Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
J Schneider - UVA
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

J Schneider - UVA

429

Published on

J Schneider - UVA

J Schneider - UVA

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
429
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Study success among 2nd Generation Turkish students Results from the TIES Survey Jens Schneider AISSR, UvA Mix-In Conference on Diversity in Higher Education, Amsterdam, 22-23 March 2010 TIES = “The Integration of the European Second Generation” = a quantitative survey on children of immigrants born in destination countries of labour migration in the 1960/70s. = almost 10.000 respondents in 15 cities in 8 countries: Sweden, Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Austria and Spain. 1
  • 2. INTERVIEWS per city and group Turkish “Yugoslavian” Moroccan Comparison Group Total Austria: Wien 252 253 - 250 755 Linz 206 242 - 234 682 Belgium: Brussel 250 - 257 271 778 Antwerpen 358 - 312 303 973 France: Paris 248 - - 174 422 Strasbourg 252 - - 177 429 Germany: Berlin 255 202 - 250 707 Frankfurt 250 204 - 253 707 Netherlands: Amsterdam 237 - 242 259 738 Rotterdam 263 - 251 253 767 Spain: Madrid - - 250 250 500 Barcelona - - 250 250 500 Sweden: Stockholm 250 - - 250 500 Switzerland: Zürich 206 235 - 202 643 Basel 252 200 - 266 718 TOTAL 3.275 1.327 1.562 3.642 9.806 TIES 2007/2008 Survey Organisation International Coordination: General: Universiteit van Amsterdam Survey: Nederlands Interdisciplinair Demografisch Instituut (NIDI), The Hague National Partners: Germany: Universität Osnabrück France: Institut National d’Etudes Démografique (INED), Paris Austria: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien Switzerland: Université de Neuchâtel Belgium: Katolieke Universiteit Leuven Sweden: Stockholm Universitet Spain: Universidad Pontificia Comillas de Madrid The Netherlands: see above. 2
  • 3. Departure point Much attention to problems of educational integration of immigrant children, BUT: • the educational system and the integration context are often taken for granted; • no distinction between immigrant children and “native-born” children of immigrants; • only differences between groups are looked at, which overemphasizes “ethnic” differences. → Alternative: comparing the same groups in different contexts BUT: international comparison is very difficult (data collection methods, group definition criteria etc.). → Basic Idea of TIES: A survey on the same groups in various European countries with the same questionnaire and definitional criteria. • Target Group: native-born children of Turkish, Moroccan or former Yugoslavian immigrants in the age group 18 to 35 (= Second Generation) Definition of Second Generation in TIES: All persons born and resident in the respective survey country from either one or both parents being born in Turkey, Morocco or former Yugoslavia. • Comparison Group: native-born children of native-born parents in the same age group and from the same neighbourhoods 3
  • 4. Sampling in TIES • Population registers as database in Austria, Belgium (Antwerp), Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland • Additional onomastic analysis in Austria, Belgium, Germany, and Switzerland • Phone directory screening + name recognition in France; Census street segment screening + name recognition in Brussels • “Rare element”-sampling (e.g. difficult to find in Paris; approaching the “entire group” in Linz) TIES Questionnaire • Educational careers and attainments • Labour market careers • Discrimination • Identity formation • Social relations • Religion • Transnationalism • Partner choice and family relations 4
  • 5. Education (42+ questions) • Special focus on transitions and steps/choices taken in school trajectories: Starting age of schooling School choices and given advice Transitions (to other schools, to higher levels, repetitions) Highest level of schooling (incl. drop-out) Highest obtained diploma (incl. branch of study) • also: School context and climate in secondary education (e.g. relation to teachers and students, extra help, discrimination) • also: Situation at home (siblings, homework guidance, role of parents, learning environment) Highest diploma Turkish G2 maximum maximum tertiary level lower secondary higher secondary (e.g. university) Austria 35,9% 49,6% 14,5% Belgium 24,0% 50,2% 24,8% France 15,8% 44,6% 39,6% Germany 34,7% 62,3% 3,0% Netherlands 32,1% 42,3% 25,6% Sweden 7,9% 55,0% 37,1% Switzerland 19,8% 67,0% 13,2% 5
