Research Group Education, Social Mobility and Social Cohesion

(EDUC)

December 2006

INTRODUCTION

Walter Müller MZES, University of Mannheim

The objectives of the EDUC research group are to investigate the pivotal role of education in

shaping individuals’ life chances in contemporary societies and to examine the mechanisms

that affect the degree of equality / inequality of educational opportunity in these societies. The

research group studies to what extent and how educational chances are unevenly distributed

among different social groups and to what extent individual characteristics as gender,

generation, social origin, and ethnicity affect the opportunity to reach the various educational

levels and degrees offered by contemporary societies. Another set of important questions

concerns the gain that individuals and society have from education. To what extent exactly do

different types and levels of education affect individuals’ life chances – in particular provide

secure and profitable employment, protect against unemployment, poverty and other social

risks – and enable advantageous occupational and mobility chances? Finally, the group

investigates how inequalities in educational participation and the returns to education change

over time and vary between countries.

The Research Group is committed to address these issues in Research Teams

concentrating on a number of specific issues. This State of the Art Report follows the lines of

these focused efforts and essentially reports on the state of research in the following areas on

which the Research Teams so far concentrate.

(1) Improving grounds for comparative education research in Europe

(2) Social mobility and educational attainment during the 20th century

(3) Educational level and field of study as channels of social inheritance and gender

inequality

(4) Problems of an education-based meritocracy

(5) Ethnic educational inequality in a comparative perspective (EEI).

Several additional topics, which are also of interest to the work of the EDUC Research Group,

have been intensively reviewed in the State of the Art Report of the CHANGEQUAL network

(“Economic Change, Unequal Life Chances and Quality of Life”), notably on:

2

• “The Comparative Study of Social Mobiliy” by Richard Breen

• “Transition from education to work” by Walter Müller

• “Gender, education an labour market outcomes” by Emer Smyth.

Rather than extending on the topics of these reviews, published in 2004, we concentrate here

on the issues (1)-(5) above that represent the main areas of present work of the EDUC

Research Group.

In this introduction, each of the topics is briefly introduced. After that the specific reports on

each topic then follow.

(1) IMPROVING GROUNDS FOR COMPARATIVE EDUCATION RESEARCH IN EUROPE: EVALUATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD CLASSIFICATION OF EDUCATION (ISCED 1997) FOR COMPARATIVE RESEARCH

Team leader: Irena Kogan, MZES; Report by Irena Kogan, with 13 country reports to be downloaded from the EQUALSOC-

website.

The work of this team and the respective report is motivated by the fact that the structure of

education and learning systems has changed dramatically over the last decades. The

increasing complexity of educational systems, bigger choices between types of programmes

and modes of attendance have imposed additional difficulties for the international

comparability of educational attainment. New forms of education have appeared and the

boundaries that have traditionally separated different types of educational programmes have

blurred. These structural changes in national education systems have brought about the

revision of the original ISCED classification in 1997. ISCED 1997, a new instrument for

measuring educational attainment in large-scale comparative research, is a significant

improvement over the earlier version of ISCED as it allows to measure in much more detail

the level and type (general or vocational) of education and training. In this sense it follows the

theoretical conception underlying the CASMIN-educational scale that has become a standard

instrument in much comparative sociological research. However, the validity and comparative

quality of the new ISCED classification has not yet been thoroughly assessed. As good

comparable measures for education are essential for the research aims of the EDUC groups

and the EQUALSOC network at large, the aim of the team is to conduct an evaluation (and

perhaps partial revision) of this classification.

3

For criterion validation purposes, i.e. the demonstration that ISCED 1997 is a

reasonable measure of underlying educational attainment, coding paths from national

educational classifications to ISCED (as suggested by OECD) are reviewed by national

experts for their validity and accuracy. The experts examine whether the proposed coding

path can be accepted as valid operationalizations of the distinctions among the various levels

and types of education that are theoretically intended in ISCED educational typology. Further,

using OECD crosswalk tables, the ISCED educational classification is implemented in

representative national data sources, such as the national labour force surveys or census data.

Results obtained through this operation (e.g. on educational distributions and their

development over time) are examined in view of their consistency with knowledge on these

issues as available from educational research in the various countries. These findings are also

compared against the ISCED classification provided in the EULFS.

In future work, various further steps will be taken to validate the ISCED 1997

classification against the national educational classifications in multivariate analyses with

education appearing as both independent and dependent variable. Such construct validation

will consider whether and to what degree ISCED 1997 is superior/inferior/similar to national

education classifications in explaining life chances. The group will construct and test different

models designed to link a range of various outcomes with education measured in the ISCED

and national educational classifications. The validation studies will also involve cross-national

comparisons based on EULFS and ESS data and examine the consistency of results that are

obtained from major national data sources as compared to results found and reported from

international databases. Ultimately, recommendations can be derived from this work, how to

understand and use best educational information available in various national and

international data sources in order to avoid pitfalls and to achieve meaningful comparability in

research various countries of Europe.

The State of the Art review of the group includes an introduction to the general problem of

comparative educational measurement (with references to available work on the issue) and

gives a summary assessment of the results of the examinations carried out so far in the

project. The summary report is accompanied by the reports of the participating national

experts (available on the EQUALSOC-website) which provide national case studies of the

ISCED implementation in the various European countries, each of which also reviews

national literature relevant to the issue.

4

(2) EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND CLASS AND INCOME MOBILITY DURING THE 20TH CENTURY.

Team leader: Richard Breen, Nuffield College Reports by Louis-André Vallet, CNRS;

Robert Erikson, SOFI

While a lot of research has studied intergenerational class mobility, its variation between

countries and evolution over time, much less is known on how education affects different

forms of mobility. To contribute to this issue, this team has two main research aims: (1) it

performs a major comparative study on the changes that have occurred over the 20th century

in the role played by education in the reproduction of social advantage from generation to

generation. (2) it studies the similarities and differences on two crucial dimensions in which

social advantage and its intergenerational reproduction occurs, one being the intergenerational

reproduction of class position, the other being the intergenerational reproduction of income

levels individuals obtain; it also examines whether educational attainment plays a similar or

different role in shaping class mobility/immobility and income mobility/immobility. In order

to identify macro-structural and institutional factors that affect these processes both issues are

studied through comparative analyses of several European countries which vary in relevant

macro-structural and institutional conditions.

In view of the first problem area, basically two more specific processes have to be

studied: (a) how and why inequality (by social origin conditions) in educational attainment

has changed in recent decades, and (b) what the implications of changes in educational

inequality are for social mobility or immobility between generations. The state of research on

inequality in educational attainment is reviewed in the report by Louis-André Vallet on

“Progress and Current State of the Art in Comparative Educational Stratification Research”.

The recent state of research on social mobility has already been reviewed recently in the

CHANGEQUAL report, mentioned above, in the section on “The Comparative Study of

Social Mobiliy” by Richard Breen.

For long the study of intergenerational reproduction of inequality has been mainly

pursued in sociology concentrating on intergenerational class mobility. In recent years there

has been an increasing number of studies of income mobility. These studies have been mostly

conducted by economists whose main concern has been to estimate intergenerational

‘elasticities’ in income. One important result to emerge from these studies is that the

estimated dependence of the incomes of children on those of their parents is greatly

influenced by the way in which income is measured: i.e. a much greater dependence – or less

5

intergenerational mobility – is found where, for both parents and children, incomes are

averaged over a number years than where one-year measures are used. Economists would

regard the former method as giving a better indication of ‘permanent’ income – i.e. income

considered net of short-term fluctuations.

From a sociological standpoint, a number of questions arise that are pursued by the

team. First, the averaging of income over several years does not take into account the fact that

income trajectories tend to differ rather systematically across classes, and this could lead to

distortion. Thus, in considering the relationship between parents’ and children’s incomes at,

say, age 50, it would seem desirable to try to estimate incomes at this age by regressing

income on age (including age 50) and seek in this way to account for differing income

trajectories as well as of the volatility of yearly incomes.

Second, the possibility arises that class itself might serve as a good proxy for

permanent income – given what is known about the relationship between class and economic

security, stability and income prospects. At all events, it is interesting to investigate, using the

same datasets, the relative strength of intergenerational association between class position, on

the one hand, and income, measured in various ways, on the other.

Third, contingency-table methods of the kind developed by sociologists in the study of

class mobility can also be applied to the study of income mobility, especially in order to

investigate further possible non-linearities and asymmetries between upward and downward

movements.

In detail, the state of research in this area is discussed below in the section below on "Income

and Class Mobility" by Robert Erikson.

(3) EDUCATIONAL FIELDS OF STUDY AND EUROPEAN LABOUR MARKETS: GENDER, FAMILY AND SOCIAL CLASS ISSUES

Team leader: Herman van de Werfhorst (AIAS) Report by Herman van de Werfhorst (AIAS)

Most research on education addresses the vertical dimension of education, that is the

differentiation along different levels of qualifications. In the past few decades, the educational

careers of individuals in modern societies have changed dramatically. Due to many factors,

such as educational expansion, technological developments, increased complexity of work,

and a rising emphasis on lifelong learning, an increasing share of the populations of many

European countries have obtained specialized education in particular educational fields (e.g.

6

engineering, humanities, sociology, biology, etc). This tremendous change in the nature of the

skills that workers bring with them to the labour market necessitates closer attention to the

horizontal educational differentiations and their implications both for the labour market

opportunities of students and for resulting inequalities in life chances. Although academic

journal articles are now increasingly published about horizontal educational differentiations,

books with a more systematic and encompassing study of this problem are completely missing

from this literature. To fill this gap, this team is preparing a volume, in which in a highly

harmonized format a systematic combination of relevant empirical studies on the interplay

between specialized skills obtained in schooling and various labour market outcomes will be

offered. Each of the chapters will include a review of the literature in the specific domain.

In the review below, Herman van de Werfhorst provides a more general discussion of the

topic.

(4) PROBLEMS OF AN EDUCATION BASED MERITOCRACY (EBM)

Team leader: Michelle Jackson (Nuffield) Report by Michelle Jackson (Nuffield)

The idea of an education-based meritocracy has been an essential assumption in the liberal

theory of industrialism. It held that economically advanced societies would exhibit a high

level of social mobility because the increasing number of professional and managerial

positions would be filled on the basis of meritocratic principles. As part of this process it is

assumed that access to education becomes less and less dependent on class origin, while class

destination increasingly depends on educational achievement. Especially, in the recruitment to

jobs universalistic standards would displace particularistic ones; ‘achieved’ characteristics of

individuals would displace ‘ascribed’ ones. To assess this controversially discussed idea of an

EBM this team focuses research on the further investigation of what appear to be three major

countervailing processes: (i) persisting class differentials in the take-up of opportunities for

higher education among children of the same level of demonstrated academic ability; (ii) the

declining role of educational qualifications (found in some countries) in mediating

intergenerational class mobility, in part at least as a result of the increasingly variable

importance that employers attach to such qualifications in their recruitment and promotion

policies; (iii) the capacity of children from more advantaged class backgrounds to maintain

7

their class positions even when their educational attainments are only modest by exploiting

‘ascribed’ rather than ‘achieved’ attributes.

In the chapter on “Meritocracy” Michelle Jackson discusses the main arguments and research

findings advanced in the literature on the issue.

(5) ETHNIC EDUCATIONAL INEQUALITY IN A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE (EEI)

Team leaders: Yaël Brinbaum (CNRS), Anthony Heath (Nuffield College) Report by Catherine Rothon

The EEI team is a joint activity of the EDUC and SOCCULT Research Groups. It is closely

interlinked with the SOCCULT-team on “New immigrants in the European countries:

Occupational structures and insertion in the labour markets”. While the “Immigrants labour

market”-team concentrates on issues of migrants’ labour market integration, the EEI team

focuses on educational inequalities among ‘second generation’ ethnic minorities. Its objective

is to measure the impact of social class and migration (and/or ethnicity) on educational

attainment in different countries. To this aim, the team describes and analyzes the school

careers of immigrant children in different countries, their schooling choices and their

educational attainment. The team analyzes how inequality varies in different countries,

according to social and family background, gender and other individual characteristics. In its

studies the team examines the heterogeneity of this “second generation” and tries to identify

which groups encounter ethnic penalties or favourable conditions for educational success, and

at what stage (primary or secondary). A review on the present state of research in this area is

given by Catherine Rothon in the chapter on “The Educational Achievements of the ‘Second

Generation’ in Europe”

8

EVALUATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD CLASSIFICATION OF EDUCATION (ISCED 1997) FOR COMPARATIVE RESEARCH

Irena Kogan MZES, University of Mannheim

INTRODUCTION The structure of education and learning systems has changed dramatically over the last

decades. The increasing complexity of educational systems, bigger choices between types of

programmes and modes of attendance have imposed additional difficulties for the

international comparability of educational attainment. New forms of education have appeared

and the boundaries that have traditionally separated different types of educational

programmes have blurred. These and other structural changes in national education systems

have brought about the revision of the original ISCED classification in 1997. ISCED-97, a

new instrument for measuring educational attainment in large-scale comparative research, is a

significant improvement over the earlier version of ISCED as it allows to measure in much

more detail the level and type (general or vocational) of education and training. However, the

validity and comparative quality of the new ISCED classification has not yet been thoroughly

assessed. As good comparable measures for education are essential for researchers we

conduct an evaluation (and perhaps a partial revision) of this classification. This is to be done

via consistency checks with alternative data sources and educational classifications used in

national data sets in the selected EU-25 countries and Bulgaria. Before describing the ISCED-

97 classification in further detail, the following section discusses the issue of measurement of

education in comparative research.

MEASURING EDUCATION IN COMPARATIVE RESEARCH1 No doubt that construction of instruments for comparative measurement of education is a very

difficult undertaking since educational systems that in reality differ systematically have to be

mapped upon measurement instruments that should be functionally equivalent. There exist

several approaches towards measuring education.

One of the most straightforward attempts is based upon the length of educational

experience or number of years of schooling (e.g. Blau and Duncan, 1967), where it is assumed

that the longer someone is exposed to education, the more skills and knowledge s/he can 1 This section draws on the material from Braun and Müller (1997).

9

acquire. Such a concept certainly has positive properties of clear interpretation and

measurement scale (i.e. an interval variable) practical for statistical analysis. The

meaningfulness of this approach depends, however, on the degree of institutional

homogeneity of the educational system, that is, whether more or less all students follow the

same kind of curriculum at relatively similar educational institutions. The years of schooling-

approach has indeed been widely used in the context of the American educational system,

which exhibits a relatively low degree of institutional differentiation (Wanner 1986)2.

European educational systems are institutionally so widely differentiated that the simple

counting of years will inevitably appear as a very poor indicator of education obtained. The

same number of years of schooling can vary greatly as a predictor of labour market

opportunities, depending on which educational path, general or vocational, is involved.

Another problem with applying years if education arises from institutional differences among

countries that may affect the social significance that is attached to years of educational

participation that do not conclude with an examination. For example, in the US context a few

years at college level are regarded as significant improvement over just a high school diploma

and will thus be rewarded in the labour market. On the contrary, a number of years of

university training in Germany ending in failure to acquire a diploma is regarded as a

disadvantage showing a lack of perseverance on the part of the student. Finally, the same

number of school years has a different meaning in countries that differ to a considerable

extent in the number of years that are generally used to obtain a roughly comparable level of

education. Furthermore, just counting the number of years of schooling might result in higher

scores for less diligent students who had to repeat classes compared to the brighter ones.

Another way of measuring education is related to the scoring of education. In this

procedure educational scores are generated through scaling in such a way that the correlation

between the scaled educational information and a criterion, i.e. a dependent variable (e.g.

income) is maximized by means of a regression analysis (Treimen and Terell 1975) or log-

linear models (Smith and Garnier 1986). As a result the procedure provides scale values for

each original educational category, which, under the chosen functional form, maximize the

correlation between this educational scale and the criterion variable. Although optimal scoring

seems to be an attractive procedure in order to overcome the problem of comparing the

incomparable, there are some drawbacks in the procedure. On the one hand, the comparability

problem might be switched from education to the criterion variable, which must be measured

2 One may have some doubts regarding the utility of this indicator even for the USA taking into consideration the quite substantial difference in the quality of schooling at public and private schools (Coleman and Hoffer, 1987) and the high variation in the standing of colleges and universities.

10

in strictly comparables ways. Depending on the scaling procedure, the scores derived for

education may also depend on the distribution of the criterion variable. If these conditions are

not met, it is generally impossible to know whether differences or similarities in results derive

from real differences, differences in measurement, or both. On the other hand, the scoring

certainly depends on the selected criterion and the measurement might be different for various

dependent variables. Sorensen (1983) proposed a different scaling approach, in which

educational scores are generated from a hierarchic educational distribution. A related

possibility is the quintile approach, in which education is scaled according to the relative

position in the hierarchy of the educational continuum. The problem with such a scale is that

the characteristic dividing lines or certificates are ignored.

In order to avoid the problems related to using years of schooling and educational

scoring a number of educational typologies, including CASMIN and ISCED, have been

proposed. Such typologies attempt to define comparable educational categories, which

combine several dimensions within one categorical schema, for example, a combination of

length of schooling, general or vocational orientation of education and credentials obtained.

The underlying assumption is that with a small number of such categories the crucial

differences among various educational outcomes can be grasped while many details of the

educational course can be neglected. In recent years the CASMIN-educational scale (Müller

et al. 1989; Müller and Karle 1993; Brauns et al. 2003) has become a standard instrument in

much comparative sociological research. The emphasis in this classification is put on

certificates attained based upon two primary classification criteria: (1) the hierarchical level

(length, quality and value of education3 and (2) the differentiation between general and

vocationally oriented education. In terms of general education the schema distinguishes three

main levels which relate to the length of educational experience, the required intellectual

capacity and the value of the educational certificate achieved: elementary (both with an

inadequate completion and with completed elementary), secondary (intermediate and full

secondary) or tertiary (both lower- and higher-level). In the CASMIN classification,

vocational training primarily comes into play at the elementary and intermediate levels of

education. The overall rational behind the CASMIN-educational scale is to certain degree

adopted also in the ISCED-97 educational classification discussed in more detail below.

3 Equivalence of the hierarchical levels of national education and training systems (in the following ETS) is mainly operationalised according to whether they allow for the access to tertiary education or not.

11

ISCED-97 EDUCATIONAL CLASSIFICATION ISCED is designed to serve as an instrument suitable for assembling, compiling and

presenting comparable indicators and statistics of education both within individual countries

and internationally. It covers all organized and sustained learning opportunities for children,

youth and adults, including those with special needs, irrespective of the institution or entity

providing them or the form in which they are delivered. The basic unit of classification in

ISCED is educational programme, which is defined on the basis of its educational content as

an array or sequence of educational activities which are organised to accomplish a pre-

determined objective or specified set of educational tasks4. From a practical standpoint,

transition points of national education systems will often need to be used as criteria for

allocating programmes to the education levels because of the way in which data are collected

at the national level. It must furthermore be ensured that the selection of national transition

points for matching the classification categories in ISCED-97 is determined by the content

and structural attributes of the underlying educational programmes, and not because its

national name just matches the name of the international reporting category. The revised

ISCED builds on three components: 1) internationally agreed concepts and definitions; 2) a

classification system that strikes a careful balance between the faithful representation of

national education systems and the possibility of aggregating data according to dimensions

that are interpretable; and 3) operational instructions and a well-defined implementation

process.

Since it is practically impossible to directly assess and compare the content of the

educational programmes in an international comparative way ISCED uses a number of

auxiliary criteria as proxies for the content for its classification. These include: typical starting

ages of participants and theoretical and typical durations of the programmes; typical entrance

qualifications and minimum entrance requirements; type of certifications, diplomas, or

qualifications awarded upon successful completion of the programme; types of subsequent

education for which completers are eligible; the degree to which the programme is

specifically oriented towards a specific class of occupations or trades and is generally oriented

towards the immediate transition into the labour market. A fundamental aspect of these

criteria is that they complement rather than exclude each other. This means that neither the

duration of an educational programme nor the theoretical and typical starting ages should be

the sole criterion for its level attribution.

4 Objectives can, for example, be preparation for a more advanced study, qualification for an occupation or range of occupations, or simply an increase of knowledge and understanding.

12

The notion of educational levels is broadly related to gradations of learning

experiences and the competences which the contents of an educational programme require of

participants, i.e. the level is related to the degree of complexity of the content of the

programme. The notion of levels is therefore a construct based on the assumption that

educational programmes can be grouped, both nationally and cross-nationally, into an ordered

series of categories broadly corresponding to the overall knowledge, skills and capabilities

required of participants if they are to have a reasonable expectation of successfully

completing the programmes in these categories. These categories represent broad steps of

educational progression from very elementary to more complex experiences. Educational

programmes are classified in ISCED into seven broad ordinal levels (0 to 6) on the basis of

the degree of complexity of their educational content.

• Level 0: Pre-primary education (school or centre-based, from age 3 or later up to age

of entry into primary education, i.e. age 5-7)

• Level 1: Primary education or first stage of basic education (beginning of systematic

learning of reading, writing and mathematics, 6 years)

• Level 2: Lower secondary education or second stage of basic education (beginning of

subject presentation, ~ 9 years since the beginning of primary or up to age 15/16, often

the end of compulsory education)

• Level 3: (Upper) secondary education (from the end of full-time compulsory education

on, requires successful completion of level 2)

• Level 4: Post-secondary non-tertiary education (not considered higher/tertiary

education, often not significantly more advanced than level 3. 6 months to 2 years, e.g.

higher education access courses.)

• Level 5: First stage of tertiary education (special entrance requirements, take at least 2

years and do not yet lead to an advanced research qualification)

• Level 6: Second stage of tertiary education (advanced research qualification, i.e.

doctorate)

13

Table 1: Description of ISCED-97 levels, classification criteria and sub-categories 0 PRE-PRIMARY Main criteria Auxiliary criteria Sub-categories Initial stage of organised instruction, designed primarily to introduce very young children and developmental needs of children to a school-type environment.

Should be centre or school-based, be designed to meet the educational and developmental needs of children at least 3 years of age, and have staff that are adequately trained (i.e. qualified) to provide an educational programme for the children.

Pedagogical qualifications for the teaching staff; implementation of a curriculum with educational elements.

1 PRIMARY Main criteria Auxiliary criteria Sub-categories Normally designed to give students a sound basic education in reading, writing and mathematics

Beginning of systematic studies characteristic of primary education, e.g. reading, writing and mathematics. Entry into the nationally designated primary institutions or programmes. The commencement of reading activities alone is not a sufficient criterion for classification of an educational programme at ISCED 1.

In countries where the age of compulsory attendance (or at least the age with virtually all students begin their education) comes after the beginning of systematic study in the subjects noted, the first year of compulsory attendance should be used to determine the boundary between ISCED 0 an ISCED 1.

2 LOWER SECONDARY Main criteria Auxiliary criteria Destination for which the programmes have been

designed to prepare students

Programme orientation

The lower secondary level of education generally continues the basic programmes of the primary level, although teaching is typically more subject-focused, often employing more specialised teachers who conduct classes in their field of specialisation.

Programmes at the start of Level 2 should correspond to the point where programmes are beginning to be organised in a more subject-oriented pattern, using more specialised teachers conducting classes in their field of specialisation. If this organisational transition point does not correspond to a natural split in the boundaries between national education programmes, then programmes should be split at the point where national programmes begin to reflect this organisational change.

If there is no clear break point for this organisational change, however, then countries should artificially split national programmes into ISCED 1 and 2 at the end of 6 years of primary education. In countries with no system break between lower secondary and upper secondary education, and where lower secondary education lasts for more than 3 years, only the first 3 years following primary education should be counted as lower secondary education.

A Programme designed to prepare students for direct access to Level 3 in a sequence, which would ultimately lead to tertiary education, that is, entrance to ISCED 3A or 3B. B Programmes designed to prepare students for direct access to programmes at level 3C C Programmes primarily designed for direct access to the labour market at the end of this level (sometimes referred to as „terminal“ programmes).

1 Education, which is not designed explicitly to prepare participants for a specific class of occupations or trades or for entrance into further vocational/technical education programmes. Les than 15% of the programme content is vocational or technical. 2 Education mainly designed as an introduction to the world of work and as preparation for further vocational or technical education. It does not lead to a labour-market relevant qualification. Content is at least 25% vocational or technical. 3 Education, which prepares participants for direct entry, without further training, into specific occupations. Successful completion of such programmes leads to a labour-market relevant vocational qualification.

14

3 UPPER SECONDARY MAIN CRITERIA MODULAR PROGRAMMES

Destination for which the programmes have been

designed to prepare students

Programme orientation

The final stage of secondary education in most OECD countries. Instruction is often more organised along subject matter lines than at ISCED Level 2 and teachers typically need to have a higher level, or more subject-specific, qualification than at ISCED 2. There are substantial differences in the typical duration of ISCED 3 programmes both across and between countries, typically ranging from 2 to 5 years of schooling.

National boundaries between lower secondary and upper secondary education should be the dominant factor for splitting Levels 2 and 3. Admission into educational programmes usually requires the completion of ISCED 2 for admission, or a combination of basic education and life experience that demonstrates the ability to handle ISCED 3 subject matter.

An educational qualification is earned in a modular programme by combining blocks of courses, or modules, into a programme meeting specific curricular requirements. A single module, however, may not have a specific educational or labour market destination or a particular programme orientation. Modular programmes should be classified at Level „3“ only, without reference to the educational or labour market destination of the programme.

A ISCED 3A: programmes at Level 3 designed to provide direct access to ISCED 5A. B ISCED 3B: programmes at Level 3 designed to provide direct access to ISCED 5B. C ISCED 3C: programmes at Level 3 not designed to lead directly to ISCED 5A or 5B. Therefore, these programmes lead directly to labour market, ISCED 4 programmes or other ISCED 3 programmes.

1 Education, which is not designed explicitly to prepare participants for a specific class of occupations or trades or for entry into further vocational/technical education programmes. Less than 25% of the programme content is vocational or technical. 2 Education mainly designed as an introduction to the world of work and as preparation for further vocational or technical education. It does not lead to a labour-market relevant qualification. Content is at least 25% vocational or technical. 3 Education, which prepares participants for direct entry, without further training, into specific occupations. Successful completion of such programmes leads to a labour-market relevant vocational qualification.

4 POST –SECONDARY NON-TERTIARY

Main criteria

Types of programmes can fit into Level 4

Destination for which the programmes have been

designed to prepare students

Programme orientation

These programmes straddle the boundary between upper secondary and post-secondary education from an international point of view, even though they might clearly be considered as upper secondary or post-secondary programmes in a national context. They are often not significantly more advanced than programmes at ISCED 3 but they serve to broaden the knowledge of participants who have already completed a programme at Level 3. The students are typically older than those in ICED 3 programmes.

Students entering ISCED 4 programmes will typically have completed ISCED 3. Programme duration: ISCED 4 programmes typically have a full-time equivalent duration of between 6 month and 2 years.

The first type are short vocational programmes where either the content is not considered „tertiary“ in many OECD countries or the programme did not meet the duration requirement for ISCED 5B – at least 2 years FTE since the start of Level 5. These Programmes are often designed for students who have completed Level 3, also a formal ISCED Level 3 qualification may not be required for entry.

A Programmes at Level 4, designed to provide direct access to ISCED 5A. B Programmes at Level 4, designed to provide direct access to ISCED 5B.

1 Education, which is not designed explicitly to prepare participants for a specific class of occupations or trades or for entry into further vocational/technical education programmes. Less than 25% of the programme content is vocational or technical. 2 Education mainly designed as an introduction to the world of work and as preparation for further vocational or technical education. It does not lead to a labour-market relevant qualification. Content is at least 25% vocational or technical.

15

The second type of programmes is nationally considered as upper secondary programmes, even though entrants to these programmes will have typically already completed another upper secondary programme (i.e. second-cycle programmes).

C Programmes at Level 4 not designed to lead directly to ISCED 5A or 5B. These programmes lead directly to labour market to other ISCED 4 programmes.

3 Education, which prepares participants for direct entry, without further training, into specific occupations. Successful completion of such programmes leads to a labour-market relevant vocational qualification.

5 FIRST STAGE OF TERTIARY EDUCATION

Classification criteria for level and sub-categories (5A

and 5B)

Classification criteria for level and sub-categories (5A

and 5B)

Cumulative theoretical duration at tertiary

Position in the national degree and qualification structure

ISCED 5 programmes have an educational content more advanced than those offered at Levels 3 and 4.

Entry to those programmes normally requires the successful completion of ISCED Level 3A and 3B or a similar qualification at ISCED Level 4A or 4B.

ISCED 5A programmes that are largely theoretically based and are intended to provide sufficient qualifications for gaining entry into advanced research programmes and professions with high skills requirements.

The minimum cumulative theoretical duration (at tertiary level) is of three years (FTE). The faculty must have advanced research credentials. Completion of a research project or thesis may be involved.

The programmes provide the level of education required for entry into a profession with high skills requirements or an advanced research programme.

A Duration categories: Medium 3 to less than 5 years; Long: 5 to 6 years; Very long: more than 6 years.

A Categories: Intermediate; First; Second; Third and further

ISCED 5B programmes that are generally more practical/technical/occupationally specific than ISCED 5A programmes.

Programmes are more practically-oriented and occupationally specific than programmes at ISED 5A and they do not prepare students for direct access to advanced research programmes. They have a minimum of two years full-time equivalent duration.

The programme content is typically designed to prepare students to enter a particular occupation.

B Duration categories: Short: 2 to less than 3 years; Medium: 3 to less than 5 years; Long: 5 to 6 years; Very long: more than 6 years.

B Categories: Intermediate, First; Second; Third and further

6 SECOND STAGE OF TERTIARY EDUCATION (LEADING TO AN ADVANCED RESEARCH QUALIFICATION) This level is reserved for tertiary programmes that lead to the award of an advanced research qualification. The programmes are devoted to advanced study and original research.

The level requires the submission of a thesis or dissertation of publishable quality that is the product of original research and represents a significant contribution to knowledge. It is not solely based on coursework.

It prepares recipients for faculty posts in institutions offering ISCED 5A programmes, as well as research posts in government and industry.

16

Some levels are again subdivided according to:

1. the type of subsequent education or destination (levels 2, 3, 4 and 5)

• A: access to more advanced theoretical programmes, rather general/ academic path

(2A to 3A and 3B; 3A to 5A; 4A to 5A and 5B; 5A to 6)

• B: access to more advanced technical/professional programmes, rather

technical/professional path (2B to 3C; 3B to 5B; 4B and 5B to LM)

• C: does not lead directly to tertiary education, different meaning at each level (2C to

LM; 3C to 3a, 3B, 4A, 4B and LM; 4c to 4A, 4B and LM)

2. the programme orientation (levels 2, 3 and 4)

• general (preparation for additional education at the same or a higher level)

• pre-vocational or pre-technical (at least 25% vocational/technical content)

• vocational or technical (leads to a labour market relevant qualification)

For level 5, there are 2 complementary dimensions:

• programme duration (short, medium and long)

• position in the national degree structure (first or second degree)

Table 1 above describes ISCED-97 classification in further detail.

ISCED-97 IN THE EUROPEAN UNION LABOUR FORCE SURVEY (EULFS) AND NATIONAL DATA SOURCES Results of the consistency checks of the ISCED-97 educational classification as applied in the

EULFS with its implementation in the national data sources are presented in Table 2. This

table shows national educational qualifications that have been recoded to ISCED-97

following the OECD (1999) suggestions and consequently compared to the educational

qualifications measured in ISCED-97 scale in the EULFS. The aim of this exercise is to

assess whether ISCED implementation is accurate and to discover possible sources of errors

in this regard.

Overall it should be mentioned, that the biggest problem of the ISCED-97

implementation in the EULFS is the level of aggregation of educational qualifications.

Although the original classification allows seven levels and three types of education (on

levels 2 to 4) this option is hardly used by individual countries. Thus, differentiation between

general and vocationally oriented courses on the level 3 (Types A and B) is absolutely

ignored by countries, as these categories separately are not available in the data. In some few

countries no differentiation at all on the level 3 or 4 is available in the EULFS data (e.g.

Slovenia). It has to be explored what role Eurostat has being playing in this regard and how

17

the changes in educational categorisation adopted by Eurostat during 1998 and 2004 affected

the implementation of this classification by individual countries.

From Table 2 becomes apparent that differentiation of the type of education is indeed

possible on ISCED level 3 in the national data. Percentages for the general education on the

upper secondary level could be found in parentheses. Clearly enough ISCED 3A types of

programmes are more widespread in France, Italy, Spain and Estonia. On the other hand

ISCED 3B programmes dominate in Germany, the Czech republic and Poland. This important

information is absolutely concealed if one works with ISCED-97 currently available in the

EULFS. Moreover, in Slovenia EULFS does not differentiate between any type of education

on the upper-secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary levels (ISCED 3 and 4), while this is

possible with the national data. Results clearly show that programmes on ISCED level 3-4A

are a small minority in Slovenia, whereas similar proportions of students are channelled to

levels ISCED 3-4B and 3-4C (about 29%). In France, on the other hand, the national data

yields some few cases with ISCED 3c qualification, while in the EULFS these seem to be

included in the ISCED 3A,B group.

