1. For-profit Mid-career Programs as a Second Chance for Disadvantaged Social Groups Hanna Ayalon and Gila Menahem Tel Aviv University, Israel Prepared for the Decowe Conference, Ljubljana, September 2009

2. Some information on the for-profit programs in Israel  A new phenomenon  Master ’ s programs aimed at junior managers with a Bachelor ’ s degree.  Do not train researchers  Charge high tuition fees  Parallel to existing programs, but less selective and more intensive  Students complete studies in four semesters (instead of two and more years)

3. Rational  Financial crisis in the Israeli universities  Part of an international trend

4. Brief information on Israeli higher education  Until the 90 th composed mainly of research universities  Traditional universities are divided into elite and non-elite universities  During the 90 th – a remarkable expansion due to the establishment of academic colleges

5.  The colleges are considered the second tier of higher education  Currently, more than 50% of the undergraduate students study in the colleges

6. Fields of study  Differ in attractiveness, prestige and selectivity (Ayalon and Yogev 2005)  Most prestigious – lucrative fields.  Least prestigious – humanities.

7. Critics of the executive programs  Turning higher education into a business  Enhancing educational inequality

8. The programs as a second chance  Provides junior managers the opportunity to upgrade their status by winning a Master ’ s degree from a prestigious university  Previously deprived of this opportunity due to social and / or educational disadvantages.  Convert their self-acquired resources into educational credentials

9. Research question  Do the for-profit programs serve as a second chance for ethnically and socially disadvantaged groups and / or for educationally disadvantaged members of privileged groups.

10. Data  About 600 students in parallel executive and regular programs in the social science programs, Tel Aviv University, 2006, 2007, and 2008.

11. Descriptive results

12. Student ’ s characteristics according to program

13. Graduation grade by program

15. Age by program

16. Income by Program

17. Results of the logistic regression Dependent variable – the odds of enrolling in an for-profit mid-career versus a regular program

18. Socio-demographic characteristics Model 3Model 2Model 1 -0.532-1.097**-0.929** Female 0.719**0.524**0.502** Mizrachim -0.0560.013-0.020 Parental education -0.016*-0.018*-0.011** Father ’ s occupational prestige

19. Educational characteristics Model 3Model 2 0.789*1.215**Non-elite university 2.209**1.763**College 1.701**1.679**Humanities -0.9161.326**Other -0.117**-0.173**Graduation score

20. Interactions -1.923**-1.175**-1.437**Mizrachim* ” father ’ s occ. prestige -0.410-0.746Non- elite*humanities -1.191-1.129*Non-elite*other -1.742-0.306**College*humanities -1.896**-1.422*College*other

21. 0.159**Age 0.159**Income -0.056Parental education 0.029**Parental education*income

22. Major results  The for-profit programs provide the opportunity of a prestigious Master ’ s degree to junior managers with the following characteristics:  Lower graduation scores  Graduates of elite universities who did not major in the social sciences  Graduates of non-elite universities and colleges who majored in the social sciences

23.  The upper stratum of the disadvantaged ethnic groups  The lower stratum of the dominant ethnic group

24. Concluding remarks  The executive programs compensate members of the dominant ethnic group for social disadvantages  Members of the disadvantaged ethnic group who enroll in the programs have better social background.  Students who use their high income to upgrade themselves are more often children of educated parents.

25. The executive programs – a second chance for whom? By using their high income, junior managers use the programs to overcome past social and educational disadvantages. Still, the programs mainly compensate members of the dominant ethnic group for socioeconomic disadvantages.