28. Sociologies of Education
Paper
Higher Education Regimes, the Level of Educational Expansion and the PhD Income Premium in European Countries
Edler Susanne, Andreas Hadjar
University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Presenting Author: Hadjar, Andreas
Since the educational expansion in the 1960s, both the number of candidates pursuing a PhD and subsequently the number of doctoral training programmes have steadily increased, accompanied by a diversification of doctoral degrees (e.g., academic, collaborative, professional or industrial doctorates) and the changing purpose of doctoral education and the doctorate in general (Sarrico, 2022). Achieving a doctoral degree requires strenuous effort, as well as opportunity costs in the form of lost spare time and income. Vis-à-vis the ‘limits of growth‘ (Hirsch, 1976), including limited resources in the economy in particular and especially in the labour market, the question arises as to whether this investment pays off in the later course of an individual’s career or whether the returns are below their level of education. Folk wisdom and public discourses often include doubts, with the image of the ‘taxi driver with a PhD degree’ as an extreme simplification of the 1980s discussion that initiated research on returns on education (e.g., Engelage and Hadjar, 2008; Ponds et al., 2016). These uncertainties are also reflected in scientific debates on the precarity among researchers or ‘academic precariat’ (OECD, 2021; Sarrico, 2022). This relates to educational returns – from a monetary perspective, this is the income people receive due to their (higher) educational qualification, while in a broader sense this concerns education-related monetary and non-monetary life chances. Such educational returns are not constant across different countries. Institutional contexts such as educational and social systems with their distinct policies, as well as labour market conditions, which are influenced by multiple factors, shape educational returns (Müller and Shavit, 1998; Glauser, Becker and Zwahlen, 2016; Hanushek et al., 2017). Furthermore, they are also affected by the degree of educational expansion (Bernardi and Ballarino, 2014).
In this study, we will focus on the distinguishing characteristics of a PhD degree and the mismatch between the demand and supply of tertiary education in countries with a greater educational expansion and examine whether possession of a very high educational qualification is gaining importance in terms of differentiation to improve one’s own income chances, or whether it reduces them due to educational attainment inflation.
In theorising the research issue, we discuss three different aspects: firstly, the PhD degree-income link (PhD premium) relating to classical human capital theory (Becker, 1964) and its application in the Mincer earnings function (Mincer, 1974) as well as to signalling theory and labour queue model (Arrow, 1973; Spence, 1973; Thurow, 1975). Secondly, we theorise the effect of the higher education regime on the base of higher education (HE) system classifications (Pechar and Andres, 2011; Triventi, 2014), which systematise structures and are strongly related to welfare state classifications. Thirdly, the effect of the degree of educational expansion on the PhD premium is conceptualised relating to concepts that center on the idea of education as a positional good. Education functions increasingly as an instrument for distinction in status attainment and labour market careers (Bol, 2015; Hadjar and Becker, 2009), as, referring to prominent conceptual approaches employed in sociology to the issue of the PhD income premium such as the ‘labour queue model’ (Thurow, 1975) and signalling theory (Spence, 1973), a higher qualification is necessary in order to differentiate oneself from others. However, arguments of increasing inflation and thus lower income premiums even for high degrees would point into the opposite direction.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe empirically examine our hypothesis by studying the PhD income premiums across 12 European countries, each representing different education regimes. Our investigation is based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), covering the years 2006 to 2020. Thus, the base of our multilevel analyses are 89 country-years.
The LIS dataset provides information on individual labour income and detailed data on the proportions of people with higher education levels in certain countries and specific years surveyed in this study. These represent various education systems.
As it is meaningful to compare PhD graduates to higher education graduates at one level below (namely MA graduates) rather than comparing them to all lower-level higher education graduates, we restrict our data to individuals holding a PhD or master’s degree. To obtain a more homogeneous sample, the sample is further limited to individuals within the working age range of 23 to 65 years, allowing us to encompass the youngest workers with a PhD. We exclude individuals who are still enrolled in education and those who are unemployed. Additionally, we confine our sample to individuals working more than 35 hours per week to exclude those engaged in low part-time employment with marginal participation in the labour market.
