“Migration patterns and the growth of high poverty neighborhoods, 1970-1990.” The American Journal of Sociology, 105(1), 1-37.

- Increase in the number of poor neighborhoods can be the result of an increase in the number of poor people or a change in the tendency of poor people to live close to each other

- Purpose of paper is to examine how each of these causes has influenced the growth of high poverty neighborhoods by decomposing flows of people among neighborhood and poverty status categories over time

3 primary hypotheses for growth of poor neighborhoods

1. Black middle class flight from poor neighborhoods

2. Increased racial segregation

3. Growing poverty rates

- Using PSID data from 1970-1990, Quillian examines the role of each of these factors in explaining growth of poor black neighborhoods

4 main conclusions

1. The movement of nonpoor blacks into white nonpoor neighborhoods in the number 1 factor explaining growth of poor black neighborhoods

2. As nonpoor blacks move into white neighborhoods whites tend to move out, obscuring the influx of blacks in white neighborhoods and resulting in more racially mixed neighborhoods (rather than predominantly white)

3. The population in black/poor census tracts is increasing primarily because these neighborhoods are becoming poorer and blacker (in terms of density), not because of movement into these neighborhoods

4. Stayers in black/poor neighborhoods did not experience increased poverty, except during the recession of the early 1980s

some erosion of black white segregation and traditional urban ghetto but continued hispanic and asian segregation

Swidler 1984

Cutler 1997

Massey 1990

The Age of Extremes: Concentrated Affluence and Poverty in the Twenty-first Century

Finds patterns of increasing segregation

 computerization

 and urbanization such that urban elite now separated from the poor. He is not optimistic about world future and trends in integration

No such thing as a classless society

inequality in position is a necessary product of sustaining society through incentivizing work based on the importance of positions and the availability of individuals to fill them, they do not speak as to what force creates this necessity.

(Note: what is class? is not defined).

They go on to note that stratication is interested in a system of positions not to the individual.

Two questions in literature: how do positions get prestige and how do individuals get positions. Most researchers focus on the latter, tho the former is more fundamental.

To get individuals to do different positions, there must be some rewards and some distribution system.

Rewards may take on three types:
1. those needed to survive
2. fun/leisure activities
3. pride/ego boosting

Rewards are built into social position rights with position and prerequisites:

Amount or type of inequality is not fixed in societies
Determinants of positional rank:

1. differential functional importance here the position must both be important and hard to fill (hj: addded corrolary supply, demand, scarce supply of
workers greater reward)

2. differential scarcity of personnel depending on training and availability of workers

Variations in systems of stratification:attributable to whatever factors affect the two determinents of differential rewards (i.e. positions that are important in one society may be less important in others or degree of internal development may be different)

the position must both be important and hard to fill - reward is high enough to get it filled anyway.  So less essential positions do not compete successfully with more essential one

Davis and Moore 1945

dierential scarcity of personnel depending on training and skill of workers. 

This includes inherent ability and training/education.  In practice can be primarily innate ability or primarily education/training.

Davis and Moore 1945

Reviews debate of functionalism vs. Marxism first in their view point about the necessity of inequality.

Functionalists- economic inequity is both necessary for society and benefits vast majority of society.

Marxist do not.

In the late 1970s, author concluded Marxist Societies, a test of whether inequality could really be abolished, were most successful in reducing economic inequality, but failed to offset political inequality or a transformation of human nature.

Author concluded Marxism flawed in its assumptions about human nature. Author stands by conclusions from the past but suggests economic inequality was greater than author predicted. Lenski also did not forsee sudden demise of Marxism in Eastern Europe.

Suggests failure of Marxism related to inadequate motivations of:
1. undermotivated workers got little, did little
2. and misdirected motivations of those in power  said they got little, took a lot

Additionally problem of infrastructure and incentivizing quotas over innovation compounded lack of motivation to work

Similarities in the experiences of Marxist countries overwhelm their differences (according to author, what about China?)

Authors says this is not an endorsement of capitalism as most economies are mixed..both providing for pop and encouraging market, and perhaps this old divide between systems is irrelevant

Concludes more work to be done on Marxist societies and what reductions are possible

Argues inequality is not
1. product of nature
2. product of invisible hand/market economics

Argues inequality is a social construction which Americans created and maintained

Suggests inequality is question of
1. who/wins and loses (gets ahead and falls behind)--this is usually answered by social environment-- advantages and disadvantages that are inhereted from parents, resources shared by their friends, quality and quantity of schooling, era in which they are born.
2. what determines how much people get for beng ahead or behind --this is political - societies choose ex. loosening or regulating markets, subsidizing some groups over others, historical result of political choices

1. which rung on the ladder,

2. why some ladders are wider or narrower

the authors reject evolutionary arguments
(survival of the ttest, bell curve etc. - cities of similar genetics are very different stratification systems) and the free market as responsible for inequality.

Suggest that income inequality is a product of societies and that both knowingly and unknowingly, Americans decide levels of inequality.  - More unequal than any affluent Western Coutry

Authors argue that more inequality does not promote growth, and may retard it. At least there is no case for encouraging inequality

Believes inequality has both positive and negative effects.

Key point of article is that societies must strike balance between benfiets of incentives related to
inequality and welfare decreasing effects of inequality.

Positives: Incentives for hard work, investments and innovation

Negatives of inequality are differences unrelated to ability i.e like discrimination are corresive to society poverty and income inequalities also create political power among rich for monopolies 

Reasons to change
1. Philosophy- Rawls: if don't know starting place want some type of provision for poor and protection of liberties for well-off (equality of opportunity Vs equality of outcomes)
2. Religion- religion favors some redistribution for the poor (equality among the public)

3. enlightened self-interest  wide disparities cause negative externalities, in redistributing income, well-off individuals (not just society) may benifet

negative externalities (that are in best interst of society to prevent):
1. more crime (lower opportunity cost of comiting crime)
2. less enlightened voters -> worse democracy

3, not willing to let citzens be totally destitute should have basic min for food, healthcare) - raising skills leads to more earning and less cost to public to provide this min

4. lower gdp (correlation not causal argument)

5. Low wages may lead to poor performance

6. Failure of the market may lead to poor distribution of income (ex. can't invest in children's education because of $$, or statistical discrimination)

7. Efficient policy Changes (ex. education leads to support for trade policy that will bring more income)

8.  Money buys influence more political influence of a few

9. Growth and income inequality - income inequality leads to policies that do not protext property rights and leads to lower growth of GDP - hard to attribute causality

--. Authors do not argue health and income inequality but note it has been argued (really the evidence might be compelling)
10. Winner take all superstars too much reward for a few people

11. Public preference - society demands a level of equality

Solutions
1. targeted education and training

suggests rewards for education the same at both ends of income distribution

Marx 1963

Come back to

devaluation of human world in direct relation to increase in value of things. Labor produces goods, labor and worker as a commidity in proportion to goods produced.

So the object produced by labor is an alien being, power independent of the producer. It is the embodiment of the labor or objectification of labor.  This deprives the worker of life and of work.  The worker's labor is alienated from him, the more objects the worker produces the fewer he can possess and he becomes dominated by capital.

suggests worker becomes poorer as he produces more. worker doesn't control what he produces making him increasingly alienated

alienation is defined as
1. result of production: work is external to worker assume external existence and exists outside himself -- object oppose his autonomy the life he gives the object set against him as a alien and hostile force -not in his nature, he denies his well being.  Only at home in leisure time
2. act/process of production: his labour is forced, it is a means for satisfying other means

External character of work shown in that work does not belong to him, but to another person

alienated labor:
1. alienates nature from man
2. man from himself

3. Turns the speices life of man and mental specifies-property as a means for his individual existance. Alientated man from his body, externa nature, mental life and human life.

4. man is alientate from other men.

(man is a species being, this is lost leaving only species-life not individual life only animal things, eating, drinking, procreating)

Private property is the result of alienated labor.

Laborers must sell labor piecemeal as a commodity.

Marx suggests that classes are unnatural and does not believe that the incentive structure is a necessary component of society.

Class: a wage/labor-property-less (Proletariat), capital(Bourgeoisies?), and landlord-property class (Bourgeoisie), (Some of two classes)

with potential subclasses never fully defined.  The lower-strata of the middle class (small tradespeople, shopkeeper, handicraft, peasants) sink to proletariat  because their captial does not suffice on the scale that of Modern Industry - redenered useless by new means of producation

highlights the unnaturalness of private property and the bourgioese/proletariat class structure.

Another Excerpt
Man's history is class conflict
bourgeiose survive by revolutionizing production they become a smaller and smaller group in control of more and more and exploitation of laborer is greater. System spreads to other civilazations/states/countries

As bourgeiose develops, proletariat increases and becomes aware of itself and leads to riots, becomes aware of itself.

Class: at first just: live on wages, prot and
ground-rent, and realiszation of labour power, but suggests maybe greater fragmentation
Suggests there is always a class acting as a ruling material force and an intellectual force

Last Excerpt
classes arise in opposition to other classes

Weber

Come back to.

Class:

Not just about property but skills matter and they determine an individual's relative position in the labor market

class is not inherently antagonistic nor central to understandings of collective action

Class: a group that comes together for some communal action tied together by economic means.

For Weber, skills can matter, what a person has, it is not a universal position but rather a position within a labor market. Everything you own is defined as a price. Market conditions matter for you. Wide array of market positions, how many classes, impossible to say.

For Weber, class is not necessarily a social phenomena, but it is the exception rather than rule that people become aware of their class positions. It is status groups that are really the meaningful group.

Defines classes as sharing a particular situation and key groups are related to the propertied, acquisition, and social class structure. Seems to go on to describe what seems like a increasingly complex class structure (Author acknowledges that only untrained unskilled workers may really share the same class), and like Marx, who he cites this description seems to present an ever expanding number of classes without an argument of how they might come together in some communal action. (I might have just been a bit confused by the argument here). It seems that in many ways author starts with Marx's denition of class in an industrialized society (Marx had a property less and property class, with potential subclasses never fully defined), but is perhaps differentiated in separating status groups from class in relation to their explicit dealings with honor and parties with their relation to power

Law exists when probability that order will be upheld by group of men to obtain conformity

Power is chance of man to realize their will in a communal action

Man doesn't strive for power only to be more economically well off

Money power is not identical to honor

The way social honor is distributed across groups may be called social order

CLASSES NOT COMMUNITIES BUT GROUPS WHICH SERVE AS FREQUENT BASES FOR COMMUNAL ACTION
THIS ARISES AS

1. NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMMON CAUSAL COMPONENT IN LIFE CHANCES

2. THIS COMPONENT REPRESENTED BY ECONOMICS

3. IS REPRESENTED UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF THE COMMODITY OR LABOR MARKETS PROPERTY AND LACK OF PROPERTY ARE FOUNDATION FOR CLASS SITUATIONS

Status groups are typically communities and honor which is related to style of life

Class situation is given probability of

1. provision with goods

2. external conditions of life

3. subjective satisfaction

Class is a group that occupies same class situation

status group: refers to non-economic affliation a person may have

-Social honor ,prestige, may even be the basis of political or economic power, and very frequently has been.

-Weber argues that classes, status groups, and parties are phenomena of the distribution of power within a community.

-Classes are not community, they merely represent possible, and frequent bases for communal action.(any group of people that is found in same class situation).

-Class situation is ultimately market situation. So people whose fate is note determined by the chance of using goods or services for themselves on the market, are not a class in the technical sense of the term. They are rather a status group.

-But class does not in itself constitute a community.

Durkiem

Come back to

begins with proposition in all societies there is a class that is ruled and rules

ruling class controls politics, the ruling class deals with politics

suggests that there are two classes one of which deals with politics (the ruling class) and the other which deals with subsistence/economy (the ruled class).

discusses the structure of power and ruling vs. ruled across societies and history,

always one individual who is chief among rulers (not always the one with supreme power by law)

discontent of the rule can exert influence on the rulers and policies of the political class.

structure of ruling classes determines political type

dominion of organized minority over majority is inevitable

societies transition from military producing rulers to wealth, religion can also be important in places where it dominates, castes supernatural justications for
power

power-elite theory, has some overlap with conict theory and Marxism more generally

American scholar

Framework of modern society connects men to daily lives but some exceptions,
some men affect everybody, they escape family or job.
These men are bound to no single community, these are the power elite. (can make great change - create demands/jobs/responsiblities for others)

power elite not completely aware of their great power.
we must consider both events of history, and men behind which here is the institutions of modern society.

Their failure to act matters and has consquences

Professional polticians are just below the power elite as are celebrities.

They decide war and peace, etc. major instiutions of modern society. Economic, political, and economic domains - other institutions are affected by these three. Politically linked economy - interlocking in three sectors.  The elites are those at the top of each of these three sectors.  More about power than wealth.

Power elite know each other - top social strata, inner circle of upper social class.  Interact a lot with one another and little/not at all with others.

no feudalism for US means no one (artiscracy) could oppose the higher bourgioese. So power elite have wealth and prestige. Unopposed and have tremendous advantages and opportunities. 

describes power structure in US as graded

Power elite consider themselves worthy of what they have and 'naturally' elite. See their profession/positions as extensions of themselves.Their experiences and training to be elite leads to elite traits.

Never an entirely visible agency rather the "them" "the man" View of elite as either omnipotent or impotent by culture/counterculture.  us and them the omnipotent our country or political party vs the other, but still amophrous.

 In truth niether omni/impotent.

Gradation, power is not equally distributed, but others have some influence (at least lower upper class) - gradiation.

May or may not be the history-makers
elite are history makers

Functionalism

inequality is good, but inequality is necessary, do we
accept that some positions are more important than others? (yes?) have no
way of measuring positions and importance, is it the case that we need to
incentivize the important or highly valued position. evolutionary argument
societies must do this in order to survive against other societies. Functionalism
may be undesirable. does not allow accumulation of inequality

Names: Davis and Moore

Dahrendorf: re-focuses Marxist denitions around the concept of exploitation and power

Wright- initially goes with Dahrendorf but then changes gears to suggest that rise of managerial class is at the boundary of class positions, exploitation takes away from centrality of class

Marx's theory was problematic for understanding modern societies' class structures. For Dahrendorf, Marx was wrong in his prediction of a unified working class, trends in the consolidation of capital, and the inability of capitalist societies to handle conflict. Dahrendorf instead finds that what has emerged is a fragmentation of classes which makes the unification of labor as Marx predicted impossible. However Dahrendorf finds that within these fragmenting groups, conflict remains and can be linked to the emergence of differential exercise of authority. Wright also acknowledges that the appearance of a middle ground between the working and capital. Wright's
previous view of the middle class was as a non-class but rather as occupying multiple positions both dominating workers and simultaneously being dominated by the capitalists. However, Wright quickly reverses himself and takes issue with the work of Dahrendorf by acknowledging some problems with emphasizing domination over exploitation for a Marxist paradigm. Specifically, domination can take on many forms which takes out the centrality of class for a
Marxist analysis. Wright then goes on to adopt a new position based on studies of Roemer to suggest that in the bourgeiose society for which the surplus production of the worker benets the capitalist, the middle class falls at some pivot point neither beneting from the exploitation nor being actively exploited. A
recurring question that I had from just reading Wright's account of Roemer's game theory work (and perhaps I should read Roemer's original account) was
the question of externalities caused by the existence of exploitation.

Dahrendorf 1959

beginning question: do classes and class conflct occur only within capitalist phenomena?

Marx was right in that root of change in a captialist society is in industrial production.  But the direction the change took is opposite of Marx prediction.

Joint stock companies recognized and took off. Today more than 2/3 are joint-stock.  Mostly individuals and families don't run companies,  This creates the manager class - separating ownership and control

dissolved owners as Marx conceived them, this was contrary to Marxist expectations; however, contrary argument is that stockholders still owners, dissolution is overstated. 

homogenous ruling class of Marx is argued NOT to have developed instead many groups this entails.  Now there are owners, managers, with some overlap and some confliciting interests.

1. replacement of capitalists with managers involves a change in the compostion of the groups participating in the conflict.

2. (as result of change in recruitment and composition of groups) there is a change in nature of issues that cause conflicts-- the issues of the functionaries without capital differ from full-blown captialist and so do the interest of labor vis-a-vis new opponents
3. change in pattern of conflict
but in spite of decomposition conflict continues
homogeny and unity required for Marx revolution never emerged and society can handle conflict
exercise of authority important for understanding class conflicit

Different levels of skill in workers (merging with engeineers and white-collar) highly skilled, semi-skilled (diffuse) vs manual labor (unskilled, new workers and semi-unemployable).  Different in level of skill and in social status (skill heirarchy corresponds with responsibility heirarchy),  So the working class is differentiated, not homogeneous

authority more important than property in dividing classes. Looks at joint-stock (separate ownership and control). Manager class – aligns the capitalist class with the owners and gives them authority.  Managers and workers confront each other at site of production and this authority is what causes conflict, workers don’t even see the owners (capitalist)

Neo-Marxist

Wright argues that Dahndorf that takes exploitation out of the equation, it’s more about domination than exploition.  It’s not clear that managers are exploiting workers, so it’s 

Wright-need a sense of contradictory interest and exploitative interest. 

For Wright, class is a relational concept, different rights and power among actors.  Compared to a parent and a child, parent dominates, but doesn’t exploit it.

Marxists are committed to polarization of classes, but that's not what societies look like at passing glance, how would Marx explain the middle class?

To deal with this some Marxists argue:
1. classes really are polarized, middle class is ideological illusion
2. middle class is just a segment of some other class
3. middle class is in some way new
4. middle class is located under multiple positions, not a singular class
ex. managers both over see laborers but fall under control of capitalists
no longer likes this view because it shifts discourse from exploitation to domination

Domination Is inadequate because it fails to speak to interests of factors, not all domination is ethically problematic , de-emphasizes centrality of class

Wright advocates making a class analysis so as to formalize like what postcapitalism would look like and to restore exploitation and class centrality to the center of Marxist analyses

Develops from Roemer's analysis

Marxist exploitation typically goes from one class using surplus work of another class

Roemer shows that inequalities in means of production can create exploitation another example is through game theory, how would people fare if a set of actors withdrew distinction between feudalism and capitalism is related to what physical assets can be withdrawn

exploitation based on bueracractic position in socialist societies

using the logic of exploitation and game theory of production this allows for a new understanding of middle class which is at the equilibrium point of
exploitation or at intersection of complex classes as in real societies multiple complex modes of production different types of exploitation, different types of productive assets:

Marx said that classes have antagonist relationship and it’s about production.

