Search

This paper analyzes trends of social mobility in England and Wales. Speculations about trends of social mobility have been prominent in contemporary commentaries on the condition of England, and on the changing structures of highly industrialized societies. Empirical research has given little support to expectations that definite changes would be observable when rates of social mobility were compared over time. The theory that in the U.S. the closing of the frontier and the consolidation of corporate capitalism must have reduced movement up and down the social scale has been questioned by recent research. And the contrasting notion, common in Western Europe, that economic, political and educational changes must have increased chances of social ascent and descent has also been empirically challenged. These studies have made little impact on the general debate about contemporary social stratification. But such evidence has also been only partly relevant to some major issues of the debate. For while the data relate to patterns of social mobility prevailing yesterday, the debate has often in effect centered on those patterns which may prevail tomorrow. It is possible that the occupational experience of those who are still only children or adolescents today will follow new lines–in consequence particularly, it has been suggested, of recent changes in educational policy.

The article discusses social status and electoral choice in two constituencies in Great Britain in 1952. The statement that social class membership is of outstanding importance as a determining factor in political behavior would probably be regarded by most contemporary social scientists as little more than a truism. And it is perhaps for the very reason that the gross outlines of the relationship are so clearly perceptible that so few systematic attempts have yet been made to analyze its structure in any detail. The material presented in this paper forms part of the results of an inquiry into certain subjective aspects of English social stratification, carried out in September-October 1950. To study social class differences in voting behavior was only one of its aims: the inquiry was designed also to study, inter alia, varying conceptions of the nature of social classes and of the criteria of class membership, the social class placement of various occupations and attitudes to social mobility. An account of the design of the survey and of some of its findings will appear elsewhere; it may be useful, however, to include here some brief notes on the sample, and on the method employed of classifying respondents.

The article focuses on social mobility and economic growth. Concerning the nature of the entrepreneurial role itself, the industrial capitalist, though he may seek profit for a variety of motives, nevertheless must behave as if profit were the defining goal of economic action. He must, in competitive circumstances, seek to discover and employ those tools and techniques which multiply the human energy invested in their creation and use, thereby providing income-yielding power in the process of production and exchange. One may reason that people who are in general achievement-oriented displayed the same orientation in selecting a career, i.e., they experimented with different occupations, either imaginatively on the basis of whatever information they had or by trial and error in practice, and so chose to stay with the activity for which they were best suited, business. It thus seems clear, then, that the achievement norm-potentially so appropriate for entrepreneurial roles-became operative in economic growth not because of the high social prestige of business activity, but rather because transformations in Elizabethan patterns of social mobility.

This article discusses trends of social mobility and social stratification in Great Britain. In Great Britain, the way in which the post-war expansion of secondary and higher education seem to have benefited middle class as much as working class children would lead one to expect a similar pattern of change in social mobility rates. The questions arise firstly, as to whether this expectation can be confirmed for Great Britain by direct evidence and secondly, implications of such changes for the structure of society. The relations between social strata can be assumed to be relations of inequality, whereby, the gain of one must necessarily be at the expense of some other, or regard them as merely functionally differentiated and therefore non-antagonistic. Social mobility, an adaptive social change, is intrinsically interesting perhaps, but bears no necessary relation to other features of the social system. From the perspective of the former position, the structural significance of social mobility may be seen as indication, on the one hand, of the accessibility of positions of privilege or prestige to the less privileged or prestigious.

Propositions and concepts are reexamined and modified as a result of the discussion on social mobility. Social structures which are ethnically differentiated give rise to the kind of definition that would apply the label 'minority.' An imbalance arises between aspirations and actual chances of mobility leading as a rule to partial mobility. Social mobility is seen as the movement in social status or social position by individuals of diverse social origins measurable by the occupational index. This is a search for the causal explanation of differential mobility rates between coloured minorities and white minorities. A number of studies have stated and others have implied that the immobility of coloured groups is due to discrimination on grounds of the special racial factor of colour. A factor which influences the social mobility chances of minority groups is the stereotyping or homogenization of attitudes in the receiving country with regard to social class. Another factor is the socio-economic structure and politico-legal condition prevalent in the receiving country. Re-statements of the propositions include that social mobility in terms of socio-economic indicators is not caused by a rigidity in social structure and that it depends on the rank order in which the minority group is.

This article explores some of the consequences of a greatly extended life for certain aspects of education and for occupations requiring long educational preparation, namely the professions. Data illustrating the great change in length of life will be presented first, followed by some general remarks on the difficulties of assessing increased longevity as a causal variable in socio-cultural change. Longevity will be considered in its relationship to education during childhood, youth and mid-life, and to careers, the professions, and social mobility. The social consequences of the great increase in average length of life that has taken place in modern industrial societies during the past two centuries have not been adequately analyzed by social scientists. Inter-generational mobility is affected by long life. Like intragenerational mobility, this phenomenon may increase as a result of longer life expectancy.

