False equivalence? Differences in the post-16 qualifications market and outcomes in higher education
False equivalence? Differences in the post-16 qualifications market and outcomes in higher education
复制标题
错误等价？
DOI：
10.1080/00131911.2017.1293614
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
A. Masardo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Shields;A. Masardo
摘要本文考察了不同入学资格的学生在高等教育成果上的差异。这项研究是在16岁以上学历日益市场化、竞争和私有化的背景下进行的，同时具有职业资格(例如商业和技术教育委员会资格)或学术和职业资格混合的学生进入高等教育的人数也在增加。它借鉴了关于教育市场的文献，以及关于教育选择和途径的研究，以检验不同的入学资格是否提供了在高等教育中同等的成功机会。该分析采用多水平Logistic回归分析了入学资格类型(学术、职业和混合)与在大学获得一等或二等以上学位的可能性之间的关系，这与劳动力市场和研究生学习机会的增加有关。在控制了一系列人口和机构特征后，分析发现，拥有职业资格的学生进入高等教育的可能性大幅下降。这些结果是与教育市场理论、社会阶层和教育理论相联系的。
Abstract This paper investigates differences in higher education outcomes according to the qualifications with which students enter university. The study is situated in the context of increasing marketization, competition and privatization in post-16 qualifications, combined with an increase in students entering higher education with either vocational qualifications (e.g. the Business and Technology Education Council [BTEC] qualification) or a mix of academic and vocational qualifications. It draws upon literature on markets in education as well as studies on educational choice and pathways to examine whether different entry qualifications offer equal chances of success in higher education. Using multilevel logistic regression, the analysis examines the relationship between types of entry qualifications (academic, vocational and mixed) and the probability of achieving a first or upper-second class degree at university, which are associated with increased opportunities in the labour market and postgraduate study. Controlling for a range of demographic and institutional characteristics, the analysis identifies a strong decrease in the probability of a first or upper-second class degree for students who enter higher education with vocational qualifications. These results are discussed in relation to theories of markets in education and social class and education