Other than the apparent drawbacks mentioned above, the implementation of ISCED-

97 classification in the majority of countries discussed here is quite satisfactory. The largest

discrepancies observed (and these are no larger than 5%) are:

• in Germany – a higher proportion of individuals at the level 3A,B and a lower

proportion of individuals at levels 5A,B in the EULFS compared to the microcensus;

• in Ireland – a higher proportion of individuals at the level 3A,B and a lower proportion

of individuals at level 5A in the EULFS compared to the Irish Quarterly National

Household Survey;

• in the Czech republic – a higher proportion of individuals at the level 3A,B and a

lower proportion of individuals at levels 5A in the EULFS compared to the census

data;

• in Hungary – a higher proportion of individuals at the level 2 and a lower proportion

of individuals at levels 5A in the EULFS compared to the Hungarian LFS;

• in Slovenia –a lower proportion of individuals at levels 5A,B and ISCED 6 in the

EULFS compared to the Slovenian LFS.

Finally, in Poland the EULFS data report a number of persons with the ISCED 5A

qualification, while the national data allows differentiating between ISCED 5B and ISCED

5A graduates.

18

Table 2: Distribution of educational attainment in countries of Western and Southern Europe

France (2004) Germany (2004) Ireland (2004) Italy (2004) Spain (2004) ISCED, as in the EULFS EULFS LFS EULFS LFS EULFS QNHS EULFS LFS EULFS LFSISCED 0 1.3 1.3 0.6 0.6 2.6 2.7 1.3 1.3ISCE 0-1 ISCED 1 12.3 13.8 2.1 2.3 16.9 17.7 16.1 16 25.8 26.8ISCED 2 19.5 19.6 14.2 14.6 18.0 18.7 31.6 32.4 27.9 26.4ISCED 3c (<=3y) 27.6 27.1 0.1 0.7 0.5 0.4ISCED 3 24.3 ISCED 3c (>=3y) 2.2 7.5 7.6 0.0 ISCED 3a,b 14.9 12.1 (10.4) 54.6 51.2 (1.9) 27.3 30.4 28.8 (25.4) 20.0 18.5 (12.4)ISCED 3c (>=3y) or ISCED 4c ISCED 3b or ISCED 4b ISCED 3a or ISECD4a ISCED 3 or 4 ISECD 4a,b 6.01 5.1 (5.1) ISCED 4c 10.3 10.5 1.1 0.1 0.1ISCED 4 0.1 0.1 1.2 ISCED 5b 9.9 9.5 9.7 10.4 10.2 10.5 0.4 0.4 7.2 7.5ISECD 5a 14.1 13.7 11.9 14.7 16.3 17.4 9.4 10.8 17.0 18.5ISCED 6 0.5 0.6 1.4 1.7 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 Note: Information in brackets pertains to level A Under ISCED 3c it is not always clear if it is a short or a long program QNHS is Quarterly National Household Survey

19

Table 3: Distribution of educational attainment in countries of Central and Eastern Europe

Czech Republic (2001) Estonia (2004) Hungary (2004) Poland (2002) Slovenia (2004) ISCED, as in the EULFS EULFS Census EULFS LFS EULFS LFS EULFS Census EULFS LFSISCED 0 0 0.43 0.6 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0ISCE 0-1 0.0 0.1ISCED 1 0.3 0.2 1.1 0.9 2.6 2.0 0.4 2.4 0.0ISCED 2 13.8 13.5 13.7 12.7 25.4 22.6 19.0 17.9 17.7 16.8ISCED 3c (<=3y) ISCED 3 ISCED 3c (>=3y) 42.0 43.2 8.0 8.6 29.5 28.8 33.5 34.3 28.4ISCED 3a,b 34.2 27.3 (4.7) 43.4 41.8 (33.7) 28.2 28.0 32.3 30.1 (6.8) ISCED 3b or ISCED 4b 29.7ISCED 3a or ISECD4a 4.8ISCED 3 or 4 63.1962.9 ISECD 4a,b 7.6 7.9 1.6 1.7 ISCED 4c 4.4 ISCED 4 0 .62 3.3 ISCED 5b 0.6 1.6 10.3 11.7 0.2 0.2 2.9 8.43 9.90ISECD 5a 8.8 10.7 15.1 15.7 12.2 16.3 11.4 9.6 6.95 9.03ISCED 6 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.98 1.28 Note: Information in brackets pertains to level A Under ISCED 3c it is not always clear if it is a short or a long program In Slovenia 28.4% at the level 3c might also include graduates from level 4c.

20

GENERAL PROBLEMS OF THE ISCED-97 CLASSIFICATION AND ITS APPLICATION While in the previous section we assessed the consistency of the implementation of the

ISCED-97 classification as suggested by the OECD, here a summary of the problems with the

ISCED coding paths, as suggested by the country-experts, is presented.

The first and one of the most frequently mentioned problems with the ISCED

classification is related to the educational expansion and educational reforms in many

countries, particularly in Southern and Central and Eastern European countries, that resulted

in changing entry ages and varying durations for different educational levels and types

(mentioned by experts from Estonia, Spain, France, Hungary, Poland and the UK). As a result

various cohorts of individuals are classified as leavers of the same educational level (type)

even though their duration of studies might substantially vary. Simultaneously, there are

countries, in which some cohorts were not even able to graduate from a particular level at all,

as such levels were compulsory (and hence ‘produced’ no leavers) in some historic periods

and not in others (e.g. Spain).

The ISCED classification as applied in the EULFS does not allow following

educational careers of individual students in more detail at the levels below ISCED 3,

particularly at ISCED 25. Such differentiation seems to be important for France, for example.

In some countries there is a further distinction, e.g. between selective schools vs. mainstream

and specialized schools (the Czech republic). Furthermore, educational reforms resulted in

schooling at the secondary (both lower and upper) levels being quite heterogeneous with

different programs existing parallel to each other, which makes any classification difficult

(e.g. Hungary).

As regards secondary and post-compulsory secondary education, the system of letters

(A, B, C) that differentiates between degrees of the same level at ISCED 2, 3 and 4 is

certainly an opportunity for identifying different educational tracks. The people with upper-

secondary education who intend to proceed into academic education should be coded as

ISCED 3A; those who want to proceed into more vocationally oriented education, as ISCED

3B; finally, those who want to get direct access into the labour market, as ISCED 3C. Unless

educational attainment is recorded in great detail in the survey, it is quite likely that all kinds

of studies are labelled as ISCED 3 and important information is thus lost (see evidence in the

section above). Exactly the same problem may arise with ISCED 4 and ISCED 4A, ISCED

5 It should be noted that the original ISCED-97 classification does differentiate between various programs (A, B, or C) on the Level 2. This differentiation is, however, implemented neither in the EULFS nor in other comparative data sources (e.g. ESS).

21

4B and ISCED 4C, respectively. Obviously, this is not the problem of the classification as

such, but often a result of a poor coding of educational attainment.

In a number of countries, particularly in the Central and Eastern Europe, there exists a

distinction between secondary general and secondary technical schools6. In the ISCED

classification these both types of schools are assigned to Level 3A. It seems that graduates of

these types of schools are disadvantaged in the transition to tertiary education (e.g. the Czech

republic), as they do mot acquire skills comparable to those of graduates from secondary

general schools.

A number of European countries (e.g. Estonia, Italy) are known for the openness of

their educational systems. This implies that there are only very few programs at various levels

denying direct access to more advanced studies, i.e. so called dead-ends. Although there are

no legal restrictions for leavers of such programs, in reality different programs, particularly

general and vocational on the ISCED 3A level, strongly differentiate according to student

ability, background, as well as outcomes.

The boundaries between levels 3 and 4 are very vague in some countries (the Czech

republic, Slovenia), particularly with regard to skills of graduates and labour market returns.

And this is not surprising since the ISCED manual is not very clear about a substantial

difference between these two levels. Similarly, a distinction between post-secondary non-

tertiary (ISCED 4) and non-university tertiary education (ISCED 5B) is quite blurred in some

countries (e.g. Spain). Furthermore, it might be even misleading, as some educational

programs at ISCED 4 serve as a sort of a ‘transition’ category before they are upgraded to

ISCED 5B. As a result one could see that ISCED 4-category becomes empty once such

educational programs are upgraded to ISCED 5B. Furthermore, such ‘misplacement’ might

effectively result in an artificial and sudden growth of highly education individuals,

particularly since often ISCED 5A and 5B are collapsed into one category due to insufficient

numbers impeding any analyses otherwise.

Possibly the worst shortcoming of the ISCED-97, mentioned by a number of experts

(Estonia, Spain, France, Hungary, Ireland, Slovenia), pertains to classification of the

university studies (hence a large number of problems in this respect, see above). Proper

university degrees might have been more easily identified with the ISCED-67 classification

than with the ISCED-97, since the former used numbers to differentiate lower and higher

university degrees. ISCED-97, on the contrary, uses just one number and one letter for both

lower and higher university degrees. As a result ISCED-97 classification on the tertiary level 6 Secondary technical schools are in turn differentiated from vocational schools, the latter providing more applied vocational skills.

22

does not allow differentiating between B.A. and M.A. in general (which is particularly

important in light of the Bologna process), as well as these degrees in the pre- and post-

Bologna periods (these differ in duration in Estonia). Furthermore, in a number of countries

graduates from the old system of tertiary education certificated with a Diploma could be

found together with B.A. graduates. And it is absolutely clear that there is a qualitative

difference between B.A. and M.A. or Diploma graduates. As a result ISCED-97 classification

loses valuable information as for programs on level 5 existing complementary dimensions

(duration of the program and position in the national degree structure) are hardly

implemented, at least not in the EULFS. In addition, in some countries ISCED 5A contains

leavers of qualitatively different types of higher education, more vocationally oriented

colleges (e.g. Hungary) or Fachhochschulen (e.g. Germany) or university special courses

(diplomi universitary e scuole dirette a fini speciali) (e.g. Italy) and traditional universities.

These programs tend to differ a lot both in duration of studies and in the content. Furthermore,

ISCED-97 classification does not take into account a distinction between elitist, very selective

and prestigious (e.g. Grande Ecoles in France) types of higher education and the rest, hence it

is suggested to take also this dimension into account.

COMPARISON OF ISCED-97 WITH OTHER INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS (E.G. CASMIN) All in all, it might be concluded that ISCED-97 fits national educational classifications in

some countries better than in other. Indeed, in a number of countries ISCED-97 is a more

detailed educational classification than the one used by the national statistical office (e.g.

Spain). On the other hand, countries with a larger variety of programs (both of general

character and more vocationally oriented) on levels 2-4 seem to have difficulties fitting their

educational classifications to the ISCED scheme. Thus, for countries like France and

Germany a CASMIN educational classification, which allows distinguishing educational

credentials within two dimensions, vertical and horizontal (see Brauns et al. 2003), seems to

work considerably better than the ISCED-97 classification.

Although compared to ISCED-67 ISCED-97 takes into account a horizontal dimension

of education, this seems not to work as good as in the CASMIN classification. In the ISCED-

97 a central criterion for differentiation between the types of education is the distinction

between programs that award formal access to higher level programs and those that do not.

Unfortunately, the general vs. vocational distinction is of only secondary importance,

although theoretically and empirically it is more meaningful than the first dimension. In this

23

regard, CASMIN educational classification seems to be better suited as it distinguishes

educational levels and, most importantly, tracks according to their selectivity effects for the

demarcation of typical class-barriers in the educational system and the identification of

decisive signals for utilisation on the labour market (Brauns et al. 2003).

NATIONAL REPORTS More detailed information on the national evaluations of the ISCED scale is available on the

EQUALSOC-website: http://www.equalsoc.org/theme.aspx?theme=EDUC

REFERENCES Blau, P. M. and Duncan, O. D. 1967, The American Occupational Structure, New York:

Wiley.

Braun, M. and Müller, W. 1997, ‘Measurement of Education in Comparative Research’,

Comparative Social Research 16, London: JAI Press.

Brauns, H., Scherer, S. and Steinmann, S. 2003, ‘The CASMIN Educational Classification

in International Comparative Research’, in J. H. P. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, and C. Wolf

Advances in Cross-national Comparison: A European Working Book for Demographic

and Socio-Economic variables. New York: Kluwer Acdemic / Plenum Publishers, pp.

221-244.

Coleman, J. S., and Hoffer, T. 1987. Public and Private High Schools. New York: Basic

Books.

Müller, W. and Karle, W. 1993. ‘Social Selection in Educational Systems in Europe’.

European Sociological Review 9: 1-23.

Müller, W., Lüttinger, P., König, W. and Karle, W. 1989. ‘Class and Education in

Industrial Nations’. International Journal of Sociology 19: 73-96.

OECD 1999. Classifying Educational Programmes: Manual for ISCED Implementation in

OECD Countries. Paris: OECD.

Smith, H. L. and Garnier, M. 1986. ‘Association between Background and Educational

Attainment in France’. Sociological Methods and Research 14: 317-344.

Treiman, D. J. and Terell, K. 1975. ‘Status Attainment in the United States and Great

Britain’. American Journal of Sociology 81: 563-583.

Wanner, R. A. 1986. ‘Educational Inequality: trends in Twentieth-Century Canada and the

United States’. Comparative Social Research, Vol. 9, London: JAI Press.

24

PROGRESS AND CURRENT STATE OF THE ART IN COMPARATIVE EDUCATIONAL STRATIFICATION RESEARCH

Louis-André Vallet CNRS and CREST, Quantitative Sociology Laboratory

Over the twentieth century dramatic increases in the supply of formal education have occurred

for successive birth cohorts in western industrialised societies, i.e. these societies have been

characterized by a considerably enlarged distribution of schooling. In most of them,

educational reforms have also been implemented during the second half of the century to

provide children from all social backgrounds with increased education and to promote

equality of educational opportunity. Sociologists have therefore tried to assess whether or not

educational attainment has gradually become less dependent on ascribed individual

characteristics (especially social origins) and whether or not a less unfair allocation of

schooling has progressively emerged in modern western societies.

SEVERAL GENERATIONS OF COMPARATIVE EDUCATIONAL STRATIFICATION RESEARCH Temporal dynamics of socio-economic inequality of educational opportunity (IEO) has in fact

been studied using various conceptual and quantitative frameworks. As a consequence,

several generations of empirical research can be distinguished. Till the end of the 1970s the

linear regression model of educational attainment was the unique approach. Using a metric

dependent variable to measure the final amount of schooling, the first period typically

answered the following question: what has been the change over time in the effect of social

origin variables on the average number of school years completed? Over the years it has

become more and more acknowledged that the enlarged distribution of schooling in modern

societies has resulted in a historical decline in the dependence of educational attainment on

social origins, as evaluated with linear regression models. In France for instance, it has been

assessed that considering simultaneously father’s and mother’s socio-economic group,

father’s and mother’s highest diploma and gender accounts for 32.3% of the total variance in

education for men and women born before 1939, but for 20.3% only for men and women born

between 1964 and 1973 (Duru-Bellat & Kieffer, 2000). More generally, in a comparative

project that reported linear regressions cohort by cohort for eight nations, a downward trend

25

was apparent in the proportion of variance explained by background variables in six of the

eight societies (Treiman & Ganzeboom, 2000).

Thus, the first generation of educational stratification research rather clearly

established that the educational expansion in a society results in a weaker dependence of

educational attainment on social origins. However, in the early 1980s, two shortcomings of

this approach became apparent. First, the linear regression model of years of education on

social origin conflates and confounds changes in the distribution of education with changes in

the allocation of education. More precisely, it conflates and confounds changes in the

marginal distributions caused by educational expansion with changes in the underlying

association between origin and educational attainment, normally conceptualised as the best

measure of inequality of opportunity. And sociologists progressively became more interested

in the latter aspect, that is, the ‘pure’ association between social origin and education,

evaluated net of the educational expansion. A second shortcoming is that studies based on the

linear regression model did not conceive and represent the educational career as the

individuals themselves did, namely as a series of transitions between levels.

The second period of educational stratification research therefore began with the

proposal of the sequential logistic regression model of educational transitions (Mare, 1980,

1981). Decomposing the intrinsically discrete and sequential nature of an educational career

in a series of successive branching points, this model assesses the net effect of social

background variables on the odds of ‘surviving’ each specific transition. With this model it

has been observed in many countries that social origin effects decline steadily from the

earliest school transitions to the latest (Müller & Karle, 1993; Shavit & Blossfeld, 1993;

Rijken, 1999). For instance, social background effects in the transition from elementary

education to lower secondary education are typically stronger than those in the transition from

higher secondary education to tertiary education. This progressive decline over school

transitions has often been attributed to a process of differential selection: from the earliest to

the latest school transitions, differential dropout rates systematically reduce heterogeneity

between children from different social origins on unmeasured determinants of school

continuation such as ability or motivation, and because of the correlation between these

variables and social origin greater homogeneity on unmeasured factors at higher levels of

schooling reduces the effects of observed social background variables (Mare, 1981: 82).

According to a related argument, over birth cohorts the educational expansion increases the

proportion of the total population which is exposed to a given transition; then its

heterogeneity on unmeasured determinants of school continuation is likely to grow and, as a

26

consequence, the effects of social background variables on the odds of surviving that

transition are likely to increase over cohorts. This is indeed what was recently highlighted for

France in two papers based on very large representative samples (Vallet, 2004; Selz & Vallet,

2006). Considering thirteen five-year birth cohorts born between 1908 and 1972 (or nineteen

three-year birth cohorts born between 1920 and 1976), these papers are able to demonstrate

that temporal dynamics of the association between social origin and the odds of surviving a

given transition is strikingly different from the earliest to the latest school transitions. As

regards the first transition (getting any diploma versus no diploma at all), a downward trend in

the general strength of social origin effects clearly appears from the early decades of twentieth

century. This is also the same from the 1938-1942 birth cohort for the second transition that

concerns getting at least a lower secondary or lower vocational diploma versus getting only a

primary education certificate. On the contrary, remarkably constant social origin effects

characterize the third transition. Finally, a slow but nearly monotonic increase in social origin

effects appears from the 1938-1942 birth cohort for the fourth transition. This transition

analyses the odds of getting at least a tertiary education degree versus getting only a higher

secondary or technical education diploma. So, a pretty clear stylised fact appears: the

educational expansion within a society is accompanied by a progressive decrease in social

origin effects in the first school transitions, but by a progressive increase in social origin

effects in the last school transitions. Or, in other words, with the educational expansion,

inequality of opportunity related to social origin seem to leave the bottom of the educational

system and to rejoin the top.

The sequential model of educational transitions therefore is a powerful tool to analyse

structure and change in inequality of opportunity related to social origin within the

educational system. As it closely parallels the continuation decision process along the

educational career, it provides us with ‘pure’ measures of social origin effects that are specific

for each transition examined. So the sequential model leaves the following question entirely

unanswered: if, in a given country, social origin effects decline over birth cohorts for some

transitions, but remain stable or even increase for some others, what is the final outcome as

regards temporal dynamics in the intrinsic association between highest educational level

attained and social origins in that country? Over recent years sociologists have essentially

focused on this question, taking advantage of recent progress in log-multiplicative modelling

– the ‘Unidiff’ or log-multiplicative layer effect model (Erikson & Goldthorpe, 1992; Xie,

1992) – that now offers considerable statistical power to discern even slow historical trends

27

which would have gone undetected otherwise. I will now outline the main findings and results

that have been obtained in this research field.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS ABOUT CHANGE OVER TIME AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COUNTRIES7

A major comparative project of empirical analyses was directed by Shavit and Blossfeld, and

brought together in the book Persistent Inequality: Changing Educational Attainment in

Thirteen Countries (1993). It included studies of thirteen industrial countries: six Western

European (Great Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, West Germany), three

Eastern European (Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland), and four non-European (Israel, Japan,

Taiwan, the United States). These studies were conducted by experts in the stratification and

school systems of each particular country. Most contributors used similar background

variables (father’s occupation or social class, father’s education) and outcomes (years of

education; transitions from primary to lower secondary, from lower to higher secondary, from

higher secondary to tertiary), and they used identical methods (linear regression model of

years of education, logistic regression models for transitions). The country chapters assessed

change in educational inequality via synthetic cohorts from cross-sectional surveys. The study

addressed several macro-oriented hypotheses. According to the modernization hypothesis, one

would expect social origin effects to decrease generally, while the reproduction hypothesis

states that inequalities may decrease at lower transitions because of educational expansion,

but not on higher transitions. The socialist transformation hypothesis assumes that there

would be an initial reduction in social origin effects that would be followed by increased

effects as new elites pursued their interests. Finally, the ‘Maximally Maintained Inequality’

(MMI) hypothesis (Hout, Raftery & Bell, 1993) predicts that the effects of social origin only

decline at those transitions for which the attendance rates of the privileged classes are

saturated.

The major result of the project was that it found little change in socio-economic IEO,

i.e. virtual stability across cohorts in the association between social origins and educational

transitions, which the editors consider a clear refutation of the modernization hypothesis.

Only two countries – the Netherlands and Sweden – experienced a decline in social origin

effects for transitions within secondary education, and in both cases that decline occurred

before the attendance rates of the upper classes were saturated (which contradicts the MMI

hypothesis). In the chapter on Sweden it was suggested that the effects of improved living 7 This section also relies on the 2005 review of the literature written by Richard Breen and Jan O. Jonsson.

28

conditions, school reforms and reorganization, and the equalization of the standard of living in

this country were probably the major explanations for the declining association (Jonsson,

1993). These conjectures have been confirmed ever since by demonstrating the importance of,

primarily, decreasing income differences and increasing income security, secondarily, the

comprehensive school reform (Erikson, 1996; Jonsson & Erikson, 2000). Yet, Shavit &

Blossfeld (1993) stressed that, in all the countries examined, the transformations of the

educational system did not lead to a reduction in the association between social origins and

any of the educational transitions. Finally, the results of the comparative project did not afford

any convincing support for the socialist transformation hypothesis.

The Persistent Inequality book therefore was an important step to establish the

conclusion that IEO is characterized by strong temporal inertia. However, over recent years its

results have been scrutinized and some of them have been contested. In particular, subsequent

analyses based on larger samples and/or more powerful statistical modelling have clearly

shown equalization trends in some countries. In Italy, a reanalysis of the data revealed

declining effects of father’s education on the odds of completing the lower levels of the

educational hierarchy (Shavit & Westerbeek, 1998). An equalization trend was also

demonstrated for Germany (Jonsson, Mills & Müller, 1996) and probably Norway (Lindbekk,

1998) while the results for Sweden (Jonsson & Erikson, 2000) and the Netherlands (Sieben,

Huinink & de Graaf, 2001) have been corroborated. In some other countries however,

constancy in IEO seems to prevail. This is the case in Ireland (Breen & Whelan, 1993; Whelan

& Layte, 2002) and the United States (Hout, Raftery & Bell, 1993; Mare, 1993; Hout &

Dohan, 1996). For Soviet Russia, a mixed pattern was found with the association between

social origin and education declining at secondary education but strengthening in access to

university (Gerber & Hout, 1995); but a later paper found that, in post-Soviet Russia, the

association has, if anything, increased (Gerber, 2000). According to most recent research

however, it is likely that many countries share in a (relatively modest) change toward a

decreasing association between social origin and educational attainment. A research project

that jointly analysed comparable data from eight countries – Germany, France, Italy, Ireland,

Britain, Sweden, Poland, and the Netherlands – for cohorts born between 1908 and 1972 was

able to detect declining association between social origins and educational attainment for all

of them except Ireland and Italy, two countries with the smallest sample sizes in the data set

(Breen, Luijkx, Müller & Pollak, 2005). The same paper also showed that the distinction,

evident in the older cohorts, between highly unequal countries (such as Germany, France and

Poland) and the more equal ones (Britain, Sweden and the Netherlands) has diminished

29

somewhat, partly because the biggest declines in IEO have been registered in the countries

with greater initial inequality. An ongoing research project specifically investigating

stratification in access to and completion of tertiary education in fifteen nations also found

more cases for inclusion – i.e. decline in social background effects or stability of those effects

in case of expansion of the tertiary sector – than diversion – i.e. increase in social background

effects – (Arum, Gamoran & Shavit, 2004). By way of illustration, I will now depict the main

features of structure and change in IEO within French society (Smith & Garnier, 1986; Thélot

& Vallet, 2000; Vallet, 2004).

STRUCTURE AND CHANGE IN INEQUALITY OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY IN FRANCE In the first 1908-1912, the median 1938-1942 and the last 1968-1972 birth cohort, educational

destination strongly depends on social origin, and in essentially the same way (Table 1). For

instance, in each generation, men and women with origins in the ‘teachers and assimilated

occupations’ category are the most advantaged, as indicated by the percentage of those who

reached a lower or upper tertiary degree. Using the same criterion, children of higher-grade

professionals and managers, then children of lower-grade professionals and technicians are

the second and third groups in each generation again. Conversely, children of farmers and

smallholders and children of agricultural and unskilled manual workers were equally

disadvantaged in the 1908-1912 birth cohort: the percentage distributions are very close and

in each case about two thirds did not get any diploma. In the 1938-1942 birth cohort the

offspring of both social groups were again rather close and still appeared to be the most

disadvantaged considering their educational qualifications. But children of farmers and

smallholders strongly improved their relative position between the 1938-1942 and 1968-1972

cohorts. At the end of the period their educational destinations are considerably more

favourable than those of children of agricultural and unskilled manual workers. They are also

clearly better than those of children of foremen and skilled manual workers and slightly better

than those of routine non manual workers. The examination of simple row percentages

therefore suggests that despite strong inertia in the association between social origin and

educational destination in France some change has occurred from the early decades of the

twentieth century in which children of farmers and smallholders played a significant part.

30

Table 1: Educational Destinations for Each Category of Social Origins in the 1908-1912 Birth Cohort (N=3,577), the 1938-1942 Birth Cohort (N=25,493) and the 1968-1972 Birth Cohort (N=11,063) – France

Birth cohort No diploma Primary

education certificate

Lower secondary diploma

Lower vocational diploma

Higher secondary diploma

Lower/upper tertiary degree Total

Farmers and smallholders 1908-1912 66.1 28.4 1.3 2.3 1.1 0.9 100 1938-1942 28.0 40.2 4.6 18.0 4.5 4.6 100 1968-1972 9.6 0.8 2.3 33.3 21.1 32.9 100

Artisans and shopkeepers 1908-1912 38.2 45.1 5.6 6.2 3.5 1.4 100 1938-1942 14.2 24.9 10.2 24.9 12.4 13.5 100 1968-1972 12.8 1.4 5.6 31.4 15.8 33.1 100

Higher-grade professionals 1908-1912 19.7 24.9 12.3 12.5 16.0 14.6 100 and managers 1938-1942 7.1 7.3 8.3 12.8 20.5 44.0 100

1968-1972 4.9 0.1 3.0 8.7 18.6 64.8 100

Teachers and assimilated 1908-1912 17.1 25.7 8.6 7.3 21.6 19.8 100 occupations 1938-1942 4.9 2.0 7.2 11.3 18.9 55.7 100

1968-1972 4.2 0.3 2.5 8.0 15.6 69.4 100

Lower-grade professionals 1908-1912 15.2 35.1 15.6 16.5 12.4 5.2 100 and technicians 1938-1942 9.6 14.0 10.9 24.6 18.3 22.5 100

1968-1972 7.4 0.3 4.4 18.3 20.4 49.3 100

Routine non manual 1908-1912 39.1 38.1 5.5 10.3 4.1 2.9 100 workers 1938-1942 15.4 21.7 9.4 28.3 12.6 12.6 100

1968-1972 14.5 0.7 5.4 31.2 19.5 28.6 100

Foremen and skilled 1908-1912 45.9 37.6 3.6 9.3 2.3 1.3 100 manual workers 1938-1942 20.8 30.1 5.6 29.1 8.3 6.1 100

1968-1972 19.1 0.8 5.5 35.2 18.1 21.4 100

Agricultural and unskilled 1908-1912 65.2 27.8 1.1 4.8 0.8 0.3 100 manual workers 1938-1942 30.2 33.4 4.7 23.4 4.7 3.6 100

1968-1972 27.3 1.7 6.6 38.2 14.1 12.2 100

Total 1908-1912 51.5 32.7 3.8 6.2 3.4 2.4 100 1938-1942 20.8 28.1 6.7 23.3 9.5 11.6 100 1968-1972 15.0 0.8 5.0 28.6 17.7 32.9 100

Statistical modelling demonstrates that the general strength of the ‘pure’ (i.e. net of

educational expansion) association between social origin and educational destination has

declined by 35% (in the logged odds ratios) over sixty years. While it has been nearly

monotonic, change in the origin-education association was especially sharp between the 1933-

1937 and 1948-1952 birth cohorts, then largely levelled off in the three subsequent cohorts,

but took off again in the very last one (1968-1972). The decline in IEO in France therefore

seems largely independent of major secondary school reforms explicitly introduced from the

late 1950s to promote equality of educational opportunity. However, the sustained trend

toward equalization between the 1933-1937 and 1938-1942 birth cohorts may confirm Prost’s

historical study according to which a reform promulgated in 1941 by the conservative

Minister of Education Jérôme Carcopino to integrate the Écoles Primaires Supérieures in the

secondary school system, had positive effects and resulted in declining IEO (Prost, 1990). The

downward trend was more pronounced among women than men, especially because the

31

former were characterized by stronger origin-education association until cohorts born in the

mid-1930s. Its existence does not depend on the precise variable used to define social

background. Change in origin-education association nonetheless appears more resistant to

cultural inequalities (parents’ education) than to socio-economic inequalities (parents’ social

class), a finding which has also been obtained in the Netherlands (De Graaf & Ganzeboom,

1993). Statistical modelling also demonstrates that the improvement of educational

opportunities among sons and daughters of farmers played a significant part in accentuating

the equalization trend but was not the only factor in creating it8. Finally, a counterfactual

approach reveals that the decline in IEO from the 1908-1912 birth cohort results in 100,000

‘additional’ men and women in the 1968-1972 birth cohort, originating from disadvantaged

classes, i.e. the peasantry and the skilled or unskilled fractions of the working class, with

diplomas in the higher secondary, lower tertiary or upper tertiary categories; they represent

5.8% of all men and women in the 1968-1972 cohort with background in these social groups.

This assessment of the concrete effects of declining IEO may be an upper-bound estimate.

According to another evaluation based on different surveys, the decline in IEO from the 1920-

1922 birth cohort results in 28,000 ‘additional’ men and women in the 1974-1976 birth

cohort, originating from the same disadvantaged classes with diplomas in the higher

secondary, lower tertiary or upper tertiary categories; they represent 3.1% of all men and

women in the 1974-1976 cohort with background in these social groups (Vallet & Selz,

2006). Over and above statistical uncertainty, these assessments exemplify that the decline in

IEO has by no means brought about a considerable change in society.

EXPLAINING TEMPORAL INERTIA IN INEQUALITY OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY Following pioneering work by Boudon (1974) in the context of rational action theory, several

sociologists have proposed theoretical and formal models to account for the high degree of

inertia in IEO despite educational expansion (Erikson & Jonsson, 1996a; Breen & Goldthorpe,

1997; Jonsson & Erikson, 2000). Rather convincing empirical tests of these models have also

begun to be published (Need & de Jong, 2001; Davies, Heinesen & Holm, 2002; Becker,

2003). I will insist here on what these theoretical efforts hold in common.

Explaining educational inequalities needs to distinguish between ‘primary’ and

‘secondary’ effects. Primary effects are all those that are expressed in the empirically

observed association that exists between children’s social origins and their average level of

8 The same result has also been documented for Germany and Sweden (Jonsson, Mills & Müller, 1996: 194-5).

32

academic ability: children of more advantaged backgrounds perform better, on average, than

children of less advantaged backgrounds; such a difference appears rather early at school and

is cumulative, i.e. the gap tends to increase along the educational career. The determinants of

this difference in academic ability may be diverse: differences in home environments, in

intellectual stimulation, in cultural factors, in sibship sizes, and so on. Assuming that any

difference in academic ability is controlled, secondary effects are those effects that are

expressed in the actual choices and decisions that children and their families make in the

course of the educational career within the school system – including the choice of exit.

Several factors affect these choices and decisions: the perceived cost associated with

continuing in education, the perceived benefit associated with continuing in education and the

perceived risk associated with continuing in education. These subjective assessments of cost,

benefit and risk depend on the family position in the social structure. The perceived cost

associated with continuing in education is higher in less advantaged families (in terms of

financial effort, earnings foregone and so on). Conversely, the perceived benefit associated

with continuing in education is lower in these families than in more advantaged ones because

further education is not a sine qua non condition for the former to avoid social demotion and

to maintain the family position in the next generation. Finally, less advantaged families are

more responsive to the risk of failure associated with continuing in education, especially when

the academic performance of the child is medium. The structural and quasi permanent nature

of these differences in the assessment of cost, benefit and risk associated with school

continuation would explain the persistence of secondary effects, the stability of the relative

importance of primary and secondary effects and, by that way, the considerable inertia that

characterizes socio-economic IEO.

