MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409703532 · doi:10.1177/00207152241303401

Does the class composition matter? Social and immigrant class composition in compulsory school and the trajectory to upper-secondary education in Germany and Switzerland

2025· article· en· W4409703532 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Glauser, Robin Busse, Katja Scharenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStaatssekretariat für Bildung, Forschung und Innovation
KeywordsComposition (language)ImmigrationClass (philosophy)Upper classSocial classSociologyMathematics educationMathematicsPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on survey data from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland, we examine whether the class composition at lower-secondary level—in particular, the proportion of low-SES and immigrant students—is associated with students’ trajectories to post-compulsory education, using linear probability models. By focusing on two tracked education systems, our study extends the existing research, which primarily examines comprehensive education systems. Our findings indicate a generally weak relationship between class composition and educational attainment, partly mediated by class-level aspirations and achievement. However, the results underscore that in tracked education systems, individual-level characteristics matter more than class composition. We conclude that it is the institutional setting of tracking, which is linked to track-specific opportunity structures, that shapes educational trajectories and life chances.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesFrench-language works237,207