences not specific to theirschool but happening everywhere: “Of course, it's not all sweet here, because there are fights andmore serious situations, but they don't happen in any environment. It happens in the family, invarious places, and in every job.”(FI4)3. Limited Awareness or Acknowledgment: Many professionals in formal education settings claimthey haven't witnessed instances of prejudices. They attribute this to a lack of exposure or62attention rather than a genuine absence of prejudiced behaviors: “[...] because we also don't noticeany big problems with discrimination There were at least no reports of someone saying that suchincidents take place (on the basis) of some discrimination. So it wasn't there” (FI2).Conversely, in non-formal education settings, there is a more pronounced recognition of prejudices,particularly towards marginalized groups such as individuals from Ukraine or those withnon-heteronormative sexual orientations. Instances of rude comments, ridicule, and exclusionary behaviorare acknowledged, indicating a need for greater awareness and intervention. Interviewees in non-formaleducation settings adopt a more candid approach, acknowledging the existence of prejudices and itsdetrimental impact on marginalized groups. Terms like "rude comments" and "not friendly behavior"highlight the tangible manifestations of discrimination observed in these settings.The denial of prejudices is not as common in the interviews with professionals from non-formaleducational institutions, however the division below presents the emerging patterns:1. Recognition of Prejudice with Some Accountability: Similar to the formal education setting,professionals in non-formal education acknowledge instances of prejudiced behaviors, such aslaughing at someone's appearance or nationality. However, there's a slightly higher level ofaccountability as they mention addressing such behaviors among volunteers.“I'm not recalling any specific examples now. Rather, it was just a case, [...] because she'sfrom Ukraine, or I'm going to throw a snowball at her because she's from Ukraine. I'm notgoing to sit with her because she is from Ukraine.” (NFI3)2. Questioning the Prejudice: Unlike the formal education setting, professionals in non-formaleducation settings are more likely to question the existence of the prejudices and seekexplanations for their existence rather than deny them completely.“Well, I think that for sure to what extent it is true, to what extent it is a factual belief, it isalso something to consider.” (NFI3)3. Denial Coupled with Overconfidence: While both settings feature denial of prejudices,professionals in non-formal education settings often express overconfidence in their lack ofprejudices. Statements like "there's no prejudices. We're too good" suggest a dismissive attitudetowards the possibility of prejudiced behaviors among their groups.63Moreover, despite efforts to promote mutual respect, interviewees in non-formal education settingsrecognize that prejudices often stem from home environments and societal attitudes. There is anadditional acknowledgment of the influence of peer dynamics, with some interviewees noting thetendency for individuals to make offensive remarks in pursuit of acceptance within their social circles,highlighting the peer influence.“Often outside of school, among their peers. They can behave the same way as they would intheir family home, that is, if an adult is watching, if someone is judging, ‘I will be good, I willguide this old woman through the road’. But if in half an hour he will be among his peers, wherethere will be more people who will not have respect for an older person, they may even takeadvantage of the fact that he is a weaker person and want to make a stupid video with this personin the role of some victim, I don't know if they would dare to stand up for such a person.” (FI4)In general, the analysis shows contrasting perspectives on the prevalence of prejudices between formaland non-formal education settings (see Figure 6). It emphasizes the importance of addressing the topic ofprejudices and discrimination, as well as promoting education and inclusivity in all educational contexts,for both teachers and students. Additionally, while formal education settings may benefit from increasedawareness and proactive measures to address subtle forms of discrimination, non-formal educationsettings can serve as platforms for fostering dialogue and challenging societal norms that perpetuateprejudices and exclusion.Nature of Prejudice.While analyzing the nature of prejudice, the following categories emerged: explicitprejudices and implicit prejudices. In formal education contexts, prejudices often emerge throughthoughtless comments, inadvertently perpetuating harmful stereotypes despite lacking malicious intent,which can be categorized as a modern type of prejudices, often implicit, subtle or even hidden (See Figure1).“These are more thoughtless comments. And when they think about it later, they absolutely didn'tmean some very negative attitude. However, if there are such cases of discrimination, these arerather thoughtless statements.” (FI4)Conversely, in non-formal education settings, prejudices are depicted as deeply rooted in subconsciousbiases shaped by systemic factors and societal norms. While conscious prejudice exists, it is alsounderstated, manifesting in biases related to diverse worldviews or beliefs. Concerns about64discrimination, particularly regarding sexual orientation and mental health, underscore the challenges offostering acceptance within these environments.“In those groups where transgender people were present and, for example, introduced themselvesby a different name, then I didn't observe any such open negative attitudes. For example, therewas a situation where someone, for example, like, has a different worldview, yes, and somewhereout there treats anti-modern people, or some kind of homosexual or bisexual person, as notentirely natural, but this person did not present attitudes openly, but simply walked away/wasdistanced.” (NFI3)“[...]well, the topic of homosexuality, because I mainly work with the staff of the teams, they arealso people of this age, from 16 to 25 years of age, and maybe it is not somehow emphasized in away that we do not call someone for a function because he is of a different orientation.” (NFI1)The complexities in the nature of prejudice are observable. By acknowledging the differences, andunderstanding the differences between both implicit and explicit types of prejudices, educators can bettertailor interventions to combat prejudice and promote diversity and inclusion in educational and socialwork settings.Manifestation of prejudicess.In examining the manifestation of prejudice as perceived by professionalsworking with youth, notable differences emerge between formal and non-formal education settings.Within formal education contexts, professionals acknowledge instances of hate speech andmicroaggressions, often coming from thoughtless comments or subconscious biases. For example,derogatory and offensive terms like "fa**ot" are used, according to FI4, without malicious intent,reflecting a lack of awareness of their harmful implications.“[...] vulgarity or some expression like that, these fag*ots” [...] (FI4)“For sure, in our school there was a problem with hate when it came to the school'sself-government, because the self-government met with the fact that they wrote various messageson Instagram. (FI2)”65(about Ukrainian students) “Yes. ‘We have already helped you so much, and no one helps us somuch. I have to do this and that, and you will have it easier, you are going to have it easier’. Andthere are such various remarks.” (FI1)There are references to “changing times” and the general idea that nowadays the world is politicallycorrect and we “delve too much into details” when speaking about inclusive vocabulary.“[…]once there was no problem to learn a poem about Murzynek (Nig**r) Bambo, and nowchildren don't learn it, because we shouldn't say it like that, Murzynek(Nig**r), but Ciemnoskóry(Dark-skinned) for example.” (FI1)Additionally, exclusionary behaviors, such as physical appearance-based discrimination or hate messageson social media platforms like Instagram, contribute to the existence of prejudices within schoolenvironments. These manifestations of prejudices are often typical and reflect societal norms andsystemic influences which are structural and often directed into minority groups, such as women orLGBTQ+ community.“But as in the background of the school, one person or two girls found a group of peers in adifferent class, so they sit somewhere separately in class, but during breaks I see that they just talkwith other people.” (FI3)In contrast, professionals in non-formal education settings also recognize hate speech and exclusionarybehaviors but additionally highlight specific targets such as individuals of Ukrainian nationality orLGBTQ+ community.“[...] for example, there are various indiscriminate rarities towards witch people, whethertowards homosexual people or people from Ukraine. Towards people from Ukraine, also thosestereotypes that appear in the stories of people from Ukraine who are in groups. And these peoplesay that, for example, they are discriminated against at school, they have been teased becausethey are completely different. Despite the fact that these people have lived here for many years,after the war these prejudices became stronger.” (NFI3)“Well, there are such thoughts and statements, but I don't think it's ever happened that someonewas not called for this reason, or was recalled from this function when he came out.” (NFI1)66Despite the presence of discriminatory thoughts and statements, there is a perception that exclusion basedon these factors is rare, particularly concerning gender identity and sexual orientation. Overall, while bothformal and non-formal education settings struggle with prejudice, the specific responses to discriminationshould vary, underscoring the importance of tailored interventions and considering how youth behave inboth of these settings, to address the anti-oppressive methods effectively and with care.Mitigating Prejudice.When speaking of the importance of tailored interventions to promote inclusivity, itis important to understand the current situation at both working environments. Interviewers were askedabout the strategies as well as the suggestions that they believe would be most effective in tacklingprejudices.In both, Formal and Non-Formal Education settings there were four main activities recognized:1. Encouraging Open Conversations - Professionals emphasize the importance of promotingopen conversations with trusted individuals, whether peers, teachers, or neighbors, toprovide support and guidance to youth experiencing prejudices, however it does notpresent itself to be commonly practiced.“You know what, I do it on a regular basis if there is a need. Once a week we have a teacher'shour and once a week on a regular basis.” (FI1)“[...] such discussions come out, so to speak, even on their own, on these practical classes, wherewe are with each other, for example, for 5 hours,[...] and then there are really such differentaspects moved, not only what's at home, what's at school, but sometimes young people canexpress themselves more broadly.” (FI3)On the contrary, in non-formal education professionals facilitate open discussions in group settings,encouraging participants to express their opinions and challenge discriminatory beliefs. They createopportunities for self-reflection and empathy, helping participants understand the consequences of hurtfullanguage and stereotypes.“So if somebody, for example, said, I don't know that a particular race or nationality is inferior,we just talk about it. If something comes up in class, we just discuss it then.” (NFI3)2. Redirecting to Professionals - The professionals in formal educational settings redirectstudents to professionals when necessary, ensuring they have access to appropriateresources for addressing discrimination. Additionally, when faced with situations beyond67their expertise, professionals from a non-formal educational environment also redirectindividuals to professionals or other resources for appropriate support and guidance.“First of all, encourage them to seek help from trusted people, because no one is the alpha andomega. Sure. First of all, always encourage young people to seek help from trusted people,because if not from friends or peers, then from someone older, it doesn't have to be a close person,it can be a teacher, even a neighbor. But listen, you don't have to talk to me about this, but I knowyou have a problem, find someone to talk to.” (FI4)“If we have such a basis, then I direct my students to a pedagogical psychologist or anotherinstitution, even above school, if we can help such a person.” (FI1)“The best advice that I can give to someone is to meet a specialist for example (when) youth thatcome to me and I don't know how to react” (NFI1)3. Feeling Obliged to Intervene - Professionals acknowledge their responsibility to intervenein conversations or situations involving prejudice, emphasizing the importance of standingup for inclusivity and challenging discriminatory attitudes.“If I can solve this problem, we will solve it on a regular basis and as soon as possible.” (FI1)Professionals in non-formal education settings also feel obligated to challenge discriminatory remarks orbehaviors, acting as mentors or older siblings to youth experiencing discrimination. They strive to createinclusive environments where youth feel supported and empowered to address prejudice anddiscrimination.“[...] and I hear that somewhere in there is this type of conversation in the background, it is myresponsibility to interfere in this conversation and react.” (NFI3)“I feel obliged to be a person who says, hey, no, it's not like that, it doesn't change anything, if thisperson does his job well, then hello, it doesn't matter at all [...]” (NFI1)4. Changing the Subject - Some professionals utilize a technique of changing the subject todivert attention away from potentially harmful or discriminatory conversations.“Yes, of course, I always answer, I always calm them down, because otherwise it would be anadventure, for the whole school. Maybe here the girls are just incredible, they see everything ineveryone, but not in themselves.” (FI3)68“‘Come on, we'll do it together, I'll help you, tell me what you were doing there on the weekend.’And very often it is also the case that I try to make this joke a little, so as not to irritate them evenmore.” (FI3)“My technique is that I answer in one sentence, in some way, if there's something, but in a closingway, and I move on to something else.” (NFI2)Overall, while professionals in both formal and non-formal education settings employ various strategiesto mitigate prejudices, the approaches differ slightly based on the context and the specific needs of theyouth they serve. Nevertheless, there seems to be a critical need for the improvement of the strategies formitigating prejudicial attitudes. The importance of taking a step forward, and instead of tackling theprejudices, promoting the diverse environment with individuals having a sense of self-agency andacceptance towards others.Figure 6: Implicit/Explicit bias among S (students) and P(professionals) within formal and non-formaleducational settings based on the interviews. Author’s created.5.5. ANTI PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION PROGRAMSFor teachers.In the area of study of reducing prejudice and discrimination, teachers encounter variedavailability and options for programs aimed at addressing these issues. In formal educational settings,69there is evidence of some initiatives, such as training sessions provided cyclically, indicating arecognition of the importance of addressing prejudice and discrimination within the education system.“Yes Yes Yes. And quite cyclically. I think even twice a semester. The needs are different. Forexample, procedures related to dealing with minors are now at the TOP level.” (FI4)“Although some of the schools were also somewhere on this topic, some topics appeared on thepedagogical boards, so it just naturally, I think, entered the school system.” (FI2)“Yes, you can use the ‘Radomskie Ośrodki’ (Centers in Radom) for teachers, you can use differenttypes of training.” (FI1)In non-formal educational settings, however, there appears to be a more diverse choice of programsavailable to teachers, ranging from collaborative efforts with municipal organizations to obligatorytrainings mandated by scout associations“I will tell you that this is a project from the Polish Academy of Sciences, which wascommissioned to us.” (NFI2)“They are certainly created by the ZHP (scout association), everyone is different, it is simplycreated by the main headquarters of the Polish ZHP, and Free Being Me is a program created byan international scout organization, to which we belong as a WACS association, that is, it is anassociation of girls, both scouts and guides.” (NFI1)These programs cover a range of topics and approaches, from general prejudice reduction to safetypolicies, with some being obligatory for all teachers within certain organizations. Despite these variations,challenges persist, such as resistance to change among older educators and questions regarding therelevance and effectiveness of mandated trainings.