Suchergebnisse

Der Beitrag analysiert die Anpassung von unterschiedlichen Typen von Immigranten und ihren Kindern an die niederländische Gesellschaft. Die Leitfrage ist dabei, ob sich die Migranten in die Schichtungsprozesse einfügen, die für die Bevölkerung der Niederlande gelten. Hierzu wird sowohl der Arbeitsmarktstatus als auch der Berufs- und Einkommensstatus der wesentlichen Gruppen von eingewanderten ethnischen Minoritäten anhand der besten verfügbaren nationalen Daten untersucht. Die Ergebnisse belegen, dass die Zugehörigkeit zu einer Minorität erkennbar negative Effekte auf die Teilnahme am aktiven Arbeitsmarkt und die Arbeitslosigkeit von männlichen Migranten hat. Die Muster der Arbeitsmarktbeteiligung und Arbeitslosigkeit bei weiblichen Migranten sind generell komplexer als bei männlichen. Überdies gibt es auch Unterschiede zwischen den jeweiligen ethnischen Gruppen und hinsichtlich des Generationsstatus der Einwanderer(innen). Unter den Frauen der zweiten Generation sind sämtliche Unterschiede der Arbeitsmarktbeteiligung - verglichen mit einheimischen niederländischen Frauen - komplett verschwunden. Für die zweite Generation der Migrant(inn)en sind die Chancen, zu einer bestimmten Berufsklasse zu gehören, nahezu dieselben wie für die einheimische Bevölkerung - mit Ausnahme der Dienstleistungsklasse, deren Statusgruppe für Migrant(inn)en nahezu verschlossen erscheint. Auch legen die niedrigen Alters- und Bildungsschwellen für die erste Generation von männlichen und weiblichen Migranten nahe, dass es eine gewisse Schließungstendenz auf dem niederländischen Arbeitsmarkt hinsichtlich insbesondere der besser gebildeten Migrant(inn)en gibt. (DIPF/Orig.)

"The major problem of introducing more parental choice is finding balance between the parental freedom of school choice and the aims of a national education policy (promotion of equal opportunities, fair payment of the costs of education, balanced provision of societally relevant education). The Dutch case is interesting for the way in which it balances parental choice and national education policy since the 1920s: it combines parental choice and equal subsidizing and treatment of public and religious schools by the state." The article describes this system, its history and its costs and analyses the role and working of the religious schools. (DIPF/Text Orig./Bi.)

In international comparative studies on academic achievement, the distinction between private government-dependent schools and private-independent schools has proven to be particularly important for understanding the differences in the effectiveness of the private and public school sectors. Despite the fact that higher achievement scores in the private sector are mainly due to their intake selectivity, private-dependent schools still tend to outperform public school in most countries if these differences are taken into account. Using a more rigorous statistical technique to control for selectivity in the analysis of three PISA data sets, it is demonstrated that the substantive advantage in the efficacy of private-dependent schools compared to public schools remains for Germany and the Netherlands. (DIPF/Orig.) ; In internationalen Vergleichstudien hat sich gezeigt, dass es für den Vergleich der Effizienz von Privatschulen mit staatlichen Schulen notwendig ist, zwischen finanziell unabhängigen und staatlich alimentierten Privatschulen zu unterscheiden. Denn obwohl die Leistungsunterschiede zwischen dem privaten und staatlichen Sektor überwiegend auf die Selektivität der Privatschulen zurückgeführt werden kann, zeigen sich doch über Nationen hinweg konsistent bessere Leistungen für die staatlich alimentierten Privatschulen auch dann, wenn die Selektivität berücksichtigt wird. Unter Verwendung eines noch effizienteren statistischen Verfahrens zur Kontrolle der Selektivität erweist sich dieses Befundmuster in der Analyse dreier PISA Datensätze als robust für Deutschland und die Niederlande. (DIPF/Orig.)

