Socialised Social Capital?

The capacity of schools to use career provisions

to compensate for social capital deficiencies
among teenagers

Elnaz T. Kashefpakdel, University of Bath

Anthony Mann, Education and Employers Taskforce
Chris Percy, Independent Researcher

Our subject: Social capital and young people

Social capital provides a familiar conceptual tool for attempting
to understand variation in outcomes experienced by young
people as they enter adulthood.
the sum of the resources, actual or virtual, that accrue
to an
individual or a group by virtue of possessing a
durable network of more or less institutionalized
relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition
(Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992)

Social capital and employer engagement

Teenage informal contacts with people in the labour market
are associated with better employment outcomes.
M. Jokisaari. 2007. From newcomer to insider? Social
networks and socialisation into working life in Youth and
Social Capital edited by Helver, H. & J. Bynner. London:
Tufnell Press

School-mediated employer engagement as a

mechanism for enhancing social capital: intensive
work experience
What we have evidenced is that, based on the process of developing social
capital through trustworthy reciprocal social relations within individualized
networks, young people are provided with an opportunity to gain information,
observe, ape and then confirm decisions and actions with significant others
and peers. Thus, everyday implicit, informal and individual practical
knowledge and understanding is created through interaction, dialogue, action
and reflection on action within individualized and situated social contexts.
Raffo, C. and Reeves, M. (2000) Youth transitions and social exclusion:
developments in social capital theory Journal of Youth Studies, 3: 147166.

Social capital as extensive engagement: the

strength of weak ties (Granovetter)
Weak ties are well suited for a bridging function, as they provide greater access to
non-redundant information about employment. In other words, connections with
adults that operate outside the young persons close-knit social circle are more likely
to provide new information about opportunities. Since weak ties are associated with
the receipt of this non-redundant information, we expect that young people who
maintain relatively weak relationships with their mentors will have the greatest
access to labor market information and opportunities. This would, in turn, enhance
their chances of being employed in young adulthood. Similarly, connections with
non-kin mentors are also likely to provide superior access to labour market
information by expanding opportunities beyond the family circle.
McDonald, S., Erickson, L. D., Johnson, M. K. and Elder, G. H. (2007) Informal
mentoring and young adult employment Social Science Research, 36: 13281347.

Evidence for School-mediated Granovetter-style

Virtual Social capital
Kashefpakdel, T.E. & Percy, C. (2016). Career Education that Works: an
Economic Analysis using the British Cohort Study, Journal of Education
and Work, DOI: 10.1080/13639080.2016.1177636.
Investigates the relationship between participation in career talks with
people from outside school during year 10 and 11 and wage at age 26
when in full time employment.
Young people who took part in career talk at age 15 benefit from 0.8%
wage premium at age 26. This is statistically significant relationship.
This wasnt the case for young people who did this activity at age 16.
Young people who found the career talks very helpful at age 14-15
benefit from 1.6% wage premium at age 26. With a smaller effect
(0.9%) 15-16 year olds also enjoy the pay rise.

Socialising social
capital?
1. Can we use longitudinal data to
distinguish between real social
capital (accessed through informal
family networks) and virtual
social capital (accessed through
school-mediated employer
engagement)?
2. Can school-mediated virtual
social capital compensate for
deficiencies in real social capital?

British Cohort Study 1970: background

British Cohort Study 1970: it has a rich set of socio-economic factors, it
follows members since birth to adulthood, relevant variables of interest
Survey background
Follows ~17,000 born in England,
Scotland and Wales in a single week of
1970

Survey attrition rate

16,571

14,350

Data is available at Birth, age 5, 10, 16,

26, 30, 34, 38 and 42

12,981

Data for background variables from birth

16

11,206

Labour market outcome data at age 26

8,654
Birth

10

16

26

Methodology: Real vs. Virtual Social Capital

R e a l S o c ia l C a pita l

Real social capital

No
Yes - Once you need
to get a job do your parents or anyone
you know have a contact(s) who might be
able to help you? (N=8,668)

Virtua l S o c ia l C a pita l

No

Yes

Virtual social capital Has anyone

come from outside school
16%to talk to you
about careers/jobs? (N=4,199)

40%

60%
84%

Outcome variable: Wage for full-time employed at age 26

Full-time weekly income in 1996 (age 26) [nominal
]
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0

Number of respondents in FT
employment: 5,932 individuals

1813

1392

1022
717

610
441

54

101

158

90

53

34

23

49

Following Mann & Percy (2013)

part-time wage earners were
excluded to identify a more
comparable set of labour market
participants.
Average earning across the
sample: 215 pw

What is the effect of having access to family contacts

on earnings?

Work in Progress

Those who have access to family contacts to help them with a job benefit from a
3.8% wage premium when aged 26 and full time employed. This relationship is
statistically significant at 10%. Young people with access to such family contacts are,
on average,
of higher social backgrounds. Regression Results
Control
variables
Academic
ability/
Education
plans
Socioeconomic
status
Early
home
learning
environme
nt
Demographics
Local
labour
market

Maths - CSE/O-level results

Highest level of qualification at 26
N= 1,116
Cognitive assessment age 5 (hum. fig. drawing)R-square= 0.201
Education expectation at age 16

Mother socio-economic status

Type of accommodation lived in

Amount of TV watched age 10

Gender
Whether has a UK parent

LEA economic activity rate

Gender
Highest qualification
Mother social class
Type of accommodation
Math ability
Local unemployment index
No of Days TV Seen After 6pm Mon-Fri
Born to UK parents
Education expectation at age 16
Cognitive assessment
Family contact able to help you
get job

Unstandardized
Coefficients

Sig.

