Gender- and SES-Specific Disparities in Shadow Education: Compensation for Boys, Status Upgrade for Girls? Evidence From the German LifE Study

Entrich, Steve R.; Lauterbach, Wolfgang

doi:10.14712/23363177.2020.10

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, detailed analyses further showed that it is not the economic resources of a family that determine whether SE is used, but that cultural and educational resources stronger influence SE access. In fact, these results coincide with the results of national studies, which indicate that economic resources play a greater role for less educated groups and that economically less advantaged strata make even more use of SE to support their below-average-performing children in Germany (Entrich and Lauterbach, 2019, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Worldwide shadow education and social inequality: Explaining differences in the socioeconomic gap in access to shadow education across 63 societies

Entrich

2020

International Journal of Comparative Sociology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the cross-national differences in socioeconomic accessibility to shadow education (SE) across 63 societies. Drawing on arguments from two competing theoretical models either emphasizing cross-national cultural, economic, and institutional differences (e.g. model of secondary schooling, scale of SE) or universally working social reproduction mechanisms (e.g. enrichment features of SE), this study provides a novel approach to understanding the role of SE for social inequality. More specifically, while the first model explicitly allows equality in access to SE, the latter suggests that SE fosters inequality under all circumstances. Using data from the 2012 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and official sources, first, the difference in the probability of top in comparison to bottom socioeconomic strata to use SE is predicted separately for all societies, before analyzing what causes the found considerable cross-national variation in the socioeconomic gap in access to SE at the country level. Results indicate that differences in SE access are linked to incentives for high-performing students to use SE. These incentives are especially common in societies with higher educational institutional differentiation (e.g. early or mixed tracking schooling models). In societies with less stratified education systems, access to SE is more equal, wherefore the potential effect of SE to social inequality is dampened. Overall, findings suggest that simple generalizations based on existing theoretical models provide no comprehensive explanation for the connection between SE and inequality. Instead, prominent beliefs about the relationship between SE and inequality are questioned.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Worldwide shadow education and social inequality: Explaining differences in the socioeconomic gap in access to shadow education across 63 societies

Entrich

2020

International Journal of Comparative Sociology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The work on the increase in the use of shadow education in Germany over the last two decades describes it as a gender specific phenomenon contrasting generally accepted beliefs that it promotes social inequity. It is largely independent of social origin but is mainly used by boys from non-academic high-income families while girls remain “unaffected by social origin entirely” (Entrich and Lauterbach, 2020). The authors’ later research states that despite dissimilarities of shadow education in different parts of the world and systems of education, it “always feeds into the broader institutionalization of education”, and moreover it “might occupy a key role in maintaining vertical and horizontal inequalities in educational attainment in schooled societies” (Entrich and Lauterbach, 2021).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shadow education: Shapes of private tutoring in e-learning environment

Glotova

Samoylenko

Zharko

et al. 2022

E-Learning and Digital Media

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern technologies and World Wide Web open new opportunities for smooth learning process making education more accessible and flexible. Digitalization of modern society has resulted in the transformation of all levels of education leading to the transition from mass education to high quality individual training. In modern context the quality of education is viewed as the most important indicator of the institutions’ competitiveness on the market of educational services. The quality of education is the priority of states’ policy agenda around the world. The paper considers “shadow education” and private tutoring, as one of its forms. The term “private tutoring” is defined in the article based on the analysis of legislative and regulatory sources that allow to provide tutoring services using e-learning tools and technologies in compliance with the legal framework of the Russian Federation. The legitimacy of the notion of “private tutoring” in the legislation of Russia is justified in the research. An overview of sites offering tutoring services is given with the comparison of price range, depending on the academic subject and regions of Russia. Besides, the advantages and disadvantages of private tutoring are outlined. The results of the study showed that private tutoring services are in high demand due to two main factors: the insufficient level of public/private education received and the inconsistency in knowledge obtained and the requirements of national and international labor markets. The paper also contains the review of popular educational platforms and online learning tools used by private tutors as well as pros and cons of their application. The results of the questionnaire offered to the academic staff of the V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University, the Sevastopol State University, and the Crimean Fevzi Yakubov Engineering and Pedagogical University show that most of educators practice online tutoring and consider it to be their additional professional activity.

show abstract

“…Although there is substantial research evidence on shadow education from these countries (e.g. Jansen, Elffers, and Volman 2020;Feistritzer 2020;Entrich and Lauterbach 2020;Kubánová 2006;Győri 2020), it has not directly addressed the question of differences in shadow education features between academic or regular-track students. Where differences are reflected upon, they are limited to comparisons of the scale of the phenomenon among students of different tracks/school types (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shadow education in the context of early tracking: between-track differences in the Czech Republic

Šťastný

2021

Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research on the implications of early-tracking education systems has not specifically focused on how studying in academic and non-academic tracks shapes the features and characteristics of shadow education (private tutoring) that students are involved in. The study compares the scale and features of private tutoring and the underlying factors of its reception among lower-secondary students in the two tracks. Analysing a representative sample of 1,280 senior grade students, the study found significant differences in scale, subjects and reasons for tutoring during their lower-secondary studies, which may partly explain the prevailing gaps in between-track student achievements. Early tracking is likely to contribute to increasing the overall scale of PT by introducing selective entrance examinations, which nurture the demand for PT. While parental education, books at home, city size and educational aspirations were significant predictors of private tutoring for regular-track students, they were insignificant for academic-track students.

show abstract

Gender- and SES-Specific Disparities in Shadow Education: Compensation for Boys, Status Upgrade for Girls? Evidence From the German LifE Study

Cited by 14 publications

References 35 publications

Worldwide shadow education and social inequality: Explaining differences in the socioeconomic gap in access to shadow education across 63 societies

Worldwide shadow education and social inequality: Explaining differences in the socioeconomic gap in access to shadow education across 63 societies

Shadow education: Shapes of private tutoring in e-learning environment

Shadow education in the context of early tracking: between-track differences in the Czech Republic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About