Access to higher education is affected by inequalities worldwide (Almeida et al. 2012; Brennan and Naidoo 2008; Brunori et al. 2012; Liu 2011; Marginson 2011). To be sure, the expansion of higher education systems and the democratisation of access have resulted in greatly increased participation rates. However, that does not necessarily amount to significant improvements in social equity because the upper classes have been disproportionately benefited by the massification of higher education (Rahona López 2009, p. 286). Portugal is a fine example of this situation: in the past 25 years it has moved from an elite to a mass system; yet, the probability of a Portuguese student attending higher education if parents have high levels of education is more than 3 times higher than the proportion of such families in the population (OECD 2012). Similar phenomena have also been identified in studies conducted in a number of countries (Marginson 2011; Mora 1997; Rahona López 2009). Therefore, important inequalities in access persist.

Inequalities in access derive from cultural, economic and procedural factors (Buisson-Fenet and Draelants 2012; Frempong et al. 2012; Wikström and Wikström 2005). Recasting cultural and economic factors is extremely hard as these are, by definition, deeply ingrained in any given context. In this change-resistant context, Marginson (2011) suggests that interventions targeted at specific points of the inequalities’ constellation are more effective than attempts to overhaul the system. This is where the fine-tuning of procedural elements in access to higher education may become instrumental in curtailing the reproduction and reinforcement of educational inequalities (Duru-Bellat and Mingat 1988; Konečný et al. 2012; Rahona López 2009; Wikström 2005). To do so requires the identification of precise, specific procedural elements that have a significant negative impact on the pursuit of fairness and social justice in access to higher education.

The study we present here deals with one of those procedural elements. Specifically, we set out to verify the validity of the nationally (in Portugal) widespread rumour that independent private, fee-paying secondary schools give their students better scores than they deserve; that is, by engaging in grade-inflation practices (Allen 2005; Brighouse 2008). This would unfairly improve their chances of accessing to public higher education, which rests on a national competition based on a weighted average of upper secondary school scores and scores obtained in national exams. As independent private, fee-paying secondary schools are accessible only to the wealthier classes, this means that if the rumour proves to be true, educational inequalities are being reinforced. Therefore, from a social justice perspective, it would be advantageous to introduce procedural corrections in the access system.   

To assess the validity of the rumour, we present an empirical study based on a large, 11 years database on scores in upper secondary education in Portugal, totalling more than 3.000.000 valid cases.

Allen, J. (2005). Grades as Valid Measures of Academic Achievement of Classroom Learning. The Clearing House, 78(5), 218-223. Almeida, L., Marinho-Araujo, C. M., Amaral, A., and Dias, D. (2012). Democratização do acesso e do sucesso no ensino superior: uma reflexão a partir das realidades de Portugal e do Brasil. Avaliação: Revista da Avaliação da Educação Superior, 17(03), 899-920. Brennan, J., and Naidoo, R. (2008). Higher education and the achievement (and/or prevention) of equity and social justice. Higher Education, 56(3), 287-302. Brighouse, H. (2008). “Grade Inflation and Grade Variation: What’s All the Fuss About?”. In L. H. Hunt, (ed.), Grade Inflation: Academic Standards in Higher Education. New York: SUNY Press, 73-92. Brunori, P., Peragine, V., and Serlenga, L. (2012). Fairness in education: The Italian university before and after the reform. Economics of Education Review, 31(5), 764-777. Buisson-Fenet, H., and Draelants, H. (2012). School-linking processes: describing and explaining their role in the social closure of French elite education. Higher Education, 66(1), 39-57. Duru-Bellat, M., and Mingat, A. (1988). Le déroulement de la scolarité au collège : le contexte «fait des différences». Revue française de sociologie, 29(4), 649-666. European Commission. (2012). Key data on education in Europe 2012. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Frempong, G., Ma, X., and Mensah, J. (2012). Access to postsecondary education: can schools compensate for socioeconomic disadvantage? Higher Education, 63(1), 19-32. Justino, D. (2005). No silêncio somos todos iguais, Lisboa: Gradiva. Konečný, T., Basl, J., Mysliveček, J., and Simonová, N. (2012). Alternative models of entrance exams and access to higher education: the case of the Czech Republic. Higher Education, 63(2), 219-235. Liu, A. (2011). Unraveling the myth of meritocracy within the context of US higher education. Higher Education, 62(4), 383-397. Marginson, S. (2011). Equity, status and freedom: a note on higher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(1), 23-36. Mora, J.-G. (1997). Equity in Spanish higher education. Higher Education, 33(3), 233–249. OECD. (2012). Education at a Glance 2012: OECD Indicators. Brussels: OECD Publishing. Rahona López, M. (2009). Equality of opportunities in Spanish higher education. Higher Education, 58(3), 285-306. Wikström, C. (2005). Grade stability in a criterion‐referenced grading system: the Swedish example. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12(2), 125-144. Wikström, C., and Wikström, M. (2005). Grade inflation and school competition: an empirical analysis based on the Swedish upper secondary schools. Economics of Education Review, 24(3), 309-322.