In this article, we analyse four different dimensions of socio-economic integration of first and second generation immigrants into the labour markets of 13 EU countries and we assess, taking into account a number of individual characteristics, the effects of the countries of origin and the countries of destination on this integration. We find that participation in the labour market, unemployment, occupational status and the chances of reaching the upper middle-class are different, although interrelated, dimensions of the socio-economic integration of immigrants and they work differently for men and women. In the countries of destination, the level of employment protection legislation and the conservative welfare regime affect this integration negatively. Most indicators of national policies aimed at the integration of immigrants have no effects on the socio-economic integration of immigrants. Furthermore, we find a number of origin effects which continue to have an impact on second generation immigrants. Political stability and political freedom in origin countries have positive and negative effects on socio-economic integration. The emigration rate of the origin countries has a negative effect. The higher levels of socio-economic integration amongst immigrants from other EU-countries demonstrates the functioning of the European Union as an integrated labour market .Controlling for individual religious affiliation turns out to be very useful, since we find a number of negative effects of being a Muslim, among both men and women. While individual education is an important predictor of immigrants' labour market outcomes, our findings indicate lower returns on this education in terms of occupational status, indicating a ceiling effect for highlyeducated second generation immigrants who cannot translate their qualifications into high-status jobs to the same extent as their native peers.

Electoral participation of immigrants is an important issue in Europe, particularly because immigrants vote less often than natives. This may suggest a lack of political integration and might result in proportionally lower representation in parliament, in turn affecting democratic legitimacy. This research analyses 8,132 immigrants in 24 European countries. We find that although the largest differences are at the level of the country of destination, the measured characteristics of the country of origin offer more powerful explanations. We conclude that immigrants from countries with more political and socio-economic opportunities have a higher propensity to vote. Immigrants who live in countries with a higher economic development level also vote more often.

ICS Radboud University Nijmegen This article explores the extent to which macro-level characteristics of destination countries, origin countries, and immigrant communities help explain differences in immigrant children's educational achievement. Using data from the 2003 PISA survey, we analyze the mathematical performance of 7,403 pupils from 35 different origin countries in 13 Western countries of destination. While compositional differences offer some explanatory power, they cannot fully explain cross-national and cross-group variance. Contextual attributes of host countries, origin countries, and communities are also meaningful. In this regard, strict immigration laws explain immigrant children's better educational performance in traditional immigrant-receiving countries. Results further suggest that origin countries' level of economic development can negatively affect immigrant children's educational performance, and that immigrant children from more politically stable countries perform better at school. Finally, socioeconomic differences between immigrant communities and a native population, and relative community size, both shape immigrant children's scholastic achievement.

It is primarily the emergence of new state policies promoting market mechanisms in the field of education that has encouraged research on education markets (Maroy, 2006). In the 1980s, conservative American and British governments, drawing on theories of public choice (Chubb & Moe, 1998), encouraged reforms aimed at reducing the alleged inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the bureaucratic management of schools by increasing their autonomy as well as parental choice (Ball, 1993; Bosetti, 2005; Glennerster, 1991; Uchitelle, 1993). Similar reforms have also been implemented in various European countries for over 20 years (Mons, 2007), often in relation with a decennia-long co-existence of public and state-granted schools. These private schools are most often Catholic or protestant schools operating within a national educational system receiving state grants. The countries of the European Union can be divided into three groups according to the relationship private education has with the public authorities (Eurydice, 20001). In Greece and the UK, private schools receive no public funding. However, this absence of funding does not prevent the state from exercising control over private education institutions. In the UK, most denominational and other schools owned by churches or trustees are considered to form part of the public sector education. In the second group of countries (France, Italy, and Portugal), different types of contracts exist which create a link between private schools and public authorities. Depending on the type of contract, the school receives grants of a more or less significant amount and is freer to a greater or lesser extent with regard to conditions (of teaching, teacher recruitment, etc.) imposed by public authorities. Finally, within the last group, which comprises the majority of countries, grant-aided private schools appear to have much in common with public sector schools. In Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg, Austria, Finland, and Sweden, private education is grant aided, either partially or fully, but operates under more or less the same conditions as public sector education. In The Netherlands, financial equality between public and grant-aided private institutions is a constitutional right. The size of these public and non-public school sectors varies strongly between these European societies for specific historic reasons, and non-public schools disappeared in some of these societies as a consequence of the communist regime. [Article's first paragraph]

