Skip to main content

Higher Education and Inequality in Anglo-American Societies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Student Equity in Australian Higher Education

Abstract

The founding moment in the Anglo-American approach to equality of opportunity in education was the early to mid 1960s, a time of relatively high social mobility, with the Master Plan in California, the Robbins report in Great Britain and the Martin report in Australia. Equality of opportunity, joined to the production of human capital, was expected to create a prosperous meritocratic society. Because the founding notions were utopian the outcome was bound to be somewhat disappointing, but as Thomas Piketty shows in Capital in the Twenty-first Century (2014), equality of opportunity was further retarded by the shift to growing economic and social inequality after 1980, together with the plutocratic capture of policy. In the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia there is now little appetite for weakening the stratifying effects of elite private schools, lifting the quality of state schools, and opening up more egalitarian access to the leading universities. Compared to the US and UK there is a higher degree of intergenerational social mobility, as well as more egalitarian higher education, in most European nations. But reform in higher education alone has limited prospects. To achieve a ‘fair chance for all’, the preconditions lie in changes in the distribution of economic rewards, a reduced tolerance for social hierarchy, and the re-democratisation of politics and policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    I thank Glyn Davis for drawing attention to this essay.

  2. 2.

    Under UC Berkeley’s progressive tuition policy, 40 % of undergraduates are subsidized by other students and pay no tuition, and two thirds receive at least some financial aid. Half Berkeley’s students graduate with no debt. The average graduate debt of $19,000 is just over two thirds of the national average of $27,000 (Douglass 2013, pp. 4–5; Soares 2007, pp. 166–167).

  3. 3.

    The violation of the merit principle in relation to Asian-Americans is the subject of a legal challenge to Harvard (Associated Press 2015). Longstanding use of non-academic criteria by the Ivy League enables them to discriminate, but the problem may also extend to the University of California (Samson 2013).

  4. 4.

    It is ironic that while current international agency literature on inequality pins the blame for growing inequality on super-salaries rather than education, it gives education policy principal credit for cases of reduced inequality, e.g. Brazil; and high growth without growing inequality, e.g. South Korea, and treats education policy as key to reducing inequality (OECD 2010, 2014b; Lee et al. 2012; Cingano 2014; Oxfam 2014, p. 18). However, it is plausible that reduced inequality, and better access to good quality education, both have origins in third factors such as changing economic values, growing trust and/or political reform; and clearly each is facilitated by, as well as facilitating, increased social mobility.