.022
.010
.006
.016
.008
.000
.006
.070
.029
.010

8.010
3.695
-2.177
-2.616
-6.565
-2.577
-1.126
-.922
-1.526
2.544

.000
.000
.030
.009
.000
.010
.260
.357
.127
.011

.022

1.698

.090

Std. Error

.180
.036
-.013
-.042
-.053
-.001
-.007
-.064
-.044
.026
.038

Two questions
Q1: does access to real social capital impact on
the benefits gained through virtual social
capital?

Young people who do not have access to real social capital but took part in
career talks with people from outside school benefit from a 8.2% wage
premium when aged 26 and full time employed. This relationship is
statistically significant 5%. This is not the case for those who have access
to real social capital.
Control variables

Regression Results

Work in Progress

Academic
ability/
Education
plans
Socioeconomic
status
Early
home
learning
environme
nt
Demographics
Local
labour
market

Maths - CSE/O-level results

Highest level of qualification at 26
N=629
Cognitive assessment age 5 (hum. fig. drawing)
Rsquare: 0.208
Education expectation age 16

Mother socio-economic status

Type of accommodation lived in

Amount of TV watched age 10

Gender
Whether has a UK parent

Unstandardized
Coefficients

Sig.

Std. Error

Gender
Highest qualification
Mother social class
Type of accomodation
Math ability
Local unemployment index
No of Days TV Seen After 6pm Mon-Fri
Born to UK parents
Education expectation at age 16
Cognitive assessment

.176
.039
-.010
-.052
-.052
-.001
-.003
-.045
-.059
.022

.030
.013
.008
.022
.010
.000
.008
.085
.039
.013

5.855
2.923
-1.193
-2.308
-5.015
-1.438
-.410
-.529
-1.507
1.644

.000
.004
.233
.021
.000
.151
.682
.597
.132
.101

Careers talks from anyone outside

school

.082

.038

2.144

.032

LEA economic activity rate

Q2: are adult wage premiums linked to teenage

participation in very helpful career talks with
people from outside of school (virtual social
capital) bigger or smaller for young people without
real social capital?

The sub-sample analysis: a) dont have access to real

social capital b) did participate in career talks with people
from outside school c) found the career talks very helpful
Year 11

N=91

Work in Progress

R-square: 0.263

Year 10
Unstandardized
Coefficients

N=52
t

Sig.

Std. Error

Gender

.056

.077

.730

.468

hqual26

.060

.036

1.684

.096

Mather social class

-.010

.022

-.439

.662

Type of accommodation

.028

.059

.475

.636

Math ability

-.057

.027

-2.079

.041

Local unemployment index

.000

.001

.250

.803

.024

.020

1.207

.231

.030

.279

.108

.914

Education expectation at age 16

-.087

.107

-.815

.418

Cognitive assessment

.040

.042

.962

.339

No. of career talks at year 11

.034

.014

2.481

.015

No of Days TV Seen After 6pm MonFri

Born to UK parents

R-square: 0.447

Unstandardized
Coefficients

Sig.

.204
.023
.555
.374

Std. Error

Gender
hqual26
Mather social class
Type of accommodation

.137
.103
-.017
-.095

.106
.043
.028
.106

Math ability

-.061

.037

Local unemployment index

No of Days TV Seen After 6pm
Mon-Fri
Born to UK parents
Education expectation at age 16
Cognitive assessment
No. of career talks at year
10

-.001

.002

1.293
2.371
-.595
-.899
1.643
-.302

.049

.027

1.794

.080

-.147
-.081
.135

.331
.141
.066

-.443
-.572
2.040

.660
.571
.048

.033

.013

2.589 .013

.108
.765

Findings
At year 10 teenagers lacking real social capital
who take part in very helpful career talks with
people from outside of school benefit from a wage
premium of 3.3% at age 26 significantly higher
than their better connected peers. The relationship
is statistically significant at 5%.
At year 11, the wage premium associated with very
helpful career talks is 3.4% per career talks and the
relationship is less significant but still strong at 5%.

These results disappear for those who didnt find

the career talks helpful .
The results also disappear when a similar analysis is
undertaken for young people who did have access to
real social capital as defined in this study.

Quality of the
career talks with
people from
outside school
matters a lot to
those who dont
have access to
family networks
The career talks
possesses a
compensatory
character if done
with high quality

Summary: what we found so far

Teenagers with access to family networks (real social capital) who are able to help them find jobs
benefit from a 4% wage premium when aged 26 and in full time employment

Teenagers who dont have access to such networks but their schools organise for them career talks with
people from outside school benefit from 8.2% wage uplift at age 26 when in full time employment

Schools with highly regarded career provision are able to compensate for the lack of access to real
social capital. Those who dont have access to real social capital and found the career talk with people
from outside school very helpful benefit from 3.3 and 3.4 percentage wage premium related to year 10
and 11 respectively.

Teenagers who already have access to real social capital appear not to gain

additional advantages from the activity.

Thank you Any questions?

Elnaz.Kashef@educationandemployers.org
Anthony.Mann@educationandemployers.org
Tel: 0207 566 4894
www.educationandemployers.org