Parkin

Parkin criticizes those neo-Marxists following in the tradition of Dahendorf.
Like Dahendorf, Parkin states that Marx's prediction about the consolidation
of the working class didn't play out and instead society has experienced an expanded
public sphere and new professions in the service industry that clearly
do not t with Marxist classications of the proletariat vs. bourgieose. Parkin
claims that neo-Marxists have struggled to account for the rise of these professions
and that part of the reason for this struggle is that they are claiming the
wrong intellectual heritage (he humorously quips that in every neo-Marxist is
a neo-Weberian to which Wright paraphrases and counters in his 2005 article,
sorry I found it amusing). Specically the domination and emphasis on authority
that Dahendorf attributes to a neo-Marxist theory is actually a classication
that came from the Weberian heritage. In his argument, Parkin focuses primarily
on how Weberian ideas of social closure have manifested themselves in
credentialling among professional classes. Parkin argues that for these professions
credentialing serves as a mechanism for maintaining position in the social
hiearchy. Moreover he stresses that like Weber predicts, the credential which
secures the position of the individual within the bourgioese comes in tension
with intergenerational transfer of position.

sociology uses manual and non-manual class distinctions but often not a story
of conict
problem with marx theory is while manual vs. non-manual labor conict
in rm may make sense, for sociologists more meaningful comparison is within
society where distinction does not hold esp with rise of public sector
often manager seen to supersede the capitalist
calls neo-Marxist theories related to weber and relationships actually in the
vein of social closure
bourgeiose maintain position through
1. property
2. credentialing
neo-Weberians largely ignore importance of property
property tricky because sociologists fail to distinguish between rights of property
as capital and personal rights
only property as capital inuences life changes
Professionalization and property of exclusion obtaiend by credentialing to
control supply of labor
Trade unions make restrictions but this is in response to exploitation
in terms of generational reproduction bourgioese must make special eort,
as weber says, class puts self ahead of individuals

Marxists see economic production and materialism at center of history but class centrality has been dialed back

Marxists all commited to radical egalitarianism and class conflict in materialism to each according to need, from each according to ability

theory is egalitarianism becomes feasible as society develops

capitalism develops human potential but stands in way of radical egalitarianism

class relations to be understood as relations of production

class analysis requires understanding variations in classes
class location is to situate people in the interactions

they engage in class locations can be taken as
1. two class models with wide variation in class
2. multiple class locations to be as descriptive and narrow as possible

unbundling of rights and powers
relational location of class understood via strata

macro class analysis typically nation state

micro class analysis how class affects individuals
class has signficant implications for individuals and institutional dynamics

1. what you have determines what you get

2. what you have determines how you get what you get

difference between Marx and Weber is exploitation

Neo-Weberian

sociology uses manual and non-manual class distinctions but often not a story
of conict
problem with marx theory is while manual vs. non-manual labor conict
in rm may make sense, for sociologists more meaningful comparison is within
society where distinction does not hold esp with rise of public sector
often manager seen to supersede the capitalist
calls neo-Marxist theories related to weber and relationships actually in the
vein of social closure
bourgeiose maintain position through
1. property
2. credentialing
neo-Weberians largely ignore importance of property
property tricky because sociologists fail to distinguish between rights of property
as capital and personal rights
only property as capital inuences life changes
Professionalization and property of exclusion obtaiend by credentialing to
control supply of labor
Trade unions make restrictions but this is in response to exploitation
in terms of generational reproduction bourgioese must make special eort,
as weber says, class puts self ahead of individuals

Parkin criticizes those neo-Marxists following in the tradition of Dahendorf.
Like Dahendorf, Parkin states that Marx's prediction about the consolidation
of the working class didn't play out and instead society has experienced an expanded
public sphere and new professions in the service industry that clearly
do not t with Marxist classications of the proletariat vs. bourgieose. Parkin
claims that neo-Marxists have struggled to account for the rise of these professions
and that part of the reason for this struggle is that they are claiming the
wrong intellectual heritage (he humorously quips that in every neo-Marxist is
a neo-Weberian to which Wright paraphrases and counters in his 2005 article,
sorry I found it amusing). Specically the domination and emphasis on authority
that Dahendorf attributes to a neo-Marxist theory is actually a classication
that came from the Weberian heritage. In his argument, Parkin focuses primarily
on how Weberian ideas of social closure have manifested themselves in
credentialling among professional classes. Parkin argues that for these professions
credentialing serves as a mechanism for maintaining position in the social
hiearchy. Moreover he stresses that like Weber predicts, the credential which
secures the position of the individual within the bourgioese comes in tension
with intergenerational transfer of position.

Parkin

Breen

Grusky

Sorensen

Tries to explain the paradox of why corporations have so much control and
power in a democratic society like the United States
Argues upper class and corporate upper class are the same and maintain it
through cooperation and tight bounds
This training begins in childhood and elite education leading to social bonding

explores rent based class, property exploitation not all wealth is, changing Marx
those charging rent benet from people remaining dependent
no accident of history goes back to feudal system

Started with ranking from sizable US sample. Used Census data to calculate the perccent of male worrkers with four years of high school or higher (1950) and those with $3,500+ (1949).

Scale is 0-96  resembles other scales

Can be intepretted as

1. estimates of (unknow) prestige scale, or

2. values on a scale of occupational socioeconomic states.

samples and ask people to rank
creates occupational scores using data which shows temporal stability in occupational rankings,

Occupations of very different character have similar scores. However, Refines but doesn not radically differ in gradation.

Considers all a gradation instead of distinct classes.  However occupations at the same level overlap in education, income, politics, measured intellegences, etc.

The classic scale for measuring occupation is presented by Duncan who uses
a socioeconomic index. To create his scale Duncan created scale values of occupation
and matched these to percentage of excellent or good responses. The
problem with this scale, as Hodge argues, is that there is some uncertainty as to
what Duncan's index is designed to measure: a combination of social economic
status, prestige, or something entirely dierent and an additional concern that
the entire measure is contextual and thus ill-equiped to handle counterfactual
scenarios.

Prestige scales are very consistent in rankings regardless of wording of question, type of ranking, types of occupation, education of rankers, and across countries etc. No systematic varations. (Intercounty correctaion is .81)

Constant ranking of occupations across place and over time, skill, authority and economic control

Alternative to the socioeconomic index are scales that measure prestige.
Treiman develops a purely prestige scale and discusses near universal agreement of respondents to such probes. However a point that Treiman is never clear on and for which Goldthorpe rightly takes him to task for is that it is: what people
are thinking when they answer these questions on occupational prestige. Does prestige has some meaning more than what perceived popular view of good jobs?

Tries to measure what is meant as prestige

critiques usefulness of the prestige concept

May measure previaling ideas at a lower level of abstraction (i.e. higher pay is better than lower pay

Treiman develops a purely prestige scale and discusses near universal agreement of respondents to such probes. However a point that Treiman is never clear on and for which Goldthorpe rightly takes him to task for is that it is: what people
are thinking when they answer these questions on occupational prestige. Does prestige has some meaning more than what perceived popular view of good jobs?

in US and Australia allocation of educational and economic status is largely socioeconomic in nature

I.e. inter and intragenerational movement of men among their own and parents' education and occupation more closely follow dimension of "socioeconomic: distance than "prestige" distances.

estimates based SEI scale yields a higher correlation than prestige scale

Model SEI off Blau-Duncan (1967) and say this is better than prestigde modeall.  The prestige and SES scales are substantively different.   and SEI is preferable.

Conceptual meaning of Duncan's scale is not clear. 3 alternative interpretations available and none are entirely satisfactory.

1. interpretation: "expected percatage of excellent and good ratings an occupations would recieve in a prestige inquiry of the North-Hatt type." (census-derived indicators).

1-problems: a. prediction equation for prestige indicator is less than satisfactory (accounts for a bit more than 4/5 of varation in prestiage rations.

2. Interpretation-"socioeconomic index of occupational status"(education as status, income as economic measures). (Duncan's preferred explanation)

2 problems. a. combining education and economics into composite.  Are they proportional to weights in the index?  For some positions education and income are opposite signs for things like fertility.  Combining them presumes unidimensionality.

b. socioecomic status SES has no independent analyytical status in strat theory.  No theorectial justification for choosing ed and income as stand ins for class measures

3. linear transformation of the best guess we could make of the age-standardized percentage of an occupation's male incumbents with either at least a high school diploma or 1949 incomes of $3,500+

this makes us aware of how education and income are glued together in Duncan's scale

This makes clear uncertainity re results obtained by Duncan's scale

Key issues: SEI reduces occupation to contextual variable No logically concievable way in which one could run an experiment to test for any observed effects.

Causes can never be isolated.  Many correlates to occupation.

Duncan looks at education and income of incumbents instead of assigning similar education to career (etc)

Advantages of Prestige vs SEI

1. SEI is derived from characteristics of occupations incumbents. Prestige does not - opperationaly independent of characteristics of an occupations incumbents

2. prestige (status) is a well-defined concept in strat theory.  (i.e. Weber's defintion of power) ie expectations that member of one occupation will recieve deference from others.  Prestige is not identical to power, but it represents command over the respect of others.  (may not actually measure, but it's an intelligent question to ask.)

Advantage of SEI over prestige:

1. SEI performs better, better reliablity.  So a good reason to prefer SEI. 

The problem with this scale, as Hodge argues, is that there is some uncertainty as to what Duncan's index is designed to measure: a combination of social economic status, prestige, or something entirely dierent and an additional concern that the entire measure is contextual and thus ill-equiped to handle counterfactual scenarios.

Wage inequality has increased dramatically in the United States since the 1980s. (Rich get richer, poor get poort).

This article investigates the relationship between this trend and occupational structure measured at the three-digit level. Using the Current Population Survey from 1983 to 2002, we find that the direct association between occupations and wage inequality declined over this period as within-occupational inequality grew faster than between-occupational inequality. We estimate multilevel growth models using detailed occupational categories as the unit of analysis to assess how the characteristics of occupations affect changes in mean wages and levels of wage inequality across this time period. The results indicate that changes in mean wages across occupations vary depending on the characteristics of individuals in those occupations and that intraoccupational inequality is difficult to predict using conventional labor force data.

These findings seem largely inconsistent with the common sociological view of occupation as the most fundamental feature of the labor market.

Correspondingly, a more comprehensive approach—one that incorporates the effects of organizational variables and market processes on rising wage inequality in the New Economy—is warranted.

rising inequality within societies this can be thought of as rising inequality within occupations

hypothesis most inequality between occupation when measured at a very detailed level and occupation dierences due to changes in mean differences for high occupations

hypothesizes within occupation inequality caused by demographics cross occupation

inequality not caused primarily by these factors
find contrary to expectations majority of inequality increases occurred within occupations around 70% of change from 1980s to 2000s

within occupations unionization increases inequalitychanging thoughts of unions as exclusionary not equalizing

inscreasing female employment decreases between occupation inequality.

Duncan's Socioeconmic Index for all Occupation

-assigns status scores to all occupations held by fathers and socns at various points in their careers

An occupation is a category of "functionally similar jobs"

detailed occupations frequently represent the the subjective aspirations individuals, they are recognized widely in society, they promote their own subcultures and lifestytles, and :indivudal identities and self-defintions are strongly affected  by occupational affiliations., almost to the point of bearing out a Durkheimian 'essentialist' view that such ties provide a master identity.

training by senior officers "introduces further homogeneity in the attitudes, behaviors and worldviews of prospective incuments and the social interations amoung occupation member reinforces occupation-specific attitudes, values, and lifetyles.

disaggregated structuralization highlighs how "the instutionalization of an ocupational classification scheme is so deeply entrench in society that it "trains us to regard between-category disparities as appropriate and legitmate"

Occupational schemes are so widely accpected that we focus almost entriely on disparitie within occupation, which are "closely scruntized and are sometimes take as evidence of discrimination (esp when correlated with race, gender, ethnicisy)

different article same year (Weeden and Grusky) Functional niches in the division of laor that typically become deeply institionalized in the labor market

dissaggregate structuration

Maximally maintained inequality

characterizes educational transitions in Ireland, even as the prevalence of education has increased, relative odds of obtaining a level of education have remained constant as changes in education are driven by higher demand among higher classes. Raftery and Hout suggest that the mechanism explaining this phenomenon is rational choice theroy where differences in valuation of education affect an individual's likelihood of obtaining it.

Raftery and Hout in a
1993 study of educational transitions across cohorts. Their findings are that despite increases in the educational attainment across class of origin over cohorts, the relative risk (expressed as an odds ratio) of obtaining a given level of education by social origin remained constant over timethey refer to this phenomena which represents the ability of advantaged classes to maintain their relative advantage as maximally maintained inequality. Under maximally maintained inequality, it is expected that odds ratios will only converge when a level of education becomes saturated for an advantaged class.

Describes cohort trends in educational attainment in Ireland. The MMI proposition has 4 parts:

1. increases in education reflect increasing population
demand for education and a social upgrading of education for those of the highest social origins

2. an increase in the supply of education will lead to
an increase in the proportion of individuals acquiring that education across all social origins but the relative disparity in making an educational transition by social origin (often measured in the form of an odds ratio) will remain unchanged

3. an exception to 2 will occur when all individuals of a particular social origin complete the education levelwhen saturation occurs, the odds ratio of transitioning
by social origin will decline

4. (I don't think this was mentioned in the original 1993 denition of the MMI but is mentioned in Gerber and Hout's 2005 article) equalizing forces at one level of education may be offset by increasing stratication at a higher level.

Cross National Comparisons in the MMI Framework
Raftery and Hout find that these principles generally hold for the case of Ireland. In spite of government policies eliminating fees for secondary schooling, authors find that patterns of inequality in educational attainment by social origin hold. The authors suggest that MMI may be the result of rational decision making. In making a cost-benet analysis, individuals from higher social origins (and their families) may put a greater value on education. While government policies in Ireland were designed to lower the costs of continuing to secondary education which should increase attendance for individuals from lower social backgrounds, these subsidies were not suficient to offset the high opportunity costs of attending school versus working.

Gerber and Hout examine the principles of MMI looking at cohort educational attainment in the Soviet Union.

Secondary education in Ireland has expanded steadily in the 20th century, with a big surge in the late 1960s. In 1967, tuition fees for secondary education were removed and other egalitarian reforms were
implemented. This article analyzes the changes in the effect of social origin on educational transitions for the 1908-56 birth cohorts. The results show that overall class differences in educational attainment
declined, but class barriers were not removed; they simply became less consequential because the educational system expanded to the point where it could afford to be less selective. The results lead to the hypothesis of maximally maintained inequality and an explanation of it in terms of rational choice. The 1967 reforms appear to have had no effect on equality of educational opportunity. A closer study of the economic incentives for education at that time suggests why and suggests alternative reforms that might have been more effective without costing
more money.

Raftery and Hout suggests that dierences in
educational attainment might be explained by dierences in the cost benet
structure.

looksat Ireland education system finds same system but change in price allowing more lower ses to enter but very little change in actual entry of classes to secondary school characterizes prior system as case of maximally maintained inequality. Ireland was poor country but commitment to education 1964 changed Irish focus from protectionism to policies encouraging economic development use Goldthorpe classication system of class and cohort data to look at changes in education.

Over the period entry into secondary education dramatically increased esp as secondary school made free in 1967
education increased but positions increased more; however across cohorts, odds ratios of education by social origin remained same suggesting maximally
maintained inequality

Use cohort analysis to make longitudinal claims.

developed new system for measuring education in terms of transitions not just in terms of years of schooling

educational transitions (ET) approach in which the
steps of moving between grade levels or types of education are modeled directly.

shows formally that even when schooling is increasing differences in educational attainment by class over cohorts may actually be invariant

a. Explain the shortcomings of the years of education approach, as Mare described them. Then describe the alternative ET approach introduced by Mare and explain the reasons that he gave for preferring it.

The original years of education used a linear regression model. I'll highlight two pitfalls of this approach: Using a linear model assumes that the effects of social background are the same across transitions be it from year to year level of education or from types of educational institution. Conceptually, there is no apriori reason to believe this is the case. A key finding of the Mare model and a number of studies which adopted this approach is that the effect of social background declined with time. Another limitation of the linear model is that it does not allow one to study trends in educational progression nor does it speak to the probabilities of moving across educational transitions.

argues that trends in education should
be measured by educational transitions not years. Mare advocates for predicting
conditional probabilities of making an educational transitions by using a
series of logistic models. This practice seems to have been an institutionalized
practice in the literature through the 1990s. However, using a logistic model
requires an assumption about the distribution of education for a given population
and an assumption that there is a hierarchy to educational transitions
such that individuals can only move between two categories.

·         Potentially the death of the “Mare model” of educational transitions. 

criticisms to the ET approach (Mare model).

1. they suggest that logistic coecients are not substantively meaningful.

2. they suggest that the Mare model does not capture how individuals make decisions, specifically, the Mare approach suggests that individuals are rationally able to assess their own abilities and make decisions
accordingly based on perceived abilities and costs and benfiets.

3. The declining effect of social background is a product of the functional form assumed.

4. they suggest that selection creates unobserved heterogeneity not accounted for in the logit model.

5. suggest the formation of a model without distributional assumptions.

argues logit models may not be most meaningful way of ascertaining whether family background has an effect on schooling.
problem is that logit models invoke a distributional assumption paramaterization of logit models and unobserved heterogeneity make them imperfectly suited model school transitions instead they use a less strict random effects type model

A main conclusion of this is that educational selectivity caused by omitted variables obscures family background effects.

argues declining relation between family and educational transitions is an artifact of the logit operationalization.

·         Address the consistent finding in sociological literature that the effects of family background and family resources diminish at children progress through school.

·         These findings are based on the Mare model, aka the educational transitions model.

o   Treats educational attainment as a series of transitions, recognizing that the determinants of continuing in school can change in importance at different levels of the school system.

o   Basically, a logistic regression of making a given transition on background variables, conditional on having completed the prior transition.

o   The major advantages of this model over the traditional logistic regression was that it recognized the qualitative differences among various transitions throughout the educational career, and that the coefficients were not confounded with changes in the marginal distribution of educational attainment (since educational attainment increased substantially throughout the 20^th century, this was important.)

·         However, the logistic model has serious flaws that bring into question many of the findings of the educational transitions literature.

·         Cameron and Heckman’s main critiques:

o   Logit coefficients are hard to interpret (odd’s ratios)

o   Model is only loosely behaviorally motivated, and assumes myopia on the part of individuals (i.e. that they are focused on the next transition rather than their long-run attainment). 

o    *The pattern of declining coefficients across transitions is an artifact of the functional form.

§  Unobserved ability can lead to bias

§  Over transitions, the distribution of unobserved ability shifts right, causing the bias to increase

§  This biases coefficients (family background effects) toward zero, because those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds are likely to have the highest levels of unobserved ability/motivation at higher transitions.

§  Even if the true effects don’t change, the coefficients will.

·         Cameron and Heckman develop a technique to correct for omitted variable bias (latent class model), and find that the effects of most background variables are actually higher at the transition to college than at lower transitions.

o   *Main conclusion is that educational selectivity caused by omitted variables obscures family background effects.

·         Their proposed alternative is an ordered discrete-choice model, which assumes that individuals observe their endowments at birth and choose the level of schooling that maximizes their net returns.

o   Relies on weaker statistical assumptions

o   Assumes rational forward-thinking behavior.

o   Does not address the qualitative differences among transitions.

·         Find that long-run factors give rise to the relationship between family income and educational attainment. 

o   Controlling for ability reduces family income effect

o   It is long-term factors such as permanent income that affect academic ability that matters for educational attainment, not short term factors like credit constraints. 

The MMI proposition has 4 parts: (Raftery and Hout)

1. increases in education reect increasing population
demand for education and a social upgrading of education for those of the highest social origins

2. an increase in the supply of education will lead to
an increase in the proportion of individuals acquiring that education across all social origins but the relative disparity in making an educational transition by social origin (often measured in the form of an odds ratio) will remain unchanged

3. an exception to 2 will occur when all individuals of a particular social origin complete the education levelwhen saturation occurs, the odds ratio of transitioning by social origin will decline

4. (I don't think this was mentioned in the original 1993 denition of the MMI but is mentioned in Gerber and Hout's 2005 article) equalizing forces at one level of education may be offset by increasing
stratication at a higher level.

educational stratication in Soviet era Russia continued

gender stratication in education dramatically decreased but stratication by parents and geography continued

blossfeld and shavit characterize rise in education relative to cohort size, decreasing association between social origin and years of schooling while association between years of schooling but a relatively constant association between
level of schooling and social origin.

Meanwhile social origin seems most important
for early schooling but less so for later transitions
under maximally maintained inequality theory
1. growth in secondary and higher ed leads to gradually maintained odds ratios for education by social origin and is due to change in demand
2. other increases in education lead to increases by all social origins but preserve odds ratios of transitioning
3. if upper class education totally saturated, odds ratios of transitioning may go down
4. equalization can be reserved, rise in one education may reduce conditional probabilities of future ed

in russia some experimentation in school system but all was standardized and centralized starting in 1934 through the 1970s

entering vocational school vs. higher secondary school precluded university entrance

Soviet era mass expansion of education which outstripped population growths

government tried to make reforms to counteract continued trends in those with more educated parents and better off backgrounds being more likely to enter higher ed

use approach following after mare that looks at logit predictions of transitions not just accumulation of years

findings that explosion in higher ed non VUZ training, urban origins and parents of means were advantageous to educational completion.

female disadvantage in education erased

increases in education increased MMI but for women same trends actually led to a decline in stratfication

increased university stratification cancelled out egalitarian effects at lower level

"A national survey of educational stratification in Russia reveals substantial inequality of educational attainments throughout the Soviet period. Parents' education, main earner's occupation, and geographical origin contributed to these inequalities. Gender prefer- ences for men were removed, and for some transitions reversed. Although secondary education grew rapidly, higher education failed to keep pace. This disparity led to a university-level enrollment squeeze, and the resulting bottleneck hurt disadvantaged classes more than advantaged ones. In turn the effect of social origins on entering university increased after 1965. The upshot was no net change in the origin-based differences in the likelihood of attaining a VUZ degree across three postwar cohorts"

By reforming only parts of the system at a time (starting at the lowest levels), educational policymakers put pressure on the levels above. The planners could not anticipate that opening access at one level would increase stratification at the next level, but that outcome is now clear.

critique the binomial logit model of educational transitions popularized by Mare (1980, 1981)
and recommend a multinomial model of educational careers. The authors use longitudinal data
from Swedish statistical registries to empirically test the strengths and weaknesses of their
proposed “MT Model” in comparison to the binomial model. Results indicate that the specific
pathways taken through the education system influence the probability of making subsequent
education transitions. Furthermore, these findings are robust to unmeasured heterogeneity. The
authors recommend use of the multinomial transition model in future stratification studies.

technical recommendation is straightforward: analysts should replace the use of a binary logit model with a multinomial logit model. This means that instead of modeling two outcomes (e.g., school continuation or drop out), analysts should model three or more outcomes (e.g., academic track, vocational track, or drop out). This relatively simple technical change has important implications for the conceptualization of educational careers and the
precision with which the relationship between social background and educational attainment is
estimated.

