Democratic systems depend on active and engaged citizens (Himmelmann, 2016). An important requirement for all types of political participation is the political interest of individuals (Prior, 2010). In contrast to the analysis of voting decisions, there is still too little research regarding political interest. Various studies have shown that adolescence can be seen as a crucial phase for the development of political interest (Russo/Stattin, 2017), in which educational institutions become increasingly relevant, which, is not yet adequately addressed by research.

It has repeatedly been shown that the more one remains in education, the more one’s interest in politics increases (Bömmel/Heineck, 2020). However, less is known about the influence different types of education have on the development of political interest. In many school systems, students are sorted into academic and non-academic/ vocational tracks at the secondary education level (Bol/van de Werfhorst, 2013). The development of political interest under the influence of different types of education with comparable length is the focus of this paper.

Theoretically, different mechanisms of influence of institutional education on political interest can be assumed. First, the curriculum may differ between different types of schools. Second, the division into different tracks is linked to social segregation, e.g. with students from privileged backgrounds and (shaped by family socialization) higher political interest are more likely to be in the academic track. As a result, the development of political interest in the academic track should be more favorable than in the non-academic track. While this assumption is confirmed by some empirical studies (Witschge/van de Werfhorst, 2019), they mostly have the following weaknesses: First, there is a lack of longitudinal studies that allow to separate the influence of selection into different tracks from the influence of the track itself. Second, the effect of changing tracks on political interest have not yet been sufficiently investigated. Third, it has been found that results regarding the relationship between education and political interest are difficult to generalize across countries, because of the complexity of national education systems (Hoskins et al., 2016). Accordingly, it is worthwhile to conduct country studies in order to better address the specifics of national education systems.

In this contribution we use the example of Germany. The German school system is strongly stratified at secondary level I (years 5 – 10, SL1). After primary school, students are sorted into an academic track that lead to the eligibility to study (e.g. Gymnasium) and non-academic tracks (e.g. Realschule) that prepare for vocational education. At secondary level II (years 11-13, SL2), the school system opens up: In addition to the general academic track (a, Gymnasium), there are vocationally oriented tracks that lead to the eligibility to study (b, e.g. Fachgymnasium) and vocational tracks that lead to vocational training qualifications (c, e.g. Berufsschule). Whereas option (c) is non-academic, option (b) can be identified as academic, since nationwide recognition of the eligibility to study obtained via general education (=a) as well as vocationally oriented schools (=b) is ensured by various political agreements on the curricular requirements. Student composition, especially in terms of socioeconomic status, is less favourable in non-academic compared to academic school types (Schuchart/Schimke, 2019). High-performing students who graduate from a non-academic school type at SL1 can move to an academic track, but also to a non-academic (=vocational track) at SL2.

We assume that the type of continuation of the educational biography in upper secondary school has an effect on the development of political interest. In particular, we are interested in the extent to which continuing academic education (a), moving into non-academic education (c), or vice versa (b) has an impact on the development of political interest.

To test the mentioned hypotheses, we analyse the data of the National Educational Panel Study (NEPS). The NEPS is a longitudinal survey about the educational processes and competence development. We use the third starting cohort, which begins in fifth grade (SL1) and covers the entire secondary school period as well as entry into the labor market. In order to be able to identify the socialization effect of the different educational trajectories at SL2 on political interest, we have to control for selection effects into these pathways. The NEPS data provide a rich set of variables, that allow us to control for relevant student achievement in SL1. In addition, we control for social and economic background as well as family practices (e.g., political discussions), which could have an impact on selection as well as a direct influence on political interest. The first observation of the outcome variable political interest is in grade 8, which is close to the end of SL1. It is measured using a single item. Due to the focus on SL2 we can use the first measurement in grade 8 as a base line to analyse the development from grade 11 through 12/13. The item has been used in several international surveys, e.g. in the European Social Survey (Bömmel et al., 2020). For our analysis, we use multilevel mixed effects linear regression models. The five observation points are nested in individuals, so that processes can be examined with regard to various influencing factors at the individual level. The independent variable on educational trajectory is based on the combination of the type of school attended by the students in SL1 and SL2. In SL1, academic education occurs exclusively at the Gymnasium, while all other types of schools (e.g., Realschule) are defined as non-academic. In SL2, all tracks that award the eligibility to study (a, b) are defined as academic (e.g. Fachgymnasium, Fachoberschule). All tracks that provide vocational training (Berufsschule) and/or award non-academic school certificates (c) are considered non-academic.

According to other studies we find, that students who came from the academic track have a greater political interest at the beginning of SL2, than students who remain in the non-academic track. Overall, political interest seems to be stabilized during SL2, (see also Prior (2010)). Looking at specific trajectories, a convergence effect in the course of SL2 can be observed. Contrary to initial assumptions, the academic and non-academic educational trajectories converge, with a slightly decrease of students in the academic track and a slightly increase of students in the non-academic track. This could indicate that it is not so much the type of education that has an effect on political interest, but rather remaining in institutionalized education itself. Therefore, the sorting into tracks in highly stratified systems such as in Germany seems not to be associated with stable track-specific effects over the educational biography as suggested by other studies (Janmaat, 2022; Witschge et al., 2019). To deepen these results, the next step is to compare them to other countries by taking greater account of characteristics of national educational systems. First, countries that also have a strong vocational training system with a fixed share of general education including political education, such as Austria, Switzerland, and Denmark (Poulsen/Eberhardt 2016), come into question for this purpose. Second, the comparison with countries that have a similarly stratified education system, for example, the Czech Republic and Hungary (Bol/van de Werfhorst, 2013), seems very useful to further investigate the effect of educational trajectory on political interest. The lessons that can be learned are relevant for all democracies, even beyond Europe, as they all depend on interested and engaged citizens.

Bol T. & van de Werfhorst H-G. (2013). Educational systems and the trade-off between labor market allocation and equality of educational opportunity. Comparative Education Review, 57(2), 285–308. Bömmel, N., & Heineck, G. (2020). Revisiting the Causal Effect of Education on Political Participation. 13954, 1–27. Bömmel, N., Gebel, M., & Heineck, G. (2020). Political Participation and Political Attitudes as Returns to Education in the National Educational Panel Study (NEPS): Conceptual Framework and Measurement. NEPS Survey Papers. Himmelmann, G. (2016). Demokratie Lernen: Als Lebens-, Gesellschafts- und Herrschaftsform ; ein Lehr- und Studienbuch (4. Auflage). Wochenschau Verlag. Hoskins, B., Janmaat, J. G., Han, C., & Muijs, D. (2016). Inequalities in the education system and the reproduction of socioeconomic disparities in voting in England, Denmark and Germany: The influence of country context, tracking and self-efficacy on voting intentions of students age 16–18. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 46(1), 69–92. Janmaat, J. G. (2022). School social segregation and social inequalities in political engagement among 16 to 20 year olds in fourteen countries. Research Papers in Education, 37(1), 52–73. Prior, M. (2010). You’ve Either Got It or You Don’t? The Stability of Political Interest over the Life Cycle. The Journal of Politics, 72(3), 747–766. Russo, S., & Stattin, H. (2017). Stability and Change in Youths’ Political Interest. Social Indicators Research, 132(2), 643–658. Schuchart, C. / Schimke, B. (2019): Lohnt sich das Nachholen eines Schulabschlusses? Alternative Wege zur Hochschulreife und ihre Arbeitsmarkterträge. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 71, 237–273. Witschge, J., & van de Werfhorst, H. G. (2016). Standardization of lower secondary civic education and inequality of the civic and political engagement of students. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 27(3), 367–384.