The dependent variable is the gross annual labour income in the main job in euro. We utilise purchasing power parity (ppp) deflators with the reference year 2017. In our multivariate analyses, we additionally employ the natural logarithm of annual labour income. The key independent variable is whether individuals possess a PhD, with a master’s degree as the reference category. Regarding our conceptual arguments, we generate dummy variables for each education system, including the Anglo-Saxon, continental, Mediterranean, and eastern (post-communist) regimes, and we measure the extent of educational expansion by calculating the country-specific share of working-age individuals (aged 23 to 65) with tertiary education based on the LIS data.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsOur analysis reveals that, on average, individuals holding a PhD benefit from an income premium. Considering country-specific factors, our results indicate that the financial benefit of a PhD degree varies depending on the education regime and the extent of educational expansion. The Anglo-Saxon education regime, categorised as inequality-prone, exhibits the highest PhD income premiums, while the eastern (post-communist) education regime shows no significant differences in incomes between master’s and PhD holders, indicating that PhD degrees may not yield financial benefits in these countries as they do in others. In countries of the Nordic (social-democratic) education regime, known for its low stratification and enhanced redistribution policies, our analyses reveal no significantly lower PhD premiums than in the more inequality-prone Anglo-Saxon and continental education regimes. In contrast, the continental regime, renowned for its strong stratification, is generally perceived as generating greater inequalities. Nevertheless, its countries show a relatively lower PhD income premium, which is significantly lower than in Anglo-Saxon education regime countries. One explanation for the relatively high Phd wage premium in Nordic countries is that due to the generally lower levels of income inequality below the Ph.D. level, the wage increase through a Ph.D. becomes relatively more pronounced. Regarding educational expansion, the results indicate that the rise in tertiary education levels erodes the unique value of PhD certificates as distinguishing criteria, as in countries with a greater degree of educational expansion (proportion of PhD graduates), the income premium of a PhD degree is comparably lower than in countries with a weaker educational expansion.
Overall, obtaining a PhD degree is according to recent data and from an international perspective a signal of distinction and comes with income benefits in most countries, but this benefit varies with the proportion of tertiary-educated people and education regime.
ReferencesArrow, K. (1973). The theory of discrimination. In Ashenfelter, O. and Rees, A. (Eds.), Discrimination in Labor Markets. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 3–33.
Becker, G. (1964). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bernardi, F. and Ballarino, G. (2014). Participation, equality of opportunity and returns to tertiary education in contemporary Europe. European Societies, 16, 422–442.
Bol, T. (2015). Has education become more positional? Educational expansion and labour market outcomes, 1985–2007. Acta Sociologica, 58, 105–120.
Engelage, S. and Hadjar, A. (2010). PhD and career – is a doctoral degree worth it? In Claes, D. and Preston, T. S. (Eds.), Frontiers in Higher Education. At the Interface/Probing the Boundaries, The Idea of Education, Volume 72. Leiden: Brill, pp. 149–165.
Hadjar, A. and Becker, R. (Eds.). (2009). Expected and Unexpected Consequences of the Educational Expansion in Europe and the US. Bern: Haupt.
Hanushek, E. A., Schwerdt, G., Woessmann, L. and Zhang, L. (2017). General education, vocational education, and labor-market outcomes over the lifecycle. Journal of Human Resources, 52, 48–87.
Hirsch, F. (1976). Social Limits to Growth. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Mincer, J. A. (1974). Schooling, Experience, and Earnings. New York: Columbia University Press.
Müller, W. and Shavit, Y. (1998). The institutional embeddedness of the stratification process. In Shavit, Y. and Müller, W. (Eds.), From School to Work. A Comparative Study of Educational Qualifications and Occupational Destinations. Oxford: Clarendon, pp. 1–48.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2021). Reducing the Precarity of Academic Research Careers. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 113. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Pechar, H. and Andres, L. 2011. Higher-education policies and welfare regimes: international comparative perspectives. Higher Education Policy, 24, 25–52.
Ponds, R., Marlet, G., van Woerkens, C. and Garretsen H. (2016). Taxi drivers with a PhD: trickle down or crowding-out for lower educated workers in Dutch cities? Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 9, 405–422.
