Social mobility is the degree to which, in a given society, an individual's social status can change throughout the course of his or her life, or the degree to which that individual's offspring and subsequent generations move up and down the class system. The former can be understood as intragenerational mobility, and the latter as intergenerational mobility. The level of mobility within a society is reflective of the opportunities available, how equal those opportunities are distributed, and how much class origin plays in this. The amount of mobility in a society is a major index of the degree of its openness', indicating how far talented individuals born into lower strata can move up the economic ladder. (Giddens, 23)
[...] “Sorokin remarks that if he had to believe in the existence of a permanent trend in mobility, it would be a declining one, since the social strata are observed to become more ‘closed' over time as the cumulative result of those in superior positions using their power and advantage to restrict entry from below.” (Erikson & Goldthorpe, 347) Some analysts have concluded that there is no mobility trend whatsoever. therefore, the variability and complexity of the determination of the structural contexts of mobility is appreciated, the extent to which the movement of absolute rates over time appears as merely trendless can no longer be found especially surprising.” (Erikson & Goldthorpe, 364) Erikson and Goldthorpe conclude that there appears to be some increase in broad mobility flow associated with industrialization, but they have found these trends to be rarely continuous over time and the timing varied between nations. [...]
[...] However, they do conclude that this is a future possibility. assertion that overall pattern of social mobility appears to be much the same in the industrial societies of various western countries' (Lipset & Zetterberg 1959, 13) is clearly wrong, but, if trends in the development of class structures are maintained, then, despite the large differences between them in their patterns of fluidity, the countries of Europe may yet prove Lipset and Zetterberg's assertion true.” (Breen & Luijkx, 403) Although Glass admitted a trend existed, but even this was limited. [...]
[...] (Erikson & Goldthorpe, 346) The conventional wisdom has markedly been that social mobility is on the rise. Is this often-cited detail based in fact or fiction? “Confident references to increasing mobility ring loud and clear in contemporary commentary, and have done so for twenty years or more. However, the evidence from the surveys around and 1970 do not confirm this assumption. It suggests no change in substance in the amount of movement up and down the social scale ”(Westgard & Resler, 314) The future of social mobility direction and development is uncertain. [...]
[...] Some studies infer that social mobility is on the rise; others claim it is falling, and still others claim there to be no pattern. Many academics and researchers claim mobility to be on the rise. Breen and Luijkx assert this rise following a comprehensive comparative study contrasting and evaluating eleven nations and the levels of fluidity over time. results from our eleven countries then point to a fairly clear conclusion : there is a widespread tendency for social fluidity to increase (Breen & Luijkx, 389) One explanation for rising mobility is the transition of societies as well as an alteration in the types of occupations in demand. [...]
[...] The general debate is one that attempts to determine if the formative factors are genetic, psychological or cultural. “What is less clear is the extent to which the relationships between education and income are casual, in other words whether ‘money matters' or whether it is that richer families produce more educated children because parental education, motivation and other aspects of family culture differ.” (Blanden & Gregg, 12) Common belief is that mobility has risen in the West. is a widespread assumption that Western societies today allow for a great deal more movement of individuals up and down the socioeconomic ladder than they used to, say, a hundred, fifty, or just thirty years ago.” (Westgard & Resler, 279) Is this assumption true? [...]
using our reader.