Some research has tried to assess the relative importance of primary and secondary

effects: Erikson & Jonsson (1996b) have estimated about equal proportions of class

differences in educational attainment to derive from primary and secondary effects, but a

recent British study indicates a larger share of primary than secondary effects, both of which

appear to have remained pretty stable since the 1970s in the United Kingdom (Jackson,

Erikson, Goldthorpe & Yaish, 2005; Erikson, Goldthorpe, Jackson, Yaish & Cox, 2005).

Finally, Breen, Luijkx, Müller & Pollak (2005) recently suggested that the declining trend in

IEO they observe for six European countries may be related to significant temporal changes in

the cost component of family educational decisions as well as a decline in primary effects

because of the long term improvement of general living conditions.

33

REFERENCES Arum, R., Gamoran, A. and Shavit, Y. 2004, ‘More Inclusion than diversion: Findings

from a 15-nation Study of Expansion and Stratification in Higher Education’, paper

presented at the Social Stratification Research Committee (ISA RC28) Summer

Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Becker, R. 2003, ‘Educational expansion and persistent inequalities of education: Utilizing

expected utility theory to explain increasing participation rates in upper secondary

school in the Federal Republic of Germany’, European Sociological Review 19: 1-24.

Boudon, R. 1974, Education, Opportunity, and Social Inequality: Changing Prospects in

Western Society, New York: Wiley.

Breen, R. and Goldthorpe, J. H. 1997, ‘Explaining educational differentials: Towards a

formal rational action theory’, Rationality and Society 9: 275-305.

Breen, R. and Jonsson, J. O. 2005, ‘Inequality of opportunity in comparative perspective:

Recent research on educational attainment and social mobility’, Annual Review of

Sociology 31: 223-243.

Breen, R., Luijkx, R., Müller, W. and Pollak, R. 2005, ‘Non-persistent inequality in

educational attainment: Evidence from eight European countries’, paper presented at

the Social Stratification Research Committee (ISA RC28) Summer Conference, Los

Angeles, USA.

Breen, R. and Whelan, C. T. 1993, ‘From ascription to achievement? Origins, education and

entry to the labour force in the Republic of Ireland during the twentieth century’, Acta

Sociologica 36: 3-18.

Davies, R., Heinesen, E. and Holm, A. 2002, ‘The relative risk aversion hypothesis of

educational choice’, Journal of Population Economics 15: 683-713.

De Graaf, P. M. and Ganzeboom, H. B. G. 1993, ‘Family background and educational

attainment in the Netherlands for the 1891-1960 birth cohorts’, in Y. Shavit and H.-P.

Blossfeld (eds) Persistent Inequality: Changing Educational Attainment in Thirteen

Countries, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press: 75-99.

Duru-Bellat, M. and Kieffer, A. 2000, ‘La démocratisation de l’enseignement en France:

polémiques autour d’une question d’actualité’, Population 55: 51-79.

Erikson, R. 1996, ‘Explaining change in educational inequality: Economic security and

school reforms’, in R. Erikson and J. O. Jonsson (eds) Can Education Be Equalized?

The Swedish Case in Comparative Perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press:

95-112.

34

Erikson, R. and Goldthorpe, J. H. 1992, The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in

Industrial Societies, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Erikson, R., Goldthorpe, J. H., Jackson, M., Yaish, M. and Cox, D. R. 2005, ‘On class

differentials in educational attainment’, Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences 102(27): 9730-9733.

Erikson, R. and Jonsson, J. O. 1996a, ‘Explaining class inequality in education: The

Swedish test case’, in R. Erikson and J. O. Jonsson (eds) Can Education Be

Equalized? The Swedish Case in Comparative Perspective, Boulder, Colorado:

Westview Press: 1-63.

Erikson, R. and Jonsson, J. O. 1996b, ‘The Swedish context: Educational reform and long-

term change in educational inequality’, in R. Erikson and J. O. Jonsson (eds) Can

Education Be Equalized? The Swedish Case in Comparative Perspective, Boulder,

Colorado: Westview Press: 65-93.

Gerber, T. P. 2000, ‘Educational stratification in contemporary Russia: Stability and change

in the face of economic and institutional crisis’, Sociology of Education 73: 219-246.

Gerber, T. P. and Hout, M. 1995, ‘Educational stratification in Russia during the Soviet

period’, American Journal of Sociology 101: 611-660.

Hout, M., Raftery, A. E. and Bell, E. O. 1993, ‘Making the grade: Educational stratification

in the United States, 1925-1989’, in Y. Shavit and H.-P. Blossfeld (eds) Persistent

Inequality: Changing Educational Attainment in Thirteen Countries, Boulder,

Colorado: Westview Press: 25-49.

Hout, M. and Dohan, D. P. 1996, ‘Two paths to educational opportunity: Class and

educational selection in Sweden and the United States’, in R. Erikson and J. O.

Jonsson (eds) Can Education Be Equalized? The Swedish Case in Comparative

Perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press: 207-231.

Jackson, M., Erikson, R., Goldthorpe, J. H. and Yaish, M. 2005, ‘Primary and secondary

effects in class differentials in educational attainment: The transition to A-level

courses in England and Wales’, paper presented to the Royal Statistical Society,

Oxford.

Jonsson, J. O. 1993, ‘Persisting inequalities in Sweden’, in Y. Shavit and H.-P. Blossfeld

(eds) Persistent Inequality: Changing Educational Attainment in Thirteen Countries,

Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press: 101-132.

Jonsson, J. O. and Erikson, R. 2000, ‘Understanding educational inequality: The Swedish

experience’, L’Année sociologique 50: 345-382.

35

Jonsson, J. O., Mills, C. and Müller, W. 1996, ‘A half century of increasing educational

openness? Social class, gender and educational attainment in Sweden, Germany and

Britain’, in R. Erikson and J. O. Jonsson (eds) Can Education Be Equalized? The

Swedish Case in Comparative Perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press: 183-

206.

Lindbekk, T. 1998, ‘The education backlash hypothesis: The Norwegian experience 1960-

92’, Acta Sociologica 41: 151-162.

Mare, R. D. 1980, ‘Social background and school continuation decisions’, Journal of the

American Statistical Association 75: 295-305.

Mare, R. D. 1981, ‘Change and stability in educational stratification’, American Sociological

Review 46: 72-87.

Mare, R. D. 1993, ‘Educational stratification on observed and unobserved components of

family background’, in Y. Shavit and H.-P. Blossfeld (eds) Persistent Inequality:

Changing Educational Attainment in Thirteen Countries, Boulder, Colorado:

Westview Press: 351-376.

Müller, W. and Karle, W. 1993, ‘Social selection in educational systems in Europe’,

European Sociological Review 9: 1-23.

Need, A. and de Jong, U. 2001, ‘Educational differentials in the Netherlands: Testing

rational action theory’, Rationality and Society 13: 71-98.

Prost, A. 1990, ‘Schooling and social stratification: Paradoxes of the reform of the middle

school in 20th-century France’, in A. Lechinsky and K. U. Mayer (eds) The

Comprehensive School Experiment Revisited, Frankfurt: Peter Lang: 38-61.

Rijken, S. 1999, Educational Expansion and Status Attainment: A Cross-national and Over-

time Comparison: ICS dissertation series.

Selz, M. and Vallet, L.-A. 2006, ‘La démocratisation de l’enseignement et son paradoxe

apparent’, in Données sociales. La société française (Édition 2006), Paris : INSEE:

101-107.

Shavit, Y. and Blossfeld, H.-P. (eds) 1993, Persistent Inequality: Changing Educational

Attainment in Thirteen Countries, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Shavit, Y. and Westerbeek, K. 1998, ‘Educational stratification in Italy: Reforms,

expansion, and equality of opportunity’, European Sociological Review 14: 33-47.

Sieben, I., Huinink, J. and de Graaf, P. M. 2001, ‘Family background and sibling

resemblance in educational attainment: Trends in the former FRG, the former GDR,

and the Netherlands’, European Sociological Review 17: 401-430.

36

Smith, H. L. and Garnier, M. A. 1986, ‘Association between background and educational

attainment in France’, Sociological Methods and Research 14: 317-344.

Thélot, C. and Vallet, L.-A. 2000, ‘La réduction des inégalités sociales devant l’école depuis

le début du siècle’, Économie et Statistique 334 : 3-32.

Treiman, D. J. and Ganzeboom, H. B. G. 2000, ‘The fourth generation of comparative

stratification research’, in S. R. Quah and A. Sales (eds) The International Handbook

of Sociology, London: Sage Publications: 123-150.

Vallet, L.-A. 2004, ‘The dynamics of inequality of educational opportunity in France: Change

in the association between social background and education in thirteen five-year birth

cohorts (1908-1972)’, paper presented at the Social Stratification Research Committee

(ISA RC28) Spring Conference, Neuchâtel, Switzerland.

Vallet, L.-A. and Selz, M. 2006, ‘Évolution historique de l’inégalité des chances devant

l’école : des méthodes et des résultats revisités’, Éducation et Formations,

forthcoming.

Whelan, C. T. and Layte, R. 2002, ‘Late industrialization and the increased merit selection

hypothesis: Ireland as a test case’, European Sociological Review 18: 35-50.

Xie, Y. 1992, ‘The log-multiplicative layer effect model for comparing mobility tables’,

American Sociological Review 57: 380-395.

37

INCOME AND CLASS MOBILITY9

Robert Erikson SOFI, Stockholm

The literature in the area of social and income mobility is very large. Much of this literature

focuses on intergenerational rather than intragenerational mobility; while the latter is our main

focus here, it is useful to begin by sketching out what is known about broad patterns of

intergenerational mobility across industrialised countries. Within sociology there is a long

tradition of studying inter-generational associations in socio-economic position using social

class or occupational prestige as outcome measures (see for example Breen and Jonsson,

2005). Economists have been engaged with inter-generational associations since at least the

1980s, mostly focusing on the correlation between the earnings of fathers and sons.

Estimation of a simple statistical regression model relating the logarithm of son’s earnings to

the logarithm of parents’ earning has been the main analytical approach.10 Much of this

literature has employed data for the USA, reflecting availability of data, although there were

also some early British studies.11

Influential US studies by Solon (1992) and Zimmermann (1992) estimated father-son

earnings elasticities above 0.4 there, a good deal higher than previous studies. Estimates of

intergenerational father-son elasticities are now also available for some other industrialised

countries (see Solon 2002, Corak 2006, Björklund and Jäntti 1997, Bratberg, Nilsen and

Vaage 2005, Bonke, Hussain and Munk 2005, and several of the contributions to Corak (ed.)

2004), and these show an interesting cross-country pattern. The lowest estimated correlations

have been for Norway, of about 0.13. Estimates for Denmark, Finland Sweden are generally

of the order of 0.2-0.28, and Canadian studies have produced estimates in a similar range. A

German study indicates a slightly higher elasticity. Estimates for the United Kingdom, on the

other hand, are like most of those for the USA at about 0.4. So father-son correlations as a key

indicator of intergenerational income mobility show a substantial divergence even across what

are in many respects quite similar industrialised countries.

9 The following review is mainly based on Erikson, R. and B. Nolan (2006): Intragenerational Income Mobility: Poverty Dynamics in Industrial Societies. Report to the World Bank and on work by John Goldthorpe and Robert Erikson. 10 The coefficient on father’s earnings in such an equation gives the elasticity of son’s earnings with respect to father’s, but if the variances in log earnings are about the same in the two generations this will approximately equal the correlation. 11 See Solon (1999) for a survey, and Atkinson, Maynard and Trinder (1983) for an early British study.

38

Most of this research has focused on the earnings of fathers rather than mothers,

because mothers’ intermittent labour market participation in the past made it problematic to

measure their long-run earnings reliably. A small number of studies have estimated father-

daughter elasticities, and these tend to be somewhat lower than father-son ones, while mother-

son or mother-daughter earnings elasticities may be lower than father-child ones (Chadwick

and Solon 2002, Bonke et al. 2005). With most studies focused on earnings, only a few have

looked at family income across the generations.

The intergenerational correlations identified in these studies obviously only measure

degrees of association between outcomes, they do not in themselves tell us anything about

how meaningful those are or the causal processes that might underpin them. A related and

substantial literature on the correlation in earnings between siblings versus non-siblings how

sought to measure how much of the variation in earnings can be attributed to factors that

siblings share – which would include not just family income but a host of other family and

neighbourhood characteristics. Björklund et al. (2002) for example estimated brother

correlations in long-run earnings to be substantially higher for the United States than for the

Nordic countries where earnings are more equally distributed. Like the related sociological

literatures on occupational, social class and educational transmission across the generations,

these studies have tried to shed some light on the processes that may be at work. A

fundamental question is the role of genetic inheritance, where analysis of data on twins has

played a central role, but assessing the extent to which resources are transmitted across the

generations through direct or indirect transfer of economic capital versus via social and

cultural capital is also key. For example, a fascinating recent study by Björklund et al. (2005)

using data on adoptees have sought to distinguish the effects of pre-birth factors including

genes and pre-natal environment from post-birth ones such as childhood environment; both

are found to contribute to intergenerational transmission, but the latter dominate in the

transmission of father’s income.

So this intergenerational literature provides the background when one comes to study

income mobility within rather than across generations. As well as bringing out the very wide

and complex set of factors that can affect income mobility, a number of more specific lessons

carry across from one context to the other. One is that annual earnings or income is affected

by transitory factors, Another is that earnings mobility may well vary across the income

distribution. For example, Bratberg, Nilsen and Vaage (2005) find the greatest inter-

generational mobility in the middle of the distribution and more persistence at the top and

bottom: it is very interesting to ask whether this sort of pattern also applies.

39

So what do we know about intragenerational income mobility and more specifically

income poverty dynamics? There has been a long-standing interest among labour economists

in mobility in individual earnings, with a particular focus on age-earnings profiles and on the

distinction between “transitory” and “permanent” components of earnings. As far as

differences across countries are concerned, OECD (1997) for example found few consistent

differences between five European countries and the USA in the scale of earnings mobility.

Research on mobility in household incomes (from all sources) is more recent, and whereas

intergenerational mobility has been measured from a variety of sources, longitudinal survey

data has dominated the analysis of intragenerational income mobility.12 These have been

available for many years in the USA, notably through the Panel Study of Income Dynamics,

and for Sweden through the Level of Living Surveys, but only from the 1980s/early 1990s in

other European countires, with national longitudinal surveys in for example Germany, The

Netherlands and the UK. More recently, panel data for most of the 15 pre-2004 members of

the European Union have been produced from the European Community Household survey

(ECHP).

While a range of studies of income mobility in individual countries have been carried

out, a reliable and comprehensive comparative picture is still emerging. A common starting-

point for comparative studies has been to test the notion that the USA’s exceptionally high

level of cross-sectional income inequality might be offset by higher levels of income mobility

than other industrialised countries – consistent with the image of the USA as a society that is

particularly open and mobile across various dimensions (compare though Erikson and

Goldthorpe 1985 and Ferrie 2005). Research to date has generally contradicted that picture.

Burkhauser and Poupore (1997) compared the USA (using PSID data) with Germany (using

the Socio-Economic Panel), and found if anything more income mobility in the latter.

Schluter (1998) found little difference between the USA, the UK and Germany in that respect.

Goodin et al. (1999) found more mobility in the Netherlands than in Germany or the USA.

Aaberge et al. (2002) found mobility levels in Scandinavian countries to be at least as great as

the USA despite their much lower levels of income inequality. Gangl (2005) found as much

income mobility in Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany as in the USA.

Focusing then on income poverty dynamics, comparative analysis was pioneered by

Duncan et al. (1993, 1995), comparing the USA and Canada with selected European countries

for which panel data was then available. In broad terms, analysis of short-term poverty

dynamics using these sources has revealed what the OECD has summarised as the seeming

12 Administrative register data provides an alternative source but only for a small number of countries.

40

paradox that poverty is simultaneously fluid and characterised by long-term traps.13 Many

spells in poverty are short and represent only transitory set-backs, and considerably fewer

people are continually poor for an extended period of time than are observed in poverty at a

point in time. On the other hand, the typical year spent in poverty is lived by someone who

experiences multiple years of poverty and whose longer-term income is below the income

poverty threshold on average. Repeated spells help to explain the apparent paradox of fluidity

combined with persistence, since many of those whose exit poverty in a given year re-enter it

within a short time. In addition, much of the time spent by such people above the poverty

threshold is not very far above it. So the evidence suggests that there is extensive persistence,

and that this is greater than just looking at spell exits would suggest.

This brings out that the extent of mobility versus persistence may depend on how one

seeks to capture poverty dynamics. For example, the most popular analytical approach

follows Bane and Ellwood’s (1986) influential US study in analysing the duration of single

spells and how they start and end; this may not adequately capture individuals’ experience of

poverty over a period of time given the importance of spell repetition.14 Furthermore, the

availability of information on individual and household characteristics in panel surveys can

lead to a bias towards concentrating on those factors in studying low income dynamics, to the

neglect of institutional and macro-economic factors - the chance of being trapped in low pay

or poverty long-term could be much higher in one institutional setting than another, and could

also be affected by the macroeconomic situation. Since most studies of poverty are based on a

dichotomy between the poor and the non-poor, analysing movements above and below an

income poverty threshold, the extent and nature of mobility may vary depending on precisely

where and how the poverty line is set. Furthermore, changes in household income may not

have an immediate impact on consumption and on levels of deprivation and exclusion, so

short-term movements above and below an income threshold may not be as significant as they

appear at first sight for poverty.15 And finally, the time horizon adopted could be critical:

mobility over the longer term may be much greater than over a period of just a few years, and

a longer perspective might produce rather different patterns within and across countries. With

these issues in mind we now proceed from this overview to a more in-depth consideration of,

first, the relationship between income poverty dynamics and mobility throughout the income

distribution.

13 See in particular OECD (2001), Whelan et al. (2001), Layte and Whelan (2002). 14 Stevens (1999) shows how poverty re-entry probabilities as well as exits might be combined to examine the implications for total poverty experienced over a period but this has not been widely applied. 15 See for example Layte, et al. (2001).

41

Measuring intergenerational economic mobility through correlation or regression

coefficients, as economists most typically to do, leads to results that can be very concisely

expressed. Sociologists’ results relating to the mobility regimes that operate within class

structures are more complex, since it is supposed that the association between class origins

and destinations may vary in strength across the component cells of the mobility table - i.e.

from one intergenerational transition to another. This supposition turns out in fact to be fully

warranted, so what is lost in parsimony is gained in realism.

With, then, some degree of simplification, the main findings from recent sociological

research could be summarised as follows.

(i) In all modern societies significant associations between class of origin and class of

destination prevail. For men, at least, there is a broad similarity in endogenous mobility

regimes across societies.i This represents an interesting parallel with the cross-national

similarities in estimates of the extent of intergenerational income mobility that are noted by

Björklund and Jännti (2000: 4, n.4). Some nationally specific variation in mobility regimes is

also apparent; but, within this variation, differences in the overall level of the origin-

destination association, as opposed to its pattern, is only one - in fact rather minor - element.

Consequently, no nations stand out as showing decisively more social fluidity or ‘openness’

than the rest. The idea of American ‘exceptionalism’ in this regard is a myth (see esp. Erikson

and Goldthorpe, 1985; 1992: ch. 9).

(ii) The main features of the cross-national commonality in mobility regimes are the

following. First, there is a general propensity for intergenerational class immobility through

the operation of what might be called ‘class-specific’ inheritance effects. These effects are

relatively strong within Classes I and II, the salariat and Classes IVa and IVb, small

employers and self-employed workers, and strongest of all within Class IVc, that of farmers.

Second, there is a general propensity for mobility to be reduced by ‘hierarchy’ effects - i.e.

those deriving from the overall advantages and disadvantages associated with different class

positions (see p. 000 above) - and especially as these effects operate between Classes I and II,

on the one hand, and Classes VIIa and VIIb, the nonskilled division of the working class, on

the other. To give some indication of the importance of class inheritance and hierarchy effects

together, the odds of a man originating in the salariat being himself found in the salariat rather

than in the nonskilled working class, relative to the same odds for a man originating in the

nonskilled working class, would, across modern societies, be of the order of 15:1.ii

42

(iii) Within particular societies, mobility regimes show a high degree of constancy over time,

and in some cases, such as Great Britain (Goldthorpe, 1987; Goldthorpe and Mills,

forthcoming) or Japan (Ishida, 1995), for periods extending back to the first half of the

twentieth century. Loglinear models that postulate no change in odds ratios reproduce the

empirical data remarkably well, usually misclassifying less than 5 per cent of all individuals

in the mobility tables analysed. In societies where trends in the overall level of fluidity can be

discerned, these are more often in the direction of increasing fluidity - odds ratios moving

generally closer to 1 - than of decreasing fluidity. But such trends, as well as being slight,

would seem more often to be episodic as, say, in the US (Erikson and Goldthorpe, 1992: ch.

9) or Sweden (Jonsson, forthcoming) than sustained, as in France (Vallet, forthcoming). The

idea of a world-wide and secular movement towards greater societal openness has been

mooted (Ganzeboom, Luijkx and Treiman, 1989) but this is scarcely borne out by the

evidence so far accumulated.

(iv) Educational attainment is a major - probably the major - mediating factor in class

mobility (Ishida, Müller and Ridge, 1995; Marshall, Swift and Roberts, 1997), although this is

more apparent when education is measured by highest level of qualification achieved

(academic or vocational) rather than by number of years of education completed, as is the

usual American practice.iii In the British case, the tradition of birth-cohort studies provides

data-sets that allow for the effects of IQ and of effort (in the sense at least of academic

motivation as measured on standard psychological scales) to be reliably compared with that of

education. The latter proves to be clearly stronger and, further, the effects of IQ and effort

appear to operate largely via educational attainment, at all events so far as the mediation of

early-life mobility (up to around age 30) is concerned (Breen and Goldthorpe, 1999).

(v) Modern societies are not, however, ‘meritocracies’ in the sense that, once educational

qualifications (and other ‘merit’ variables) are controlled, class of destination is no longer

dependent on class of origin. To the contrary, a significant and often substantial dependence

remains (Marshall, Swift and Roberts, 1997; Breen and Goldthorpe, 1999, 2001) - and in

some cases, for example, Sweden, the persisting effect of class origins has been shown to

extend to income also (Erikson and Jonsson, 1998). Thus, as Breen and Goldthorpe have put

it (1999: 21) ‘children of disadvantaged class origins have to display far more merit [as

indicated by educational attainment or by IQ and effort] than do children of more advantaged

origins in order to attain similar class positions’.

43

(vi) The mediating role of education varies significantly in its importance from one type of

intergenerational transition to another. Thus, educational qualifications have been shown

(Ishida, Müller and Ridge, 1995) to be of no importance at all in mediating intergenerational

immobility (for which there is a high propensity) within any of the subdivisions of Class IV:

i.e. among small employers, self-employed workers or farmers. What appears crucial here is

the direct intergenerational transmission of ‘going concerns’ or of economic capital in other

forms - a factor that Bowles and Gintis (2001) also find important for the intergenerational

income correlation. Further, several studies now in progress suggest that educational

qualifications are of greater importance in ‘long-range’ upward mobility - as, say, from

working-class origins into the salariat - than they are in intergenerational immobility within

the salariat (see e.g. Guzzo, 2002). Here in particular the advantages of a ‘disaggregated’,

contingency-table approach can be seen. Effects that bear on mobility from specific origins to

specific destinations can be shown up in a way that would not be possible if the same

regression rules were simply assumed to apply ‘across the board’.

REFERENCES Aaberge, R., Björklund, A., Jäntti, M., Palme, M., Pedersen, P., Smith, N. and

Wennemo, T. 2002, ‘Income Inequality and Income Mobility in the Scandinavian

Countries Compared to the United States’, Review of Income and Wealth 48(4): 443-

469.

Atkinson, A. B., Maynard A. K. and Trinder C. G. 1983, Parents and Children: Incomes

in Two generations, London: Heinemann.

Bane, M. J. and Ellwood, D. T. 1986, ‘Slipping Into and Out of Poverty’, Journal of Human

Resources 21: 1-23.

Björklund, A. and Jäntti, M. 1997, ‘Intergenerational Income Mobility in Sweden

Compared to the United States’, American Economic Review 87: 1009-1018.

Björklund, A., Eriksson, T., Jäntti, M., Raaum, O. and Österbacka, E. 2002, ‘Brother

correlations in earnings in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden compared to the

United States’, Journal of Population Economics 15: 757-772.

Björklund, Anders and Jännti, Markus 2000, ‘Intergenerational Mobility of Socio-

economic Status in Comparative Perspective’, Nordic Journal of Political Economy

26: 3-32.

44

Bonke, J., Hussain, M. A. and Munk, M. D. 2005, ‘A comparison of Danish and

International Findings on Intergenerational Earnings Mobility’, SFI-working paper

2005: 11.

Bowles, Samuel and Gintis, Herbert 2001, ‘The Inheritance of Economic Status:

Education, Class and Genetics’, in Marcus Feldman and Paul Baltes (eds)

International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Genetics, Behavior

and Society, New York: Oxford University Press and Elsevier.

Bratberg E., Nilsen, O. and Vaage, K. 2005, ‘Intergenerational Earnings Mobility in

Norway: Levels and Trends’, Scandinavian Journal of Economics 107 (3): 419-435.

Brauns, H. and Steinmann, S. 1999, ‘Educational Reform in France, West Germany and the

United Kingdom: Updating the CASMIN Educational Classification.’ ZUMA-

Nachrichten 44: 7- 44.

Breen, R. and Jonsson, J. O. 2005, ‘Inequality of Opportunity in Comparative Perspective:

Recent Research on Educational Attainment and Social Mobility’, Annual Review of

Sociology 31: 223-43

Breen, Richard and Goldthorpe, John H. 1999, ‘Class Inequality and Meritocracy: a

Critique of Saunders and an Alternative Analysis.’, British Journal of Sociology 50: 1-

27.

Breen, Richard and Goldthorpe, John H. 2001, ‘Class, Mobility and Merit: the Experience

of Two British Birth Cohorts.’, European Sociological Review 17: 81-101.

Burkhauser, R.V., and Poupoure, J. 1997, ‘A cross-national comparison of permanent

inequality in the United States and Germany.’, Review of Economics and Statistics

LXXIX(1), February: 10-18.

Chadwick, L. and Solon, G. 2002, ‘Intergenerational Income Mobility Among Daughters’,

American Economic Review 92 (1): 335-344.

Corak, M. 2006, ‘Do Poor Children Become Poor Adults? Lessons from a Cross Country

Comparison of Generational Earnings Mobility’, IZA Discussion Paper No. 1993,

Bonn: IZA.

Duncan, G. J., Gustafsson, B., Hauser, R., Schmaus, G., Jenkins, S., Messinger, H.,

Muffels, R., Nolan, B., Ray, J-C., Voges, W. 1995, ‘Poverty and Social-Assistance

Dynamics in the United States, Canada and Western Europe’, in K. McFate, R.

Lawson and W. J Wilson (eds) Poverty, Inequality and the Future of Social Policy:

Western States in the New World Order, New York: Russell Sage, pp. 67-108.

45

Erikson R., and Goldthorpe, J.H. 1985, ‘Are American Rates of Social Mobility

Exceptionally High? New Evidence on an Old Issue’, European Sociological Review

1: 1-22.

Erikson, Robert and Jonsson, Jan O. 1998, ‘Social Origin as an Interest-bearing Asset:

Family Background and Labour Market Rewards among Employees in Sweden.’, Acta

Sociologica 41: 19-36.

Ferrie, Joseph P. 2005, ‘The End of American Exceptionalism?: Mobility in the U.S. Since

1850.’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 19(3): 199-215.

Gangl, M. 2005, ‘Income inequality, permanent incomes and income dynamics: Comparing

Europe to the United States’, Work and Occupations 32(2): 140-162

Ganzeboom, Harry G. B., Luijkx, Ruud and Treiman, Donald J. 1989; ‘Intergenerational

Class Mobility in Comparative Perspective.’, Research in Social Stratification and

Mobility 8: 3-55.

Goldthorpe, John H. (with Payne, Clive and Llewellyn, Catriona) 1987, Social Mobility

and Class Structure in Modern Britain, 2nd Edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Goldthorpe, John H. and Mills, Colin. 2004, ‘Trends in Intergenerational Class Mobility in

Britain in the Late Twentieth Century’, in Richard Breen (ed) Social Mobility in

Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goodin, R.E., Heady, Muffels, R. and Dirven, H.J. 1999, The Real Worlds of Welfare

Capitalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Guzzo, Sal. 2002, ‘Getting in Through the Back Door: Equal Educational Qualifications,

Unequal Occupational Outcomes’, ISA Research Committee on Social Stratification

and Mobility, Oxford: April.

Ishida, Hiroshi, Müller, Walter and Ridge John, M. 1995, ‘Class Origin, Class

Destination, and Education: A Cross-National Study of Ten Industrial Nations’,

American Journal of Sociology 60: 145-93.

Ishida, Hiroshi. 1995, ‘Intergenerational Class Mobility and Reproduction’, in H. Ishida (ed)

Social Stratification and Mobility: Basic Analysis and Cross-National Comparison,

Tokyo: SSM Research Series: 145-197.

Jonsson, Jan O. Forthcoming, ‘Social Mobility in Sweden, 1976-1999’, in Richard Breen

(ed) National Patterns of Social Mobility: Convergence or Divergence, Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

König, Wolfgang, Lüttinger, Paul and Müller, Walter 1988, ‘A Comparative Analysis of

the Development and Structure of Educational Systems: Methodological Foundations

46

and the Construction of a Comparative Educational Scale.’, CASMIN Working Paper

12, University of Mannheim.

Layte, R. and Whelan, C.T. 2002, ‘The Dynamics of Income Poverty Risk’, chapter 5 in

European Social Statistics: Income, Poverty and Social Exclusion: 2nd Report - Data

1994-1997, Luxembourg: European Communities.

Layte, R., Maitre, B., Nolan, B. and Whelan, C.T. 2001, ‘Poverty Dynamics: An Analysis

of the 1994 and 1995 Waves of the European Community Household Panel Survey’,

European Societies 2 (4): 505-31.

Marshall, Gordon, Swift, Adam and Roberts, Stephen 1997, Against the Odds? Social

Class and Social Justice in Industrial Societies, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

OECD 1997, ‘Earnings Mobility: Taking a Longer-Run View’, Employment Outlook Chapter

2, Paris: OECD.

OECD 2001, ‘When Money is Tight: Poverty Dynamics in OECD Countries’, Employment

Outlook Chapter 2, Paris: OECD.

Schluter, C. 1998, ‘Income dynamics in the USA, Germany and the UK’, European Meeting

of the Econometric Society, Berlin.

Solon, G. 1992, ‘Intergenerational Income Mobility in the United States’, American

Economic Review 82: 393-408.

Solon, G. 1999, ‘Intergenerational Mobility in the Labor Market’, in O. Ashenfelter and D.

Card (eds) Handbook of Labor Economics, Volume 3A: North Holland.

Solon, G. 2002, ‘Cross-country Differences in Intergenerational Earnings Mobility’, Journal

of Economic Perspectives 16(3): 59-66.

Stevens, A.H. 1999, ‘Climbing Out of Poverty, Falling Back In: Measuring the Persistence of

Poverty over Multiple Spells.’, Journal of Human Resources 34 (3): 557-588.

Vallet, Louis-André Forthcoming, ‘Change in Intergenerational Class Mobility in France

Analysed According to the CASMIN Perspective from the 1970s to the 1990s’, in

Richard Breen (ed) National Patterns of Social Mobility: Convergence or Divergence,

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Whelan, C.T., Layte, R., Nolan, B. and Maitre, B. 2001, ‘Income, Deprivation and

Economic Strain’, European Sociological Review 17 (4): 357-372.

Zimmermann, D.J. 1992, ‘Regression Toward Mediocrity in Economic Stature’, American

Economic Review 82: 409-436.

47

EDUCATIONAL FIELDS OF STUDY AND SOCIAL INEQUALITY

Herman van de Werfhorst AIAS, Amsterdam

In recent years social research has enlarged the insight into the role of education in processes

of social stratification and mobility, by moving beyond the study of vertical educational

differentiation in higher versus lower levels of schooling. One extension has been to

emphasize distinctions between vocational and generic types of schooling within the same

level, like has been already extensively studied in the CASMIN project (e.g. Brauns et al.

1999; Shavit & Muller 1998). This distinction has proven to be very useful, and has much

relevance in our studies of social inequality of educational attainment and the role of

education on the labour market. Furthermore, the distinction is valuable from a cross-national

perspective, as our understanding of institutional differences in the organization of

educational systems is greatly enhanced by this framework.

The second extension of our insights in the importance of education for the

stratification and mobility of modern postindustrial societies concerns the role of fields of

study, or subject choice. In this section we summarize the state of the art with regard to

horizontal educational differentiations across fields of study, and highlight the most important

findings in this literature.

