Search Results

This chapter takes into account information about parents' education and political involvement and about the home political environment, which adds another dimension to the persistence of inequalities of political voice. These processes, in short, work across generations. Those who had well-educated parents are, for two reasons, more likely to be politically active as adults. For one thing, they are more likely to have grown up in politically stimulating homes with parents who were politically active and an environment of frequent political discussion. More important but less often noticed, because educational attainment is likely to be handed on across generations, those whose parents were well educated are more likely to become well educated themselves, with consequences for the acquisition of many other factors that encourage political participation.

This chapter, which uses statistical techniques to deal with sample-selection problems in order to determine the relative importance of primary and secondary effects in creating inequalities in Italy, considers the influence of parental class and education in creating inequalities in the transitions to upper secondary and tertiary education. It finds that there are very large inequalities related to social background, at both the level of upper secondary and tertiary education. Only a minority of children from the lowest backgrounds enroll in the academic track. Although all upper secondary school degrees provide access to university, completion of the academic track is a strong predictor of tertiary-education enrollment. Therefore, inequality at early stages of the school career carries over to university participation.

Drawing on sociological and psychological theoretical perspectives, this chapter elaborates on two research questions. How does parents' formal education influence children's internet use? And how does children's development by age interact with their family background in terms of an autonomous and competent use of the internet? The interrelation between these two processes, parental socialisation and development by age, helps us understand the interplay of children's activities in dealing with the internet and their parents' handling of that. The chapter first discusses the persistent importance of social inequality for information and communications technology (ICT) use in the industrialised countries. It then elaborates on a theoretical framework by discussing both children and parents' individual agency and how these are interlinked with respect to their societal status. Finally, based on the EU Kids Online dataset, it tests out the theoretical ideas and hypotheses and ask how parental socialisation shapes young people's online competences, and how children's development by age interacts with structural processes and dynamics of socialisation. Children with a lower socio-economic background agree that they know more about the internet than their parents, as these children might acquire internet skills often independently from their parents.

Education is a multiplier right. Without education, other rights cannot be fully enjoyed. Education is also an accelerator right: it equips people to enter the labour force and participate in public life. However, education is not only an instrumental right. It should primarily be regarded as an intrinsic right, valuable in its own terms. Section II considers how the freedom, social, and equality components of the right are reflected in different human rights instruments, contrasting these to education in the Sustainable Development Goals. Section III considers the meaning of ‘free and compulsory’ education and particularly the paradoxical nature of a compulsory right. Section IV examines the complex contestations between the freedom and equality dimensions of the right, especially in the context of parental choice as to the religious, moral, or political nature of the right to education. Section V is concerned with the extent to which a human rights approach to education can be used to achieve quality education.

This chapter assesses IEO in relation to parental education in the Netherlands. It shows the contribution of primary and secondary effects to IEO in the transitions to upper secondary and tertiary education for cohorts of students born in the 1970s and later. The chapter provides an overview of the Dutch educational system and the distribution of students in educational tracks over time. Results show that the relative importance of secondary effects at the first transition at age 12 has decreased over time and now amounts to an average of 38 percent of total IEO at this transition. While secondary effects lose some of their power at this transition, their importance clearly grows at later educational transitions.

This study analyses the determinants of learning outcomes (measured as test scores). It reconfirms that socio-economic variables and parental education impact learning outcome. While mother’s education is an important factor in getting children to school, and keeping them there, this factor loses much of its significance when it comes to student achievement. Father’s education, on the other hand becomes a lot more important, even when controlling for paid tuition. Our study is restricted to government schools. This does not reduce the validity of the study since those who use such schools, still constitute a large majority of school-going children in India. Second, parents, who demonstrate a demand for education by making a choice and attendant sacrifices to send their children to private school, may theoretically be in a better position to then engage with the school and actualize better outcomes.