Breen and Jonsson argue that individuals do not necessarily move through the educational system in a unilinear sequential mode as assumed by the logit model. Many European systems, for example, have qualitatively different parallel branches of education (e.g., academic and vocational) that may or may not converge at a later stage. Furthermore, social background effects may be stronger/weaker in shaping transition rates to specific branches. For example, “classorigin differences between those who choose the vocational path and those leave school will generally be rather less than class-origin differences between those who follow the academic
path and those who leave school” (pg. 759). In the binomial model, the academic and vocation
paths are often collapsed which means that the social-origin coefficient is a weighted average of
the true* coefficients.

Alternatively, one track could be thrown out of the binomial analysis, but this ignores potentially valuable information.

Breen and Jonsson are also interested in understanding how educational careers shape potential career outcomes in two ways that the Mare Model is unable to estimate.

1. They want to examine path dependency or the extent to which prior educational choices influence subsequent educational transitions.

2. investigate the “possibility of variations in the
effects of class-origins in determining the probability of choosing among a set of educational options” (pg. 755).

The Swedish registry provides a high-quality dataset with measures of parents’ occupation, social class, gender, educational transitions, and grade point average for over 350,000 individuals born between 1954 and 1967. Sweden’s educational system includes three transitions between approximately age 16 and the start of tertiary education. At each transition point, students are able to select an academic path, vocational path, or leave school and the system is relatively “open” meaning there is technically the possibility of switching paths at each transition.

Finally, Sweden has implemented public policies with the goal of reducing educational inequality by
equalizing resources rather than through educational expansion, which makes it an interesting case study.

The authors analyze the Swedish data using the Mare Model and the MT Model and compare the
results. In these data, the Mare Model tends to deflate class-origin effects at the lower transition
points and inflate them at the transition to higher education. Note that this is not a feature of the
models and these results will vary depending on the data analyzed.

The authors also use average log odds ratios to determine the extent of path dependency. In the
Swedish case, they find that there is a “marked persistence effect” at the second transition point
such that the rate of switching paths is negligible. At the third transition, those who followed an academic-academic path or a vocational-academic path have the highest odds of continuing their schooling. Given this evidence of path dependency, Breen and Jonsson investigate its relationship to class-origin using the MT model. They find that less common educational pathways are characterized by higher class-origin inequalities in comparison to more common educational pathways.

Particularly for men, class-origin effects vary according to path.

Like Cameron ad Heckman (1998), Breen and Jonsson are also concerned about the potential
problem of unmeasured heterogeneity.

Unfortunately, the MT Model is susceptible the same
critique, although to a lesser extent.

1 Closely related is the problem of selection bias, which is actually more problematic in the MT Model than the Mare Model because of non-independence
of transitions. “An apparent path dependence may be spurious because it is induced by the common effect of the unmeasured variable on earlier choices (the paths) and current choices.”

To address these selection bias concerns, Breen and Jonsson use Vermun’s latent class approach and “focus on the robustness of the effects of path dependence at the transition to tertiary education” (pg. 768). I am not familiar with this procedure, but the authors state that the findings are robust and did not change any prior conclusions.

Breen and Jonsson conclude, “the MT model improves our understanding of underlying processes of educational inequality and provides better guidance for which political measures are appropriate to reduce such inequality” (pg. 771). I agree that the MT model allows for more complex and nuanced studies of educational inequality. In this regard, it should be a ‘tool’ in every analyst’s ‘toolbox.’ However, I am not convinced that is appropriate for all or even many studies of intergenerational process related to educational attainment. Breen and Jonsson note that their criticisms of the Mare Model do not apply to educational systems that permit only binary choices or when these choices are unimportant (pg. 755).

However, they also state “such differentiation is present in (virtually) all educational systems, including that of the United States” (pg. 759). While the MT model seems very appropriate in the Swedish context (and several others), it is less clear how it would apply to the U.S. context. According to research on tracking and school organization more broadly, the U.S. educational system is more
differentiated within schools than across schools.

Even if alternative stratifying measures were
available (e.g., prestige is recommended by the authors), it still seems implausible at the k-12
level in the U.S. It is possible that this model could be used to study horizontal stratification in
postsecondary education. Furthermore, cross-national studies that prioritize standardization of
measures and models will be faced with difficult decisions regarding how to classify each
nation’s educational system into several categories.

Additionally, the authors gloss over the limitations associated with using a multinomial outcome.
In my personal experience, I have found that researchers are significantly less familiar with a
multinomial outcome, which makes interpretation more difficult. Therefore, papers using
multinomial logit models must be written in a more careful and explanatory manner.

Additionally, some specialty statistical analyses and certain combinations of procedures with a multinomial outcome are not possible in standard statistical software packages. Finally, the MT
model simply asks a lot of the data so a relatively large sample size is necessary to avoid small
cell size issues or problems of ‘perfect prediction.’
Therefore, I believe that the MT Model can serve as an important advancement to the Mare Model under certain conditions. However, I do not believe that it will revolutionize the field in the way that the Mare Model did in the early 1980s. It is important for analysts to understand its potential given certain research questions and datasets, but like any model, it has limitations that
were not very clearly represented in this paper.

Based on United States data. Effectively maintained inequality suggests that advantaged classes will more easily obtain advantaged positions in educational institutions and once in those positions are more readily able to maintain them.

Eectively maintained inequality is less about a numerical inequality but about a qualitative inequality and seems to suggest that advantaged classes are at the top of horizontal stratication.

Lucas proposes an important amendment to the proposition of maximally maintained inequality, what he terms, effectively maintained inequality. Lucas suggests that depending on available educational quantity and quality, parents
of higher social origins will be able to secure the educational advantages available regardless and that parents and maintain these advantages.

An important problem with the MMI theory at least in my view (and it seems Lucas agrees) is that it focuses on the quantity of education but does not
speak to qualitative dierences in the education received. Lucas thus proposes to amend MMI theory with a theory called eectively maintained inequality.Lucas suggests that inequality depends on variation in the quantity and quality of education
available to a society. In circumstances where there is greater variation in the quantity of education, higher social origin will increase the chances of a
child getting that education; in circumstances where there is greater variation in the quality of education, higher social origin will increase the chances of a
child getting the education judged to be better.

cites two contradicting literatures: tracking students vs. looking at educational transitions
declining logit coeffcients have been explained via

1. life course perspective as children age, they can make more of their own choices

2. mmi structural factors contribute to declines or maintenence of inequality

criticism of educational transition literature is that it cannot account for qualitative dierences in school experiences

for tracking to be important
1. tracking must be predictive of outcomes
2. social origin must be associated with starting tracking position

tracking matters as middle class parents may be more active in keeping kids in particular track
and social origins also start children in a particular track

Effectively maintained inequality posits that socioeconomically advantaged actors secure for themselves and their children some degree of advantage wherever advantages are commonly possible. On the one hand, if quantitative dierences
are common, the socioeconomically advantaged will obtain quantitative
advantage; on the other hand, if qualitative differences are common they will be observed.

This proposition comes out of the tracking literature
solves issue put by cameron and heckman by including time varying covariates solve heterogeneity issue
Lucas argue that students make decisions both sequentially and myopically opts for an approach to include time varying and time invariant covariate 

I am skeptical
life course perspective decline of parental effects, mmi shocks to the system not always possible to adjudicate

The efforts of Lucas are to introduce the ordered
logit model. Lucas suggests the ordered logit allows for transitions following Cameron and Heckman's advice of use of an ordered logit model when the
error term is homoskedastic.  Lucas uses an ordered logit, because he's interested in a
tracking model

Lucas proposes a more complex model that accounts for an exhaustive list of covariates to measure both the likelihood of transitioning to a
higher level of education and for remaining in a particular educational track or trajectory

Unequal childhoods.

concerted cultivation vs. natural growth

middle class parents throuch activities make concerted effort to develop their children's abilities
lower ses do not cultivate allow socialization  natural growth cultivation in middle class breeds entitlement,

lower class may feel isolated professionals have known set of cultural repetoires passed to middle class but not lower, middle class children trained in rules of game

working class children and lower class grow up in social systems, they are shaped by them but mostly not in control of them working class neighborhood is

lower richmond, decent school, mid level access
to stores but school while pretty safe is short on supplies teachers about half students in school reading below grade level, black students face
discrimination (or it is a concern)

Swan school, upper ses, safe, no fences, very near stores/other resources, highly regarded parents have exaggerated sense of child accomplishments teachers across schools support cultivating efforts by parents
teachers encourage activities and reading through reasoning not directives want involved but deferential parents

both institutions have same demands, different supply of resources

scheduling
middle class families adult leisure spent at children activities

working class more leisure but more economic strain but gender of child and race also mattered
for middle class, more activities led to more hostility within family and weaker family ties but they had more white collar skills like how to be on a team and meet strangers

parents have invisible work of balancing hectic schedule

mothers have more burden of child care and sacrafices

older sibling activities dictate actions of younger sibs

only in middle class families does sibling hatred seem common

activities are expensive but not mentioned in front of children, not mentioning money conveys entitlement

for working class kids scheduled activities were an interruption

for working class kids activities not as age specic organized activities in working class families occur as a result of a child's request

working and lower class kids showed greater independence and creativity

in middle class households, child's requests are treated seriously

in working class homes, child requests are often ignored, or treated as role of children

ongoing interactions between structure and context

language

middle class families use words in daily life, take pleasure and negotiate life through them versus poor/middle class families where directives and functionality of language is emphasized when parents issue directives in middle class families, they are accompanied by explantion

interrupting person of authority characterizes middle class children

children in middle class families expect institutions to be tailored to them, this is partly due to parental investment

middle class parents have more informal access to institutions

concludes black middle class families have to do more work to avoid exclusion based on race

cites middle class failure when parents don't engage with institutions

while middle class parents engage, working class parents defer

aspects of family intersected by social class better understanding

working class natural growth too requries effort to allow children time in unstructured activities

suggested that for both classes of families these methods of child-rearing were natural

how did concerted cultivation arise?
once philosophy of natural growth mcdonaldization, rationalization of society and childrearing problem of intervention is social segregation

followup and reaction

most miiddle class did well and found value to their activities

Lareau does intensive observations
and interviews on focal children aged 9 to 10 growing up in families that she
identies as middle class, working class, and poor. Laraeu argues that middle
class households follow practices of concerted cultivation where the parents are
actively involved in shaping their child whereas working and lower class house-
72
holds follow practices of natural growth where parental interference is limited
and less rigidly structured.1 Laraeu cites dierences in household behaviors, language
use, and interactions with institutions in highlighting these dierences.
When Laraeu follows-up with these families 10 years later, the middle class
children have obtained a greater level of education and social standing compared
to those of working or poor origins. An important argument (I thought)
came out of this book is NOT that practices of concerted cultivation are better
for children, but rather that the middle class children are raised in a manner
aligned with the dominant cultural paradigm. Parents of middle class children
recognize the dominant standards, have practices largely aligned with them,
can use their resources to adjust institutions to suit their children, and raise
children who believe they are entitled to such institutions. In contrast, children
born to working and middle class parents are often alienated or raised to be
hostile to the dominant institutions and parents defer to them. Some of this
argument drew on theoretical work by Bourdieu in suggesting that individuals
have a particular social position which is associated with particular strategies
and opportunities for social advancement.
An alternative model for explaining why inequality dierentials exist is presented
by both Raftery and Hout and Goldthorpe and Hope. I'd argue that both
models are based on the rational choice decision making paradigm. Raftery and
Hout are fairly loose in their formulation of this paradigm (whereas Goldthorpe
and Hope are more formal). Raftery and Hout suggests that dierences in
educational attainment might be explained by dierences in the cost benet
structure. Goldthorpe and Hope specify these dierences as having three dimensions
which they parameterize: 1. dierences in perceived costs/benets
2. dierences in perceived abilities 3. dierences in resources. While Laureau
seems to focus on dierences in culture, she does also note that dierences in
the perception of costs/benets, abilities, and resources do play a role in shaping
the dierent lives of middle class children vs. working/lower class. Here
she also seems to cite less knowledge and certainty about education in shaping
the decisions of the working class and poor. For example, one of the working
class kids, Tyrec, joins a football program and while his mother encourages this,
she does not perceive football having an important benet whereas middle class
1I had a certain sense of unease in reading this ethnography, and I'm not sure where else to
describe my criticism/issue with Lareau's characterization of dierenting parenting styles. An
issue that I had was that Laraeau was not very clear on how she denes the classes which she
calls categorically dierent. Her appendix A did not suciently satisfy my question of how
these denitions came to be. What I was thinking about specically is that the middle class
families were those that adhered to dominant paradigms of what the family should be (married
individuals, nuclear household, home ownership, suburbs I am thinking like in the sociology
of family lit) while the working and lower class were often in violation of these dominant social
expectations. My question then is, well if families adhere to or violate dominant social norms,
how would one expect the childrearing behaviors to not fracture along these same lines. Does
she mean for class to like this, or is class a question of income and education which correlate
but are not perfectly associated with dominant norms? Moreover if Lareau means for class
to be the latter denition, why didn't she include any families which had sucient levels of
income and education but did not conform to dominant social standards (like for example a
divorced single parent working in a white collar job)?
73
parents

encourage these activities and see them as important for cultivating
characteristics in their children. In other words, the cultural and rational choice
explanations for why there are class dierences in educational attainment may
not be mutually exclusive.

• Sugar Rush

Nick Falzone

Abraham

Martha

Kris Ruffino

Morgan

Chris Gleason

Anna *2

savanna

shannon

Stando*2

Nicole Gregory

Sari

Nikki

Morgan

Justin Wilder

Jen Valade

Jacquie Solomon

Cindy S

Luke Holland

Judith Horwitz

Tabitha

Jeff

Stacey

Mikal

June

Aaron Alley

Sean?

direct effect of origin on test scores, secondary effect on evaluation of meaning of education

suggest a revision to rational choice which acknowledges:

1. cost befinets,

2. perceived abilities and

3. available resources

for working class people have guarantee that they maintain working class position by jobs and education to maximize utility also comes with risk which may lower their social standing

Breen and Goldthrope – risk aversion, want to stay at or above current class. for upperclass, don’t want to risk failing below their SES status and to do this must attend school.  For lower-class, there is a guarantee to get job at their level, don’t want to end up in the lowest class, and the safer strategy is to just get a job, less uncertainity, less of a risk.

Idea is if you go to college and fail the key exam you are in a worse place than if you never go. The perception of risk is more important than the reality

Breen and Goldthrope develop an economic model considering risk aversion – not wanting to end up in a position lower than one’s parents, resource cost, and belief about one’s ability to succeed.  They argue that for working class families, the decision to leave school makes rational sense given their assumptions and available resources.

suggests revision to social capital to acknowledge how individuals of actors are shaped by context, merges capital and rational perspectives social capital control over certain events and resources, situational, can be positive and negative

social capital exists in relations among persons
density of social capital matters for determining interactions social capital can produce human capital, if relations in families are close they can compensate for lack of skills through interactions suggests younger siblings do worse off because of less social capita

Coleman 1988-says introducing social capital, linked to possess of a network to share how to resource other capital in their network.  Brings together how people act in a social structure to best maximize their utility. Obilgation, expectation, and favors of the network. (carpooling, baby-sittying to make things easier).

Information sharing – (ex. Talking to friends about fashion/parents finding out about homework assignments from others), norms and sanction – norm of doing homework right away, that helps community as a whole.

closure- the relationships you have they know each other also. Parent A knows Parent B and they both know the teacher and because it’s a closed network – in the school it helps you.  Existing social organizations you can use for other proposes.

Social capital as a compliment to human capital, need human capital to get benefit from social capital.  One type of social capital is in the family – time and effort in the family. Other is broader capital –network another type of social capital

Coleman sees social capital as a public good, sees high levels of social capital in the Catholic school. – makes it integrated.

Problems- social capital is defined by its function so it’s hard to define and measure.  Difficult to find cause and effects.   Can you operationalize things differently.  Methodological programs

Coleman would argue that Lareau gets cultural capital and social capital mixed up.

Coleman 1988 social capital, bourdieu!
made up of social obligations that is linked to the possession of a network.

rational actors and social structures, social capital relates these two things

three aspects
1. obligations, expectations and trustworthiness of a network

2. networks from friends or connections bartered to goals

3. norms and sanctions, if people you know, know each other this leads to closure

different from bourdieu coleman talks about social capital as a public good

Problems with social capital
social capital is denfied by its functions

Abstract

In this paper, the concept of social capital is introduced and illus- trated, its forms are described, the social structural conditions under which it arises are examined, and it is used in an analysis off dropouts from high school. Use of the concept of social capital is part of a general theoretical strategy discussed in the paper: taking rational action as a starting point but rejecting the extreme individ- ualistic premises that often accompany it. The conception of social capital as a resource for action is one way of introducing social structure into the rational action paradigm. Three forms of social capital are examined: obligations and expectations, information channels, and social norms. The role of closure in the social structure in facilitating the first and third of these forms of social capital is described. An analysis of the effect of the lack of social capital available to high school sophomores on dropping out of school be- fore graduation is carried out. The effect of social capital within the family and in the community outside the family is examined

Conclusion

In this paper, I have attempted to introduce into social theory a concept, "social capital," paralleling the concepts of financial capital, physical capital, and human capital-but embodied in relations among persons. This is part of a theoretical strategy that involves use of the paradigm of rational action but without the assumption of atomistic elements stripped of social relationships. I have shown the use of this concept through demonstrating the effect of social capital in the family and in the commu- nity in aiding the formation of human capital. The single measure of human capital formation used for this was one that appears especially responsive to the supply of social capital, remaining in high school until graduation versus dropping out. Both social capital in the family and social capital outside it, in the adult community surrounding the school,

Social Capital showed evidence of considerable value in reducing the probability of dropping out of high school. In explicating the concept of social capital, three forms were identified: obligations and expectations, which depend on trustworthiness of the social environment, information-flow capability of the social structure, and norms accompanied by sanctions. A property shared by most forms of social capital that differentiates it from other forms of capital is its public good aspect: the actor or actors who generate social capital ordinarily capture only a small part of its benefits, a fact that leads to underinvestment in social capital.

find for public schools (though not Catholic schools) parental social closure associated with negative effects on hs graduation,

Coleman expected such effects to be positive
school with closed social functioning referred to by authors as a norm enforcing school, catholic schools effective example of this, downside is schools can
be oppressive argues social closure doesn't explain Catholic school performance

While the findings have always supported the potential effect of intergenerational closure in Catholic schools, their analyses did not lead them to conclude that intergenerational closure has the same effect in public school; in fact, closure might have its “cost”, and would even have negative association with students’ academic achievement (Morgan and Sorensen 1999a). They came to the conclusion that the reason why intergenerational closure might have positive effect on students’ achievement is that the parental network is coupled with the religious norm that could potentially encourage learning.