It is primarily the emergence of new state policies promoting market mechanisms in the field of education that has encouraged research on education markets (Maroy, 2006). In the 1980s, conservative American and British governments, drawing on theories of public choice (Chubb & Moe, 1998), encouraged reforms aimed at reducing the alleged inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the bureaucratic management of schools by increasing their autonomy as well as parental choice (Ball, 1993; Bosetti, 2005; Glennerster, 1991; Uchitelle, 1993). Similar reforms have also been implemented in various European countries for over 20 years (Mons, 2007), often in relation with a decennia-long co-existence of public and state-granted schools. These private schools are most often Catholic or protestant schools operating within a national educational system receiving state grants. The countries of the European Union can be divided into three groups according to the relationship private education has with the public authorities (Eurydice, 20001). In Greece and the UK, private schools receive no public funding. However, this absence of funding does not prevent the state from exercising control over private education institutions. In the UK, most denominational and other schools owned by churches or trustees are considered to form part of the public sector education. In the second group of countries (France, Italy, and Portugal), different types of contracts exist which create a link between private schools and public authorities. Depending on the type of contract, the school receives grants of a more or less significant amount and is freer to a greater or lesser extent with regard to conditions (of teaching, teacher recruitment, etc.) imposed by public authorities. Finally, within the last group, which comprises the majority of countries, grant-aided private schools appear to have much in common with public sector schools. In Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg, Austria, Finland, and Sweden, private education is grant ...

It is primarily the emergence of new state policies promoting market mechanisms in the field of education that has encouraged research on education markets (Maroy, 2006). In the 1980s, conservative American and British governments, drawing on theories of public choice (Chubb & Moe, 1998), encouraged reforms aimed at reducing the alleged inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the bureaucratic management of schools by increasing their autonomy as well as parental choice (Ball, 1993; Bosetti, 2005; Glennerster, 1991; Uchitelle, 1993). Similar reforms have also been implemented in various European countries for over 20 years (Mons, 2007), often in relation with a decennia-long co-existence of public and state-granted schools. These private schools are most often Catholic or protestant schools operating within a national educational system receiving state grants. The countries of the European Union can be divided into three groups according to the relationship private education has with the public authorities (Eurydice, 20001). In Greece and the UK, private schools receive no public funding. However, this absence of funding does not prevent the state from exercising control over private education institutions. In the UK, most denominational and other schools owned by churches or trustees are considered to form part of the public sector education. In the second group of countries (France, Italy, and Portugal), different types of contracts exist which create a link between private schools and public authorities. Depending on the type of contract, the school receives grants of a more or less significant amount and is freer to a greater or lesser extent with regard to conditions (of teaching, teacher recruitment, etc.) imposed by public authorities. Finally, within the last group, which comprises the majority of countries, grant-aided private schools appear to have much in common with public sector schools. In Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg, Austria, Finland, and Sweden, private education is grant ...

It is primarily the emergence of new state policies promoting market mechanisms in the field of education that has encouraged research on education markets (Maroy, 2006). In the 1980s, conservative American and British governments, drawing on theories of public choice (Chubb & Moe, 1998), encouraged reforms aimed at reducing the alleged inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the bureaucratic management of schools by increasing their autonomy as well as parental choice (Ball, 1993; Bosetti, 2005; Glennerster, 1991; Uchitelle, 1993). Similar reforms have also been implemented in various European countries for over 20 years (Mons, 2007), often in relation with a decennia-long co-existence of public and state-granted schools. These private schools are most often Catholic or protestant schools operating within a national educational system receiving state grants. The countries of the European Union can be divided into three groups according to the relationship private education has with the public authorities (Eurydice, 20001). In Greece and the UK, private schools receive no public funding. However, this absence of funding does not prevent the state from exercising control over private education institutions. In the UK, most denominational and other schools owned by churches or trustees are considered to form part of the public sector education. In the second group of countries (France, Italy, and Portugal), different types of contracts exist which create a link between private schools and public authorities. Depending on the type of contract, the school receives grants of a more or less significant amount and is freer to a greater or lesser extent with regard to conditions (of teaching, teacher recruitment, etc.) imposed by public authorities. Finally, within the last group, which comprises the majority of countries, grant-aided private schools appear to have much in common with public sector schools. In Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg, Austria, Finland, and Sweden, private education is grant aided, either partially or fully, but operates under more or less the same conditions as public sector education. In The Netherlands, financial equality between public and grant-aided private institutions is a constitutional right. The size of these public and non-public school sectors varies strongly between these European societies for specific historic reasons, and non-public schools disappeared in some of these societies as a consequence of the communist regime. [Article's first paragraph]