scholarly journals Access and Expansion of Educational Opportunity in India With Reference to Higher Education

Author(s):  
Abhai Maurya
Author(s):  
Peter Plympton Smith

This chapter discusses the historic progression of American higher education and its role in opportunity and work. There are social and economic costs in higher education's current opportunity structure, in that many Americans are excluded by campus models, traditions, and values coupled with broader societal norms. For them, the higher education opportunity pathway remains an opportunity monopoly beyond their reach. Clayton Christiansen's theory of disruptive innovation is referenced to reframe this education-opportunity debate.


1997 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanley Aronowitz

In this article, Stanley Aronowitz argues that "American" ideology contains two elements. First, the United States is believed to confer equality of opportunity on each citizen. Second, unlike other advanced industrial nations, the United States is considered an "open society" that allows and promotes social mobility. In this paradigm, racial minorities and women have the same chances to escape the ranks of the working poor as White men. Aronowitz uses a class-based analysis nested within ethnicity to expose the fallacy of this ideology. Since higher education is most often pointed to as a source of social mobility, Aronowitz focuses his argument on the meritocratic norms that are replacing democratic norms within higher education, and on the devolution of educational opportunity for the poor, working class, and racial minorities.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iakovos Tsiplakides

In this paper we draw on the hypothesis of “Effectively Maintained Inequality” (EMI), which holds that inequalities in higher education concern differentiation as regards the institutions or study programmes which people from different socioeconomic backgrounds choose, rather than the difference between participating and non-participating. It is an important issue, as in modern knowledge and information societies, characterized by new methods of getting, processing and distributing information, higher education is important as a means of equipping people with the knowledge necessary to participate actively in them, for personal growth and national growth. It also impacts positively on social justice, equality of educational opportunity and can boost intergenerational social mobility. These potential benefits, however, are undermined by segregation within higher education. In this paper we present the findings of a research study that examined the breadth of segregation of the higher sector in Greece by socioeconomic background. Research findings indicate a correlation among cultural, social and financial capital and programme or institution, thus conforming the theory of “Effectively Maintained Inequality”.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 233
Author(s):  
Muhammad Husni Arifin

This paper explains the link between higher education and social mobility in Indonesia. There are several theoretical frameworks talking about the link between higher education and social mobility and the relevant theory of them is Raymond Boudon’s Inequality of Educational Opportunity (IEO) and Inequality of Social Opportunity (ISO). The results reveal that the link between higher education and social mobility in Indonesia is influenced by other factors: inequality of social-economy and geography and cultural disparities. Furthermore, the more decreasing inequality in the society, the more people can go to higher education and in turn will promote upward social mobility.


2013 ◽  
pp. 11-12
Author(s):  
Sandy Baum ◽  
Saul Schwartz

The evolution of higher education from a privilege for the elite to an economic and social necessity for broad segments of the population has created financing challenges, along with new opportunities, for students and their families. Governments that were able to provide free or low-priced access to universities for the select few have found it necessary to charge rising levels of tuition, even as less-affluent citizens aspire to enroll. In a number of countries—including Canada, Chile, and England—students have taken to the streets to protest tuition policies. Students are less militant in the United States; but there, as elsewhere, rising college prices and stagnating incomes have led to the widespread perception that postsecondary education is “unaffordable” for more and more people.Yet, it is not obvious what “unaffordable” means. What price is relevant—the published price of postsecondary study, the price people actually pay, or the price people should be expected to pay? Efforts to increase educational opportunity can be hindered if policymakers do not have a clear idea of the meaning of an “affordable” or “unaffordable” education.


1987 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Keppel

Francis Keppel, former United States Commissioner of Education, 1962-1965, and Chairman, National Student Aid Coalition, 1981-1986, here gives his view of the evolution of the historic Higher Education Act of 1965 from the time of its passage to its reauthorization in 1986. He focuses particularly upon those sections of the law that deal with undergraduate education and student financial aid, for which the act is now best known. While the basic intent of the act — increasing equality of educational opportunity — has remained constant, there have been important shifts both in the methods chosen to approach that goal and in the social context within which the act operates. The present political and economic atmosphere differs markedly from that of 1965. Federal support for higher education has shifted in emphasis from financing of physical resources to support for students themselves, and has come to rely increasingly on loan programs. Priorities for serving different kinds of institutions and student populations have changed in attempts to meet new needs. Yet, the author remarks, several difficult challenges and unresolved problems in the field of higher education finance remain. Careful collaboration among the branches of government and the higher education community will be required if we are to achieve the full potential of the Higher Education Act in the coming years.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document