Morgan and Todd 2009

Better methods and different data find there is not a positive association with social networks and success in public schools

In Morgan and Todd (2009), they claimed to add the following “new” things to the literature. First of all, they used the data from Education Longitudinal Study in 2002 and 2004 (ELS), as opposed to the data from National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS 88) that the previous studies used. The ELS data is not only more recent but they also include network measures that can better capture Coleman’s idea. That is to say, while NELS 88 only include the quantity of students’ and their parents’ networks, ELS provide information on the characteristics of those networks (e.g. the sex and the academic achievement of the students’ friends). They employed those measures in response to previous critiques (Hallinan and Kubitschek 1999). Secondly, to engage the discussion on the “cost” of intergenerational closure, they ran separate models for students from Catholic schools and from public schools and in order to see the difference in the effects on the outcomes. This strategy is similar to what Morgan and Sorensen (1999a) did as they included interaction terms of “Catholic schools” with other independent variables in the models. Finally, though Morgan and Todd (2009) used “parents know parents” as the measure for intergenerational closure, while the previous studies used the number of students’ friends the students’ parents know for the measure. Morgan and Todd’s (2009) measure is potentially more in line with Coleman’s (1988) idea of intergenerational closure being a network among parents.

Another important advancement in Morgan and Todd (2009) is their model specification. Previous studies have used a “causal” language while it is only association/correlation they were referring to (and hence I hereby use them interchangeably to certain degree). Morgan and Sorensen (1999a) only measure intergenerational closure on the school level by using the school-specific means. They argued that closure on the school level is more in line with Coleman’s (1988) concept of closure as the measure on the school level emphasizes its contextual nature in its effect. In order to draw a more holistic map of the causal relationships Morgan and Todd (2009) attempted to, they allow the slope to be random and observe the effect of closure across levels. It is by doing so that they found the difference in the role of intergenerational closure in Catholic schools and in public schools. While including network characteristics and family background measures do reduce the magnitude of parents know parents in Catholic schools, the coefficient is still substantial in the full model with all of the controls. On the contrary, the coefficients of parents know parents are greatly reduced with all other controls for students in public schools[1].

Morgan and Todd (2009) then concluded that while the correlation between intergenerational closure and academic achievement in Catholic schools is consistent with Morgan and Sorensen (1999a), they did not find the negative association between them in public schools as Morgan and Sorensen (1999a) presented. They speculated that the difference is cause by 1) model specification, 2) changes in the effectiveness of some types of public schools and 3) revisions to the data collection instrument.

I mentioned the previous studies because they could account for some of the analytical decisions Morgan and Todd (2009) made in their ten-years-after study. In the ten-year debate, the critiques the two campaigns have on each other, along with the improvements the authors try to make, mostly center on the technical issues, including model choice and specification. Their purpose of doing so is to better operationalize the concepts Coleman (1988) presented.

The Blau Duncan path diagram shows a correlation
between father's education and father's occupation and direct effects: of

father's education on a respondent's education,

father's occupation on respondent's first job,

father's occupation on respondent's occupation,

respondent's education on respondent's occupation, and

respondent's first job on respondent's occupation.

The Blau Duncan's structure is such to suggest that the total direct effects of father's status can be measured by summing the direct effect of father's characteristics and the effect of father's characteristics as they correlate with other pathways indirect effects.

The authors conclude that father's characteristics have something of a .535 correlation with child characteristics, but that education serves as an important mediating variable aectiong intergenerational occupational mobility. The finding that education serves as an important mediator
emphasizes why last week's readings on how families determine educational attainment is important.

They use the (what they deem) moderate correlation between father and child characteristics to challenge the notion of a vicious cycle of poverty by arguing that even with some signicant intergenerational correlations, signicant mobility occurs.

In class notes: father’s occupation is measured by SEI scale.  Assume Father’s occupation and education are correlated and not stating which is which (no causal implications). All are standardized, so are in units of standard deviation.  The arrow from nowhere is everything else we don’t know the residual, (luck, other stuff, measurement error- but not correlated with father’s occupation/education). Arrows in path analysis that don’t go directly to dependent variable are indirect effects.

Probably quantifying and correlating/relating variables all effects models.

How much of respondents outcome depends on family background isn’t that much, not-zero, but not a lot.  There is a lot of uncertainity in position in society isn’t as effected by social background, but not a vicious circle, more variation than not in people’s outcomes.

Limitations of this model/study. All based on men. (this is all white men, but the book found more mobility in blacks, they call it a perverse openness among blacks, upper class blacks less able to pass on advantage to kids). What about genes, grandparents status, cognitive ability – inherited, (very controversial stuff) there is a lot of stuff that happens when motivation, intelligence. Fundamental measurement problems.  Twin studies and gene mapping, looking to models with gene markers and DNA samples.

Harding et al. 2005

Harding et al (2005) used the Occupational Changes in a Generation survey and the General Social Survey to measure how current family income related to parental characteristics. They found overall, the upper quartile and lower quartile of both men and women tended to stay in the same quartile as they were at birth and very few shifted more than one quartile. 

develop approach which focuses on family's total income

this allows them to take into account how marriage market influences life chances

natural abilities often determine what choices people make for themselves

family inuences genes and how much people work and their taste for goods, and the goods they receive

from 1960s payo to education increased in both the labor and marriage markets

Harding et al (2005) used the Occupational Changes in a Generation survey and the General Social Survey to measure how current family income related to parental characteristics. They found overall, the upper quartile and lower quartile of both men and women tended to stay in the same quartile as they were at birth and very few shifted more than one quartile. 

focus analysis on adults 30 to 50 and family income in previous year

look at OCG sample born more recently and GSS, sample born earlier (between 1913 and 1945) finds in OCG, associations between family status and respondents went down, for GSS associations went up for men

for women it's more complicated

decline in role of parental occupation due in part to decline in farmers

reaches conclusion that income relationship between parent and child income has remained fairly steady over time but because inequality grew, the effects of this correlation are magnified.

effect of parent's education grew between 1970s and 1990s

-How the relationship between American family income during adulthood and family background during childhood changed from 1961 to 1999?

-This paper focuses on individual’s total family income (those who are not working will be considered)

-The authors measure 7 different family background characteristics (independent variables).  They use multiple correlation and bivariate correlation method, and they found that there were significant changes in equality of opportunity in the U.S. between 1961 and 1999.

For men, the equality of opportunity increased during the 1960s but changed little thereafter.

Among women there was less equality opportunity in the early 1970s than among men, but equality of opportunity among women increased during the 1970s. By the late 1990s, the importance of family background for women’s economic prospects was similar to its importance for a man’s economic prospects.

-The importance of race, ethnicity and religion declined between 1961 and 1999.

A serious problem with Blau and Duncan's challenge
to the viscous cycle of poverty literature is that they measure the association between father and son outcome's using correlations. The substantive importance of correlation coecients can only be understood in relation to the variation in the population or sample of interest. By variation, I am referring to the range of prestige in jobs, the number of jobs at each prestige, and the distribution
of pay across jobs. This is a point made quite effectively by Harding and colleagues who conclude among other things that the correlation between father and son outcomes have remained relatively stable from the 1970s through the present, but as income inequality has increased, these correlations have become substantively more meaningful

Adding social psychological variables to the Blau-Duncan model they considered mental ability (and found it to be correlated to SES of birth) and the influence of parents, teachers, and friends' expectations for the individual along with his own academic and educational aspirations to predicted actual education and occupational attainment.

Overall, their model was successful, they found personal and significant others’ aspirations for the individual and the individual’s academic performance all significantly influence on later adult attainment.

The Wisconsin model of status attainment first developed by Sewell and colleagues begins with the proposition that while the Blau and Duncan model
is interesting it fails to explain how father and child characteristics are related.

Sewell et al consider that mental and socio-emotional skills of children may be important mechanisms inducing this correlation (they call this social psychology, but their model seems to emphasize cognitive ability and aspirations). The Wisconsin model is empirically tested and more fully developed with the WLS work done by Hauser and colleagues who find signicant effects of aspirations, social support, and scholastic achievement on later oucomes.

-Blau and Duncan fail to include the psychological inputs in their model. Moreover, they omitted the social psychological factors which mediate the influence of the input variables on attainment.

-They argue that Blau-Duncan model fails to explain the connection between different variables. They claim that the social psychological variables explain the motive of people’s actions and provide a causal explanation of the relationship between family background and attainment (education and occupation). More important, the total explanation of variance might increase.

-In their model, significant others’ influence (parents’ encourage for college, teachers’ encouragement for college, friends’ college plans) is of central importance in this model.  The data and theory agree that SOI has direct effects on levels of edu and occ aspiration, as well as edu attainment. In turn, each aspiration variable appears to have the predicted substantial effects on its respective attainment variable. SOI is affected directly by SES and indirectly by MA through the latter’s effect on the AP.

-Variables explain 34 % of variance in occ attainment, 50% on educational attainment.

Conley discussion of sibling similarity and dierences over the life course

high sibling resemblance resembles a more castelike society

global effect of family is measured in family background

parents are often thought to have investment neutral investments or child

equality preferences
correlations among siblings are highest by education then occupation income and wealth

Conley more explicitly approaches questions of how
dierential parental investments may aect sibling outcomes.

looks at sibling correlations in life outcomes
which siblings are alike, which diverge
assumes high sibling resemblance, reflects caste like society, low sibship resemblance

more meritocracy
however could be dynamics with siblings and sib order in the family

suggests parents may have equal investment strategy or equal child outcomes

suggest sibling correlation most similar for education then occupation then income

parent preference models not supported, wealth correlation is lower than income

black siblings lower educational correlation

Conley (2008), family background affects all siblings in the same way.  Instead of looking at each family background separately, look at all of background as a common factor that affects both self and siblings. Can decompose attainment into things all have in common and things unique to individual sibs. If interested in a particular question in teasing out the mother/father education, etc matters separately.

But Conley looks at how may invest in kids differentially, maybe the better child or like the welfare state, bring them up. If don’t assume that people treat kids differently, the idea of family background effect is less strong.  But, by and large find that family background does have an effect.  That parents overall do treat kids fairly equally. 

looks at explanatory effect of Wisconsin model of intergenerational inheritance when measurement error is taken into account, revised model allowing for changes and response inconsistency supports original model and suggests these adjustments improve it's explanatory power by systematic nature to measurement error offsets downward bias of expectation

used the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (WLS) to account for some of the measurement error in the earlier studies. They found there was large response error in the earlier studies and when it was corrected socioeconomic background had more influence on later educational and occupational attainment.

Hauser and Mossel's main conclusions are that across
family variation in outcomes is greater than within family variation and that while there is signicant correlation between brothers (around .6), there are also important differences.

can decompose attainment into a factor that extends to a factor that all sibs having common and some that are unique to individuals

Auggest for individuals process of occupational stratification changes as people age

this may occur as inequality is the process of interactions over time

1. they expect family and gender (i.e. woman) matters most for people in their early careers

2. expect education eects also strongest at career entry but

3. cognition should remain of constant importance

they find support for all three of these hypotheses

Finds decreasing sibling similarity with age

finds outcome and sibling correlation is sensitive to measure of ses used

Warren, Hauser, and Sheridan (2002) used paired sibling data to account for measured and unmeasured aspects of family background, again using WLS. They took a life course perspective on career status and earnings. They found that family background’s entire influence is through education and cognitive ability, both education and cognitive ability affect first job, and the first job and cognitive ability directly influence later careers. While men worked in higher paying careers, the process of occupational stratification is similar for men and women.

Warren (2002) suggests that education most
strongly aects an individual's rst job but it does not have an enduring effect on contemporary employment (Warren contrasts this with cognition which does
have an enduring effect).

distinguishes between achievement and aptitutde and argues that the former is a more important predictor of educational attainment and later labor market success.

finds achievement better predicts education than aptitude, largely conrms wisconsin model

Campbell 1983

has some criticisms, says attempts should be made to not only replicate Wisconsin model but extend it

Ask whethers the questions intended to measure aspirations, achievement, and/or ability in fact adequately measures those constructs.

This a challenge to Hauser's model: yes, researchers
may get the same findings about the role of aspirations and scholastic achievement in determining occupational status if questions are asked in the exact same way, but are these questions actually capturing the intended constructs?

Diprete wt al. 1990

Come back to:

say that year to year uctations important and product of more macro level processes

Moblity tables

This week introduces mobility tables. Moving forward from our discussion last
week of the intergenerational transfers of occupation, mobility tables help to
more formally relate associations between class of origin and destination class.
The Basic Structure of Mobility Tables
Mobility tables take some denition of classes, using evolved from Goldthorpe's
neo-Weberian schema and takes a measure of a sample intended to be representative
of the population and places each population member in a table cell. The rows of the table indicate the class the individual came from (the origin class);

the columns of the table are the individual's current class position (the destination class). The rows and columns of the table are organized in such a way
that the diagnol represents immobility. Interpreting mobility tables in terms of structure and exchange requires making certain assumptions.

Mobility Tables- Origin and Destinations.

Looking at frequency, Chi-square test of a particular model that says the two variables are independent.

Chi-square is the measure of difference between observed and expected if independent. Larger the X-square greater the deviance.

If no association between origin and destination, all you need is row effect, column effect and grand mean. F=abc

If there is an association F=a*b_i*c_j*g_ij,

Log(F) = log(a)+log(b)+…

If you estimate all parameters for all cells, you get perfect association, but too many parameters and not helpful.

Want a model where we don’t use all parameters, want more parsimonious.

Want to make sure it reproduces the correct frequency in the marginal frequency. 

Log linear implies different constraints on frequency.
Chi-square measures the goodness of fit of a specific model, can estimate other models between statistically independent and perfectally saturated model (in which Chi-square =0)

Map out regions and within each region (group of cells) the association is the same.  Get a pattern of expected frequencies that work with expected model and get a Chi-square that tells how much expected frequency are with observed frequency.

Constant Flux (book)- known as the core model

-Quasi-perfect mobility. Diagonal cells in the table are immobility. Another model is to estimate separate diagonal cells (immobility) and if it doesn’t happen can equally go up or down in mobility.

Problem with topological models is that very different models can be good, but other models may also be good and mapping is arbitrary.

Another ways is to scale/order the categories and use a single parameter in the difference in origin and destination based on number of cells up or down.  The uniform association models have a single parameter to describe association.

Quasi-uniform association model where immobility is considered, assumes a higher concentration of cases on the diagnol and the rest of the parameters are consistent and depend on how far apart (number of classes) move.

Don’t need to use integers to scale, may use different numbers i.e. average status, SES, percentage not specialized, those with specialized training.

Can compare countries, genders, time, etc by comparing models. Look for differences in marginal distribution to tell how much structure mobility (up and down).  Also can measure absolute mobility.

Unidiff is a very popular model to compare. Forces them to keep same measures of association, but the magnitude of them can vary.  Proportional is preserved.

Looking at the average occupation overtime of parent and children, get strong immobility.

two main approachs topological model approach featherman and hauser,
look at different regions of table and say they have the same procesess going on,
you map out the mobility space map
esti
quasi perfect mobility if you are not immobile you have an equal chance of being in any other classs
use a single parameter that expresses distance between origin and destination, this is called association models, this is more parsimonious. they have one association parameter that is a funciton of assocition models

simplest association model is row and column ffeects are integers and expressed as a single parameter but this doesn't fit because it doesn't incorporate
immobility very well

quasi-mobility association perfectly models diaganol cells with uniform association

but not independence, farther you go from origin to destination, lower associtons

Mobility table

suggest blanking out really dense or sparse cells in mobility table and ditting quasi-independence models
larger number of entries blocked, the worse the model fit

suggests quasi-independence model attaches too much importance on

suggests understand mobility tables as defined as expected value of cell given, row effect, column effect and interaction term

doesn't assume ordinality but acknowledges it is helpful for making interpretations

suggest occupational immobility highest for farm then next highest for high manual labor

doesn't describe distribution of labor just mobility
great immobility at top and bottom of occupational hierarchy

The classic mobility table analysis presented this week by Featherman and
Hauser nds that in the United States at the time they were writing (the 1960s)
there was relatively little mobility at the top and the bottom of the occupational
distribution. They nd are transitional classes which have about equal odds of
moving up or down, and blue collar positions in the middle of the hierarchy
are not very predictive of ultimate social class.

if person's income is independent of parents society is highly mobile

part of child inheritance from family is mechanical, reputation,

other part reflects human capital investment by parents.

this model assumes people do not
bequest financial assets to child and cannot borrow resources against a child's future

income elasticity decreases as public investment in children increases

estimates of income elasticity likely downwardly biased

what are roles of genetic and cultural heritability

determined you should average father and son incomes to determine true levels of inequality

Solon 1992

finds new improved data from PSID shows substantially higher intergenerational transfers of income between fathers and sons

concludes Sweden and Poland most fluid countries

Britain yardstick

Germany less mobile

found convergent trend in absolutely mobility across countries

no convergence in social mobility

social fluidity relationship between class origin and current placement

uses chi sq, likelihood

study of trends in social mobility across several countries in Europe.

Using loglinear models to show changes in social mobility across countries.

Demonstration of broad trends in similar social mobility across countries.

Findings entirely dependent on whether the definition of class is meaningful and

whether the implications of occupying a particular class status are similar across countries studied.,

index of dissimilarity and bic to measure model t

cross-national analysis documents a convergence in the class distribution across countries but does not
highlight a similar trend in social fluidity.

In his conclusion about trends in social mobility across countries, Breen introduces the OED triangle.

This model shows two pathways from which origin social standing leads to a destination standing.

The first is a direct path from origin to destination, consistent with an ascriptive view of social standing, social standing inherited.

The second is a direct path between origin social standing and education and then a second path from education to destination. If education completely mediated the relationship between origin and destination positions, we might view the society
as meritocratic (IF and ONLY IF we ignore selection processes into particular educational attainment)

introduces novel approach to the field (of mobility tables), studying women! finds this alters implications of mobility tables, actually declined since 1960s

The social origin measure used is typically derived from a father's class position. However, Beller makes an important change to the inputs in the classic mobility structure. She updates the mobility table approach to test which operationalization
of social origins is the best fit for predicting social destinations.

She runs a series of models that test:

1. models including father's standing only
2. model's including mother's standing only

3. mothers which include both maternal and paternal standing in an additive model

4. models which include some interaction of paternal and maternal characteristics.

Her conclusions from this analysis is that for situations for which both parents are in the labor market, including maternal and paternal characteristics in measuring social origins
provides the best model fit. However, when housewives are included in such a  model, this produces considerable heterogeneity.

missing mothers distorts social stratication produced biasing estimates of mobility can change findings

nds in Chile high inequality is not associated with low mobility
highlights two theories:
1. resource perspective high inequality cements advantage, lowering mobility
2. competition perspective high inequality raises stakes more competition
highlights hierachy eects, eect social distance has on mobility and inheritance
eect eects current status has on future
in chile short hierarchy weaker, long hiearchy moves stronger

Response to Hout who says college degree is the great equalizer.

challenged and revised by Torche who finds in the
contemporary US, college graduates do have about independent life chances, but graduate school is becoming a new norm which is unequally distributed
and looking just at college graduation, ignores horizontal stratication within college graduates (i.e.
prestige of* major and institution). However, looking only at those who make it to college might be misleading.

is a college degree the great equalizer?
Finds u-shaped inheritance, lowest among college grads higher at low ed and above ed
social origin gaps are much smaller than gender gaps gendered effect lower social origin

Torche, updates Hout.  U shaped pattern of parental influence.   Looks at occupation, occupational status, respondent’s income and family income.  Finds effects for those without college degree, not much for those with advanced degree, but not much immobility by family class for those with a BA only.

Idea is that social capital that get from families with higher degrees is important.

Torche thinks of horizontal stratification, that at same level of education different value in the labor market and the institution matters. Trend is that working class are more likely study in more practical value of degree. (For undergrad level).  

Hout 1988

Finish this

College cancels out earlier effects

Education has been cited as increasingly important for economic success and life style variations. Hout shows this in his 1988 paper which suggests that among those individuals who obtain a college degree have life chances completely independent of class of origin.