GENDER AND SUBJECT CHOICE When it comes to horizontal educational differentiations, the majority of publications deal

with (1) gender differences in choices, and (2) their consequences for gender inequality on the

labour market (see section on labour market outcomes below). Despite women’s decreasing

disadvantage in the level of acquired schooling, up to the point where younger cohorts now

obtain levels of schooling at the same level as men or above in many countries, segregation

across fields of study is far more stable across time. This is demonstrated for the USA (Jacobs

1985, 1995, 1996; Wilson & Boldizar 1990, Turner 1999), and in cross-national perspective

(Bradley 2000; Kelly & Slaughter 1991).

With regard to the explanation of why women choose different fields of study than

men, studies can be distinguished that focus on individual characteristics, on gender

characteristics, and on broader societal developments. The studies focussing on individual

characteristics have emphasized that part of the gender segregation can be explained by

48

differences in mathematics achievements in secondary school (e.g. Ayalon 2003), or by

comparative advantage on languages versus mathematics (Jonsson 1999; Van de Werfhorst et

al. 2003). Jonsson (1999) analyzed whether the comparative advantage of women in

languages versus mathematics explains the gender segregation across fields of study. He

found some support for it in Sweden using one educational cohort, although only a fraction of

the gender effect could be explained. Another single-cohort study of Van de Werfhorst et al.

(2003) found no support for the comparative advantage mechanism explaining gender

segregation in Britain, although comparative advantage did explain field-of-study choices

well.

Studies oriented towards gender-based explanations usually refer to the differential

returns and expectations that men and women have with regard to their future career.

Polachek (1978, 1981) argues that men and women anticipate on optimizing their life-time

earnings, so that women often choose fields with relatively high returns at the start of the

career, and with fewer penalties for temporary labour market withdrawal. Such aspects of

careers are attractive for women who may wish to work reduced hours in order to take care of

children. Additionally, fields are chosen that offer many opportunities for reduced working

hours and extensive child care facilities. All these features make it likely that women are

relatively often found in teaching and health related fields. Pitcher and Purcell (1998) focus

not so much on preferences but more on expectations for the types of skill that people obtain,

and show that men and women have different career expectations.

Another strand of research on gender-based explanations has focussed on the gender-

specific types of socialization. For Sweden, Dryler (1998) examined from this perspective

whether gender-typical parents get gender-typical children, and vice versa. Although some

support was found for this hypothesis, most of the reproduction of horizontal educational

fields was gender-independent; that is, children often choose fields that are related to their

parents’ occupation, irrespective of their gender. Yet another approach is taken by James

Hearn, who argues that women often choose fields of study with lower socio-economic power

where faculties are supportive of students, and that men often choose fields in which faculties

are more critically evaluative to students, which is caused by greater labour market power

(Hearn 1980; Hearn & Olzak 1981).

Studies oriented towards wider societal developments have stressed that cultural

pressures towards gender equality have had a larger impact on vertical inequalities between

men and women, than on horizontal inequalities (Charles and Bradley 2002).

49

SOCIAL ORIGIN AND SUBJECT CHOICE By now quite a few studies have been published on the impact of social origin on horizontal

educational choices, using data from various countries. How does social class and education

of parents affect horizontal choices in education? One starting point is to see educational

choices as part of individual strategies to reach specific social positions later in life. Such

strategies are influenced by the social origin; hence it is relevant to see educational choices as

being part of mobility strategies (Goldthorpe 2000). One reason for this is that a more

complete understanding of education in the mobility process may shed new light on the

magnitude of direct versus indirect effects of social origin on social destination (Erikson &

Jonsson 1998). The second reason is more theoretical: As origins can be seen as multi-

dimensional rather than just hierarchical, educational choices should also be treated

multidimensional (Van de Werfhorst 2002b).

Various theories have been employed to deal with this multidimensionality of

educational choices in social mobility processes. First, educational choices have been

explained by cultural and social reproduction strategies (cf. Bourdieu 1984; Bourdieu &

Passeron 1990), in which the amount of cultural and economic capital in the family of origin

affects choices in order to reproduce this type of capital (Davies & Guppy 1997; Hansen

1997; Van de Werfhorst et al. 2001). Second, educational choices have been regarded as part

of rational actions in which costs and benefits are balanced in order to reach certain income

levels or social classes, whether or not from the perspective of relative risk aversion (Jonsson

1999; Rochat & Demeulemeester 2001; Van de Werfhorst 2002).

One of the first studies in this topic was by Kelsall et al (1972), who argued that,

among British university graduates, working class children were over-represented in technical

and engineering fields, whereas they were under-represented in the humanities and social

studies. This general pattern is also found by Davies and Guppy (1997) for the USA, Hansen

(1997) and Hansen & Mastekaasa (2006) for Norway, Van de Werfhorst et al. (2001) for the

Netherlands, Van de Werfhorst et al. (2003) for Britain, and Ayalon and Yogev (2005) for

Israel. So, despite the fact that each of these studies have looked at the issue in a rather

different way, some general patterns have emerged.

As said, several of these studies have placed the choice of field of study in the

tradition of Bourdieu’s theory of social and cultural reproduction. Davies and Guppy analyzed

the impact of parental cultural resources (based on subscriptions to magazines and

newspapers, and having a library card) on the earnings power of fields of study, and found no

effect of cultural resources, nor of parental socio-economic status. Hansen (1997) separated

50

managers (rich in economic capital) from professionals (rich in cultural capital) and found

that children of professionals were relatively likely to choose the professional fields (i.e

medicine, law, business administration), and more so than children of managers. However,

both groups have a higher likelihood to enter professional fields than the academic field

(humanities and social sciences). Van de Werfhorst et al (2001) analyzed the extent to which

children choose the same field of study as their parents, and furthermore tried to explain

intergenerational resemblance by cultural and economic resources of the family of origin.

That study showed that in all fields of study the odds ratio of intergenerational resemblance

was larger than 1 (and often larger than 2), indicating resemblance in all fields. Strongest

resemblance was found in the agricultural and teaching fields, with odds ratios over 4. Part of

these reproductions were attributable to family differences in cultural and economic capital.

Parents’ reading behaviour affected choices for cultural fields, the medical/caring field, and

the teaching field, whereas parents’ economic resources affected the choice for economics and

law. They concluded that Davies and Guppy’s finding of no effect of cultural resources on

field of study is due to their misrecognition of the preferences of children of the cultural elite.

These children have not a preference for well-paying fields of study, but rather opt for fields

where their type of family capital can be reproduced, i.e. cultural fields that do on aggregate

not pay well.

Only few of the studies on the impact of social origin on choice of discipline have

been able to control for measured ability (e.g. in the form of school tests). The reason for this

is that most studies use cross-sectional data, in which standardized tests are not available.

There are three exceptions. First, the study by Davies and Guppy (1997) mentioned above

showed that ability affected the choice for lucrative fields of study (i.e. fields with high

average salaries), although we could doubt the causality here. It could very well be that the

occupations are well-paying because they select not only on fields of study but also on ability.

It should be noted that the non-effect of cultural resources in the study by Davies and Guppy

is also found in a model without control for ability. The second example is the study by Van

de Werfhorst et al. (2003) on a British cohort born in 1958, who analyzed the impact of age

11 abilities in languages and mathematics, and age 16 subject related abilities, on choices for

tertiary field of study. Their analysis showed that the impact of social origin was very weak

when controlling for abilities. The only persistent finding was that children of professionals

had a high chance to choose prestigeous fields of study (e.g. medicine and law) even when

abilities are controlled. The third study that looked in more detail into the impact of social

origin and measured ability is by Hansen and Mastekaasa (2006). They analyzed to what

51

extent social origin affected grades in tertiary education, controlling for secondary level

grades. They found that children from social classes rich in cultural capital did relatively well

in fields that are closely connected to the cultural domain.

FIELD OF STUDY AND LABOUR MARKET OUTCOMES The large majority of existing research on the impact of educational field of study on labour

market outcomes is on explaining the gender wage gap. Given that typical female-dominated

fields of study usually lead to lower wages than typical male-dominated fields, part of the

gender wage gap may be attributable to differential field of study choices. Support for this

reasoning can be found in Kalmijn and Van der Lippe (1997), Gerhart (1990), Loury (1997),

Marini & Fan (1997), and Katz-Gerro & Yaish (2003). Marini and Fan (1997) and Kalmijn

and Van der Lippe (1997) have advanced on human capital theory by arguing that men

generate predominantly market skills through their education, while women acquire mainly

social and nurturing skills. Research by Gerhart (1990) shows that, among college-educated

workers, field of study is the most important explanation for income differences between men

and women. In addition, the effects of field of study on income remained stable in the 1980s

in the USA, while for women the positive effect of having a degree in engineering almost

doubled (Loury 1997). Daymont and Andrisati (1987) add to this literature by stating that

men’s and women’s choices are guided by differential preferences, and that the gender wage

gap is thus partially explained by these preferences. Katz-Gerro and Yaish (2003) as well as

Kalmijn and Van der Lippe (1997) examine the interaction between field of study and gender,

predicting labour market outcomes. Katz-Gerro and Yaish conclude (using Israeli data) that

men and women benefit most from fields where they are a minority. They explain this finding

by a higher level of commitment to a discipline if people have graduated as a minority.

Kalmijn and Van der Lippe, using Dutch data, did not find this result; their analysis points to

the finding that men and women benefit relatively much from fields where their own gender

forms the majority.

There are a few studies that do not focus on gender differences, but are more

generally concerned with between-field differences in labour market returns. This started off

with the work by Griffin and Alexander (1978: 319), who claimed that “the traditional use of

quantitative indices of schooling (years of school completed or certification levels) in

assessing the market consequences of investments in education needs to be supplemented by

information on qualitative variations in educational experiences”. Their analysis using US

52

data, showed that engineering and business administration affected wages positively in

comparison to other fields (but not occupational status).

Hansen (2001) shows with superb Norwegian population data that, among tertiary

qualified people, the economics field leads to the highest yearly earnings, and engineering and

the natural sciences come second. Lowest earnings were found in the humanities field and in

social work and teaching. Interestingly, these differences become larger if work-related

earnings are extended to cover stock income. Elsewhere Hansen (1996) showed that earnings

are higher if people specialize in a field that connects to the parents’ occupation.

Van de Werfhorst (2002b) ranked fields of study on four resource-dimensions

according to the types of skills that are obtained: cultural, economic, communicative and

technical. His findings with Dutch data showed that economic resources obtained in

educational fields of study, and to a lesser extent also cultural resources, lead to higher wages.

Moreover, most of the impact of field-related resources was constrained to occupations that

match the types of skill obtained. One exception concerns the cultural resources, that mainly

lead to higher wages outside cultural occupations, which stresses the generic nature of cultural

skills. Relatedly, Wolbers (2003) examined the prevalence of and returns to job mismatches in

thirteen European countries. He showed that people educated in the humanities, the sciences,

and in agriculture are more often employed in jobs unrelated to their discipline than teachers;

and people educated in the social sciences, engineering, health, and services are more often

employed in matching jobs. Wolbers furthermore showed that job mismatches lead to lower

occupational status, which makes the varying level of job matching across fields of study a

relevant issue in terms of potential labour market achievement.

In a cross-national comparative research, Van de Werfhorst (2004) showed that the

economics field also pays off relatively much in the Netherlands and Australia, whereas the

technical field enlarges incomes in the Netherlands but not in Australia or Norway. Health

disciplines lead to relatively high wages in Australia, but not in Norway or the Netherlands.

Remarkably, the arts and humanities lead to relatively low wages in Norway and Australia,

and to higher wages in the Netherlands.

53

REFERENCES Ayalon, H. 2003, 'Women and Men Go to University: Mathematical Background and Gender

Differences in Choice of Field in Higher Education', Sex Roles 48: 277-290.

Ayalon, H. and Yogev, A. 2005, 'Field of Study and Students' Stratification in an Expanded

System of Higher Education: The Case of Israel', European Sociological Review 21:

227-241.

Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction, A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, London:

Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.C. 1990 [1977], Reproduction in Education, Society, and

Culture, London; Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage in association with Theory Culture &

Society Dept. of Administrative and Social Studies Teesside Polytechnic.

Bradley, K. 2000, 'The Incorporation of Women into Higher Education: Paradoxical

Outcomes?' Sociology of Education 73: 1-18.

Brauns, H., Steinmann, S., Kieffer, A. and Marry, C. 1999, 'Does Education Matter?

France and Germany in Comparative Perspective', European Sociological Review 15:

61-90.

Charles, M. and Bradley, K. 2002, 'Equal but Separate? A Cross-National Study of Sex

Segregation in Higher Education', American Sociological Review 67: 573-599.

Davies, S. and Guppy, N. 1997, 'Fields of Study, College Selectivity, and Student

Inequalities in Higher Education', Social Forces 75: 1417-1438.

Daymont, T.N. and Andrisani, P.J. 1984, 'Job Preferences, College Major, and the Gender

Gap in Earnings', Journal of Human Resources 19: 408-428.

Dryler, H. 1998, 'Parental Role Models, Gender, and Educational Choice', British Journal of

Sociology 49: 375-398.

Erikson, R. and Jonsson, J.O. 1998, 'Social Origin as an Interest-bearing Asset: Family

Background and Labour-market Rewards Among Employees in Sweden', Acta

Sociologica 41: 19-36.

Gerhart, B. 1990, 'Gender Differences in Current and Starting Salaries: The Role of

Performance, College Major, and Job Title', Industrial and Labor Relations Review

43: 418-433.

Goldthorpe, J.H. 2000, On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research

and Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Griffin, L.J. and Alexander, K.L. 1978, 'Schooling and Socioeconomic Attainment: High

School and College Influences', American Journal of Sociology 84: 319-347.

54

Hansen, M.N. 1996, 'Earnings in Elite Groups: The Impact of Social Class Origin', Acta

Sociologica 39: 385-408.

Hansen, M.N. 1997, 'Social and Economic Inequality in the Educational Career: Do the

Effects of Social Background Characteristics Decline?' European Sociological Review

13: 305-321.

Hansen, M.N. 2001, 'Education and Economic Rewards: Variations by Social-Class Origin

and Income Measures', European Sociological Review 17: 209-231.

Hansen, M.N. and Mastekaasa, A. 2006, 'Social origins and academic performance at

university', European Sociological Review 22: 277-291.

Hearn, J.C. 1980, 'Major Choice and the Well-Being of College Men and Women: An

Examination from Developmental, Organizational, and Structural Perspectives',

Sociology of Education 53: 164-178.

Hearn, J.C. and Olzak, S. 1981, 'The Role of College Major Departments in the

Reproduction of Sexual Inequality', Sociology of Education 54: 195-205.

Jacobs, J.A. 1985, 'Sex Segregation in American Higher Education' in L. Larwood,

A.H.S.B.G. (ed.) Women and Work: An Annual Review, Beverly Hills: Sage.

Jacobs, J.A. 1995, 'Gender and Academic Specialties: Trends Among Recipients of College

Degrees in the 1980s', Sociology of Education 68: 81-98.

Jacobs, J.A. 1996, 'Gender Inequality and Higher Education', Annual Review of Sociology 22:

153-185.

Jonsson, J.O. 1999, 'Explaining Sex Differences in Educational Choice. An Empirical

Assessment of a Rational Choice Model', European Sociological Review 15: 391-404.

Kalmijn, M. and Van der Lippe, T. 1997, 'Type of Schooling and Sex Differences in

Earnings in the Netherlands', European Sociological Review 13: 1-15.

Katz-Gerro, T. and Yaish, M. 2003, 'Higher Education: Is More Better? Gender Differences

in Labour Market Returns to Tertiary Education in Israel', Oxford Review of Education

29: 571-592.

Kelly, G.P. and Slaughter, S. 1991, Women's Higher Education in Comparative Perspective,

Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.

Loury, L.D. 1997, 'The Gender Earnings Gap Among College-Educated Workers', Industrial

and Labor Relations Review 50: 580-593.

Marini, M.M. and Fan, P.-L. 1997, 'The Gender Gap in Earnings at Career Entry', American

Sociological Review 62: 588-604.

55

Pitcher, J. and Purcell, K. 1998, 'Diverse Expectations and Access to Opportunities: Is there

A Graduate Labour Market?' Higher Education Quarterly 52: 179-203.

Polachek, S.W. 1978, 'Sex Differences in College Major', Industrial and Labor Relations

Review 31: 498-508.

Polachek, S.W. 1981, 'Occupational Self-Selection: A Human Capital Approach to Sex

Differences in Occupational Structure', Review of Economics and Statistics 63: 60-69.

Rochat, D. and Demeulemeester, J.-L. 2001, 'Rational Choice under Unequal Constraints:

The Example of Belgian Higher Education', Economics of Education Review 20: 15-

26.

Shavit, Y. and Müller, W. 1998, 'From School to Work. A Comparative Study of

Educational Qualifications and Occupational Destinations', Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Sorensen, K.H. and Berg, A.-J. 1987, 'Genderization of Technology among Norwegian

Engineering Students', Acta Sociologica 30: 151-171.

Turner, S.E. and Bowen, W.G. 1999, 'Choice of Major: The Changing (Unchanging)

Gender Gap', Industrial and Labor Relations Review 52: 289-313.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G. 2002a, 'A Detailed Examination of the Role of Education in

Intergenerational Social Class Mobility', Social Science Information 41: 407-438.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G. 2002b, 'Fields of Study, Acquired Skills and the Wage Benefit from

a Matching Job', Acta Sociologica 45: 287-303.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G. 2004, 'Systems of Educational Specialization and Labour Market

Outcomes in Norway, Australia, and the Netherlands', International Journal of

Comparative Sociology 45: 315-335.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G. and De Graaf, N.D. 2004, 'The Sources of Political Orientations in

Post-Industrial Society: Social Class and Education Revisited', British Journal of

Sociology 55: 211-235.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G., De Graaf, N.D. and Kraaykamp, G. 2001, 'Intergenerational

Resemblance in Field of Study in the Netherlands', European Sociological Review 17:

275-294.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G. and Kraaykamp, G. 2001, 'Four Field-related Educational

Resources and Their Impact on Labor, Consumption, and Sociopolitical Orientation',

Sociology of Education 74: 296-317.

Van de Werfhorst, H.G., Sullivan, A. and Cheung, S.Y. 2003, 'Social Class, Ability and

Choice of Subject in Secondary and Tertiary Education in Britain', British Educational

Research Journal 29: 41-62.

56

Wilson, K.L. and Boldizar, J.P. 1990, 'Gender Segregations in Higher Education: Effects of

Aspirations, Mathematics Achievement, and Income', Sociology of Education 63: 62-

74.

Wolbers, M.H.J. 2003, 'Job Mismatches and their Labour-Market Effects among School-

leavers in Europe', European Sociological Review 19: 249-266.

57

MERITOCRACY

Michelle Jackson Nuffield College, Oxford

In recent years, there has been renewed interest in an extremely old sociological debate. The

question of how different types of societies allocate occupational positions and subsequent

rewards has long been of concern to sociologists, in particular those originating from liberal

(or functionalist) schools of thought16. Throughout the twentieth century, sociologists have

been engaged with testing propositions about how industrialisation impacts on stratification

systems and processes of occupational attainment. Such issues were thrust back into the

limelight in the late twentieth century with the publication of high profile works such as The

Bell Curve (Herrnstein and Murray 1994: 13). Suddenly, academics, journalists and the

public alike became concerned with the problems of occupational attainment, equality and

social justice.

SOCIOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF ‘MERITOCRACY’ Sociological interest in processes of occupational attainment can be traced back to the theories

of industrialism associated with Parsons, Kerr, Bell and Blau and Duncan. Here, the move

from ascription to achievement as a primary basis of social selection is seen to be one of the

defining characteristics of modern societies (Parsons and Bales 1956; Blau and Duncan 1967;

Kerr, et al. 1960)17. ‘Ascribed’ characteristics are those features of an individual that are

acquired more or less automatically, as a result of birth, family background, or genetic

fortune. ‘Achieved’ characteristics, on the other hand, are features that have been acquired as

a result of the actions of individuals, such as qualifications, or accomplishments (Levy 1966;

Parsons 1954). The possession of blue eyes is an example of an ascribed characteristic,

whereas a university degree is achieved.

16 In general, the term ‘liberal’ represents an ideology while the term ‘functionalist’ represents a sociological theory. I use the term ‘liberal’ to describe all theories which propose that merit selection should predominate in the labour market (functionalism being such a theory). 17 The ascription/achievement distinction is a rather simplistic one, and is difficult to maintain in the light of subsequent research. The liberal theorists were perfectly prepared to accept IQ as an achieved characteristic, even though it is clear that IQ is ascribed to a (possibly very large) extent. This problem tends to be ignored in discussions of the ascription/achievement distinction in the liberal theory of industrialism, and thus IQ is taken to be included among ‘achieved’ characteristics. Here I make no attempt to defend the distinctions made between ascribed and achieved characteristics (or indeed the implications for normative theory), simply taking my lead from previous work in the field.

58

As industrialisation progresses, the occupational structure is characterised by a move

away from agriculture: as countries industrialise, the efficiency of agricultural production

increases and the proportion of the labour force engaged in agriculture decreases. In non-

agricultural sectors, increased mechanisation creates a shift from the production of goods to

the production of services (Bell 1973). These shifts in the labour market encourage the

development of extensive educational systems, designed to meet the demand for trained

personnel. The industrial system cannot function effectively without a workforce trained in a

wide range of skills and professional competencies (Kerr, et al. 1960). Levels of income tend

to rise, and income inequality tends to be reduced as a consequence of industrialisation

(Treiman 1970: 215-219). Accompanying these changes in social structure, industrialisation

generates changes in the process of status attainment. According to Treiman (1970), we

should expect to see a decrease in the direct effect of father’s on son’s occupational status, an

increase in the direct effect of education on occupational attainment, and a shift from

ascriptive to universalistic achievement criteria as a basis for allocation to occupational roles.

As a consequence of this, we should also see higher rates of overall intergenerational

mobility. In effect,

“The industrial society is an open community encouraging occupational and

geographic mobility and social mobility. Industrialization calls for flexibility

and competition; it is against tradition and status based upon family, class,

religion, race, or caste” (Kerr, et al. 1960: 26).

The thesis of industrialism, therefore, posits a society moving through different levels of

development, towards ever-increasing openness and efficiency. While,

“...industrialization follows widely differing patterns in different countries,

some characteristics of the industrialization process are common to all. These

“universals” arise from the imperatives intrinsic to the process. They are the

prerequisites and the concomitants of industrial evolution. Once under way, the

logic of industrialization sets in motion many trends which do more or less

violence to the traditional pre-industrial society” (Kerr, et al. 1960: 15).

The traditional structures, processes and systems characteristic of pre-industrial society are

steadily destroyed, as the industrial machine progresses towards maturity18. The final stage of

18 Not all believe that the relationship between industrialisation and modernisation is so self-evident. Wrigley (1972) provides a compelling historical argument to suggest that the relationship is not an inevitable one.

59

this movement represents the highest level of advancement that industrial, even post-

industrial19, society could potentially reach: the meritocracy.

In a meritocracy, the sole principle of stratification is achievement. Ascriptive

characteristics are deemed irrelevant to the judgement of merit, and are necessarily

superseded by achievement criteria designed to allow efficient allocation of occupational

positions.

“In social fact, the meritocracy is thus the displacement of one principle of

stratification by another, of ascription for achievement” (Bell 1973: 427).

Modern societies should be characterised by increasing merit selection: merit should become

the principal determinant both of an individual’s access to education and of their subsequent

position within the social division of labour – this is the Increased Merit Selection Hypothesis

(see Jonsson 1996 for a full critical exposition of the IMS hypothesis). Ascriptive

characteristics should be irrelevant to both of these processes.

WHAT IS MERIT?

What, then, counts as ‘merit’? The terms ‘merit’ and ‘achievement’ create a certain amount

of ambiguity in the literature, as it is not immediately obvious how the distinction should be

made between merit and non-merit criteria. However, two main conceptions of merit can be

distinguished in the literature. The first is that ‘merit’ should refer to those formal

qualifications that an individual has achieved – outward demonstrations of inner capacities

and skills, and emphasises the importance of educational qualifications for judging

appropriateness for a particular role (Parsons 1954; Parsons and Bales 1956; Bell 1973). The

second conception comes from Michael Young’s The Rise of the Meritocracy (1958), a

classic and brilliant social satire, and where the term ‘meritocracy’ was first coined. Here,

merit is seen not as achieved qualifications, but as a measure of the specific inner capacities of

individuals. ‘Intelligence and effort together make up merit’ (Young 1958: 94). While the

two definitions of merit (qualifications or IQ+effort) are clearly different, there has been a

tendency in the literature to treat them as functionally equivalent, with educational

qualifications being taken to provide a good proxy measure of IQ and effort.

19 I use the term ‘post-industrial’ (Bell 1973) to refer to the highest stage of the industrialisation process.

60

MERITOCRACY: EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE While the theses of industrialism and merit selection are generally internally coherent, a great

deal of the literature is theoretical, and in many cases the vision of society moving towards a

meritocratic state as industrialisation progresses is often taken to be self-evident, rather than

empirically proved. However, a number of clear hypotheses and areas for empirical testing

can be identified. As we saw earlier, a meritocratic society is one in which either educational

qualifications or IQ+effort determine occupational position. We can state the relevant

propositions of the theory in relation to educational attainment in reference to the following

diagram:

Figure 1.1: Elements of the Liberal Theory of Industrialism

E

O

D

O = class origin

E = educational attainment

D = class destination

= weakening association over time

= strengthening association over time

= vanishing association over time

In the diagram, we see the relationship between class origin (O), educational attainment (E)

and class destination (D). According to the MS hypothesis, as societies modernise:

• The association between class origin and educational attainment (the O-E link)

weakens. The development of mass educational systems allows talented individuals

from all class backgrounds to have equal chances of achieving qualifications.

61

• The association between educational attainment and class destination (the E-D link)

strengthens (the ‘tightening bond’). This ensures that the most highly educated

individuals achieve the high-level and functionally important occupational positions.

• And as a result of these changes, the association between class origin and class

destination (the O-D link) weakens. Controlling for education, the O-D link should

progressively vanish. As mediated by education, the association between O and D

should fall to the level set by cultural and genetic effects of O on IQ and effort (which

E cannot modify) (see Jackson, et al. 2005; Goldthorpe and Jackson 2007; Breen and

Jonsson 2005 provide an impressive overview of evidence pertaining to the OED

triangle).

Therefore, in the following two sections, I will assess the evidence for and against hypotheses

concerning:

i Social mobility in the industrial society, and evidence for and against the ‘open

society’ (the O-D link).

and

ii The influence of education in mediating the origin-destination link (the O-E

and E-D links).

I will then consider:

iii The influence of IQ and effort.

Social Mobility (the O-D link) In the post-industrial society, social mobility should be extensive. The thesis of industrialism

predicts that as society moves through ever higher stages of the industrialisation process,

social mobility will reach ever higher levels, and the link between class origin and class

destination will eventually vanish. Industrialisation is connected with a fundamental trend

towards universalistic selection criteria based on achieved characteristics which leads to a

trend of increasing mobility rates in industrialised societies (e.g. Blau and Duncan 1967;

Treiman 1970).

Most statements of the IMS hypothesis refer to general predictions regarding

increasing ‘mobility rates’ as industrialisation progresses. At the time that Parsons and many

of the other liberal theorists were writing it was not possible to decompose the concept of

‘mobility rates’ any further than an examination of simple inflow and outflow percentages.

Such writings pre-date what has since become a crucial theoretical distinction between

absolute and relative mobility rates. The corresponding move to loglinear modelling therefore

62

represented a significant advance in the analysis of social mobility, as it provided a

technically adequate way of distinguishing absolute mobility chances from relative mobility

chances. In fact, relative mobility rates are more appropriate for an analysis of the effects of

the move from ascription to achievement. Relative measures control for structural changes

brought about by changing occupational opportunities, and so provide a better measure of the

openness of a society.

Relative mobility rates should be higher in post-industrial societies because of changes

in the process of occupational attainment – occupational positions are no longer simply

inherited, but open to all to achieve. Relative rates of mobility will tend to be equal for

equally talented individuals from different social origins. If jobs are to be assigned on the

basis of merit, greater equality of opportunity will create an open society, where class or

status origins are irrelevant to the individual’s probability of reaching a certain destination

(Treiman 1970; Kerr, et al. 1960). Relative rates of mobility should reflect this, so that

instead of showing a strong association with origin and destination (as would be expected in

previous stages of the transition to post-industrialism), there should be either no, or a steadily

falling, association (a weakening O-D link).

Some evidence has suggested that there is no steady progression towards greater

fluidity as modernisation progresses. In Britain, for example, the O-D association has been

found to be rather similar over time, such that significant inequalities exist between

individuals from different social origins. For example, Marshall et al. estimate that the

chances of a man of service class origin being found in a service class rather than a working

class destination are almost eight times greater than the same chances for a man of working

class origin (Marshall, et al. 1988; and similar patterns are found in Marshall, et al. 1997;

Goldthorpe 1987; Erikson and Goldthorpe 1992). There has been a high degree of stability in

relative mobility rates over time such that in modern Britain, a situation approximating

constant social fluidity has prevailed (Goldthorpe 1987: 94; Goldthorpe and Mills 2004).

Running against the stability argument, Breen’s edited collection Social Mobility in

Europe, shows that there is evidence of increasing fluidity in many countries in Europe

(2004). So, for example, Vallet (2004) shows that the O-D association in France has been

steadily weakening over time. Ganzeboom et al. argue that there is a tendency towards

increasing equality in relative mobility chances, on the basis of an analysis of repeated cross-

sectional mobility surveys from thirty five countries (1989). However, as mentioned above,

the trend of increasing fluidity is by no means universal, and there remain countries in which

stability in relative rates over time is notable (e.g. Britain, as described above). Furthermore,

63

while the association between origin and destination may have weakened in some countries,

in no country has it disappeared altogether.

(see State of the Art report for ‘Social Mobility and Educational Attainment During the 20th

Century’ team for more details on this topic)

Education In trying to explain differences in relative mobility chances, sociologists have examined the

role of education in mediating the transition from origin to destination. While relative rates

have not equalised as the thesis of industrialism predicted, it is still possible that any

inequalities in relative mobility chances could be explained by inequalities in educational

achievement. That is, in a society based on selection by merit, we would expect differences in

mobility chances to be explained by differences in the distribution of merit throughout that

society. According to the IMS hypothesis,

‘...in modern societies merit becomes the key determinant of an individual’s access to

education above the basic minimum and in turn, then, of the position within the social

division of labour that he or she eventually obtains’ (Goldthorpe 1996: 261-262).

Therefore, if those from less advantaged class positions do not achieve more

advantaged class positions, it is possible that this is because they lack the necessary level of

educational qualifications to move into more advantaged class positions. The IMS hypothesis

can still be supported if inequalities in relative mobility chances are the result of a

meritocratic allocation of individuals to occupations. The idea of movement implied in the

thesis of industrialism is important, and in this case entails a weakening of the link between

class origin and educational attainment and a ‘tightening bond’ between educational

attainment and occupational position as industrialisation progresses.

Early research on the role of education in mediating the origin-destination link was

somewhat supportive of the proposition that differences in educational qualification levels

create the observed differences in relative mobility chances. For example, Blau and Duncan

(1967) found that the chances of upward mobility were substantially related to educational

qualifications, in a virtually linear way. High qualifications increased the likelihood of entry

into high-status occupations regardless of social origins: an individual from a low status

background could move up into a high status occupation if they had the necessary educational

qualifications20. Downward mobility, on the other hand, did not exhibit such a relationship

20 Education is found to have a similar effect on income. A parallel literature in economics examines what impact schooling has on future earnings. Estimates suggest that each additional year of schooling increases wages by between 2.5% (Miller, et al. 1995) and 16% (Ashenfelter and Krueger 1994) (estimates vary quite

64

(Blau and Duncan 1967: 156-157). They found some evidence that the influence of

educational on occupational attainment increased in the mid-part of the century, which lends

support to the prediction of a tightening bond between the two. Thus, occupational allocation

in modern societies would seem to have moved away from selection on the basis of ascriptive

characteristics, and towards increasingly universalistic allocation on the basis of educational

attainments (Featherman and Hauser 1978). Research by Halsey (1977) provided further

confirmation that education held a crucial role in mediating the origin-destination link.

Occupational positions were found to be far more dependent on educational qualifications

than they were on family origin, as measured by father’s class. Coming from a high class

background was not as directly important as gaining the requisite qualifications in the

attainment of occupational positions. In terms of a tightening bond between education and

occupation, the direct effect of education on occupational level was high and getting ever

higher, while the direct effect of parent’s on child’s status was decreasing.

