In education systems all over Europe social inequality is a major concern, as children from less privileged families are systematically disadvantaged. Especially at the transition to university strong secondary effects of social origin have been observed (e.g. Duru-Bellat, Kieffer & Reimer, 2008; Tieben & Wolbers, 2010). One often-discussed means to reduce social inequality in education systems is to open them up, e.g. by revising the requirements for educational transitions. This was done for the university entry in Germany in 2009 (KMK, 2009), where the social selection at this transition is even more pronounced than at earlier transitions (Lörz & Schindler, 2011). With the renewal of the entry requirements, universities are now also open to students with vocational qualifications. However, it seems that this measure does not fulfill its purpose of reducing social inequality. In 2018, almost ten years after the reform, the share of so-called non-traditional students was 5 percent in the German higher education system. All over Europe, this group makes up for 10 percent of all students, some countries even reach shares of above 25 percent (Iceland, the Netherlands) (Hauschildt, Vögtle & Gwosć 2018). Another measure that aims at reducing social inequalities at the entry to university is becoming popular in Europe in recent years: in local and regional initiatives universities set up programs to attract underrepresented groups and diversify their student body (Claeys-Kulik & Jørgensen, 2018). To date, no data is available that would allow for a comprehensive analysis of the effects these initiatives have on reducing social inequalities at the transition to university. To gain first insights, this paper analyzes the case of Germany, where a certificate for diversification measures is available which can be used to quantify universities' efforts in this respect. The Stifterverband (Donor’s Association)awards the so-called Diversity Audit certificate to universities that have undergone a supervised process to value and extent diversity at their institutions (Stifterverband, 2020). Additionally, we can make use of data from the National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), which is representative of Germany (Blossfeld, Roßbach & von Maurice, 2011). Against the theoretical background of rational choice theory (Breen & Goldthorpe, 1997; Esser, 1999), in this paper we will, first, quantify the effects of social origin at the transition to university. Second, we will analyze to what extent universities’ efforts with regards to diversity, indicated by the Diversity Audit certificate, contribute to reducing the secondary effects of social origin at this educational transition.

For the empirical analyses, we will use data from NEPS starting cohort 4, which is a panel study that follows students since grade 9. In the latest available dataset (wave 11) most of the students have left the school system to take up studies or enter vocational training. After multiple imputation of missing data, we employ logistic regression analyses, taking into account the multi-level and panel structure of the data. All analyses are done with R. Our dependent variable is the NEPS participants’ decision to take up studies at a university after finishing upper secondary school. The secondary effects of social origin are operationalized according to Bourdieu (1986), looking at economic (parents’ income, parents’ professional status), cultural (number of books at home, parents’ education), and social capital (parents’ support for their children, parents’ social network). Whether universities are diversity-oriented and have respective initiatives in place, is operationalized by the Diversity Audit certificate awarded by the Stifterverband. Additionally, the following students’ characteristics are included in the analyses as control variables: migration history, gender, entitlement to state aid for studying (BAföG), type and grade of university entry certificate, competencies in mathematics and reading.

Our analyses show that almost all aspects of social origin are related to the decision to take up studies after upper secondary school in Germany. The higher parents’ professional status, the higher their educational attainment, the more diverse their social networks, and the more books they have at home the more likely it is for their daughters and sons to enter university even when competencies are controlled for. For now, we can only present the following expected results regarding the effects of the Diversity Audit certificate: Based on previous analyses with a more general indicator for diversity orientation at universities (Lorenz et al., 2019), we expect to find a substantial reduction of the above-mentioned effects at universities that have been awarded a Diversity Audit certificate, particularly with regards to the effect of parents’ educational attainment, i.e. students’ cultural capital.

Blossfeld, H.-P., Roßbach, H.-G. & Maurice, J. von (Eds.). (2011). Education as a lifelong process. The German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood Press. Breen, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1997). Explaining educational differentials. Towards a formal rational action theory. Rationality and Society, 9, 275–305. Claeys-Kulik, A.-L. & Jørgensen, T. E. (2018). Universities’ strategies and approaches towards diversity, equity and inclusion. Examples from across Europe. Brüssel: European University Assocation. Duru-Bellat, M., Kieffer, A. & Reimer, D. (2008). Patterns of social inequality in access to higher education in France and Germany. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 49 (4-5), 347–368. Esser, H. (1999). Soziologie: Spezielle Grundlagen. Band 1: Situationslogik und Handeln. [Sociology: Special Basics. Volume 1: Situational Logic and Actions] Frankfurt a. M.: Campus. Hauschildt, K., Vögtle, E. M. & Gwosć, C. (2018). Social and Economic Conditions of Student Life in Europe – Eurostudent III. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. KMK (Kultusministerkonferenz) (2009). Hochschulzugang für beruflich qualifizierte Bewerber ohne schulische Hochschulzugangsberechtigung (Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 06.03.2009) [University entry for applicants with vocational qualification without formal university entry qualification (resolution of the standing committee of the ministers of education and cultural affairs of the Länder in the federal republic of Germany]. https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2009/2009_03_06-Hochschulzugang-erful-qualifizierte-Bewerber.pdf Lorenz, J., Schaufelberger, R. & Stubbe, T. C. (September, 2019). Soziale Herkunft und Hochschulzugang – Inwieweit gelingt die „Öffnung der Hochschulen“? [Social origin and university entry – how successful is the “opening up of the universities”?] Presentation at the 10th conference of the DGfE-section ‚Empirische Bildungsforschung‘, Münster. Lörz, M. & Schindler, S. (2011). Bildungsexpansion und soziale Ungleichheit: Zunahme, Abnahme und Persistenz ungleicher Chancenverhältnisse – eine Frage der Perspektive? [Educational expansion and social inequality: increase, decrease, and persistence of unequal opportunity -- a matter of perspective?]. Zeitschrift für Soziologie der Erziehung und Sozialisation, 40(6), 458–477. Stifterverband (2020). Diversity Audit. https://www.stifterverband.org/diversity-audit Tieben, N. & Wolbers, M. (2010). Success and failure in secondary education: Socio-economic background effects on secondary school outcome in the Netherlands, 1927–1998. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31, 277–290.