10
Germ Janmaat, Institute of Education, [email protected] LLAKES Second International Conference London, 18-19 October 2012 Educational Differentiation and Inequalities of Civic Engagement

Educational Differentiation and Inequalities of Civic Engagement

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Educational Differentiation and Inequalities of Civic Engagement. Germ Janmaat, Institute of Education, [email protected] LLAKES Second International Conference London, 18-19 October 2012. Central question and rationale. Key question: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Germ Janmaat, Institute of Education, [email protected]

LLAKES Second International Conference

London, 18-19 October 2012

Educational Differentiation and Inequalities of Civic Engagement

Central question and rationale

Key question:Does educational differentiation exacerbate

inequalities of civic engagement?

Rationale:• Disparities of civic engagement undermine

social cohesion;• Almost no studies looking at the role of

education in mitigating such disparities

Civic engagement (CE)A hazy concept because it is contested

Two schools of thought:- CE as conventional political participation,

institutional trust, law abidance, sense of duty (i.e. the conservative view)

- CE as tolerance, civic equality, alternative participation, critical attitude towards authority (i.e. the left-wing view)

Our approach - take components from both views:• Civic knowledge and skills• Political efficacy• Voting intentions• Institutional trust• Gender equality• Ethnic tolerance

Educational differentiation and the link with civic engagement

Two modes of educational differentiation:• Grouping on the basis of ability• School autonomy

Hypotheses:1. The more grouping by ability, the larger (a) the cross-

classroom gaps in CE and (b) the effect of social background on CE;

2. The more school autonomy, the larger (a) the cross-classroom gaps in CE and (b) the effect of social background on CE;

Why these effects?Curriculum differences across tracks/schools; selection

by ability = selection by social background; peer effects

Data and methods

Data sources:- ICCS 2009 (14 year olds) and Cived 2000 (16 year olds)

for indicators of Civic Engagement (ready made scales)- PISA 2009 and ICCS national context study for indicators

of ability grouping and school autonomy- Ability grouping: age of first selection + within school

ability grouping- School autonomy: curriculum planning + curriculum

delivery + textbooks

Methods:- ICCCs to calculate cross-classroom gaps in CE- Proportions of explained variance to measure social and

ethnic background effect

Descriptive stats: Comprehensivization (inverse of grouping by ability)

Comprehensivization

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Comprehensivization

Comprehensivization

Descriptive stats: School autonomyE

SP

CZ

E

NLD

BF

L

RU

S

EN

G

SW

E

NO

R

FIN

DN

K

PO

L

SV

K

ITA

SV

N

IRL

LV

A

AU

T

BG

R

LT

U

ES

T

GR

C

SW

I School autonomy

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

School autonomy

School autonomy

Educational differentiation and inequalities of CE (14 year olds) (correlations; N=22)

Comprehensivization School autonomy

Between classroom differences in:

Civic knowledge -.46* -.16

Civic efficacy .01 .19

Intention to vote -.50* -.26

Institutional trust -.19 -.43*

Gender equality -.35 -.21

Ethnic tolerance .07 .19

The effect of social background on:

Civic knowledge -.24 -.02

Civic efficacy .47* .29

Intention to vote -.31 .12

Institutional trust .09 .08

Gender equality -.06 .16

Ethnic tolerance .09 .13

Educational differentiation and inequalities of CE (16-19 year olds) (correlations; N=11)

Comprehensivization School autonomy

Between classroom differences in:

Civic knowledge -.50 -.03

Expected political participation -.20 .26

Institutional trust -.20 .25

Gender equality -.25 -.11

Ethnic tolerance -.13 -.18

The effect of social background on:

Civic knowledge .15 .89**

Expected political participation -.16 .50

Institutional trust -.13 .13

Gender equality -.09 .46

Ethnic tolerance -.17 .18

Conclusions• Only Hypothesis 1a is supported: smaller classroom

disparities in CE in states with comprehensive systems;• The two modes of educational differentiation are not

related to the strength of the social background effect;

Why is educational differentiation not related in the same way to CE as to achievement?

• Low status of citizenship education;• Youngsters only gain an interest in CE in late

adolescence;• Civic engagement only takes on a definite shape when

youngsters enter the labour market and become aware of inequalities and exclusion;

• CE has become an identity marker for different education groups