However, as Marshall et al. (1997) argue, increasing merit selection in the labour

market (a strengthening E-D link) is easily offset by decreasing merit selection in the

educational market (a strengthening O-E link), such that ascriptive forces find a way of

expressing themselves as ‘achievement’ (Halsey 1977: 184). For the O-D link to weaken

through the mechanism of educational attainment, the E-D link must strengthen and the O-E

link must weaken (Goldthorpe and Jackson 2007). In contrast, Halsey found that family

background was important, mainly due to its effects on educational attainment: education was

a crucial transmitter of the prior influences of family background (1977: 181). So, while

education was indeed becoming more closely related to occupational attainment, the influence

of family origins on educational attainment was also getting stronger. Blau and Duncan

similarly recognise that, ‘Superior family origins increase a son’s chances of attaining

superior occupational status in the United States in large part because they help him to obtain

a better education…’ (1967: 430). Therefore, an increased emphasis on educational

qualifications does not necessarily create greater equality of opportunity for those of all class

origins.

More recent research on the link between class origin and educational attainment has

failed to replicate Halsey’s finding of a strengthening O-E link. The evidence suggests that

overall there has been a relatively high degree of temporal stability in the association between

class origin and educational attainment, although where change has occurred it has generally

been in the direction of a weakening association. There is, moreover, some apparent cross- substantially between studies due to different methods of analysis and control variables). Why schooling should affect wages is the subject of some debate (see Ashenfelter and Rouse 2000; Bowles and Gintis 2000).

65

national variation in this respect. The collection Persistent Inequality (Shavit and Blossfeld

1993) indicated that in only two out of thirteen countries – Sweden and the Netherlands - was

there evidence of a secular trend towards a weakening class origin-educational attainment

link. But more recent work has suggested that such a trend is in fact present in a number of

other countries, including Germany, France and Italy. Britain remains a case in which

change, if any, appears rather slight (Halsey, et al. 1980; Jonsson, et al. 1996; Heath 2000;

Heath and Clifford 1996; Cheung and Egerton 2007; Vallet 2004; Breen and Jonsson 2005;

Erikson, et al. 2005).

Therefore, if modern educational systems do not act as an effective filtering device on

the basis of ‘merit’, either in identifying talented individuals, or in providing such individuals

with the opportunities to gain the necessary qualifications, an increasing influence of

education on employment chances cannot be taken as unequivocal evidence of increasing

selection by merit (Goldthorpe 1996: 266; Whelan and Layte 2002). Even if there has been a

tightening bond between education and occupation, the strong influence of class origins on

the education process may leave the origin-destination association untouched.

Although we have seen that there is some early evidence that the influence of

education on occupation is getting stronger a great deal of more recent research tends to

suggest that education might not be as important as previously thought in trying to explain

differences in relative mobility chances. In part, changes in statistical methods and data

analysis may help to explain why this is the case. The move from path analysis to loglinear

modelling has been particularly influential here. Of course, it may well be that both findings

are valid: the research may simply be highlighting valid differences between societies at

different points in space and time.

Recent research has been somewhat more sceptical about the impact of education on

occupational attainment. It is true that the higher social classes have, to an ever increasing

extent, come to be composed of people with higher education. People in the service classes

are more likely than ever to have degree level qualifications. The least qualified are rarely

found in higher service class positions and usually enter manual employment. It is clear that

an individual’s educational credentials have substantial implications for occupational

prospects: greater educational attainment increases the chances of being in a service class

position (Jonsson 1996; Heath, et al. 1992; Marshall, et al. 1997; Whelan and Layte 2002;

Goldthorpe and Jackson 2007).

However, the growing proportion of degree holders in the service class has not been

caused by some fundamental change in the underlying mechanisms assigning occupational

66

positions, but because of structural changes related to educational provision. Such changes in

the educational and social class distributions can potentially change the percentage

distributions (so creating an illusion of change towards meritocracy) without affecting the

social selection principles at work (Jonsson 1996: 135). So, a rapid increase in the

proportions of degree holders in a society would obviously increase the probability of service

class positions being filled by degree holders, but this need have nothing to do with a

tightening bond between education and occupation. When we control for the general increase

in the acquisition of educational qualifications, we find that while some results point in the

direction predicted by the thesis of industrialism, some actually point in the opposite. For

example, Heath et al. find that the occupational chances of graduates have remained the same,

the chances of those with intermediate qualifications have deteriorated over time, while the

occupational chances of those with low or no qualifications have improved (1992: 231).

While education may have become more important in mediating the origin-destination link in

most advanced countries in the mid-twentieth century, evidence for a steadily tightening bond

between educational and occupational position is simply not there. In fact, in recent decades

the tightening bond between education and occupation has ceased to increase, and if anything

has weakened in certain countries (on Britain, see Jackson, et al. 2005; on Sweden, Jonsson

1996; on France, Vallet 2004; on Ireland Whelan and Layte 2002).

Therefore, there seems to be mounting evidence against the predictions of the liberal

theory regarding changes in the O-E, E-D and O-D links. Educational qualifications alone

cannot explain observed differences in relative mobility chances. The effects of class origin

still persist, even after controlling for education (Breen 1998; Breen and Whelan 1993;

Marshall, et al. 1997; see also Krauze and Slomczynski 1985). The existence of a significant

and substantial association between class origins and destinations still persists, and any

mediating role that education might play by no means fully explains how this association is

maintained.

IQ + Effort Although we have seen that educational qualifications are not able to explain why differences

in relative mobility chances persist, in order to do full justice to the IMS hypothesis, we must

investigate the effect of the full range of ‘merit’ variables identified in the literature.

Educational qualifications were indeed given prominence in many of the theoretical writings

on the theses of industrialism and meritocracy (e.g. Parsons 1954; Bell 1973). However, as

we have seen, other theorists have defined ‘merit’ to be a combination of intelligence and

effort, most notably Young (1958). In many cases in the literature, educational qualifications

67

and IQ+effort are conflated, such that qualifications are simply assumed to measure levels of

intelligence and effort. If educational qualifications do not provide a good proxy measure of

these characteristics, as Saunders (1997) suggests, we may not be assessing correctly whether

meritocratic allocation to occupational positions is taking place by examining educational

qualifications alone. Thus, a proper test of whether modern post-industrial society is in fact a

meritocracy must include an assessment of the influence of IQ+effort. Instead of predicting a

tightening bond between education and occupational position, we should expect the process of

industrialisation to be accompanied by a ever-closening association between IQ+effort and

occupation (a strengthening bond between IQ+effort - rather than education - and class

destination). In the meritocracy, IQ21+effort should be the sole basis of allocation of

occupational and corresponding class position.

There is some research in support of the hypothesis that levels of intelligence might

have some influence in occupational allocation: Herrnstein and Murray’s, The Bell Curve

(1994), is a highly publicised example. While much of the discussion at the time of the

book’s publication surrounded the authors’ controversial views on the relationship between

race and intelligence, a large part of the book is actually devoted to trying to explain social

class inequalities. Herrnstein and Murray claimed that there had been a shift from a world

segregated into social classes with lines of separation based on ascriptive principles to a world

where cognitive ability is the decisive dividing force. In accordance with the prediction of a

tightening bond between merit and occupational level, there has been a movement towards a

society where intelligence levels are the determinant of occupational status. By the end of the

twentieth century, a very high proportion of those in the top tenth of the IQ distribution were

concentrated in high-end professional and managerial jobs. Modern societies identify the

brightest individuals and guide them into very narrow educational and occupational channels, 21 Levels of IQ are determined by one’s score on an IQ test. There is obviously a great deal of controversy surrounding the capacity of IQ tests to measure innate levels of intelligence. IQ tests rely on a measure of general intelligence, (or g as it is known), to provide a score for some overall intelligence level. It is this score which is claimed to be one’s IQ. There is some debate as to whether g really exists at all (for good discussions on this point see Gardner 1995; Carroll 1997; Cawley, et al. 1997). Furthermore, even if g does exist, performance in an IQ test may be influenced by factors other than innate intelligence. First, IQ tests are always culturally bound, in that they measure performance on tests constructed in modern industrial societies (see Jensen 1969; Lewontin 1977). Second, performance on an IQ test may be both genetically and environmentally determined. If there are such environmental influences, a test may pick up social or economic advantages in developmental conditions to the same degree as it picks up genetic differences (see Layzer 1977). Third, the qualities which influence a person’s performance on an IQ test may be related to those qualities which affect performance on the labour market. Bowles and Gintis (2002b) argue that, “…taking a test is more than a little like doing a job – the results measure performance, which is the joint effect of skill along with other contributors such as the disposition to follow instructions, persistence, work ethic, and other traits…” (: 8; a similar position is found in Block and Dworkin 1977a; Eysenck 1994). (A review of all these issues can be found in Block and Dworkin 1977b). The studies discussed in this section make the not unproblematic assumption that IQ tests do provide some kind of measure of a general intelligence level.

68

such that, ‘Social class remains the vehicle of social life, but intelligence now pulls the tram’

(Herrnstein and Murray 1994: 25).

Echoing the writings of those such as Parsons, Herrnstein and Murray are not specific

about the micro-mechanisms which drive people with high levels of ability into the most

important and necessary jobs for society. Further support for the importance of IQ is found in

the work of Peter Saunders (1995; 1996; 1997), who addresses the specific question of

whether or not Britain is a meritocracy. Although Britain is not a perfect meritocracy, it is far

more meritocratic than many seem to believe, he claims. In part, this is due to sociologists

refusing to even consider the possibility that the significant differences in class mobility

chances may be due to differences in levels of IQ+effort within these groups. Meritocracy

depends on equality of opportunity, but generates unequal outcomes. Therefore, if middle

class children are more intelligent than working class children, on average, meritocratic

allocation would create the observed mobility patterns. Saunders presents analyses to show

that assuming a normal distribution of intelligence in the population, and a correlation of 0.5

between the intelligence levels of parents and that of their children, existing patterns of social

mobility in Britain correspond exactly with patterns that would be found if class recruitment

were based solely on differences of intelligence between individuals (1996: 43)22. Ability is

in important factor influencing social mobility chances, such that, ‘To the extent that it is

possible to predict somebody’s occupational destiny, it is their ability and their motivation

that matters much more than the social class into which they were born’ (1996: 7; see Farkas

and Vicknair 1996; Kanazawa 2005 for similar arguments in relation to race).

Sociological research on IQ invariably seems to provoke dramatic reactions from other

researchers, and the meritocracy question has proved to be no exception. Both of the pieces

of research discussed above were heavily criticised as being fundamentally mistaken in

methodology and ideology (on The Bell Curve see Fraser 1995; Devlin, et al. 1997; Fischer, et

al. 1996; Korenman and Winship 2000; Arrow, et al. 2000; on Saunders' work see Lampard

1996; Marshall and Swift 1996; Savage and Egerton 1997; Breen and Goldthorpe 1999;

2001). The notoriety which research supporting the role of IQ+effort seems to have in the

discipline has tended to disguise the fact that actually the weight of evidence points far away

from the conclusions of these studies. Most research shows that advantages relating to family

22 The correlation between parents’ and children’s intelligence levels is another area riddled with controversy. Sociologists are often accused of making simplistic assumptions regarding the heritability of IQ. The problem is discussed in Scarr-Salapatek: ‘…since normal IQ is a polygenic characteristic, various recombinations of parental genotypes will always produce more variable genotypes in the offspring than in the parents of all social class groups, especially the extremes. Even if both parents, instead of primarily the male, achieved social class status based on their IQs, recombinations of their genes would always produce a range of offspring, who would be upwardly or downwardly mobile relative to their families of origin’ (1977: 121).

69

origin remain even after controlling for scores in ability tests. For example, Savage and

Egerton (1997) demonstrate that the sons of managerial and professional fathers have a low

chance of moving into the working class, even if they perform badly in ability tests.

Cognitive inequalities cannot explain economic inequalities either to any great extent (Jencks

1972; Bowles and Nelson 1974; Arrow, et al. 2000). In a study of the intergenerational

transmission of economic status, Bowles and Gintis find that while the intergenerational

transmission of both IQ and economic status is rather high, the transmission of IQ across

generations only accounts for a little of the transmission of economic status (Bowles and

Gintis 2002a). The persistence of inherited wealth in the upper levels of stratification

systems, provides a further barrier to wide-ranging mobility based on meritocratic principles.

Post-industrial society does not appear, therefore, to allocate occupational positions solely on

the basis of IQ+effort. As Jencks and Riesman argue, ‘Given the present state of genetic and

sociological knowledge we cannot say with certainty how much intergenerational turnover

would be expected in a “pure” meritocratic system. We can, however, say with considerable

confidence that there would be more turnover than at present’ (1968).

The bulk of the influence of intelligence on occupational attainment appears to be

indirect, and acts through the education system. Educational qualifications play a more

important role in mediating class inequalities in mobility chances than ability and effort,

which in themselves tend to operate through educational qualifications (Breen and Goldthorpe

1999; see also Hauser, et al. 2000). Even after controlling for educational attainment, IQ and

effort, substantial inequalities in class mobility chances are still in evidence. While merit

does count in mobility processes, children of lower class origins have to display far more

merit than children of higher class origins to attain similar class positions (Breen and

Goldthorpe 1999: 21). Even Saunders is prepared to admit that a high degree of variance in

relative mobility chances is left unexplained by a model which includes only ‘meritocratic’

variables. Therefore, ‘In other words, there are processes creating class inequalities in

mobility chances that cannot be given a ‘meritocratic’ legitimation of any kind that has so far

been suggested’ (Breen and Goldthorpe 1999: 18).

IF NOT MERITOCRACY, WHAT? Empirical evidence therefore suggests that post-industrial society is not a meritocracy, in the

sense that different levels of education and IQ+effort cannot explain all differences in relative

mobility chances. These factors are important, but even after controlling for both education

and IQ+effort significant inequalities remain to be explained. Something other than the

70

‘merit’ variables identified in the thesis of industrialism is working to create and maintain the

inequalities we see in relative mobility chances.

One reason why the IMS hypothesis might fail to fully explain inequalities in relative

mobility chances is that the meritocratic allocation of people to jobs is not inevitable at the

level of individual action and interaction. There is no exclusive link between high levels of

education or IQ+effort and high-level jobs, just as there is no direct link between low levels of

‘merit’ and low-level jobs. A high level of education and a high IQ do not in themselves

magically lead to an allocation to a high-level job. The process of allocation, as conceived by

the proponents of the thesis of industrialism, does not specify the micro-processes guiding

individuals into different levels of the occupational hierarchy. However, this process may be

intricate and complex. Class inequalities in mobility chances are created, not given, in that

they are the macro-level result of a whole range of micro-level decisions by employers and

prospective employees.

In a free market society, it is not possible to ensure that the rewards gained from

economic activity are systematically related to merit: economic activities can only ever have

value to individuals, not societies. As a result, achievement cannot be seen as more or less

meritorious in the sense of fulfilling certain essential societal needs (Goldthorpe 1996).

Instead, ‘The remunerations which the individuals and groups receive in the market

are...determined by what these services are worth to those who receive them (or, strictly

speaking, to the last pressing demand for them which can still be satisfied by the available

supply) and not by some fictitious “value to society”’ (Hayek 1976: 76). That is, individuals

attain higher and lower occupational levels because they have attributes of a higher or lower

value to employers and consumers. Services can only have value to particular people or

organisations, and any particular service will have different values for different members of

the same society (Hayek 1960; Hayek 1976: 75). There is no necessary connection between

‘merit’ (as defined by the functionalists) and success, as ‘...far from any conception of merit,

or meritorious achievement, being “societally given” as functionalists would wish to suppose,

merit must in fact be “socially constructed” and...within a market economy, it will be so

constructed in a diversity of ways’ (Goldthorpe 1996: 277).

Inequality is an inevitable and necessary consequence of a market economy, and it

will be based not on differences in levels of education and IQ+effort per se, but on differences

in marketable characteristics among individuals. In modern societies, the vast majority of

people are not in a position to directly offer services to the consumer, and in most cases the

71

intermediary in this transaction is the employer. The employer is the one who responds to

market forces, and the employer is the one who will decide what counts as ‘merit’.

It has always been assumed by supporters of the thesis of industrialism that levels of

education and IQ+effort will be the factors of prime importance to employers: meritocracy is

of such obvious functional importance that employers could hardly fail to appreciate this.

Yet, for many types of jobs, these meritocratic characteristics may actually be of very little or

even no importance or value. Employers may not wish to employ on the basis of meritocratic

criteria if the particular occupation requires other kinds of attributes and characteristics. As

even Herrnstein and Murray recognise, ‘...measures of intelligence have reliable statistical

relationships with important social phenomena, but they are a limited tool for deciding what

to make of any given individual...’ (1994: 21, italics in original). If employers are interested

in characteristics other than the meritocratic ones so far identified, it should be of no surprise

to find that meritocratic factors, when considered alone, fail to explain why all of the

inequalities in relative mobility chances persist. It is clear, therefore, that research focussing

on the behaviour of employers is needed (Bills 1988; Gottfredson 1985; Campbell 1983;

Rubery 1988; Jackson 2001). What types of attributes do employers value?

While educational qualifications and levels of IQ+effort might be important for some

jobs, in many cases, they might not be as pertinent to a particular occupation as other skills

and attributes of the individual (Bills 1988; Block and Dworkin 1977a; Collins 1979;

Warhurst and Nickson 2001). The modern occupational structure encompasses a wide range

of occupations, and it is not at all obvious that different occupations should have similar

proficiency requirements. Certain abilities and motivations may be more useful in the

particular occupational context than merit criteria. Following Marshall et al. (1997), we may

call these ‘relevant competencies’. There are many jobs for which formal educational

qualifications can be regarded as a good indicator of relevant competencies, and in these cases

we would expect a close fit between levels of educational and occupational attainment.

However, there are many other types of occupation for which the abilities certified by

education are far less applicable than other attributes and relevant competencies. There may

well be a close connection between high educational attainment and, say, an academic

professorship, but the connection is likely to be looser between educational attainment and a

managerial position. Different types of occupation are likely to require different types of

72

relevant competencies from the employee23. There is some evidence that employers are

looking for such relevant competencies in addition, or even instead of, educational

qualifications.

For some jobs, the relevant competencies are likely to include the technical skills

required to carry out the job effectively. Such skills are uncertificated by education, and may

be gained through specialised training, apprenticeships or on-the-job experience. The ability

to type quickly and accurately, and the ability to use certain computing packages may be

unrelated to particular educational qualifications, but such skills are closely related to

appropriateness for a secretarial position. The move to the service economy has had a number

of implications for skill requirements. In contrast to arguments suggesting that

industrialisation would lead to a general deskilling of occupational tasks, a general pattern of

sustained, or increasing, levels of skill requirements is found. In Britain, Ashton et al. (1999:

3) report that between 1986 and 1997 there was a decrease in the proportion of employees

whose occupation required less than three months training (from 66% to 57%), while there

was an increase in the proportion whose occupation required more than two years training

(from 22% to 29%). At the same time though, skill requirements are very different within the

growing service sector: while some occupations have very extensive skill requirements, there

is also a high proportion of low- and unskilled occupations, particularly in the private sector.

Changes in technology have also led to changes in the types of skills required. For example,

computing skills are increasingly required for a wider and wider range of occupations

(Ashton, et al. 1999). Therefore, in the post-industrial society, there is evidence that

employers do seem to value technical skills, even where they are not certified with a

qualification.

Although qualifications and skills are sufficient relevant competencies for some

occupations, it is often no longer enough to acquire the appropriate credentials and show

evidence of technical competence. In the post-industrial service economy, the whole person

is on show, and as such, there is increasing emphasis laid on the ‘personality package’, where

success depends on how well an individual sells themselves in the market, how well they get

23 This argument goes somewhat against claims of ‘credentialism’. Supporters of the credentialist position argue that regardless of the type of occupation, qualifications have become a necessary condition for employment. Collins writes, ‘..educational credentials have become the currency for employment” and that, “Educational credentials, then, are not the only basis of barriers to a free labor market, but they are a crucial component of the system of barriers that would have to be removed’ (1979: 183 and 200 respectively). While going strongly against the liberal theory of industrialism by pointing to persisting inequalities in occupational and economic attainment, Collins comes strangely close to the liberal assumption that educational qualifications will be primary, regardless of the behaviour of employers. In fact, recent research by Ashton et al. (1999: 2) has found that the proportion of the population holding intermediate level educational qualifications greatly exceeds the proportion of individuals who report that qualifications are required to get their current job.

73

their personality across, and whether they are ‘cheerful’, ‘sound’, ‘reliable’, and the like

(Fromm 1947). The widespread increase in demand for social skills has come about largely

through the expansion of the service sector and an increase in jobs which require very specific

types of these skills: ‘Leaving aside public sector health and education jobs needing

professional qualifications, most positions being created in the new…economy…require so-

called ‘person-to-person’ not ‘thinking’ skills’ (Warhurst and Nickson 2001).

Consequently, there has been an increasing significance attached to social skills, and

personal and transferable capacities, in particular those which relate to communication and

people-handling (Brown and Scase 1994; Gallie and White 1993). For example, Hochschild’s

(1983) study of air hostesses emphasised the crucial role of social skills and ‘emotional

labour’. The ability to manage personal feelings and create a publicly observable display of

empathy was in the case of the air hostess far more relevant than any educational

qualification. In addition, personality traits have been shown to have a crucial impact on

economic and occupational success (Andrisani and Nestel 1976; Turner and Martinez 1977;

Andrisani 1978; Jencks 1979; Duncan and Morgan 1981; Filer 1986; Mulligan 1996; Cawley,

et al. 1997; Goldsmith, et al. 1997; Dunifon and Duncan 1998; Blumberg and de Graaf 2004;

Nyhus and Pons 2004; Osborne-Groves 2004; 2005; Semeijn, et al. 2005; Jackson 2006). For

a good summary of the findings of research examining the effect of personality traits on

socio-economic outcomes for different measures see Osborne-Groves (2005). While

personality characteristics, social and interpersonal skills may well be relevant to the job at

hand, such ‘skills’ have very little relevance to the elements of the IMS hypothesis discussed

earlier.

Other personal characteristics including beauty, height, weight and self-presentation

all affect occupational success. Studies have found that beauty has a significant effect on

earnings: attractive people earn more than average-looking people, who earn more than

unattractive people. The premium for attractiveness has been estimated as a 4-5% increase in

earnings (Hamermesh and Biddle 1994). ‘”Looking good” and “sounding right” are the most

overt manifestations of aesthetic labour: In essence, then, employers are seeking employees

who can portray the firm’s image through their work and at the same time appeal to the sense

of the customer for the firm’s commercial benefit’ (Warhurst and Nickson 2001: 13).

Jobs outside the expanding service sector also require certain characteristics which are

related more to personal capacities and attributes than to educational qualifications. For

example, In Blackburn and Mann’s classic study of The Working Class in the Labour Market

(1979), ‘The ideal worker was considered to be married with small children. Thus he was

74

likely to be about 30. Obviously this has little to do with intelligence and a lot to do with the

employer’s conception of “responsibility”. The worker with dependents will do as he is told,

not risk losing his job, be keen to do overtime, and show himself capable of promotion to a

higher-paid job’ (Blackburn and Mann 1979: 105). So, management selection in some cases

may be based more on a qualitative assessment of the worker’s character and co-operativeness

than it is on educational credentials. Ability, then, as understood in the thesis of industrialism

may be of far less significance than a whole range of attitudinal, motivational and behavioural

criteria (Blackburn and Mann 1979; Bowles and Gintis 2000).

Given that factors other than education and IQ+effort are playing a role in employers’

hiring decisions, it is probable that by concentrating on these narrow merit criteria, we will

necessarily be missing a number of explanatory opportunities. Previous research has

controlled for educational qualifications and levels of IQ and effort, and has found that an

amount of the variance in differences in relative class mobility chances remains unexplained.

If factors which are unrelated to merit criteria are important to employers, such as relevant

competencies and personal characteristics, this is hardly surprising. It is likely that some of

these competencies and personal characteristics are more accessible to certain groups in

society than others, as unlike qualifications, these characteristics are necessarily individual

and subjective. Furthermore, such characteristics are likely to be ascribed rather than

achieved. There is evidence that personality characteristics are strongly heritable (Plomin

1986; Loehlin 2005). For example, leadership qualities are essential for management

positions, and such qualities are often derived through specific patterns of child-rearing,

education, and class-based experiences (Scase and Goffee 1989). Therefore, differences in

class mobility chances may be explainable by reference not to differences in levels of

education or IQ+effort between classes, but to differences in the possession of the relevant

competencies and attributes required for certain occupations (Bowles and Gintis 2002b;

Bowles, et al. 2005). As Whelan and Layte suggest, ‘…where higher average levels of

education ensure that a substantial number of candidates come above the minimum threshold,

a particular level of education may become a necessary but not sufficient condition of access

to higher-level occupations. In these circumstances employers may make use of additional

criteria without incurring significant costs and in some cases with considerable

gain…whatever the balance which exists between the use of these different criteria, the

continued strength of direct class-origin effects indicates that they are no less class-related

than those applied in earlier periods’ (2002: 47).

75

REFERENCES Andrisani, P. J. 1978, Work Attitudes and Labor Market Experience. Evidence from the

National Longitudinal Surveys, New York: Praeger.

Andrisani, P. J. and Nestel, G. 1976, ‘Internal-External Control as Contributor to and

Outcome of Work Experience’, Journal of Applied Psychology 61(2): 156-165.

Arrow, K., Bowles, S. and Durlauf, S. (eds) 2000, Meritocracy and Economic Inequality,

Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ashenfelter, O. and Krueger, A. 1994, ‘Estimates of the Economic Return to Schooling

from a New Sample of Twins’, American Economic Review 84(5): 1157-1173.

Ashenfelter, O. and Rouse, C. 2000, ‘Schooling, Intelligence, and Income’, in K. Arrow, S.

Bowles and S. Durlauf (eds) Meritocracy and Economic Inequality, Princeton:

Princeton University Press.

Ashton, D., Davies, B., Felstead, A. and Green, F. 1999, Work skills in Britain, ESRC

Centre on Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance (SKOPE), Oxford and

Warwick Universities.

Bell, D. 1973, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. A Venture in Social Forecasting,

London: Heinemann.

Bills, D. 1988, ‘Educational Credentials and Hiring Decisions: What Employers Look for in

New Employees’, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 7: 71-97.

Blackburn, R. M. and Mann, M. 1979, The Working Class in the Labour Market, London:

Macmillan.

Blau, P. M. and Duncan, O. D. 1967, The American Occupational Structure, New York:

Wiley.

Block, N. and Dworkin, G. 1977a, ‘IQ, Heritability, and Inequality’, in N. Block and G.

Dworkin (eds) The IQ Controversy, London: Quartet Books.

Block, N. J. and Dworkin, G. (eds) 1977b, The IQ Controversy: Critical Readings, London:

Quartet.

Blumberg, B. F. and de Graaf, P. M. 2004, ‘Dutch Self-Employment Between 1980 and

1997’, in R. Arum and W. Müller (eds) The Reemergence of Self-Employment: A

Comparative Study of Self-Employment Dynamics and Social Inequality, Princeton:

Princeton University Press.

Bowles, S. and Gintis, H. 2000, ‘Does Schooling Raise Earnings by Marking People

Smarter?’, in K. Arrow, S. Bowles and S. Durlauf (eds) Meritocracy and Economic

Inequality, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

76

Bowles, S. and Gintis, H. 2002a, ‘The Inheritance of Inequality’, Journal of Economic

Perspectives 16(3): 3-30.

Bowles, S. and Gintis, H. 2002b, ‘Schooling in Capitalist America Revisited’, Sociology of

Education 75: 1-18.

Bowles, S., Gintis, H. and Osborne-Groves, M. (eds) 2005, Unequal Chances. Family

Background and Economic Success, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Bowles, S. and Nelson, V. 1974, ‘The "Inheritance of IQ" and the Intergenerational

Reproduction of Economic Inequality’, The Review of Economics and Statistics 56(1):

39-51.

Breen, R. 1998, ‘The Persistence of Class Origin Inequalities among School Leavers in the

Republic of Ireland, 1984-1993’, British Journal of Sociology 49: 275-298.

Breen, R. (ed) 2004, Social Mobility in Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Breen, R. and Goldthorpe, J. H. 1999, ‘Class Inequality and Meritocracy: A Critique of

Saunders and an Alternative Analysis’, British Journal of Sociology 50(1): 1-27.

Breen, R. and Goldthorpe, J. H. 2001, ‘Class, Mobility and Merit: The Experience of Two

British Birth Cohorts’, European Sociological Review 17(2): 81-101.

Breen, R. and Jonsson, J. O. 2005, ‘Inequality of Opportunity in Comparative Perspective:

Recent Research on Educational Attainment and Social Mobility’, Annual Review of

Sociology 31: 223-243.

Breen, R. and Whelan, C. 1993, ‘From Ascription to Achievement? Origins, Education and

Entry to the Labour Force in the Republic of Ireland during the Twentieth Century’,

Acta Sociologica 36: 3-17.

Brown, P. and Scase, R. 1994, Higher Education and Corporate Realities : Class, Culture

and the Decline of Graduate Careers, London: UCL Press.

Campbell, R. T. 1983, ‘Status Attainment Research: End of the Beginning or Beginning of

the End?’ Sociology of Education 56: 47-62.

Carroll, J. B. 1997, ‘Theoretical and Technical Issues in Identifying a Factor of General

Intelligence’, in B. Devlin, S. E. Fienberg, D. P. Resnick and K. Roeder (eds)

Intelligence, Genes and Success: Scientists Respond to The Bell Curve, New York:

Springer.

Cawley, J., Conneely, K., Heckman, J. and Vyracil, E. 1997, ‘Cognitive Ability, Wages,

and Meritocracy’, in B. Devlin, S. E. Fienberg, D. P. Resnick and K. Roeder (eds)

Intelligence, Genes and Success: Scientists Respond to The Bell Curve, New York:

Springer.

77

Cheung, S.-Y. and Egerton, M. 2007, ‘Higher Education Expansion and Reform: Changing

Educational Inequalities in Great Britain’, in Y. Shavit, R. Arum, A. Gamoran and G.

Menahem (eds) Expansion, Differentiation and Stratification in Higher Education: A.

Comparative Study of 15 Countries, Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

Collins, R. 1979, The Credential Society. An Historical Sociology of Education and

Stratification, New York: Academic Press.

Devlin, B., Fienberg, S. E., Resnick, D. P. and Roeder, K. (eds) 1997, Intelligence, Genes

and Success: Scientists Respond to The Bell Curve, New York: Springer.

Duncan, G. J. and Morgan, J. N. 1981, ‘Sense of Efficacy and Subsequent Change in

Earnings – A Replication’, The Journal of Human Resources 16(4): 649-657.

Dunifon, R. and Duncan, G. J. 1998, ‘Long-Run Effects of Motivation on Labor-Market

Success’, Social Psychology Quarterly 61(1): 33-48.

Erikson, R. and Goldthorpe, J. H. 1992, The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in

Industrial Societies, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Erikson, R., Goldthorpe, J. H., Jackson, M., Yaish, M. and Cox, D. R. 2005, ‘On Class

Differentials in Educational Attainment’, Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences 102(27): 9730-9733.

Eysenck, H. 1994, ‘Intelligence and Introversion-Extraversion’, in R. Sternberg and P.

Ruzgis (eds) Personality and Intelligence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Farkas, G. and Vicknair, K. 1996, ‘Appropriate Tests of Racial Wage Discrimination

Require Controls for Cognitive Skill: Comment on Cancio, Evans, and Maume’,

American Sociological Review 61(4): 557-560.

Featherman, D. L. and Hauser, R. M. 1978, Opportunity and Change, New York, London:

Academic Press.

Filer, R. 1986, ‘The Role of Personality and Tastes in Determining Occupational Structure’,

Industrial and Labor Relations Review 39(3): 412-424.

Fischer, C. S., Hout, M., Sanchez Jankowski, M., Lucas, S., Swidler, A. and Voss, K.

1996, Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton

University Press.

Fraser, S. (ed) 1995, The Bell Curve Wars: Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America,

New York: Basic Books.

Fromm, E. 1947, Man for Himself: An Enquiry into the Psychology of Ethics, New York:

Rinehart.

78

Gallie, D. and White, M. R. 1993, Employee Commitment and the Skills Revolution,

London: Policy Studies Institute.

Ganzeboom, H. B. G., Luijkx, R. and Treiman, D. J. 1989, ‘Intergenerational Class

Mobility in Comparative Perspective’, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility

8: 3-84.

Gardner, H. 1995, ‘Cracking Open the IQ Box’, in S. Fraser (ed) The Bell Curve Wars:

Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America, New York: Basic Books.

Goldsmith, A. H., Veum, J. R. and Darity, W. 1997, ‘The Impact of Psychological and

Human Capital on Wages’, Economic Inquiry 35(4): 815-829.

Goldthorpe, J. H. 1987, Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain, 2nd Edition,

Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Goldthorpe, J. H. 1996, ‘Problems of “Meritocracy”’, in R. Erikson and J. O. Jonsson (eds)

Can Education be Equalized? The Swedish Case in Comparative Perspective,

Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Goldthorpe, J. H. and Jackson, M. 2007, ‘Problems of an Education-Based Meritocracy’, in

A. Lareau and D. Conley (eds) Social Class. How Does it Work? : Russell Sage

Foundation Press.

