1 / 15

Determinants of Post Secondary Aspirations of Secondary School Students

Determinants of Post Secondary Aspirations of Secondary School Students. Mark Bowden (with James Doughney) Economics and Finance. The Motivation. Widening participation in university. Low socio-economic - ethnic backgrounds? The student’s decision. Rational? or cultural bias. The Objective.

rafal
Download Presentation

Determinants of Post Secondary Aspirations of Secondary School Students

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Determinants of Post Secondary Aspirations of Secondary School Students Mark Bowden (with James Doughney) Economics and Finance

  2. The Motivation • Widening participation in university. • Low socio-economic - ethnic backgrounds? • The student’s decision. • Rational? or cultural bias.

  3. The Objective • Using binary logit model:- • Identify the key variables • Estimate the marginal effects. • Boudon or Bourdieu?

  4. Summary • Economic (Boudon) and Cultural (Bourdieu). • SES more important for students with ethnic background. • Access to internet appears important.

  5. Theory • Structure: Social systems constrain individual behaviour. • Bourdieu (1973): unconscious decisions- cultural capital • Boudon (1973): conscious decisions- dependent on socio-economic background.

  6. Theory (cont) • Non-English speaking- stronger support from parents • Greater proportions of females than males

  7. Determinants From Standardised Residuals Mean = -0.00053 Std Deviation = 1.003 Goodness of Fit H-L Statisticp = 0.3973 Andrews Statisticp = 0.5408

  8. Marginal Effects • Parent completed university 2.9% • English not spoken at home 11.8% • Catholic School 9.1% • Independent School 8.9% • Views of Teachers 7% • Views of Parents 10%

  9. Marginal Effects • Internet at home 14.9% • Female 9.8% • Lose touch with friends -3.6% • Only for the wealthy -3.7%

  10. Revised Model Goodness of Fit H-L Statisticp = 0.4173 Andrews Statisticp = 0.61.30 From Standardised Residuals Mean = -0.0028 Std Deviation = 1.009

  11. Marginal Effects • Not English & high SES 13.6% • Not English & low SES 7.7% • English at home & high SES 1.4%

  12. Model Specification • Without the socio-economic status variable Goodness of Fit tests rejected at 10%. • Omitted Variable: School results; other variables?

  13. Acknowledgements • Denise Bett, manager of the former Equity and Social Justice Branch, Victoria University and leader of the Aspirations Online Project Team • Kate O’Rourke, Kathryn O’Rourke, Katia Honour, and Peter O’Callaghan, Aspirations Project Officers

  14. References • Boudon, R. (1974) Education, opportunities, and social inequality; changing prospects in Western society, New York, Wiley. • Bourdieu, P. (1973) Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction. In Brown, R. (Ed.) Knowledge, education, and cultural change : papers in the sociology of education. London, Tavistock Publications Limited. • Foskett, N. & Hemsley-Brown, J. (2001) Choosing Futures: Young people's decision-making in education, training and careers markets, London, Routledge Falmer.

  15. References • Marks, G. N., Cresswell, J. & Ainley, J. (2006) Explaining Socioeconomic Inequalities in Student Achievement: The role of home and school factors. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12, 105 - 128. • Nash, R. (1990) Bourdieu on Education and Social and Cultural Reproduction. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 11, 431-447. • Nash, R. (2005) Cognitive habitus and collective intelligence: concepts for the explanation of inequality of educational opportunity. Journal of Education Policy, 20, 3-21.

More Related