Skip to main content
Log in

The questionable role of higher education as an occupational screening device

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Employers optimally pursue activities which facilitate the coordinating of employee characteristics and the requirements of the job. One allegedly important employee characteristic is the level of education. Employees with higher levels of education are rewarded with higher wages than employees with lower levels. This may occur if higher levels of education make an employee truly more productive or if because of an employer's beliefs only those individuals with higher levels of education are allowed to enter the higher paying positions (occupational screening).

The above propositions are testable, depending crucially upon the theoretical model employed for determining occupational choices. We shall compare the implications of two possible occupation choice models: (1) enter the job which offers the highest lifetime income, (2) enter the job which offers the highest level of overall satisfaction. We estimate these two models using the NBER-TH data sample. By distributing our estimated results and the actual distribution of occupations over the education levels of high school, some college and BA we can see if more or less people are expected to enter specific occupations at each education level. Support for screening exists if more people are expected in high status occupations at low education levels than are actually in those occupations.

When comparing the estimated results for each model we see different outcomes emerge. The latter indicates that screening does not exist while the former does. We present arguments as to why we feel that the second model is the more correct and appropriate and, consequently, why we feel that education is not an effective screening device.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arrow, K. (1972). “Higher Education as a Filter.” Paper presented at La Paz Conference, June.

  • Becker, G. (1964). Human Capital. N.Y.: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, S. (1972). “Schooling and Inequality from Generation to Generation,” Journal of Political Economy, May/June, Part II.

  • Chiswick, B. (1973). “Schooling, Screening, and Income,” in Taubman, P. and Solmon, L. (eds.) Does College Matter? New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, G. (1974). “Nonpecuniary Work Rewards,” Five Thousand American Families, Vol. II. Michigan: Survey Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. and W. Mason (1972). “Education, Income, and Ability,” Journal of Political Economy, May/June, Part II.

  • Haspel, A. (1974). Occupational Decision Making: A Socioeconomic Analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

  • Haspel, A. and P. Taubman (1975). “The Choice of Occupations: Some Empirical Evidence,” mimeo.

  • Henderson, J. and R. Quandt (1971). Microeconomic Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jencks, C. (1972). Inequality. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layard, R. and G. Psacharopoulos (1974). “The Screening Hypothesis and the Return to Education,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 82, No. 5.

  • Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, Experience and Earnings. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgenstern, R. (1973). “Direct and Indirect Effects on Earnings of Schooling and SES,” Review of Economics and Statistics, May.

  • Rees, A. (1961). Occupations and Social Status. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1957). Selections from the Wealth of Nations, G. Stigler (ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, L. (1973). “The Definition and Impact of College Quality,” in Taubman, P. and Solomon, L. (eds.) Does College Matter? New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, M. (1973). “Job Market Signalling,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August.

  • Taubman, P. (1975). Sources of Inequality and Earnings. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taubman, P. and T. Wales (1974). Higher Education: An Investment and a Screening Device. New York: NBER. (McGraw-Hill, Inc.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. and S. Rosen (1974). “The Value of Saving a Life: Evidence from the Labor Market.” University of Rochester Discussion Paper 74-2.

  • Theil, H. (1971). Principles of Econometrics. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, R. and E. Hagen (1959). Ten Thousand Careers. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinbergen, J. (1959). “On the Theory of Income Distribution,” Jan Tinbergen - Selected Papers. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiles, P. (1974). “The Correlation between Education and Earnings: The External Test-Not-Content Hypothesis (ETNC),” Higher Education, 3: 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zavoina, W. and R. McKelvey (1969). “A Statistical Model for the Analysis of Legislative Voting Behavior.” Paper presented at the 1969 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, NYC, September.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haspel, A.E. The questionable role of higher education as an occupational screening device. High Educ 7, 279–294 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139527

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139527

Keywords

Navigation