“And this is a training that every adult member of the ZHP must currently go through, i.e. staff,people performing such instructional functions, and people who have completed the 18th year oflife.” (NFI1)“[...] it also shows what kind of overtaking and lack of openness to change at all, because we areas an organization now in such a mode that basically until today everyone has to finish thiscourse, [...]older people who have been working for a long time as educators in scouting, theyhave such a situation, and what do they need it for, what they hurt before, and now they won't hurtsomeone, after all, some kind of, I don't know, closure to the fact that it doesn't make sense.”(NFI1)70Overall, while both formal and non-formal educational settings offer directions for addressing prejudiceand discrimination, the non-formal sector appears to provide a more diverse and structured approach,albeit with its own set of challenges.For students.The availability of programs aimed at reducing prejudice and discrimination among studentsvaries between formal and non-formal educational settings. In formal education, there is evidence ofefforts to address these issues, such as the involvement of psychologists in providing support andguidance to students on various aspects, including current affairs and coping strategies. On top of this,there are instances of informal programs, such as talks and presentations focusing on diversity andcultural understanding, organized by teachers with the support of pedagogues.“Of course. Year by year we have more and more teachers and psychologists.” (FI4)“They are organized, they come, for example, policemen, who, you know, know each other on thisinformation and present young people in situations where they can be offended on the forum, orshare videos, that everything is to be recovered, to be aware that this is going to be discovered,that they are not harmless.” (FI1)There are activities and meetings organized by outside of school authorities such as police, implementingprograms on cybersecurity, which is found to be relevant in the school setting amongst Youth. However,there are also indications of limited awareness or implementation of specific programs, with somerespondents noting a lack of structured initiatives in their schools.“Well, I have children in schools, yes. And to be honest, I have not seen it in other schools, [...]This is probably an omitted topic.” (FI3)“Probably not. As of now, teachers do it individually in their educational classes, but I have noinformation about who did it and whether they did it. So it's as if we don't practice something likethat.” (FI2)In non-formal education, there is a more structured approach, with various programs and initiatives aimedat addressing prejudices and discrimination among students. These include programs like "EveryoneEqual" and "Free Being Me," which focus on acceptance, tolerance, and diversity. Additionally, there areefforts to integrate these topics into broader discussions on mental health and safety, on acceptance andtolerance, on the topic of abnormality and some workshops directly working on prejudice anddiscrimination with sessions conducted by psychologists and other professionals.71“When it comes to therapeutic and developmental groups, we have a series of meetings andspecific topics that we discuss, and every year there is this topic related to stereotypes andprejudices. So when it comes to young people, it's a long time on such ground.” (NFI3)“So we also deal with European topics, about the future, about managing yourself in time. Thereis also one strong topic that we do, but it's done by my second facility, and that's mental health.”(NFI2)“Yes, when it comes to such education on diversity, of course, ZHP has several such programsthat can help in working with the team, or with the staff on the subject of diversity, one is such aPolish program proposal, it's called Everyone Equal, something like that, there is also such aprogram Free Being Me, it's good to be yourself, and it also focuses on, on the one hand,acceptance and tolerance of yourself.” (NFI1)Overall, while both formal and non-formal settings offer avenues for addressing prejudices anddiscrimination among students, non-formal education appears to provide a more diverse and structuredapproach, with a wider range of programs and initiatives targeting these issues.The interest.The interest in programs aimed at reducing prejudices and discrimination among students andteachers varies significantly between formal and non-formal educational settings. In formal education,there are challenges with student engagement, with some students expressing a lack of interest due tofatigue and time constraints“they don't want to stay for any additional hours” (FI1).“It is difficult to talk to the youth about other topics at lessons, because we are limited by thebasics, and after lessons, the youth is just tired and there is no strength and probably no time forit.” (FI3)Additionally, there is a perception that topics related to prejudices and discrimination may not be aspopular among students compared to other subjects.“Taking this project into account, it is definitely other topics that are more popular. For example,building bonds with the school, or topics related to boundaries, emotions, communication,cooperation, probably more focused on…”(NFI3).Teachers also face obstacles, such as time constraints and competing priorities, which can contribute to alack of interest in implementing these programs as well as financial issues faced by the schools.72“No, they're not interested. It's the teachers' time. They often have to stay after classes. Theschool's finances are often at stake. They're not interested, too.” (NFI2)However, some of the teachers express interest indicating the beneficial aspects of the programs.“You know what, I try to use it. I try to use it because I have small children at home.” (FI1)“[...]and you know, this teacher also has her children at school age, some of them already, andthey just also deal with it, so they know, they are also interested.” (FI2)However, in non-formal education, there are instances of both student and teacher interest, with somestudents actively engaging with program content and expressing appreciation for external speakers.“When I went with my prelectures I was invited to high school. As I told you, it happened to me afew times that people were like, ‘wow, it's nice that you came.’ They came up to me. I sent them anemail or wrote an e-mail later.” (NFI2)However, there are still challenges, such as resistance from certain students or teachers who may questionthe relevance or effectiveness of these programs.“A person with a presentation comes and talks to them. What do they learn? Nothing.” (NFI2)“I refuse to do it, and what if I don't? You'll remove me from the scouts? you know, just a way tooppose and refuse to do it. I'm not sure where this ideas come from, but some people, have statedthat they won't participate.” (NFI1)Overall, while there are pockets of interest and engagement in both formal and non-formal settings, thereare also significant barriers that hinder the effective implementation of programs aimed at reducingprejudices and discrimination. Addressing these barriers requires a comprehensive approach thatconsiders the unique challenges and dynamics of each educational context.5.5.1. Implementation of the pedagogy of the oppressedOne of the objectives was to analyze the application and efficacy of critical pedagogy principles inaddressing prejudice among Polish youth in both, formal and non-formal educational settings. Theanalysis of the interviews presents that in the formal education setting, the implementation of the elementof Critical Consciousness from the pedagogy of the oppressed faces several challenges. One major issueis the passivity of students, who are less likely to initiate discussions or actively engage in identifyingsocietal issues. Teachers often find it challenging to encourage participation and assertiveness amongstudents, who may resist engaging in activities that involve drama or self-disclosure.73“Young people are less likely to initiate, rather teachers initiate when they have a specific problemwith young people.” (FI4)“When I tried to conduct such a lecture where we could talk openly about such topics, no onewanted to talk. I mean, they are a bit ignorant about this. [...] But most of them, unfortunately,they are such ‘a wall’ for teachers.” (FI2)Moreover, limited time within the curriculum restricts the opportunity for in-depth discussions on socialissues, as teachers are pressured to adhere strictly to program guidelines.“But, for example, as I tell you, one hour and 30 people is rather not. No, we just do everythingfrom the curriculum and we don't go [...], to such side topics.” (FI3)Teachers themselves may lack awareness of effective pedagogical methods, further hindering their abilityto address prejudices effectively.“[...] they are different, just like dramas here, we present, we step into the shoes of some person,the truth, who is wronged and what would you do then, you wouldn't do anything then, because atthe moment, inventing such things by force is often just inventing things by force and foolingaround.” (FI4)“No, unfortunately. Ok. I hope that maybe I will still be able to in my education, if I had aneducation, to convey such things. [...[ You know what, teachers don't know such methods. Theyjust don't even know that such things exist and that they could do something like that. So,unfortunately, there is already a lack of knowledge.” (FI2)However, some educators attempt to incorporate elements of the Pedagogy of the Oppressed, such aspsychological tests and role-playing exercises to learn about student’s main issues that they would like toaddress, and practice empathy. Albeit, with constraints due to time limitations and constraints within theirapplication, not allowing the students to work outside of the box. The example:“Sometimes I manage, but it's at the end of the year,[...] I make some tests for them, suchpsychological ones,[...] Or maybe some games, very often I make them, cards with some definingthe other person.[...] we stick the cards on the back and they choose what they think about thisperson[...] and then this person takes this card from their back and sees what others think abouther. [...] And these cards, as you mentioned, are all positive.” (FI3)Contrary, in non-formal education settings, there appears to be more flexibility and awareness inimplementing the CC from the pedagogy of the oppressed. Activities such as role-playing, experiential74learning, and discussions are employed to engage students in identifying and addressing societal issues.Examples of activities such as privilege walk, or a human library have a great potential to engage Youthand influence the decrease of prejudices. Moreover, one professional from the Non-Formal education hada professional training on the methodology of the Theater of the Oppressed, based on the Pedagogy of theOppressed (1970).“I had the training with the theatre of the oppressed method and I used some elements of it.”(NFI3)These activities allow for greater participation and open dialogue among students, facilitated by educatorswho actively encourage discussions and provide space for self-expression. The visible difference in theattitudes of students might be caused by the context. While formal education is a must and obligation,non-formal education’s principle is the voluntary participation, which have been found to improve studentlearning experiences, increase empathy for stakeholders, and integrate social and technical aspects of thelearning process (Dhadphale and Wicks, 2022). The participatory activities, nevertheless, involve activeparticipation and collaboration among researchers, educators, and learners, which in the end can result ina more inclusive and dynamic learning experience (Petry & Puigcercós, 2022).The emphasis on experiential learning enables students to empathize with others' experiences and reflecton their own perspectives, fostering a deeper understanding of prejudices and discrimination.Additionally, interactions with individuals from diverse backgrounds, such as international guests, orimaginary contact with refugees, increases the levels of tolerance and might further enrich students'learning experiences by broadening their cultural awareness and empathy.“I have the impression that the best is such an experience of meeting someone, just and somethinglike a living library.” (NFI1)“I mean kids at different ages [...] had this role to be a bit of a refugee [...] there is also such aform[...] such off-road games in which [...] you get into some role, it's very normal for us only justthen the topic was very related to the exclusion.” (NFI1)In general, the main element of the pedagogy of the oppressed is a Critical Consciousness. By becomingcritically aware of the social issues/oppressions that exist in the closest environment - in the society,country or worldwide - and addressing these issues adequately, individuals raise awareness. However, it isnot only about making individuals aware of the oppression, but at the same time, giving the individualsthe opportunity to engage in a problem by analyzing it critically, evaluating the situation and findingsolutions through role play, and later, the public discussion on forums.75Amongst interviewers, while there is a recognition of the importance of engagement of students, severalchallenges appear. One significant challenge is the passive stance of students, who may be ignorant of oruninterested in participating actively in discussions about oppression. In turn, teachers lack knowledge ofeffective methods to facilitate such discussions, further contributing to student passivity. Limited timewithin the formal education system is also cited as a constraint, with educators feeling pressured to followstrictly the curriculum requirements. Additionally, there's a lack of familiarity with alternative teachingmethods that could foster critical dialogue. Some attempts at engagement are made in non-formaleducational settings, where there is more flexibility, but challenges persist due to students' unfamiliaritywith being asked to participate actively. Despite these obstacles, there are instances of success wheneducators create spaces for dialogue and when students are given the opportunity to express themselves,suggesting that there is potential for deeper engagement if the barriers can be addressed.The findings of the level of student participation point to a question about the reason for the lack ofinvolvement amongst the students in activities offered to them. The motivation of youth participationdiffers between formal and non-formal settings with students showing more interest in participationvoluntarily.Overall, while both formal and non-formal education settings strive to address prejudices anddiscrimination, the Pedagogy of the Oppressed faces different challenges and opportunities in eachcontext. In formal education, constraints such as time limitations and teacher awareness hinder its fullimplementation, whereas non-formal education settings offer greater flexibility and emphasis onexperiential learning, enabling more effective engagement with societal issues.Suggestions.The theme explores the suggestions of the professionals within both, formal and non-formalenvironments about promoting a diverse and less prejudiced environment among youth. From theinterviews, it is observable that professionals suggest employing various tactics and tools that couldpromote creating a less prejudiced environment, with the special focus on education (See Figure 7).Consequently, one recurring theme is the importance of education, both formal and non-formal, ashighlighted by the quote,"Well, first of all, education." (FI4)Education plays a crucial role in challenging prejudices and promoting understanding. Teachers'involvement is emphasized, with an emphasis on their role in shaping attitudes and behaviors. As oneinterviewee mentions,76"So that's where I think, we've slowly started to act, which is to educate" (NFI3)Team games and activities are proposed as effective means of promoting cooperation and breaking downstereotypes. Integration trips and sports competitions provide opportunities for young people to interactand collaborate, fostering understanding and respect. By mixing groups and encouraging cooperation,educators aim to challenge