Social Selection in Educational Systems in Europe

Müller, Walter; Karle, Wolfgang

doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.esr.a036652

Cited by 216 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Educational systems routinely sort students, whose class backgrounds affect their propensities to continue after each transition between levels (Müller & Karle, 1993). Differentially distributed, education reflects national characteristics in ideology, values, social norms and governance structures.…”

Section: Social and Spatial Mobility And Selection Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Bologna Process's Model of Mobility in Europe: The Relationship of its Spatial and Social Dimensions

Powell

Finger

2013

European Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross-border mobility is among the pillars of internationality in higher education. Understood as central to educational and economic growth for individuals and societies, mobility also should facilitate social cohesion. Yet those who can afford spatial mobility are unevenly distributed; elites benefit in far greater measure. Policymakers in Europe aim to bolster the competitiveness and attractiveness of European higher education, especially through enhanced mobility of students and staff. Extending beyond the successes of Erasmus, the Bologna process defines a new model of mobility in higher education to foster spatial mobility, but how is the social selectivity of spatial mobility addressed? Based on a theory-guided content analysis of official Bologna policy documents, the authors examine the principles and standards of mobility. Which dimensions of mobility are mentioned in these declarations and communiqués from 1998 to 2012? To what extent are spatial mobility's social significance and selection processes reflected? The authors find that the dimensions, benefits and effects of spatial mobility have been mainly taken for granted, and both its social selectivity and its effects on social mobility understated. However, if the Bologna process is to facilitate social inclusion, inequalities must be addressed. The authors argue that if the 47 signatory countries to the Bologna process simply follow the principles espoused in this model, considerable disparities in participation in international exchange are likely to persist, reproducing social reproduction of dis/advantages.

show abstract

Section: Social and Spatial Mobility And Selection Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Bologna Process's Model of Mobility in Europe: The Relationship of its Spatial and Social Dimensions

Powell

Finger

2013

European Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Life Course Perspective (Müller & Karle, 1993), for instance, posits that the diminished effects of family background are a result of the growing independence between child and parent during later educational transitions. The theory of Maximally Maintained Inequality (MMI) (Raftery & Hout, 1993), however, hypothesizes that the effects of family background only diminish when educational attainment becomes compulsory and near universal, such as in secondary education, and further expansion cannot be maintained by students in the highest socioeconomic stratum.…”

Section: Effectively-maintained Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Pervasive Inequality in the Stratification of Four-Year College Destinations

Engberg

2012

Equity & Excellence in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rooted in sociological models of educational transitions and tracking, this study examines patterns of stratification in the educational trajectories of low-and high-socioeconomic students.Utilizing longitudinal data from the Educational Longitudinal Study of 2002, this study describes qualitative differences in students' choice sets based on a number of metrics obtained from the Integrated Postsecondary Data System (IPEDS). Additionally, multinomial logistic regression models are used to demonstrate the relative probabilities of attending a low, moderate, or highselectivity undergraduate institution between students of low and high-socioeconomic statuses.Overall, the results demonstrate the pervasiveness of inequality in the college choice decisions of low-and high-SES students and the continued stratification of opportunity for students based on their family background. The study concludes with implications for policymakers and practitioners working within secondary and postsecondary educational sectors.Educational access, particularly as it relates to postsecondary education, remains a critical social justice concern of the 21 st century. While numerous technical reports point to the opening of opportunity for all groups (NCES, 2007) and the concomitant attenuation of educational inequality (Arum, Gamoran, & Shavit, 2007), few studies have examined how more qualitative forms of stratification (e.g., selectivity of institutions) pervade the college choice process, especially among those students who go on to four-year institutions. Rather, most studies have 2 highlighted how social origins and access to capital manifest in the unequal distribution of lowincome and underrepresented racial/ethnic minority students within different hierarchical tracks (i.e., two-year versus four-year; Arum et al., 2007;Engberg & Allen, 2011;Perna & Titus, 2005).The expansion of higher education, however, has led to a graduation erosion of the value of a college degree (i.e., a baccalaureate degree no longer ensures a good job for all; Arum et al.,2007), placing an overall higher premium on qualitative differences in degree attainment.Research has demonstrated the benefits of attending a more prestigious college or university, particularly as it relates to labor market outcomes (Brewer, Eide, & Ehrenberg, 1999;Thomas, 2000) and social mobility (Breen & Jonsson, 2000). Other researchers have argued that the general expansion of higher education has led to a more differentiated and stratified system that continues to protect those institutions that enroll students of higher socioeconomic means (Thomas & Perna, 2004).The mechanisms that drive stratification in higher education have been explored through a number of different paradigms and institutional perspectives. Economic theories point to differences in access to information when determining the benefits and costs of attending college, whereas sociological theories highlight status attainment and access to social networks (Perna, 2006). These theoretical paradigms, howev...

show abstract

“…Similarly, research based on the Goldthorpe-Erickson class schema challenged the "liberal" notion that disparities in educational attainment among social classes tend to decline in advanced capitalist nations. Based on the estimates from logistic regression models using early 1970s data for men in age group 30-65 from nine European nations, Müller and Karle (1993) showed that the probability of transition from the lower to higher levels of educational attainment was higher for those higher in the class hierarchy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Class Structure and Economic Inequality

Wolff

Zacharias

2007

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in January 2007Acknowledgments: Our primary debt is to Hyunsub Kum who implemented the statistical matching algorithms used in creating the synthetic dataset used in this study. We are grateful for comments from Stephan Klasen and Michael Zweig. We have also benefited from discussions about our paper with participants in the conferences of the Working Class Studies Association, Eastern Economic Association, Allied Social Science Association and International Association for Research on Income and Wealth. We alone are responsible for any errors and omissions. The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection presents research in progress byLevy Institute scholars and conference participants. The purpose of the series is to disseminate ideas to and elicit comments from academics and professionals.The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, founded in 1986, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, independently funded research organization devoted to public service. Through scholarship and economic research it generates viable, effective public policy responses to important economic problems that profoundly affect the quality of life in the United States and abroad. ABSTRACTExisting empirical schemas of class structure do not specify the capitalist class in an adequate manner. We propose a schema in which the specification of capitalist households is based on wealth thresholds. Individuals in noncapitalist households are assigned class locations based on their position in the labor process. The schema is designed to address the question of the relationship between class structure and overall economic inequality. Our analysis of the U.S. data shows that class divisions among households, especially the large gaps between capitalist households and everyone else, contribute substantially to overall inequality.

show abstract

Social Selection in Educational Systems in Europe

Cited by 216 publications

References 27 publications

The Bologna Process's Model of Mobility in Europe: The Relationship of its Spatial and Social Dimensions

The Bologna Process's Model of Mobility in Europe: The Relationship of its Spatial and Social Dimensions

Pervasive Inequality in the Stratification of Four-Year College Destinations

Class Structure and Economic Inequality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About