Does Institutional Stratification Matter? the Meaning and Value of a Tertiary Degree for Disadvantaged Students in Professional Training Programmes

Social stratification in mass higher education, in terms of a persistent class differential in accessing higher levels of programmes and different types of tertiary institutes, has received increasing attention worldwide. Increasing number of studies have point out that the expanded or more inclusive higher education systems do not necessarily narrow the social inequalities in educational and occupational attainment. Sociologists of education have explored the internal stratification within the higher education sector, in terms of the types and levels of qualification offered, institutional and degree prestige, and student composition, leads to differential occupational outcomes of their graduates. Findings from their research reveal that despite the anticipation of greater inclusion, students from privileged classes have retained their relative advantages in entering elite universities nearly in all nations. However, researchers have directed little attention to working-class students’ intentions or motivations of getting valuable qualifications in new types/ less reputable tertiary institutions. Using in-depth interviews with students who enrol in different levels and types of accredited nursing programmes in the expanded tertiary education sector, this paper examines how students from less advantaged background make their educational choices in the increasingly stratified higher education system. I argue that choosing a programme that have a strong record on graduates’ jobs and pays, despite their being offered by low-ranking institutions, is their strategy of acquiring a stable and proper employment at a lower cost in a shorter timeframe. This paper contributes to theories of institutional stratification and offers an alternative approach to understand young people’s educational decisions and learning experiences in an expanded education system.