misconceptions and foster inclusivity."And sometimes, so to speak, with premeditation I choose people who don't like each other to seethat they can work together" (FI3)Furthermore, the contact theory is emphasized, advocating for greater exposure to diverse experiencesand cultures. There is a perspective that through meetings with people from different backgrounds andparticipation in multicultural activities like Erasmus programs, young people can broaden theirperspectives and challenge stereotypes."Meeting with another culture. Getting to know another culture. Getting to know people fromanother culture. And this is the first motive that minimizes these prejudices and stereotypes if theyappear" (NFI2)Early intervention is also highlighted as crucial, with suggestions to start addressing prejudice from anearly age. By integrating lessons, conversations, and workshops on diversity and inclusion into thecurriculum from primary school onwards, educators aim to instill acceptance and understanding from ayoung age."For me it would be ideal to start from the first year of their class, that is, when they are theyoungest and the most childish" (FI2)Adopting a blended approach that incorporates education, teacher participation, team building exercises,and exposure to a range of experiences is necessary to foster a varied and less prejudiced atmosphereamong young people. Nevertheless, if one aims at relying on the contact hypothesis, the optimalconditions need to be met in order to build the intergroup relations based on the positive contact,diminishing the risk of the negative contact affecting the relationships.77Figure 7. Wordcloud: Suggestions of Professionals to address topic of prejudices6. DISCUSSIONThis empirical research aims to address the gap in understanding prejudice within the Polish educationalsystem, both in formal and informal educational environments, from the perspectives of both students andprofessionals working with them at the regional level. To achieve this, a mixed-method research designwas employed to comprehensively capture and analyze youth attitudes towards prejudices in Poland,alongside insights from educators who have considerable influence over young people's perceptions andbehaviors, particularly regarding prejudices. The perspectives of teachers and other professionals arecrucial, as studies demonstrate their significant impact on shaping young minds. Research suggests thatsupportive teachers can effectively curb the spread of prejudices among students and foster thedevelopment of social trust (Miklikowska et al., 2019). Additionally, the research shows the closeness ofthe teacher-student tie has the potential to mitigate the correlation between ethnic prejudices and bullying,emphasizing the significance of a supportive and good teacher-student relationship in reducing biasedbehaviors (Iannello et al., 2021). The analysis of the interviews indicates several concerns related toimplicit prejudices held by the professionals shown by the language of the responses and responsesindicating that the prejudices might be of modern type (McConahay, 1986) which is subtle, sometimeshidden, or even rejected.78After analyzing the data from both the quantitative and qualitative research it was possible to establish themain characteristics of the youth in the sample group, the most appearing types of prejudices, the level ofinfluence of their environment, as well as their perspective about the effectiveness of anti-oppressiveeducational offers and diversity programs in Poland. Similarly, after interviewing the professionals it waspossible to compare the attitudes of prejudices of youth in both formal and non-formal settings, on theregional level. It is a significant exploration because it can give a better tailored introduction to addressingthe differences on the macro level in Poland and in social work practice.The quantitative data analysis confirmed the demographic homogeneity of participants with the majoritybeing Polish, Cristian Catholic (Boguszewski et al., 2020, however with the growing tendency to claim“atheist”, with an equal division between rural and urban areas of living .The most significant finding is that rejecting the hypothesis that increased intergroup contact reducesprejudices. The questions on the Scale for ISM - Intolerant Schema Measure towards the members of theout-group are based on the belief in the greatness and importance of the individual’s in-group on the basisof ethnicity, religion, LGBTQ, gender, physical appearance and age. Furthermore, considering the contacttheory (Allport, 1954), it is thought that reduced prejudices against all other groups may result fromincreased contact with members of the out-groups. The General Prejudice Scale and the participants'Summed Contact with members of the out-group were correlated negatively, rejecting the hypothesis andquestioning the theory. The correlation at (r.-0.200) provides information that the contact with membersof the out-group might be not beneficial in reducing prejudices, and rather the opposite. Examining thenuanced relationship between intergroup contact and prejudices in Poland needs a thoroughunderstanding of the complexity of its causes. While intergroup contact theory posits that increasedinteraction between diverse groups mitigates prejudices, there are instances where such interactionsprovided unexpected outcomes, potentially increasing prejudicial attitudes, as results from this studyindicated. Recent findings by Visintin et al. (2019), and Berge et al. (2017) underscores the role ofadverse experiences or interactions with out-group members, as well as unfavorable intergroup contact, inamplifying prejudices. Negative contact can intensify prejudices by exposing individuals to conflicts,biases, and stereotypes that reinforce negative perceptions of the out-group (Visintin et al., 2019). Thesefindings may be connected to various factors influencing young people, including traditions, culturalinfluences, media discourse, socioeconomic status, and educational levels. The main challenge ofquestioning the negative attitudes consists of perception biases, particularly evident in the omnipresentinfluence of technology and social media. Whether positive or negative contact, our perceptions ofout-group members find validation in the public discourse or social media platforms, further shaping ourcognitive landscapes. Therefore, cultivating critical thinking skills and fostering an awareness of biased79perceptions are crucial steps in enhancing intergroup contact and mitigating prejudices through thepromotion of positive interaction under the optimal conditions. The results from the first sight contradictsthe Contact Theory and the majority of worldwide research that supports it (Pettigrew & Tropp).However, Allport (1954) indicates that it is not just contact with members of the out-group that improvesthe attitudes towards minority groups, but contact under the right conditions. These are (a) common goals,(b) equal status, (c) intergroup cooperation (i.e., the absence of competition), and (d) authority sanction(i.e., support from societal customs and/or authorities). Furthermore, it is believed that these conditionsfunction better when combined as a whole rather than separate parts (Gaertner and Dovidio, 1993). Notmeeting these conditions when interacting with members of the out-group contributes to the negativeattitudes that are further confirmed by Polish youth.Questions that followed revealed that the most experienced prejudices and discriminations among thesample of young people referred to gender and physical appearance. The findings from both urban andrural locations reported a similar percentage of prejudices, indicating that home location has little impacton the likelihood of prejudice or discrimination. The findings that physical appearance is one of the mainfactors for prejudices. Literature confirms, as O’Brien and others (2013) indicated in his studies, theconnection between “disgust, anti-fat prejudices, and physical appearance” to be a complicatedinteraction between feelings, body image, and prejudices. Therefore, on one hand weight plays a big role,and on another hand prejudices and discrimination against male and slim persons seems to be of leastsignificance. The emerging issue of weight prejudices in Poland calls for action. It involves a combinedstrategy that takes into account societal, environmental, and individual factors. According to research byBrewis & Bruening (2018), weight stigma and shame can have a major impact on teenagers' mentalhealth therefore interventions to reduce weight-related bias are crucial. They should includesocial-environmental elements such as encouraging inclusion and addressing weight stigma in socialcircles. Furthermore, relationships and support systems, such as friendships, can help to mitigate theharmful impacts of weight bias (Brewis & Bruening, 2018).The perception about the existing prejudices compared to experienced prejudices in Poland is different.Young Polish people see the stereotypes that exist in Poland differently. According to the findings, Polishyouth believe that there are widespread prejudices against transgender persons, people who identify asnon-heterosexual, Ukrainians, and obese people in three different contexts: the nation as a whole, thepublic media, and social media. The perception of sample youth on the prejudices existing in Poland tosome extent confirms the studies conducted by the Polish Centre for Research on Prejudice in 2017 inPoland indicating the most affected groups are: people from the LGBTQ+ community, “people on the80move”, however this study adds the recognition of the prejudices towards Ukranian individuals, whichwas not a present issue in 2017. Additionally, this research study does not pose significant prejudicestowards Jewish and Roma minorities. The possible explanation can be found in the psychological effectof “If I do not see, it does not exist”, referred to as a biased perspective. Mathur (2014) presented thataddressing biased perspectives by different perspective-taking can reduce automatic racial biases inbehavior, highlighting the role of cognitive processes in moderating prejudiced responses. Additionally,perspective-taking interventions, which encourage people to imagine the ideas, feelings, and experiencesof others, can help to counter automatic prejudices and create more inclusive attitudes towards diversegroups (Mathur et al., 2014). The region investigated in Poland is not characterized with the presence ofneither Roma nor Jewish or Muslim communities indicating a possible biased perspective in the lack ofprejudices towards the groups that one has no contact with. However, as shown in the research, evenimagined contact, such as visualizing oneself being helped by an out-group member or taking theperspective of a black character in a computer game, has been shown to reduce unconscious racialprejudices, indicating the potential for empathy to decrease prejudice towards out-group members.Empathy-based approaches like "Verstehen" have been effective in some instances and show potential forapplying the strategy of positive contact when coming in contact with members of the out-group.Ageism is the prejudices and discrimination based on the age of individuals. The findings show that inPoland it seems to be a significant issue (Podhorecka, 2021). The tendency to maintain social distance canconsequently be a manifestation of prejudice (Allport, 1954; Bogardus, 1925; Makashvili, 2018; Weaver,2008; Kelman & Pettigrew, 1959). And ven though the negative attitudes towards LGBTQ individuals,people of Ukrainian descent, "people on the move", and on the basis of the physical appearance are themost prevalent factors in the contemporary public discourse in Poland, the findings indicate that there is asignificantly negative attitude towards people of either older or younger age than the participants. In herfindings across the group of young people, Levy, (2016) has discovered that generally educated youngpeople who are not in the field of medicine, have been associated with acceptance towards older adults.Findings of this questionnaire indicate that the sample Youth have rather negative attitudes towards olderadults, which might be related to the level of education in the particular region and amongst the schoolsample. Podhorecka et al., (2022) addresses the issue of ageism in Polish society confirming theprevalence of ageism amongst the sample group. Understanding aging is tied to negative attitudes towardolder individuals, especially among younger people. However, increased contact with the elderly is linkedto more positive perceptions. Educational initiatives should promote interactions with older adults tocombat ageism, but further research is needed for a comprehensive understanding, especially81post-pandemic. These findings underscore the importance of integrating young people with the elderly ineducational settings (Podhorecka, 2022).Following the analysis, the next section touched upon the environment of the sample group. There was arelationship found between the similarity of views to the parents and the level of prejudices. The strongerthe similarity, the higher the level of prejudices. This is an interesting finding suggesting that parents havea significant influence on young people’s minds and that in the context of prejudices, it stresses howimportant a role parents play in either sustaining or opposing prejudiced ideas among their children. As aresult, interventions aiming at eliminating prejudices must recognise the critical role of parental influenceand try to promote inclusive and empathetic parenting practices. The finding increases the need for theunderstanding of prejudices in Poland on a general scale, in order to address it appropriately to bothadults and youth. As anti-oppressive practice indicates in order to work effectively with youth andchildren, parent’s engagement is needed to achieve a common goal. The relationship between parents andchildren needs to be understood before any intervention is taken. Generally, the findings confirm theliterature review (Degner & Dalege, 2013; Pirchio et. al, 2018, Miklikowska, 2017) suggesting thatparents do have significant influence on the explicit and implicit prejudices levels amongst young people.The students were also questioned regarding their preferences for a diversity programme to be taught inthe classroom. Finding that a significant proportion of the youth sample expressed an interest in learningmore about various aspects of diversity, such as religions, cultures, skin colors, disabilities, and sexualorientations, is consistent with previous research emphasizing the importance of diversity education inpromoting inclusivity and tolerance among young people (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006; Andreouli et al.,2013; Albarello et al., 2022). Additionally, the low number of respondents who expressed an interest inmaking contact with members of out-groups brings into question the effectiveness of intergroupinteraction programmes in enhancing social harmony and reducing prejudices. This conclusioncontradicts the well-established literature, which frequently emphasizes the benefits of intergroup contactfor reducing prejudices and enhancing intergroup contact (Allport, 1954; Gaertner et al., 1996; Pettigrew& Tropp, 2006; Andrighetto et al., 2012; Levy, 2016; Meleady & Crisp, 2016). It would be beneficial toinvestigate the causes for this lack of interest in intergroup contact further.Schools play a pivotal role in shaping young people's ideas, values, and beliefs, making them crucialenvironments for socialization. As students encounter diversity and interact with peers from differentbackgrounds, schools become key settings for promoting social inclusion and positive intergroup relationsto combat prejudices. Professionals like teachers and psychologists hold significant influence in thisregard. Kumashiro (2000) underscores the importance of understanding school environments, particularly82in contexts like Poland, where oppression may occur across various levels. Therefore, analyzing theschool environment is essential for comprehending and addressing issues of prejudices and discriminationin youth development.Firstly, the analysis of qualitative data is emphasizing particularly the perspective of professionals aboutyouth. The main challenges identified are those referring to mental health and digital citizenship. Theinterviewees raise worries regarding young mental resilience decline, which is made worse by things likedisinformation and overstimulation on social media. It seems that abusive use of technology is affectingmany aspects of youth’s life such as motivation, focus, and social divide (see Figure 8). Technology has abig impact on how discrimination is perceived in society. Worry regarding the possibility that moderntechnologies, like artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithms, will