Immigration and educational inequalities in France: statistical evidence and beyond

Transcription

1 Immigration and educational inequalities in France: statistical evidence and beyond Mathieu Ichou PhD student in OSC -Sciences Po Visitor in Nuffield College & Department of Sociology, University of Oxford ( ) IPR-Northwestern University June

2 Outline Introduction: ethnic inequalities in French Republic? Data & method: panel and matching techniques Results: Asians overachive & Turks underachieve Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Discussion: what next? 2

3 Introduction: Ethnic inequalities in French Republic? France, a country of immigration: 30% of people in France linked to immigration (Beauchemin et al., 2010) France, a (color-)blind ideology Lack of relevant data on ethnicity Lack of relevant research on ethnic inequalities 3

4 Introduction: Ethnic inequalities in French Republic? What is known: Brinbaum & Cebolla-Boado (2007) ; Brinbaum & Kieffer (2009) ; Caille (2008) ; Cebolla Boado, (2006, 2007, 2008) ; Vallet (1996) ; Vallet & Caille (1995, 1996, 2000) Second-generation immigrants underachieve in secondary school By and large, ethnic disadvantage disappears when class and educational background are controlled for 4

5 Introduction: Ethnic inequalities in French Republic? What is unknown: What happens in primary school? What is the situation of small minorities? How to make sense of the residual ethnic differences? My aim: address these issues empirically 5

6 Data & methods: surveys Panel study From kindergarten (age 5/6) to 10th grade (age 15/16) N=9,641; N minority=1,952 TeO survey 3 generations N= tbc; N minority =tbc 6

7 Data & methods: surveys Panel study Primary & secondary school TeO survey 3 generations N= tbc; N minority =tbc 7

8 Data & methods: surveys Panel study Primary & secondary school TeO survey Empirical interpretations 8

9 Data & methods: measures 100% Second-generation groups 90% % 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% Others SE Asia DOM-TOM Sahel Turkey Southern Europe North Africa Mixted with French 10% 0% Source: 1997 Panel study 9

10 Data & methods: measures Academic achievement measures: Standardized test scores at age 6, 11 and 15 (z-scores) Other background variables: Both parents education Occupation of head of household Both parents employment status Number of siblings, rank among them Parents relationship status Pupil s gender 10

11 Data & methods: exact matching Exact Matching (Ho et al., 2007; Iacus, King & Porro, 2009; see Imbens, 2004, Morgan & Harding, 2006, for reviews) o o o o Focus: difference in academic achievement linked to country of birth of parents Groups also differ according to other relevant sociological properties In each group of common origin, each pupil is matched with children of natives sharing exactly the same observed sociological properties Multivariate analysis (including all interactions) on small groups without any statistical modeling. 11

12 0,6 0,4 Results: trajectories of academic (under?)achievement Academic achievement during compulsory education: RAW differences between groups 0,2 0-0,2-0,4-0,6-0,8-1 -1,2 Age 6 Age 11 Age 15 Mixted with Fr Southern Europe North Africa DOM-TOM Sahel Turkey SE Asia Source: 1997 Panel study, own calculations 12

13 0,6 0,4 Results: trajectories of academic (under?)achievement Academic achievement during compulsory education: NET differences between groups 0,2 0-0,2-0,4-0,6-0,8-1 -1,2 Age 6 Age 11 Age 15 Mixted with Fr Southern Europe North Africa DOM-TOM Sahel Turkey SE Asia Source: 1997 Panel study, own calculations 13

14 0,6 0,4 Results: trajectories of academic (under?)achievement Academic achievement during compulsory education: RAW differences between groups 0,2 0-0,2-0,4-0,6-0,8-1 -1,2 Age 6 Age 11 Age 15 Mixted with Fr Southern Europe North Africa DOM-TOM Sahel Turkey SE Asia Source: 1997 Panel study, own calculations 14

15 0,6 0,4 Results: trajectories of academic (under?)achievement Academic achievement during compulsory education: NET differences between groups 0,2 0-0,2-0,4-0,6-0,8-1 -1,2 Age 6 Age 11 Age 15 Mixted with Fr Southern Europe North Africa DOM-TOM Sahel Turkey SE Asia Source: 1997 Panel study, own calculations 15

16 Results: trajectories of academic (under?)achievement The least often studied minorities are the most puzzling A two-fold result, a double puzzle Turkish second-generation underachivement Southeast Asian second-generation overachivement 16

17 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics 17

18 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Immigrant's father's occupation South Europe North Africa Sahel Turkey SE Asia Mixed -1 Farmer (raw) Unskilled manual worker (raw) Farmer (net) Unskilled manual worker (net) Source: Teo survey, own calculations 18

19 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Immigrant's mother's occupation South Europe North Africa Sahel Turkey SE Asia Mixed -1 Farmer (raw) Unskilled manual worker (raw) Farmer (net) Unskilled manual worker (net) Source: Teo survey, own calculations 19

20 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics Turkish immigrants from more rural and unskilled backgrounds Southeast Asian immigrants from better off backgrounds 20

21 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics Language skills 21

22 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured 0,4 Level of difficulties in French 0,3 0,2 0,1 0-0,1 South Europe Sahel Turkey SE Asia Mixed Raw Net -0,2-0,3 Source: Teo survey, own calculations 22

23 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics Language skills Both Turkish and Southeast Asian immigrants have difficulties in French 23

24 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics Language skills Urban segregation and deprived local schools Turkish immigrants are the most segregated group; Southeast Asians are rather segregated too 24

25 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics Language skills Urban segregation and deprived local schools Length of stay in France 25

26 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured 90 % of immigrants arrived after Father Mother Southern Europe North Africa Sahel DOM-TOM Turkey SE Asia Source: 1997 Panel study, own calculations 26

27 Empirical interpretation: exploring the unmeasured Pre-migration socioeconomic characteristics Language skills Urban segregation and deprived local schools Length of stay in France Both Turks and Southeast Asians are recent migrants 27

28 Discussion: summary The groups who differ the most from the majority group are also the smaller and least often studied; Class background in France is in general the main factor of the academic underachievement of children of immigrants; For children of parents from Turkey (-) and Southeast Asia (++), a residual difference still needs to be explained 28

29 Discussion: summary The residual underachievement of children of Turkish immigrants seem to be explained by usually unmeasured properties before and after migration. To be fully explained, the differences recorded [ ] would need to be related to both the living and working conditions in France and the differences which, initially, that is to say prior to and independently of emigration, already characterized emigrants or groups of emigrants. (Sayad, 1999, p. 57) 29

30 Discussion: summary Southeast Asians success: Cannot be only explained by socioeconomic properties; Contradicts traditional assimilationist views. Seems to correspond to a process of selective assimilation (Portes & Zhou, 1993). Immigrants may not necessarily divest themselves of their previous cultural patterns, including their languages, and adopt those of the host society to take full part in it; instead, they may lean on these unique cultural characteristics to facilitate their adaptation.(bankston & Zhou, 1995, p. 5; see also Zhou & Bankston, 1999; and, e.g. Caplan et al., 1992, Ogbu, 1989, Rumbaut & Ima, 1988, Sung, 1987) 30

31 Discussion: what next? Explore the role of the educational experience of parents Critically discuss the notion of cultural orientation Explore the influence of the local context Explore the role of school as institution Explore school choices and tracking decisions Fieldwork to come 31