In recent years, tendencies of political polarization and trends toward democratic backsliding in several countries have underscored the critical importance of civic competences for fostering engaged and informed citizens (Van de Werfhorst/Mijs 2010; Geboers et al. 2013; Eidhof et al. 2016). Social inequalities in these competences can exacerbate existing societal divides, potentially fueling further polarization. Educational systems play a crucial role in shaping these competences, and extensive research has demonstrated that structural features such as early between-school tracking significantly impact academic achievement and perpetuate social inequalities in traditional competence domains (Van Zanten 2005; Terrin/Triventi 2022). However, the effects of tracking on civic competences remain understudied. Our study aims to investigate the relationship between early between-school tracking, socioeconomic status (SES), and civic knowledge among adolescents across multiple countries. We address three key research questions: (1) To what extent do socioeconomic inequalities in civic competences exist across countries? (2) How does early tracking influence civic competences among students? (3) Does tracking moderate the relationship between SES and civic competences? We employ a cross-sectional multilevel regression approach, pooling data from the 2009, 2016 and 2022 IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education Studies (ICCS) for 46 countries. Our dependent variable is civic knowledge, with individual-level SES and country-level early between-school tracking as primary independent variables. Following previous research, we hypothesize that higher SES will correlate with greater civic competences across all countries (Kavadias et al. 2020; Potter/Roksa 2013). Furthermore, we anticipate that early tracking systems will exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities in civic competences by concentrating disadvantaged students in lower tracks resulting in unequal access to civic learning opportunities and limited exposure to diverse viewpoints necessary for fostering democratic attitudes and engagement. Moreover, schools serving lower SES populations typically have fewer resources and reduced emphasis on civic education, perpetuating a cycle of civic disengagement. Our analysis enhances the existing literature on educational inequality and civic education by providing a comprehensive cross-national examination of the interplay between SES, tracking, and civic competences. By elucidating the complex dynamics between individual background, institutional factors, and civic outcomes, we aim to inform discussions on promoting equitable civic development among diverse student populations.

Eidhof, Bram Bf, Geert Tm Ten Dam, Anne Bert Dijkstra, &Herman G. Van De Werfhorst. 2016. „Consensus and Contested Citizenship Education Goals in Western Europe“. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 11(2):114–29. Geboers, Ellen, Femke Geijsel, Wilfried Admiraal, & Geert ten Dam. 2013. „Review of the effects of citizenship education“. Educational Research Review 9:158–73. Kavadias, Dimokritos, Echeverria Vicente Nohemi Jocabeth, & Kenneth Hemmerechts. 2020. „Inequality, Civic Education and Intended Future Civic Engagement: An Examination of Research in Western Democracies“. S. 583–97 in The Palgrave Handbook of Citizenship and Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Potter, Daniel, & Josipa Roksa. 2013. „Accumulating advantages over time: Family experiences and social class inequality in academic achievement“. Social Science Research 42(4):1018–32. Van De Werfhorst, Herman G., & Jonathan J. B. Mijs. 2010. „Achievement Inequality and the Institutional Structure of Educational Systems: A Comparative Perspective“. Annual Review of Sociology 36(1):407–28. Van Zanten, Agnès. 2005. „New Modes of Reproducing Social Inequality in Education: The Changing Role of Parents, Teachers, Schools and Educational Policies“. European Educational Research Journal 4(3):155–69. Terrin, Éder, &Moris Triventi. 2023. „The Effect of School Tracking on Student Achievement and Inequality: A Meta-Analysis“. Review of Educational Research 93(2):236–74.