reinforce prejudices and discriminationis growing as these tools become more advanced. Research showed that algorithms have the ability ofproducing results that are discriminatory, especially when it comes to race and gender (Stypińska, 2022).This highlights how the AI and technology community need to pay more attention to creating tools thatare able to identify and eliminate biases (Wang, 2021). The issue of technology and its effect on mentalhealth raises important questions about how formal education could implement the lessons related tomental health resilience in the curriculum, and additionally how could both, formal and non-formaleducation implement activities and lessons related to the digital literacy so youth feel comfortable, safeand responsible in the digital space. Considering the developing world, as well as the stance of theEuropean Commission that the technology and AI tools are the biggest promise of the twenty-firstcentury, it should be one of the most burning concerns for the professionals to adapt youth with the skillsto manage this new environment in creating cohesion in the society, instead of more division. As forsocial work profession, and social workers, the technology is a tool that can improve the intervention formany fields such as children with learning difficulties, adults in nursing homes, individuals in remoteareas, and that puts a significance to increased digital training in Poland for both, teachers, social workersand students.Figure 8. Exaggerate Use of Technology and its consequences on youth83The analysis highlights the parental influence in both formal and non-formal educational settings. Theliterature review confirms the influence of parents in shaping youth’s attitudes ( (Degner & Dalege, 2013;Pirchio et. al, 2018, Miklikowska, 2017). It confirms the results from the quantitative study. Thechallenge is to equip parents with the resources that would both facilitate communication with the youthand improve their cooperation with the school and teachers to better assist their children. Social Workproposes the solution within the anti-oppressive framework, suggesting that it is important to address thepower abuse issue - of the dominant group towards the more submissive group. Therefore theunderstanding of parents about the power relations dynamics that are present at home is important, as wellas the engagement of parents in the cooperation with social workers and teachers is of importance for thegreater understanding of youth’ issues.Additionally, the analysis highlights the generational bias of youth towards both, older and youngerindividuals. Ageism is again identified as a growing issue, especially with the rise of AI (Stypinska,2022), and therefore awareness about this social issue should be addressed by not only social workers, butalso educators. Technology, including social media, has been demonstrated to promote intergenerationalcommunication (Zhou & Salvendy, 2017), therefore it has been determined that it is an effectiveinstrument for encouraging intergenerational cooperation. Competently utilizing technology can be asignificant tool for encouraging intergenerational collaboration and addressing ageism in society.Consequently, intergenerational communication and establishing the relationship between different agegroups can play a significant role in mitigating prejudices. The challenge of building empathy, respect,and appreciation for different viewpoints across generations is one that education needs to confront.Additionally, research shows that respect and understanding between generations have been effectivelyfostered by intergenerational programmes and initiatives such as community service projects andintergenerational learning projects (Spudich & Spudich, 2010). These programmes give older andyounger people the chance to connect, exchange stories, and gain knowledge from one another, whichimproves communication and develops empathy amongst various age groups. Nevertheless, whiletechnology can help with intergenerational communication and cooperation, it is important to recognisethat the younger generation may not be actively interested or optimistic about diversity programmes andactivities aimed at reducing prejudices.This passivity and lack of hope that youth are described with could be attributed to a variety of factors,including skepticism about the efficiency of these programmes and feeling of disconnection from societyissues. One strategy is for educators, social workers and above all, the authorities, to rethink howdiversity programmes are created and carried out so that they are more relevant and meaningful for youngpeople. This might involve introducing participatory methods that appeal to younger audiences and84connect with their beliefs and interests. Furthermore, there is a need for effectively incorporating societalissues into the educational system to make young people aware of them. Educators could develop criticalthinking and empathy in students by incorporating issues such as diversity, racism, and social justice intothe curriculum to ultimately empower the youth through initiatives such as The Positive Education aboutAgeing and Contact Experiences (PEACE) (Levy, 2016). PEACE approach emphasizes the need ofteaching people about aging and offering positive elder role models in order to remove prejudices. ThePEACE approach includes two key elements such as education about ageism that includes facts andpositive role models, and the positive intergroup contact. The model has a potential to influence policiesand ultimately contribute to tackling the issue on the spectrum of all ages of people.In the analysis of the second theme, the issue of prejudices is addressed in a broader sense, addressingaspects such prevalence of prejudices, nature of prejudices, and mitigation of prejudices. The crucialemerging issues identified in the analysis are the downplaying of the existence of prejudices anddiscriminatory acts by professionals. It is essential to address the question of what are the elements thatcontribute to downplaying and avoidance of the conversation about prejudices amongst professionals. Thepotential answers could be the educational level and awareness, the fear and reluctance and neglect ofaddressing the systemic issues or a genuine belief that prejudices do not exist. Teachers play a pivotal rolein the process of promoting equity and inclusivity in schools, as they are at the forefront of interactingwith students on a daily basis. However, there may be instances where teachers exhibit reluctance toaddress systemic issues within the education system posing an issue. Lack of knowledge orcomprehension of the systemic problems may be one cause of this resistance. It is possible that educatorsare not receiving enough professional development or training on issues like prejudices, sexism, racism,or other types of discrimination that occur in the educational system. Teachers could find it difficult toidentify and successfully address these problems if they lack this information. Teachers and otherprofessionals could also feel overburdened or unprepared to deal with systemic problems in theirclassrooms. They can be afraid of saying or doing the incorrect thing and unintentionally fosteringnegative stereotypes or biases. Talking about systemic concerns can be difficult when one is afraid ofmaking mistakes or becoming angry at parents, coworkers, or administrators. In fact, the results from thequestionnaire indicate that the more intergroup contact with out-group members, the higher level ofprejudices amongst sample youth which is contrary to the general findings of the Contact Hypothesis andcontradicts what one might believe - that the more contact with members of the out-group, the lessenedthe prejudices. The negative contact, that is furthermore, mostly perceptional, is a potential answer to theperception of professionals, too, who live and work in the same environment. Additionally, the analysis ofthe data indicates that teachers in both, formal and non-formal educational settings express prejudices,85either explicit, by their actions or implicit, by unconscious choice of wording towards different sexualorientations. Explicit prejudices can be shown as discriminatory acts or behaviors against people ofdifferent sexual orientations, producing settings that impact learning process and personal development.In contrast, implicit prejudices, which stems from unconscious biases, can quietly impact educators'language choices, reinforcing stereotypes and marginalizing LGBTQ+ community children, which asKumashiro (2000) points out, contributes to creating the oppressive environment in the classroom.Lastly, the Pedagogy of the Oppressed has been used as a guideline to ask professionals if they use anyelements, and more specifically, the critical consciousness to work with the students. The issues withinthis theme cross with those raised in other themes. The passivity and lack of motivation of students,awareness and knowledge about the anti oppressive tools used in education, and most importantly lack oftime and space to create a space for the open dialogue between students. The methodology in addition toits broad use in social work (Boal, 2019; Giesler, 2017; Proctor et al., 2008; Alizadeh & Jiang, 2022;Saeed, 2015; Kina & Fernandes, 2017; Cole et al., 2023) finds its use in the classroom too. Giesler (2017)points out that by incorporating Boal's activities into the macro and micro practice classroom, teachersmay help students become more self-aware and socially conscious, which in turn helps them focus onprinciples like empathy, empowerment, and social change. Nevertheless, despite the broad andcomprehensive literature review about the effective use of the methodology in both social work practiceand education, the issues emerging in the Polish educational system, especially the field of formaleducation, are more systemic and not allowing the teachers flexibility.The interviews show the attemptsof professionals in applying the elements of the critical pedagogy in the classroom, however those takeplace mostly in the non-formal educational settings such as NGOs and scouts associations where there ismore space for implementing those. The education of professionals in aspects of methodologies andanti-oppressive tools, nevertheless, seems to be crucial in the Polish environment.The fourth theme presents the analysis of the availability of programmes on prejudices, discrimination,diversity, and social inclusion for both teachers and students. The analysis contradicts the results from thequestionnaire conducted with students. The availability of programmes appears to be diversifiedaccording to the teachers, nevertheless the results revealed by the students showed a significant disparitybetween the perception of available anti-prejudice programs and their actual implementation in Poland.The low percentage of youth who believe enough has been done to combat prejudices aligns with studiesconducted by the European Union, indicating potential lack in the effectiveness and reach of existingprograms. Moreover, the high proportion of students reporting the absence of such initiatives highlights agap in the implementation of anti-prejudicess measures, necessitating better strategies for promotion andincreasing youth awareness. Teachers and professionals point to initiatives offered by school pedagogues,86official programs run by police in the formal setting, and to various programs such as “Free Being Me”and others in the non-formal educational setting. The low confirmation of anti-prejudice programs in theschool curriculum raises questions about their accessibility and engagement, suggesting potentialobstacles within the educational system that need to be addressed to effectively combat prejudices.Generally, the research results conducted by the EU (2020) are confirmed indicating similarly lownumbers of awareness. However the literature claiming that governmental and non-governmentalprograms in Poland exist raises questions of their transparency amongst youth and effectiveness.In the final theme, professionals put forth proposals and recommendations aimed at promoting a lessprejudiced society, with education emerging as the most frequently cited solution. Education is of highimportance in tackling prejudices due to its potential to increase knowledge, awareness, and criticalthinking skills in individuals from a young age (for instance: Freire, 1970; Kumashiro, 2000; FitzGeraldet al. 2019; Souto-Otero, 2021) By integrating anti-prejudice education into formal curricula andnon-formal educational initiatives, young people can develop a deeper understanding of diversity,empathy, and respect for others (Suzina, 2020). Additionally, education provides a platform forchallenging stereotypes, promoting inclusivity, and fostering intergroup understanding, which are allcrucial for addressing prejudices. Furthermore, education enables people to become advocates for socialjustice, providing them with the tools and knowledge they need to confront discrimination in theircommunities. In summary, education stands out as an important tool for breaking down prejudices andbuilding a more equitable and inclusive society.7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONSThe study confirms that prejudices are a significant concern in Poland, affecting youth and educationalsettings as well as professionals in both, formal and non-formal educational environments. Theconclusion aims to summarize the issue from various angles, highlighting the perspectives of both youngpeople and education professionals and point to the complexity and the multifacetedness of the issue. Itwill be divided into three main parts summarizing the attitudes of youth about prejudices, theprofessional’s perspective and the anti-oppressive methods that are being used and can be used in Poland.Additionally, I will point to the pivotal role of social work in the field of prejudices and education.The attitudes of youthPolish youth report experiencing prejudices based on factors including gender, physical appearance, andsexual orientation. Additionally, the negative attitudes are identified towards people of Ukrainian descent,and religious and ethnic minorities. Interestingly, the youth perceive a higher prevalence of prejudices in87society than they personally encounter. This contradiction could be due to underreporting or a lack ofawareness. The most important finding indicates that intergroup contact does not contribute to lowerlevels of prejudices. The negative contact needs to be addressed and methods reinforcing positive contactapplied. Additionally, despite the potential benefits of intergroup contact programs, young people showlittle interest in participating. A crucial finding is the significant influence of parental attitudes on youth'ssusceptibility to prejudices.The perspective of professionalsProfessionals working in both formal and non-formal educational settings expressed concerns about youthmental health and the impact of digital citizenship. Downplaying the existence of prejudices across allprofessionals has been identified raising a need for addressing this issue further. This could be due to alack of awareness or the presence of systemic issues within the educational system. Furthermore, someeducators exhibited implicit bias in their language choices, potentially creating an unwelcomingenvironment for certain groups of students. Finally, professionals, especially from a formal educationalsetting reported a lack of time and resources to create open dialogue spaces where students feelcomfortable discussing prejudices. On the contrary, professionals from non-formal educational settingspossess more time and space to implement elements of the Critical Consciousness in raising awareness ofyouth about topics such as prejudices and discrimination.Anti-Oppressive methodsThe discussion revealed potential limitations in the effectiveness and reach of current anti-prejudiceprograms. While intergroup contact with positive experiences according to the literature shows promise inreducing prejudices, across the sample youth group it does not seem to be effective. Therefore, bettertailored actions and initiatives should be analyzed. Critical pedagogy approaches that encourage criticalthinking and social awareness hold significant potential, especially in non-formal educational settings.Formal education is revealed to be more controlled and not have enough space for implementation of theanti-oppressive programs in the already extensive school curriculum. Parental engagement and educationabout prejudices are also crucial for lasting change and contributing to the less-prejudiced environment.The Role of Social WorkSocial workers play a vital role in addressing prejudices by tackling power imbalances within familiesand communities basing the actions in the oppressive theory framework. They can equip parents withresources