Education is increasingly important for earnings,
occupation, health and family formation.

or both men and women more upward mobility

women more likely be in white collar occupation
mothers influence daugthers but not sons

1970s and 1980s similar levels of gross mobility but a balance between more universalism, those who get a college degree are more more likely to be open

but less structural mobility (differences between row and columns)

1970s move away from farmwork so sons moved but just because of structure of occupations, people were forced to be mobile

opposed to this in 1970s white collar jobs grew
in the 1980s, he thinks shift from farmwork is pretty over for men upward and downward mobility is narrowing because of fluidity provided by college degrees, in the 1980s credentialing becomes more important

drop in origin destination association for workers without hs degree

lack of changes masked two countervailing trends
women have more fluidity than men
driving that increasing fluidity is increasing share of workforce with college degrees

college degree is a great equalizer of occupations but once you get a college degree an independence model holds

you do better when there is a model for fathers and mothers
1991 fater looking at both sides father status homogamy by intergenerational
ways

The association between men's and women's socioeconomic origins and destinations decreased by one-third between 1972 and 1985. This trend is related to the rising proportion of workers who have college degrees. Origin status affects destination status among workers who do not have bachelor's degrees, but college graduation cancels the effect of background status. Therefore, the more college graduates in the work force, the weaker the association between origin status and destination status for the population as a whole. Overall mobility remains unchanged because a decline in structural mobility offsets the increased openness of the class structure. Up- ward mobility still exceeds downward mobility in the 1980s but by a smaller margin than it did in the 1960s and 1970s. We c

Sobel, Hout, and Hauser 1985

Come back to

CASMIN -- Erikson and Goldthorpe's cross national study used as a template
for developing models of class using a neo-Weberian schema. Widely used in loglinear
studies.

Criticized by Hauser and Hout (1992) for ignoring heterogeneity
and non-linearity in the model.

main conclusions of CASMIN project, variation across countries in social mobility and policy affects mobility but so different policies that it is hard to compare

For example a criticism
of the CASMIN ndings brought up by Hauser and Haut is that there is the heterogeneity
in class distances across countries which should not be ignored when
running analyses. Even if dierences in particular countries are acknowledged
as Mueller does in his work, it is very dicult to say that countries are comparable
on all characteristics except that being studied. For example, the United
States diers from Germany in the orientation of its education system, but it is
dicult to say that this dierence accounts for dierences in the eects of the
education system on employment trajectoriesit is always possible that historical
processes which dierentiate the countries are driving patterns observed not
the variables studied. This is a challenge in conducting cross national research
that, even if dierences are acknowledged, is diuclt to overcome. One potential
solution is when comparing countries, to use each case as its own control.
concludes CASMIN measures have problems in linearity and heterogeneity
connecting occupations to other outcomes

For mobility tables to have
value, we have to make some assumptions about the signicance of being in
a particular class and having a constant meaning over time or in the case of
a cross-national analysis, across countries. Additionally useful in an analysis
about the substantive importance of changing classes is some parametric assumption
about what a change in a class means for other outcomes (i.e. does a
1 unit increase in class yield a 1000 dollar increase in income). This is a topic
that Hauser and Hout explore in their 1992 work. They nd that Goldthorpe's
original schema of class classication had signicant deviations from linearity
(or any parameterization really) such that this interpretation of the eects of a
class change were not realistic.

models crossnational comparison of origin selection to qualification and qualification selection to destination class

expect less inequality for manual labor in egalitarian case but possibly same relative service advantage

expect unqualified more likely to enter unskilled labor

service advantage comes from having better access to qualifications and avoiding low qualifications

confirms hierachy 2 is in part explained by qualifications

signicant cross national variation

perception of stereotyping and inferiority might perpetuate it

to test stereotyping gave black and white students a test designed to be intentionally dicult

this is a good test because test is frustrating and challenging so as to perhaps make stereotypes not affordable when test presented as test black students did 1 sd worse,

when test presented as diagnostic, black students did equally well

following the test, found blacks more likely to make associations of race most advantaged students did worse, you have to care about a domain to fear stereotype

African American students only did well when they thought the test was race fair, the only way they were convinced of this was when they thought it
was developed by African Americans

Both Steele and Downey suggest that African American students as having positive attitudes towards school but as less likely to achieve their aspirations.

Downey describes this as a paradox in the literature whereby African Americans report having more positive attitudes towards school than white counterparts but being less likely to achieve their desired level of schooling. In his analysis of
NELS data, Downey decomposes school attitudes into a number of categories to try and determine if African American students had positive attitudes about aspects of school that were correlated with later educational attainment.

Oliver and Shapiro 1997

(Book?)

starts with top of spectrum, at top of income, many blacks, at top of wealth, not as much

most bad effects of race from past which over generations has prevented accumulation of disadvantage

argues state policy has discouraged black well accumulation

argues blacks form sediment of Amerian society

racial inheritance is a key part of how inequalities are transmitted

income supports black middle class, wealth supports white middle class

need to have policies to promote asset growth for blacks and address historical disadvantage

blacks have positive school attitudes even though weaker performance explain this

1. black attitudes may be disingenuous, lack credibility, suggests not all attitudes are the same

2. black pro-school attitudes may be confined to areas which do not matter for schools.

3. relationship of expectations and achievement do not seem to vary across races

4. for disadvantaged groups tie between expectations and achievement is weak

5. other groups get more advantages of good attitudes than blacks, tho black attitudes

6. find results consistent with idea that black's social conditions contribute to why their attitudes don't measure up to success

Both Steele and Downey suggest that African American students as having positive attitudes towards school but as less likely to achieve their aspirations.

Downey describes this as a paradox in the literature whereby African Americans report having more positive attitudes towards school than white counterparts but being less likely to achieve their desired level of schooling.

In his analysis of NELS data, Downey decomposes school attitudes into a number of categories to try and determine if African American students had positive attitudes about aspects of school that were correlated with later educational attainment.

Downey finds indeed that many of these attitudes are indeed correlated with educational attainment and that the relationship between attitudes and attainment was partially explained by dierences in resources and social conditions which made it more difficult to African American students to achieve their aspirations.

This hypothesis might be consistent with Conley's findings that after controlling for wealth (and examining different types of wealth), the race gap in high school graduation disappears and African American students are actually slightly more
likely to graduate from high school than their white counterparts.

find no evidence for a penalty of working in a black dominated job

use multilevel model of metropolitan areas

high proportion blacks in metropolitan areas has been linked to higher wage inequality

asks does concentration of race effect job segregtion, are black jobs more devalued in places with larger black concentration

blacks more segregated into black jobs in places where there are more black workers

black wage penality decreases as proportion of blacks increase

conclude increased job devaluation is not the mechanism through which black white wage differentials are driven, concludes segregation more pronounced where blacks are more visible

segregation into jobs where higher concentration of blacks is more important for producing wage inequaltiies

administered telephone survey to employers

found employers who said they were more willing to hire an ex-offender no more likely to do so in practice

no survey dierences in willingness to hire black vs. white offenders but in practice whites more likely to be hired

only 58 percent response

interpret likely or very likely in survey versus only a minority in practice

A key thesis of Oliver and Shapiro's paper and Conley's book is that wealth is important for explaining variations in inequality across races.

Conley builds upon Oliver and Shapiro's thesis. Conley argues that race is not chiefly associated
with wealth differences but the associations between race, class and wealth cause differences in other outcomes such as education and employment.

Conley highlights how inequality accumulates throughout the life course and cites a historic interaction between race and class: middle class African Americans may be playing catch-up while the urban poor fall behind.

property matters for determining position

uses PSID

historical dierences contribute to black white wealth disparity

how much related to inheritance and how much related to contemporary issues?

residential issues most dramatic barrier to black white wealth

black white segregation not explained by class


finds when controls are added wealth matters more than skin color

concludes policy can't be raced bases

finds net of class, african americans actually enjoy some wage advantage

finds that after controlling for wealth (and examining different types of wealth), the race gap in high school graduation disappears and African American students are actually slightly more likely to graduate from high school than their white counterparts.

suggests that the degree of wage inequality actually increases for jobs at the upper end of the occupational spectrum.

In a decomposition, it seemed some but not all of these differences were explained by dierences in human capital. An interesting variable that I
don't think entered their decomposition was wealth.

People on the job market may be more or less likely to bargain for wages

looks at how location in occupation structure affects black and white wage inequalities

recent trends in more equality in occupation and less equality in earnings

individual level variables do not explain all race gap but education does reduce it

majority of race gap accounted for by differences in human capital

look at combined occupation as a mediator

Grosky 2001 suggests that the degree of wage inequality actually increases for jobs at the upper end of the occupational spectrum. In a decomposition, it seemed some but not all of these dierences were explained by dierences in human capital.

Wilson 1978

Wilson gives a review of historical patterns in racial inequality in the United
States. He highlights three phases in race dierences in US history: the rst is
the period of legalized slavery, the second the Jim Crow era through the mid-
20th century with continued institutional policies designed to maintain African
American disadvantage, the third is the present modern era which has done
away with institutional policies designed to maintain race based inequality but
in which a black underclass continues. For the rst two periods, Wilson argued
that two economic theories might explain the various institutional inequalities
designed: the rst, Marxist theory, suggests that maintaining racial prejudice
was a policy instituted by the bourgeiose designed to prevent proletariat solidarity,
the second segmented labor market theory suggests that when there is
a wage dierential between two groups the more advantaged labor group will
try to maintain the inequality by excluding the lower group from getting the
necessary skills needed to be competitive in the labor market.Wilson argues that
in the modern era neither economic explanation is sucient and in fact the role
of race should in fact be de-emphasized in favor of considering the role of class
in determining outcomes.

life chances of blacks now more equal barriers changed from race oppression to class subordination

three stages of black-white contact in the US
1. antebellum slaveryplantation economy
2. jim crow laws post slavery but legal racial subordination industrializing

3. change from race to class

policy interacted with economy
to explain economic origins of racism we can turn to marx who argues racism is used to isolate worker

in contrast split labor market says business wants same wage for all work and antagonism only arises when two groups expect different pay for the same
work  higher labor keeps out poor labor by preventing them from having skills to compete

argues neither theory has relevance to third period, modern policy in US from 1940s onward designed to mediate conflict argues now challenge is that government is not equipped to deal with under
clas

segregation not named in 1970s and 1980s but extremely common

poverty overlaps with segregation causing worse neighborhood conditions for blacks

argue that segregation is instrumental in causing underclass

argues in absence of segregation transformaiton of urban economy wouldn't have been so disastrous

problems are not about black middle class flight but limited black residential options

welfare policies
segregation concentrates disadvantage creates norms

dismantling urban commitment will require moral commitment on the part of white america

race and class disadvantages are firmly connected in his simulation studies and also in the follow-up work exploring the association between percent minority in a neighborhood and sub-prime mortgages and foreclosure.

Massey's argument, as Heide understood it, is that American cities are often segregated by both race and
class, and the intersection of both race and the lowest class position creates a few neighborhoods characterized by simultaneously a high percentage of African American residents, unemployment, lack of social institutions, and welfare dependence.

Historical housing discrimination created these neighborhoods which are continually maintained by processes of white flight and the increased segregation of the black community where those who improve their socioeconomic status are likely to move to white neighborhoods

perceptions of neighborhood trajectories may dictate changes more than even any changes themselves

in beltway white neighborhood, residents exercised voice over exit or decision to stay in neighborhoods and protest change

when people believe neighborhood resources can't accomodate ethnic change they are more likely to exit

strong neighborhoods remain so through opposition to outsiders

continually created as demonstrated in Wilson's analysis of neighrhoods by processes of flight from neighborhoods by residence with the capacity to leave often choose to do so when the residents perceive that resources and the integrity of the neighborhood cannot withstand entering minority residents.

census denes tracts as an important policy territorial unit but not a necessarily natural one

segregation by tract can't capture big changes over small places of space

common segregation measures don't distinguish living distances within a census tract

creates distances in coencentric cirles

uses spatial information theory index, H

comparing the proximity-weighted racial composition with the racial composition of the metropolitan Systematic manipulation of the radius of the population as a whole.

minorities at special risk for sub-prime mortgage and foreclosure

in minority neighborhoods financial institutions are likely predatory

US residential labor market divided by race of  borrower and racial composition of neighborhood

segregation increases sub-prime lending

higher ses increases likeliood of moving to whiter census tract

alba and logan develop spatial assimilation model:

say immigrants move from enclaves to white areas

place stratication model: people seek to preserve inequality through stratification

housing availability model: people come into housing as it becomes open

blacks tend to move out of white neighborhoods but not statistically significant

whites do not move to racially mixed or black neighborhoods

highly educated, married people more likely to move to white areas

improving human capital will address issues of assimilation

Historical housing discrimination created these neighborhoods which are continually maintained by processes of whtie flight and the increased segregation of the black community where those who improve their socioeconomic status are likely to move to white neighborhoods (see Crowder and South 1998
that across races those with her education and married are likely to move to white areas).

do whites move away from black neighborhoods to avoid blacks

or conditions correlated with African American neighbors?

An interesting empirical nding in this literature cited by
Quillian and Pager (2001) is that whites tend to admit these neighborhood preferences in surveys and their behaviors match these survey preferences. I find this
nding interesting both because I would have imagined that white respondents would not have so freely admitted segregation preferences, and because Pager
was the one of the researchers so skeptical of using surveys to measure race based discrimination. However, Quillian and Pager argue that neighborhoods
preferences may not be directly shaped by race aversion but by characteristics associated with black neighborhoods versus white neighborhoods, and they
nd evidence to suggest that neighborhoods with higher percentages of black men are perceived to have higher levels of crime even after the actual crime rate is controlled for.

Week 9

variation across countries in antagonism
race antagonism can take on the forms of exclusion or exploitation

ethnic antagonism is outcome because it subsumes racial antagonism

split labor market theory, two sets of workers with two different prices for people from different group, poorer workers need less incentive to enter labor market

Bonacich 1972 argues that antagonism by ethnicity (called nativism when referencing conflict between native born individuals and recent migrants) is
really antagonism by class and arises in situation of economic competition.

Like Wilson, Bonacich argues that businesses want one price for labor and for that labor to cost as little as possible. However workers may elect to respond to
incoming migrants and labor through two options:

1. exclusion to restrict labor inflows whenever possible 2. when exclusion from a society is not possible, a caste type system where the competing higher wage group seeks to maintain its advantage.

A strategy of protecting the migrant/disadvantaged group is the ethnic enclave.

Bonaich in her 1972 excerpt describes antagonisms by ethnicity or gender or really any demographic characteristic imaginable as potentially rational in that
the antagonism is often rooted in a class threat. When there is an emerging group that threatens to lower the price of labor, the existing labor force may
work to either exclude the new group or to establish a caste system with themselves on the top of the hierarchy. Exclusion may occur in the form of controlling in-flows of migrants and is manifested in the U.S. case in the form of cyclical policy
responses to migration. When exclusion is not possible, Bonaich highlights native groups taking advantage of migrants' limited resources, knowledge, skills, and political capital as methods through which they are marginalized within the labor market.

immigrants may be restricted by information available to them, they may be forced into a contract by not knowing about alternatives, political resources
also determine a group's leveraging powers, weaker groups are more vulnerable

temporary workers may be less objectionable to inequality, often men without families

split labor market may not form with mutliple ethnicities simultaneously it may form without different ethnicities such as when there is a female labor force
or a prison labor force

businesses on the other hand try to pay as little for labor as possible

business may import labor if cost of labor is too high
for higher paid class this is the threat, really their antagonism against other ethnic group is about class not race

lack of resources of weaker group allow for employer to break boundaries set by higher paid group
exclusion often occurs when weaker group resides outside territory

when labor can't be excluded higher labor tries to set up a caste system

solution in caste system is to weaken already weak labor so it can't compete

business does not like caste systems

classical assimulation theory

argues that over generations migrants become
indistinguishable from mainstream America and the wasps via intermarriage

skilled labor generally does not form an ethnic enclave
refugee destinations generally indeterminant

enclave requires
1. substantial immigrants with business experience
2. available capital
3. labor

enclaves usually start small and cater to native clientele

enclave is spatially indentiable
ethnic enclave can be readily subsumed into public sector

counters second generation experiences based on pre-WW2 experiences

immigrants have to adjust faster

in heterogeneous cities, immigrants tend to prefer non-ethnic enclaves for higher wages and fairer rules

ethnic enclave challenges segmented labor market theory of disadvantage

error in identifying the ethnic enclave

blau suggests as size of ethnic group increases, the likelihood of mixed economy and intergroup relations increases

in heterogeneous cities more movement across types of firms will be more likely to cross ethnic boundaries
as time passes people will transition away from ethnic market and into formal economy

over time suggests people will rely less on personal ties
random selection process taken from lists of immigrants
use friends to get jobs in formal economy
ethnic jobs are strict and dicult
introduce long reference period then include abbreviated version in all followup
questions
increased time in the United States, less likely to use personal ties, call into
question dual labor market theory with impermeable ethnic barriers

There is a tradeoff in ethnic enclaves between longer hours and lower pay which however does allow for the accumulation of capital.

Nee et al (1994) argues that the identification of ethnic enclaves is in fact difficult and show through their extensive interviews, that Asian migrants
of various national origins living in ethnically diverse metropolitan areas actually prefer to work in the mainstream economy.

Over time spent in the US (they use a hazard model!!!) individual likelihood of finding work through ethnic ties declines.

examines the econonomic well being of
migrants from different origins in a diverse number of destination sites. His study is massive in scope both in the data sources and hypotheses tested. His outcomes are related to labor market participation and employment. His findings are generally that migrants from more distant communities do better in the labor market (this might be consistent with Nee's ndings).

do a comparison of multiple origin groups in mulitple destinations

had information on 18 destinations and 187 origin countries

becker says immigrant success in labor market depends on skills which can be divided into observable and unobservable types

predicted migrants do better in countries with a screening test using point system

more distant communities, more select migrants, might do better

for men more variation in employment in destinations vs origins

in analysis point system for assessing immigrant readiness was not signicant

higher income inequality in country of origin, less likely migrants to be employed

little evidence of language as important
greater distance associated with better labor market performance but were less likely to take part in the labor market

more left wing parties, more labor market selection


find members of larger ethnic groups somewhat more likely to be part of labor market

argues size of Mexican community matters both for reinforcing group identity and allowing for intragroup divisions

in sample structural assimilation by mexican workers but still have salient ethnic identities

ethnic attitudes become salient when confronted with nativist sentiment

portrays a historical shift in domestic labor where in the mid-20th century African Americans rejected domestic occupations as racially subordinating and degrading.

These nannies and housekeepers came to be replaced by Latina women who are vulnerable to the labor market marginalization Bonaich describes.

These Latina women may often be in the United States illegally or have a work visa that prevents them from taking jobs. When they first arrive in the
United States, they may have limited language skills, education, and references making them vulnerable to unfavorable employment conditions, in particular,
working as a live in nanny. Once in this live-in situations, these women may be subject to other forms of control including control over their daily activities, accesss to food, and unpredictable working hours.

However, Hondagneu-Sotelo notes that these positions as nannies may serve as a bridge to better jobs including that of live-out nanny and housekeeper.

Through greater time spent in the US, interactions with an employer, and interaction with other domestic workers, these women may improve their position.

