Search

There has been renewed policy interest in intergenerational social mobility as a route to a fairer society, but in ignoring the sociological evidence this article will argue that the current policy agenda will fail to achieve its goal. Based on an analysis of "social congestion", "social exclusion", and "social justice", it also argues that existing sociological research on education and social mobility needs to be extended. In the early decades of the twenty-first century, the experiences of working-class and middle-class students and families are not defined by intergenerational social mobility, but by social congestion and an opportunity trap.

This paper examines the sociology of education from the perspective of its recent history and attempts to assess the current state of the field. The authors argue that cognate disciplines such as economics and social policy have taken over some of the key questions that were once the preserve of sociology of education. This raises the question of what is lost if the sociology of education is no longer making a significant contribution, in key areas, to the major educational, social and economic issues of the day. (Contains 3 notes.)

International education can be seen as a kind of litmus test in interrogating the place of education, power, and ideology in a globalized economy. In this paper, the authors detail the development of international education both with respect to character and credentials, and identify its putative links with elite higher education. How then might this educational path feed into global class recruitment? If one accepts that significant aspects of class structuration develop out of economic relations, then clearly the plausibility of concepts like that of a transnational ruling class will depend upon global economic developments. Here there are two theoretically competing accounts of economic globalization which have a bearing on the issue of social class; the first relates to the ideology and practice of neoliberalism, which gives some plausibility to the emergence of a transnational ruling class, while the second sees economic globalization as fundamentally about imperialism--that is, a competition between nations for fundamental economic advantage across the globe. In this case the focus remains, as it has traditionally, on the construction of national class systems. (Contains 7 notes.)

Talk of the rise of a global war for talent and emergence of a new global meritocracy has spread from the literature on human resource management to shape nation-state discourse on managed migration and immigration reform. This article examines the implications that the global war for talent have for education policy. Given that this talent war is a product of neoliberalism, it raises many of the same concerns for educators as neoliberalism in general: the embrace and promotion of social, economic and educational inequality; and a narrow, market-based conception of education, skill and talent. This article argues, however, that the global war for talent represents a new phase in neoliberalism, as it seeks to liberalise the global movement not just of capital and commodities, but of high skill labour as well. In this, it threatens to undercut some of the founding assumptions and goals that have shaped national education policy in OECD countries throughout the post-World War II period, and raises serious concerns for how we are to think about and pursue equality, inclusion and fairness in and through education in the future.

The dominant view today is of a global knowledge-based economy, driven by the application of new technologies, accelerating the shift to high-skilled, high-waged European economies. This view is reflected in the expansion of higher education and the key role of higher education in national and European economic policy. The Lisbon agenda seeks to make the European Union "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion". Not only is education believed to hold the key to international competitiveness but to the foundations of social justice and social cohesion. This article outlines the underlying assumptions of this mantra, which in many respects has changed little since the 1960s when human capital theory gained increasing prominence in education and economic policy (Halsey, 1961). It examines the prospects for the creation of high-skills economies throughout Europe in light of new realities of the global economy. This analysis is based on interviews with senior managers and executives in leading transnational companies and government policy makers in seven countries including China and India. In conclusion, the authors outline a series of issues as a contribution toward a new agenda for education and the knowledge economy within the European Research Area. Following this essay are two responses: (1) "Expanding the Higher Education System and Building World-Class Universities: China's Response to Globalization and the Knowledge Economy." (Wang Yingje); and (2) "Education, Globalisation and the Future of the Knowledge Economy: Three Comments" (Stephan Vincent-Lancrin). (Contains 1 figure, 1 table, and 25 notes.)

This article examines the dominant view of the changing relationship between education, jobs and rewards in the global knowledge economy. This asserts that the developed economies can resolve issues of individual aspirations, economic efficiency and social justice through the creation of a high-skills, high-wage "magnet" economy. Here the authors examine four of the key dimensions of this account and argue that while there has been a fundamental change in the relationship between education, economy and society, their conclusions are far removed from the assumptions that currently inform public and policy debates. (Contains 3 tables, 4 figures and 29 notes.)