to communicate effectively with their children about prejudices and its impacts. Additionally,88social workers can advocate for educational reforms that promote inclusivity and address ageism.Collaboration with educators to develop and implement effective anti-oppressive programs is another keyarea where social workers can contribute. The role of social workers in the Polish educational systemshould be addressed further.This study's findings include policy and practice recommendations for formal and non-formal educationalsettings as well as implications for social work practice and future research.7.1. POLICY AND PRACTICEIn formal education:1. Implementing the diversity and inclusion programs in the curriculum by educators andprofessionals working with youth with the assistance of other professionals (e.g., psychologists,youth workers etc.).2. Establishing the role of School Social Worker or reinforcing the role of School Pedagogue foraddressing the discrimination and prejudices in the school environment and contributing toproviding a non-oppressive environment for students using the anti-oppressive methods.3. Improving the level of involvement of parents in the relationship on the line between youth -parents - school. Providing resources, workshops and support networks for parents to address theissues of prejudices and discrimination at home.4. Providing professional development for the educators including strategies for recognizing theprejudiced and discriminatory acts and ways for the effective facilitation of the discussion onforum.5. Recognizing the importance of empathy and critical thinking in educational and personaldevelopment of youth.6. Reinforce the school curricula with workshops for building greater awareness about theimportance of prejudices towards physical appearance. Addressing the issues such as weight isessential in building a more inclusive environment at schools.7. Actively promoting intergenerational communication to combat ageism and promoting a moreinclusive environment and mutual understanding between generations.8. Reinforcing the importance of digital citizenship and utilizing technology for educationalawareness. Educational institutions should include digital literacy and critical thinking skills intheir curricula to assist students utilize online spaces responsibly and critically analyzeinformation about prejudices and discrimination.89In non-formal education1. Developing anti-oppressive programs to address specific forms of prejudices and discrimination.These curricula should include interactive and engaging activities that encourage critical thinking,empathy, and inclusivity.2. Obligatory training on the topics of diversity and inclusion for professionals of all ages in order topromote the inclusive environment for all the participants.3. Promoting positive intergroup contacts between diverse groups making sure the contact ismaintained under the ‘optimal conditions’.4. Non-formal educational organizations should collaborate with community-based organizations,advocacy groups, and local stakeholders to raise resources and expertise in combating prejudicesand discrimination.5. Non-formal educational organizations should provide safe and supportive environments in whichparticipants can engage in open and honest discussions on prejudices, discrimination, and socialjustice issues. These areas should be facilitated by trained members who can conduct talks,mediate conflicts, and encourage constructive dialogue.6. Promoting and encouraging methods that contribute to greater empathy, critical thinking andcritical consciousness amongst youth.7.2. FUTURE RESEARCHWhile this study has made substantial contributions to the literature on attitudes to prejudices amongstyouth in Poland, further research should focus on the following areas:1. The denial and neglect of prejudices amongst professionals: further research should investigateand focus on the reasons for the professionals for neglecting the presence of prejudices to betterunderstand the reasons and consequently be able to develop educational training to empower theeducators.2. Intergroup Contact: further research on why intergroup contact increases the level of prejudicesamongst youth in Poland is required to better understand the intergroup dynamics between variousgroups in Poland and find methods to adequately address the contact with members of theout-groups.3. Motivation of youth: further research should investigate the strategies and ways to encourage andmotivate youth for participation. To properly address this situation, it is critical to focus onstrategies that involve and motivate young people through rethinking how diversity programmesare created and conducted so that they are more relevant and meaningful for young people.904. Theater of the Oppressed: further research on the impact and effectiveness of the CC (CriticalConsciousness) in addressing the topic of prejudices. The methodology of the Theater of theOppressed and its long-term effects on tackling prejudices amongst Polish youth should beinvestigated further in order to analyze if it is an effective way to work with Polish youth.5. Technology as a prejudices reduction tool: further research is required to understand the ways inwhich technology can be used in working with youth to tackle various forms of prejudices.6. Prejudice on the basis of physical appearance: the findings are significant, however there are fewstudies referring to the analysis of this issue in Poland suggesting an area for further research.7. Additional findings from the quantitative study have not been included due to the time andword-count constraints, however they provide a great foundation for the future research inaddressing the prejudices on the regional level.91ReferencesAbbink, K., & Harris, D. (2019). In-group Favouritism and out-group Discrimination in NaturallyOccurring Groups. PLOS ONE, 14(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221616Al Ramiah, A., & Hewstone, M. (2013). Intergroup contact as a tool for reducing, resolving, andpreventing intergroup conflict: Evidence, limitations, and potential. American Psychologist, 68(7),527–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032603Albarello, F., Manganelli, S., Cavicchiolo, E., Lucidi, F., Chirico, A., & Alivernini, F. (2022). AddressingAdolescents’ Prejudice toward Immigrants: The Role of the Classroom Context. Journal of Youthand Adolescence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-022-01725-yAlizadeh, F., & Jiang, L. (2022). Application Of Theatre In Digital Space For Mental Health Care DuringCovid-19 Pandemic. MIER Journal of Educational Studies Trends and Practices, 19–37.https://doi.org/10.52634/mier/2022/v12/i2/2249Almeida, F., & Morais, J. (2024). Non-formal education as a response to social problems in developingcountries. E-Learning and Digital Media. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530241231843Altemeyer, B. (1998). The Other “Authoritarian Personality.” Advances in Experimental SocialPsychology, 30, 47–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60382-2Althusser, L. (1971). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. In L. Althusser (Ed.), Lenin andphilosophy and other essays. New York: Monthly Review Press.Amodio, D. M., & Cikara, M. (2020). The Social Neuroscience of Prejudice. Annual Review ofPsychology, 72(1). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050928Andreouli, E., Howarth, C., & Sonn, C. (2013). The role of schools in promoting inclusive communitiesin contexts of diversity. Journal of Health Psychology, 19(1), 16–21.https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105313500257Andrighetto, L., Mari, S., Volpato, C., & Behluli, B. (2012). Reducing Competitive Victimhood inKosovo: The Role of Extended Contact and Common Ingroup Identity. Political Psychology,33(4), 513–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00887.xAosved, A. C., & Long, P. J. (2006). Co-occurrence of Rape Myth Acceptance, Sexism, Racism,Homophobia, Ageism, Classism, and Religious Intolerance. Sex Roles, 55(7-8), 481–492.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9101-4Aosved, A. C., Long, P. J., & Voller, E. K. (2009). Measuring Sexism, Racism, Sexual Prejudice, Ageism,Classism, and Religious Intolerance: The Intolerant Schema Measure. Journal of Applied SocialPsychology, 39(10), 2321–2354. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00528.xArnaudova, I., Krypotos, A.-M., Effting, M., Kindt, M., & Beckers, T. (2016). Fearing shades of grey:individual differences in fear responding towards generalisation stimuli. Cognition and Emotion,31(6), 1181–1196. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1204990Asante, Molefi Kete. (1991). The Afrocentric Idea in Education. The Journal of Negro Education, 60(2),170–180. https://doi.org/10.2307/2295608Baines, D., & Clark, N. (2017). Doing anti-oppressive practice: Social justice social work (3rd ed.).Fernwood Publishing.Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall ; Toronto :Prentice-Hall of Canada.Bansak, K., Hainmueller, J., & Hangartner, D. (2016). How economic, humanitarian, and religiousconcerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers. Science, 354(6309), 217–222.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2147Bartoş, S. E., Berger, I., & Hegarty, P. (2014). Interventions to Reduce Sexual Prejudice: A Study-SpaceAnalysis and Meta-Analytic Review. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(4), 363–382.https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2013.87162592Beelmann, A., & Heinemann, K. S. (2014). Preventing prejudice and improving intergroup attitudes: Ameta-analysis of child and adolescent training programs. Journal of Applied DevelopmentalPsychology, 35(1), 10–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2013.11.002Bennett, W. L. (1998). 1998 Ithiel De Sola Pool Lecture: The UnCivic Culture: Communication, Identity,and the Rise of Lifestyle Politics. PS: Political Science and Politics, 31(4), 740.https://doi.org/10.2307/420711Berge, J. B., Lancee, B., & Jaspers, E. (2017). Can Interethnic Friends Buffer for the Prejudice IncreasingEffect of Negative Interethnic Contact? A Longitudinal Study of Adolescents in the Netherlands.European Sociological Review, 33(3), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcx045Bešić, E. (2020). Intersectionality: A pathway towards inclusive education? PROSPECTS, 49(49),111–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09461-6Bilewicz, M. (2007). History as an Obstacle: Impact of Temporal-Based Social Categorizations onPolish-Jewish Intergroup Contact. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(4), 551–563.https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207081540Bilewicz, M., Soral, W., Marchlewska, M., & Winiewski, M. (2015). When Authoritarians ConfrontPrejudice. Differential Effects of SDO and RWA on Support for Hate-Speech Prohibition.Political Psychology, 38(1), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12313Bilewicz, M., Winiewski, M., Kofta, M., & Wójcik, A. (2013). Harmful Ideas, The Structure andConsequences of Anti-Semitic Beliefs in Poland. Political Psychology, 34(6), 821–839.https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12024Binder, J., Zagefka, H., Brown, R., Funke, F., Kessler, T., Mummendey, A., Maquil, A., Demoulin, S., &Leyens, J.-P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? Alongitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three europeancountries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 843–856.https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013470Bogardus, E. S. (1928). Teaching and Social Distance. Journal of Educational Sociology, 1(10), 595.https://doi.org/10.2307/2961789Boguszewski, R., Makowska, M., Bożewicz, M., & Podkowińska, M. (2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic’sImpact on Religiosity in Poland. Religions, 11(12), 646. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11120646Bounds, D. T., Winiarski, D. A., Otwell, C. H., Tobin, V., Glover, A. C., Melendez, A., & Karnik, N. S.(2020). Considerations for working with youth with socially complex needs. Journal of Child andAdolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 33(4), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcap.12288Brewis, A., & Bruening, M. (2018). Weight Shame, Social Connection, and Depressive Symptoms inLate Adolescence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(5),891. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050891Britzman, D.P. (1998). Lost subjects, contested objects: Toward a psychoanalytic inquiry of learning.Albany,NY: State University of New York PressBrown, R. (2010). Prejudice : its social psychology. Blackwell Pub.Brown, R. (2011). Prejudice: Its social psychology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press. (Original workpublished 2004)Carey, P. (2013a) Representation and student engagement in higher education: a reflection on the viewsand experiences of course representatives, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 37(1),pp71-88.Carvacho, H., Zick, A., Haye, A., González, R., Manzi, J., Kocik, C., & Bertl, M. (2013). On the relationbetween social class and prejudice: The roles of education, income, and ideological attitudes.European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(4), 272–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.196193Cole, A., Fontana, L., Hirzel, M., Johnston, C., & Miramonti, A. (2023). On burning ground: Theatre ofthe Oppressed and ecological crisis in Bolivia. Cultural Geographies, 147447402311542.https://doi.org/10.1177/14744740231154259Collins, S., & Wilkie, L. (2010). Anti-Oppressive Practice and Social Work Students’ Portfolios inScotland. Social Work Education, 29(7), 760–777. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615471003605082Conrad, D. (2004). Exploring Risky Youth Experiences: Popular Theatre as a Participatory, PerformativeResearch Method. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 12–25.https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300102Constitution of the Republic of Poland. (1997). Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Refworld.https://www.refworld.org/legal/legislation/natlegbod/1997/en/20710Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nded.). Sage Publications.de Zavala, A. G., & Bierwiaczonek, K. (2020). Male, National, and Religious Collective NarcissismPredict Sexism. Sex Roles. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01193-3Dean, J. (2021). Informal Volunteering, Inequality, and Illegitimacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary SectorQuarterly, 51(3), 089976402110345. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640211034580Degner, J., & Dalege, J. (2013). The apple does not fall far from the tree, or does it? A meta-analysis ofparent–child similarity in intergroup attitudes. Psychological Bulletin, 139(6), 1270–1304.https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031436Denzin, N. K. (2019). Performing Critical Pedagogy in a Politicized Public Sphere. Qualitative Inquiry,107780041987908. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800419879082Dettlaff, A. J., & Boyd, R. (2020). Racial Disproportionality and Disparities in the Child Welfare System:Why Do They Exist, and What Can Be Done to Address Them? The ANNALS of the AmericanAcademy of Political and Social Science, 692(1), 253–274.https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716220980329Diemer, M. A., Rapa, L. J., Voight, A. M., & McWhirter, E. H. (2016). Critical Consciousness: aDevelopmental Approach to Addressing Marginalization and Oppression. Child DevelopmentPerspectives, 10(4), 216–221.Dienstbier, R. A. (1970). Positive and negative prejudice: Interactions of prejudice with race and socialdesirability1. Journal of Personality, 38(2), 198–215.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1970.tb00004.xDovidio, J. F. (2013). The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination. Sage.Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracialinteraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 62–68.https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.62Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential Effects of Right Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientationon Outgroup Attitudes and Their Mediation by Threat From and Competitiveness to Outgroups.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 684–696.https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205284282Dunham, Y. (2018). Mere Membership. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(9), 780–793.