Education and social mobility — practice questions

Pro-mobility: Expansion of higher education; grammar/comprehensive debates; some working-class upward mobility via qualifications; official policy aims (widening participation).

Limits: Private schooling and tuition advantage; Bourdieu — cultural capital converts to grades; credential inflation — degrees less distinctive; Saunders vs Goldthorpe debate on openness.

Evaluation: Absolute mobility rose mid-20th century; relative mobility still linked to class — education necessary but not sufficient.

Conclusion: Education opens some routes but reproduces inequality for many — formal meritocracy, substantive stratification.

Step 1: Identify the relevant data from the question.

• Number of individuals who experienced upward mobility = 350
• Total number of individuals from a working-class background = 1,000

Step 2: State the formula for the rate of upward mobility.

• Rate (%) = (Number who moved up / Total number in origin group) × 100

Step 3: Substitute the values and calculate the rate.

• Rate = (350 / 1,000) × 100
• Rate = 0.35 × 100
• Rate = 35%

Step 4: State the final answer and provide a sociological explanation.

• Final Answer: The rate of inter-generational upward mobility for this cohort is 35%.
• Explanation: This shows that mobility is possible, supporting the functionalist idea of an 'opportunity ladder'. However, the fact that a majority (65%) remain in the working class suggests significant barriers exist. A Marxist explanation, drawing on Bourdieu, would be the lack of 'cultural capital'. Working-class children may not possess the language, knowledge, and attitudes valued by the education system, leading to lower qualifications and restricting their access to middle-class professions, thus reproducing class inequality.