Social Inequality in Dropout from Higher Education in Germany. Towards Combining the Student Integration Model and Rational Choice Theory

Abstract

Students from a lower socioeconomic background have a higher risk of dropping out of higher education. The underlying mechanisms of this association between socioeconomic background and higher education dropout are not well understood. Previous research in higher education has followed Tinto’s model of academic and social integration to explain dropout but has largely neglected social inequality therein. In contrast, social stratification research draws on rational choice theory to explain social inequality in educational attainment but has rarely been applied to explain dropout from higher education. In our paper, we combine these two strands of research. Utilizing data from the National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), we draw on a largescale, representative sample of students in Germany to quantify the relative contribution of each theoretical approach for explaining social inequality in dropout from higher education. Binary logistic regression models reveal that both students’ integration and costs-benefit considerations are associated with their dropout risk net of each other. While academic and social integration appears to better predict dropout, rational choice theory accounts for a larger proportion of social inequality therein. We conclude that combining Tinto’s model and rational choice theory provides a more comprehensive perspective of dropouts from higher education and social inequality therein.

The relevance of basic psychological needs and subject interest as explanatory variables for student dropout in higher education — a German case study using the example of a cooperative education program

“…Current research supports this (Allensworth & Clark, 2020). Furthermore, socioeconomic status (SES) would be a worth control variable due to its effects on motivation (Jansen et al, 2022;Tucker-Drob et al, 2012), achievement (Sirin, 2005;Steinmayr et al, 2012;Tucker-Drob & Harden, 2012), and dropout (Müller & Klein, 2022;Mϋller & Schneider, 2013). However, accurate measures for SES are not available in our data.…”

Misfits or misrecognition? Exploring STEMM degree students' concerns about non‐completion

“…This has led some researchers to seek to integrate additional interpretive models with Tinto's, such as Müller and Klein (2022), who found that rational choice theory better helped to account for the role of social stratification in exacerbating attrition.…”

“…Comparatively few studies have focused on the area of social integration, although those that do have drawn attention to the negative impact of experiences of social isolation and disconnect from peer groups and the impact this can have on attrition (e.g., G. Johnes and McNabb, 2004; Müller & Klein, 2022; Smith & Naylor, 2002; Yorke, 1999). Most research on non‐completion has focused on academic preparedness and/or students' academic pre‐entry attributes, exploring the lack of academic integration (or “mismatch”) between students and the course and/or university in question (e.g., G. Johnes and McNabb, 2004)—or what others have termed the issue of student “preparedness” (e.g., Smith & Naylor, 2002; Yorke, 1999).…”

“…For instance, it has been argued that his ideas do not apply to all types of higher education institution (e.g., Braxton et al, 2000) and may be more applicable to students who attend full time and live on campus (e.g., Müller & Klein, 2022). In particular, the overwhelming majority of empirical evidence in support of Tinto's model hails from the United States and whether the model proves fruitful for explaining drop‐out beyond the US higher education system remains an open question (Müller & Klein, 2022). Müller and Klein (2022) also noted that Tinto's model does not provide a good explanation for why working‐class students in Germany experience higher rates of attrition than their more affluent peers.…”

“…OECD (2017) data suggests that, internationally, women are more likely to complete degrees than men. In contexts such as the United Kingdom, Europe, and the United States, racially minoritized students and those from low-income families are at a higher risk of non-completion (e.g., Hillman, 2021;Müller & Klein, 2022), with some studies suggesting that attrition among racially minoritized students may be higher within STEM degrees (e.g., Morton & Parsons, 2018;. In the United Kingdom, more selective UK universities tend to record lower non-completion rates than less selective institutions (Hillman, 2021), but again with considerable variations between subject areas and some indication that racialized patterns in attrition are not evident when controlling for socioeconomic status (e.g., Rodgers, 2013).…”