References

  • Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2014). Aspiring adults adrift. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Associated Press (2015). Asian American groups file racial quotas complaint against Harvard University. The Guardian, 16 May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentele, K. (2013). Distinct paths to higher inequality? A qualitative comparative analysis of rising earnings inequality among U.S. States, 1980–2010. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 34, 30–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingley, P., Corak, M. & Westergård-Nielsen, N. (2011). The intergenerational transmission of employers in Canada and Denmark. IZA discussion paper No. 5593. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boliver, V. (2011). Expansion, differentiation, and the persistence of social class inequalities in British higher education. Higher Education, 61, 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boliver, V. (2013). How fair is access to more prestigious UK universities? The British Journal of Sociology, 64(2), 344–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgen, N. (2015). College quality and the positive selection hypothesis: The ‘second filter’ on family background in high-paid jobs. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 39, 32–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production (Trans. various). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand, J., & Xie, Y. (2010). Who benefits most from college? Evidence for negative selection in heterogeneous economic returns to higher education. American Sociological Review, 75, 273–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chankseliani, M. (2013). Rural disadvantage in Georgian higher education admissions: A mixed-methods study. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 424–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cingano, F. (2014). Trends in income inequality and its impact on economic growth. OECD social, employment and migration working papers, No. 163. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corak, M. (2006). Do poor children become poor adults? Lessons from a cross country comparison of generational earnings mobility. IZA discussion paper No. 1993. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croucher, G., Marginson, S., Norton, A., & Wells, J. (Eds.). (2013). The Dawkins revolution 25 years on. Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, S., & Krueger, A. (2011). Estimating the return to college selectivity over the career using administrative earnings data. NBER working paper 17159. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S., & Zarifa, D. (2012). The stratification of universities: Structural inequality in Canada and the United States. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 30, 143–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education, Employment and Training. (1990). A fair chance for all: National and institutional planning for equity in higher education. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deresiewicz, W. (2014). Excellent sheep: The miseducation of the American elite and the way to a meaningful life. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorling, D. (2014). Inequality and the 1 %. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglass, J. (2013). To grow or not to grow? A post-great recession synopsis of the political, financial, and social contract challenges facing the University of California. Research and occasional paper CSHE 15.13. Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gale, T., & Parker, P. (2013). Widening participation in Australian higher education. Report submitted to the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and the Office for Fair Access (OFFA), England. August.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärtner, S., & Prado, S. (2012). Inequality, trust and the welfare state: The Scandinavian model in the Swedish mirror. Högre seminariet, 7 November. Ekonomisk-historiska institutionen, Göteborgs universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, R. (2015). Does higher education cause inequality? Essay review on Mettler (2014) and Armstrong and Hamilton (2013). American Journal of Education, 121(2), 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, C. (2011). Investigating the organizational sources of high-wage earnings growth and rising inequality. Social Science Research, 40, 902–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, P. (2014). Establishment and meritocracy. London: Haus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoxby, C., & Avery, C. (2013, Spring). The missing “one-offs”: The hidden supply of high-achieving, low-income students. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Washington: DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, A., & Vargas, N. (2015). Horizontal stratification of higher education in urban China. Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s10734-014-9833-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussain, I., McNally, S., & Telhaj, S. (2009). University quality and graduate wages in the UK. IZA discussion paper No. 4043. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, E., O’Connell, P., & Smyth, E. (2010). The economic returns to field of study and competencies among higher education graduates in Ireland. Economics of Education Review, 29, 650–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C. (2001a). The gold and the blue: A personal memoir of the University of California, 1949–1967 (Academic triumphs, Vol. 1). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C. (2001b/1963). The uses of the University (5th ed.) First edition 1963. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., Lee, M., & Park, D. (2012). Growth policy and inequality in developing Asia: Lesson from Korea. ERIA discussion paper 2012–12. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIAEA). Senayan, Indonesia: ERIAEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, S. (2001). Effectively maintained inequality: Education transitions, track mobility, and social background effects. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1642–1690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, S. (2009). Stratification theory, socioeconomic background, and educational attainment: A formal analysis. Rationality and Society, 21, 459–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macintyre, S. (2015). Australia’s boldest experiment: War and reconstruction in the 1940s. Sydney: UNSW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, S. (1997a). Educating Australia: Government, economy, and citizen since 1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, S. (1997b). Markets in education. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L. (1964). Tertiary education in Australia. Melbourne: Australian Universities Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melguizo, T., & Wolniak, G. (2012). The earnings benefits of majoring in STEM fields among high achieving minority students. Research in Higher Education, 53, 383–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mettler, S. (2014). Degrees of inequality: How the politics of higher education sabotaged the American dream. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mincer, J. (1958). Investment in human capital and personal income distribution. Journal of Political Economy, 66(4), 281–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mountford-Zimdars, A., & Sabbagh, D. (2013). Fair access to higher education: A comparative perspective. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 359–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD. (2010). Growth, employment and inequality in Brazil, China, India and South Africa: An overview. Paris: OECD Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, (2014a). Education at a glance 2014. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, (2014b). United States: Tackling high inequalities, creating opportunities for all. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxfam. (2014). Even it up: Time to end extreme inequality. Oxford: Oxfam GB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry, G. (2011). Mobility and hierarchy in the age of near-universal access. Critical Studies in Education, 52(2), 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2014). In A. Goldhammer (Ed.), Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, L. (2011). Ivies, extracurriculars, and exclusion: Elite employers’ use of educational credentials. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 29, 71–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, L. (2012). Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms. American Sociological Review, 77(6), 999–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, L. (1966). The University in the modern world. New York: St Martin’s Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, L. (1963). Higher education: Report. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robst, J. (2007). Education and job match: The relatedness of college major and work. Economics of Education Review, 26, 397–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roksa, J. (2005). Double disadvantage or blessing in disguise? Understanding the relationship between college major and employment sector. Sociology of Education, 78(3), 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roksa, J., & Levey, T. (2010). What can you do with that degree? College major and occupational status of college graduates over time. Social Forces, 89(2), 389–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samson, F. (2013). Altering public university admission standards to preserve white group position in the United States. Results from a laboratory experiment. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 369–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, T. (1959). Investment in man: An economists’ view. Social Service Review, 33(2), 109–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, T. (1960). Capital formation by education. Journal of Political Economy, 68(6), 571–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, T. (1961). Investment in human capital. American Economic Review, 51(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavit, Y., Arum, R., & Gamoran, A. (2007). Stratification in higher education: A comparative study. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soares, J. (2007). The power of privilege: Yale and America’s elite colleges. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (2013). The price of inequality. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • The PELL Institute. (2015). Indicators of higher education equity in the United States. Co-published with PennAHEAD, Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania. http://www.pellinstitute.org/downloads/publications-Indicators_of_Higher_Education_Equity_in_the_US_45_Year_Trend_Report.pdf

  • Tholen, G., Brown, P., Power, S., & Allouch, A. (2013). The role of networks and connections in educational elites’ labour market entrance. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 34, 142–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen, P., Munk, M., Eiberg-Madsen, M., & Hansen, G. (2013). The educational strategies of Danish university students from professional and working class backgrounds. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 457–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tridico, P. (2012). Financial crisis and global imbalances: Its labour market origins and the aftermath. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36, 17–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triventi, M. (2013). The role of higher education stratification in the reproduction of social inequality in the labor market. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 32, 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trow, M. (1973). Problems in the transition from elite to mass higher education. Berkeley: Carnegie Commission on Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Programme, UNDP. (2013). Humanity divided. Washington: UNDP.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2015). UNESCO Institute for Statistics data on education. http://data.uis.unesco.org/

  • Unz, R. (2012). The myth of American meritocracy. The American Conservative, December (pp. 14–51).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisman, J. (2013). Wage stagnation, rising inequality and the financial crisis of 2008. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 37, 921–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolniak, G., Seifert, T., Reed, E., & Pascarella, E. (2008). College majors and social mobility. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 26, 123–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, W. (2012). Economic inequality, status perceptions, and subjective well-being in China’s transitional economy. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 30, 433–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Marginson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Marginson, S. (2016). Higher Education and Inequality in Anglo-American Societies. In: Harvey, A., Burnheim, C., Brett, M. (eds) Student Equity in Australian Higher Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0315-8_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0315-8_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-0313-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-0315-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics