The Process Of School And Track Choice At The Transition From Primary To Secondary Education: A Parent Perspective.
Author(s):
Marie Seghers (presenting / submitting) Simon Boone (presenting) Piet Van Avermaet
Conference:
ECER 2015
Format:
Paper

Session Information

14 SES 06 B, School-Related Transitions Within a Life Course Perspective IV

Paper Session

Time:
2015-09-09
15:30-17:00
Room:
109.Oktatóterem [C]
Chair:
Patricia Schuler

Contribution

Social inequality in educational attainment remains a very persistent feature in Western Europe (Breen et al., 2009).  These disparities in educational attainment are explained by two processes, firstly social differences in educational achievement and secondly inequality in educational choice (Breen & Jonsson, 2005). In this study we focus on the process of choice-making at the transition from primary to secondary education. Research has shown that self-selection is still a dominant feature of school and track choice among families from lower social backgrounds.  Regardless of their grades, students from lower social backgrounds are less inclined to opt for the more demanding educational tracks. (Boone & Van Houtte, 2013).

While research into social disparities in education is abundant in European sociological research on education, the process of arriving at a particular choice has received much less attention. In this study we want to focus specifically on social disparities in the process of school- and track choice at the transition from primary to secondary education. First of all, we want to study whether parents proceed differently in arriving at a particular educational choice dependent on their social background. Secondly, if such differences can be established, we will then try to explain these differences. In doing so, we hope to get a better understanding of how parental social background shapes the decision-making process.

The theoretical backbone of our study is formed by three theoretical strands. First of all, social-psychological research on parental involvement has pointed to the importance of parental beliefs and  resources in shaping parents’ decisions to become involved in the schooling of their children (Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1997; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005). Parents with a positive sense of efficacy for helping their child learn and an active role constructing for involvement tend to be more involved in the schooling of their children (Green, Walker, Hoover-Dempsey, & Sandler, 2007).  In this study we try to find evidence for these claims in a European educational context and determine whether this affects the process of school and track choice of parents.

A second strand is the sociological literature on social capital in education (Bourdieu, 1986) which is generally related to social disparities in educational outcomes (Dika & Singh, 2002). Research inquiring into the role of social capital in educational choice is predominantly qualitative and primarily deals with school choice (e.g. Ball, 2003), rather than with the choice of an educational track. These studies show great differences in the composition of social networks  and  in how these networks are put into use  depending on parents’ social background (Horvat, Weininger, & Lareau, 2003). Ethnographic research in schools has shown that middle class parents can use their personal networks as a powerful source of information to intervene in their children’s schooling. Working class families are more dependent on kinship ties and have less access to professional advice and inside information about the school (Lareau, 2000). In this study we look at the composition of the network of families and try to determine its influence in the process of school and track choice.  

A third explanation for inequality in educational trajectories is found in literature on cultural capital. While cultural capital is often rather narrowly operationalized in terms of high status culture, we draw on a broader conception of cultural capital incorporating knowledge about education, educational background and the logics parents adopt in interaction with social institutions like schools (Calarco, 2014; Lareau, 2000; Symeou, 2007; Weininger & Lareau, 2003). In this study we look at how parents’ knowledge about education differs and how this shapes parents’ school and track choices.

Method

Sample This study is part of a large scale research project on educational choice at the transition from primary to secondary education in two Flemish cities: Ghent and Antwerp. We draw on a large sample of 1116 children in 5th grade of primary education and their parents, their class teachers and the entire staff in 36 primary schools. Schools were selected using a disproportionally stratified sample on the basis of two criteria – school sector and number of pupils with a poorly educated mother per school. We did so as to assure that there is enough variation in our sample of schools with regard to the socio-economic composition of the school population. The results presented in this study are based on the first two waves of data collection comprising two consecutive surveys conducted in the schools in June 2014 (5th grade) and April/May 2015 (6th grade). Using both waves of data collection allows us to portray the evolution in the choice-making process. Design We will proceed in three steps. First of all we will sketch a detailed picture of the process of parents’ school and track choice using univariate statistics. We will examine the number of parents who received/asked information about the transition to secondary education and if so, from whom they received information – professional (teachers, pupil councilors, school principal) or non-professional sources (relatives, friends, parents of other pupils). In addition, we will look at the number of parents who already decided which school to attend and which track to enroll in, in wave one. Furthermore we will look at whether parents intend to follow the advice offered by different actors and whether their track choice coincides with the advice of the 5th grade class teacher. Secondly, we will bivariately analyse the relation between these variables and social background. Thirdly, if differences according to parents’ social background can be established, we will then try to explain these differences using logistic and multinomial regression techniques. Consistent with our theoretical underpinnings, we will try to explain these differences using variables that measure parents’ self-efficacy, role construction, social networks and knowledge of the educational system.

Expected Outcomes

Descriptive statistics show considerable variation between parents within our sample with regard to the outcome variables. In fact, in wave one more than half of the parents (55,6%) indicated not to have received any information about the transition yet. The same holds for the question with regard to asking information (62,4%). Less than half of the parents (44,5%) indicated that they had already decided which school their child would attend in secondary education. By contrast only 33,8% of the parents had already decided which track their child would attend. Bivariate analyses show that the variables under study are related to parents’ social background. The lower parents’ socio-economic status the more likely they are to state that they did not receive information about the transition to secondary education. Furthermore, parents with a higher socio-economic status are more likely to have made a school and track choice already. Further analyses will be conducted in the following months.

References

Ball, S.J. (2003). Class strategies and the educational market: the middle classes and social advantage. London: Routledge Falmer. Bourdieu, P. (1986).The forms of capital, in John G. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258.). New York: Greenwood Press. Boone, S., & Van Houtte, M. (2013). In search of the mechanisms conducive to class differentials in educational choice: a mixed method research. The Sociological Review, 61(3), 549-572. Breen, R., & Jonsson, J. O. (2005). Inequality Of Opportunity In Comparative Perspective: Recent Research on Educational Attainment and Social Mobility. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 223-243. Calarco, J. M. (2014). Coached for the Classroom: Parents' Cultural Transmission and Children's Reproduction of Educational Inequalities. American Sociological Review, 79(5), 1015-1037. Dika, S. L., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: A critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 31-60. Green, C. L., Walker, J. M. T., Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (2007). Parents' motivations for involvement in children's education: An empirical test of a theoretical model of parental involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 532-544. Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why Do Parents Become Involved In Their Children's Education? Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3-42. Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Walker, J. M. T., Sandler, H. M., Whetsel, D., Green, C. L., Wilkins, A. S., & Closson, K. (2005). Why Do Parents Become Involved? Research findings and Implications. . The Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 105-130. Horvat, E. M., Weininger, E. B., & Lareau, A. (2003). From social ties to social capital: Class differences in the relations between schools and parent networks. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 319-351. Lareau, A. (2000). Home advantage : social class and parental intervention in elementary education (2nd ed.). Lanham (Md.): Rowman and Littlefield. Symeou, L. (2007). Cultural capital and family involvement in children's education: tales from two primary schools in Cyprus. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(4), 473-487. Weininger, E. B., & Lareau, A. (2003). Translating Bourdieu into the American context: the question of social class and family-school relations. Poetics, 31(5-6), 375-402.

Author Information

Marie Seghers (presenting / submitting)
Ghent University
Centre for diversity and learning
Ghent
Simon Boone (presenting)
Free University of Brussels, Belgium
Ghent University, Belgium

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.