Past research has shown that the assignment of children with so-called learning disabilities to special classes is not related to the children’s actual school performance (e. g. Becker & Beck, 2012; Kronig, 2007, 2003; Reisel, 2011). According to Kronig’s (2007) theory of 'systematic randomness' children’s educational success as well as their assignment to schools is rather linked to external factors, such as their domicile, social background or nationality. These external differentiation measures have been heavily criticized and are often used as an argument to change to integrative school forms. The question now arises as to whether integrative school measures, such as “reduced individual learning goals”, or “compensation for disadvantages”, are also allocated in a similar way. In particular, we’ve attempted to find out what impact the social background has on the assignment of each of these integrative measures. To answer these questions, we’ve collected data from N = 232 schools in the canton of Berne in Switzerland, in which integrative school measures have been similarly implemented. In the Canton of Berne, the allocation of resources is throughput-based, since it depends on the size of the school and the social index. The data set of this study contains information from 232 school principals, 66 specifically selected classes and 1128 pupils, of which 70 received the measure “reduced individual learning goals” and 52 “compensation for disadvantages”. All pupils completed standardized tests in Math and German, which served as a measure for school performance. Furthermore, basic intelligence tests were conducted. Data from the parents’ questionnaire contained information about the students' socio-economic background. Finally, the teachers were asked questions about each student in their class. Our results confirmed the hypothesis that the allocation of integrative measures does not depend on children’s school performances but is in fact systematically random. Analyses show that children’s domicile and the attitude of the school principals play a key role in determining whether and how often the measures have been assigned. Furthermore, we found evidence that beneficial measures were being allocated to children with a higher socio-economic status whereas measures with an attached stigma were more often allocated to children with a lower status. This enhances educational inequalities even more.

Becker, R., & Beck, M. (2012). Herkunftseffekte oder statistische Diskriminierung von Migrantenkindern in der Primarstufe? [Family Background Effects or Statistical Discrimination of Children with Migration Background in Primary School?] In R. Becker, & M. Beck, (Hrsg.), 2012: Soziologische Bildungsforschung. Sonderheft 52 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Kronig, W. (2003). Das Konstrukt des leistungsschwachen Immigrantenkindes [Constructing the Low Performing Immigrant Child]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 6(1), 126-141. Kronig, W. (2007). Die systematische Zufälligkeit des Bildungserfolgs. Theoretische Erklärungen und empirische Untersuchungen zur Lernentwicklung und zur Leistungsbewertung in unterschiedlichen Schulklassen [Systematic Randomness of Educational Success]. Bern/Stuttgart/Wien: Haupt Verlag. Reisel, L. (2011). Two Paths to Inequality in Educational Outcomes: Family Background and Educational Selection in the United States and Norway. Sociology of Education, 84(4), 261-280.