Sarrico, C. S. (2022). The expansion of doctoral education and the changing nature and purpose of the doctorate. Higher Education, 84, 1299–1315.
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87, 355–374.
Thurow, L. C. (1975). Generating Inequality. London/Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Triventi, M. (2014). Higher education regimes: an empirical classification of higher education systems and its relationship with student accessibility. Quality & Quantity, 48, 1685–1703.
28. Sociologies of Education
Paper
Globalisation and the Mobilities of International Baccalaureate Teachers in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore
Jack Tsao1, Yu-Chih Li2, Suraiya Abdul Hameed3
1The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R. (China); 2National University of Tainan, Taiwan; 3The University of Queensland, Australia
Presenting Author: Tsao, Jack;
Li, Yu-Chih
International Baccalaureate (IB) development in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore is distinct from Asian counterparts like Japan and South Korea due to Chinese cultural influences (Li, Hameed, & Tsao, 2021). These societies share a “re-contextualisation” approach to embedding IB programmes within their local educational systems (Lee, Kim, & Wright, 2021). Hong Kong’s IB schools vie with other diploma options, relying on academic excellence to attract parental support (Tsao, Li, & Hameed, 2023). With limited presence within the local school system, IB in Singapore is mainly adopted in international/independent schools (Morrissey et al. 2014) and exhibits hybrid curricula that balance local/national and international elements. In Taiwan, the IB’s integration came later, primarily within private and international schools, and recently expanded to government schools, scrutinising its alignment with the national curriculum (Li, Hameed, & Tsao, 2021).
In this context, the international mobility of teachers in IB schools presents a rich area for inquiry due to its imbrications with technology, tourism, immigration, and social culture. Teacher mobility in international schools is a byproduct of globalisation, serving the transient needs of expatriate families as a symbol of the school’s global identity and fostering the international mobility of the students. This research aims to dissect and understand the complexities of teacher mobility in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, where the confluence of Chinese cultural influences, global educational frameworks, assessment-focused culture and local educational policies create unique settings for international education.
The following research questions guide the study:
- What are the characteristics and experiences of international mobility among IB school teachers in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore?
- How does the establishment and evolution of the IB curriculum influence the international mobility of teachers within these regions?
- What implications does international mobility have on the professional trajectories and pedagogical practices of teachers engaged in international education?
The primary objective of this study is to explore the interplay between the international mobility of teachers and the operational dynamics of IB schools in distinct socio-educational landscapes. It seeks to contribute to a deeper understanding of how mobility shapes educational practices and professional identities within the globalised context of IB schooling and European and Western educational contexts. The study is embedded in the conceptual framework of the “mobility turn” in contemporary sociology (Sheller & Urry, 2006), which regards movement and fluidity as central to understanding modern social life. By examining the mobility of teachers as a phenomenon that encompasses not only geographic relocation but also cultural, intellectual, and experiential shifts, our study acknowledges the potential tension outlined by Deleuze and Guattari (1987) between mobility and the fixed. Consequently, it considers the role of state power and educational policies in guiding and constraining teacher movement. This research recognises the “re-contextualisation” of the IB program as a process influenced by both global aspirations and local educational imperatives (Lee, Kim, & Wright, 2021). It views teacher mobility through the lens of this re-contextualisation, considering how teachers navigate and negotiate their professional roles amid different curricular and cultural demands. It will build on the foundational work of scholars such as Madge, Raghuram, and Noxolo (2015) and Sorensen and Dumay (2021), who have highlighted the need for further exploration of the international teaching labour market and its relation to globalisation. The research is also aligned with calls for a more nuanced approach to the study of education and mobility, one that factors in the diverse experiences of teachers and the multifaceted impacts of their mobility on international education (Gulson & Symes, 2019).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study responds to Resnik’s (2012) call for research on the sociology of international education to develop conceptual frameworks for understanding the new social constructions impacted by globalisation that incorporate the dimension of teacher mobility. By studying the international mobility of teachers in IB schools in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, this research project attempts to break through the limitations of nationalist methodology in observing teacher professionalism and teaching careers by using a dynamic comparative approach. This research project further disrupts the boundaries between national territories in education and between global and local contexts (Sorensen & Dumay, 2021) by analysing the context, meaning, and social environment of mobility. Our analysis draws on Cresswell’s (2006, 2010) notions of mobility, which include measurable or analysable mobility, cultural and intellectual mobility, and habits shaped through various mobility experiences, to interrogate international teacher mobility. This is also analysed through postcolonial and critical theoretical lenses to understand the IB’s embedded Western norms and Europe’s legacy within the global economy of knowledge and people.
