Session Information
09 SES 11 A, Findings from International Comparative Achievement Studies: Social Disparities and Student Achievement
Paper Session
Contribution
Theoretical framework
Many studies have documented the link between students’ SES and their educational and career aspirations. Dumora (1998) studied the evolution of this relationship among young people between 11 and 16. The youngest usually choose prestigious and attractive careers (like doctor, veterinary, actor, lawyer …) and there is no relationship with their parents’ professions. At a later stage, teenagers will move from myth to norm and gradually integrate in their aspirations objective features from their school career. At 16, aspirations vary according to previous school career, but also according to home sociocultural background.
Buchman and Dalton (2002) also underline the same evolution according to age in their comparative study of education aspirations led in 12 different countries amongst 13-14 year-olds. Besides, in each country, the length of future studies is significantly linked at P. < 01. with parents’ level of education. Huge differences are observed between countries, the link is for instance much stronger in Germany than in the U.S.
It seems that this influence of SES on the educational aspirations could be figured as a process of self-selection of students coming from a less privileged background. Those students, even with a same level of proficiency, usually choose less ambitious or demanding studies. Dumora (1998) and Duru-Bellat (1995) show how the educational aspirations are rooted in a “causality of the plausible”, subjective aspirations being adjusted to objective probabilities.
Beyond the impact of individual characteristics on educational aspirations, the impact of school contexts is another crucial issue. Numerous studies in social psychology, sociology and education have shown how influential peers can be on learning and motivation. But few studies have documented how peers influence educational choices and how this influence can be interpreted.
Lastly, very few comparative studies have documented to what extent the structural characteristics of education systems moderate the social construction of educational aspirations. Buchman and Dalton (2002), analyzing TIMSS data, have shown that peers’ opinions is influential in some education systems, namely the comprehensive ones (U.S., Norway, Spain, Hong-Kong, Korea and Thailand). According to those authors, in tracked systems, the level of aspirations is mainly influenced by the attended track.
Objectives and research questions
This study is aimed at measuring how social factors influence educational aspirations expressed by students in secondary education. The social dimension of aspirations will be analysed at three different levels. The first level, mainly investigated by sociologists, is the influence of home sociocultural background on aspirations. The second level is the influence of peers on aspirations. Previous studies have underlined that beyond the students’ family social background, the peer environment at school is a major socialization context which contributes to the definition and the validation by individuals of their personal educational choices. Lastly, variations between education systems of the influence of social background on the one hand, and peers at school on the other hand, will be analysed and discussed in relation with structural characteristics of those systems (especially tracking in lower secondary education and age of the first selection).
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Buchman, C. & Dalton, B. (2002). Interpersonal influences and educational aspirations in 12 countries: the importance of institutional context. Sociology of Education, 75(2), 99-122. Dumora, B. (1998). Expérience scolaire et orientation. L’Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle, 27(2), 211-234. Dupriez, V., Dumay, X. & Vause, A. (2008). How do school systems manage pupils’ heterogeneity ? A reanalysis of PISA 2003. Comparative Education Review, 52(2), 245-273. Duru-Bellat, M. (1995). Des tentatives de prédiction aux écueils de la prévention en matière d'échec à l'université. Savoirs, 3, 399-416. Hanushek, E. A. and L. WöBmann (2006). Does Educational Tracking Affect Performance and Inequality ? Differences-in-Differences Evidence across Countries, Economic Journal, 116, C63-C76. Mons, N. (2007). Les nouvelles politiques éducatives: La France fait-elle les bons choix? Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Monseur, C ; & Lafontaine, D. (2009). L’organisation des systèmes éducatifs : quel impact sur l’efficacité et l’équité ? In V. Dupriez & X. Dumay, L’efficacité en éducation, promesses et zones d’ombre. Bruxelles : De Boeck, 141-165.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.