Reasons why the UK remains a closed society Flashcards
P1: What is the main reason the UK remains a relatively closed society in terms of social mobility?
Structural inequalities mean that class origin still plays a major role in determining occupational outcomes, despite the ideal of meritocracy.
What does research by Bukodi and Goldthorpe (2013) show?
Class origin significantly influences occupational outcomes, even when individuals achieve similar educational qualifications.
What is an example of class origin affecting social mobility?
Children from service-class families are four times more likely to enter elite jobs compared to working-class children with similar qualifications (the “4-2-1 rule” by Killner and Whilby).
Why does education alone fail to equalise life chances?
Middle-class children benefit from cultural capital, insider knowledge, and better networking opportunities, giving them an advantage over working-class children.
How do Marxists critique the idea of meritocracy?
They argue that meritocracy is an ideological myth that disguises the reproduction of class inequality, creating an illusion of openness while maintaining privilege.
P2: What is the second reason the UK remains a relatively closed society?
Opportunity hoarding by the middle and upper classes restricts upward mobility for the working class.
What is opportunity hoarding, according to Reeves (2017)?
Families in elite positions actively protect their advantages by using private schools, unpaid internships, and social networks to secure opportunities for their children.
What is the “glass floor” phenomenon?
Even low-achieving children from wealthy families avoid downward mobility, while high-achieving working-class children struggle to rise, reinforcing class inequality.
How does opportunity hoarding affect social mobility?
It creates a self-reinforcing cycle where middle-class children are safeguarded, while working-class children remain trapped in their class position due to unequal access to opportunities.
How do left-wing sociologists like Savage and Devine explain inequality of outcome?
They argue that inequality of outcome is due to inequality of access and inherited advantage, not personal failure or lack of motivation.