An issue that I have with segmented labor theory generally is that it seems that there are innite divisions and competitive groups within a society. Hondagneu-Sotelo documented a complex hierarchy of worker position by language ability, by experience, by references and even by appearance. While it might be
tempting to reduce conict to occurring across groups (white native born wasps vs. latina migrant women),

Domestica presents examples of competition within
group to secure the best references, to exclude others from sought after jobs, and to guide more vulnerable individuals into less desirable jobs. Indeed the use of references, word of mouth, and quasi-formal nanny agencies was reminiscent of processes of social closure by which wages are also controlled.

economists sex differences in wages due to utility maximizing behaviors

neo-classical view, household division of labor
women choose occupations easy to enter and exit

becker suggests women exert less effort to work, but bielby finds this is not true -- women tend to undervalue their work

employers don't test who can best do types of work

beliefs about gender affected decisions of relocation

gender dierences can reflect queing, employer preferences for hiring workers and worker preferences for jobs

when large numbers of women, they can force job changes

high turnover occupations workers too poorly mobilized to resist integration

segregation fundamental inequality
allows for groups to remain ignorant of others preserving illusion of equality
essay emphasizes segregation's role in creating inequality

men and women have always done different jobs
occupation integration slowed in 1980

sex labels and sex essentialism affects both supply and demand for workers in occupation

suggests economic growth fosters female access to male occupations

integration can be stalled by protests of male workers, shield from need to cut costs, and responses of customers

gender dierences can be produced by
1. differential allocation to jobs
2. occupations dominated by women are devalued
3. women receive less money for same work, within-occupation discrimination

researchers argue that 1 and 2 are biggest problems in
within-occupation dierences are relatively small

This wage gap is primarily caused by the selection of women into particular
types of occupation and the devaluation of those occupations but is also, to a
lesser degree caused by devaluation of women's work when they are in the same
occupation as men (see Petersen and Morgan 1995).

economic explanation for different valuation of female jobs

1. female jobs tend to be more comfortable
2. female jobs are more crowded, greater suply of labor, lower value

Socialization perspective: 

This is related to gender essentialism but distinct
in that this perspective focuses explicitly on how men and women develop different interests and occupational preferences early in life which inuence later outcomes. England champions this perspective.

questions devaluation perspective of female jobs because it attributes residual differences to employer devaluation of women ffnds no devaluation for female occupied jobs

women earnings have been rising
women's lesser labor market experience contributes to pay gap wages converged in 1980s possibly as statistical discrimination declined

wage convergance slowed in 1990s as more women with less experience entered labor market

trends in overall wage inequality may change shape and size of gender wage gap more generally

studies women who choose to simply stop working inspire of appropriate credentials

more women in the labor force may lower overall participation if new entrants

like hispanics are more likely to also leave

recession made it appear women wanted to leave when in fact they were forced to leave

essentialism internalized and externalized assumptions about what men and women can do

women recognizing unequal pay may opt out

the opt-out phenomenon, if perceived to be relatively common, may serve to reinstate processes of statistical discrimination.

It is interesting to me that Grusky focuses on radical egalitarianism in relation to women when in fact it seems that cultural norms also disadvantage men in so far as men are not seen as capable of being caretakers nor being particularly nurturing.

Moreover, Grusky cites the decreasing gendered norms especially regarding manual labor as potentially bad for women.

growing college completion gap, women do better than men in completing college

incentives and resources may have made women better able to succeed in college

finds greater female disadvantage when there is an educated mother in old period but advantage when mothers are more educated in recent periods

change often caused by a reversal of father effects where there was a male advantage in earlier periods and a female advantage in later periods

girls are more likely to complete college degree even though rates of college entry are similar

gap in education is largely due to women doing better in college

studied gender essentialism across countries

Gender essentialism predicts that stereotypes about male and female capabilities influence both the supply and demand for workers.

It inuencs supply
by giving women preconceived ideas about their strengths and limitations; it influences demand because it gives employers ideas of what women can do.

While Grusky and Charles note that essentialism can both advantage women (moving them into service vs. manual labor) it can also exclude women from analytic
mathematical professions which tend to have the highest pay

conclusions women earn less than men and this inequity has not changed much over time

convergence in median earnings for black women, for white women, men's growing inequality led to many of their gains

they predict a slowing of earnings convergence

ascription, within organizations men more likely to be hired when other men in control'

formalization can undermine ascription when it is more than a symbolic gesture
higher paying managerial positions, more men

suggests cultural constraints create preferences
men do better in tasks and rate themselves better when they feel they should

Correll in her experiment suggests that these beliefs (about what women are best/worst at) can in turn influence performance (women believe they do worse than men in math activities when primed) suggesting that beliefs might constrain actions.

allocative vs. valuative discrimination,

selection into jobs vs. value in jobs

childbearing penalty is shrinking across cohorts

finds little evidence to suggest that more recent cohorts are opting out of the labor market and in fact nds at level of female employment but at high level and a declining penalty for mother hood in terms of labor market productivity

Using decomposition debunks opt out myth high percentage of women working and shrinking penalty to child bearing across more recent cohorts

60% of income earners
period in 1970s women left families and moved to work
many children feel they would have been better off with a working mother, less ambivalence about having a work committed mother

flexible families useful
kids like their parents being flexible
parents leaving labor market unwillingly seen as downward shift

traditional marriages can doom both partners to being forever unhappy

worst case is seemingly happy marriage that dissolves

Gerson in the Unnished Revolution provides the prospective of some new
parents but mostly unmarried young adults (20s to 30s). Her ndings are consistent
with some work of Bianchi as well as McLanahan regarding new perspectives
on parenting and marriage in the United States. Specically, she nds that
a majority of women want some form of autonomy and equality with partners
and don't view domestic labor as their preferred chosen profession. They largely
view that working mothers can be good mothers and some view the domestic
labor of their own mothers as limiting. The men she spoke to largely supported
what Gerson referred to as neo-traditionalist model where their careers would
come rst but women had a right and often responsibility to work although this
labor should be secondary to men's aspirations. Both genders expressed a grow-
100
ing uncertainty about their future life partners and the stability of marriage and
Gerson closes with a hopeful view of the future as the old paradigm dies, she
sees an opportunity for a system with greater exibility. While I am somewhat
skeptical about this new system and greater future options, I liked Gerson's
book, in particular its inclusion of both genders. A qualm I have with a lot of
this literature is the exclusion of tmen. Too often gender studies seems to focus
on changes for women almost always assuming that men hold an advantaged
position and without acknowledging the ways in which culture constrains the
options of men.

eect of family structure has been constant over the last 30 years
single parent households, children do worse
ndings consistent with parent investments

From a very macro perspective, Biblarz and Raftery conclude that the negative effect of children living in a single parent household has been constant over
time (although the the proportion of single parent households has increased).

They find that children from both single father and single mother households are disadvantaged, which runs contrary to Moynihan's hypothesis that single
mother households are particularly disadvantageous.

They argue that their findings, that the effect of growing up in a single parent household is constant
over time and that a step parent is not particularly advantageous for a child's development, to be supporting the evolutionary theory of parent investment.

An important note about Biblarz and Raftery's analysis, is that it cannot directly test the mechanisms implicit in the evolutionary theory of the family.

Specically, they make conclusions based on the experiences of step-parents but alternatives, such as the outcomes of adopted children, are not specically excluded.

Thus, they cannot truly speak to biology as driving outcomes. They also do not have measures of parental investment which seems problematic for
adjudicating which theory drives their substantive ndings about the constant negative effect of alternative household structures over time.

increase entry of larbor women into labor market and changing relationship between husband's earnings and wives

husband working and earning more is now associated with greater likelihood of wife working before it was negative, this also increases income inequality

poor women choose to have children outside of marriage rather than choosing to marry unwisely

they believe good mothering is about beign there
women believe baby can solve anything
they talk about childbearing as an in wtf?
talks about not really planning but no active prevention
trivializes abortion, women say it is the easy way out
pregnancy as a reverse
poor owmen see marriage as too permanent, hold it to a higher standard
fear marriage will shift the balance of power in relationship
being there standard for single women diers from laruaeu's conclusions
motherd don't want fathers dealing drugs, perceptions of legitimacy, frailty

Edin and colleagues describe norms in poor neighborhoods conducive
to early childbearing and limiting sexual abstinence, contraceptive use, and
abortion. Edin interviews mothers living in a number of low-income high risk
neighborhoods around Philadelphia. She nds in talking to these women that,
as Gerson discussed somewhat last week, childbearing is increasingly being decoupled
from marriage. She highlights a trend in fertility that is not planned
but not unplanned. This incomplete planning for a child can result in complex
situations during the pregnancy and after the child is born. Mothers are subject
to a new set of expectations while men are not similarly constrained.
104
In addition to not having to experience the biological constraints of pregnancy,
men also have more available sexual partners without similar commitment.
Women also come to have new expectations for men which they cannot
or may not be prepared to meet and because of unbalanced sex ratios, men may
have additional opportunities to form new unions. She also notes that some
women feel having a child somehow saves them from reckless behaviors. These
women, once they become mothers, often prioritize the role.
I found this book really o-putting. Edin had this rather annoying habit of
juxtaposing the behaviors and perception of women in her sample with those of
the middle class relying on popular stereotypes she felt middle class individuals
had about single parenthood and at some points abortion without providing
evidence to ground these statements. She also frequently spoke of the attitudes
of young poor women without qualifying, at least enough for my liking, that she
was speaking about her small sample in Philadelphia. I object to the way Edin
made comparisons because I thought that her question was interesting, why do
many young women growing up in disadvantaged areas become young, single
mothers and how do they feel about motherhood? However, her approach of
interviewing only the mothers seemed a bit one-sided. I am somewhat skeptical
of ndings when a researcher only samples on the dependent variable (single
motherhood) when other perspectives that are available and relevant to the
research question are ignored. Specically, from my understanding she only
interviewed women who had or were already pregnant with children and didn't
seem to make an eort to understand how young women might have felt before
pregnancy nor any perspectives of men that are relevant in this decision-making.

increase in economic homogamy relative to cultural homogamy

When at a societal level, individuals come to select partners more on shared educational
and economic characteristics as opposed to cultural ones (see Kaljimin),
inequality across households can be expected to increase.

either causal model of sibship size or selection/spurious factors explain association
between sibship size and intellect
kids with more siblings do worse

Parity can also be seen to have important implications for diering child outcomes.

Guo explores the eect of sibship size on performance on cognitive  sts. Using data from the NLSY studies, theyfind that while conventional ols regressions suggest that sibship size is negatively related to measured cognitive abilities, these effects are largely attenuated in a fixed effects model which can try to control for time invariant traits. This suggests that the correlation between sibship size and cognitive ability may be spurious.

role of employment on poverty can best be  understood by considering a dual labor market

primary sector offers good jobs with high wages

secondary sector bad jobs long hours low wages

suggests punctuality and regularity important skills to succeeding in primary labor market

suggests we should de-emphasize policies moving people from secondary to primary employment

qualitative differences across jobs deviate from predictions of neo-classical economics

employment relationships are social relationships

created in relation to production of goods and services

two types of autonomy in relation to jobs: control in doing the job and control in accessing job

goal is to identify matching process that leads to satisfaction of neo-classical labor market assumptions

employee access to job changes productivity for employers

only when wage employment is completely open can neoclassical assumptions be met

closed systems can be efficient but dif mechanisms
vacancy of jobs there is concern about characteristics of person since they are not easily replaced

majority of job changes now result of vacancy not wages

temporary work driven by employer needs

differences across countries in extent part-time jobs are good or bad

Kallberg suggests another classication
system for jobs, part-time and full-time.

Part-time jobs can be thought of as bad but this is really country and context specific as it depends on both the characteristics of the job and other systems of social support.

goal in transition from communism to market in Russia was to make a more flexible market

newly privatized jobs, higher job transitions, low upward mobility

workers in higher privatized branches more job transitions low upward mobility


firm and branch effects increase over time

in privatized branches with poor perform more job loss
greater privatization in a region, greater turn over
better regional performance -lower job loss


finds at firm level private property effects modest at best branch privatization does have effects to push reform

provides a critical view of dual market theory by suggesting that too often these characteristics of dual market theory are conated (periphery firms, bad jobs, part-time work) versus (core firms, good jobs, full-time
work) and that dual market theory often makes these types of assumptions that might be interesting areas of study, not taken for granted. Their conclusions are that dual market theory is valuable in creating a discourse challenging neoclassical economics, but it is ultimately limiting. As they put it (far more eloquently than I could try), ....the assumptions of duality in structure and a
one-to-one parallelism between economic sectors and labor markets impose an overly restrictive conception of economic and labor market segmentation

There are four basic elements in the dual model:

1. organizational structure of capital

2. the organization of labor within capital structures

3. a set of outcomes for workers which result from their participation in the labor market

4. and a social division of labor in terms of racial, ethnic, and gender groups.

two sectors of economy primary/periphery periphery firms, there is free moves in and out of the labor market

core firms, firm specic training barriers to moving between markets

discipline in primary sector is bueracratic in secondary it is harsh

finds evidence of institution specific capital

Sakomato's work seems to suggest evidence that there is an embededness to certain types of capital, and basically issues a challenge to neoclassical economists to demonstrate otherwise.

strength of a tie
1. duration
2. intensity
3. intimacy
4. reciprocity

information can be transferred to more people via weak ties

resources in labor market can be classied into

1. personal
2. social

strength in weak ties might lie in access to positions vertically above ones own

Burt suggests that not only does the density of social networks matter, but structural weaknesses or holes in the network can also present opportunities for social entrepreneurs, i.e. chances for aware individuals to network like-minded people for some greater ambitiion or
purpose.

networks with structural holes present opportunities for entrepreneurial behavior

need to look at mechanisms through which minorities are excluded from productive networks

don't find much evidence of exclusion of minorities

Mouw however finds that in the United States the causal effect of networks don't really play out rather who you are determines who you know.

does social capital affect labor market outcomes?

suggest much of effect of social capital is similar people becoming friends not causal effect

However, in developing countries and/or those countries which are in the process of institutional transitions, social networks might operate differently.

Gerber's findings of the use of social networks in job acquisition in Russia are consistent with theories that suggest that in periods of greater job scarcity, uncertainty, and market transition, use of social networks becomes more common and important for outcomes.

concludes effects of social networks grew following the market transition

in areas with higher unemployment, greater reliance on networks

emphasizing job scarcity (crisis), uncertainty (transition), and our own explanation

(privatization) for why the labor market has gotten more personal in Russia.

In another firm based study of a technology company, Petersen and colleagues (2000) find that there are small race effects which depress the likelihood of a minority individual becoming a new hire, but that these race effects disappear once referral method is controlled for in the model.

negative effects for minorities getting a job offer

for getting a second interview, no race effects

once referral method taken into account, no race effects

the average of the inward and outward flows for detailed labor market categories

divided by the category size definition of structural turbulence

find those with least resources most affected
for men clear push, pull effects

Dual labor markets differ from neoclassical theory in that dual labor market theorists assume that individuals in core jobs cannot be replaced under neoclassical
assumptions because companies have invested in them firm specic capital and entry into the primary labor market is controlled because of a greater supply
of workers compared to demand within companies.

bell predicted post-industrial society with professionals and technicians

pessimists see declining middle class and creation of new underclass proletariat with new class correlates of disadvantage

decline in industrial economy, rise in service industries which are the cause of almost all new jobs

if as optimists want, all jobs are professionalized, then signicant portion of the population is marginalized

professional growth in jobs inversely related to growth in service jobs

suggests professionalization can only come at the cost of service jobs

in Sweden women have worst jobs, in US minority groups do

structural arrangements mediate role between individual origins and attainment

ganzeboom 1991
three generations of stratification models
1. tables cross-classifying occupation of fathers and soons

2. path model beginning with Blau and Duncan

3. now return to tables but with more sophisticated models and better data

this review is grounded in second generation of research
can conceptualize intergenerational mobility in terms of moves across a series of institutions

institutions constrain individual actions and options

blau and duncan's model is limited in three ways
1. failure to consider structural locations in social organizations and moves

2. model is oversimplication of move from origin to adult destination

3. variation in orderliness of individual career pathways which path model cannot capture

section 1 connection between social origin and educational attainment
job of school is to grade students and create the next generation of aristocracy but never really democratic

1. personal traits associated with school achievement and social origin

2. different social origins have different access to educational resources

3. formal and informal structure of schools may favor those of higher social origins

focuses on resources
schools can be opportunities encouraged with family resources

section school and labor force entry
difficult to discern which is first completed educational attainment or first job

differences across cultures, returns to school common in Britain not so much in Germany

career advancement
education may only affect first job but there are certain glass ceilings

varies across countries, most orderly in german case
signicant differences across countries in mobility

Education is a key institution

called education a crucial institution relevant to stratification.
Mueller important differences across countries in association of education and occupational attainment

differences in vocationally oriented countries workers can move across firms easily without much loss of human capital. US not one of these countries

neo-institutionalists expect that the association between education and occupational standing will converge as types of educational systems convege

industrialization hypotheses suggest that as social development converges

associations between education and occupational standing will converge

two types of education: qualification (high vocational training) and organizational which is less vocational

also differences in standardization within a country
across types of countries, slope differs based on dierent role of secondary education on occupational entry

unemployment is often lower with education but non-linear effects in many countries

standardization matters in terms of giving information

two arguments about diverging destinies of American destinies

1. increased competition via deindustrialization and globalization

2. turbulence in industries

problem with emphasing technological change is that it ignores in nation change and is unobservable

technical thesis assumes common trend operating across contexts so it requires comparative perspective

differences in job mobility can lead to important differences in earnings mobility

finds overall class dierences are smaller in Germany relative to US

changes in hours worked relatively less important in Germany

welfare states increase female participation in labor force but doesn't give them access to highly desirable jobs

women in welfare state occupy traditionally female dominated jobs not much managerial access

employee and employer preferences are related

curious if welfare state reduces longterm detrimental consequences of unemployment

employment protection associated with higher unemployment but lower disadvantages associated from unemployment

compares US and west german case

in industrialized countries, 20th century period of standardization, rationalization, and bueracratization

increasing importance of education but inequality in education by class pretty stable over time

education stratication may be caused by theories of cultural capital, bourdieu children from low families lack capital

parsons functionalist perspective education changes as societal functions deem necessary

Collins 1971 cultural reproduction theorist, education serves to marginalize

yield convergent conclusions move to social homogamy in education in Sweden and Netherlands, relative stability everywhere else

feminist solution to women labor force entry, abandon the family as unit of analysis, focus on individual both men and women separately.

Hauser and Warren argue occupation rather than income better long term indicator, more stable

permanent income assumes people know what their income will be

women in west germany more vulnerable to marital dissolution, reason is less likely to work

both german and us workers have about same likelihood of job displacement

job displacement in germany lasts longer but isn't as detrimental

suggests that education most strongly affects an individual's first job but it does not have an enduring effect
on contemporary employment (Warren contrasts this with cognition which does have an enduring effect).

Luxemburg Income Study allows comparison across 30 countries

compare US anti-poverty policies to others around the world

attempts to answer:
do other questions (countries) have an official poverty line?

how do other countries compare to US poverty?

what are drivers of poverty?

dierences in societal emphasis in self reliance?
only us and uk have official poverty indicators

poverty in industrialized countries relative concept

smeeding uses 50% of median income as poverty line

us second highest poverty rate of all nations, highest of wealthy nations reasons for this

1. support for poor
2. distribution of wages

incidence of low pay accounts for variance in poverty among non-elderly

high social spending reduces poverty

uk policy intervention caused its child poverty rate to diverge from that of the US

societies address inequalities by race and gender but not restructured labor

market as structure stagnates, reversal of kuznet curve
income rises in kuznet curve as capital concentrated then
in us since 1970s basically everyone lost ground
supply side reason

1. baby boom
2. women labor force entry
3. migration

skill biased technological change college grads did relatively better off due to collapse of hs grad wages

decline in good (manufacturing) jobs in favor of bad (service) jobs

this theory has been replaced with theories of internal labor markets

Under Kuznet theory, inequality is expected to rise in the process of industrialization as a product of sector dualism. Inequality is thought to rise through dierences in wages nd the distributional dierences between agricultural and industrial sectors and the concentration of capital in the industrial sphere.

