The myth of education-based meritocracy

(2003) - J. H. Goldthorpe

Journal: New Economy
Link::
DOI:: 10.1046/j.1468-0041.2003.00324.x
Links::
Tags:: #paper #Attainment #LabourMarket
Cite Key:: [@Goldthorpe2003]

Abstract

T he theory of education-based meritocracy was developed, chiefly by American sociologists such as Daniel Bell, in the 1960s and 1970s. Subsequently, the theory has gained wide acceptance and influence among academics, policy specialists and politicians. In most modern societies it could now be regarded as conventional wisdom.

Notes

“To conclude, across modern societies three things appear generally to militate against steady progress towards an education-based meritocracy and bring out the weaknesses of the underlying theory.” (Goldthorpe, 2003, p. 239)

“Children of less advantaged class origins do not translate their demonstrated academic ability into courses that lead on to higherlevel qualifications to the same extent as do children of more advantaged origins” (Goldthorpe, 2003, p. 239)

“There is no good reason why employers should only be interested in, or be increasingly interested in, the formal qualifications of potential employees; ‘non-meritocratic’ characteristics that derive more from socialisation than from education may also, to a growing extent, have productive value.” (Goldthorpe, 2003, p. 239)

“Children from more advantaged class origins who do not do well educationally have other resources available to them to protect them against downward mobility” (Goldthorpe, 2003, p. 239)

“resources that reflect their social background rather than their individual achievements.” (Goldthorpe, 2003, p. 239)