Goldthorpe, J. H. and Mills, C. 2004, ‘Trends in Intergenerational Class Mobility in Britain

in the Late Twentieth Century’, in R. Breen (ed) Social Mobility in Europe, Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Gottfredson, L. S. 1985, ‘Education as a Valid but Fallible Signal of Worker Quality:

Reorienting an Old Debate about the Functional Basis of the Occupational Hierarchy’,

Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization 5: 123-169.

Halsey, A. H. 1977, ‘Towards Meritocracy? The Case of Britain’, in J. Karabel and A. H.

Halsey (eds) Power and Ideology in Education, New York: Oxford University Press.

Halsey, A. H., Heath, A. F. and Ridge, J. 1980, Origins and Destinations: Family, Class

and Education in Modern Britain, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Hamermesh, D. S. and Biddle, J. E. 1994, ‘Beauty and the Labor Market’, American

Economic Review 84(5): 1174-1194.

Hauser, R., Warren, J., Huang, M.-H. and Carter, W. 2000, ‘Occupational Status,

Education, and Social Mobility in the Meritocracy’, in K. Arrow, S. Bowles and S.

Durlauf (eds) Meritocracy and Economic Inequality, Princeton: Princeton University

Press.

Hayek, F. A. 1960, The Constitution of Liberty, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

79

Hayek, F. A. 1976, Law, Legislation and Liberty: A Statement of the Liberal Principles of

Justice and Political Economy, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Heath, A. F. 2000, ‘The Political Arithmetic Tradition in the Sociology of Education’,

Oxford Review of Education: 313-331.

Heath, A. F. and Clifford, P. 1996, ‘Class Inequalities and Educational Reform in Twentieth

Century Britain’, in D. Lee and B. S. Turner (eds) Conflicts about Class, London:

Longman.

Heath, A. F., Mills, C. and Roberts, J. 1992, ‘Towards Meritocracy? Recent Evidence on

an Old Problem’, in C. Crouch and A. Heath (eds) Social Research and Social Reform.

Essays in Honour of A.H. Halsey, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Herrnstein, R. J. and Murray, C. A. 1994, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure

in American Life, New York: Free Press.

Hochschild, A. R. 1983, The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling,

Berkeley, London: University of California Press.

Jackson, M. 2001, ‘Non-Meritocratic Job Requirements and the Reproduction of Class

Inequality: An Investigation’, Work, Employment and Society 15(3): 619-630.

Jackson, M. 2006, ‘Personality Traits and Occupational Attainment’, European Sociological

Review 22(2): 187-199.

Jackson, M., Goldthorpe, J. H. and Mills, C. 2005, ‘Education, Employers and Class

Mobility’, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 23: 3-34.

Jencks, C. 1972, Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in

America, New York: Basic Books.

Jencks, C. 1979, Who Gets Ahead?: The Determinants of Economic Success in America, New

York: Basic Books.

Jencks, C. and Riesman, D. 1968, The Academic Revolution, 1st Edition, Garden City, N.Y:

Doubleday.

Jensen, A. 1969, ‘How Much can we Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?’ Harvard

Educational Review 39: 1-123.

Jonsson, J. O. 1996, ‘Stratification in Post-Industrial Society. Are Educational

Qualifications of Growing Importance?’ Can Education be Equalized? The Swedish

Case in Comparative Perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Jonsson, J. O., Mills, C. and Müller, W. 1996, ‘A Half Century of Increasing Educational

Openness? Social Class, Gender and Educational Attainment in Sweden, Germany

80

and Britain’, in R. Erikson and J. O. Jonsson (eds) Can Education be Equalized? The

Swedish Case in Comparative Perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Kanazawa, S. 2005, ‘The Myth of Racial Discrimination in Pay in the United States’,

Managerial and Decision Economics 26: 285-294.

Kerr, C., Dunlop, J. T., Harbison, F. H. and Myers, C. A. 1960, Industrialism and

Industrial Man: The Problems of Labor and Management in Economic Growth,

Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Korenman, S. and Winship, C. 2000, ‘A Reanalysis of The Bell Curve: Intelligence, Family

Background, and Schooling’, in K. Arrow, S. Bowles and S. Durlauf (eds)

Meritocracy and Economic Inequality, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Krauze, T. K. and Slomczynski, K. M. 1985, ‘How far to Meritocracy? Empirical Tests of

a Controversial Thesis’, Social Forces 63: 623-642.

Lampard, R. 1996, ‘Might Britain be a Meritocracy? A Comment on Saunders’, Sociology

30: 387-393.

Layzer, D. 1977, ‘Science and Superstition. A Physical Scientist Looks at the IQ

Controversy’, in N. J. Block and G. Dworkin (eds) The IQ Controversy: Critical

Readings, London: Quartet.

Levy, M. J. 1966, Modernization and the Structure of Societies. A Setting for International

Affairs, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Lewontin, R. 1977, ‘Race and Intelligence’, in N. J. Block and G. Dworkin (eds) The IQ

Controversy: Critical Readings, London: Quartet.

Loehlin, J. C. 2005, ‘Resemblance in Personality and Attitudes Between Parents and Their

Children: Genetic and Environmental Contributions’, in S. Bowles, H. Gintis and M.

Osborne-Groves (eds) Unequal Chances. Family Background and Economic Success,

New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Marshall, G., Rose, D., Newby, H. and Vogler, C. 1988, Social Class in Modern Britain,

London: Hutchinson.

Marshall, G. and Swift, A. 1996, ‘Merit and Mobility: A Reply to Peter Saunders’,

Sociology 30: 375-386.

Marshall, G., Swift, A. and Roberts, S. 1997, Against the Odds? Social Class and Social

Justice in Industrial Societies, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Miller, P. W., Mulvey, C. and Martin, N. 1995, ‘What do Twins Studies Reveal about the

Economic Returns to Education? A Comparison of Australian and U.S. Findings’,

American Economic Review 85(3): 586-599.

81

Mulligan, C. B. 1996, ‘Work Ethic and Family Background: Some Evidence’, University of

Chicago.

Nyhus, E. K. and Pons, E. 2004, ‘The Effects of Personality on Labour Market Participation

and on Earnings’, paper presented at the European Society for Population Conference.

Osborne-Groves, M. 2004, ‘Personality and the Integenerational Transmission of Earnings’,

in S. Bowles, H. Gintis and M. Osborne-Groves (eds) Unequal Chances: Family

Background and Economic Success, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Osborne-Groves, M. 2005, ‘How Important is Your Personality? Labor Market Returns to

Personality for Women in the US and UK’, Journal of Economic Psychology 26(6):

827-841.

Parsons, T. 1954, Essays in Sociological Theory, Rev. i.e. 2d ed Edition, Glencoe, Ill: Free

Press.

Parsons, T. and Bales, R. F. 1956, Family, Socialization and Interaction Process, London:

Routledge & Paul.

Plomin, R. 1986, ‘Behavioral Genetic Methods’, Journal of Personality 54(1): 226-261.

Rubery, J. 1988, ‘Employers and the Labour Market’, in D. Gallie (ed) Employment in

Britain, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Saunders, P. 1995, ‘Might Britain be a Meritocracy?’, Sociology 29: 23-41.

Saunders, P. 1996, Unequal but Fair? A Study of Class Barriers in Britain, London: IEA

Health and Welfare Unit.

Saunders, P. 1997, ‘Social Mobility in Britain: An Empirical Evaluation of Two Competing

Explanations’, Sociology 31: 261-288.

Savage, M. and Egerton, M. 1997, ‘Social Mobility, Individual Ability and the Inheritance

of Class Inequality’, Sociology 31: 645-672.

Scarr-Salapatek, S. 1977, ‘Unknowns in the IQ Equation’, in N. J. Block and G. Dworkin

(eds) The IQ Controversy: Critical Readings, London: Quartet.

Scase, R. and Goffee, R. 1989, Reluctant Managers. Their Work and Lifestyles, London:

Unwin Hyman.

Semeijn, J., Boone, C., van der Velden, R. and van Witteloostuijn, A. 2005, ‘Graduates’

Personality Characteristics and Labour Market Entry. An Empirical Study among

Dutch Economics Graduates’, Economics of Education Review 24: 67-83.

Shavit, Y. and Blossfeld, H.-P. 1993, Persistent Inequality: Changing Educational

Attainment in Thirteen Countries, Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

82

Treiman, D. J. 1970, ‘Industrialization and Social Stratification’, in E. O. Laumann (ed)

Social Stratification: Research and Theory for the 1970s, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

Turner, C. F. and Martinez, D. C. 1977, ‘Socioeconomic Achievement and the

Machiavellian Personality’, Sociometry 40(4): 325-336.

Vallet, L.-A. 2004, ‘Change in Intergenerational Class Mobility in France from the 1970s to

the 1990s and its Explanation: An Analysis Following the CASMIN Approach’, in R.

Breen (ed) Social Mobility in Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Warhurst, C. and Nickson, D. 2001, Looking Good, Sounding Right? Style Counselling in

the New Economy, London: The Industrial Society.

Whelan, C. and Layte, R. 2002, ‘Late Industrialization and the Increased Merit Selection

Hypothesis. Ireland as a Test Case’, European Sociological Review 18(1): 35-50.

Wrigley, E. 1972, ‘The Process of Modernization and the Industrial Revolution in England’,

Journal of Interdisciplinary History: 226-259.

Young, M. D. 1958, The Rise of the Meritocracy, 1870-2023. An Essay on Education and

Equality, London: Thames and Hudson.

83

THE EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE “SECOND GENERATION” IN EUROPE: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Catherine Rothon Queen Mary, University of London24

INTRODUCTION The huge migration to affluent western countries from a wide diversity of origin countries in

the last third of the twentieth century has been one of the most striking developments of

recent social history. As a result of these migrations, a growing number of “second

generation” children are now moving through the western educational systems and into the

labour market. Their experience is of great significance with important implications for

equality of opportunity and for social integration. Pessimists foresee problems ahead for the

members of the “new” second generation with the possibility of downwards assimilation into

a disadvantaged underclass for some minorities. Optimists hope for upward mobility

especially through education. In both accounts education is key, both in the form of human

capital with its valuable payoffs in the labour market and also as a crucial mechanism of

social integration. Shared experiences of higher education in particular are often believed to

promote tolerance and the blurring of group boundaries.

This review reports on the evidence presented in the current literature on the

educational achievements of the second generation in Europe. As well as providing an outline

of the descriptive work that has been undertaken, it seeks to examine the extent to which

factors such as social class, parental education, reactions to discrimination, “ethnic social

capital” and parental interest play a part.

24 The author would like to thank members of the Ethnic Educational Inequalities Group within the Education, Social Mobility, and Social Cohesion (EDUC) Research Theme of the 6th EU Framework Network of Excellence “Economic Change, Quality of Life & Social Cohesion” (EQUALSOC) for their contributions in preparing this review, particularly Yael Brinbaum, Hector Cebolla Boado, Silje Noack Fekjær, Nadia Granato, Anthony Heath, Cornelia Kristen, Karen Phalet, Herman van de Werfhorst and Frank van Tubergen.

84

DESCRIPTIVE WORK

Achievement/Attainment Research has suggested that fewer children of immigrants in Belgium are found in general

secondary education than native pupils, with second generation children overrepresented in

vocational training, especially in the options “central heating and sanitary fittings”, “electrical

installations”, “hairdressing” and “nursing” (Timmerman et al. 2003). In terms of entrance to

further education, it has been found that Moroccans and Turks are particularly likely to attend

a higher education institute (Neels 2000; Timmerman et al. 2003). Research using the 1994-

1996 surveys on Migration History and Social Mobility (which provide the only recent

national data for both Wallonia and Flanders with reference to the educational position of the

second generation) found that more Turkish males than their Moroccan counterparts entered

higher education. It has been suggested that the proportion of Moroccans and Turks attending

a higher education institute is rising, but that these groups are more likely to drop out

(Timmerman et al. 2003).

The Youth Cohort Study of England and Wales (YCS) has been a rich source of data

for the study of minority ethnic educational achievement in Britain. Drew and Gray (1990)

and Drew (1995) used it to analyse attainment at the General Certificate of Secondary

Education (GCSE). They found that Afro-Caribbeans scored lower than whites on an overall

measure of attainment, while Asian performance was comparable to that of white pupils.

Demack et al’s (2000) analysis, which took advantage of the more detailed information now

available in the YCS on ethnic background, distinguished between two attainment clusters.

The higher attaining cluster consisted of Chinese, Indian and white students, and the lower

attaining cluster of Pakistani, black and Bangladeshi students. Owen et al. (2000) and Rothon

(2005b) found a similar pattern. Indian students exhibited the highest rate of success;

Pakistani and Bangladeshi students evinced the lowest level of attainment.

There are also a number of studies in Britain of a more limited geographical scope that

have been used to look at minority ethnic achievement. Haque and Bell (2001) investigated

the performance and progress of black and minority ethnic pupils between Key Stage 3 (age

14) and GCSE. They found significant differences in performance at Key Stage 3 and GCSE,

with negative effects of African, Bangladeshi and Pakistani pupils in comparison to their

white counterparts. Demie (2001) looked at results from the London borough of Lambeth

from Key Stage 1 (age 7) to GCSE and noted that Caribbean pupils performed better than

Bangladeshi pupils at Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 but that this was reversed by GCSE.

McCallum and Demie (2001) used the Census and pupil records to examine the performance

85

of the 1998/99 GCSE cohort of pupils in an Inner London borough. They found that African

and white pupils performed similarly well and that Caribbeans exhibited lower levels of

achievement. Overall, the performance of girls was found to be superior to that of boys.

Gillborn and Mirza (2000) found a different pattern using data collected by LEAs as part of

their submission for support under the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant (EMAG) and

found that each ethnic group was the highest attaining in at least one LEA.iv

Simon (2003) used data from the Enquête Histoire Familiale (Family History Survey,

EHF) to analyse the positions of pupils of Turkish, Moroccan and Portuguese origin in

France. It was found that leaving school without achieving any qualification was more

common for Turks that for any other group. This was compounded by gender differences,

with girls being even more likely to leave without any formal qualifications. Turks were

disproportionately found in the vocational tracks. University attendance among second

generation Turks was rare. The Portuguese second generation was less likely to follow the

general curriculum and were most often found in short-term, vocational training courses. The

proportion of this group existing school was early compared to the average in France.

Moroccans, on the other hand, were found to be in a relatively good educational position, with

their performance being much closer to the general average for France. They were more likely

to attend general courses and they were found in lower numbers in the vocational tracks.

However, the data for this group was affected by particularly high performance of children of

mixed couples whose rate of access to the general stream and to university is higher than the

French average. Children with two Moroccan parents exhibited educational attainments closer

to those of Turks and Portuguese.

The EFFNATIS study in Germany revealed that native youth were more likely to be

found secondary and tertiary education than Turks and Yugoslavs. The latter two groups were

found to be more likely to enter the vocational training system or have already entered the

labour market, often without vocational training (Worbs 2003). An examination of those no

longer in education revealed that more than 70 per cent of Turks and more than 50 per cent of

Yugoslavs had achieved only basic qualifications. Worbs found little evidence of

intergenerational educational mobility for the immigrant population. Alba et al. (1994) used

data from the 1980s and Seifert (1995) employed a longitudinal data set of the German Socio-

Economic Panel 1984-1989 to examine educational differentials in Germany. In both studies

the second generation included only “foreigners” and the results are not directly comparable

with EFFANTIS data. Both came to a clear finding; there was a marked distance between

young Germans and the Turkish second generation in educational qualifications. Kalter and

86

Granato (2001) focused on differences between second generation youth and native youth and

concluded that the gap had increased between 1989 and 1996 in spite of intergenerational

progress.

In terms of highest educational qualification obtained, “foreigners” lag behind native

Germans. 7.9 per cent of Germans leave with no educational qualification; the corresponding

figure for “foreigners” is 19.2 per cent. At the upper end of the scale, 24.8 per cent of native

Germans obtain the generation qualification for university entrance whilst only 8.9 per cent of

foreigners do (Federal Statistical Office 2003, quoted in Luchtenberg 2005). One must take

care in interpreting these figures; the number of students with a migrant background in

Germany is far higher than the number with a foreign passport.

For the Netherlands, one body of research examines the role of ethnicity and social

class in primary education, drawing on the large-scale PRIMA cohort surveys initiated in the

year 1988 (Gijsberts 2003; Oomens et al. 2003). These studies unequivocally conclude that

pupils of the major non western immigrant groups from the Caribbean (Surinamese, Dutch

Antilleans) and particularly of Mediterranean origin (Turks, Moroccans) are at a large

disadvantage when they start primary education. Their language skills are approximately two

years behind those of natives, their mathematics skills about half a year (Gijsberts 2003).

Mediterranean pupils have fewer language and mathematics skills in the second year of

primary schooling (when pupils are about six years of age) than native pupils, even when

considering social class and other factors (Oomens et al. 2003). Following the same pupils

throughout their primary schooling reveals that minority students make more progress in

language and mathematics than native Dutch students, thereby diminishing ethnic differences

(Gijsberts 2003).

There are still ethnic differences at the start of secondary education, however. Despite

the fact that minority students in the Netherlands receive better recommendations by their

teachers and choose higher levels of education than would be justified on the basis of their

achievements at the end of primary schooling (Gijsberts 2003; Luyten & Bosker 2004), on

average they are more often found at the lower tracks than native Dutch students (Herweijer

2003).

After completing MAVO, HAVO or VWO, more than 90 per cent of the pupils in the

Netherlands chooses to attend continuing education at MBO, HBO or University level

(Herweijer 2003). Minority students are more likely to choose higher tertiary tracks compared

to native Dutch pupils who obtain the same level of secondary education (Korteweg et al.

2003). However, because of their lower social class background and the lower tracks they

87

follow at secondary school, minority students are overrepresented in lower tertiary education

and underrepresented at university level. In 2001, about 17 per cent of native Dutch students

went to university against no more than seven per cent among students from Turkish and

Moroccan origin (Herweijer 2003). Minority students are more likely to dropout in tertiary

education than native Dutch students, partly because they are somewhat older (Bosma and

Cremers 1996; Crul and Wolff 2002).

Rroma, or “Gypsies” as they are commonly called in many parts of the world are a

group that exhibits considerable disadvantage educationally in Europe. Because of their

nomadic existence, many Rroma children receive little formal education. High levels of

illiteracy persist in the Rroma population which are rarely reduced when host countries

attempt to use education to encourage assimilation and settlement (Kruczek-Steiger and

Simmons 2001).

Progress The Inner London Education Authority (ILEA) Study, School Matters, reported research on

the performance of 2000 pupils in 50 London schools.v The research largely focused on

progress. Smith and Tomlinson (1989) found that white pupils attained the highest

examination results overall, but that the gap narrowed between minority students and white

students during secondary education. These findings were largely supported by those of

Nuttall et al. (1989), Thomas and Mortimore (1994) and Thomas et al. (1994). Sammons

(1994) found that many of the gaps in performance at the primary level were reversed at the

secondary level, with Asian pupils performing significantly better than their white peers and

the Caribbean pupils performing at a similar level to the white group.

Bressoux’s (1994) study of nearly 3000 children in France achieved a similar result,

with minorities progressing more than their peers of a similar social class. In two studies

about school careers in the early stages of secondary school the same pattern was found (Ernst

and Radica 1994; Meuret 1994). Some papers contradict these findings however. Mingat

(1991) concluded that although foreign-born minorities made greater progress, France born

minority children made less progress than the native population. Serra and Thaurel-Richard

(1994) found that a pupil’s nationality made no difference to rates of progress.

Gender differences In Britain, a distinctive feature of the pattern of results over the last decade and a half has

been the “gender gap” in attainment. From the late 1980s, a pattern emerged whereby girls

outperformed boys at GCSE level; this has been sustained ever since (Arnot et al. 1998). The

88

trend has been greatly publicised in the media and has not generally led to a resounding

acknowledgement of girls’ achievements. This gender gap in achievement at GCSE has been

found to apply to all ethnic groups (Rothon 2005b).

In France, for both Portuguese and Moroccans, limited gender differentials have been

found in favour of women. Girls perform better at school regardless of social background

(Duru-Bellat 2004). This is also true for those of foreign origin (Brinbaum and Kieffer 2005).

Second generation Portuguese and Moroccan boys have been found to be more focused on

short-term studies and drop out more, while girls seem to invest more seriously in education.

This is in contrast to the pattern for Turks where girls were less likely to continue onto higher

levels of education (Simon 2003).

In Germany competence measures (Baumert and Schümer 2001; Müller and Stanat

2006; Schwippert et al. 2003, 2004; Stanat 2003), teacher assessments (Bos et al. 2004;

Kristen 2006), transition rates (Bos et al. 2004), track attendance (Alba et al. 1994; Haisken-

DeNew et al. 1997) and degrees accomplished (Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung 2006)

all demonstrate considerable inequality by ethnic group. While members of the second

generation attain better results than those of the first generation, compared to their German

age peers without a migration background, children of immigrants still experience

considerable disadvantage.

Worbs (2003) found that in the native German, Turkish and Yugoslav groups there

was little difference between men and women in current educational status. However, when

school leaving certificates were compared for those who have already left education there is a

differential; women achieved intermediary and higher degrees more often but this was only at

a significant level for the Turkish group. Seifert showed the increase in educational

qualifications for the second generation between 1990 and 1995 by gender. It was found that

although there has been favourable development for both women and men, there has been a

greater increase for women in absolute terms, particularly at the intermediate school

certificate level (Seifert 1999). Alamdar-Niemann et al. (1991) point to the problem of

Turkish girls being unable to join important school activities, such as travelling in mixed

classes with overnight stays.

Crul and Doomernik (2003) and Timmerman et al. (2003) found a similar gender

pattern in the Netherlands and Belgium respectively. In the Netherlands, 15 per cent of

Turkish second generation women aged 19 and a quarter of those aged 21 are already married

(Alders et al 2001). Marriage at a young age usually heralds the end of a school career.

Timmerman et al. (2003) suggest that this has implications that extend beyond the individual;

89

the fact that a number of Turkish girls get engaged or married at 16 while still at school means

that many of them are more preoccupied with marriage and engagement than with school.

This affects the classroom climate negatively. In Belgium, figures based on the 1991 census

suggest that second generation Moroccan girls usually continue in education for longer than

second generation Turkish females. In the 20-25 age group there were twice as many

Moroccan girls as Turkish girls studying (Lesthaeghe 1996).

EXPLAINING ETHNIC DIFFERENCES

Individual level differences The association between social class and educational attainment has been extensively

documented (see for example Blackburn and Marsh 1991; Floud et al. 1956; Halsey et al.

1980; Heath 2000; Jonsson and Mills 1993a, 1993b; Savage and Egerton 1997; Shavit and

Blossfeld 1991). How the effect of social class varies by ethnicity is less clear. Minority

ethnic groups are heavily concentrated towards the bottom of the class structure; it might

therefore be expected that many of the inequalities in performance can be explained by the

differential distributions of the major ethnic groups across the occupational framework.

A theory that has often been tested alongside the measurement of the effects of

socioeconomic background is that of cultural capital. Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) argued

that a parental cultural investment in children could yield educational returns. They asserted

that middle class parents are able to endow their children with various linguistic and cultural

competencies that are vital to success in school. The middle classes fail to transmit these skills

to the working classes. Such competencies may be acquired in many ways, for example

through the availability of suitable books in the household, visits to museums and visits to art

galleries. Bourdieu and Passeron’s view was that children develop a deeply ingrained, largely

unconscious orientation (habitus) that shapes their tastes. Although they acknowledged that

people do pick up new cultural baggage, they argued that they only enjoy consuming culture

that fits with their habitus. Individuals may learn new things but they are learning the same

kinds of things, so their cultural capital stays the same. Despite the fact that it has been

demonstrated that sociocultural factors can be associated with achievement (see for example

de Graaf 1986; DiMaggio 1982; Sullivan 2001) evidence that cultural capital theory is useful

in explaining differences in performance by ethnicity has been mixed. Because Bourdieu

relates his theory so strongly to the effects of social class background, papers looking at the

influence of cultural capital on educational attainment will be discussed in this section.

90

In the case of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in Britain class has been found to be an

extremely important factor in explaining their low levels of attainment. These groups perform

worse than any other ethnic group in the examinations taken at the end of compulsory

education. However, they also fall disproportionately into lower socio-economic groups; this

explains much of the deficit (Haque and Bell 2001; Rothon 2006). However, social class is

not able to explain the lower performance of Afro-Caribbean students, particularly boys

(Rothon 2006).

In France, Vallet and Caille (1996) found that when controlling for socio-economic

conditions and family structure the performance of immigrants at primary school was similar

to that of those with non-immigrant parents. At secondary school the effect of being a child of

immigrants was positive. They argued that immigrant ancestry itself was not detrimental to

students. However, belonging to larger families and having parents in lower social positions

did have an effect; this largely explained the lower achievements of immigrant pupils. As

regards social class, nearly 80 per cent of immigrant fathers had been or still were manual

workers, if they were employed at all. Their 1999 study, also using the 1989 French National

Education Longitudinal Survey, found that 31.8 per cent of French secondary school students

complete the baccalauréat within seven years (without repeating a year). The corresponding

figures for the major minority ethnic groups were much lower than this: a rate of 24.7 per cent

for South East Asians, 20.2 per cent for Portuguese, 19.1 per cent for Moroccans, 18.2 per

cent for Tunisians, 16.9 per cent for Algerians and 12.9 per cent for Turks. However, once

socio-demographic characteristics were controlled for, children of immigrants more often

completed the qualification within seven years.

Simon (2003) found a strong positive effect on educational achievement for the

offspring of mixed marriages. Although, as discussed above, children with two Moroccan

parents performed relatively badly, those with one Moroccan parent and one parent of

different heritage performed above the French average. This was linked to the higher social

class of mixed couples. If the socio-economic status of parents in the two family types was

taken into account, the social mobility of the second generation for both groups was moderate.

Simon summarised his paper on the second generation in France neatly: “all things being

unequal, performance of children of immigrants in school is not so bad” (Simon 2003, p.

1105).

91

Many French studies have pointed out that family environment and in particular

parental educational attainment may explain children’s achievement at school. Immigrant

families find it difficult to help their children with homework or more generally to invest in

their schooling (Brinbaum 2002; Thin 1998; van Zanten 2001). They lack the kind of

knowledge that is required to navigate the French school system and they do not have the

cultural and socio-economic resources that would allow them adopting the strategies of the

French middle class.

A study based on a French representative quantitative survey focused on parental

educational investment in immigrant families compared with those of native French one

showed the discrepancy between the high expectations of immigrant families and their

concrete investment due to their lack of resource (Brinbaum, 2002). Nevertheless, this study

also showed the high mobilisation in some families (North African families in particular)

despite their social origin and lack of resources.

Worbs (2003) argued that low levels of parental education (as well as limited

knowledge of the national language) were particularly detrimental in the German case.

German schools are predominantly half day schools. This means that intensive support with

homework by parents is necessary; this is often problematic in minority ethnic families. After

taking social origin into account Müller and Stanat (2006) identified a persistent Turkish

disadvantage in the reading performance of 15-year-olds. Alba et al. (1994), who analysed

ethnic variation in the distribution over the three different secondary tracks, also found a

negative Turkish effect.

Overall, Dutch studies report few, if any, differences across ethnic groups once social

class background is controlled for. All studies find a strong effect of social class and of

parental education in particular. What remains of the small ethnicity effect is to a small degree

attributable to factors like the number of children, home language use, parental involvement

with school activities, length of stay in the Netherlands and various other potentially relevant

family characteristics (Roelandt et al. 1991; Van ‘t Hof and Dronkers 1993; Van Ours and

Veenman 2003; Wolbers and Driessen 1996).

Although studies report few net ethnic differences in secondary education, it is

important to acknowledge that ethnic minorities sometimes do better than natives with

comparable class background. Some studies find that although ethnic minorities have lower

achievement at entry into secondary school they choose higher levels of secondary education

than natives with the same educational level (Hustinx 2002; Luyten 2004). In the literature

there is considerable debate about this net positive ethnic effect. Some researchers argue that

92

ethnic minorities are “over-advised”, leading them to drop out from secondary school more

frequently than natives, for whom capacities and achievements are better matched to their

educational level (Herweijer 2003; Tesser and Iedema 2001). Indeed, research shows that

minority students are more likely to drop out from school than native Dutch pupils even after

social class and other factors are considered (Kalmijn and Kraaykamp 2003). Others,

however, argue that over-advice has almost vanished in the pupils finishing primary school in

2003 (Driessen 2006) and that even among earlier cohorts ethnic minorities are generally able

to survive at the level of their advice (Hustinx 2002).

Driessen and Dekkers (1997) analysed the Educational Priority Policy (EPP)

evaluation study; this was conducted among 20,000 secondary level pupils from 400 schools.

They found that social class was the best predictor of educational achievement (in language,

mathematics and information processing) and that ethnic and gender effects were far smaller.

The two lowest performing ethnic groups were Turks and Moroccans, most of whom come

from the lowest socioeconomic category. This led to the conclusion that social class

background and ethnic origin were so closely interlinked that it was virtually impossible to

distinguish between the two. They also pointed to the importance of considering factors

beyond social class in explaining the differentials observed. These include cultural and social

differences, ethnic relations with racial undertones, ethnic bias on the part of the school and

discontinuities between the home environment and the socialising principles of the home.

Driessen (2001), using data from the Dutch nationally representative cohort study of Primary

Education (PRIMA), concluded that cultural capital theory had no utility in explaining the

performance of children of immigrants. Van der Veen (1999) came to the opposite

conclusion; cultural capital as measured by how much the parents read, what kind of books

were present in the home, whether the students talked about politics, news and books with

their parents, whether their parents watched the news, documentary and educational programs

and frequency of attendance at a museum, library or theatre was found to be significant in

predicting attainment.

Lower educational attainment among minority groups, partly explained by social

background, is also found in Norwegian studies (Dæhlen 2001; Støren 2005; Fekjær 2006).

Støren (2005) finds that social background is less important among minorities also in Norway,

but these differences are small and the sample size is limited. Some studies on educational

achievement and attitudes towards school find less effect of social background among

minority groups in Norway and the US, but do not distinguish between groups of different

93

countries of origin (Krange and Bakken 1998; Roscigno and Ainsworth-Darnell 1999; Lauglo

2000).

Reactions to discrimination Another group of explanations focuses on the reaction of minority ethnic pupils to

discrimination both within and outside the school. Historically, these arguments have focused

on the impact of direct discrimination. More recently, however, it has been suggested that

more indirect discrimination, “institutional racism” can also play a part.

A great deal of qualitative work has looked to teacher racism to explain ethnic

differentials in achievement. Mac an Ghaill (1988, 1989, 1993) noted the conflict between

black pupils and their teachers and went on to explore the range of teachers’ perspectives and

expectations, finding that many teachers operated with views of black pupils as disadvantaged

by broken homes and pathological family structures. In addition the research highlighted a

range of stereotypes existing in the boys’ school about Asian pupils; Asians were portrayed as

technically able and well-behaved but uncreative. One teacher said that Asian students were

not interested in “real learning”. Mac an Ghaill concluded that “racism was prevalent

throughout the white staff” (Mac an Ghaill 1988, p. 61), but it is impossible to assess the

proportion of teachers for which this was the case. Wright (1986, 1987, 1993) focused on the

interaction between teachers and Afro-Caribbean students. This was often characterized by

confrontation and conflict. She found that Afro-Caribbean students were placed in academic

bands and examination sets that did not reflect their ability. This is backed up by Eggleston et

al.’s (1986) finding that children from black and minority ethnic backgrounds were more

likely to be placed on courses below those which might better suit their abilities and

ambitions. Connolly (1995) reported similar processes of conflict and control between

teachers and pupils. Gillborn (1990) found that teachers penalised Afro-Caribbean students

more frequently than any other group. He found that teachers often viewed Asian pupils as

being more highly motivated, better behaved and of relatively high ability. Although the

studies reported here suggest that teachers often view Asian pupils as being more well-

behaved, more highly motivated and of relatively higher ability than Afro-Caribbean pupils

(see for example, Gillborn 1990; Mac an Ghaill 1988, 1989) negative stereotypes have also

been observed. Treatment has been found to vary according to the gender of the students in

question. So, while Mac an Ghaill (1988) found that “there was a tendency for Asian male

students to be seen by the teachers as technically of “high ability” and socially as

“conformist” (Mac an Ghaill 1988, p. 64), Wright (1992) noted that Asian girls were seen as

quiet and submissive; this rendered them “invisible” in class.

