Sustaining a Nonrepresentative Democracy: How Academic Inequality in High School Affects Voting in Midlife

• In Event: 56.076 - High School and Beyond: Effects of Equality and Inequality of Educational Opportunity at Midlife

Abstract

Introduction
Educational institutions have two duel purposes: academic and civic. Academic instruction, particularly in high school, shapes students’ trajectories through higher education and the labor market. It is inherently unequal, preparing students for high versus low status jobs (Spring 1976; Oakes 1985; Ferrare 2012). The civic goals of schooling stress the importance of civic engagement and political participation for all students (Dewey 1916). Can schools support equal political participation while supporting unequal academic preparation?

Theoretical Framing
Prior research on high school and political participation has focused on activities outside of the classroom, using academic preparation as a control for extracurricular involvement (Glanville 1999; McFarland & Thomas 2006), but evidence suggests that individuals with higher-levels of education are more likely to vote (Sondheimer & Green 2009; Nie et al. 1996; Dee 2004; Hoskins & Janmaat 2016). There are two main explanations for this link (Brand 2010; Nie et al. 1996). First, education introduces individuals to higher status positions, which lower the costs associated with voting. Second, schools develop citizens who understand how to interact with political institutions. For the most part, schools are the first institution outside of the family that individuals have experience with, and any negative experiences within this institution may make them less likely to trust and participate in other such institutions, like politics. Additionally, civic instruction has less of an impact on students if it does not coincide with their lived experiences, such as being taught that all individuals all equal while facing inequality in school (Rubin & Hayes 2010). This study investigates how inequality in academic preparation between and within high schools affects long-term voting behavior.

Data and Methods
We use the High School and Beyond (HS&B) dataset to link within and between high school differences in academic preparation with voting behavior at midlife. We linked HS&B survey data, which started in 1980, to state-level voting records maintained by Catalist, a data service used by political campaigns. Our dependent variable is voting in national elections from 2012 to 2014. Our independent variables of interest are course-taking, course failure and leadership-building learning experiences (working in groups, public speaking, and having to defend positions). We consider the school-level trends for these measures to place students within the academic hierarchy of their schools. We first perform an individual-level analysis predicting voting behavior to understand overall trends on academic preparation and voting. Then, we use HLM to ascertain how inequality within high schools is associated with voting. We control on selection into schools and learning opportunities to isolate the effect of academic preparation on voting behavior.

Findings
Our preliminary findings suggest that failing courses, taking low-level courses and having few leadership-building learning experiences lowers the odds of voting in midlife. Although a most of the associations operate through postsecondary degree attainment, an independent association with unequal academic preparation and civic participation in midlife remains. These relationships are amplified by within school inequality. By AERA we will finalize these results and discuss the implications of our findings for understanding the development of a representative democracy through high school preparation.

Author

• Jamie Mary Carroll, The University of Texas - Austin