The Second Generation in Europe

Education and the transition to the labour

market. Maurice Crul and Jens Schneider

Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies (IMES)

University of Amsterdam

The Idea of the International Comparison

• We usually think about integration issues within a national or local frame work.

• Invitation to think out outside of your own local and national framework.

• Europe can be considered as a natural laboratory. States, and sometimes cities within states, have practiced different ways of including children of immigrants in educational institutions.

• We explore what seems to work best across cities and countries.

Turkish second generation• The Turkish second generation is the most interesting group

for an international comparison. It is the largest group It is the group that is present in the most countries The low social-economic background of the parents.

• These are all important conditions to test how inclusive the different school systems and school policies are.

Why not look at the differences with the comparison group?

Our focus here is on the importance of the integration context and not on the characteristics of the groups.

In further publications we will also look at the educational differences with the comparison group in each city.

Countries or Cities?• The TIES survey is executed in two big cities in each

participating country.• Educational position:

If it comes to educational results there are in general no big differences between the two cities within one country.

• The exception is France.• School setting:

Differences between cities do appear in the way schools provide support, have a welcoming climate or are more or less segregated.

Emphasis on School and Labour Market Careers

• The TIES survey makes it possible to reconstruct school and labour market careers in detail.

• This allows us to look at development of the careers over time and the importance of the different selection mechanisms across the countries.

School system differences accross Europe

• Starting age in school• Selection age in secondary school • Permeability of the school system (incl. the possibility to

take a longer or alternative route to higher education)• How the transition to the labour market is organized

Average starting age in schoolCountries Starting age in

school

Sweden 3.1

France 3.1

Belgium 3.0

Netherlands 4.0

Germany 4.2

Switzerland 4.9

Austria 5.2

Selection age in secondary school

Countries Selection age

Sweden 15

France 15

Belgium 14

Netherlands 12

Germany 10/12

Switzerland 12

Austria 10

Number of years and access to pre-academic track

Countries Number of years in school

Pre-academic track

Sweden 11.9 56.2%

France 11.9 53.6%

Belgium 11.0 51.3%

Netherlands 8.0 25.6%

Germany 5.8/7.8 12.7%

Switzerland 7.1 8.2%

Austria 4.8 n.a.

School segregation and access to pre-academic track

Austria Belgium France Germany Netherlands Sweden

Almost none/

Approx 25%

30.4 76.3 55.9 17.6 32.2 78.4

Almost all/

Approx 75%

14.7 45.3 51.5 10.6 19.5 36.1

Drop out (no secondary school diploma)Countries Drop out % of those who left school

Austria 5.1%

Belgium 1.7%

France 9.2%

Germany 2.5%

Netherlands 11.5%

Sweden 3.5%

Switzerland 3.2%

Early School leaversCountries Early school leavers % of

those who left school

Austria 33.5%

Belgium 10.0%

France 24.6%

Germany 34.2%

Netherlands 48.4%

Sweden 11.4%

Switzerland 17.3%

Turkish second generation. Access to Higher Education

Countries Pre-academic Access H.E.

Sweden 56.2 35.5

France 53.6 52.0

Belgium 51.3 24.2

Netherlands 25.6 33.2

Germany 12.7 7.5

Switzerland 8.2 13.8

Austria n.a. 19.7

Turkish second generation. Drop out in Higher Education

Countries % Access H.E. % H.E. Students

Sweden 35.5 35.5 (10.4)

France 52.0 44.2

Belgium 24.2 18.6

Netherlands 33.2 28.4

Germany 7.5 6.7

Switzerland 13.8 12.4

Austria 19.7 18.1

Turkish second generation. Higher Education Students

Countries % H.E. Students

Sweden 35.5 (10.4)

France 44.2

Belgium 18.6

Netherlands 28.4

Germany 6.7

Switzerland 12.4

Austria 18.1

Transition to the labour market: active labour market population

• Position directly after full time school• Current position in the labour market

Immediate job Odd job Fam. job Unemployment

Paris 32.7 18.2 5.5 43.6

Strasburg 36.3 20.5 4.1 39.0

Amsterdam 54.9 16.9 2.8 25.4

Rotterdam 59.3 11.4 2.4 26.9

Vienna 53.2 10.1 1.8 34.9

Linz 27.8 25.0 6.5 40.7

Zurich 77.8 7.4 1.9 13.0

Basel 67.3 6.6 3.6 22.4

Berlin 36.5 10.2 9.5 43.8

Frankfurt 27.8 5.2 15.0 52.0

Antwerp 72.6 Q.N.A. 0.4 27.0

Brussels 61.2 Q.N.A. 1.4 37.4

Stockholm 78.7 0.6 2.9 17.8

Job(s) Own business Fam. business Unemployment

Paris 78.2 5.0 1.0 15.8

Strasburg 75.0 5.4 0.6 18.9

Amsterdam 70.9 8.7 3.1 17.3

Rotterdam 75.7 5.4 1.4 17.6

Vienna 72.2 5.3 1.5 21.1

Linz 79.8 7.2 0.8 12.1

Zurich 82.9 5.0 0 12.1

Basel 85.5 6.9 2.1 5.5

Berlin 77.3 2.2 0 20.4

Frankfurt 80.7 1.8 5.4 12.0

Antwerp 68.4 12.8 0 18.8

Brussels 56.8 15.3 0.5 27.3

Stockholm 81.0 9.2 0 9.8

Concluding Remarks

• The international comparison shows that we need to put the spotlights on how we organize our schools and school systems.

• The clear differences in school results invite us to focus on best practices across the countries.

• There is not clear hierarchy between countries. • The aim of the conference workshops in the coming days is

to inform you about best practice and to start an international dialogue about the implications for national and local policies.

http://www.tiesproject.eu/

Thanks