94

The findings of ethnographic studies such as these are open to a number of

interpretations. It has been argued, for example, that as a group black pupils simply break

more rules than any other ethnic group. Foster (1990, 1991, 1993) and Foster et al. (1996)

argued that there is currently no conclusive evidence by which discrimination against black

students can be established and that ethnographic studies alleging racist attitudes are filtered

through a process of selective interpretation based on the preconceived assumption that

schools are racist. Foster argued that teachers’ views of students are not based on cultural

stereotypes but on the actual behaviour and attitudes of students. In addition, he highlighted

the methodological weakness in many of the studies which reported teacher racism in

allocating students to lower ability sets at school and in making decisions to exclude pupils:

they failed to control for pupils’ prior attainment. He argued that without doing this it is

impossible to ascertain whether any discrimination has taken place. This critique has been

dismissed by some researchers as racist (Blair 1998; Gillborn 1998). Mirza (1992) has argued

that such studies have a very narrow focus and are “in danger of ignoring the wider social and

economic forces that affect the school’s independence as a social institution” Mirza (1992, p.

52).

Some studies have controlled for prior ability in order to assess how fair the

judgements of teachers are. Tizard et al. (1988) found that reading, there appeared to be no

systematic relation between misclassification and sex or ethnicity. For mathematics,

expectations for black boys were high relative to their scores on the tests, and expectations for

white girls relatively low. Mortimore et al. (1988) found no association between teachers’

assessments and ethnicity once attainment had been controlled for. Smith and Tomlinson

(1989) found that allocation to course levels was based on tested attainment rather than

ethnicity. US research has displayed a similar pattern, with allocation to ability groups

associated with ethnicity and social class being determined by average differences in test

scores rather than bias on the part of teachers (Haller 1985, Oakes et al. 1992).

Resistance to the “white culture” of schools A great deal of literature has focused on the effects of curriculum and staff in explaining the

lower performance of certain ethnic groups, in particular black males.

In the US literature Ogbu has focused on the notion of an “oppositional culture”. This

develops as a reaction to the poorer position of blacks in society which eventually manifests

itself in a negative reaction to the “white” values of schools. Firstly, in an abstract sense,

black children and parents recognise the value of education. Ogbu (1978) documented the

95

deep and abiding belief of blacks in education as a crucial means to attain upward mobility.

Secondly, this belief is not translated into better academic performance as blacks are aware

that they face a job ceiling. The discordance between abstract beliefs in the importance of

education and actual achievement has been termed the “attitude-achievement paradox”

(Mickelson 1990). Ogbu (1974, 1997b, 2003) argued that black families may initially have

high aspirations for their children, but as they are made aware of barriers to opportunities in

further education and the labour market they develop a bleak view of their children’s

prospects. Thirdly, the children themselves choose not to compete for scholastic rewards.

Finally, they adopt alternative strategies within a limited opportunity structure to defend

against “failure” in mainstream schools and jobs. An important feature of these strategies is

that they are created in opposition to the culture of white Americans, contributing to the

formation of an oppositional cultural identity. Ogbu later refers to this as “cultural inversion”:

Cultural inversion is the tendency for involuntary minorities to regard certain forms of

behavior, events, symbols and meanings as inappropriate for them because these are

characteristic of white Americans. At the same time the minorities value other forms

of behavior, events, symbols and meanings, often the opposite, as more appropriate for

themselves (Ogbu 1992, p. 8).

Fordham and Ogbu (1986) developed this idea further by claiming that this form of identity

was reinforced by a sense of group loyalty among black Americans. Through this, members

of the group are sanctioned for violating the established norms of the dominant culture.

Fordham and Ogbu argued that black Americans face the “burden of ‘acting white’” if they

aim for success academically, as this is seen to be the role of white Americans.

Ogbu accounted for the fact that many black and minority ethnic groups succeed at

school, and resist the adoption of an oppositional cultural identity, by differentiating between

two main groups of minorities (Ogbu 1974, 1978, 1981, 1986, 1987, 1991a, 1991b, 1997a,

1997b, 1999, 2003).

1. Immigrant minorities: Groups that migrated freely to the host country, for example

East Asians, compare their condition to that of relatives in their homelands. This

comparison is generally favourable so they develop optimistic attitudes regarding

both their chances for success in the new country and reward for their efforts.

Voluntary minorities see cultural differences as barriers to be overcome in order to

achieve their long-range goals of future employment and assimilation into the host

96

society. These groups also have a “symbolic option” of returning to their

homeland, unless they have emigrated for political reasons (Ogbu 1986).

2. Involuntary minorities: Individuals from historically oppressed minorities such as

black Americans, who have been conquered or relocated against their will and lack

an identifiable foreign reference group, do not hold such positive expectations for

their future. They learn from those around them that they have limited job

opportunities and place little emphasis on success at school, developing a pattern

of linguistic, cognitive, motivational, and other skills related to school which is at

odds with the ethos of the American public school system. They do not accept

their ascribed menial position and blame the “system” for their subordination.

Involuntary minorities see cultural differences between them and the dominant

group as barriers to be retained, and thus avoid complete assimilation into

mainstream society. These minorities have also been described by Ogbu as

“castelike” minorities (Ogbu 1978, 1981a, 1986, 1987, 1991a, 1991b, 1997a,

1997b, 2003).

A similar argument was put forward by Wilson (1987). His “resigned adaptation” explanation

argued that, in response to high levels of unemployment and discrimination, non-whites have

become relatively more tolerant of joblessness. The fact that many black and minority ethnic

groups live in communities where unemployment is prevalent restricts their aspirations and

decreases their desire for work. This is reinforced by a feeling that obtaining work will not

necessarily result in any financial gain compared to benefits or other non-market income.

Such norms, it was argued, can become transmitted within and across generations and the

incentive to acquire education in order to offset discrimination becomes less and less

important. These problems are compounded by the lack of economic opportunities in the

inner city areas where less affluent black and minority ethnic groups are concentrated. This

has been termed “spatial mismatch” theory (Holzer 1991).

The majority of the work to date testing Ogbu’s theory has been carried out in the

United States; this is unsurprising given that this is his country of focus. A number of

researchers have found strong support for his thesis (see for example Farkas et al. 2002;

Graham et al 1998). Other papers have questioned the validity of Ogbu’s theory (see for

example Ainsworth-Darnell and Downey 1998; Cook and Ludwig 1998; Cross 2003; Downey

and Ainsworth-Darnell 2002; Erickson 1987; Gibson 2000; Jaynes and Williams 1989;

MacLeod 1987, 1995; O’Connor 1997; Trueba 1988).

97

Some work has been undertaken in Europe with the aim of assessing the validity of

Ogbu’s claims. Hermans (2004) suggested that Ogbu’s theory is at odds with the situation of

the largest minority groups in Belgium and the Netherlands; the paper examines the

educational position of Moroccans specifically. It was pointed out that there has been little

attention paid to the theory of oppositional culture in the Low Countries. This is partly

because there has been an emphasis on socio-economic explanations for educational

disadvantage, but also because Ogbu’s theory has no obvious applicability. Firstly, although

Moroccans form a voluntary minority they still lag behind, contrary to Ogbu’s expectations.

There is also a sense of pessimism inherent in the theory; it is deterministic and suggests that

whatever measures the system develops they will have no impact. Hermans reported on a

series of ethnographic research. This looked at Moroccans’ frame of comparison, relationship

with the dominant society and beliefs about the instrumental value of education and

educational strategies and concluded that the community forces that hinder the achievement

of Moroccan children are not dissimilar from those that inhibit involuntary minorities in the

United States. Although Ogbu’s insights were seen as valuable, it was argued that the initial

voluntary nature of the migration is not crucial. The development of the relationship of the

originally voluntary immigrants with the host society should instead be considered in detail. It

was posited in the paper that when immigration started in the 1960s, Belgium and the

Netherlands considered it to be a temporary measure. The immigrants themselves shared this

view seeing working abroad as an opportunity earn capital and return to better their situation

in their country of origin (Obdeijn et al. 1999). It was only gradually that they realised that the

situation was likely to be permanent. The time when guest workers were in demand had by

then gone. This was followed by a recession in the 1970s in which many people lost their jobs

and where immigrant workers were often the first to go. Racism follwed as guest workers

were viewed as having taken the jobs of the original inhabitants. In addition, there existed a

long history of distrust between Muslim Moroccans and the Christian West (Wheatcroft

2003). Hermans believes that this history gives some sense of the similarities between

involuntary minorities in the United States and certain groups of European migrants (Hermans

2004).

Very little work has been done to test Ogbu’s theory in Britain. An examination of

abstract and concrete attitudes to education in general, attitudes to school specifically and

pupils’ behaviour did not elicit any results that suggested that the attitudes and behaviour of

black children in Britain are significantly different from those of the other major ethnic

98

groups. In fact, the analysis indicated that black children and their native white counterparts

behaved very similarly with regard to engagement with school (Rothon 2005a). Gillborn

(1997) argued that Ogbu’s theory, with its focus on community forces may lead to

stereotyping certain groups and holding them responsible for their disadvantaged status. He

stresses the importance of focusing on the schools themselves in seeking an explanation for

discrepancies in educational attainment by ethnic group.

In the British case, it has been argued that Caribbean males experience a particular

lack of connection with the school due to cultural and linguistic differences. This, it is

contended, may lead to an inability to view teachers and other adults at the school as positive

role models. For black Caribbean children, the paucity of co-ethnic adults in educational

institutions might compound this. Some researchers have suggested that this is a major factor

in explaining the low attainment of some ethnic groups. Mac an Ghaill (1991), for example,

has pointed to the conspicuous success of black voluntary schools. These are private schools,

but are often linked to the state sector through funding from Local Educational Authorities or

Community Relations Councils. The teachers are black and the schools are closely linked to

the communities that they serve. Parents are encouraged to take an active role in the running

of the school. Specifically black material is incorporated into the curriculum. These

characteristics lead to more positive engagement with school and to higher educational

attainment. A factor of potential interest, therefore, may be the extent to which schools are

sensitive to the needs of minority ethnic children and the degree to which the curriculum takes

account of this diversity.

Gibson (1997) commented on the paucity of French research into the effects of the

cultural and linguistic backgrounds of students on their educational attainment. She suggested

that this is not surprising given the national ideology of assimilation. Van Zanten’s (1997)

paper sought to look at these explanations in depth and found that Ogbu’s theory cannot be

easily applied. In the French case, students of Algerian and Moroccan ancestry (who might be

described as an involuntary minority given their colonial background) performed at a higher

level than the Spanish and Portuguese “voluntary” minority groups. When Vallet and Caille

(1999) controlled for social class and family structure, they found that the children of

immigrants are more successful in French secondary schools that native children.

Eldering’s (1997) paper examining the applicability of Ogbu’s theory in the

Netherlands also demonstrated the limitations of his involuntary/voluntary minority

dichotomy. Her major comparison was between the African Surinamese and Turks and

Moroccans. Within Ogbu’s framework the former group could be described as an involuntary

99

minority as its members were slaves in the former Netherlands Guiana. The latter group came

as guest workers so might therefore be considered as a voluntary minority. However, the

African Surinamese in the Netherlands performed significantly better than the Moroccans;

this would not be predicted by Ogbu’s framework. Eldering pointed to the complexity of the

situation in the Netherlands, highlighting the fact that the first Surinamese arrivals were

mainly from the elite classes. These migrants had not been slaves in the former colony. They

also arrived for the most part with a knowledge of Dutch culture and language and were

entitled to full Dutch citizenship. This was not the case for the Turks and Moroccans. Eldering

suggested that other factors may be more relevant than the distinction between voluntary and

involuntary minorities. These include the cultural capital of the arriving group, the ethnic and

class resources available, the extent of conflicts between the cultures of the home and the

school and the quality of schooling provided.

Pásztor (2005) looked at the case of Hungarians who became part of their countries or

residence involuntarily as a consequence of territorial arrangements following the two World

Wars. She found considerable variability between the identification of the Hungarian groups

in Slovakia, Romania, the Ukraine and Serbia; in Slovakia, for example, a majority of

respondents identified themselves as purely Hungarian. In the other three countries the

emphasis was on a “hyphenated” identity. Educational attainment relative to the native

majority also varied considerably between the countries. In Romania and Serbia a higher

proportion of Hungarians attended higher education institutes compared to the native

population. The opposite was the case in Slovakia and Serbia. This led Pásztor to conclude

that the voluntary/involuntary dichotomy is not sufficient to explain the observed differences

in educational attainment.

There are a number of reasons why one might not expect Ogbu’s theory to fit the

European data. Firstly, as discussed by Hermans (2004) one of the central features of the

castelike minorities that Ogbu identified in the United States is that they came involuntarily to

the country. The same cannot be said of most European black and minority ethnic groups.

Many groups were primarily attracted by a strong demand for labour as a result of post-war

reconstruction and the expansion of Western European economies which has been attributed,

in part, to the Marshall Plan (Layton-Henry 2002). Later arrivals, for example Moroccans and

Turks, initially arrived in Europe as guest workers whose primary aim was to improve their

economic standing and return to their home countries to better their situation there.

100

Secondly, it is not necessarily the case that black and minority ethnic groups in Europe

have no “homeland” to return to. Many black and minority ethnic groups retain strong links

with their country of origin. As Layton-Henry (2002) pointed out, international migrants are

no longer as isolated from their countries of origin as they were in the past. Modern

communication through the internet, telephone, satellite television and cheaper air travel

means that migrants can maintain contact with the people and institutions of their country of

origin. There are some groups in Europe, however, which might be worth investigating as

“involuntary minorities”. These include indigenous groups such as the Sámi in Finland and

Sweden or the Travellers in Ireland. In addition, the delineation may be stretched to national

or linguistic minorities who have lived in the respective countries or specific territories for

centuries. These include the Roma and the Muslim minority in Greece.

Thirdly, Ogbu (1986) argued that legal devices in the United States had been

instrumental in relegating blacks to menial positions. There have been few formal laws

limiting the activities of black and minority ethnic groups in Europe. There are exceptions to

this. Luciak (2004) argued that no minority ethnic group in Europe completely fits Ogbu’s

notion of a “castelike” minority, but that some groups have very similar attributes. This is

especially true of the Rroma; although they were not colonised or brought as slaves, they were

enslaved in Romania for centuries, suffered from persecution in many countries and were

victims of the Holocaust. They have also faced segregation in schooling which in some

countries continues today (Luciak 2004).

Ogbu’s primary emphasis on blacks as a castelike minority in the context of

discrimination in Europe is also questionable. In Britain, for example, it is not clear that

blacks receive substantially more discrimination than other black and minority ethnic groups.

Modood (1997) found a consensus among Caribbeans, Indians, African Asians, Pakistanis,

Bangladeshis and whites that “Asians” suffered the greatest level of discrimination in Britain.

Indians, African Asians and Pakistanis felt that within the Asian group, Muslims faced the

most prejudice. The survey on which this conclusion is based (The Fourth National Survey of

Ethnic Minorities) was conducted prior to September 11th 2001. Model and Lin (2002) also

found substantial evidence of religious discrimination against British Muslims.

Discrimination testing (where two or more testers equally matched in every respect except

their ethnicity apply for the same job vacancy at the same time) has consistently uncovered

substantial levels of racial discrimination for both black and Asian groups (Brown and Gay

1985; Commission for Racial Equality 1996; Hubbuck and Carter 1980; Simpson and

101

Stevenson 1994). Researchers on Europe have highlighted the importance of September 11th

in increasing levels of racism against Muslim groups.

A key problem with Ogbu’s work is that he concentrated only on one type on

immigrant minority group: those that migrate to a new country for primarily economic

reasons. These groups enter the country with full rights of residence. He has given scant

attention to other types of immigrant groups. Although a number of US studies have found

that the school performance of the children of refugees and temporary workers may be similar

to those of economic immigrants (Bankston 1994; Caplan et al. 1991; Rumbaut 1995; Suárez-

Orozco 1991) there is also evidence of a great deal of variation in performance. The theory of

“segmented assimilation” discussed below takes a number of other factors into account; these

include immigrants’ status in their new country, context on arrival, the resources available to

the group and patterns of residence.

Ethnic social capital and the theory of “segmented assimilation” Although a number of theorists have been instrumental in developing the concept of social

capital (Bourdieu and Passeron 1977, Bourdieu 1984, 1986, 1988, 1991, 1997 [1983]; Loury

1977, 1981; Putnam 1995, 2000, 2003) the key contributor as regards education is James

Coleman. Coleman’s primary aim in utilising the concept was to develop an understanding of

the relationship between educational achievement and social inequality. His empirical work

included a series of studies in 1980 and 1982 to compare educational attainment in public

high schools with those in Catholic schools in the United States (Hoffer, Greeley and

Coleman 1985). It was noted that pupils in Catholic schools exhibited significantly higher

levels of attainment than those in public high schools. Coleman’s (1988) use of social capital

represents a post hoc explanation for his earlier findings.

Coleman argued that there were two main ways in which social capital could be

successfully developed. The first was through closing networks by which adults in the

community could successfully sanction their children’s behaviour. The second was by

promoting strong relations within the family. Coleman also discussed the importance of

friendship networks. In relation to education, closing networks meant creating not only ties

between children and their peers and parents and their children, but also by encouraging

“intergenerational closure” through parent-parent contact. This enables children’s behaviour

to not only be sanctioned by their own parents, but also by the parents of others.

The second way in which social capital could be important, according to Coleman, is

through the family. He asserted that social capital, in the form of relations within families,

102

sets the context within which parents’ financial and human resources can impact on the

schooling decisions made by their children. High levels of social capital, in the form of the

physical presence of parents and a high level of attention to their children, was seen as the

only way in which parents could transmit their human capital to their children. Given the

limited financial capital of many minority ethnic groups, it might be expected that social

capital may be of particular importance to their children. On the other hand, there is an

assumption that time spent with parents will benefit children through offering practices or

knowledge that is relevant in the classroom. Minority ethnic parents may not be as able to

navigate their children through the school system because they have not been through it

themselves.

Alejandro Portes and Min Zhou ((2001) [1993]) used the model of “segmented

assimilation” to describe various outcomes faced by different groups of second generation

youth. The theory of segmented assimilation expands on the work done on social capital by

looking at ethnic social capital specifically and proposing ways in which the levels of social

capital possessed by a minority group will affect their assimilation into the host society. Those

with strong ethnic networks, access to capital and limited ties to disaffected youth from the

host country experience a “linear” ethnicity that creates networks of social ties and may

provide access to job opportunities while reinforcing the authority and values of parents.

The concept of segmented assimilation developed from a reaction against more

traditional assimilation models (Park 1928; Park and Burgess 1969 [1921]; Stonequist 1961

[1937]). Recently, there has been renewed interest in the concept of assimilation, with a move

away from the assumption of inevitable assimilation into a middle-class Anglo-American way

of life. Contemporary accounts have recognised the differing social group and spatial contexts

in which black and minority ethnic groups are located. The theory of segmented assimilation

represents an important development in this direction. It formulates an alternative framework

of immigrants’ adaptation, looking at “why different patterns of adaptation emerge among

contemporary immigrants and how these patterns necessarily lead to the destinies of

convergence or divergence” (Zhou 1997, p. 984). Portes and Zhou identified three main

patterns of assimilation:

One of them replicates the time-honored portrayal of growing acculturation and

parallel integration into the white middle class; a second leads straight in the opposite

direction to permanent poverty and assimilation into the underclass; still a third

103

associates rapid economic advancement with deliberate preservation of the immigrant

community’s values and tight solidarity (Portes and Zhou 2001 [1993], p. 599).

The first of Portes and Zhou’s three patterns is to be expected of those from middle-class

backgrounds. Socio-economic background determines the type of neighbourhood in which

children will live, the quality of the schools they attend and the peers that they associate with.

Immigrants from middle-class backgrounds are able to benefit from financial security, good

schools, safe neighbourhoods and other supportive formal and informal organisations that will

improve their life chances. It is expected that these groups will gain relatively rapid entry into

professional occupations and develop links with middle-class American society. For less

privileged immigrants, however, specifically ethnic networks may be important in creating an

environment within which educational learning is supported and fostered.

Children who have parents with little education and few skills are more likely to grow

up in underprivileged neighbourhoods. For these groups, the second pattern of assimilation is

anticipated. There are two key aspects to this. Firstly, interaction with existing communities

may lead to the creation of an “oppositional culture” among immigrant youth or to “resigned

adaptation” (Wilson 1987). Secondly, there is a lack of economic opportunities in the inner

city areas in which poorer ethnic minorities are concentrated.

For children living in an area densely populated with co-ethnics, however, it is

possible to build social capital by preserving values and solidarity. Portes and Zhou saw

resources within immigrant communities as the most important factor for improving chances

of upward mobility. Those with strong ethnic networks, access to capital, and limited ties to

U.S minorities experience a “linear” ethnicity that creates networks of social ties and may

provide access to job opportunities while reinforcing parental authority and values. Through

retaining a close-knit ethnic community, members can also protect themselves from

discrimination.

Crul and Doomernik (2003) pointed to the effect of mutual help and support from

family and community networks as a key factor in predicting minority ethnic educational

success in the Netherlands. They compared the Turkish community in Utrecht with the

Moroccan community in Amsterdam. In the case of the Turks they argued that strong social

cohesion is key in promoting higher academic achievement and entry into the labour market.

In these communities there is a high degree of membership in Turkish cultural,

religious and sports organisations. Turkish people watch Turkish news more than Dutch news

and the majority regard themselves first and foremost as Turks. The most successful segment

104

of the younger generation can be found in the professions; members of this group generally

remain very much in the community and continue to observe its traditions. By contrast, the

Moroccan group are overrepresented in crime statistics. Less community spirit is observed

and there is greater debate and conflict between fathers and sons and young men and their

socially mobile girlfriends. Obdeijn and de Mas (2001) have characterised this group as

“fighting” their way into Dutch society.

In comparing Turkish students with Spanish and Portuguese students, however, Lindo

(1996) pointed to some disadvantages of strong social cohesion within the Turkish

community. In trying to explain the higher achievement of the latter group, he argued that the

strict social control within families meant that immigrants to the Netherlands were compelled

to send money to their relatives back in Turkey, thus reducing their financial capital. He noted

that Turkish children comply with strict social control due to the financial burden even when

it interferes with their academic career. An example of how this social control works to limit

educational possibilities in practice is the convention to marry young, particularly for girls.

These limitations do not apply to Spanish and Portuguese students as they do not have such

strong obligations to their family.

Bakken (1999) used social capital theory as a starting point for examining the impact

of parents on their children’s school achievement in Norway. It was hypothesised that the

children of immigrants will be more dependent of parental expectations and strong family

relations than the majority group due to their parents’ relatively low levels of financial and

cultural capital. The research utilised the Oslo Youth Study. It was found that living with both

parents (a measure of parental monitoring) was statistically significant for the achievement of

native Norwegian students and not for the children of immigrants. Time spent with parents

also had a greater effect for Norwegian students that those from minority ethnic groups. In

addition, parents’ emotional support and attitudes to education had a greater effect for native

youth. Parental help with homework had a weak relationship with achievement for both

groups. Participation of parents at school meetings had a surprising effect for the children of

immigrants; among the 38 minority ethnic pupils that reported that their parents never attend

such meetings, 42 per were found to be high achievers.

Lauglo (2000) used a questionnaire survey of youth in the city of Oslo to examine the

extent to which social capital affects attitudes to school. He found that youth from developing

country backgrounds most often displayed attitudes that indicated constructive engagement

with their schoolwork and that it was ethnic Norwegians that least often displayed these traits.

This was despite the fact that immigrant children from a developing country background often

105

faced difficulties at school. In terms of parental control Lauglo found that whilst able to

monitor children effectively within the family, parents of immigrant background found this

more difficult outside the family, and were less likely to be directly involved with the school.

In other aspects of the social capital framework immigrant youth tended to possess high social

capital; Lauglo found that immigrants displayed higher rates of cohesive family ties and that

this led to a more positive engagement with school. It was found that immigrants from a

developing country background were less likely to be part of a “gang” than other young

people, as well as being less intensely involved with their friends and peers. The most

“culturally remote” immigrant youth were at an advantage in this respect. This lends support

to the segmented assimilation thesis and also mirrors Coleman’s (1988) findings in the US.

Lauglo also found that the ethnic minorities in his survey were able to cement social ties

through higher levels of participation in the religious community. This was conducive to high

performance at school. Overall, Lauglo concluded that the net effect of social capital

influences is helpful to immigrant youth from a developing country background.

Parental attitudes Parental attitudes are also of potential importance. These are often cited as a possible

explanation for the high performance of Indians across Europe. Modood (2005) pointed to the

motivational drive for self-improvement that some ethnic minorities have for themselves and

their children. Inglehart’s (1981, 1997) theory of post-materialism may have relevance here.

The majority of the native white children who have recently completed secondary education

will have been born to the “baby boomers” that grew up in a period of relative affluence

following the Second World War. Such parents are argued to have post-materialist values ie.

to value goals other than upward mobility through material gain (such as self-actualisation).

Indian parents born in the same era may have very different priorities for their children. Less

affluent than whites in relative terms, they develop materialist values which place emphasis

on the social mobility of their family. As a result of this, they view the academic achievement

of their children as a concern of the utmost importance.

For France, Vallet and Caille (1999) found that although immigrant parents suffered

disadvantage because of their location in the socio-economic structure and their level of

education, they invest in the educational system. They develop strong aspirations for their

children and invest in the education system to improve their children’s future. The authors

found that these socio-psychological factors had a key role in explaining the educational

attainments of the children of immigrants in both French lower and upper secondary schools.

106

In the context of the Netherlands, it has been argued that parental attitudes differ

depending on the child’s gender. The literature contains evidence that parental attitudes

towards the schooling of their daughters is sometimes ambivalent; this has been found to

especially be the case among Turks (Coenen 2001; Lindo 2000). Coenen has explained these

attitudes in terms of the past experience of parents who grew up in rural societies where

education for girls is seen as unimportant. However, this has also been found to apply to

Moroccan parents; in these families girls are more likely to progress to higher levels of

education (Crul and Doomernik 2003). It has been suggested that the strong social cohesion of

the Turkish population partly explains this more negative effect of group solidarity. It is

suggested that gossip is stronger, which keeps girls in line. Early marriage can ward off

shame for the family. In addition, parents can reap better short-term payoffs from early

marriage, especially with a family member from Turkey, than if a daughter extends her

educational career. This also has the potential to benefit extended family income and status in

the community in the country of origin. It has been argued that weaker community bonds in

the case of Moroccans give daughters greater room to study and to postpone marriage (Crul

and Doomernik 2003). It is important to recognise that these attitudes and trends are

constantly subject to change.

EUROPEAN COMPARATIVE RESEARCH Comparative studies of ethnic inequalities in education are relatively rare, but a limited

amount of analysis has been attempted.

Levels and Dronkers (2005) found socio-economic background to be of great

importance in explaining differential attainment in Mathematics. Using the PISA 2003 data,

they found that the occupational status of both parents, indices of family cultural possessions

(for example the presence of literature, poetry and works of art), home educational resources

and home possessions and family type (nuclear or not) to all be significant variables. In

regression analysis, these variables reduced the origin effect greatly, although some effect

remained; this suggested that seeking explanations beyond that of social class background is

important.

Marks (2005) carried out a comparative study using the PISA data to establish patterns

of achievement among the children of immigrants. He found that in almost all countries the

children of immigrants had lower scores in reading than the native population. In Switzerland

their scores were 100 score points lower, in Luxembourg 98 points lower, in Germany 91

points lower, in Austria 78 points lower, in Greece 65 points lower, in the Netherlands 62

107

points lower and in Sweden 57 points lower. There were no significant differences in Latvia,

the Russian Federation, Spain and the United Kingdom. However, it must be remembered that

these scores reflect an aggregate only; there is considerable variation between minority groups

within the countries in question. As Levels and Dronkers (2005) point out, the fact that PISA

2000 only allowed for a distinction between natives and non-natives means that an

explanation in terms of the diversity of the origin composition of the non-native group cannot

be tested. In the UK, for example, Indians form the biggest minority ethnic group and perform

at a level that is higher than the native population. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, on the other

hand, perform at a significantly lower level. Averaging out the high scores of certain minority

groups and the low scores of others may lead to the conclusion that minority and native

performance is not very different. In measuring whether inequalities exist, this is misleading.

Marks found that children who did not speak the national language at home performed worse.

Those who did performed more similarly to native pupils; in Australia, Canada, Greece,

Latvia, New Zealand, Portugal and the US there were no significant differences although in

Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland

children of immigrants performed worse even if they spoke the national language at home. In

Mathematics the pattern of achievement was found to be similar to that for reading. In

countries where the scores for the children of immigrants were low for reading, they were also

low for Mathematics.

Marks found that controlling for socio-economic background significantly reduced

differences in overall scores for most of the 20 countries that he examined using the PISA

study. In the United States, almost all of the differences were explained by socio-economic

background. In other countries about half the differential was explained; this was the case in

Sweden, Austria, France, Germany and Luxembourg. In some the difference was reduced by a

quarter. These included Belgium, Denmark, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

When socio-economic factors were taken into account differences in reading scores between

the children of immigrants who spoke another language at home and the native population

were no longer significant in France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, New Zealand and

Spain. Up to half the gap in reading scores was explained in Austria, Belgium, Denmark,

Luxembourg, Sweden and the UK. For Norway and Sweden this control also resulted in

smaller differences. In several countries socio-economic factors reduced differences in

reading scores between second generation minority ethnic children who spoke the national

language at home and native students. This was the case, for example, in Germany and

Luxembourg. Similar patterns were found in Mathematics scores, with a substantial impact in

108

Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and

Switzerland. Socio-economic background explained less in Greece, Norway, Portugal,

Sweden and the UK.

CONCLUDING REMARKS There is a relatively large body of work examining differences in the achievements of

the second generation in Western Europe within individual countries. In a number of key

areas, the evidence is consistent across countries. Most notably, the importance of socio-

economic background as a factor contributing to ethnic inequalities in educational

performance comes across strongly in all of the countries under consideration here.

Comparative work is more limited, however. This is largely due to a lack of standardised

measures. Where standardised measures are available, there are limitations. In the PISA

dataset, for example, the measure for parental social class is weak and ethnicity is not

measured in a uniform way across the participating countries.

The development of comprehensive data in which standardised measures are available

is desirable, particularly since there are some grounds for expecting ethnic inequalities in

education to vary cross-nationally. It has frequently been claimed that early selection will

tend to be associated with greater social class inequalities whereas educational systems that

delay selection will be more egalitarian (Breen and Jonsson 2005). Similar processes might

be expected in the case of ethnic inequalities on the grounds that, if minority students have

low test scores at the time selection occurs (for example because of language difficulties),

these inequalities will be perpetuated throughout their subsequent educational careers.

It is also possible that neighbourhood comprehensive schools might have some

disadvantages for ethnic minority students. Since ethnic minorities are often concentrated in

particular neighbourhoods, typically economically deprived ones, and that deprived

neighbourhoods tend to be associated with poorer schooling, higher teacher turnover and

possibly adverse “contextual effects” of the school’s social composition on student

attainment, comprehensive systems may reduce ethnic minority opportunities. This may be

more of a problem in highly unequal societies such as Britain and the USA than in more equal

societies such as Norway where variations in school quality and school contextual effects may

be smaller.

109

REFERENCES Ainsworth-Darnell, J.W., Downey, D.B. 1998, ‘Assessing the oppositional culture

explanation for racial/ethnic differences in school performance’, American

Sociological Review 63: 536-553.

Alamdar-Niemann, M., Bergs-Winkels, D. and Merkens, H. 1991, ‘Educational conditions

of Turkish migrant children in German schools’, Anthropology and Education

Quarterly 22: 154-161.

Alba, R., Handl, J. and Müller, W. 1994, ‘Ethnische Ungleichheiten im deutschen

Bildungssystem’, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 46(2): 209-

237.

Alders, M. 2001, ‘Allochtone Moeders’, in J. Garssen et al. (ed) Samenleven: Nieuwe Feiten

over Relaties en Gezinnen, Voorburg: Statistics Netherlands: 107-121.

Bakken, A. 1999, ‘Parental impact on adolescents’ school achievement: a comparison of

second generation immigrants and Norwegian youth’, Paper presented at the ESF

conference European Societies or European Society? Migrations and Inter-Ethnic

Relations in Europe, Obernai: September 23-28.

Bakken, A. 2003, Minoritetsspråklig ungdom i skolen. Reproduksjon av ulikhet eller sosial

mobilitet, Oslo: NOVA.

Baumert, J. and Schümer, G. 2001, ’Familiäre Lebensverhältnisse, Bildungsbeteiligung und

Kompetenzerwerb’, in J. Baumert et al. (eds) PISA 200. Basiskompetenzen von

Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich, Opladen: Leske and

Budrich: 323-407.

Baumert, J. et al. (eds) 2006, Herkunftsbedingte Disparitäten im Bildungswesen.

Differenzielle Bildungsprozesse und Probleme der Verteilungsgerechtigkeit,

Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Blackburn, R.M. and Marsh, C. 1991, ‘Education and social class’, British Journal of

Sociology 42: 507-536.

Blair, M. 1998, ‘The myth of neutrality in educational research’, in B. Connolly and B.

Troyna (eds) Researching Racism in Education: Politics, Theory and Practice,

Birmingham: Open University Press: 12-20.

