Education policy in Iceland emphasises inclusive and comprehensive education for all and upper secondary schooling is open to all students throughout their lifespan (Jónasson &  Óskarsdóttir, 2016; Ministry of Education, Science and Culture [MoESC], 2012). However, schools set their own admission policies, and some are selective ( Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018; Eiríksdóttir, 2022). Iceland is currently defined as one school district and admission governance is based on the idea of freedom of choice in a decentralized educational system (Dovemark & Rasmussen, 2022;  Eiríksdóttir et al., 2022). This means that upper secondary schools create admission policies based on their ability to compete for students. High status schools are traditionally those that only offer academic programs preparing students for university, while comprehensive schools that include vocational programmes are considered less prestigious (Bergsdóttir & Magnúsdóttir, 2018; Blöndal et al., 2011; Þorkelsson, 2011). The hierarchy of upper secondary pathways (academic or vocational) in Iceland is clear and reflects the disparity of esteem seen elsewhere (i.e., Billett, 2014; Cedefop, 2014; see Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018). Vocational pathways generally have lower status than academic pathways that prepare students for university education and are often seen as a landing place for students with lower academic achievement (see Eiríksdóttir et al., 2018; Nylund et al., 2018). The aim of the paper is to explore how school and pathway selection perpetuate and reflect established hierarchies and social inequalities. Especially as it relates to access to upper secondary education for different groups of students and their future prospects.

In the study, the 13 upper secondary schools in Reykjavik metropolitan area were categorised into two school types: Schools that offer only academic programmes and schools that offer both vocational and academic programmes. Systematic patterns in students’ school and pathway choice based on their social and economic background, academic achievement, and educational expectations were analysed. In this longitudinal cohort study, a questionnaire was first administered to all students at the end of compulsory education in the Reykjavik metropolitan area in 2014. Subsequently, data on their standardized grades and progress at upper secondary schools was collected and linked to the questionnaire data. The participants in the study were students of the baseline cohort who attended upper secondary schools the year following compulsory education (in autumn 2015) and who participated in the survey at baseline in tenth grade (N = 1869 or 80% of the cohort).

The result shows a clear pattern of school hierarchies and social stratification between and within the 13 upper secondary schools in the Reykjavik metropolitan area. Upper secondary schools that only offer academic pathways have a higher proportion of students with stronger socio-economic status and parents with university education compared to schools that offer both academic and vocational programmes. The students in the academic schools also have higher academic achievements and are more likely to see themselves attending universities in the future compared to students in the schools that also offer both vocational and academic programmes. The same pattern of results was also seen between the academic and vocational pathways within the schools that offered both programme types. This school and pathway hierarchy reflects a social stratification reinforced by the selection system and free school choice that in practice contradicts inclusion policy and highlight the different selection opportunities associated with socio-economic backgrounds (Magnúsdóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2018; Dovemark & Nylund, 2022; Dovemark & Rasmussen, 2022). The tension between the actual admission structures and the educational policy can be traced to two contradictory ideas: on the one hand, the idea of inclusive education and, on the other, the ideology of decentralization and free school choice. Mainly students with high socio-economic backgrounds and educated parents have in fact the option of choosing upper secondary school and pathway. Other students are more likely to adjust their choices and prospects to fit within this hierarchy. This also means that only some schools are responsible for the diversity of the student population and upholding inclusion policies. The findings give rise to complex questions on social justice, the need to discuss the aim of education, and how the admission structure and implementation can lead to results that are in opposition to official education policy.

Billett, S. (2014). The standing of vocational education: Sources of its societal esteem and implications for its enactment. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66(1), 1–21. Bergsdóttir, Á. & Magnúsdóttir, B. R. (2018). Ólíkur félagslegur og menntapólitískur veruleiki íslenskra framhaldsskóla: Nám til stúdentsprófs í 20 ár af sjónarhóli framhaldsskólakennara og -stjórnenda. Sérrit Netlu 2018 – Framhaldsskólinn í brennidepli. Blöndal, K. S., Jónasson, J. T. og Tannhäuser, A.-C. (2011). Dropout in a small society: Is the Icelandic case somehow different? Í S. Lamb, E. Markussen, R. Teese, N. Sandberg og J. Polesel (Eds.), School dropout and completion: International comparative studies in theory and policy (p. 233–251). Springer. Cedefop. (2014). Attractiveness of initial vocational education and training: Identifying what matters. Publications Office of the European Union. Dovemark, M. & Rasmussen, A. (2022). Upper secondary education in the Nordic countries: Governance and choice. Í A. Rasmussen og M. Dovemark (ritstjórar), Governance and choice of upper secondary education in the Nordic countries: Access and fairness (bls. 1–17). Springer Eiríksdóttir. (2022). Áskoranir starfsmenntunar: Aðgengi starfsmenntanema að háskólanámi. Sérrit Netlu 2022 – Framtíð og tilgangur menntunar. https://doi.org/10.24270/serritnetla.2022.79 Eiríksdóttir, E. Ragnarsdóttir, G. & Jónasson, J. T. (2018). Þversagnir og kerfisvillur? Kortlagning á ólíkri stöðu bóknáms- og starfsnámsbrauta á framhaldsskólastigi. Sérrit Netlu 2018 – Framhaldsskólinn í brennidepli. Jónasson, J. T. & Óskarsdóttir, G. (2016). Iceland: Educational structure and development. Í T. Sprague (ritstjóri), Education in non-EU countries in Western and Southern Europe (bls. 11–36). Bloomsbury. Nylund, M., Rosvall, P.-Å., Eiríksdóttir, E., Holm, A.-S., Isopahkala-Bouret, U., Niemi A.-M. & Ragnarsdóttir, G. (2018). The academic-vocational divide in three Nordic countries: Implications for social class and gender. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 97–121 Þorkelsson. M. (2011). Hverjir eru valkostir nýnema í framhaldsskólum? Ráðstefnurit Netlu – Menntakvika 2011.