1. Researching working class students and the career decision-making process: progress to date Paul Greenbank & Sue Hepworth Edge Hill University

2. Introduction Widening participation is a key policy objective of New Labour Focus: students from lower SEGs (i.e. the ‘working class’) Concerned not just with participation rates, but all stages of the ‘student life cycle’

3. The labour market experience It is argued that working class students are disadvantaged in the graduate labour market Evidence  Working class graduates earn less (Marshall et al., 1997; Evans, 2002)  Research on social mobility indicates little change in the past 20-30 years (HM Treasury, 1999)

4. Objectives of this research Examine how working class students make career decisions Rationale behind the approach they adopt Contribute to their disadvantage?

5. Research methodology Stage 1: Initial survey Stage 2: Interviews Stage 3: Action research

6. Literature Decision-making Career decision-making Social class

7. Social class and decision-making Economic capital Cultural capital Habitus Social capital

8. Economic capital Limited financial resources Social capital Lack ‘useful’ networks Cultural capital Lack a future orientation Value informal rather than formal information Low aspiration levels Pennel and West (2005); Bergerson (2007); Thomas and Jones (2007). Skeggs (1997); Pollard et al. (2004); Furlong and Cartmel (2005); Thomas and Jones (2007). Willis (1977); Argyle (1994); Robertson and Hillman (1997); Marshall et al. (1997); Hargrove et al. (2002); Purcell et al. (2002); Arulmani et al. 2003); Skeggs (2004). Ball and Vincent (1998); Skeggs (2004); Greenbank (2006). Roberts (1999); Archer and Hutchings (2000); Walpole (2003); Maguire (2001, 2005); Furlong and Cartmel (2005); Redmond (2006); Bergerson (2007).

9.  Limited financial resources  Lack ‘useful’ networks  Lack a future orientation  Value informal rather than formal information  Low aspiration levels

10. Our study suggests: Factors influencing career decision- making are in reality more complex and nuanced Careful of making generalisations Two examples

11. Heterogeneity of working class Broad classes are internally differentiated Class ambiguities Working class students occupy different habituses

12. Common themes Recognised parents lack of knowledge, but many students still failed to use the careers service Role models At the time of their interview very few students had started applying for jobs

13. Realistic aspirations Lacked geographical mobility Considered limited options Lacked an understanding of the nature of the graduate labour market Little conscious attempt to develop their employability

14. Questions for discussion 1. Is the heterogeneity of the working class an argument against targeting particular groups such as the ‘working class’ and offering them ‘special’ help? 2. To what extent should we ‘educate’ students about the nature of the graduate labour market, particularly discriminatory practices by some employers? 3. Should undergraduates be required to undertake career planning modules?