However, inequality is expected to decline as the industrial transition is completed and the distribution
of workers shifts to almost a completely industrialized work force (I've also heard a related argument about industrialization decreasing inequality through
regulation and the development of social institutions accompanying industrialization)

Inverted U

tests technological bias a cause for rising racial inequality, demand for lower skilled jobs

looks at retooling of food processing plant, effect on workers truly exogenous

retooling about the people change in literacy requirements

after turnover decline in wages below the median, this is in large part caused by exit from the company

wage gap increased dramatically at this new plant

argues 2008 collapse consequence of US financialization since 1970s

real estate collapse was a proximate cause
advances rent theory by emphasizing role of institutions in income

finacialization
1. increases in financial institutions in social, economic and political terms
2. increasing involvement of non-financial institutions in financial institutions

financial employees now at top of income earner
market equilibria is constructed
rent theory questions assumptions that market reward based on productivity

rent creation or destruction occurs based on actor's relative power

deregulation helped along financialization
shift in 1980s from pro population to pro business

31% of americans in non-standard employment
Kalleberg finds many bad jobs

uncertainty, employers don't invest fringe beneftis
unionization can't help temps

low inequalities tend to have persistence of low inequality

looks at longitudinal data, to examine permanent income

there is both more income inequality and income mobility in the US than Europe

real income growth similar in US comparable to other places

20 to 25 percent of income inequality is by chance fluctuations and this variance is especially large in US

US exceptional in people at bottom of income distribution experiencing loss relative to other earners

at bottom of income distribution income is least stable
taking longitudinal view doesn't change view of inequality

genuine income instability is highest in the US

US unique in level of instability and negative income on bottom decile and positive income change on top

union membership dramatically declined in same period 1973-2009 that hourly wages fell, argues these are related process

argues unions can raise wages for non-unions by threat of organizing

unions create moral economy for fair pay

unions raise pay for blue collars and standardize wages across firms in industries

• Sugar Rush

Nick Falzone

Abraham

Martha

Kris Ruffino

Morgan

Chris Gleason

Anna *2

savanna

shannon

Stando*2

Nicole Gregory

Sari

Nikki

Morgan

Justin Wilder

Jen Valade

Jacquie Solomon

Cindy S

Luke Holland

Judith Horwitz

Tabitha

Jeff

Stacey

Mikal

June

Aaron Alley

Sean?

direct effect of origin on test scores, secondary effect on evaluation of meaning of education

suggest a revision to rational choice which acknowledges:

1. cost befinets,

2. perceived abilities and

3. available resources

for working class people have guarantee that they maintain working class position by jobs and education to maximize utility also comes with risk which may lower their social standing

Breen and Goldthrope – risk aversion, want to stay at or above current class. for upperclass, don’t want to risk failing below their SES status and to do this must attend school.  For lower-class, there is a guarantee to get job at their level, don’t want to end up in the lowest class, and the safer strategy is to just get a job, less uncertainity, less of a risk.

Idea is if you go to college and fail the key exam you are in a worse place than if you never go. The perception of risk is more important than the reality

Breen and Goldthrope develop an economic model considering risk aversion – not wanting to end up in a position lower than one’s parents, resource cost, and belief about one’s ability to succeed.  They argue that for working class families, the decision to leave school makes rational sense given their assumptions and available resources.

critique the binomial logit model of educational transitions popularized by Mare (1980, 1981)
and recommend a multinomial model of educational careers. The authors use longitudinal data
from Swedish statistical registries to empirically test the strengths and weaknesses of their
proposed “MT Model” in comparison to the binomial model. Results indicate that the specific
pathways taken through the education system influence the probability of making subsequent
education transitions. Furthermore, these findings are robust to unmeasured heterogeneity. The
authors recommend use of the multinomial transition model in future stratification studies.

technical recommendation is straightforward: analysts should replace the use of a binary logit model with a multinomial logit model. This means that instead of modeling two outcomes (e.g., school continuation or drop out), analysts should model three or more outcomes (e.g., academic track, vocational track, or drop out). This relatively simple technical change has important implications for the conceptualization of educational careers and the
precision with which the relationship between social background and educational attainment is
estimated.

Breen and Jonsson argue that individuals do not necessarily move through the educational system in a unilinear sequential mode as assumed by the logit model. Many European systems, for example, have qualitatively different parallel branches of education (e.g., academic and vocational) that may or may not converge at a later stage. Furthermore, social background effects may be stronger/weaker in shaping transition rates to specific branches. For example, “classorigin differences between those who choose the vocational path and those leave school will generally be rather less than class-origin differences between those who follow the academic
path and those who leave school” (pg. 759). In the binomial model, the academic and vocation
paths are often collapsed which means that the social-origin coefficient is a weighted average of
the true* coefficients.

Alternatively, one track could be thrown out of the binomial analysis, but this ignores potentially valuable information.

Breen and Jonsson are also interested in understanding how educational careers shape potential career outcomes in two ways that the Mare Model is unable to estimate.

1. They want to examine path dependency or the extent to which prior educational choices influence subsequent educational transitions.

2. investigate the “possibility of variations in the
effects of class-origins in determining the probability of choosing among a set of educational options” (pg. 755).

The Swedish registry provides a high-quality dataset with measures of parents’ occupation, social class, gender, educational transitions, and grade point average for over 350,000 individuals born between 1954 and 1967. Sweden’s educational system includes three transitions between approximately age 16 and the start of tertiary education. At each transition point, students are able to select an academic path, vocational path, or leave school and the system is relatively “open” meaning there is technically the possibility of switching paths at each transition.

Finally, Sweden has implemented public policies with the goal of reducing educational inequality by
equalizing resources rather than through educational expansion, which makes it an interesting case study.

The authors analyze the Swedish data using the Mare Model and the MT Model and compare the
results. In these data, the Mare Model tends to deflate class-origin effects at the lower transition
points and inflate them at the transition to higher education. Note that this is not a feature of the
models and these results will vary depending on the data analyzed.

The authors also use average log odds ratios to determine the extent of path dependency. In the
Swedish case, they find that there is a “marked persistence effect” at the second transition point
such that the rate of switching paths is negligible. At the third transition, those who followed an academic-academic path or a vocational-academic path have the highest odds of continuing their schooling. Given this evidence of path dependency, Breen and Jonsson investigate its relationship to class-origin using the MT model. They find that less common educational pathways are characterized by higher class-origin inequalities in comparison to more common educational pathways.

Particularly for men, class-origin effects vary according to path.

Like Cameron ad Heckman (1998), Breen and Jonsson are also concerned about the potential
problem of unmeasured heterogeneity.

Unfortunately, the MT Model is susceptible the same
critique, although to a lesser extent.

1 Closely related is the problem of selection bias, which is actually more problematic in the MT Model than the Mare Model because of non-independence
of transitions. “An apparent path dependence may be spurious because it is induced by the common effect of the unmeasured variable on earlier choices (the paths) and current choices.”

To address these selection bias concerns, Breen and Jonsson use Vermun’s latent class approach and “focus on the robustness of the effects of path dependence at the transition to tertiary education” (pg. 768). I am not familiar with this procedure, but the authors state that the findings are robust and did not change any prior conclusions.

Breen and Jonsson conclude, “the MT model improves our understanding of underlying processes of educational inequality and provides better guidance for which political measures are appropriate to reduce such inequality” (pg. 771). I agree that the MT model allows for more complex and nuanced studies of educational inequality. In this regard, it should be a ‘tool’ in every analyst’s ‘toolbox.’ However, I am not convinced that is appropriate for all or even many studies of intergenerational process related to educational attainment. Breen and Jonsson note that their criticisms of the Mare Model do not apply to educational systems that permit only binary choices or when these choices are unimportant (pg. 755).

However, they also state “such differentiation is present in (virtually) all educational systems, including that of the United States” (pg. 759). While the MT model seems very appropriate in the Swedish context (and several others), it is less clear how it would apply to the U.S. context. According to research on tracking and school organization more broadly, the U.S. educational system is more
differentiated within schools than across schools.

Even if alternative stratifying measures were
available (e.g., prestige is recommended by the authors), it still seems implausible at the k-12
level in the U.S. It is possible that this model could be used to study horizontal stratification in
postsecondary education. Furthermore, cross-national studies that prioritize standardization of
measures and models will be faced with difficult decisions regarding how to classify each
nation’s educational system into several categories.

Additionally, the authors gloss over the limitations associated with using a multinomial outcome.
In my personal experience, I have found that researchers are significantly less familiar with a
multinomial outcome, which makes interpretation more difficult. Therefore, papers using
multinomial logit models must be written in a more careful and explanatory manner.

Additionally, some specialty statistical analyses and certain combinations of procedures with a multinomial outcome are not possible in standard statistical software packages. Finally, the MT
model simply asks a lot of the data so a relatively large sample size is necessary to avoid small
cell size issues or problems of ‘perfect prediction.’
Therefore, I believe that the MT Model can serve as an important advancement to the Mare Model under certain conditions. However, I do not believe that it will revolutionize the field in the way that the Mare Model did in the early 1980s. It is important for analysts to understand its potential given certain research questions and datasets, but like any model, it has limitations that
were not very clearly represented in this paper.

concludes Sweden and Poland most fluid countries

Britain yardstick

Germany less mobile

found convergent trend in absolutely mobility across countries

no convergence in social mobility

social fluidity relationship between class origin and current placement

uses chi sq, likelihood

study of trends in social mobility across several countries in Europe.

Using loglinear models to show changes in social mobility across countries.

Demonstration of broad trends in similar social mobility across countries.

Findings entirely dependent on whether the definition of class is meaningful and

whether the implications of occupying a particular class status are similar across countries studied.,

index of dissimilarity and bic to measure model t

cross-national analysis documents a convergence in the class distribution across countries but does not
highlight a similar trend in social fluidity.

In his conclusion about trends in social mobility across countries, Breen introduces the OED triangle.

This model shows two pathways from which origin social standing leads to a destination standing.

The first is a direct path from origin to destination, consistent with an ascriptive view of social standing, social standing inherited.

The second is a direct path between origin social standing and education and then a second path from education to destination. If education completely mediated the relationship between origin and destination positions, we might view the society
as meritocratic (IF and ONLY IF we ignore selection processes into particular educational attainment)

growing college completion gap, women do better than men in completing college

incentives and resources may have made women better able to succeed in college

finds greater female disadvantage when there is an educated mother in old period but advantage when mothers are more educated in recent periods

change often caused by a reversal of father effects where there was a male advantage in earlier periods and a female advantage in later periods

girls are more likely to complete college degree even though rates of college entry are similar

gap in education is largely due to women doing better in college

Burt suggests that not only does the density of social networks matter, but structural weaknesses or holes in the network can also present opportunities for social entrepreneurs, i.e. chances for aware individuals to network like-minded people for some greater ambitiion or
purpose.

networks with structural holes present opportunities for entrepreneurial behavior

·         Potentially the death of the “Mare model” of educational transitions. 

criticisms to the ET approach (Mare model).

1. they suggest that logistic coecients are not substantively meaningful.

2. they suggest that the Mare model does not capture how individuals make decisions, specifically, the Mare approach suggests that individuals are rationally able to assess their own abilities and make decisions
accordingly based on perceived abilities and costs and benfiets.

3. The declining effect of social background is a product of the functional form assumed.

4. they suggest that selection creates unobserved heterogeneity not accounted for in the logit model.

5. suggest the formation of a model without distributional assumptions.

argues logit models may not be most meaningful way of ascertaining whether family background has an effect on schooling.
problem is that logit models invoke a distributional assumption paramaterization of logit models and unobserved heterogeneity make them imperfectly suited model school transitions instead they use a less strict random effects type model

A main conclusion of this is that educational selectivity caused by omitted variables obscures family background effects.

argues declining relation between family and educational transitions is an artifact of the logit operationalization.

·         Address the consistent finding in sociological literature that the effects of family background and family resources diminish at children progress through school.

·         These findings are based on the Mare model, aka the educational transitions model.

o   Treats educational attainment as a series of transitions, recognizing that the determinants of continuing in school can change in importance at different levels of the school system.

o   Basically, a logistic regression of making a given transition on background variables, conditional on having completed the prior transition.

o   The major advantages of this model over the traditional logistic regression was that it recognized the qualitative differences among various transitions throughout the educational career, and that the coefficients were not confounded with changes in the marginal distribution of educational attainment (since educational attainment increased substantially throughout the 20^th century, this was important.)

·         However, the logistic model has serious flaws that bring into question many of the findings of the educational transitions literature.

·         Cameron and Heckman’s main critiques:

o   Logit coefficients are hard to interpret (odd’s ratios)

o   Model is only loosely behaviorally motivated, and assumes myopia on the part of individuals (i.e. that they are focused on the next transition rather than their long-run attainment). 

o    *The pattern of declining coefficients across transitions is an artifact of the functional form.

§  Unobserved ability can lead to bias

§  Over transitions, the distribution of unobserved ability shifts right, causing the bias to increase

§  This biases coefficients (family background effects) toward zero, because those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds are likely to have the highest levels of unobserved ability/motivation at higher transitions.

§  Even if the true effects don’t change, the coefficients will.

·         Cameron and Heckman develop a technique to correct for omitted variable bias (latent class model), and find that the effects of most background variables are actually higher at the transition to college than at lower transitions.

o   *Main conclusion is that educational selectivity caused by omitted variables obscures family background effects.

·         Their proposed alternative is an ordered discrete-choice model, which assumes that individuals observe their endowments at birth and choose the level of schooling that maximizes their net returns.

o   Relies on weaker statistical assumptions

o   Assumes rational forward-thinking behavior.

o   Does not address the qualitative differences among transitions.

·         Find that long-run factors give rise to the relationship between family income and educational attainment. 

o   Controlling for ability reduces family income effect

o   It is long-term factors such as permanent income that affect academic ability that matters for educational attainment, not short term factors like credit constraints. 

Campbell 1983

has some criticisms, says attempts should be made to not only replicate Wisconsin model but extend it

Ask whethers the questions intended to measure aspirations, achievement, and/or ability in fact adequately measures those constructs.

This a challenge to Hauser's model: yes, researchers
may get the same findings about the role of aspirations and scholastic achievement in determining occupational status if questions are asked in the exact same way, but are these questions actually capturing the intended constructs?

studied gender essentialism across countries

Gender essentialism predicts that stereotypes about male and female capabilities influence both the supply and demand for workers.

It inuencs supply
by giving women preconceived ideas about their strengths and limitations; it influences demand because it gives employers ideas of what women can do.

While Grusky and Charles note that essentialism can both advantage women (moving them into service vs. manual labor) it can also exclude women from analytic
mathematical professions which tend to have the highest pay

mobility which occurs independent of structural forms, often equated with exchange mobility

Sobel argues future work should abandon distinction between structural and circulation mobility

we could move away from log linear mobility tables and get better structural vs circulation mobility but this would retard our understanding of mobility

suggests revision to social capital to acknowledge how individuals of actors are shaped by context, merges capital and rational perspectives social capital control over certain events and resources, situational, can be positive and negative

social capital exists in relations among persons
density of social capital matters for determining interactions social capital can produce human capital, if relations in families are close they can compensate for lack of skills through interactions suggests younger siblings do worse off because of less social capita

Coleman 1988-says introducing social capital, linked to possess of a network to share how to resource other capital in their network.  Brings together how people act in a social structure to best maximize their utility. Obilgation, expectation, and favors of the network. (carpooling, baby-sittying to make things easier).

Information sharing – (ex. Talking to friends about fashion/parents finding out about homework assignments from others), norms and sanction – norm of doing homework right away, that helps community as a whole.

closure- the relationships you have they know each other also. Parent A knows Parent B and they both know the teacher and because it’s a closed network – in the school it helps you.  Existing social organizations you can use for other proposes.

Social capital as a compliment to human capital, need human capital to get benefit from social capital.  One type of social capital is in the family – time and effort in the family. Other is broader capital –network another type of social capital

Coleman sees social capital as a public good, sees high levels of social capital in the Catholic school. – makes it integrated.

Problems- social capital is defined by its function so it’s hard to define and measure.  Difficult to find cause and effects.   Can you operationalize things differently.  Methodological programs

Coleman would argue that Lareau gets cultural capital and social capital mixed up.

Coleman 1988 social capital, bourdieu!
made up of social obligations that is linked to the possession of a network.

rational actors and social structures, social capital relates these two things

three aspects
1. obligations, expectations and trustworthiness of a network

2. networks from friends or connections bartered to goals

3. norms and sanctions, if people you know, know each other this leads to closure

different from bourdieu coleman talks about social capital as a public good

Problems with social capital
social capital is denfied by its functions

Abstract

In this paper, the concept of social capital is introduced and illus- trated, its forms are described, the social structural conditions under which it arises are examined, and it is used in an analysis off dropouts from high school. Use of the concept of social capital is part of a general theoretical strategy discussed in the paper: taking rational action as a starting point but rejecting the extreme individ- ualistic premises that often accompany it. The conception of social capital as a resource for action is one way of introducing social structure into the rational action paradigm. Three forms of social capital are examined: obligations and expectations, information channels, and social norms. The role of closure in the social structure in facilitating the first and third of these forms of social capital is described. An analysis of the effect of the lack of social capital available to high school sophomores on dropping out of school be- fore graduation is carried out. The effect of social capital within the family and in the community outside the family is examined

Conclusion

In this paper, I have attempted to introduce into social theory a concept, "social capital," paralleling the concepts of financial capital, physical capital, and human capital-but embodied in relations among persons. This is part of a theoretical strategy that involves use of the paradigm of rational action but without the assumption of atomistic elements stripped of social relationships. I have shown the use of this concept through demonstrating the effect of social capital in the family and in the commu- nity in aiding the formation of human capital. The single measure of human capital formation used for this was one that appears especially responsive to the supply of social capital, remaining in high school until graduation versus dropping out. Both social capital in the family and social capital outside it, in the adult community surrounding the school,

Social Capital showed evidence of considerable value in reducing the probability of dropping out of high school. In explicating the concept of social capital, three forms were identified: obligations and expectations, which depend on trustworthiness of the social environment, information-flow capability of the social structure, and norms accompanied by sanctions. A property shared by most forms of social capital that differentiates it from other forms of capital is its public good aspect: the actor or actors who generate social capital ordinarily capture only a small part of its benefits, a fact that leads to underinvestment in social capital.

A key thesis of Oliver and Shapiro's paper and Conley's book is that wealth is important for explaining variations in inequality across races.

Conley builds upon Oliver and Shapiro's thesis. Conley argues that race is not chiefly associated
with wealth differences but the associations between race, class and wealth cause differences in other outcomes such as education and employment.

Conley highlights how inequality accumulates throughout the life course and cites a historic interaction between race and class: middle class African Americans may be playing catch-up while the urban poor fall behind.

property matters for determining position

uses PSID

historical dierences contribute to black white wealth disparity

how much related to inheritance and how much related to contemporary issues?

residential issues most dramatic barrier to black white wealth

black white segregation not explained by class


finds when controls are added wealth matters more than skin color

concludes policy can't be raced bases

finds net of class, african americans actually enjoy some wage advantage

finds that after controlling for wealth (and examining different types of wealth), the race gap in high school graduation disappears and African American students are actually slightly more likely to graduate from high school than their white counterparts.

Conley discussion of sibling similarity and dierences over the life course

high sibling resemblance resembles a more castelike society

global effect of family is measured in family background

parents are often thought to have investment neutral investments or child

equality preferences
correlations among siblings are highest by education then occupation income and wealth

Conley more explicitly approaches questions of how
dierential parental investments may aect sibling outcomes.

looks at sibling correlations in life outcomes
which siblings are alike, which diverge
assumes high sibling resemblance, reflects caste like society, low sibship resemblance

more meritocracy
however could be dynamics with siblings and sib order in the family

suggests parents may have equal investment strategy or equal child outcomes

suggest sibling correlation most similar for education then occupation then income

parent preference models not supported, wealth correlation is lower than income

black siblings lower educational correlation

Conley (2008), family background affects all siblings in the same way.  Instead of looking at each family background separately, look at all of background as a common factor that affects both self and siblings. Can decompose attainment into things all have in common and things unique to individual sibs. If interested in a particular question in teasing out the mother/father education, etc matters separately.

But Conley looks at how may invest in kids differentially, maybe the better child or like the welfare state, bring them up. If don’t assume that people treat kids differently, the idea of family background effect is less strong.  But, by and large find that family background does have an effect.  That parents overall do treat kids fairly equally. 

Consumption

dimension of inequality

1. resources to consume differ

2. heiarchy of style and tastes (social closure)

suggests cultural constraints create preferences
men do better in tasks and rate themselves better when they feel they should

Correll in her experiment suggests that these beliefs (about what women are best/worst at) can in turn influence performance (women believe they do worse than men in math activities when primed) suggesting that beliefs might constrain actions.

 term originally coined by Merton to describe career
progression in the sciences. Young scientists who had exceptional findings attracted resources that carried them through their careers.

Cumulative advantage is a theory that suggests starting position is correlated with future trajectories.

This can be a purely mathematical relationship, higher principle wealth can get higher interest or in a more complex form where extended exposure to advantage or disadvantage (such as exposure to race).

This definition is discussed in a 2005 review article by Diprete and Eirich suggests that the term has come to have multiple meanings across many different disciplines. But its salience to social stratification is in relation to theories of how starting position
either advantaged or disadvantaged perpetuates itself.

Dahrendorf 1959

beginning question: do classes and class conflct occur only within capitalist phenomena?

