By comparing the coefficients of the variables which appear in the successive Models (Model A to Model E in the case of Table 3.3), it is possible to identify which variable in the subsequent model was mediating the indirect effect of any variable in the reduced model. A lower coefficient for any variable in Table 3.3 -i.e. approaching 0 -means that the gap between that variable and the reference category is decreasing. One of the interesting findings of Table 3.3 is the significant decreases in the coefficient of place of birth, ethnicity, region and especially religion of mother, after parents’ education was put in the model (Model D). This indicates that differences in parents’ education have played significant roles in the differences in place of birth, region, ethnicity and religion of mother of the children. Parents’ education was the crucial variable and has mediated the particular influence of these factors in the educational attainment of children. Similar to this is the role of migration and especially marital status in mediating the effects of other variables, sex, age and ethnicity in particular, on educational attainment. A great reduction in the coefficients of sex and ethnicity after the marital status variable was included in the model indicates that the dividing line of marital status -married and single - largely falls along sex and ethnic lines and affects the likelihood of obtaining a better education. This means that marital status was mediating the effect of sex and ethnicity on educational attainment.
As shown in Table 3.4, the ratio of indirect effects to the total effect of place of birth, ethnicity, region and especially religion of mother was large. This situation suggests that the indirect influences of place of birth, ethnicity, and especially region and religion of mother on children’s educational attainment were operating largely through other variables, as shown in Table 3.3, through parents’ education, and to some extent father’s occupation and marital status. Since parents’
education also has the strongest direct effect (the coefficient was 0.50 and the R square change was 0.145) and mediated large parts of the indirect effects of several socio-environmental variables, therefore parents’ education was the key factor for explaining the educational attainment of children.
Nevertheless, since all variables in this study could only explain around 30 per cent of the variation in children’s educational attainment, an important issue remains about the significance of other variables excluded from the study, such as children’s psychological characteristics and efforts, peer groups or parental income that could contribute to their achievement in education.
Table 3.4
Total effect, direct effect and indirect effect^ of variables on the educational attainment among youth 15 to 29 years in three cities of Java, 1994.
Independent variables Total
effect Direct effect Indirect effect Indirect / Total effect Sex .48 .32 -.16 .33 Age .30 .28 -.02 .06 Sibling -.02 .03 -.05 2.50 Place of birth 2.56 1.43 -1.13 .44 Ethnicity Javanese 1.47 .81 -.66 .44 Others .97 .34 -.63 .64 Religion of mother -1.34 -.44 -.90 .67 Region Semarang -.68 -.11 -.57 .84 Surabaya .01 .37 +.36 36.0 Education of parents .53 .50 -.03 .001 Father’s occupation Professional 1.19 1.19 .00 .00 Clerical 1.07 1.03 -.04 .03 Trades .82 .80 -.02 .02 Services .42 .42 .00 .00 Production .41 .41 .00 .00 Migration status .16 .16 .00 .00 Marital status -.83 -.83 .00 .00 Source: Table 3.3.
a Total effect is the coefficient of the variable at the first entry in the model. Direct effect is the coefficient of the variable at the last model. Indirect effect = the gap between the total effect and the direct effect as a result of a decrease ( - ) or increase ( + ) of the coefficient after other variables were put in the model.
Reference categories were females, rural born, Other ethnic groups, non-Moslem, Jakarta, farmers, non-migrant and those who were single.
If parental education indicates cultural resources of parents and parental occupation indicates economic resources of parents, this study confirms that the
process of stratification in educational attainment in the area shows a stronger tendency of ‘cultural reproduction’ than ‘economic reproduction’. This does not mean that parental economic support has no significant effect on children’s educational attainment. Indeed, Table 3.3 shows a significant effect of economic support on children’s educational attainment, as measured by the effect of father’s occupation. Nevertheless, the effect was weaker than that of parental education. This situation is parallel with cultural capital theory (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977) which emphasizes the role of cultural capital as a socialization force, which determines educational achievement. One of the reasons was that in Indonesia, as was mentioned earlier, the education system was highly subsidized, so that the economic constraints (emphasized by Boudon, 1974) were reduced, and the role of cultural resource was more decisive in the school achievement process. Therefore, a higher explanatory power of ‘cultural capital’ than economic capital seems to be partly caused by the government’s intervention on school supply.
In regard to the debate on the relative importance between cultural capital and economic capital, human capital theory seems to be insensitive. Human capital theory seems to generalize the issue as the ‘demand’ for education at the household level without considering the relative importance between parental ‘cultural resources’, such as education and ‘economic resources’, such as occupation (Becker, 1975:64-75). Human capital theory also played a part in explaining the educational attainment in the area, because there were significant differences in educational attainment between male and female, rural and urban, single and married youth. Nevertheless, since human capital theory does not explain the role of education in the social system, this theory appears to be inadequate. On the other hand, reproduction theory or cultural capital theory does explain the issue, when differentials in educational attainment between children with different
parental background, sex, marital status and place of birth are regarded as efforts to reproduce the social system. This theory appears to be more adequate in explaining the issue. Social system also appears to be maintained through sex differentials in the subjects of study and chance to have non-formal education.