The article focuses on a study based on information obtained on all arts and science degree entrants to the University of Ghana, Legon in 1957 and 1960. Although the University College of Ghana opened only in 1948, university education has been part of the training of sons in some coastal families for more than three generations. There are still large numbers of Ghanaians who receive university education abroad, either because the subject they wish to study is not taught in Ghana or for prestige reasons. Still, the university population in Ghana has grown rapidly and the majority now do at least their undergraduate work in Ghana. Since these graduates perform key functions in Ghana as in all developing countries, it seems useful to examine theft background, to see how representative they are of the population as a whole and what changes have taken place in the university population since independence in 1957. In the light of the high status of university graduates, access to the university is an indication of the possibility of social mobility.

In this article certain ideas concerning a particular kind of horizontal movement is suggested which brings occupational and social mobility and explore their utility through selected examples. Attention has been drawn to the neglect of the horizontal dimension in occupational structure. This article is concerned with the characteristics of occupations or clusters of occupations as they facilitate such mobility. Bridging occupations as established by the article is one which provides, through work experience, the conditions and opportunities for movement from one occupation or cluster of occupations to another. In identifying the principal characteristics of the bridging occupation, attributes generally relevant to the process of occupational change is focused. The article end with a discussion of the conditions under which bridging occupations are likely to be of importance in occupational and social mobility.

The article focuses on social stratification. While societies have been analysed in terms of income, occupation, prestige and social class, little attention has been paid to the distribution of power in general or to the position of political leadership. Students of social mobility have, of course, investigated the recruitment to certain high-ranking strata of society but have tended on the whole to pay little attention to the movement into or from the ruling political groups. Political scientists, on the other hand, have studied the social back- ground of legislators and administrators and have tried to relate political decisions to the interests represented by those making them, but they have generally been concerned with specific political &eaute;lites at a particular point of time, or, at the best, over a certain period. Moreover an insight into social mobility in respect of political &elites;lites should help towards the understanding of social stratification and social mobility in general.

The significance of social status and social mobility as variables in the analysis of social action is by now taken for granted. This is true even though there is considerable unevenness in how these variables arc defined and measured, and in the ways and degrees to which the effects of these variables are evidenced. These variables take on added importance when their implications for social integration and anomie are considered. Status refers to position in a social order, and mobility to changes in such positions. Differential positions tend frequently to receive differential evaluation. Therefore, one of the most important effects to be expected is the degree to which persons with different status and mobility-profiles feel differently valued by their social other, and act as if they were differently integrated into its norms. These effects probably are most noticeable when insecurity, anxiety, and a general sensitivity to questions of status are widespread, as is so often the case in an open class system. Social changes which threaten status arrangements ought therefore to be viewed with different degrees of alarm, and resistance to such changes should emerge in proportion to the degree of threat which is experienced. Desegregation, as it refers to the promised amelioration of the positions of Negroes in our society, is one such major change.

Recent analysis of social mobility in Europe has suggested a pattern of recruitment to the upper positions in the stratification system which bears a more reasonable semblance to American society than formerly has been assumed. This has come as a surprise to many, since there exists in the United States a strong impression, not only that equality of opportunity exists, but that U.S. far excels others in this respect. Although the U.S. has for some time maintained a free educational system at the primary and secondary level, it has failed to eliminate class differences in type and amount of education. The more recent extension of education in Great Britain shows evidence of presenting the same problem. Both cases suggest that universal, free education is no panacea to the problem of unequal opportunity and utilization of manpower to maximum efficiency. Such factors as differences in socialization, economic resources, business ownership, knowledge concerning mobility skills, the placement position of the family, reproduction rates, and change in the occupational structure all continue to operate somewhat independently of the educational institution in sorting out youths for and provision of opportunity in the stratification system.

This article presents the question of social class differences in measured intelligence as an illustration of the more general problem of the relation between social structure and the distribution of genetic characteristics in populations. Though innate intelligence may legitimately be inferred from available evidence, the evidence is also strong that it is determined not by one gene but polygenically. On these assumptions a genetic model may be constructed which, when relevant variations in social structure are taken into account, throws considerable doubt on the possibility that mean differences between classes in measured intelligence are innate. When a caste society is transformed into a class society the classes, may still be seen as gene pools but with migration between them. The question now becomes one of determining the relation between social mobility and genic migration. On the evidence, especially of correlation coefficients derived from studies of twins, siblings and foster children, it may be concluded that there is a genetic component in the intelligence test performance of individuals.