Bos, W. et al. 2004, ’Schullaufbahnempfehlungen von Lehrkräften für Kinder am Ende der

vierten Jahrgangsstufe’, in W. Bos et al. (eds) IGLU. Einige Länder der

Bundesrepublik Deutschland im nationalen und internationalen Vergleich, Münster:

Waxmann: 191-228.

110

Bosma, H. and Cremers, P. 1996, ‘Sociaal-economische verschillen bij de doorstroom naar

de universiteit’, Mens en Maatschappij 71: 142-53.

Bourdieu, P. 1984, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, London:

Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Bourdieu, P. 1986, ‘The forms of capital’, in J. Richardson (ed) Handbook of Theory and

Research for the Sociology of Education, New York: Greenwood: 241-8.

Bourdieu, P. 1988, Homo Academicus, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. 1991, Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. 1997 [1983], ‘The forms of capital’, in A.H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown and

A. Stuart Wells (eds) Education: Culture, Economy, and Society, Oxford: Oxford

University Press: 46-58.

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J-C. 1977, Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture,

London: Sage.

Breen, R. and Jonsson, J. 2005, ‘Inequality of opportunity in comparative perspective:

recent research on educational attainment and social mobility’, Annual Review of

Sociology 31: 223-244.

Bressoux, P. 1994, ‘Les effets de la formation initiale et de l’expérience professionnelle des

instituteurs: etude portent sur le CE2’, Les Dossiers d’Éducation et Formations 36,

Ministry of Education: DEP.

Brinbaum, Y. 2002, Au cœur du parcours migratoire, les investissements éducatifs des

familles immigrées : attentes et disillusions, Thèse de Doctorat de Sociologie,

Université Paris V.

Brinbaum, Y. and Kieffer, A. 2005, ‘D’une génération à l’autre, les aspirations éducatives

des familles immigrées : ambition et persévérance’, Education et Formations 72: 53-

75.

Brown, C and Gay, P. 1985, Racial Discrimination: 17 years after the Act, London: Policy

Studies Institute.

Caplan, N., Choy, M and Whitmore, J. 1991, Children of the Boat People: A Study of

Educational Success, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Coenen, L. 2001, Word niet Zoals Wij: de Veranderende Betekenis van Onderwijs bij Turkse

Gezinnen in Nederland, Amsterdam: Het Spinhius.

Coleman, J. 1988, ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’, American Journal of

Sociology 94 (Supplement): 95-120.

111

Commission for Racial Equality 1996, We Regret to Inform You…, London: Commission

for Racial Equality.

Connolly, P. 1995, ‘Reconsidering multicultural/antiracist strategies in education:

articulations of “race” and gender in a primary school’, in M. Griffiths and B. Troyna

(eds) Antiracism, Culture and Social Justice in Education, Stoke on Trent: Trentham.

Cook, P.J. and Ludwig, J. 1998, ‘The burden of “acting White”: Do Black adolescents

disparage academic achievement?’, in C. Jencks and M. Phillips (eds) The Black-

White Test Score Gap, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution: 375- 400.

Cross, W. 2003, ‘Tracing the historical origins of youth delinquency and violence: myths and

realities about Black culture’, Journal of Social Issues 59(1): 67- 82.

Crul, M. and Doomernik, J. 2003, ‘The Turkish second generation in the Netherlands:

divergent trends between and polarization within the two groups’, International

Migration Review 37(4): 1039-1064.

Crul, M. and Wolff, R. 2002, Talent gewonnen. Talent verspild. Een kwantitatief onderzoek

naar de doorstroom van allochtone studenten in het hoger onderwijs 1997-2001,

Utrecht: ECHO.

Dæhlen, M. 2001, ‘Sosial bakgrunn betyr mer enn innvandrerbakgrunn. Rekruttering til

høyere utdanning’, Samfunnsspeilet 15(2): 42-47.

Demack, S., Drew, D. and Grimsley, M. 2000, ‘Minding the gap: ethnic, gender and social

class differences in attainment at 16, 1988-95’, Race, Ethnicity and Education 3: 117-

143.

De Graaf, P. 1986, ‘The impact of financial and cultural resources on educational attainment

in the Netherlands’, Sociology of Education 59: 237-46.

Demie, F. 2001, ‘Ethnic and gender differences in educational achievement and implications

for school improvement strategies’, Educational Research 43(1): 91-106.

DiMaggio, P. 1982, ‘Cultural capital and school success: the impact of status culture

participation on the grades of US high school students’, American Sociological Review

47: 189-201.

Downey, D. and Ainsworth-Darnell, J. 2002, ‘The search for oppositional culture among

black students’, American Sociological Review 67(1): 156-164.

Drew, D. 1995, Race, Education and Work: the Statistics of Inequality, Aldershot: Avebury.

Drew, D. and Gray, J. 1990, ‘The fifth year examination results of black young people in

England and Wales’, Educational Research 32(3): 107-117.

112

Driessen, G. 2001, ‘Ethnicity, forms of capital, and educational achievement’, International

Review of Education 47(6): 513-538.

Driessen, G. 2006, ‘Het advies voortgezet onderwijs: is de overadvisering over?’, Mens &

Maatschappij 81: 5-23.

Driessen, G. and Dekkers, H. 1997, ‘Educational opportunities in the Netherlands: policy,

students’ performance and issues’, International Review of Education 43(4): 299-315.

Duru-Bellat, M. 2004, L’école des filles, Quelle formation pour quels roles sociaux?, Paris:

L’Harmattan.

Eggleston, S.J., Dunn, D.K. and Anjali, M. (eds) 1986, Education for Some: The

Educational and Vocational Experiences of 15-18 Year Old Members of Minority

Ethnic Groups, Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.

Eldering, L. 1997, ‘Ethnic minority students in the Netherlands from a cultural ecological

perspective’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 28(3): 330- 350.

Erickson, F. 1987, ‘Transformation and school success: the politics of culture of educational

achievement’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 18: 336- 355.

Ernst, B. and Radica, K. 1994, ‘Les élèves au cycle d’observation: caratéristiques,

performances en français et en mathématiques, orientation en fin de cycle’, Les

Dossiers d’Éducation et Formations 40, Ministry of Education: DEP.

Farkas, G., Lleras, C. and Maczuga, S. 2002, ‘Comment: does oppositional culture exist in

minority poverty peer groups?’, American Sociological Review 67(1): 148-155.

Fekjær, S. 2006, ‘Utdanning hos annengenerasjon etniske minoriteter i Norge’, Tidsskrift for

samfunnsforskning 47(1): 57-93.

Fekjær, S. and Birkelund, G. 2005, ‘Immigration and education in a welfare state. A

multilevel analysis of the influence of the ethnic composition of upper secondary

schools on Norwegian students’ educational achievement and educational attainment’,

Paper presented at the Education, Social Mobility, and Social Cohesion (EDUC)

Workshop, start-up Workshop of the EDUC Research Theme of the 6th EU Framework

Network of Excellence “Economic Change, Quality of Life & Social Cohesion”

(EQUALSOC), Mannheim Centre for European Social Research: 2-3 December 2005.

Floud, J. E., Halsey, A. H. and Martin, F. M. 1956, Social Class and Educational

Opportunity, London: Heinemann.

Fordham, S. and Ogbu, J.U. 1986, ‘Black students’ success: coping with the “burden of

acting White”’, Urban Review 18: 176-206.

113

Foster, P. 1990, Policy and Practice in Multicultural and Anti-racist Education, London:

Routledge.

Foster, P. 1991, ‘Case not proven: an evaluation of two studies of teacher racism’, British

Educational Research Journal 16(4): 269-281.

Foster, P. 1993, ‘Case not proven: an evaluation of a study of teacher racism’, in P. Woods

and M. Hammersley (eds) Gender and Ethnicity in Schools: Ethnographic Accounts,

London: Routledge: 216-223.

Foster, P., Gomm, R. and Hammersley, M. 1996, Constructing Educational Inequality: An

Assessment of Research on School Processes, London: Falmer.

Gibson, M. 1997, ‘Exploring and explaining the variability: cross-national perspectives on

the school performance of minority students’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly

28(3): 318-329.

Gibson, M. 2000, ‘Situational and structural rationales for the school performance of

immigrant youth. Three cases’, in H. Vermeulen and J. Perlmann (eds) mmigrants,

Schooling and Social Mobility, London: Macmillan: 72-102.

Gijsberts, M. 2003, ‘Minderheden in het basisonderwijs’, in J. Dagevos, M. Gijsberts and C.

van Praag. (eds) Rapportage Minderheden 2003, Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel

Planbureau: 63-109.

Gillborn, D. 1990a, Race, Ethnicity and Education, London: Unwin Hyman.

Gillborn, D. 1997, ‘Ethnicity and educational performance in the United Kingdom: racism,

ethnicity, and variability in achievement’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly

28(3): 375-393.

Gillborn, D. 1998, ‘Racism and the politics of qualitative research: learning from controversy

and critique’, in B. Connolly and B. Troyna (eds) Researching Racism in Education:

Politics, Theory and Practice, Birmingham: Open University Press: 34-54.

Gillborn, D. and Mirza, H. 2000, Educational Inequality: Mapping Race, Class and Gender,

London: OFSTED.

Graham, S., Taylor, A. and Hudley, C. 1998, ‘Exploring achievement values among ethnic

minority early adolescents’, Journal of Educational Psychology 90: 606-620.

Haisken-DeNew, J.P., Büchel, F. and Wagner, G. 1997, ‘Assimilation and Other

Determinants of School Attainment in Germany. Do Immigrant Children Perform as

well as Germans?’, Vierteljahreshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung 66(1): 169-179.

Haller, E. 1985, ‘Pupil race and elementary school ability grouping: are teachers biased

against black children?’, American Educational Research Journal 22(4): 465-483.

114

Halsey, A. H., Heath, A. F. and Ridge, J. M. 1980, Origins and Destinations: Family, Class

and Education in Modern Britain, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Haque, Z. and Bell, J.F. 2001, ‘Evaluating the performances of minority ethnic pupils in

secondary schools’, Oxford Review of Education 27(3): 357-368.

Heath, A. 2000, ‘The political arithmetic tradition in the sociology of education’, Oxford

Review of Education (3 and 4): 313-331.

Hermans, P. 2004, ‘Applying Ogbu’s theory of minority academic achievement to the

situation of Moroccans in the Low Countries’, Intercultural Education 15(4): 431-439.

Herweijer 2003, ‘Voortgezet onderwijs, beroepsonderwijs en hoger onderwijs’, in J.

Dagevos, M. Gijsberts, and C. van Praag (eds) Rapportage Minderheden 2003, Den

Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau: 111-142.

Hoffer, T., Greeley, A. and Coleman, J.S. 1985, ‘Achievement and growth in public and

Catholic schools’, Sociology of Education 58: 74-97.

Holzer, H.J. 1991, ‘The spatial mismatch hypothesis: what evidence has it shown?’, Urban

Studies 28: 105-122.

Hubbuck, I and Carter, S. 1980, Half a Chance: A Report on Job Discrimination Against

Young Blacks in Nottingham, London: Commission for Racial Equality.

Hustinx, P.W.J. 2002, ‘School Careers of Pupils of Ethnic Minority Background After the

Transition to Secondary Education: Is the Ethnic Factor Always Negative?’,

Educational Research and Evaluation 8: 169-195.

Hvistendahl, R. and Roe, A. 2004, ‘The Literacy Achievement of Norwegian Minority

Students’, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 48(3): 307-324.

Inglehart, R. 1981, ‘Post-Materialism in an Environment of Insecurity’, American Political

Science Review 75(4): 880-900.

Inglehart, R. 1997, Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political

Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jaynes, G. and Williams, R. 1989, A Common Destiny: Blacks and American Society,

Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Johnston, R., Forrest, J. and Poulsen, M. 2002, ‘The ethnic geography of ethnicities: the

“American Model” and residential concentration in London’, Ethnicities 2(2): 209-

235.

Jonsson, J. and Mills, C. 1993a, ‘Social class and educational attainment in historical

perspective: a Swedish-English comparison. Part I’, British Journal of Sociology

44(2): 403-428.

115

Jonsson, J. and Mills, C. 1993b, ‘Social class and educational attainment in historical

perspective: a Swedish-English comparison. Part II’, British Journal of Sociology

44(3): 213-247.

Kalmijn, M. and Kraaykamp, G. 2003, ‘Dropout and downward mobility in the educational

career: an event-history analysis of ethnic schooling differences in the Netherlands’,

Educational Research and Evaluation 9: 265-87.

Kalter, F. and Granato, N. 2001, ‘Recent Trends of Assimilation in Germany’, ZUMA-

Arbeitsbericht 2001/02, Mannheim: Zentrum für Umfragen, Methoden and Analysen.

Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung 2006, Bildung in Deutschland. Ein

indikatorgestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Bildung und Migration, Bielefeld:

Bertelsmann.

Korteweg, J.A. et al. 2003, ‘Sociaal milieu en de keuze tussen hbo en wo’, Tijdschrift voor

hoger onderwijs 21: 2-16.

Krange, O. and Bakken, A. 1998, ‘Innvandrerungdoms skoleprestasjoner. Tradisjonelle

klasseskiller eller nye skillelinjer?’, Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning 39(3): 381-410.

Kristen, C. 2005, School Choice and Ethnic School Segregation. Primary School Selection in

Germany, Münster: Waxmann.

Kristen, C. 2006, ’Ethnische Diskriminierung in der Grundschule? Die Vergabe von Noten

und Bildungsempfehlungen’, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie

58(1): 79-97.

Kruczek-Steiger, E. and Simmons, C. 2001, ‘The Rroma: their history and education in

Poland and the UK’, Educational Studies 27(3): 281-290.

Lauglo, J. 2000, ‘Social Capital Trumping Class and Cultural Capital? Engagement With

School Among Immigrant Youth’, in S. Baron, J. Field and T. Schuller (eds) Social

Capital: Critical Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 142-167.

Layton-Henry, Z. 2002, ‘Transnational communities, citizenship and African Caribbeans in

Birmingham’, Working Paper WPTC-02-07, Institute of Social and Cultural

Anthropology: University of Oxford.

Lesthaeghe, R. 1996, Diversiteit in Sociale Verandering – Turkse en Marokkaanse Vrouwen

in België, Brussels: VUB Press.

Levels, M. and Dronkers, J. 2005, ‘Differences in mathematical ability between first and

second-generation migrant-pupils coming from various regions and that of native

pupils in highly developed countries of Europe and the Pacific Rim’, Paper presented

at the ECSR conference, Paris: 25-26 November.

116

Lindo, F. 2000, ‘The silent success: the social advancement of Southern European labour

migrants in the Netherlands’, in H. Vermeulen and R. Penninx (eds) Immigration

Integration: The Dutch Case, Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis: 132- 152.

Loury, G. 1977, ‘A dynamic theory of racial income differences’, in P.A. Wallace and A.M.

LaMond (eds) Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination, Lexington, MA:

D.C. Heath and Company:153-86.

Loury, G. 1981, ‘Intergenerational transfers and the distribution of earnings’, Econometrica

49: 843-67.

Luchtenberg, S. 2005, ‘Citizenship and education in multicultural Germany including a

comparative reference to Australia’, Paper presented at SSRC and Nuffield Workshop,

London: 11-12 February.

Luciak, M. 2004, ‘Minority status and schooling: John U. Ogbu’s theory and the schooling of

ethnic minorities in Europe’, Intercultural Education 15(4): 359-367.

Luyten, H. 2004, ‘Succes in het voortgezet onderwijs: capaciteiten, inzet of achtergrond?’,

Pedagogische Studiën 81: 151-166.

Luyten, H. and Bosker, R. 2004, ‘Hoe meritocratisch zijn schooladviezen?’, Pedagogische

Studiën 81: 89-103.

Mac an Ghaill, M. 1988, Young, Gifted and Black, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Mac an Ghaill, M. 1989, ‘Coming of age in 1980s England: reconceptualising black

students’ schooling experience’, British Journal of Sociology of Education 10(3): 273-

86.

Mac an Ghaill, M. 1991, ‘Black voluntary schools: the “invisible” private sector’, in

Walford, G. (ed) Private Schooling: Tradition, Change and Diversity, London: Paul

Chapman: 133-142.

Mac an Ghaill, M. 1993, ‘Beyond the white norm: the use of qualitative methods in the study

of black youths’ schooling in England’, in P. Woods and M. Hammersley (eds)

Gender and Ethnicity in Schools: Ethnographic Accounts, London: Routledge: 145-

165.

MacLeod, J. 1987, Ain’t No Makin’ It: Aspirations and Attainment in a Low Income

Neighborhood, Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

MacLeod, J. 1995, Ain’t No Makin’ It: Aspirations and Attainment in a Low Income

Neighborhood, Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

Marks, G. 2005, ‘Accounting for immigrant non-immigrant differences in reading and

mathematics in twenty countries’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 28(5): 925-946.

117

McCallum, I. and Demie, F. 2001, ‘Social class, ethnicity and educational performance’,

Educational Research 43(2): 147-59.

Meuret, D.1991, ‘L’efficacité de la politique des zones d’éducation prioritaire dans les

collèges’, Française de Pédagogie 109: 41-64.

Mickelson, R. 1990, ‘The attitude-achievement paradox among black adolescents’, Sociology

of Education 63: 44-61.

Mingat, A. 1991, ‘Expliquer la variété des acquisitions au cours préparatoire: les roles de

l’enfant, la famille et l’école’, Revue française de pédagogie 95: 47-63.

Mirza, H. 1992, Young, Female and Black, London: Routledge.

Model, S. and Lin, L. 2002, ‘The cost of not being Christian: Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in

Britain and Canada’, International Migration Review 36(4):1061-1092.

Modood, T. 1997, ‘Employment’, in T. Modood and R. Berthoud (eds) Ethnic Minorities in

Britain: Diversity and Disadvantage, London: Policy Studies Institute: 83-149.

Modood, T. 2005, ‘The educational attainments of ethnic minorities in Britain’, in G. Loury,

T. Modood and S. Teles (eds) Ethnicity, Social Mobility, and Public Policy,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 288-308.

Mortimore, P., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., Lewis, D. and Jacob, R. 1988, School Matters,

London: Open Books.

Müller, Andrea G. and Stanat, P. 2006, ’Schulischer Erfolg von Schülerinnen und

Schülern mit Migrationshintergrund. Analysen zur Situation von Zuwanderern aus der

ehemaligen Sowjetunion und aus der Türkei’, in Baumert, Jürgen et al. (eds)

Herkunftsbedingte Disparitäten im Bildungswesen. Differenzielle Bildungsprozesse

und Probleme der Verteilungsgerechtigkeit, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für

Sozialwissenschaften: 221-255.

Neels, K. 2000, ‘Education and the transition to employment: young Turkish and Moroccan

adults in Belgium’, in R. Lesthaeghe (ed) Communities and Generations: Turkish and

Moroccan Populations in Belgium, Brussels: VUB University Press: 243-278.

Nuttall, D., Goldstein, H., Prosser, R. and Rasbach, J. 1989, ’Differential school

effectiveness’, International Journal of Educational Research 13: 769-776.

O’Connor, C. 1997, ‘Dispositions toward (collective) struggle and educational resilience in

the inner city: a case analysis of six African-American High School Students’,

American Educational Research Journal 34: 593-629.

Oakes, J. 1985, Keeping Track: How Schools Structure Inequality, New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

118

Oakes, J., Gamoran, A. and Page, R.N. 1992, ‘Curriculum diffrerentiation: opportunities,

outcomes and meanings’, in P.W. Jackson (ed) Handbook of Research on Curriculum,

Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association: 570-608.

Obdeijn, H., De Mas, P. and Hermans, P. 1999, Geschiedenis van Marokko, Amsterdam:

Bulaaq.

Obdeijn, H. and De Mas, P. 2001, De Marokkaanse uitdaging, De tweede generatie in een

veranderend Nederland, Utrecht: Forum.

Ogbu, J.U. 1974, The Next Generation: An Ethnography of Education in an Urban

Neighborhood, New York and London: Academic Press.

Ogbu, J.U. 1978, Minority Education and Caste: The American System in Cross Cultural

Perspective, New York: Academic Press.

Ogbu, J.U. 1981, ‘Education, clientage, and social mobility: caste and social change in the

United States and Nigeria’, in G. Berreman (ed) Social Inequality: Comparative and

Developmental Approaches, New York: Academic Press: 277-306.

Ogbu, J.U. 1986, ‘The consequences of the American caste system’, in U. Neisser (ed) The

School Achievements of Minority Children: New Perspectives, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum:

19-56.

Ogbu, J.U. 1987, ‘Variability in minority school performance: a problem in search of an

explanation’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 18: 312-334.

Ogbu, J.U. 1991a, ‘Low Performance as an Adaptation: The Case of Blacks in Stockton,

California’, in M.A. Gibson and J.U. Ogbu (eds) Minority Status and Schooling: A

Comparative Study of Immigrant and Involuntary Minorities, New York: Grand

Publishing.

Ogbu, J. 1991b, ‘Minority coping responses and school experiences’, The Journal of

Psychohistory 18: 443-56.

Ogbu, J.U. 1997a, ‘Racial Stratification and Education in the United States: Why Inequality

Persists’, in A.H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown and A. Stuart Wells (eds) Education:

Culture, Economy, Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 765-778.

Ogbu, J.U. 1997b, ‘Understanding the school performance of urban blacks: some essential

background knowledge’, in H. Walberg, O. Reyes and R. Weissberg (eds) Children

and Youth: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, London: Sage: 190-221.

Ogbu, J.U. 1999, ‘A cultural context of children’s development’, in H. Fitzgerald, B. Lister

and B. Zuckerman (eds) Children of Color: Research, Health, and Policy Issues, New

York: Garland: 73-92.

119

Ogbu, J.U. 2003, Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic

Disengagement, Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Oomens, S., Driessen,G. and Scheepers, P. 2003, ‘De integratie van allochtone ouders en

onderwijsprestaties van hun kinderen: enkele allochtone groepen vergeleken’,

Tijdschrift voor sociologie 24: 289-312.

Owen, D., Green, A., Pitcher, J. and Maguire, M. 2000, Minority Ethnic Participation and

Achievements in Education, Training and the Labour Market, London: HMSO.

Park, R.E. 1928, ‘Human Migration and the Marginal Man’, American Journal of Sociology

33: 881-893.

Park, R.E. and Burgess, E.W. (1969) [1921], Introduction to the Science of Sociology,

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Pásztor, A. 2005, ‘National minorities as involuntary minorities: test of the “oppositional

culture” explanation for ethnic differences in educational attainment in Europe. The

case of Hungarians’, Paper presented at the ISA RC28 meeting on Inequality and

Mobility in Family, School and Work, University of California, Los Angeles: 18-21

August.

Portes, A. and Zhou, M. 2001 [1993], ‘The New Second Generation: Segmented

Assimilation and Its Variants’, in D.B. Grusky (ed) Social Stratification: Class, Race

and Gender, Oxford: Westview Press: 597-608.

Putnam, R. 1995, ‘Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital’, Journal of Democracy

6: 65-78.

Putnam, R. 2000, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New

York: Simon and Schuster.

Putnam, R. and Feldstein, L. 2003, Better Together: Restoring the American Community,

New York: Simon and Schuster.

Roelandt, T., Martens, E. and Veenman, J. 1991, ‘Ethnic minority children in Dutch

education: Ethnic stratification, social class and migration’, Netherlands Journal of

Social Sciences 27: 92-107.

Roscigno, V. J. and Ainsworth-Darnell, J. W. 1999, ‘Race, Cultural Capital, and

Educational Resources: Persistent Inequalities and Achievement Returns’, Sociology

of Education 72(3): 158-178.

Rothon, C. 2005a, ‘An assessment of the “oppositional culture” explanation for ethnic

differences in educational attainment in Britain’, Working Paper Number 2005-02,

Department of Sociology, University of Oxford: January.

120

Rothon, C. 2005b, Black and Minority Ethnic Educational Attainment and Engagement with

School in Britain, Unpublished DPhil Thesis: University of Oxford.

Rothon, C. 2006, ‘The importance of social class in explaining the educational attainments of

minority ethnic pupils in Britain: evidence from the Youth Cohort Study’, Working

Paper Number 2006-01, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford: December.

Rumbaut, R. 1995, ‘The new Californians: comparative research findings on the educational

progress of immigrant children’, in R. Rumbaut and W. Cornelius (eds) California’s

Immigrant Children: Theory, Research and Implications for Educational Policy,

University of California, Sandiego: La Jolla: Center for US-Mexican Studies: 17-69.

Sammons, P. 1994, ‘Gender, ethnic and socio-economic differences in attainment and

progress: a longitudinal analysis of student achievement over nine years’, Paper

prepared for the symposium ‘Equity issues in Performance Assessment’, Annual

meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans: April.

Savage, M. and Egerton, M. 1997, ‘Social mobility, individual ability and the inheritance of

class inequality’, Sociology 31(4): 645-672.

Schwippert, Knut, Bos, W. and Lankes, E-M. 2003, ’Heterogenität und Chancengleichheit

am Ende der vierten Jahrgangsstufe im internationalen Vergleich’, in W. Bos et al.

(eds) Erste Ergebnisse aus IGLU. Schülerleistungen am Ende der vierten

Jahrgangsstufe im internationalen Vergleich, Münster: Waxmann: 265-302.

Schwippert, K., Bos, W. and Lankes, E-M. 2004, ’Heterogenität und Chancengleichheit am

Ende der vierten Jahrgangsstufe in den Ländern der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und

im internationalen Vergleich’, in W. Bos et al. ( eds) IGLU. Einige Länder der

Bundesrepublik Deutschland im nationalen und internationalen Vergleich, Münster:

Waxmann: 165-219.

Seifert, W. 1995, Die Mobilität der Migranten. Die Berufliche, Ökonomische und Soziale

Stellung Ausländischer Arbeitnehmer in der Bundesrepublik, Berlin: Edition Sigma.

Seifert, W. 1999, ‘Labour market performance of Mediterranean immigrants in Germany and

Hispanic Immigrants in the United States’, in R. Münz and W. Seifert (eds) Inclusion

or Exclusion of Immigrants: Europe and the US at the Crossroads, Demographie

Aktuell Nr. 14, Berlin: Lehrstuhl für Bevölkerungswissenschaft der Humboldt-

Universität: 46-62.

Serra, N. and Thaurel-Richard, M. 1994, ‘Acquisitions des élèves au CE2 et pratiques

pédagogiques’, Revue Française de Pédagogie 107: 43-62.

121

Shavit, Y. and Blossfeld, H-P. 1991, Persistent Inequality. Changing educational attainment

in Thirteen countries, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Simon, P. 2003, ‘France and the unknown second generation: preliminary results on social

mobility’, International Migration Review 37(4): 1091-1119.

Simpson, A. and Stevenson, J. 1994, Half a Chance, Still? Jobs, Discrimination and Young

People in Nottingham, Nottingham: Nottingham and District Racial Equality Council.

Smith, D.J. and Tomlinson, S. 1989, The School Effect: A Study of Multi-Racial

Comprehensives, London: Policy Studies Institute.

Stanat, P. 2003, ‚Schulleistungen von Jugendlichen mit Migrationshintergrund.

Differenzierung deskriptiver Befunde aus PISA und PISA-E’, in Baumert, J. et al.

(eds) PISA 2000. Ein differenzierter Blick auf die Länder derBundesrepublik

Deutschland, Opladen: Leske and Budrich: 243-260.

Stonequist, E.V. 1961 [1937], The Marginal Man, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Støren, L. A. 2004, Arbeidsledighet og overkvalifisering blant ikke-vestlige innvandrere med

høy utdanning. Analyser av kandidatundersøkelsen 2002, Oslo: Norsk institutt for

studier av forskning og utdanning.

Suárez-Orozco, M. 1991, ‘Immigrant adaptation to schooling: a Hispanic case’, in M.

Gibson and J. Ogbu (eds) A Comparative Study of Immigrant and Involuntary

Minorities, New York: Garland Publishing: 37-61.

Sullivan, A. 2001, ‘Cultural capital and educational attainment’, Sociology 35: 893-912.

Tesser, P.T.M. and Idema, J. 2001, Rapportage Minderheden 2001: Vorderingen op school,

Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.

Thomas, S. and Mortimore, P. 1994, Report on Value Added Analysis of 1993 GCSE

Examination Results in Lancashire, London: University of London Institute of

Education.

Thomas, S., Pan, H. and Goldstein, H. 1994, Report on the Analysis of 1992 Examination

Results: AMA Project on Putting Examination Results in Context, London:

Association of Metropolitan Authorities.

Timmerman, C., Vanderwaeren, E. and Crul, M. 2003, ‘The second generation in

Belgium’, International Migration Review 37(4): 1065-1090.

Tizard, B., Blatchford, P., Burke, J., Farquhar, C. and Plewis, I. 1988, Young Children at

School in the Inner City, Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Trueba, H. 1988, ‘Culturally based explanations of minority students’ academic

achievement’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 19(3): 270-287.

122

Vallet, L-A. and Caille, J-P. 1996, ‘Les élèves étrangers ou issus de l’immigrantion dans

l’école et le collège Français: une étude d’ensemble’, Les Dossiers de’Education et

Formations 67.

Vallet, L-A. and Caille, J-P. 1999, ‘Migration and integration in France. Academic careers of

immigrants’ children in lower and upper secondary school’, Paper presented at the

ESF conference European Societies or European Society? Migrations and Inter-

Ethnic Relations in Europe, Obernai: September 23-28.

Van’t Hof, L. and Dronkers, J. 1993, ‘Onderwijsachterstanden van allochtonen: klasse,

gezin of etnische cultuur?’, Migrantenstudies 1: 2-25.

Van der Veen, I. 1999, ‘The parents of successful students from ethnic minorities in

secondary education: their cultural orientation, child-rearing practices and educational

support’, Paper presented at the ESF conference European Societies or European

Society? Migrations and Inter-Ethnic Relations in Europe, Obernai: September 23-28.

Van Ours, J.C. and Veenman, J. 2003, ‘The educational attainment of second generation

immigrants in the Netherlands’, Journal of Population Economics 16: 739-53.

Van Zanten A. 2001, L'école de la périphérie. Scolarité et ségrégation en banlieu, PUF: col.

Le lien social.

Van Zanten, A. 1997, ‘Schooling immigrants in France in the 1990s: success or failure of the

republican model of integration?’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 28(3): 351-

374.

Wheatcroft, A. 2003, Infidels. The Conflict Between Christendom and Islam 638 - 2002,

London: Viking.

Wilson, W.J. 1987, The Truly Disadvantaged, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Wolbers, M. and Driessen, G. 1996, ‘Milieu of migratie? Determinanten van

schoolloopbaanverschillen tussen allochtone leerlingen in het voortgezet onderwijs’,

Sociologische Gids 43: 349-66.

Worbs, S. 2003, ‘The Second Generation in Germany: Between school and labour market’,

International Migration Review 37: 1011-1038.

Wright, C. 1986, ‘School processes: an ethnographical study’, in J. Eggleston, J.Dunn, M.

Anjali (eds) Education for Some: The Educational and Vocational Experiences of 15-

18 Year Old Members of Ethnic Minority Groups, Stoke-on- Trent: Trentham Books

Wright, C. 1987, ‘Black students, white teachers’, in B. Troyna (ed) Racial Inequality in

Education, London: Tavistock.

Wright, C. 1992, Race Relations in the Primary School, London: David Fulton.

123

Wright, C. 1993, ‘School processes: an ethnographic study’, in P. Woods and M.

Hammersley (eds) Gender and Ethnicity in Schools: Ethnographic Accounts, London:

Routledge: 191-215.

Zhou, M. 1997, ‘Segmented Assimilation: Issues, Controversies, and Recent Research on the

New Second Generation’, International Migration Review 31: 975-1008.

i Although it has not so far been demonstrated, we would think it highly probable that such a result will hold for women also. The mobility regimes for men and women within particular nations have repeatedly been shown to differ little – apart from the fact that odds ratios for women overall tend to be slightly lower than for men.

ii Sector effects, operating between the classes of farmers and agricultural workers and the rest, reduce propensities to mobility still more strongly than do hierarchy effects and were indeed a major feature of the mobility regimes of many modern societies even up to the middle decades of the twentieth century, although they are by now of much reduced importance overall.

iii The standardised measure that is chiefly used here is the CASMIN educational classification (König, Lüttinger and Müller, 1988; Brauns and Steinmann, 1999).

iv No single ethnic classification was followed; in some cases LEAs collapsed the data into broad ethnic categories, masking the differences in educational attainment between the various Asian and black groups. One third of the LEAs did not record GCSE attainments by ethnic origin. Attainments at GSCE in the majority of submissions were expressed in percentages making it impossible to know how many pupils were involved. No social class control was used. Their findings are therefore unconvincing. It could be that in these LEAs there were a very small number of students of the minority group in question and that these pupils came from particularly affluent and educated backgrounds. There is no indication of the number of LEAs in which the results are significant.

v It must be remembered that this study was not nationally representative; there may be important differences between children in schools in Inner London and those in schools elsewhere in the country.

124