Showing posts with label family_background. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family_background. Show all posts

Thursday, 3 October 2019

The UK's ‘culture of aspiration’, and how the political class misunderstand it

an article by Duncan Exley (independent author) published in IPPR Progressive Review Volume 26 Issue 2 (Autumn 2019)

Abstract

We need to create a political narrative that appeals to aspirations that are part of the cultural values of the majority of the UK. This means involving people with insights and values from beyond the ‘political class’.

Full text (PDF 8pp)


Saturday, 14 October 2017

Cumulative Inequalities over the Life-Course: Life-long Learning and Social Mobility in Britain

an article by Erzsébet Bukodi (University of Oxford, UK) published in Journal of Social Policy Volume 46 Issue 2 (April 2017)

Abstract

This paper examines the possibility that life-long learning promotes intergenerational class mobility. The following two research questions are asked.

  • Is it the case that further education provides individuals coming from less advantaged origins with a second chance to improve on their educational attainment?
  • Is it the case that the returns to further qualifications, in terms of chances of upward class career mobility, are greater for children from less advantaged backgrounds than for children from more advantaged backgrounds?

The analyses – that are based on the complete educational and class histories of men and women in a British birth cohort – mainly produce negative findings. Children coming from managerial and professional backgrounds seem to benefit most from further education.

More specifically, further education appears to be an effective means of career advancement for individuals of managerial and professional origins who start out in their working lives in relatively low-level class positions. Via further education they can increase or update their qualifications, and in turn enhance their chances of being counter-mobile back to their class of origin.

Overall, based on the findings of this paper, we can conclude that qualifications attained through life-long learning primarily serve to maintain, rather than to narrow, inequalities attached to social origins in Britain.

Full text (HTML)


Sunday, 24 July 2016

The effects of father’s worklessness on young adults in the UK

an article by Wouter Zwysen (Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex) published in IZA Journal of European Labor Studies Volume 4 Number 2 (2015)

Abstract

Using the United Kingdom household longitudinal study (UKHLS), this paper shows the effect of experiencing a father being out of work on a range of labour market outcomes as young adults.

Children of non-working fathers work less and are less satisfied while working despite similar wages and contract types.

A sensitivity analysis shows that this effect of father’s worklessness is robust to the inclusion of strong unobserved confounders, indicating non-spuriousness. Support is found for the idea that young adults who grew up experiencing their father’s worklessness develop a different, less negative attitude, towards being out of work.

JEL codes: J620, J640, J30

Full text (HTML)


Wednesday, 10 October 2012

Intergenerational transmission of worklessness: …

Evidence from the Millennium Cohort and the Longitudinal Study of Young People In England

a DFE Research Report (DFE-RR234) by Matt Barnes, Victoria Brown, Samantha Parsons, Andy Ross, and Ingrid Schoon (Centre for Analysis of Youth Transitions) and Anna Vignoles (Institute of Education and National Centre for Social Research) published by the DFE as DFE-RR234 in September 2012

Abstract

This project investigated the extent of parental worklessness in families with young and teenage children, and determined how parental worklessness impacts on children’s cognitive ability, education attainment, behaviours, attitude to school, academic aspirations and experience of the transition from school to work.

We found that parental worklessness was significantly associated with:
  • poorer academic attainment and behavioural adjustment of young children (at age 7)
  • poorer academic attainment (GCSE point scores) of young people (at Key Stage 4 (KS4))
  • with being not in education, employment and training (NEET) and with being NEET for longer (months spent in NEET) in late adolescence.
This result was obtained even after allowing for a number of other socioeconomic risks facing these children and young people (e.g. low income, low parental education level). Though it must be stated that much of the association (but not all) between parental worklessness and these outcomes was attributable to these other risk factors facing workless families.

Parental worklessness had no independent effect on a number of other outcomes, such as children’s well-being (not being happy at school, being bullied and bullying other children), feelings of lack of control, becoming a teen parent, and risky behaviour.