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.06.004Elsen, F., & Ord, J. (2021). The Role of Adults in “Youth Led” Climate Groups: Enabling Empowerment.Frontiers in Political Science, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.641154European Commission. (n.d.). Non-governmental organisations - Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion- European Commission. Ec.europa.eu. https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=330European Union. (2023). Eurobarometer. Europa.eu. https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/297294European Union. (2024). Aims and values. European Union.https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/principles-and-values/aims-and-values_enEuropean Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2023). FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS REPORT -2023REPORT.https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2023-fundamental-rights-report-2023_en_1.pdfEverett, J. A. C., Faber, N. S., & Crockett, M. (2015). Preferences and Beliefs in Ingroup Favoritism.Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9(15). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00015Fenteng, A. (2023). Prejudice as a Concurrent Stimulus for Violence: A Case of an Asian Community.Psychology, 14(2), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2023.142008FitzGerald, C., Martin, A., Berner, D., & Hurst, S. (2019). Interventions designed to reduce implicitprejudices and implicit stereotypes in real world contexts: a systematic review. BMC Psychology,7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-019-0299-7Flick, U. (Ed.). (2013). The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. Sage.Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum.Freire, P. (2013). Education for critical consciousness. Bloomsbury Academic.Furlong, A., & Harris, A. (2017). Routledge handbook of youth and young adulthood. Routledge.Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2011). Common Ingroup Identity Model. The Encyclopedia of PeacePsychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470672532.wbepp041Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The CommonIngroup Identity Model: Recategorization and the Reduction of Intergroup Bias. European Reviewof Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779343000004Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., & Bachman, B. A. (1996). Revisiting the contact hypothesis: The inductionof a common ingroup identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20(3-4), 271–290.https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(96)00019-3Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural Violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27(3), 291–305.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022343390027003005Gao, Q., & Zhou, J. (2022). Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Technology in EverydayLiving. Springer.Garcia, B., Crifasi, E., & Dessel, A. B. (2019). Oppression Pedagogy: Intergroup Dialogue and Theatre ofthe Oppressed in Creating a Safe Enough Classroom. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(4),669–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1567414Garcia, B., & Dorothy Van Soest. (2021). Social Work Practice for Social Justice. From CulturalCompetence to Anti-Oppression. CSWE Press.Giesler, M. A. (2017). Teaching Note—Theatre of the Oppressed and Social Work Education:Radicalizing the Practice Classroom. Journal of Social Work Education, 53(2), 347–353.https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1260503Golec de Zavala, A., & Cichocka, A. (2011). Collective narcissism and anti-Semitism in Poland. GroupProcesses & Intergroup Relations, 15(2), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430211420891Golec de Zavala, A., Cichocka, A., & Iskra-Golec, I. (2013). Collective narcissism moderates the effectof in-group image threat on intergroup hostility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,104(6), 1019–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032215Golec de Zavala, A., Dyduch‐Hazar, K., & Lantos, D. (2019). Collective Narcissism: PoliticalConsequences of Investing Self‐Worth in the Ingroup’s Image. Political Psychology, 40(S1),37–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12569Golec de Zavala, A., & Lantos, D. (2020). Collective Narcissism and Its Social Consequences: The Badand the Ugly. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 273–278.https://doi.org/10.1177/096372142091770395Golec de Zavala, A., Peker, M., Guerra, R., & Baran, T. (2016). Collective Narcissism PredictsHypersensitivity to In-group Insult and Direct and Indirect Retaliatory Intergroup Hostility.European Journal of Personality, 30(6), 532–551. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2067Grapin, S. L., Griffin, C. B., Naser, S. C., Brown, J. M., & Proctor, S. L. (2019). School-BasedInterventions for Reducing Youths’ Racial and Ethnic Prejudice. Policy Insights from theBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(2), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219863820Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, andstereotypes. Psychological Review, 102(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4Grigoryan, L., Cohrs, J. C., Boehnke, K., van de Vijver, F. (A. J. R. ), & Easterbrook, M. J. (2020).Multiple categorization and intergroup bias: Examining the generalizability of three theories ofintergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(1).https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000342Groyecka, A., Witkowska, M., Wróbel, M., Klamut, O., & Skrodzka, M. (2019). Challenge yourstereotypes! Human Library and its impact on prejudice in Poland. Journal of Community &Applied Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2402Hawke, L. D., Hayes, E., Darnay, K., & Henderson, J. (2021). Mental health among transgender andgender diverse youth: An exploration of effects during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychology ofSexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000467Heinen, J. (2009). “Religion, Politics and Gender Equality in Poland”, Final research Report preparedfor the project “Religion, Politics and Gender Equality.”Iannello, N. M., Camodeca, M., Gelati, C., & Papotti, N. (2021). Prejudice and Ethnic Bullying AmongChildren: The Role of Moral Disengagement and Student-Teacher Relationship. Frontiers inPsychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.71308Iloradanon Efimoff, & Starzyk, K. B. (2023). The impact of education about historical and currentinjustices, individual racism and systemic racism on anti‐Indigenous racism. European Journal ofSocial Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2987Janion, M. (2010). Niesamowita Słowiańszczyzna: fantazmaty literatury. Angelaki, 15(3).Jemal, A. (2017). Critical Consciousness: A Critique and Critical Analysis of the Literature. The UrbanReview, 49(4), 602–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-017-0411-3Jemal, A. (2018). Transformative Consciousness of Health Inequities: Oppression Is a Virus and CriticalConsciousness Is the Antidote. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 3(4), 202–215.https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-018-0061-8Jolley, D., Meleady, R., & Douglas, K. M. (2019). Exposure to intergroup conspiracy theories promotesprejudice which spreads across groups. British Journal of Psychology, 111(1).https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12385Jones, J. M. (1972). Prejudice and Racism.Jones, S., & Rutland, A. (2018). Attitudes Toward Immigrants Among the Youth. European Psychologist,23(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000310Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A Decade of System Justification Theory: AccumulatedEvidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo. Political Psychology,25(6), 881–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.xKelly, L. L. (2022). “What they allow us to learn”: exploring how white English teachers cultivatestudents’ critical literacies through curriculum and pedagogy. English Teaching: Practice &Critique, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-03-2022-0034Kina, V. J., & Fernandes, K. C. (2017). Augusto Boal’s Theatre of the oppressed: democratising art forsocial transformation. Critical and Radical Social Work, 5(2), 241–252.https://doi.org/10.1332/204986017x1495177693723996Kirsch, C., & Seele, C. (2020). Translanguaging in Early Childhood Education in Luxembourg: FromPractice to Pedagogy. Inklusion Und Bildung in Migrationsgesellschaften, 63–81.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28128-1_5Kjellberg, I. (2022). The Capability Approach in Social Work with Older People. InternationalPerspectives on Aging, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78063-0_11Kolluri, S., & Tichavakunda, A. A. (2022). The Counter-Deficit Lens in Educational Research:Interrogating Conceptions of Structural Oppression. Review of Educational Research,003465432211252. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221125225Konopka, K., & Chrustowicz, M. (2019). The influence of gender threat on social distance towardminority groups. Men Disability Society, 45(3), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0013.6226Korolczuk, E. (2019). The fight against “gender” and “LGBT ideology”: new developments in Poland.European Journal of Politics and Gender, 3(1).https://doi.org/10.1332/251510819x15744244471843Kothari, C. R. (2014). Research methodology : methods and techniques. New Age International (P)Limited, Publishers.Krzyżanowska, N., & Krzyżanowski, M. (2018). “Crisis” and Migration in Poland: Discursive Shifts,Anti-Pluralism and the Politicisation of Exclusion. Sociology, 52(3), 612–618.https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038518757952Kumashiro, K. K. (2000). Toward a Theory of Anti-Oppressive Education. Review of EducationalResearch, 70(1), 25–53. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070001025Kunstman, J. W., Plant, E. A., Zielaskowski, K., & LaCosse, J. (2013). Feeling in with the outgroup:Outgroup acceptance and the internalization of the motivation to respond without prejudice.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(3), 443–457. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033082La Macchia, S. T., & Radke, H. R. M. (2017). Social Dominance Orientation and Social DominanceTheory. Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences, 1–9.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1267-1Lai, C. K., Marini, M., Lehr, S. A., Cerruti, C., Shin, J.-E. L., Joy-Gaba, J. A., Ho, A. K., Teachman, B.A., Wojcik, S. P., Koleva, S. P., Frazier, R. S., Heiphetz, L., Chen, E. E., Turner, R. N., Haidt, J.,Kesebir, S., Hawkins, C. B., Schaefer, H. S., Rubichi, S., & Sartori, G. (2014). Reducing implicitracial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology: General, 143(4), 1765–1785. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036260Lai, C. K., Skinner, A. L., Cooley, E., Murrar, S., Brauer, M., Devos, T., Calanchini, J., Xiao, Y. J.,Pedram, C., Marhsburn, C. K., Simon, S., Blanchar, J. C., Joy-Gaba, J., Conway, J., Redford, L.,Klein, R. A., Roussos, G., Schellhaas, F. M. H., Burns, M., & Hu, X. (2016). Reducing ImplicitRacial Preferences: II. Intervention Effectiveness Across Time. SSRN Electronic Journal, 145(8).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2712520Lambert, A. J. (1995). Stereotypes and social judgment: The consequences of group variability. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 68(3), 388–403.https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.3.388Leonardelli, G. J., & Toh, S. M. (2015). Social Categorization in Intergroup Contexts: Three Kinds ofSelf-Categorization. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(2), 69–87.https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12150Levy, S. R. (2016). Toward Reducing Ageism: PEACE (Positive Education about Aging and ContactExperiences) Model. The Gerontologist, 58(2), gnw116. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw116Linville, P. W., Fischer, G. W., & Yoon, C. (1996). Perceived covariation among the features of ingroupand outgroup members: The outgroup covariation effect. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 70(3), 421–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.421Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (1998). Intergroup relations: Insights from a theoretically integrativeapproach. Psychological Review, 105(3), 499–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.105.3.49997Maher, F. A., & Kay, M. (2001). The feminist classroom : dynamics of gender, race, and privilege.Rowman & Littlefield.Maiti, S. N., Pakrashi, D., Saha, S., & Smyth, R. (2022). Don’t judge a book by its cover: The role ofintergroup contact in reducing prejudice in conflict settings. Journal of Economic Behavior &Organization, 202, 533–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.08.030Major, B., & S. Brooke Vick. (2005). The Psychological Impact of Prejudice. 139–154.https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470773963.ch9Makashvili, A., Vardanashvili, I., & Javakhishvili, N. (2018). Testing intergroup threat theory: Realisticand symbolic threats, religiosity and gender as predictors of prejudice. Europe’s Journal ofPsychology, 14(2), 464–484. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v14i2.1483Malcom, Z. T., Wenger, M. R., & Lantz, B. (2022). Politics or prejudice? Separating the influence ofpolitical affiliation and prejudicial attitudes in determining support for hate crime law. Psychology,Public Policy, and Law, 29(2). https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000350Malinowitz, H. (1995). Textual Orientations. Heinemann Educational Books.Martinez, N., Sowcik, M., & Bunch, J. C. (2019). The Impact of Leadership Education and Co-curricularInvolvement on the Development of Socially Responsible Leadership Outcomes in UndergraduateStudents: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Leadership Education, 19(3).https://doi.org/10.12806/v19/i3/r3Mathur, V. A., Richeson, J. A., Paice, J. A., Muzyka, M., & Chiao, J. Y. (2014). Racial Bias in PainPerception and Response: Experimental Examination of Automatic and Deliberate Processes. TheJournal of Pain, 15(5), 476–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2014.01.488McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the Modern Racism Scale. In J. F. Dovidio &S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). Academic Press.Meekosha, H., & Dowse, L. (2007). Integrating critical disability studies into social work education andpractice: An Australian perspective. Practice, 19(3), 169–183.https://doi.org/10.1080/09503150701574267Meleady, R., & Crisp, R. J. (2016). Intergroup Contact Theory. In Routledge eBooks. Informa.https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315646510Meleady, R., & Forder, L. (2018). When contact goes wrong: Negative intergroup contact promotesgeneralized outgroup avoidance. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(5),136843021876156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218761568Merkel-Holguin, L., Drury, I., Gibley-Reed, C., Lara, A., Jihad, M., Grint, K., & Marlowe, K. (2022).Structures of Oppression in the U.S. Child Welfare System: Reflections on AdministrativeBarriers to Equity. Societies, 12(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12010026Merrilees, C. E., Taylor, L. K., Baird, R., Goeke-Morey, M. C., Shirlow, P., & Cummings, E. M. (2017).Neighborhood Effects of Intergroup Contact on Change in Youth Intergroup Bias. Journal ofYouth and Adolescence, 47(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0684-6Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, Social Stress, and Mental Health in Lesbian, Gay, and BisexualPopulations: Conceptual Issues and Research Evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674–697.https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674Michelle Leigh Crozier. (2023). The Transformative Experience of Drama and Performance art withSurvivors of Gender-Based Violence. INDIGO (University of Illinois at Chicago).https://doi.org/10.32920/16632460.v2Miklikowska, M. (2016). Like parent, like child? Development of prejudice and tolerance towardsimmigrants. British Journal of Psychology, 107(1), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12124Miklikowska, M. (2017). Development of anti-immigrant attitudes in adolescence: The role of parents,peers, intergroup friendships, and empathy. British Journal of Psychology, 108(3), 626–648.https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.1223698Miklikowska, M., Bohman, A., & Titzmann, P. F. (2019). Driven by context? The interrelated effects ofparents, peers, classrooms on development of prejudice among Swedish majority adolescents.Developmental Psychology, 55(11), 2451–2463. