Study Notes: The Educational and Early Occupational Attainment Process

Educational and Early Occupational Attainment Process: A Social Psychological Model (Sewell, Haller, Portes, 1969)

Introduction and Critique of Blau and Duncan (1967)

  • Blau and Duncan's Model (1967:165–172):

    • A path model explaining occupational attainment of American adult males.

    • Starting Variables: Father’s educational and occupational attainment statuses (early stratification position).

    • Behavioral Variables: Individual’s educational level completed, prestige level of first job.

    • Dependent Variable: Person’s occupational prestige position in 1962.

    • Explanatory Power:

      • Accounts for approximately 26\% of the variance in educational attainment.

      • Accounts for approximately 33\% of the variance in first job.

      • Accounts for approximately 42\% of the variance in 1962 occupational attainment.

    • Limitations Noted by Sewell, Haller, and Portes:

      1. Omission of Psychological Inputs: Despite repeated literature references (e.g., Lipset and Bendix, 1959; Sewell and Armer, 1966), practical considerations prevented inclusion of mental ability.

      2. Omission of Social Psychological Mediating Factors: The model lacked variables that transmit the influence of social structural inputs to attainment. These include:

        • Reference groups (Merton, 1957)

        • Significant others (Gerth and Mills, 1953)

        • Self-concept (Super, 1957)

        • Behavior expectations (Gross et al., 1958)

        • Levels of educational and occupational aspiration (Haller and Miller, 1963; Kuvlesky and Ohlendorf, 1967)

        • Experiences of success or failure in school (Parsons, 1959; Brookover et al., 1965)

      3. Lack of a Plausible Causal Argument: The Blau-Duncan model struggles to explain why father's education and occupation connect to respondent's education, first job, and later occupation. Social psychological theories suggest cognitions and motivations (knowledge, self-concept, aspirations) develop in structured situations and influence actions.

      4. Inability to Suggest Intervention Points: A social psychological model could identify points (e.g., expectations of significant others) where interventions could alter attainment behaviors, an area Blau and Duncan did not address.

      5. Potential for Increased Variance Explanation: Adding psychological and social psychological variables could enhance the explanation of variance in dependent variables.

The Proposed Social Psychological Model

  • Goal: To extend previous research by applying social psychological concepts to explain variations in educational and occupational attainment.

  • Core Assumptions:

    1. Certain social structural and psychological factors (initial stratification position and mental ability) affect:

      • The influences of significant others on youth.

      • The youth's own observations of their ability.

    2. The influence of significant others, and possibly self-estimates of ability, affect the youth's levels of educational and occupational aspiration.

    3. Levels of aspiration affect subsequent levels of educational attainment.

    4. Educational attainment, in turn, affects levels of occupational attainment.

    5. All effects are linear.

    6. Social psychological variables primarily perform mediating functions.

  • Aim: Provide a logically consistent social psychological model with a plausible causal argument, linking stratification and mental ability inputs through social psychological and behavioral mechanisms to educational and occupational attainments. A key feature is that some inputs are manipulable through intervention for policy application.

Model Variables and Causal Order

Eight variables are analyzed. Path models require knowledge of causal order, supported by both theoretical argument and temporal sequence:

  • X_1: Occupational Attainment (OccAtt) - Occupational prestige level attained by the adult person.

  • X_2: Educational Attainment (EdAtt) - Educational level previously attained.

  • X_3: Level of Occupational Aspiration (LOA) - Occupational prestige level aspired to as a youth.

  • X_4: Level of Educational Aspiration (LEA) - Level of educational aspiration as a youth.

  • X_5: Significant Others’ Influence (SOI) - Influence for educational achievement exerted on the youth by significant others during high school.

  • X_6: Academic Performance (AP) - Quality of academic performance in high school.

  • X_7: Socioeconomic Status (SES) - Level of the youth's family in the stratification system.

  • X_8: Mental Ability (MA) - Mental ability as measured in high school.

  • Causal Order:

    • X7 (SES) and X8 (MA) precede all other variables.

    • X5 (SOI) and X6 (AP) precede aspirations and attainments.

    • X6 (AP) is generally assumed to precede X5 (SOI).

    • Youthful aspirations (LOA, LEA) obviously precede later educational and occupational attainments.

    • Pre-adult educational attainments precede adult occupational attainments.

Hypothesized Causal Linkages (Based on Figure 67.1)

  • Diagrammatic Representation: Straight solid lines indicate theoretically expected causal paths; dotted lines are possible but theoretically debatable; curved lines represent unanalyzed correlations without assigned causal priority.

  • Exogenous Variables:

    • A low positive correlation (r_{78} = .21) exists between mental ability (MA) and parents' socioeconomic status (SES).

  • Academic Performance (AP) and its Antecedents:

    • Significant effect of MA on AP (path p_{68}).

    • Debatable Path: A dotted path (p_{67}) from SES to AP is included, acknowledging the possibility that teachers' desires or