Marx was right in that root of change in a captialist society is in industrial production.  But the direction the change took is opposite of Marx prediction.

Joint stock companies recognized and took off. Today more than 2/3 are joint-stock.  Mostly individuals and families don't run companies,  This creates the manager class - separating ownership and control

dissolved owners as Marx conceived them, this was contrary to Marxist expectations; however, contrary argument is that stockholders still owners, dissolution is overstated. 

homogenous ruling class of Marx is argued NOT to have developed instead many groups this entails.  Now there are owners, managers, with some overlap and some confliciting interests.

1. replacement of capitalists with managers involves a change in the compostion of the groups participating in the conflict.

2. (as result of change in recruitment and composition of groups) there is a change in nature of issues that cause conflicts-- the issues of the functionaries without capital differ from full-blown captialist and so do the interest of labor vis-a-vis new opponents
3. change in pattern of conflict
but in spite of decomposition conflict continues
homogeny and unity required for Marx revolution never emerged and society can handle conflict
exercise of authority important for understanding class conflicit

Different levels of skill in workers (merging with engeineers and white-collar) highly skilled, semi-skilled (diffuse) vs manual labor (unskilled, new workers and semi-unemployable).  Different in level of skill and in social status (skill heirarchy corresponds with responsibility heirarchy),  So the working class is differentiated, not homogeneous

authority more important than property in dividing classes. Looks at joint-stock (separate ownership and control). Manager class – aligns the capitalist class with the owners and gives them authority.  Managers and workers confront each other at site of production and this authority is what causes conflict, workers don’t even see the owners (capitalist)

No such thing as a classless society

inequality in position is a necessary product of sustaining society through incentivizing work based on the importance of positions and the availability of individuals to fill them, they do not speak as to what force creates this necessity.

(Note: what is class? is not defined).

They go on to note that stratication is interested in a system of positions not to the individual.

Two questions in literature: how do positions get prestige and how do individuals get positions. Most researchers focus on the latter, tho the former is more fundamental.

To get individuals to do different positions, there must be some rewards and some distribution system.

Rewards may take on three types:
1. those needed to survive
2. fun/leisure activities
3. pride/ego boosting

Rewards are built into social position rights with position and prerequisites:

Amount or type of inequality is not fixed in societies
Determinants of positional rank:

1. differential functional importance here the position must both be important and hard to fill (hj: addded corrolary supply, demand, scarce supply of
workers greater reward)

2. differential scarcity of personnel depending on training and availability of workers

Variations in systems of stratification:attributable to whatever factors affect the two determinents of differential rewards (i.e. positions that are important in one society may be less important in others or degree of internal development may be different)

the average of the inward and outward flows for detailed labor market categories

divided by the category size definition of structural turbulence

find those with least resources most affected
for men clear push, pull effects

feminist solution to women labor force entry, abandon the family as unit of analysis, focus on individual both men and women separately.

Hauser and Warren argue occupation rather than income better long term indicator, more stable

permanent income assumes people know what their income will be

women in west germany more vulnerable to marital dissolution, reason is less likely to work

both german and us workers have about same likelihood of job displacement

job displacement in germany lasts longer but isn't as detrimental

two arguments about diverging destinies of American destinies

1. increased competition via deindustrialization and globalization

2. turbulence in industries

problem with emphasing technological change is that it ignores in nation change and is unobservable

technical thesis assumes common trend operating across contexts so it requires comparative perspective

differences in job mobility can lead to important differences in earnings mobility

finds overall class dierences are smaller in Germany relative to US

changes in hours worked relatively less important in Germany

Diprete wt al. 1990

Come back to:

say that year to year uctations important and product of more macro level processes

Tries to explain the paradox of why corporations have so much control and
power in a democratic society like the United States
Argues upper class and corporate upper class are the same and maintain it
through cooperation and tight bounds
This training begins in childhood and elite education leading to social bonding

blacks have positive school attitudes even though weaker performance explain this

1. black attitudes may be disingenuous, lack credibility, suggests not all attitudes are the same

2. black pro-school attitudes may be confined to areas which do not matter for schools.

3. relationship of expectations and achievement do not seem to vary across races

4. for disadvantaged groups tie between expectations and achievement is weak

5. other groups get more advantages of good attitudes than blacks, tho black attitudes

6. find results consistent with idea that black's social conditions contribute to why their attitudes don't measure up to success

Both Steele and Downey suggest that African American students as having positive attitudes towards school but as less likely to achieve their aspirations.

Downey describes this as a paradox in the literature whereby African Americans report having more positive attitudes towards school than white counterparts but being less likely to achieve their desired level of schooling.

In his analysis of NELS data, Downey decomposes school attitudes into a number of categories to try and determine if African American students had positive attitudes about aspects of school that were correlated with later educational attainment.

Downey finds indeed that many of these attitudes are indeed correlated with educational attainment and that the relationship between attitudes and attainment was partially explained by dierences in resources and social conditions which made it more difficult to African American students to achieve their aspirations.

This hypothesis might be consistent with Conley's findings that after controlling for wealth (and examining different types of wealth), the race gap in high school graduation disappears and African American students are actually slightly more
likely to graduate from high school than their white counterparts.

Duncan's Socioeconmic Index for all Occupation

-assigns status scores to all occupations held by fathers and socns at various points in their careers

Durkiem

Come back to

poor women choose to have children outside of marriage rather than choosing to marry unwisely

they believe good mothering is about beign there
women believe baby can solve anything
they talk about childbearing as an in wtf?
talks about not really planning but no active prevention
trivializes abortion, women say it is the easy way out
pregnancy as a reverse
poor owmen see marriage as too permanent, hold it to a higher standard
fear marriage will shift the balance of power in relationship
being there standard for single women diers from laruaeu's conclusions
motherd don't want fathers dealing drugs, perceptions of legitimacy, frailty

Edin and colleagues describe norms in poor neighborhoods conducive
to early childbearing and limiting sexual abstinence, contraceptive use, and
abortion. Edin interviews mothers living in a number of low-income high risk
neighborhoods around Philadelphia. She nds in talking to these women that,
as Gerson discussed somewhat last week, childbearing is increasingly being decoupled
from marriage. She highlights a trend in fertility that is not planned
but not unplanned. This incomplete planning for a child can result in complex
situations during the pregnancy and after the child is born. Mothers are subject
to a new set of expectations while men are not similarly constrained.
104
In addition to not having to experience the biological constraints of pregnancy,
men also have more available sexual partners without similar commitment.
Women also come to have new expectations for men which they cannot
or may not be prepared to meet and because of unbalanced sex ratios, men may
have additional opportunities to form new unions. She also notes that some
women feel having a child somehow saves them from reckless behaviors. These
women, once they become mothers, often prioritize the role.
I found this book really o-putting. Edin had this rather annoying habit of
juxtaposing the behaviors and perception of women in her sample with those of
the middle class relying on popular stereotypes she felt middle class individuals
had about single parenthood and at some points abortion without providing
evidence to ground these statements. She also frequently spoke of the attitudes
of young poor women without qualifying, at least enough for my liking, that she
was speaking about her small sample in Philadelphia. I object to the way Edin
made comparisons because I thought that her question was interesting, why do
many young women growing up in disadvantaged areas become young, single
mothers and how do they feel about motherhood? However, her approach of
interviewing only the mothers seemed a bit one-sided. I am somewhat skeptical
of ndings when a researcher only samples on the dependent variable (single
motherhood) when other perspectives that are available and relevant to the
research question are ignored. Specically, from my understanding she only
interviewed women who had or were already pregnant with children and didn't
seem to make an eort to understand how young women might have felt before
pregnancy nor any perspectives of men that are relevant in this decision-making.

economic explanation for different valuation of female jobs

1. female jobs tend to be more comfortable
2. female jobs are more crowded, greater suply of labor, lower value

Socialization perspective: 

This is related to gender essentialism but distinct
in that this perspective focuses explicitly on how men and women develop different interests and occupational preferences early in life which inuence later outcomes. England champions this perspective.

bell predicted post-industrial society with professionals and technicians

pessimists see declining middle class and creation of new underclass proletariat with new class correlates of disadvantage

decline in industrial economy, rise in service industries which are the cause of almost all new jobs

if as optimists want, all jobs are professionalized, then signicant portion of the population is marginalized

professional growth in jobs inversely related to growth in service jobs

suggests professionalization can only come at the cost of service jobs

in Sweden women have worst jobs, in US minority groups do

in US and Australia allocation of educational and economic status is largely socioeconomic in nature

I.e. inter and intragenerational movement of men among their own and parents' education and occupation more closely follow dimension of "socioeconomic: distance than "prestige" distances.

estimates based SEI scale yields a higher correlation than prestige scale

Model SEI off Blau-Duncan (1967) and say this is better than prestigde modeall.  The prestige and SES scales are substantively different.   and SEI is preferable.

two main approachs topological model approach featherman and hauser,
look at different regions of table and say they have the same procesess going on,
you map out the mobility space map
esti
quasi perfect mobility if you are not immobile you have an equal chance of being in any other classs
use a single parameter that expresses distance between origin and destination, this is called association models, this is more parsimonious. they have one association parameter that is a funciton of assocition models

simplest association model is row and column ffeects are integers and expressed as a single parameter but this doesn't fit because it doesn't incorporate
immobility very well

quasi-mobility association perfectly models diaganol cells with uniform association

but not independence, farther you go from origin to destination, lower associtons

Mobility table

suggest blanking out really dense or sparse cells in mobility table and ditting quasi-independence models
larger number of entries blocked, the worse the model fit

suggests quasi-independence model attaches too much importance on

suggests understand mobility tables as defined as expected value of cell given, row effect, column effect and interaction term

doesn't assume ordinality but acknowledges it is helpful for making interpretations

suggest occupational immobility highest for farm then next highest for high manual labor

doesn't describe distribution of labor just mobility
great immobility at top and bottom of occupational hierarchy

The classic mobility table analysis presented this week by Featherman and
Hauser nds that in the United States at the time they were writing (the 1960s)
there was relatively little mobility at the top and the bottom of the occupational
distribution. They nd are transitional classes which have about equal odds of
moving up or down, and blue collar positions in the middle of the hierarchy
are not very predictive of ultimate social class.

tests technological bias a cause for rising racial inequality, demand for lower skilled jobs

looks at retooling of food processing plant, effect on workers truly exogenous

retooling about the people change in literacy requirements

after turnover decline in wages below the median, this is in large part caused by exit from the company

wage gap increased dramatically at this new plant

need to look at mechanisms through which minorities are excluded from productive networks

don't find much evidence of exclusion of minorities

Argues inequality is not
1. product of nature
2. product of invisible hand/market economics

Argues inequality is a social construction which Americans created and maintained

Suggests inequality is question of
1. who/wins and loses (gets ahead and falls behind)--this is usually answered by social environment-- advantages and disadvantages that are inhereted from parents, resources shared by their friends, quality and quantity of schooling, era in which they are born.
2. what determines how much people get for beng ahead or behind --this is political - societies choose ex. loosening or regulating markets, subsidizing some groups over others, historical result of political choices

1. which rung on the ladder,

2. why some ladders are wider or narrower

the authors reject evolutionary arguments
(survival of the ttest, bell curve etc. - cities of similar genetics are very different stratification systems) and the free market as responsible for inequality.

Suggest that income inequality is a product of societies and that both knowingly and unknowingly, Americans decide levels of inequality.  - More unequal than any affluent Western Coutry

Authors argue that more inequality does not promote growth, and may retard it. At least there is no case for encouraging inequality

Functionalism

inequality is good, but inequality is necessary, do we
accept that some positions are more important than others? (yes?) have no
way of measuring positions and importance, is it the case that we need to
incentivize the important or highly valued position. evolutionary argument
societies must do this in order to survive against other societies. Functionalism
may be undesirable. does not allow accumulation of inequality

Names: Davis and Moore

curious if welfare state reduces longterm detrimental consequences of unemployment

employment protection associated with higher unemployment but lower disadvantages associated from unemployment

compares US and west german case

low inequalities tend to have persistence of low inequality

looks at longitudinal data, to examine permanent income

there is both more income inequality and income mobility in the US than Europe

real income growth similar in US comparable to other places

20 to 25 percent of income inequality is by chance fluctuations and this variance is especially large in US

US exceptional in people at bottom of income distribution experiencing loss relative to other earners

at bottom of income distribution income is least stable
taking longitudinal view doesn't change view of inequality

genuine income instability is highest in the US

US unique in level of instability and negative income on bottom decile and positive income change on top

goal in transition from communism to market in Russia was to make a more flexible market

newly privatized jobs, higher job transitions, low upward mobility

workers in higher privatized branches more job transitions low upward mobility


firm and branch effects increase over time

in privatized branches with poor perform more job loss
greater privatization in a region, greater turn over
better regional performance -lower job loss


finds at firm level private property effects modest at best branch privatization does have effects to push reform

However, in developing countries and/or those countries which are in the process of institutional transitions, social networks might operate differently.

Gerber's findings of the use of social networks in job acquisition in Russia are consistent with theories that suggest that in periods of greater job scarcity, uncertainty, and market transition, use of social networks becomes more common and important for outcomes.

concludes effects of social networks grew following the market transition

in areas with higher unemployment, greater reliance on networks

emphasizing job scarcity (crisis), uncertainty (transition), and our own explanation

(privatization) for why the labor market has gotten more personal in Russia.

The MMI proposition has 4 parts: (Raftery and Hout)

1. increases in education reect increasing population
demand for education and a social upgrading of education for those of the highest social origins

2. an increase in the supply of education will lead to
an increase in the proportion of individuals acquiring that education across all social origins but the relative disparity in making an educational transition by social origin (often measured in the form of an odds ratio) will remain unchanged

3. an exception to 2 will occur when all individuals of a particular social origin complete the education levelwhen saturation occurs, the odds ratio of transitioning by social origin will decline

4. (I don't think this was mentioned in the original 1993 denition of the MMI but is mentioned in Gerber and Hout's 2005 article) equalizing forces at one level of education may be offset by increasing
stratication at a higher level.

educational stratication in Soviet era Russia continued

gender stratication in education dramatically decreased but stratication by parents and geography continued

blossfeld and shavit characterize rise in education relative to cohort size, decreasing association between social origin and years of schooling while association between years of schooling but a relatively constant association between
level of schooling and social origin.

Meanwhile social origin seems most important
for early schooling but less so for later transitions
under maximally maintained inequality theory
1. growth in secondary and higher ed leads to gradually maintained odds ratios for education by social origin and is due to change in demand
2. other increases in education lead to increases by all social origins but preserve odds ratios of transitioning
3. if upper class education totally saturated, odds ratios of transitioning may go down
4. equalization can be reserved, rise in one education may reduce conditional probabilities of future ed

in russia some experimentation in school system but all was standardized and centralized starting in 1934 through the 1970s

entering vocational school vs. higher secondary school precluded university entrance

Soviet era mass expansion of education which outstripped population growths

government tried to make reforms to counteract continued trends in those with more educated parents and better off backgrounds being more likely to enter higher ed

use approach following after mare that looks at logit predictions of transitions not just accumulation of years

findings that explosion in higher ed non VUZ training, urban origins and parents of means were advantageous to educational completion.

female disadvantage in education erased

increases in education increased MMI but for women same trends actually led to a decline in stratfication

increased university stratification cancelled out egalitarian effects at lower level

"A national survey of educational stratification in Russia reveals substantial inequality of educational attainments throughout the Soviet period. Parents' education, main earner's occupation, and geographical origin contributed to these inequalities. Gender prefer- ences for men were removed, and for some transitions reversed. Although secondary education grew rapidly, higher education failed to keep pace. This disparity led to a university-level enrollment squeeze, and the resulting bottleneck hurt disadvantaged classes more than advantaged ones. In turn the effect of social origins on entering university increased after 1965. The upshot was no net change in the origin-based differences in the likelihood of attaining a VUZ degree across three postwar cohorts"

By reforming only parts of the system at a time (starting at the lowest levels), educational policymakers put pressure on the levels above. The planners could not anticipate that opening access at one level would increase stratification at the next level, but that outcome is now clear.

60% of income earners
period in 1970s women left families and moved to work
many children feel they would have been better off with a working mother, less ambivalence about having a work committed mother

flexible families useful
kids like their parents being flexible
parents leaving labor market unwillingly seen as downward shift

traditional marriages can doom both partners to being forever unhappy

worst case is seemingly happy marriage that dissolves

Gerson in the Unnished Revolution provides the prospective of some new
parents but mostly unmarried young adults (20s to 30s). Her ndings are consistent
with some work of Bianchi as well as McLanahan regarding new perspectives
on parenting and marriage in the United States. Specically, she nds that
a majority of women want some form of autonomy and equality with partners
and don't view domestic labor as their preferred chosen profession. They largely
view that working mothers can be good mothers and some view the domestic
labor of their own mothers as limiting. The men she spoke to largely supported
what Gerson referred to as neo-traditionalist model where their careers would
come rst but women had a right and often responsibility to work although this
labor should be secondary to men's aspirations. Both genders expressed a grow-
100
ing uncertainty about their future life partners and the stability of marriage and
Gerson closes with a hopeful view of the future as the old paradigm dies, she
sees an opportunity for a system with greater exibility. While I am somewhat
skeptical about this new system and greater future options, I liked Gerson's
book, in particular its inclusion of both genders. A qualm I have with a lot of
this literature is the exclusion of tmen. Too often gender studies seems to focus
on changes for women almost always assuming that men hold an advantaged
position and without acknowledging the ways in which culture constrains the
options of men.

Tries to measure what is meant as prestige

critiques usefulness of the prestige concept

May measure previaling ideas at a lower level of abstraction (i.e. higher pay is better than lower pay

Treiman develops a purely prestige scale and discusses near universal agreement of respondents to such probes. However a point that Treiman is never clear on and for which Goldthorpe rightly takes him to task for is that it is: what people
are thinking when they answer these questions on occupational prestige. Does prestige has some meaning more than what perceived popular view of good jobs?

classical assimulation theory

argues that over generations migrants become
indistinguishable from mainstream America and the wasps via intermarriage

strength of a tie
1. duration
2. intensity
3. intimacy
4. reciprocity

information can be transferred to more people via weak ties

gross income total income including transfers and foodstamps.

disposable income, income after taxes and social distributions

ignores in kind transfers

the opt-out phenomenon, if perceived to be relatively common, may serve to reinstate processes of statistical discrimination.

It is interesting to me that Grusky focuses on radical egalitarianism in relation to women when in fact it seems that cultural norms also disadvantage men in so far as men are not seen as capable of being caretakers nor being particularly nurturing.

Moreover, Grusky cites the decreasing gendered norms especially regarding manual labor as potentially bad for women.

An occupation is a category of "functionally similar jobs"

detailed occupations frequently represent the the subjective aspirations individuals, they are recognized widely in society, they promote their own subcultures and lifestytles, and :indivudal identities and self-defintions are strongly affected  by occupational affiliations., almost to the point of bearing out a Durkheimian 'essentialist' view that such ties provide a master identity.

training by senior officers "introduces further homogeneity in the attitudes, behaviors and worldviews of prospective incuments and the social interations amoung occupation member reinforces occupation-specific attitudes, values, and lifetyles.

disaggregated structuralization highlighs how "the instutionalization of an ocupational classification scheme is so deeply entrench in society that it "trains us to regard between-category disparities as appropriate and legitmate"

Occupational schemes are so widely accpected that we focus almost entriely on disparitie within occupation, which are "closely scruntized and are sometimes take as evidence of discrimination (esp when correlated with race, gender, ethnicisy)

different article same year (Weeden and Grusky) Functional niches in the division of laor that typically become deeply institionalized in the labor market

essentialism internalized and externalized assumptions about what men and women can do

women recognizing unequal pay may opt out

dissaggregate structuration

either causal model of sibship size or selection/spurious factors explain association
between sibship size and intellect
kids with more siblings do worse

Parity can also be seen to have important implications for diering child outcomes.

Guo explores the eect of sibship size on performance on cognitive  sts. Using data from the NLSY studies, theyfind that while conventional ols regressions suggest that sibship size is negatively related to measured cognitive abilities, these effects are largely attenuated in a fixed effects model which can try to control for time invariant traits. This suggests that the correlation between sibship size and cognitive ability may be spurious.

Harding et al. 2005