  • 6. Still in education Turkish G2 Austria 19,7% Belgium 21,7% France 46,0% Germany 12,7% Netherlands 43,2% Sweden 22,7% Switzerland 42,8% Highest diploma + current level of education: Turkish G2 and Comparison Group TIES diverse 2007/2008 Netherlands Germany France Sweden Turk. CG. Turk. CG. Turk. CG. Turk. CG. Prim. primary 6,0% 1,2% 3,0% 2,4% 10,0% 1,4% n.a. n.a. special 1,5% 0,4% 0,8% 0,0% n.a. n.a n.a. n.a. Sec. I vocational 10,2% 5,0% 19,4% 6,6% n.a. n.a. n.a n.a integr. 1,7% 0,4% 0,4% 0,2% 3,8% 0,6% 2,0% 0,8% mixed 9,3% 3,2% 7,5% 4,8% n.a. n.a. n.a n.a academic n.a. n.a n.a n.a. n.a n.a. n.a n.a Sec II. apprent. 11,8% 5,6% 48,5% 49,5% 22,4% 11,1% n.a. n.a. post-sec. n.a. n.a. 5,9% 8,9% n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. vocational 23,4% 13,4% 0,4% 1,4% 14,8% 10% n.a. n.a. academic 1,0 6,2% 7,3% 7,2% 2,2% 3,1% 60,4% 35,6% Tert. vocational 26,6% 32,1% 1,9% 5,0% 7,4% 7,7% n.a. n.a. university 8,5% 39,6% 5,6% 14,1% 42,8% 66,1% 36,6% 63,6% 6
  • 7. Educational attainment Moroccan/Turk. G2 Still in education or highest diploma Moroccan G2 Turkish G2 Amsterdam primary 7,1% 4,2% lower sec. 16,6% 22,8% apprenticeship 12,4% 8,0% tertiary 32,0% 30,0% Rotterdam primary 9,2% 12,2% lower sec. 16,3% 19,0% apprenticeship 9,6% 13,3% tertiary 27,1% 27,4% Background Turkish parents: educational level of the fathers Austria CH Germany Belgium NL France Sweden max. 28,2% 33,5% 60,6% 38,7% 46,2% 48,8% 47,8% primary Sec I 50,2% 47,1% 19,6% 40,7% 35,0% 40,9% 28,6% Sec II + 15,9% 10,1% 1,6% 6,8% 6,2% 9,6% 15,5% Tert. No answer 5,7% 9,2% 18,2% 13,8% 12,6% 0,7% 8,1% total N 458 465 505 602 500 500 253 TIES diverse 2007/2008 7
  • 8. Educational level Turkish G2: current level + highest diploma (parents of high educational background) Brussels 4,7 63,6 31,8 Antwerp 6,0 58,1 35,9 Paris 4,0 27,3 68,7 Strasbourg 6,4 52,4 41,3 Stockholm 9,5 52,0 38,5 Zürich 10,3 77,3 12,4 Basel 17,8 68,3 13,9 Linz 8,6 59,1 32,3 Vienna 15,9 67,1 17,1 Frankfurt 16,3 67,4 16,3 Berlin 21,1 63,2 15,8 Rotterdam 25,4 38,8 35,8 Amsterdam 18,4 36,7 44,9 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% lower secondary or below Upper secondary and vocational orientated Post Seocndary & Tertiary education Educational level Turkish G2: current level + highest diploma (parents of low educational background) Brussels 15,1 60,3 24,7 Antwerp 10,1 64,5 25,4 Paris 12,5 36,4 51,1 Strasbourg 23,8 51,6 24,6 Stockholm 7,0 56,1 36,8 Zürich 19,0 63,8 17,2 Basel 22,1 66,3 11,6 Linz 32,8 49,2 18,0 Vienna 40,0 47,1 12,9 Frankfurt 34,1 63,8 2,2 Berlin 36,8 60,2 3,0 Rotterdam 37,2 42,5 20,4 Amsterdam 31,0 43,0 26,0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% lower secondary or below Upper secondary and vocational orientated Post Seocndary & Tertiary education 8
  • 9. Influential Factors e.g. Educational level of the parents; speaking about school at home; help with homework by parents or siblings; a quiet place to study; the number of books at home... only relevant, when school system fails to fulfill a “complete duty” (Germany: yes, Sweden: no); highest relevance in higher education Permeability of the system in both directions; second or third chances, long routes for “late bloomers” Germany: no; Netherlands: yes Better access conditions to the labour market through vocational training in “full-term”-apprenticeships Germany and Switzerland: yes; Netherlands and France: no 9
  • 10. Average starting age in education (incl. pre-school) Turkish G2 Starting age in school Austria 5.2 Belgium 3.0 France 3.1 Germany 4.2 Netherlands 4.0 Sweden 3.1 Switzerland 4.9 Selection age for secondary school Turkish G2 Selection age Austria 10 Belgium 14 France 15 Germany 10/12 Netherlands 12 Sweden 15 Switzerland 12 10
  • 11. Number of years in school before tracking and % of those in pre-academic tracks Turkish G2 joint years in school % in pre-academic track Sweden 11,9 56,2% France 11,9 53,6% Belgium 11,0 51,3% Netherlands 8,0 25,6% Germany 5,8/7,8 12,7% Switzerland 7,1 8,2% Austria 4,8 n.a. Turkish G2: Relation pre-academic track and actual access to higher education Pre-academic track Entering higher education Austria n.a. 19,7% Belgium 51,3% 24,2% France 53,6% 52,0% Germany 12,7% 7,5% Netherlands 25,6% 33,2% Sweden 56,2% 35,5% Switzerland 8,2% 13,8% 11
  • 12. Turkish G2: Drop-out in higher education % left without a diploma Austria 5,6% Belgium 22,8% France 15,0% Germany 10,5% Netherlands 14,5% Sweden (29,2%) Switzerland 9,3% Second generation Success? Success is relative: Do we compare with peers or with parents? Institutional arrangements condition second generation success across Europe. Educational success = question of integration or discrimination? 12
  • 13. Thank you! www.TIESproject.eu 13

×