CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 99Higher Education Research StudiesSocial and Cultural DynamicsYouth Education and Societal Dynamics

‘Higher than Einstein’: constructions of going to university among working-class non-participants

Hutchings, Merryn, Archer, Louise·2001·Research Papers in Education
DOI 10.1080/02671520010011879
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Despite a vast increase in numbers in higher education, the lower socio-economic groups continue to be under-represented. Many reasons have been put forward for this: they include institutional and financial factors; low academic achievement and aspirations; lack of knowledge of HE; and perceptions of universities as élitist. While a number of studies have identified knowledge and perceptions of HE as factors that may deter working-class groups from aspiring to go to university, there has been limited investigation of the views of those who do not enter HE. This study focuses on constructions of going to university among young working-class non-participants. Drawing on data collected in focus groups, it analyses the discourses used in talking about entry qualifications, financial arrangements, studying at university and students. It is suggested that these young working-class people are to some extent aware of the hierarchy of HE entry routes and institutions and that they believe that the openings most easily accessible to them constitute a second rate form of HE.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02671520010011879

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Hutchings and Archer (2001) found that a key reason for non-participation in higher education among young working-class people was a perception that the kinds of higher education institutions realistically available to them were second-rate.

    “Hutchings and Archer (2001) interviewed young working‐class people who were not participating in HE and found that a key reason for their non‐participation was a perception that the kinds of HE institutions that were realistically available to them were second‐rate”

    From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Hutchings and Archer (2001)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hutchings, M., & Archer, L.
ORCID
Archer, Louise
Venue
Research Papers in Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2001-01
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
69-91
ISSN
  • 0267-1522 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1146
DOI
10.1080/02671520010011879
OpenAlex
W2111616598
Cited by
98
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
41.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Research Papers in Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Cultural Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Youth Education and Societal Dynamics
Keywords
higher education participation, working-class students, non-participants, social class and education, admission requirements, student finance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review