Social Mobility

From Part 2 of the Student Handbook

Parsons - meritocracy

achievement rather than ascription

Peter Saunders - New Right

equality of opportunity does not ensure equality of outcome → society is meritocratic but unfair

Althuesser

education system is an ideological state apparatus

Bowles and Gintis

meritocracy is a myth which legitimizes inequality

Life chances

opportunities to obtain something desirable - higher social classes have more life chances

Consequences of underachievement

• negative impact on economy, human resources not used appropriately

• inequality will be maintained

Types of social mobility

1. intragenerational - within one generation

2. intergenerational - across generations

3. absolute - total amount of social mobility

4. relative - compared to other people from different class backgrounds

5. upward/downward mobility

6. Closed societies are ascribed, open are meritocratic

Oxford Mobility Study

• Studied impact of the 1944 education act

• found high rates of upward mobility

• relative mobility varied: 45% of sons with class 1 fathers also ended up in class 1 but only 7% of sons with class 7 fathers ended up in class 1

Evaluation - Oxford Mobility Study

• no significant increase in the openness of the system - more opportunity with dev of new professional occupational (at the time)

• More layers to classes → the smaller and higher class 1 will show higher percentage

• ignored women

Comparative studies

• Difficult carrying out comparative studies on social mobility rates: occupational classification varies from society to society → comparable data unavailable

• international comparisons possible due to similar occupational classifications in many countries

Breen 2004

International comparison of how far social mobility rates were influenced by educational success & how far occupations were determined by eds quals.

• Sweden most meritocratic, Britain least

• based on how changeable/open the class system was

Blanden et al. 2005

comparison of social mobility

• Britain, USA - lowest rates of international mobility

• Norway, Denmark, Canada - relatively high

Functionalist - social mibility

• ed system has a key role in training future workforce

• the relationship bw educational attainment, social class and occupational destinations will grow stronger to respond to society’s needs.

Evaluation - functionalists

• overdeterministic - too much focus on needs of society over individual social actors

Goldthorpe

No definite evidence of weakening association bw social origin and class destination OR strengthening association bw educational attainment and class destination → educational attainment may have little effect on social mobility → critique against social dems

Brown

Higher education today - hard currencies (qualifications, credentials) are less valuable than soft currencies (personality etc) → advantages higher social class (habitus/cultural capital)

Social congestion rather than social mobility for WC and MC

Feminists

Females less likely to study STEM subjects bc family and counselors may not help challenge stereotypes

Studies like OMS ignore women