This evidence provides limited support for a policy agenda targeted only at getting parents back into work. It was generally not parental worklessness per se that caused poorer outcomes in childhood and adolescence but rather the complex needs and numerous socio-economic risks faced by workless families.

Our report cannot determine whether we should tackle the underlying sources of these risks (e.g. family poverty, poor parental education etc.) or deal directly with the consequences of these risks (e.g. poor achievement of young people at KS4; experience of NEET). What our research does clearly show is that policy needs to not only target getting parents back into work but also to address the other risks that these children and their families face

Full text (PDF 52pp)


Monday, 13 August 2012

How important is family background for labor-economic outcomes?

an article by Anders Björklund and Markus Jäntti (Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI), Stockholm University) published in Labour Economics Volume 19 Issue 4 (August 2012)

Abstract

This paper uses Swedish register data to examine four classical outcomes in empirical labor economics: IQ, noncognitive skills, years of schooling and long-run earnings.

We estimate sibling correlations – and the variance components that define the sibling correlation – in these outcomes.

We also estimate correlations for MZ-twins, who share all genes.

We also extend the variance-component decomposition by accounting for birth order. We find that conventional intergenerational approaches severely underestimate the role of family background, and that future research should follow a more multidimensional approach to the study of family background.

Highlights

► We estimate sibling correlations in five central labour-economic outcomes.
► These correlations suggest a large role for family background.
► Conventional intergenerational models underestimate the role of family background.
► Future research should find out what siblings share more than parental income.


Thursday, 3 May 2012

Employment key to social mobility

an Evidence Briefing paper published by the Economic and Social Research Council

Introduction

Research demonstrates a negative relationship between worklessness and outcomes for children over and above what would be expected due to other factors, such as material deprivation and low income. This underlines the importance of supporting parents to move into the labour market.

In addition, the high number of young people not in education, employment or training is a huge risk to the skill development of the current cohort of young people. Other research points to the pressing need for interventions, such as apprenticeships, that improve employability combined with strategies to improve the quality, flexibility, sustainability and progression routes of the jobs on offer.

Key findings
  • Family background characteristics are still influencing who gets the UK’s top jobs. Consistent with other evidence on social mobility, this trend appears to have worsened for many of the top professions over time.
  • The extent to which our economy will be able to produce more and more ‘top jobs’ needs to be considered. Avoiding future poverty may for many people be just as much a matter of being able to make a ‘good life’ from lower paid, lower status employment, and to find this worthwhile.
  • The first few years of life are not totally decisive, and interventions aimed at promoting mobility throughout the rest of childhood, adolescence and into working life are also important. Interventions that change students’ decisions at key points (e.g., the decision about whether to stay in full-time education beyond age 16) rather than influence their skills directly, could still have a positive impact on social mobility.
  • Apprenticeships used to offer not just skill acquisition but also five years of structured, disciplined relationships with adults. For many young people who have not experienced this at home, the apprenticeship system offers a chance of psychological growth and development. However, demand from potential apprentices for training significantly outstrips the supply of places made available by employers.
  • Targeted educational opportunities for mature women from ethnic minority groups are needed to assist ethnic minority women into the workplace, improve workplace culture and to progress in employment.
  • Developing the evidence base on ‘what works’ in terms of intervention is vital. Robust field trials of promising interventions should become a core part of the child poverty strategy, building an evidence base of action which is proven to work, cost-effective and capable of being scaled up to the required level.
  • While inducing lone mothers to work could lift some children out of poverty, encouraging young mothers to take up any employment might also impact negatively on their children, particularly in the absence of good quality childcare. Supporting employment through the provision of good quality childcare is a priority.
  • Undertaking interventions to improve social mobility at the very bottom of the skill or income distribution may be more difficult and more expensive than interventions to improve the social mobility of those nearer the middle of the distribution.
  • Understanding how to manage money requires complex skills and those with poorer levels of education can find financial decisions difficult, particularly in terms of accessing appropriate advice, products and services.