Education & Work
Week 1: From origin to education across countries
1, 2, 3: how your social background influence your education attainment
1. Inequality: outcome vs. opportunity
● outcome: difference in potential, effort gives us different results; we observe
that for many kinds of characteristics → some people earn more, get more,
know more
● opportunity: despite the same ability (e.g. to run) we get different
opportunities and support to show them (e.g. different running shoes); does
everyone have the same opportunity to achieve success (e.g. to get specific
training to get better at a skill)?
● Meritocracy:
○ we tend to accept inequality of outcome = different potential as ready
explanation
○ meritocratic ideal: talent + effort = success
○ Some people are doing better than others, but to what extent is that
caused by the opportunity that was given to them?
Inequality of educational opportunity: social background affects educational outcomes
● Your family wealth helps with your access to a university degree
● Inequality in test scores: social background, parental income (advantaged &
privileged vs disadvantaged & unprivileged) - e.g. research shows that your chances
of doing well on math test are higher if you come from a privileged background
● Children of parents with lower education and income:
○ score lower on tests
○ have lower attainment (e.g. completion of tertiary degree)
, 2. Primary vs. secondary effects of social background on education
● PRIMARY: achievement (test scores, grades)
○ differences in preschool cognitive development: (e.g. how many words
parents use with their children → children know more words and can express
themselves better)
○ inequality in (cognitive) skills due to different home environment
○ explanations: different ‘habits’: reading books, extra-curricular activities;
motivation, role modelling; tutoring, ‘shadow education’, the resources of
the parents
● SECONDARY
○ choice given achievement (track placement, continuation in education)
○ differential educational decision-making
Expectations & frame of reference:
Relative Risk Aversion
● Rational action approach to educational decision making: students/parents take
decisions to optimize outcomes relative to parents’ position
● Universal goal: avoiding downward mobility, achieving at least equal status to
parents
○ Less investment by lower educated parents
○ More investment by higher educated parents (maintaining social position
requires more education and more time to achieve university degree)
○ Going higher than your parents comes with the price and additional risks:
drop out and alienation
Primary vs. secondary effect: which one is stronger?
Erikson et al. (2005): primary effects ~3x stronger than secondary (England/Wales)
● But ratio might depend on educational system: choice-based or achievement based,
age of selection
Why is it important to disentangle?
● Different mechanisms: improve achievement of students with lower social
background OR intervene in choices?
3. Educational systems: cross-national perspective
, ● Institutional context:
● Countries differ in how:
○ Education is organized – children & schools
○ Parental leave policies – children & parents
● The context in which individuals find themselves, impacts the choices they can
make
○ e.g. how many tracks are there in upper secondary education
● Tasks of education:
● Providing skills & preparing for the labour market
○ Cognitive skill development
● Raising active citizens
○ Social-emotional development
Children enter schools with different levels of development, depending on their social
background
● Countries differ in:
● Starting age of compulsory schooling
● Length of school day & year
● Content of curriculum & standardization
● Organisational structure: who decides on curriculum & exit qualifications
● Age of selection
● Number and types of tracks
● Mobility between tracks
Educational system: consequences for social inequality
Schools create a field for the construction and legitimation of social inequality
Standardization → tends to reduce inequality
● Curriculum
Week 1: From origin to education across countries
1, 2, 3: how your social background influence your education attainment
1. Inequality: outcome vs. opportunity
● outcome: difference in potential, effort gives us different results; we observe
that for many kinds of characteristics → some people earn more, get more,
know more
● opportunity: despite the same ability (e.g. to run) we get different
opportunities and support to show them (e.g. different running shoes); does
everyone have the same opportunity to achieve success (e.g. to get specific
training to get better at a skill)?
● Meritocracy:
○ we tend to accept inequality of outcome = different potential as ready
explanation
○ meritocratic ideal: talent + effort = success
○ Some people are doing better than others, but to what extent is that
caused by the opportunity that was given to them?
Inequality of educational opportunity: social background affects educational outcomes
● Your family wealth helps with your access to a university degree
● Inequality in test scores: social background, parental income (advantaged &
privileged vs disadvantaged & unprivileged) - e.g. research shows that your chances
of doing well on math test are higher if you come from a privileged background
● Children of parents with lower education and income:
○ score lower on tests
○ have lower attainment (e.g. completion of tertiary degree)
, 2. Primary vs. secondary effects of social background on education
● PRIMARY: achievement (test scores, grades)
○ differences in preschool cognitive development: (e.g. how many words
parents use with their children → children know more words and can express
themselves better)
○ inequality in (cognitive) skills due to different home environment
○ explanations: different ‘habits’: reading books, extra-curricular activities;
motivation, role modelling; tutoring, ‘shadow education’, the resources of
the parents
● SECONDARY
○ choice given achievement (track placement, continuation in education)
○ differential educational decision-making
Expectations & frame of reference:
Relative Risk Aversion
● Rational action approach to educational decision making: students/parents take
decisions to optimize outcomes relative to parents’ position
● Universal goal: avoiding downward mobility, achieving at least equal status to
parents
○ Less investment by lower educated parents
○ More investment by higher educated parents (maintaining social position
requires more education and more time to achieve university degree)
○ Going higher than your parents comes with the price and additional risks:
drop out and alienation
Primary vs. secondary effect: which one is stronger?
Erikson et al. (2005): primary effects ~3x stronger than secondary (England/Wales)
● But ratio might depend on educational system: choice-based or achievement based,
age of selection
Why is it important to disentangle?
● Different mechanisms: improve achievement of students with lower social
background OR intervene in choices?
3. Educational systems: cross-national perspective
, ● Institutional context:
● Countries differ in how:
○ Education is organized – children & schools
○ Parental leave policies – children & parents
● The context in which individuals find themselves, impacts the choices they can
make
○ e.g. how many tracks are there in upper secondary education
● Tasks of education:
● Providing skills & preparing for the labour market
○ Cognitive skill development
● Raising active citizens
○ Social-emotional development
Children enter schools with different levels of development, depending on their social
background
● Countries differ in:
● Starting age of compulsory schooling
● Length of school day & year
● Content of curriculum & standardization
● Organisational structure: who decides on curriculum & exit qualifications
● Age of selection
● Number and types of tracks
● Mobility between tracks
Educational system: consequences for social inequality
Schools create a field for the construction and legitimation of social inequality
Standardization → tends to reduce inequality
● Curriculum
