Page 43 - Igor Ž. Žagar in Ana Mlekuž, ur. Raziskovanje v vzgoji in izobraževanju: mednarodni vidiki vzgoje in izobraževanja. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut, 2020. Digitalna knjižnica, Dissertationes 38
P. 43
inequality, poverty and education in the post-yugoslav space
2012) showed that only 2 % of those entering higher education at universi-
ty level for the first time were 21 or older. In addition, only some 5 % of stu-
dents reported having physical disabilities, suggesting that such students
are chronically under-represented in Croatian higher education. The Dool-
an study hypothesizes, rather depressingly, that only when the higher ed-
ucation of the elite reaches saturation point, will access for working-class
students improve (Doolan et al, 2013).
According to the latest EUROSTUDENT figures, 42 % of students in
Croatia had a least one parent who had completed tertiary education, com-
pared to 56 % for Serbia and 33 % for Slovenia (EUROSTUDENT, 2018), al-
beit with a significant increase, of some 5 percentage points, of students in
Croatia who indicated their parents did not have tertiary education com-
pared to the previous survey. The trend in Serbia, however, is opposite, with
a significant decrease of some 11 percentage points between the two sur-
veys (ibid.).
There are very few valid and relevant cross-country comparisons in-
cluding all of the post-Yugoslav states. One notable exception is a study in
2013 by Crespa Cuaresma and his colleagues (Crespo Cuaresma et al, 2013)
(Figure 3). The graph below, that needs a little unpicking, shows that, be-
tween 1960 and 2010, South Eastern Europe (including all the post-Yugo-
slav states except Slovenia, Albania, Bulgaria, Moldova, Romania and Tur-
key) is the only European sub-region that shows a consistent fall in social
mobility, at its greatest in the two decades from 1980 – 2000. They construct
an index of educational mobility which compares educational mobility, ex-
pressed as a GINI type coefficient, as the ratio of the education GINA of
those aged 25–54 compared to those 55+.
Including Slovenia in the picture leads to an interesting side question
about statistics. Despite its meritocratic ideology, and the unproblematic
use of PISA test results, the OECD (of which Slovenia is a member, success-
fully blocking currently, together with Hungary, Croatia’s membership) has
some of the most useful and up-to-date statistics, many of which have been
put together in a report from 2018 (OECD, 2018). The report suggests that
some 13.5% of variation in PISA science results in Slovenia in 2015 was a re-
sult of socio-economic status, down some 4 base percentage points from 9
years earlier but above the OECD average of 12.9%. The OECD defines ‘dis-
advantaged adults’ as adults with parents who did not complete lower sec-
ondary education. In 2015, only 9.5% of Slovenes from these backgrounds
had completed tertiary education, although this rose to 16.5% for those aged
43
2012) showed that only 2 % of those entering higher education at universi-
ty level for the first time were 21 or older. In addition, only some 5 % of stu-
dents reported having physical disabilities, suggesting that such students
are chronically under-represented in Croatian higher education. The Dool-
an study hypothesizes, rather depressingly, that only when the higher ed-
ucation of the elite reaches saturation point, will access for working-class
students improve (Doolan et al, 2013).
According to the latest EUROSTUDENT figures, 42 % of students in
Croatia had a least one parent who had completed tertiary education, com-
pared to 56 % for Serbia and 33 % for Slovenia (EUROSTUDENT, 2018), al-
beit with a significant increase, of some 5 percentage points, of students in
Croatia who indicated their parents did not have tertiary education com-
pared to the previous survey. The trend in Serbia, however, is opposite, with
a significant decrease of some 11 percentage points between the two sur-
veys (ibid.).
There are very few valid and relevant cross-country comparisons in-
cluding all of the post-Yugoslav states. One notable exception is a study in
2013 by Crespa Cuaresma and his colleagues (Crespo Cuaresma et al, 2013)
(Figure 3). The graph below, that needs a little unpicking, shows that, be-
tween 1960 and 2010, South Eastern Europe (including all the post-Yugo-
slav states except Slovenia, Albania, Bulgaria, Moldova, Romania and Tur-
key) is the only European sub-region that shows a consistent fall in social
mobility, at its greatest in the two decades from 1980 – 2000. They construct
an index of educational mobility which compares educational mobility, ex-
pressed as a GINI type coefficient, as the ratio of the education GINA of
those aged 25–54 compared to those 55+.
Including Slovenia in the picture leads to an interesting side question
about statistics. Despite its meritocratic ideology, and the unproblematic
use of PISA test results, the OECD (of which Slovenia is a member, success-
fully blocking currently, together with Hungary, Croatia’s membership) has
some of the most useful and up-to-date statistics, many of which have been
put together in a report from 2018 (OECD, 2018). The report suggests that
some 13.5% of variation in PISA science results in Slovenia in 2015 was a re-
sult of socio-economic status, down some 4 base percentage points from 9
years earlier but above the OECD average of 12.9%. The OECD defines ‘dis-
advantaged adults’ as adults with parents who did not complete lower sec-
ondary education. In 2015, only 9.5% of Slovenes from these backgrounds
had completed tertiary education, although this rose to 16.5% for those aged
43
