Specific Features of Children Involvement in Supplementary Education Depending on Cultural, Educational and Financial Status of Families and Place of Living

Sergey Kosaretsky, Boris Kupriyanov and Darya Filippova
Additional contact information
Sergey Kosaretsky: http://www.hse.ru/en/org/persons/447250
Authors registered in the RePEc Author Service: Sergey Gennadievich Kosaretski

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, 2016, issue 1, 168-190

Abstract: Sergey Kosaretsky - Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, Director, Center of Social and Economic School Development, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: skosaretski@hse.ruBoris Kupriyanov - Doctor of Sciences in Pedagogy, Analyst, Center of Social and Economic School Development, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: boriskuprianoff2012@yandex.ruDaria Filippova - Analyst, Center of Social and Economic School Development, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: skosaretski@hse.ruThis paper presents research results on children involvement in supplementary education. This research was conducted by NRU HSE in partnership with Levada Center as part of the 2013 Education Markets and Organizations Monitoring. The survey covered over 2,000 parents of school students involved in supplementary education provided by various institutions. Correlations between some parameters of student involvement in supplementary education (the rate and continuity/discontinuity of services' consumption; the choice of supplementary education programs' and institutions' types; the place of supplementary education in the structure of free time and holidays) and family characteristics (place of living, financial status, cultural and educational background) are analyzed. Some solutions are suggested on how to overcome difficulties produced by differences in policies and the real situation in the field of supplementary education. For instance, authors claim that national policies oriented at children from vulnerable socioeconomic backgrounds and those living in rural areas should be a combination of two instruments: informational (raising parental awareness of and motivation for their children supplementary education), and socially supportive to disadvantaged families (introducing certificates for supplementary education services; setting quotas for public-funded places in high-quality supplementary education programs; targeted financing of supplementar y education programs in rural schools and schools for difficult students).DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2016-1-168-190

Keywords: supplementary education; spare time; educational inequality; accessibility of education services; cultural capital; educational policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://vo.hse.ru/data/2016/05/10/1129069137/Kosaretsky%20EN_1.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nos:voprob:2016:i:1:p:168-190

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow from National Research University Higher School of Economics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Marta Morozova ().