Search

The transition research framework combines two selection mechanisms, one non-discriminatory, based on equality criteria for transition from home to education, the other discriminatory, based on suitability criteria for transition from education to labour market. With the expansive, egalitarian Nordic higher education policy as its starting point, and drawing on Bourdieuan-Collinsian ideas and Finnish census data, the article examines changes in inequality of educational opportunity and labour market returns to university graduates over the course of three decades. Two elite university generations (born in 1946 and 1966) and one mass higher education age group (born in 1976) are compared by gender and family background. Differences in participation in university education, as measured by odds ratios, have narrowed in three generations by a sequence: 19.1-10.8-8.2, being still eightfold in favour of students from academic families. The differences in relative returns to university graduates (academic versus non-academic background) were minimal for those born in 1946 (1.01), whereas for the '1966 generation' they were threefold (3.17) in favour of graduates from academic homes. Our simulations predict high returns for the 1966 generation at the mature career stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses mainly on the key results of research on the differences in participation in higher education in Finland in the 1980s and 1990s. The recent discussion surrounding the methods of measuring participation in higher education is also considered. The results show that, in 1980, the odds for children of the well educated participating in higher education was 13 times greater than that of children of fathers with only a basic level of education. Since then, the trend has decreased slowly from 12 in 1985 to 10 in 1995. Despite the various egalitarian policy measures applied by the State, the difference in participation, indicated by the odds ratio 10, is still enormous, and the actual situation for youth with poor family backgrounds has not changed during the past decades. The persistent inequality of educational opportunity in relative terms revealed by the odds ratio, which the authors argue to be the appropriate measure for changes over time, is analysed further by exploring regional differences and the differences between various fields of study. It is shown that the real competition for higher education is among the well off. This is illustrated by a metaphor from bicycle racing: even if the tail-end cyclists reach the main pack, the front-runners widen their gap between the main pack. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]