IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v21y2016i1p65-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘My mother thought upper secondary school was OK, but then my sibling said no’ - Young People's Perceptions of the Involvement of Parents and Siblings in their Future Choices

Author

Listed:
  • Sanna Aaltonen

Abstract

This paper seeks to contribute to the research on the role of the family in the educational decision-making of young people by highlighting two overlooked areas of study: vocational education and the role of siblings. It explores young, mainly working-class Finnish 15- to 17-year-olds’ future expectations and decision-making processes concerning the choice between the academic and vocational tracks by drawing on interviews with the young participants of targeted support programmes and their parents. The aim of the paper is to shed light both on how parents try to influence their children's post-school choices and on young people's perceptions of the influence that parents and older brothers and sisters had on their aspirations towards vocational education. The paper demonstrates how horizons for action and educational choices are influenced by family traditions and advice, but that the pieces of advice dispensed by parents and siblings are not necessarily in congruence with each other. The familial suggestions work as a point of reference which is acknowledged and reflected on in the young people's process of mapping and recognising their own preferences. The paper suggests that while the goals of parents and older siblings would not necessarily be upward mobility, but rather to help young people to make a decent choice within a sector corresponding to their own, it is important to acknowledge their influence as a resource valued by many young people.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanna Aaltonen, 2016. "‘My mother thought upper secondary school was OK, but then my sibling said no’ - Young People's Perceptions of the Involvement of Parents and Siblings in their Future Choices," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 21(1), pages 65-76, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:21:y:2016:i:1:p:65-76
    DOI: 10.5153/sro.3850
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5153/sro.3850
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5153/sro.3850?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:21:y:2016:i:1:p:65-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.