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000809Miklikowska, M., Thijs, J., & Hjerm, M. (2019). The Impact of Perceived Teacher Support onAnti-Immigrant Attitudes from Early to Late Adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,48(6), 1175–1189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-00990-8Moreau, M. (1979). A structural approach to social work practice. Canadian Journal of Social WorkEducation / Revue Canadienne d’Éducation En Service Social, 5(1).https://doi.org/10.2307/41670012Muller, M., & Boutte, G. S. (2019). A framework for helping teachers interrupt oppression in theirclassrooms. Journal for Multicultural Education, 13(1), 94–105.https://doi.org/10.1108/jme-09-2017-0052Murrar, S., & Brauer, M. (2017). Entertainment-education effectively reduces prejudice. Group Processes& Intergroup Relations, 21(7), 1053–1077. https://doi.org/10.1177/136843021668235Nagda, B. (Ratnesh) A., Tropp, L. R., & Paluck, E. L. (2006). Looking Back as We Look Ahead:Integrating Research, Theory, and Practice on Intergroup Relations. Journal of Social Issues,62(3), 439–451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2006.00467.xNelson J. R. (2003). Bioethics and the marginalization of mental illness. Journal of the Society ofChristian Ethics, 23(2), 179–197.Nowicka, M., Krzyżowski, Ł., & Ohm, D. (2017). Transnational solidarity, the refugees and opensocieties in Europe. Current Sociology, 67(3), 383–400.https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392117737817O’Brien, K. S., Daníelsdóttir, S., Ólafsson, R. P., Hansdóttir, I., Fridjónsdóttir, T. G., & Jónsdóttir, H.(2013). The relationship between physical appearance concerns, disgust, and anti-fat prejudice.Body Image, 10(4), 619–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.07.012O’Brien, K. S., Latner, J. D., Ebneter, D., & Hunter, J. A. (2012). Obesity discrimination: the role ofphysical appearance, personal ideology, and anti-fat prejudice. International Journal of Obesity,37(3), 455–460. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2012.52Opfermann, L. S. (2019). Language, trust and transformation: exploring theatre as a research method withmigrant youth. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(2), 139–153.https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1645386Paluck, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice Reduction: What Works? A Review and Assessment ofResearch and Practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 339–367.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163607Payne, M. (2002). Modern Social Work Theory. Oxford Univ Press Us.Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup Contact Theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65–85.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65Pettigrew, T. F. (2021). Contextual social psychology : reanalyzing prejudice, voting, and intergroupcontact. American Psychological Association.Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751Piekut, A., & Valentine, G. (2021). Generation-making narratives and responses to diversity in Poland.International Sociology, 36(6), 887–905. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580921998527Pirchio, S., Passiatore, Y., Panno, A., Maricchiolo, F., & Carrus, G. (2018). A Chip Off the Old Block:Parents’ Subtle Ethnic Prejudice Predicts Children’s Implicit Prejudice. Frontiers in Psychology,9(110). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00110Pittman, C. T. (2010). Race and Gender Oppression in the Classroom: The Experiences of WomenFaculty of Color with White Male Students. Teaching Sociology, 38(3), 183–196.https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055x1037012099Podhorecka, M., Husejko, J., Pyszora, A., Woźniewicz, A., & Kędziora-Kornatowska, K. (2022).Attitudes Towards the Elderly in Polish Society: Is Knowledge About Old Age and PersonalExperiences a Predictor of Ageism? Psychology Research and Behavior Management, Volume15(15), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.2147/prbm.s342800Polynczuk-Alenius, K. (2020). At the intersection of racism and nationalism: Theorising andcontextualising the “anti-immigration” discourse in Poland. Nations and Nationalism, 27(3).https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12611Pon, G., Gosine, K., & Phillips, D. (2011). IMMEDIATE RESPONSE: ADDRESSING ANTI-NATIVEAND ANTI-BLACK RACISM IN CHILD WELFARE. International Journal of Child, Youth andFamily Studies, 2(3/4), 385. https://doi.org/10.18357/ijcyfs23/420117763Poulter, J. (2005). Integrating theory and practice: A new heuristic paradigm for social work practice.Australian Social Work, 58(2), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0748.2005.00204.xProctor, K., Perlesz, A., Moloney, B., McIlwaine, F., & O’Neill, I. (2008). Exploring theatre of theoppressed in family therapy clinical work and supervision. Counselling and PsychotherapyResearch, 8(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733140801889139Pszczółkowska, D. (2022). Poland: What does it take for a public opinion coup to be reversed?International Migration, 60(4), 221–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.13041Raabe, T., & Beelmann, A. (2011). Development of Ethnic, Racial, and National Prejudice in Childhoodand Adolescence: A Multinational Meta-Analysis of Age Differences. Child Development, 82(6),1715–1737. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01668.xRogers, J. (2012). Anti-Oppressive Social Work Research: Reflections on Power in the Creation ofKnowledge. Social Work Education, 31(7), 866–879.https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2011.602965Rose, P. (2010). Achieving Education for All through public–private partnerships? Development inPractice, 20(4-5), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614521003763160Saeed, H. (2015). Empowering Unheard Voices through “Theatre of the Oppressed”: Reflections on theLegislative Theatre Project for Women in Afghanistan--Notes from the Field. Journal of HumanRights Practice, 7(2), 299–326. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huu028Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 118–137). Sage Publications, Inc.Sheppard, H., Bizumic, B., & Calear, A. (2023). Prejudice toward people with borderline personalitydisorder: Application of the prejudice toward people with mental illness framework. InternationalJournal of Social Psychiatry, 69(5), 002076402311550.https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640231155056Siemieńska, R. (2021). Attitudes toward Young and Old People and Their Placein Poland’s ChangingSociety. Polish Sociological Review, 214(2), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.26412/psr214.07Slote, M. (2007). The ethics of care and empathy. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Souto‐Otero, M. (2021). Validation of non‐formal and informal learning in formal education: Covert andovert. European Journal of Education, 56(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12464Spudich, D., & Spudich, C. (2010). Welcoming intergenerational communication and senior citizenvolunteers in schools. Improving Schools, 13(2), 133–142.https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480210375350Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.),Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Stypinska, J. (2022). AI ageism: a critical roadmap for studying age discrimination and exclusion indigitalized societies. AI & SOCIETY, 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01553-5Suzina, A. C., & Tufte, T. (2020). Freire’s vision of development and social change: Past experiences,present challenges and perspectives for the future. International Communication Gazette, 82(5),411–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048520943692100Szekeres, H., Halperin, E., Kende, A., & Saguy, T. (2022). Endorsing negative intergroup attitudes tojustify failure to confront prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 136843022211204.https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221120488Szulc, Ł. (2021). Uncanny Europe and Protective Europeanness: When European Identity Becomes aQueerly Viable Option. Sociology, 003803852110241.https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385211024117Tajfel, H. (1978). The achievement of inter-group differentiation. Differentiation between social groups.Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In W. G. Austin & S.Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of inter-group relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA:Brooks/Cole.Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. PoliticalPsychology, 276–293. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16Tang, S. Y., & Browne, A. J. (2008). “Race” matters: racialization and egalitarian discourses involvingAboriginal people in the Canadian health care context. Ethnicity & Health, 13(2), 109–127.https://doi.org/10.1080/13557850701830307Tenny, S., Brannan, J. M., & Brannan, G. D. (2022). Qualitative Study. In StatPearls. StatPearlsPublishing.Thomas, V. (2020). “How Dare You!” African American Faculty and the Power Struggle With WhiteStudents. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 23(4), 155545892094576.https://doi.org/10.1177/1555458920945762Tomasz Browarek. (2023). The Situation of the Roma in Poland in the Opinions of the AdvisoryCommittee and the Committee of Experts of the Council of Europe. Annales Universitatis MariaeCurie-Skłodowska, 30(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.17951/k.2023.30.1.47-59Tran, K. Q., & S. Selcen Guzey. (2023). Good intentions are not enough: A case study uncoveringperpetuation of internalized and interpersonal oppression in middle school STEM classrooms.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21924Trepte, S., & Loy, L. S. (2017). Social Identity Theory and Self-Categorization Theory. The InternationalEncyclopedia of Media Effects, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0088Tropp, L. R., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2005). Relationships Between Intergroup Contact and Prejudice AmongMinority and Majority Status Groups. Psychological Science, 16(12), 951–957.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01643.xTropp, L. R., White, F., Rucinski, C. L., & Tredoux, C. (2022). Intergroup Contact and PrejudiceReduction: Prospects and Challenges in Changing Youth Attitudes. Review of GeneralPsychology, 26(3), 108926802110465. https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680211046517UNHCR. (1951). Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. UNHCR; UNHCR.https://www.unhcr.org/media/convention-and-protocol-relating-status-refugeesUnzueta, M. M., Everly, B. A., & Gutiérrez, A. S. (2014). Social dominance orientation moderatesreactions to Black and White discrimination claimants. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 54, 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.04.005Vervaet, R., Van Houtte, M., & Stevens, P. A. J. (2018). The Ethnic Prejudice of Flemish Pupils: The Roleof Pupils’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Multicultural Teacher Culture. Teachers College Record:The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 120(5), 1–30.https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000508Vezzali, L., & Stathi, S. (2020). Using Intergroup Contact to Fight Prejudice and Negative Attitudes (1sted.). Taylor and Francis.https://www.perlego.com/book/1899975/using-intergroup-contact-to-fight-prejudice-and-negative-attitudes-psychological-perspectives-pdf101Visintin, E. P., Green, E. G. T., Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., & Berent, J. (2019). Intergroup contactmoderates the influence of social norms on prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,136843021983948. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219839485Wang, C., Wang, K., Bian, A., Islam, R., Keya, K. N., Foulds, J., & Pan, S. (2021, July 28). UserAcceptance of Gender Stereotypes in Automated Career Recommendations. ArXiv.org.https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.07112Weaver, C. N. (2008). Social Distance as a Measure of Prejudice Among Ethnic Groups in the UnitedStates. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(3), 779–795.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00326.xWilson, E. C., Chen, Y.-H., Arayasirikul, S., Raymond, H. F., & McFarland, W. (2016). The Impact ofDiscrimination on the Mental Health of Trans*Female Youth and the Protective Effect of ParentalSupport. AIDS and Behavior, 20(10), 2203–2211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-016-1409-7Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., & Ropp, S. A. (1997). The extended contact effect:Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 73(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.73Żemojtel-Piotrowska, M., Piotrowski, J., & Sawicki, A. (2021). Religiosity, spirituality, nationalnarcissism, and prejudice toward refugees and sexual minorities in Poland. Psychology of Religionand Spirituality. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000430Żemojtel-Piotrowska, M., Piotrowski, J. P., & Sedikides, C. (2023). Agentic collective narcissism andcommunal collective narcissism. In P. K. Jonason (Ed.), Shining light on the dark side ofpersonality: Measurement properties and theoretical advances (pp. 63–71). Hogrefe.Zhou, & Salvendy. (2017). Human aspects of IT for the aged population : third International Conference,ITAP 2017, held as part of HCI International 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 9-14, 2017,proceedings. Springer.Zirkel, S. (2008). Creating More Effective Multiethnic Schools. Social Issues and Policy Review, 2(1),187–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2008.00015.x102103APPENDICESAPPENDIX ARIGA STRADINS UNIVERSITYFACULTY OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SOCIAL WELFAREWelfare and social work departmentInformed ConsentBy this I certify that Wiktoria Wilk is the 2nd-year full-time student in Erasmus Mundus European JointMaster Social Work with Children and Youth (ESWOCHY) program and is carrying out her research forher Master thesis on the topic “The “Theatre of the Oppressed” as a Social Work Method for ReducingPrejudices among Youth in Poland". Aim of the research: to gather data by conducting online surveyswith students who can share their views on prejudices in the school environment.I hereby confirm that she is acknowledged about the research ethics in social science and social workethics in her research activities, including the following principles:● Participants will be given information about the purpose of the research project.● Participants have the right to decide whether they will participate in the research project, evenafter the surveys have been concluded.● The collected data will be handled confidentially, including data analysis and presentation andwill be kept in such a way that no unauthorized person can view or access it.● The recorded online survey data will be used only for this research purposes and will be deletedafter finishing the research.It is kindly asked for your cooperation in informing parents so that they may consent to the datagathering as part of an ongoing research project.ESWOCHY is implemented by the universities of the Consortium that is Mykolas Romeris University(Lithuania), Riga Stradins University (Latvia), The Catholic University in Ruzomberok (Slovakia) andISCTE University Institute of Lisbon (Portugal).ESWOCHY program director Anna BrokaRiga Stradins UniversityWelfare and Social Work department+371 67061541, +371 27222201E-mail: anna.broka@rsu.lv104APPENDIX BQUESTIONNAIRE: THE PREJUDICE AMONG YOUTH IN HIGH SCHOOLS IN POLANDDear Participants,Thank you for taking the time to participate in this important survey on prejudice among high school students inPoland. Your insights are invaluable for understanding and addressing issues related to diversity, discrimination,and inclusion. Please, remember:- All information you give will be treated with confidentiality. Your responses will be collected in ananonymous way. No personal links will be used for the further analysis and report. - Your participation isentirely voluntary, and you have the right to skip any question you don’t want to answer.