How are the characteristics of national educational systems related to social inequality?

Introduction. A great deal of research concerns the impact of education on the socio-economic performance in different countries, with highlighting the positive impact of education.

Aim. The current research is devoted to the relationship between educational indicators and social inequality representing the socio-economic development.

Methodology and research methods. By having the use of correlation analysis, the authors examined the relationship between the indicators of national educational systems, including the participation of the population in education, the structure of graduation in educational programmes, the quality of secondary education, the organisation of the educational process, the volume and structure of education funding, on the one hand, and social inequality, on the other. Social inequality was measured using the Gini index, which represents the level of income inequality in the country. The authors also investigated the educational statistics data in the OECD countries, Russia and some other countries participating in the OECD educational research.

Results. The results revealed the relationship between many educational indicators and the Gini index, as well as showed several features of these relationships in Russia. In particular, the authors observed a relationship between the social inequality index and such groups of educational indicators as the level of education (the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient varies from -0,68 for the level of upper-secondary vocational education to 0,51 for the level of upper-secondary general education), participation of the population in education (the correlation coefficient with the integral indicator of participation in education, the average number of years of learning, was -0,64), the quality of education (a positive relationship with the proportion of students, who have not reached the second level of reading literacy in the Programme for International Student Assessment – PISA, reflected in the correlation coefficient equal to 0,56), the organisation of the educational process (positive correlation coefficient with class size equal to 0,61) and the indicators of education financing (negative correlation coefficients for primary and secondary education – -0.48, as well as for tertiary education – -0.57). It is important to note that the indicators related to master’s degree programmes show a greater negative correlation with social inequality than those reflecting the scale of bachelor’s degree programmes and short tertiary programmes.

Scientific novelty of the research includes the detailed analysis of the determinants influencing the national educational systems in their relationship with social inequality, as well as the correlation between these parameters in Russia as compared with other countries.

Practical significance of the study involves the development of the information and analytical basis for adjusting further policy in the sphere of education with taking into account socio-economic factors.

1. Psacharopoulos G., Patrinos H. A. Human capital and rates of return. In: International handbook on the economics of education [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2021 June 20]. p. 1–57. Available from: https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/2847_1.html

2. McMahon W. W. The external benefits of education. Economics of Education. 2010; 68–79. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.01226-4

3. Levin H. M. The costs to the nation of inadequate education. US Government Printing Office; 1972. V. 2. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08331192

4. Leslie L. L., Brinkman P. T. The economic value of higher education [Internet]. American Council on Education/Macmillan Series on Higher Education. NY: Macmillan Publishing; 1988 [cited 2021 June 20]. Available from: https://archive.org/details/economicvalueofh0000lesl

5. Abdullah A., Doucouliagos H., Manning E. Does education reduce income inequality? A meta-regression analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys. 2015; 29 (2): 301–316. DOI: 10.1111/joes.12056

6. Jerrim J., Macmillan L. Income inequality, intergenerational mobility, and the Great Gatsby Curve: Is education the key? Social Forces. 2015; 94 (2): 505–533. DOI: 10.1093/SF/SOV075

7. Lee J. W., Lee H. Human capital and income inequality. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy. 2018; 23 (4): 554–583. DOI: 10.1080/13547860.2018.1515002

8. Jeng R., Gane J., Lages R. Effect of education on income inequality: A cross–national study [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 June 20]. p. 1–17. Available from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Effect-of-Education-on-Income-Inequality%3A-A-Study-Jeng-Gane/12ef1ea734cd2928d170be4a77008f9669c279f9

9. Jianu I. The impact of government health and education expenditure on income inequality in European Union. In: International Finance and Banking Conference FIBA 2018, XVIth Edition, Theoretical and Applied Economics. Special Issue, General Association of Economists from Romania (GAER) [Internet]; 2018; Bucharest. Bucharest; 2018 [cited 2021 June 20]; p. 121–134. Available from: http://www.ectap.ro/supliment/international-finance-and-banking-conference-fi-ba-2018-xvithedition/28/

10. Ahluwalia M. S. Income distribution and development: Some stylized facts. The American Economic Review [Internet]. 1976 [cited 2021 June 20]; 66 (2): 128–135. Available from: https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v66y1976i2p128-35.html

11. Simmons J., Alexander L. The determinants of school achievement in developing countries: A review of the research. Economic Development and Cultural Change. 1978; 26 (2): 341–357. DOI: 10.1086/451019

12. Ram R. Population increase, economic growth, educational inequality, and income distribution: Some recent evidence. Journal of Development Economics. 1984; 14 (3): 419–428. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3878(84)90069-5

13. Coady D., Dizioli A. Income inequality and education revisited: Persistence, endogeneity and heterogeneity. Applied Economics. 2018; 50 (25): 2747–2761. DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2017.1406659

14. Acemoglu D., et al. Income and democracy. American Economic Review. 2008; 98 (3): 808–842. DOI: 10.1257/aer.98.3.808

15. Vinod T., Yan W., Xibo F. Measuring educational inequality: Gini coefficients of education [Internet]. In: Policy Research Working Paper 2525, The World Bank. Washington, DC; 2001 [cited 2021 June 20]. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=258182&rec=1&srcabs=304640.&pos=2

16. Mo J. How does PISA define and measure reading literacy? PISA in Focus. 2019; 101. DOI: 10.1787/22260919

17. de Grof J., Yankevich V., Agranovich M. L., Belikov A. A., et al. Upravlenie sistemoj obrazovanija na raznyh urovnjah: vertikal’ vlasti, transfer polnomochij i regional’noe sotrudnichestvo = Management of the education system at different levels: The vertical of power, transfer of powers and regional cooperation. Ed. by de Grof J., Yankevich V. Moscow: Higher School of Economics; 2019. 336 p. DOI: 10.17323/978-5-7598-2143-4 (In Russ.)

18. Karaman Aksentijević N., Ježić Z. Education and reducing income inequalities – the importance of education in maritime studies. Pomorstvo. 2019; 33 (2): 191–204. DOI: 10.31217/p.33.2.9

19. Heckman J., Carneiro P. Human capital policy. In: NBER Working Papers, No. 9495 [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2021 June 20]. Available from: https://vo.hse.ru/data/2013/10/21/1280185330/VO3_11%20Hekman.pdf