Inequality/difference in education: is a real explanation of primary and secondary effects possible?

Nash, Roy

doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2003.00433.x

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, relative risk aversion was negatively related to social origins: students from the lower strata seemed more concerned about downward social mobility that those from the more privileged strata. Although BG's predictions about the determinants of educational choices were validated in part, we agree with Stocké (2007) and with Nash (2003Nash ( , 2006 that rational choice theory in education focuses too heavily on secondary effects. Our findings indicate that secondary effects on educational attainment are weaker compared with primary effects.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 49%

Curricular Choice: A Test of a Rational Choice Model of Education

Gabay-Egozi¹,

Shavit²,

Yaish³

2009

European Sociological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rational choice theories of education view student's educational decision as a sequence of binary choices between options that entail long-term utility and options that reduce short-term risk of failure. One of the best articulated models of educational choice asserts that choice between alternative options is affected by students' utility considerations, their expectations regarding the odds of success or failure in alternative educational options, and their motivation to avoid downward social mobility. We evaluated these propositions using data on students' curricular choices in Tel Aviv-Jaffa high schools. We found that educational choice was affected by subjective utility and failure expectations, but not by class maintenance motivations. Just as important, and contrary to the model's main assertion, educational inequality between social strata was not mediated by any of these choice mechanisms. Finally, and importantly, about a fifth of the students in Tel Aviv-Jaffa did not choose between long-term utility and short-term risks, but combined the two. These students, the hedgers, combined the riskier scientific subjects that are expected to yield long-term utility with social sciences and the humanities that reduce the risk of failure in the short term, but are not expected to yield large long-term utilities. The hedgers, moreover, were shown to be disproportionately female and drawn from disadvantaged social strata. These results suggest that educational systems that allow multiple rather than alternative choices may enhance the attainment of working-class youth because they enable them to opt for long term utility while providing a safety-net in the form of additional safer subjects.

show abstract

Section: Summary and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 49%

Curricular Choice: A Test of a Rational Choice Model of Education

Gabay-Egozi¹,

Shavit²,

Yaish³

2009

European Sociological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While private tuition has no net impact on exam performance in the Irish context, it may be the case that taking grinds shapes young people's orientations and approaches to learning and thus has longer-term consequences. primary effects are roughly three times as large as secondary effects (a point earlier made by Nash, 2003; see also Nash, 2006). 3.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Buying your way into college? Private tuition and the transition to higher education in Ireland

Smyth

2009

Oxford Review of Education

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recently Nash (2003Nash ( , 2006 has argued that relative risk aversion theory too strongly focuses on the secondary effects, while the secondary effects make up only a minority of the total origin effect on schooling. The balance between primary and secondary effects forms the unfortunate basis of Nash's attack on relative risk aversion theory.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural capital or relative risk aversion? Two mechanisms for educational inequality compared¹

Werfhorst

Hofstede²

2007

British Journal of Sociology

177

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we empirically examined two explanatory mechanisms for educational inequality: cultural reproduction and relative risk aversion, using survey data taken from secondary school pupils in Amsterdam. Cultural reproduction theory seeks to explain class variations in schooling by cultural differences between social classes. Relative risk aversion theory argues that educational inequalities can be understood by between-class variation in the necessity of pursuing education at branching points in order to avoid downward mobility. We showed that class variations in early demonstrated ability are for a substantial part cultural: cultural capital - measured by parental involvement in highbrow culture - affected school performance at the primary and secondary level. However, relative risk aversion - operationalized by being concerned with downward mobility - strongly affects schooling ambitions, whereas cultural capital had no effect. Thus, we conclude that 'primary effects' of social origin on schooling outcomes are manifested through cultural capital and not through relative risk aversion (in addition to other potential sources of class variations such as genetics). Relative risk aversion, and not cultural capital, affects schooling ambitions, which is relevant for our understanding of secondary effects.

show abstract

Inequality/difference in education: is a real explanation of primary and secondary effects possible?

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Curricular Choice: A Test of a Rational Choice Model of Education

Curricular Choice: A Test of a Rational Choice Model of Education

Buying your way into college? Private tuition and the transition to higher education in Ireland

Cultural capital or relative risk aversion? Two mechanisms for educational inequality compared¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Inequality/difference in education: is a real explanation of primary and secondary effects possible?

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Curricular Choice: A Test of a Rational Choice Model of Education

Curricular Choice: A Test of a Rational Choice Model of Education

Buying your way into college? Private tuition and the transition to higher education in Ireland

Cultural capital or relative risk aversion? Two mechanisms for educational inequality compared1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Cultural capital or relative risk aversion? Two mechanisms for educational inequality compared¹