Abstract
The competition paradigm assumes that competition between educational institutions leads to better education which raises income levels. If there is equal access to better education, then it is possible to speak of a meritocracy. The elites within such a meritocracy are considered to be legitimate incumbents of their position. Thus the internationalisation of elite formation should lead to the establishment of a legitimate global meritocracy. However, drawing on a conflict-theoretical perspective shows that such claims are contradicted by some of the evidence examined. Intensified competition results, in fact, in the emergence of a new kind of “aristocracy”. This argument is examined drawing on the example of the USA and the role of international university rankings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
ASA (American Statistical Association). (2014). ASA statement on using value-added models for educational assessment. Retrieved from www.amstat.org
Bourdieu, P. (1996). The state nobility. Cambridge: Polity.
Davis, K., & Moore, W. E. (1945). Some principles of stratification. American Sociological Review, 10(2), 242–249.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.
Gaztambide-Fernández, R., & Garlen-Maudlin, J. (2015). Private schools in the public system. School choice and the production of elite status in the USA and Canada. In C. Maxwell & P. Aggleton (Eds.), Elite education. International perspectives (pp. 55–68). Abingdon: Routledge.
Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA “effect” in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 1, 23–37.
Heckman, J., Stixrud, J., & Urzua, S. (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. Journal of Labor Economics, 24(3), 411–482.
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.
Jones, D. (2015). 5 myths about standardized testing and the opt out movement. Retrieved from www.empowermagazine.com
Kovacs, P. E. (2011). The Gates Foundation and the future of US “public” schools. London and New York: Routledge.
Kreckel, R. (2004). Politische Soziologie der sozialen Ungleichheit (3rd ed.). Frankfurt and New York: Campus.
Lubienski, C. A. (2005). Public schools in marketized environments: Shifting incentives and unintended consequences of competition-based educational reforms. American Journal of Education, 111(4), 464–486.
Lubienski, C. A. (2007). Marketing schools: Consumer goods and competitive incentives for consumer information. Education and Urban Society, 40(1), 118–141.
Lubienski, C. A., Gulosino, C., & Weitzel, P. (2009). School choice and competitive incentives: Mapping the distribution of educational opportunities across local education markets. American Journal of Education, 115, 601–647.
Lubienski, C. A., & Theule Lubienski, S. (2014). The public school advantage. Why public schools outperform private schools. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Lubienski, C. A., & Weitzel, P. C. (2010). The charter school experiment: Expectations, evidence and implications. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
McNamee, S. J., & Miller, R. K. (2004). The meritocracy myth. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Merton, R. K. (1968a). The Matthew Effect in science. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.
Merton, R. K. [1949] (1968b). The self-fulfilling prophecy. In R. K. Merton (Ed.), Social theory and social structure (pp. 424–436). New York: Free Press.
NAEP. (2016). National assessment of educational progress. Retrieved from http://www.nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ltt
National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. (2015). Charter public schools serving 250,000 new students in 2015–16. Retrieved from http://www.publiccharters.org
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/index.html
OECD. (1996). Employment and growth in the knowledge-based economy. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (1999). The knowledge-based economy: A set of facts and figures. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2010). The high cost of low educational performance. The long-run economic impact of improving PISA-outcomes. Retrieved from http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=IDD
Picciano, A. G., & Spring, J. (2012). The great American education industrial complex: Ideology, technology and profit. London and New York: Routledge.
Ravitch, D. (2010, March 9). Why I changed my mind about school reform. Wall Street Journal, A21.
Ravitch, D. (2015). Education industrial complex. Retrieved from www.greatschoolwars.files.wordpress.com
SAT. (2016). Scholastic aptitude test. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171
Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2013). The OECD and global governance in education. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 710–725.
Tumin, M. M. (1953). Some principles of stratification: A critical analysis. American Sociological Review, 18(4), 387–394.
van Zanten, A., & Maxwell, C. (2015). Elite education and the State in France: Durable ties and new challenges. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(1), 71–94.
Young, M. (1958). The rise of meritocracy. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Münch, R. (2018). Elite Formation in the Educational System: Between Meritocracy and Cumulative Advantage. In: Maxwell, C., Deppe, U., Krüger, HH., Helsper, W. (eds) Elite Education and Internationalisation. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59966-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59966-3_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59965-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-59966-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)