Through a comparative qualitative approach, we explored teacher mobility’s complex and nuanced phenomena, including the motivations, challenges, and impacts associated with this mobility process. Data was gathered using two primary methods: semi-structured interviews and archival document analysis. Interviews of schoolteachers and administrators from IB schools across the three contexts elicited rich, detailed narratives of their lived experiences, perceptions, and insights that illuminated how teacher mobility was related to the interplay between personal agency and structural constraints and the resultant professional and pedagogical implications. Schools selected were a mix of public, private, and international schools and targeted teachers and administrators with experience within IB programmes. Reviewing relevant documents from IB schools, such as teaching records, program descriptions, and policy documents, provided the detailed contextual background for our interview data.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe study makes a substantive contribution to the limited research on teacher mobility in the field of international education, particularly within East Asia. By adopting a comparative perspective across three distinct regions, the study sheds light on IB educators’ shared and divergent experiences and the regional and cultural dynamics that shape their professional paths, illustrating mobility as a multifaceted phenomenon deeply interconnected with the nuances of local curricular demands and global educational movements, that is still saliently shaped by assumptions of European and Western centrality. We, therefore, hope to contribute to how intercultural and mobility practices among European societies act as a reference vis-a-vis the tensions between universal educational models and demands for localised relevance arising from globalisation.
The findings reveal distinct patterns of mobility influenced by regional cultural influences, the presence of international and local educational pathways, and the strategic positioning of IB programmes within these societies. The research highlights how mobility is entangled in the negotiation and construction of teachers’ professional identities and pedagogical practices within these fluid contexts and how their mobility experiences contribute to the broader discourse on international education and globalisation. The anticipated outcomes point towards a complex interplay between personal agency, institutional strategies, and national educational policies shaping IB educators’ mobility and impacting teaching methodologies and career trajectories. The findings also provide insights into how the IB curriculum serves as a vehicle for international mobility and a site of convergence for global and local educational imperatives. The empirical evidence and theoretical insights can inform policymaking, curriculum development, and the professional development of teachers, ensuring the sustainability of high-quality international education that is responsive to the global and local contexts in which it operates.
ReferencesCresswell, T. (2006). On the move: Mobility in the modern western world. Routledge.
Cresswell, T. (2010). Towards a politics of mobility. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28(1), 17-31. https://doi.org/10.1068/d11407
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. (B. Massumi, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.
Gulson, K. N., & Symes, C. (2019). Making moves: Theorizations of education and mobility. In K. N. Gulson & C. Symes (Eds.), Education and the mobility turn. Routledge.
Li, Y-C., Hameed, S., & Tsao, J. (2021, September). Liminal internationalisation in Southeast Asian societies: Comparing International Baccalaureate schools in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER 2021), Geneva, Switzerland.
Lee, M., Kim, H., & Wright, E. (2021). The influx of International Baccalaureate (IB) programmes into local education systems in Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea. Educational Review, 73(3), 345-363. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1891023
Madge, C., Raghuram, P., & Noxolo, P. (2015). Conceptualising international education: From international student to international study. Progress in Human Geography, 39(6), 681-701.
Morrissey, A. M., Rouse, E., Doig, B., Chao, E., & Moss, J. (2014). Early years education in the primary years programme (PYP): Implementation strategies and programme outcomes. Deakin University.
Resnik, J. (2012). Sociology of international education: An emerging field of research. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 22(4), 291-310.
Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 207-226.
Sorensen, T. B., & Dumay, X. (2021). The teaching professions and globalization: A scoping review of the Anglophone research literature. Comparative Education Review, 65(4), 527-548.
Tsao, J., Y. C. Li & S. A. Hameed (2023) The impacts of International Baccalaureate expansion on professional cultures and assessments in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, Cambridge Journal of Education, DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2023.2246397
|
