Class Inequality and Egalitarian Reform

Major studies of recruitment to higher education find the association with class to be stable over time, and on this basis conclude that egalitarian reforms have been ineffective. In contrast, measures of inequality for the same data show the distribution of attractive positions to have evened out considerably. The difference in results is explained by how the two sets of measures are affected by changes in the marginals of the class-education table, in particular the increased provision of higher education. It is argued that measures of inequality are more relevant for the question of the effectiveness of reform than measures of association, whether linear or loglinear.