Another example is the Viktor Rydbergs School Foundation, with four sought-after post-16 schools in the Stockholm region. Two of these are located in the inner-city area. One of these two schools, Viktor Rydbergs gymnasium Odenplan is located in a former hospital building. The building has experienced substantial renovation and today looks strikingly similar to the prestigious public schools in Stockholm. As seen in Figure 2.2, both the architectural design with red bricks and the inscription over the main entrance of Viktor Rydbergs gymnasium Odenplan (on the right) emulates the design of public Norra Real (on the left) and Södra Latin, both dating back to the 1890s. Viktor Rydbergs gymnasium Odenplan even refers to the school as a ‘cultural landmark’ and continues by mentioning the construction date of 1885 (Viktor Rydberg Odenplan, 2019),13 creating a similar historical legacy as older elite schools.
Figure 2.2: Norra Real and Viktor Rydbergs gymnasium Odenplan
Something new, something borrowed
Most recently established inner-city independent schools do not have historical buildings. Typically, they provide educational settings in centrally located, residential or office buildings. As Figure 2.3 displays, sometimes store fronts are used as access points and entrances. Distinct from older inner-city elite schools or more recent schools inhabiting historical buildings, these schools also claim the profits from being centrally located. Consequently, there are several differences in how profits are made from the symbolic assets of geography and architecture.
Figure 2.3: Two independent schools inhabiting office and residential buildings
One other interesting strategy could be found in the appearance of certain independent schools. For instance, the effort to capitalise from locational profits leads some post-16 schools to share a common space. When the concentration is this intense, students can choose to attend one of several comparable schools in the same area. In fact, schools owned by the same or competing companies occasionally share the same building. These agglomerations are often used by for-profit enterprises who provide smaller educational settings, often supply specific educational programmes and attract fewer high-achieving students. An illustrative example is provided in Figure 2.4 where three different post-16 schools share an office building from the 1970s. Two of the schools, Snitz and Cybergymnasiet are owned by Swedish Education Group AB and the third school, NTI Handelsgymnasiet, is owned by formerly mentioned Academedia.
Figure 2.4: Three independent schools using a former office building
As these examples suggest, the use of school buildings varies substantially among the different post-16 schools. The point we want to make, is that these schools profit from being located within the inner-city. At the same time, schools located in low-income areas and so on, struggle to provide educational opportunities. This is related to the socio-symbolic boundaries of the city. Still, as we will show later, besides the variations in how schools appropriate space, there are also differences in the degree that schools are recognised as prestigious/sought-after inner-city schools.
Getting a ‘feeling’ for the city
To understand the strategies deployed by the different schools in the city centre of Stockholm, and the process of appropriating space, it is necessary to recognise students’ perception of the city. That is to say, there is a relationship between students’ strategies and opinions of preferable schools and the institutional strategies deployed by schools.
The geographical location of the school is not the only important feature for students. If it were, hierarchies between schools would be less observable. However, a large proportion of the interviewees make reference to their willingness to attend centrally located schools. For many students, the inner-city represent a hub, or the centre of the region and it delivers preferable schools within a reasonable distance due to the possibilities of public transport. There are many reasons for students’ willingness to be geographically mobile and these reasons could usually be summarised by the term ‘melting-pot’ (Webber, 2007).
‘Melting-pot’ includes both the previously mentioned socio-symbolic boundaries and characteristics such as historical legacy. Equally important are features of meeting, culture and consumption. That is to say, a transformative city that simultaneously represents intermingling, possibilities and prosperity (Franzén, 2007). These categories are often inseparable and encapsulate a place where interesting things occur while it also refers to the distinction between home and away. Or in other terms, the difference between attending a familiar neighbourhood school or parting with the comfort of the accustomed and exploring new things. One important factor here is the rhetoric of ‘freedom of choice’. Students often refer to school choice as a facilitator of mobility and pluralism. This does not necessarily mean a social pluralism, rather a geographical mixture. Therefore, they cite this as a reason for attending inner-city schools rather than neighbourhood schools (Larsson and Hultqvist, 2017).
‘Then when I thought about it, it was like this: why exactly the inner-city? … Then it was like this: yes, but maybe because it is in the middle – so it is in the city, that is simply where you have mostly central Stockholm. So, you have people from everywhere come here all the time and it is so mixed. It won’t be this kind of people from just the red [metro line] or people from just the green line but it’s so mixed up so it’s so fun getting to know other people than just the ones you’ve known in your [residential] area.’ (Male, working-class)
The term ‘melting-pot’ also includes the cultural-consumption dimension of the city. Students often recognise the importance of the proximity to opportunities such as shopping culture, coffee houses and restaurants. It is the added experience of what occurs outside of school and differences from routine, that become crucial. As a student explains:
‘But [attending a school in the city] is something different. I think just when school ends on a Friday. Then you can go out and do something fun instead of going home to someone. But when you go to where I live – then it is like this … Yes, but everyone meets up at someone’s home. Here [in the city] you can go to a café or walk around town. Thus, make more