Download
1 / 11
110 likes | 180 Views
This study examines the impact of early tracking in the Netherlands on educational opportunities, particularly for disadvantaged and non-Western migrant students. While a stratified system can be efficient, it may hinder equal opportunities. Research suggests that early tracking reinforces inequalities and leads to varying learning outcomes. However, systemic characteristics do not fully explain these disparities, as social, cultural, and organizational factors also play a significant role. Despite some positive trends, such as increased participation of non-Western migrant students in tertiary education, disparities persist. Successful migrant students display high motivation and resilience, often utilizing flexible pathways through the education system. The study explores the need for a mix of approaches, including post-selection mobility and timely compensation for disadvantages, to address these challenges. Non-Western migrant students may require alternative routes to access social capital due to structural disparities in guidance and selection processes. The verdict on the effectiveness of existing flexibility in the education system remains ambiguous, posing questions about the balance between stratification and equal opportunities.
E N D
OECD vs the Netherlands Early tracking – or: are we flexible enough?
A stratified education system • students are subject to institutionalised differentiation from age 12 • OECD 2007: differentiation diminishes opportunities for disadvantaged and non-Western migrant pupils to enter Tertiary Education • Tension: stratified system is efficient, but what about equal opportunities for all?
What about equal opportunities? • Most research results suggest that early tracking reinforces inequality through: * strengthening socio-economic deficit * more inequality in learning outcomes However: causal relationship between systemic characteristics and (un)equal opportunities appears problematic
Systemic characteristics do not explain everything • School careers: social, cultural and organisational characteristics are more important than systemic features • “Education cannot compensate for society” • Paradox in the Netherlands? Despite inequality in learning outcomes, their differentiation is relatively limited
Learning outcomes and non-Western migrant pupils in the Netherlands • Lower learning outcomes follow from lower socio-economic status • However: in Primary Education migrant pupils catch up a lot (not all) and this continues in Secondary Education • Participation of non-Western migrant students in Tertiary Education has strongly increased • Yet migrant school careers retain peculiar characteristics
School career characteristics of non-Western migrants • In general achievement is lower • Within the group there are major differences (some without qualification, others in Tertiary Education) • Succesful migrant students achieve better than native students (after correction for socio-economic deficit) • They are highly motivated • They make extensive use of roundabout routes through the system (flexibility)
Flexibility goes even further • In the 3d year of Secondary Education, 24 % of pupils is no longer in the school-type where he/she started (13 % upward, 11 % downward) • Mobility within vmbo and with havo/vwo is substantial during the first years (upward from vmbo to havo 6 – 7 %) • There are no impermeable walls between the school-types
Early tracking and flexibility • A substantial flexibility exists – but is it enough? • A mix of approaches is advisable * post-selection mobility (as shown above) * timely compensation for disadvantages * investing in education time (ECEC)
The verdict is ambiguous (?) • Non-Western migrant students need the roundabout routes to gather social capital • Non-Western migrant students are duped because they are structurally “under-advised” and thus are selected on perseverance instead of talent and capacity
