Few sociological studies of educational transition examine progression to terminal degrees – i.e. PhDs (Posselt & Grodsky, 2017). Higher education expansion has meant considerable growth in PhD numbers and entry rates. A PhD confers advantages in job quality and income (Yudkevich, 2020). Although not conferring the very highest incomes or wealth, PhDs - especially PhDs from the most prestigious universities (Wapman et al., 2022) - can unlock access to that slice of the cultural elite represented by academics, scientists etc.

Based on studies of earlier educational transitions, sociologists have pointed to declining effects of background on later transitions, especially for class, noting unobserved heterogeneity among educational ‘survivors’. Empirical evidence on this question for advanced degrees is mixed. Torche (2018) found some evidence that graduate education is an equaliser, whereas others find continued inequalities (In & Breen, 2022; Wakeling & Laurison, 2017).

Institutional stratification is a complicating factor. Many higher education systems exhibit formal or informal institutional strata, frequently hierarchical (Shavit et al., 2007). These correspond with structural inequalities in access, especially class and race/ethnicity; and differentiated outcomes for income, occupation etc. Institutional stratification has been little studied at the postgraduate degree level, although evidence suggests at least a persistence of tracked inequality (In & Breen, 2022; Mateos & Wakeling, 2022). There is also evidence of sticky pathways in some countries from first degree through PhD into faculty positions (Altbach et al., 2015).

Here, we examine the transition between UK-domiciled first-degree undergraduate degrees and PhDs. The UK makes an interesting case because it combines formal equality between universities, strong institutional stratification (Boliver, 2015; Wakeling & Savage, 2015) and a tradition of geographical mobility for higher education (Willetts, 2017). We measured higher education institutional stratification using a measurement of institutional prestige for the UK proposed by David et al. (2021) - ‘top-27’, pre-1992 and post-1992 institutions.

Our research aims to answer the following questions:

1. What are the patterns of institutional mobility from first-degree to postgraduate research degrees in the UK?

2. What is the association between patterns of institutional mobility and higher education stratification in the UK?

3.  How do those patterns differ according to major structural inequalities, including class, race and gender?

We use HESA (Higher Education Statistical Agency) data to examine institutional mobility between first and postgraduate research degrees. The dataset comprises all UK-domiciled first-degree graduates, between 2012/13 and 2016/2017. It includes graduates' socioeconomic class, previous attainment, first-degree subject, higher education institution and ‘first destination’ six months after graduation. We consider only individuals entering a postgraduate research degree immediately after first-degree graduation (N = 26,900). For them, the HESA dataset also provides information on the type of postgraduate qualification and postgraduate higher education institution. Considering the research on higher education inequalities in the UK (Boliver, 2015, Wakeling & Savage, 2015), we have also created a variable measuring the prestige of the higher education institutions. Following Davies et al. (2021), we divided the higher education institutions in the UK into (1)“Top-27” higher education institutions, comprising the 24 ‘Russell Group’ universities, plus the universities of St Andrews, Bath and Strathclyde (2) pre-1992: includes higher education institutions that were created before the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, except the ‘top-27’ institutions, (3) post-1992: institutions that were granted the university title after the 1992 Act. We also created indicator variables for institutions that were located in London and for institutions located in metropolitan areas in the UK to understand geographical mobility. First, we use descriptive statistics to understand the different patterns of institutional mobility between first-degree and postgraduate degrees in the UK. Then, we use different logistic regression models to examine (1) the probability of changing institutions between first and postgraduate research degrees and individuals’ socioeconomic characteristics and type of higher education institution of the first degree and (2) the probability of pursuing a PhD in a ‘top-27’ institution and individuals’ socioeconomic characteristics and type of higher education institution of the first degree for individuals who were institutionally mobile.

Our findings show most students do not move HEI, but post-1992 graduates are the least likely to do so. This is counterintuitive because there are many more PhD positions outside than inside post-1992 universities, suggesting post-1992 graduates are especially likely to ‘remain in lane’. ‘Top-27’ graduates were more likely to move institutions, but only a handful moved down the status hierarchy. By contrast, those in the pre-1992 sector were the least likely to remain in the same university, almost one-third ‘trading up’ to the ‘Top-27’.Our findings suggest that inequalities in PhD access are ‘baked in’ to ‘sticky’ UK institutional hierarchies. Our logistic regression models show that women and graduates from Black and Asian minority ethnic groups were more likely to change institutions between levels. When analysing occupational class we see that first-degree graduates from intermediate, and routine/manual occupational backgrounds had a lower probability of institutional mobility than first-degree graduates with higher managerial, administrative and professional occupational backgrounds. Controlling for these other characteristics, we found first-degree graduates from pre-1992 institutions had a higher probability and graduates from post-1992 had a lower probability of being institutionally mobile for their PhDs. This finding endorses research on HE stratification in the UK by showing that first-degree graduates from ‘teaching-intensive’ institutions were more likely to pursue a PhD in the same institution. Last, the geographical distribution of universities might affect mobility: given the concentration of universities in London, it is easier to move institutions without moving residence than elsewhere in the UK. When considering mobility to an ‘elite’ institution, institutional stratification seems to play a more prominent role. The model confirms that for institutionally mobile postgraduates only, first-degree graduates from pre-1992 and post-1992 institutions were less likely to pursue a PhD in the ‘Top-27’ when compared to first-degree graduates from the ‘Top-27’ institutions.

Altbach, P. G., Yudkevich, M. & Rumbley, L. E. (eds.) (2015) Academic Inbreeding and Mobility in Higher Education: Global Perspectives. Basingstoke: Routledge. Boliver, V. (2015). Are there distinctive clusters of higher and lower status universities in the UK? Oxford Review of Education, 41(5), 608–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1082905 Davies, J., Donnelly, M., & Sandoval-Hernandez, A. (2021). Geographies of elite higher education participation: An urban ‘escalator’ effect. British Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 1079–1101. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3711 In, J., & Breen, R. (2022). Social Origin and Access to Top Occupations among the Highest Educated in the United Kingdom. Sociology of Education, 00380407221128527. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380407221128527 Mateos-González, J.L., Wakeling, P. Exploring socioeconomic inequalities and access to elite postgraduate education among English graduates. High Educ 83, 673–694 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00693-9 Pásztor, A., & Wakeling, P. (2018). All PhDs are equal but … Institutional and social stratification in access to the doctorate. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 39(7), 982–997. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2018.1434407 Posselt, J. R. & Grodsky, E. (2017) Graduate education and social stratification. Annual Review of Sociology, 43, 353 - 378. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074324 Wakeling, P. & Laurison, D. (2017) Are postgraduate qualifications the ‘new frontier of social mobility’? British Journal of Sociology, 68(3), 533 - 555. https://doi:10.1111/1468-4446.12277 Wakeling, P., & Savage, M. (2015). Entry to Elite Positions and the Stratification of Higher Education in Britain. The Sociological Review, 63(2), 290–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12284 Wapman, K,. H., Zhang, S., Clauset, A. & Larremore, D. B. (2022) Quantifying hierarchy and dynamics in US faculty hiring and retention. Nature, 610, 120 - 127. https://10.1038/s41586-022-05222-x Willetts, D. (2017) A University Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Yudkevich, M., Altbach, P. G. & de Wit, H. (eds.) (2022) Trends and Issues in Doctoral Education: a Global Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.