- Your answers will be stored securely and used for the research purpose only. - Bycontinuing with the questionnaire, you consent to participate in the study.In case of any questions or concerns, please contact the researcher: Wiktoria Wilk. (email:wiwilk@stud.mruni.eu, or tel. 572840245)Thank you for your extremely valuable participation. Your answers will contribute better to a betterunderstanding of the issue of prejudice in Poland.Wiktoria WilkSECTION 1 - PREJUDICE ON THE NATIONAL LEVELUnderstanding of prejudice: Please indicate Yes / No / I prefer not to sayHave you experienced any of the following within the last school year in Poland:1.Prejudice - Yes / No / I prefer not to sayIf yes, please specify. What was it based on:■ Gender■ Age■ Nationality■ Religion■ Sexual orientation■ Skin colour■ Ethnicity (being Roma/ Chechen)■ Ideological beliefs (vegan)■ Disability■ Weight■ Any other reason: please specify which one.2.Discrimination? - Yes / No / I prefer not to sayIf yes, please specify, was it based on the…■ Gender■ Age■ Nationality■ Religion■ Sexual orientation■ Skin colour■ Ethnicity (being Roma/ Chechen)■ Ideological beliefs (vegan)■ Disability■ Weight105■ Any other reason: please specify which one.3. Identification with your own groupUsing the scale from 1 (Strongly Disagree) -5 (Strongly Agree) please refer to each sentence:● I have a lot in common with other Poles. (bonds)● I feel a strong bond with other Poles. (bonds)● I often think about the fact that I am Polish. (centrality)● Overall, being Polish is an important part of who I am. (centrality)● Overall, I am happy with being Polish. (affect)● Generally, I feel good when I think of myself as a Pole. (affect)4.Right wing authoritarianismUsing the scale from 1-5 please refer to each sentence:● Society should handle disagreements and laziness with a strong approach.● Those causing trouble should know they're not welcome in society.● Following the rules of society is very important and should be strictly enforced.● To keep life safe and sound, we really need strong leaders in charge.● Let the leaders make the big decisions that affect everyone in society.● We should appreciate the people in charge for giving us clear directions on what to do.● It's important to keep and take care of our traditions.● Don't doubt things that have been proven to work.● Doing things the way they've always been done is usually the best way.5.Do you think that the attitudes in Poland are negative towards…..?Please indicate on the scale from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree)● Roma minority● Jewish minority● Muslim● Ukrainians● People of different skin colour than white● Sexual orientation● Transgender● Physical disabilities● Old people● Children● Men● Women6.Using the scale from 1-5 please indicate if you think that the public media (TVP, TVN, Onet etc.) haveimpact on spreading the negative ideas and prejudicess about:● Muslim● Jewish minority● LGBTQ● Transgender● Disabled person● Roma● Ukrainians● Man● Woman● A obese person● A thin person● older adults● Young person1067.Using the scale from 1-5 please indicate if you think that the social media (Facebook, Instagram,TikTok, twitter) have impact on spreading the negative ideas and prejudice about:● Muslim● Jewish● LGBTQ● Transgender● Disabled person● Roma● Ukrainians● Man● Woman● A obese person● A thin person● older adults● Young person8. General Prejudice ScaleOn the scale from 1 - 5 please indicate:1. To what extent do you agree with the following statement?2. People from different cultures enrich our society.3. Roma people have different traditions that I would like to learn more about.4. Individuals with different than the normative heterosexual orientation should be treated equally.5. I do not mind if our president is transgender.6. It is important to challenge the stereotypes about gender roles.7. People with different religious beliefs should be accepted by our society.8. We should have more mosques in our country for the followers of Islam.9. Women are not as competent as men in the leading positions.10. Older individuals do not have valid opinions.11. Thin people have more opportunities on the job market.9.Please answer YES / NO / I DON’T KNOWDo you think enough effort is made in Poland to combat prejudice and discrimination?9a. Why?SECTION 2 - PREJUDICE AT THE SCHOOL LEVEL10.Using a scale from 1 to 5 or “Prefer not to say”, please tell me if you would feel comfortable about havingsomeone from each of the following categories as a headmaster of the school?● ○ A different skin color person -● ○ A person of a different religion than yours● ○ A woman● ○ A man● ○ A disabled person● ○ AN LGBTQ● ○ A transgender person● ○ A Roma person● ○ A child● ○ An older adult● ○ An obese person10711.Do the schools and lesson plans in your high school incorporate education and information ondiversity, social inclusion, and prejudices?Yes / No / I don’t know12.Please answer on the scale from 1 -5 if you agree that the School materials and lessons should includemore information about the diversity related to:● People of different than most of the population skin color● Different religion than the majority of population● Sexual orientation.● Different ethnicities and their cultures (Roma, Chechens)● Different types of physical disabilities.● Different types of mental disabilities.13 .On the scale from 1 - 5 please indicate if you think that enough effort is made in your school to combatprejudice and discrimination?1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3.Neutral 4.Agree 5. Strongly Agree● ○ Why? ………………………………………………………………………………………………● ○ How do you think the school could promote diversity and inclusion?a) discussions included during the regular lessons;b) non - formal (voluntary) education workshops;c) no need for any additional events.SECTION 3 - PREJUDICE ON THE PERSONAL LEVEL14. Do you have friends or acquaintances that are: (YES / NO / I don’t know/ I prefer not to answer.)● Of a different nationality than your● Of different than your skin color● Disabled● Muslim● Jewish● Roma● LGBTQ● Transgender● Who has different ideological beliefs (vegan)?● Who weighs differently than you?● Who come from different socio-economic backgrounds (are poorer or richer)15.Using the scale from 1 to 5 would you describe YOUR views and the views of your:● I have the same views as my Mother● I have the same views as my Father● I have the same views as my Close friends● I have the same views as the Youth in general16.In case of harassment, discrimination or cyberbullying how do you feel about being able to protectyourself? I feel…● Very Insecure: I feel very insecure and unable to protect myself.● Insecure: I feel somewhat insecure and may struggle to protect myself.● Neutral: I feel neither secure or insecure about protecting myself.● Secure: I feel somewhat secure and confident in my ability to protect myself.● Very Secure: I feel very secure and confident in my ability to protect myself.17.In the scale from 1-5 please indicate if you agree thatIn case of experiencing harassment or discrimination the best source of seeking help would be….● Talk to the parents108● Talking to a friend● Talking to a schools’ teachers● Informing and talking to a School Pedagogue / Social Worker● Calling Police● Calling an Ombudsman● Seeking help online anonymously● Not talking to anyone● Other: (please specify)18.Is there anything else you would like to share about the topic of prejudices among high school youth inPoland? ……………DEMOGRAPHICS:● Your age:● Your gender:● Where do you live?■ urban to 19.000 inhabitants■ urban 20.000 - 49.000■ urban 50.000 - 99.000■ urban 100.000 - 499.000■ urban more than 500.000■ rural?● What is your political attitude on the scale from 1-5?● (1 – definitely left-wing, 5 – definitely right-wing), or “I don’t know” or “I prefer not to say”● Your nationality:● Religious belief: Christian Catholic/ Christian Orthodox / Christian Luteran/Protestantism/Jehovah's Witnesses or other alternative belief/ Muslim/ Jewish/ Atheist / Other.● How strongly religious are you? Strongly / Moderately/ Slightly/ not at all● Which of the following best describes your family socioeconomic status:○ Upper class○ Upper middle class○ Middle class○ Lower middle class○ Lower class○ Prefer not to say109APPENDIX CFORMULARZ ZGODYStudent: Wiktoria Wilk Katedra Nauk SpołecznychKierownik: Anna BrokaE-mail: wiwilk@stud.mruni.euTytuł badania:Odkrywanie postaw wobec uprzedzeń wśród młodzieży w Polsce. Perspektywa pracownika socjalnego.Jeżeli się z tym zgadzasz, zaznacz pole po każdym stwierdzeniu.Zapoznałem się z celem tego badania. Miałem możliwość rozważenia informacji izadania pytań. Odpowiedzi na wszystkie pytania były zadowalające.Rozumiem, że mój udział jest dobrowolny i że mogę w każdej chwilizrezygnować bez podania przyczyny.Rozumiem, że wyniki tego badania mogą być publikowane i/lub prezentowane naspotkaniach. Wyrażam zgodę na rozpowszechnianie w ten sposób moichanonimowych danych, które nie pozwalają na moją identyfikację.Rozumiem, że o informacje zebrane w trakcie tego badania może poprosićodpowiedni personel (np. przełożeni i egzaminatorzy zewnętrzni) i je sprawdzić.Wyrażam zgodę na działanie dowolnego organu, z prawem dostępu do niego iprzeglądania informacji.Wyrażam zgodę na rejestrację audio/video mojej rozmowy kwalifikacyjnej. Napotrzeby badania transkrybowane i analizowane będzie wyłącznie nagraniedźwiękowe.Wyrażam zgodę na użycie w publikacjach dosłownych cytatów; Nie zostanęwymieniona, ale rozumiem, że istnieje ryzyko, że mogę zostać zidentyfikowana.Chciałbym otrzymać dalsze informacje na temat wyników badania oraz przesłaćmi podsumowanie wyników pocztą elektroniczną.Zgadzam się wziąć udział w tym badaniuData: 25 lutego 2024 rUczestnik BadaczNazwa: Name: Wiktoria WilkData:110APPENDIX D111Research Question Research Objective Question in the Interview GuideWhat are the perspectives ofprofessionals engaged inyouth work regarding theprevalence andmanifestations of prejudiceswithin their respectiveworking schoolenvironments?Exploring the perspectiveof professionals in bothformal and non-formaleducational settingsconcerning theirperception of youth.1. Could you describe yourcurrent youth work setting in terms ofthe diversity of the youth population(e.g. cultural, ethnic, religious ordisability background) and how longyou have worked there?2. What could you tell me aboutyoung people today from yourperspective? What changes are weseeing among young people today?Analyzing theperspectives ofprofessionals in bothformal and non-formaleducational settingsconcerning prevalentprejudices in their workenvironments.3. Do you notice any form ofdiscrimination and prejudices amongpeople in your work environment?Can you give examples?4. What factors or causes do youthink contribute to prejudice amongyoung people in Polish schools?(How do these factors manifestthemselves?)5. Do you feel involved orresponsible in dealing with bias inyour work environment?Discovering the mainchallenges encounteredby professionals whenaddressing prejudicessswithin formal andnon-formal educationalcontexts with youth inPoland.6. Do you notice the generationdifference in Poland? Do you noticedifferences in young people'sattitudes towards different agegroups? to older people etc?7. Do you see gender role bias amongyoung people?9. Do you work withtransgender people? If so, have youobserved any prejudices againsttransgender students? If so, why doyou think this is happening and whatis the attitude of Polish youth towardstransgender people?Table 5. Semi-structured Interview Guide based on the research questions and objectives.11210. How common do you thinkdiscrimination based on physicalappearance is among young people inPolish society?To what extent can theprinciple of ‘CriticalConsciousness’ outlined inPaulo Freire's "Pedagogy ofthe Oppressed" be utilizedby professionals workingwith youth in Poland as aframework for addressingand mitigating prejudices?Analyzing the applicationof Critical Pedagogyprinciples in addressingprejudice among Polishyouth.11. Do you engage young people,and how, in identifying issues orissues that affect them personally orin their communities?12. Do you have the opportunityto use the experiential educationmethod when presenting prejudicesto young people?13. Do you have open discussionsand dialogues among young peopleabout identified problems andpotential solutions?To explore thesuggestions for methodsand techniques thatprofessionals aspire toemploy while engagingwith youth in their work.14. What techniques and toolswould you use to develop yourimagination and empathy so that youcan understand different points ofview?APPENDIX E# YearbornPrevious Education Years of Experiencewith youthFI1 1979 ● Graduated in food engineering;● Postgraduate studies in teaching.7 y.FI2 1994 ● Mathematics with a specialization inteaching;● Master's studies in Pedagogy;● Having a license.4 y.FI3 1972 ● Pedagogical mathematics 27 y.FI4 1985 ● Bachelors in B.H.P. Master, Safetyand Hygiene of Work;● Postgraduate studies, in pedagogy;● Postgraduate studies in HumanNutrition and Dietetics.5 y.NFI 1 1996 ● Internal organizational trainingwithin ZHP at all three levels, i.e. guide,sub-master and master;● Course of colonial educators;License to be a colonial educator;● Various smaller workshops.10 y.NFI 2 1998 ● Graduated in Journalism and SocialCommunication.● Master's degree from theDepartment of Information Society.1,5 y.NFI3 1993 ● Graduated in psychology;● Pedagogical training at apost-graduate degree;● Currently doing post-diplomadegree in suicidology.2 y 6 monthsTable 6. Profile of the participants in semi-structured interviews.113APPENDIX FMain Themes Subthemes Emerging Themes1. Perception of theProfessionals about YoungPeople1.1. Needs and ChallengesDigital Citizenship and SafetyMental health and Well-beingSocial Inclusion andDiscriminationEducation and DevelopmentNormative Behaviors1.2. Strengths and CapabilitiesOpennessEmotional AwarenessPassions and knowledge1.3. Engagements and CommunicationLack of motivationLack of focus1.4 Contact with ParentsInfluence from HomeParents lacking right resourcesOver Caring ParentsLack of time1.5 Generational BIasCommunication and BoundariesTechnology UseValues and AttitudesRespect and AuthorityRelationship Issues2. Prejudice Management inthe Working Environment(by Professionals)2.1 Identifying the DiversityPhysical AppearanceGender and Sex OrientationMental and Physical DisabilitiesReligionNationality/Ethnicity2.2 Prevalence of PrejudiceRecognition of PrejudiceDenial of PrejudiceNeutral Perception2.3 Nature of PrejudiceOpen prejudicessUnconscious biasHormones2.4 Manifestation of prejudiceMicroagressionExclusionHate-speech2.5 Mitigating PrejudiceOpen ConversationCommentsRedirecting to ProfessionalsBystander position2.6. Suggestions on Tackling PrejudiceCollaborative gamesEducation Teachers/Youth/ParentsContact Theory3. Implementation of thePedagogy of the Oppressed3.1 Engaging Students into Identifying the SocialIssues (CC)Limited timeLimited KnowledgeChallenges of studentsParticipation3.2 Activities and MethodsDiscussion on the ForumExperiential LearningRole-play and DramaContact with Out-Group members3.3 Impact and ReflectionEmpowermentDevelopment1144. Programs for Prejudiceand DiscriminationReduction4.1 Availability of the Programs for studentsInformal ProgramsFormal ProgramsLack of Initiatives4.2 Availability of the programs for teachersVariety in OptionsLimited EffectivenessImportance of Collaboration4.3 Interest in the ProgramsTeachersStudents5. Education of the interviewers6. Working environment6.1. School environment6.2. NFE working environmentTable 7. The themes, sub-themes and emerging themes from the interviews.115APPENDIX GNon-plagiarism declarationSubmitted to the Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Social Work with Child and Youth:• Has not been submitted to any other Institute/University/College• Contains proper references and citations for other scholarly work• Contains proper citation and references from my own prior scholarly work• Has listed all citations in a list of references.I am aware that violation of this code of conduct is regarded as an attempt to plagiarize and will result in afailing grade in the programme.Date 17/05/2024Signature: Wiktoria WilkName (in block letters): WIKTORIA AGATA WILK116APPENDIX HTable 8. Participants’ division by age, gender and urban vs. rural area.Table 9. General Prejudice Scale. Questions.117Table 10: Age of Participants.Table 11. Correlation between General prejudices and Similarity to Parent’s point of view118Table 12. Correlation between General Prejudice levels and intergroup contact.Table 13. Correlation between General Prejudice levels and Social Distance119Table 14. Correlation between Social Distance across various minority groupsTable 15. Correlation between Prejudice Experienced on the basis of weight, gender and ideologies.120 |
| Clean Full Text | (not set) |
| Language | (not set) |
| Doi | (not set) |
| Arxiv | (not set) |
| Mag | (not set) |
| Acl | (not set) |
| Pmid | (not set) |
| Pmcid | (not set) |
| Pub Date | 2024-06-06 01:00:00 |
| Pub Year | 2024 |
| Journal Name | (not set) |
| Journal Volume | (not set) |
| Journal Page | (not set) |
| Publication Types | (not set) |
| Tldr | (not set) |
| Tldr Version | (not set) |
| Generated Tldr | (not set) |
| Search Term Used | Jehovah's AND yearPublished>=2024 |
| Reference Count | (not set) |
| Citation Count | (not set) |
| Influential Citation Count | (not set) |
| Last Update | 2024-11-02 00:00:00 |
| Status | 0 |
| Aws Job | (not set) |
| Last Checked | (not set) |
| Modified | 2025-01-13 22:06:31 |
| Created | 2025-01-13 22:06:31 |