The interrelation of twenty-first-century education and work from a gender perspective

Abstract

This paper analyses the interrelation of twenty-first-century education and work from a gender perspective. The analysis is carried out theoretically by asking whether human capital theory and Bourdieu’s reproduction theory are adequate instruments for such an endeavour. It is argued that the explanatory power of the human capital concept of the interrelation between education and work is extremely weak, because the human capital concept conceals costs necessary to create human capital. In contrast, reproduction theory comprehends investments in education through reproductive work. But, reproduction theory fails short to explain ongoing gender hierarchies within employment. Therefore, analysis of social and societal structure needs to go beyond the focus on education and work to explain the maintenance of gender hierarchies.

Keywords:

• education
• work
• gender

Notes

1. In addition, England (1982) found from data of the US National Labour Statistics that women are NOT ‘penalized less for time spent out of employment if they choose predominantly female occupations than if they choose occupations more typical for males’ (England, 1982, p. 358). In light of this finding, studies on gender bias of education systems in the varieties of capitalism debate (Estébez-Abe, 2011) are put into question.

2. This assessment is shared by Collins (1979) who concludes his literature review on studies on the creation of employment skills by stating that apart from literacy most skills are taught at the workplace and not in schools.

3. In light of this assertion, the whole debate on the so called knowledge society or knowledge economy could well be analysed and would reveal how this policy and discourse contributes to the creation of social inequality.

4. Here, Collins’ concept of credentialism (1979), which is in large parts very similar to the Bourdieuan perspective, could partly step in as Collins also understood companies and other employment organisations as cultural places, but focuses more than Bourdieu does on what happens inside companies and found out that employment positions and careers do not depend on skills, but on ‘manoeuvring to reach the sequence of positions that lead upward’ (Collins, 1979, p. 30). Here, personal sponsorship is the prevailing pattern. Collins’ focus on the inner processes of employment lead him to the assertion that social inequality is less occurring along class divisions, ‘but (a) the segregation between higher-paying male occupations; and (b) admission into full-time and relatively secure jobs within the urban labor force’ (Collins, 1979, p. 185). Thus, following Collins, and here Bourdieu would agree, the design of employment positions is the product of power relations.

5. One could find a parallel to the human capital concept in this omission.