Educational systems and gender segregation in education

A threecountry comparison of Germany, Norway and Canada

authored by
Christian Imdorf, Kristinn Hegna, Verena Eberhard, Pierre Doray
Abstract

How do institutional settings and their embedded policy principles affect gender-typed enrolment in educational programmes? Based on gender-sensitive theories on career choice, we hypothesised that gender segregation in education is higher with a wider range of offers of vocational programmes. By analysing youth survey and panel data, we tested this assumption for Germany, Norway and Canada, three countries whose educational systems represent a different mix of academic, vocational and universalistic education principles. We found that vocational programmes are considerably more gender-segregated than are academic (e.g. university) programmes. Men, more so than women, can avoid gender-typed programmes by passing on to a university education. This in turn means that as long as their secondary school achievement does not allow for a higher education career, they have a higher likelihood of being allocated to male-typed programmes in the vocational education and training (VET) system. In addition, social background and the age at which students have to choose educational offers impact on the transition to gendered educational programmes. Overall, gender segregation in education is highest in Germany and the lowest in Canada. We interpret the differences between these countries with respect to the constellations of educational principles and policies in the respective countries.

External Organisation(s)
University of Bern
University of Oslo
Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB)
Universite du Quebec a Montreal (UQAM)
Type
Review article
Journal
Comparative Social Research
Volume
31
Pages
83-122
No. of pages
40
ISSN
0195-6310
Publication date
01.01.2015
Publication status
Published
Peer reviewed
Yes
ASJC Scopus subject areas
Sociology and Political Science
Sustainable Development Goals
SDG 5 - Gender Equality
Electronic version(s)
https://doi.org/10.1108/S0195-631020150000031004 (Access: Unknown)