Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2020 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 45

The Performance of Education System in Different Welfare Regimes in School to Work Transitions: Denmark, France, Spain, Greece, and Turkey

Farklı Refah Devleti Modellerinde Eğitim Sisteminin Okuldan İş Piyasasına Geçişteki Performansı: Danimarka, Fransa, İspanya, Yunanistan ve Türkiye

Pages
49–61
Publication Date
2020-07-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The article also addresses potential policy transfers in the findings.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:School systems and their links with the labor market play an important role in students’ success or failure and, consequently, facilitate (or not) their later access to the labor market.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This article presents a comparison of the effects of different welfare regimes on school to work transitions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The article also addresses potential policy transfers in the findings.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Okul Sistemleri · Refah Devleti Modelleri · Okuldan İş Piyasasına Geçiş

Abstract

School systems and their links with the labor market play an important role in students’ success or failure and, consequently, facilitate (or not) their later access to the labor market. This article presents a comparison of the effects of different welfare regimes on school to work transitions. By drawing on an intense desk study and secondary analysis, the article examines five countries with different welfare regime types and reveals how they shape schooling and school to work transitions, particularly for disadvantaged groups. These countries are Denmark (universalistic regime), France (employment- centered regime), Spain, Greece, and Turkey (sub-protective regime). The article also addresses potential policy transfers in the findings.

Özet

Eğitim sistemleri ve eğitim sistemleri ile iş piyasası arasındaki bağlar öğrencilerin akademik başarısına ve okul sonrası iş piyasasına nasıl entegre olacaklarına hayati şekilde etki etmektedir. Yoğun ve karşılaştırmalı bir literatür çalışmasına ve ikincil kaynakların analizine dayanarak, bu makale farklı refah devleti modellerine sahip beş ülkeye odaklanmakta, bu modellerin okul sistemlerini ve okuldan iş piyasasına geçişi nasıl etkilediğini incelemektedir. Bu ülkeler sırasıyla evrenselci modele sahip Danimarka, istihdam merkezli modele sahip Fransa ve Güney Avrupa 1 modeline sahip İspanya, Yunanistan ve Türkiye’dir. Makale bu ülkelerin içinde bulundukları refah devleti modellerinin okullaşma ve okuldan iş piyasasına geçiş sürecini özellikle dezavantajlı gruplar açısından incelemekte ve muhtemel politika aktarımlarını tartışmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇELİK, Ç. (2020). The Performance of Education System in Different Welfare Regimes in School to Work Transitions: Denmark, France, Spain, Greece, and Turkey. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 45, 49–61. https://ajindex.com/articles/139587

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. References Adato, M., and L. Bassett. 2009. “Social Protection to Support Vulnerable Children and Families: The Potential of Cash Transfers to Protect Education, Health and Nutrition.” AIDS Care 21 (sup1): 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540120903112351.
  2. Alba, Richard, Jennifer Sloan, and Jessica Sperling. 2011. “The Integration Imperative: The Children of Low-Status Immigrants in the Schools of Wealthy Societies.” Annual Review of Sociology 37 (1): 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150219.
  3. Antonakakis, Nikolaos, and Alan Collins. 2014. “The Impact of Fiscal Austerity on Suicide: On the Empirics of a Modern Greek Tragedy.” Social Science & Medicine 112 (July): 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.04.019.
  4. Audebert, Cédric. 2013. “The Social Geography of Ethnic Minorities in Metropolitan Paris: A Challenge to the French Model of Social Cohesion?” Patterns of Prejudice 47 (3): 309–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2013.814876.
  5. Bell, David N.F., and David G. Blanchflower. 2010. “Youth Unemployment: Déjà Vu?” IZA Discussion Paper Series 4705.Bradley, H., and R. Devadason. 2008. “Fractured Transitions: Young Adults’ Pathways into Contemporary Labour Markets.” Sociology 42 (1): 119–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038507084828.
  6. Buchmann, Marlis C., and Irene Kriesi. 2011. “Transition to Adulthood in Europe.” Annual Review of Sociology 37 (1): 481–503. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150212. Cabasés Piqué, M. Àngels, Agnès Pardell Veà, and Tanja Strecker. 2015. “The EU Youth Guarantee – a Critical Analysis of Its Implementation in Spain.” Journal of Youth Studies, October, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2015.1098777.
  7. Carcillo, Stéphane, Sebastian Königs, Andreea Minea, and Rodrigo Fernández. 2015. “NEET Youth in the Aftermath of the Crisis.” OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 164. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/neet-youth-in-the-aftermath-of-the-crisis_5js6363503f6-en.Carstensen, M. B., and C. L. Ibsen. 2015. “Barriers to and Triggers of Policy Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in Denmark.” WP4.1/DK. http://www.style-research.eu/publications/working-papers.
  8. Cederberg, Margareta, and Nanny Hartsmar. 2013. “Some Aspects of Early School Leaving in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland.” European Journal of Education 48 (3): 378–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12036.
  9. Çelik, Çetin, Fatoş Gökşen, Alpay Filiztekin, İbrahim Öker, and Mark Smith. 2019. “Fragile Transitions from