IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03726195.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Geisteswissenschaften ? Vergleich zwischen selektiven und nicht selektiven Bachelorstudiengängen
[Is selection at university entrance a guarantee of further study ? Comparison between selective and non-selective degrees in the Humanities]

Author

Listed:
  • Mathieu Rossignol-Brunet

    (CERTOP - Centre d'Etude et de Recherche Travail Organisation Pouvoir - UT2J - Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès - UT - Université de Toulouse - UT3 - Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier - UT - Université de Toulouse - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Die in den Bachelorstudiengängen beobachteten „Durchfallquoten" machen die Zulassungsbeschränkungen zu einem verlockenden Instrument, um zu versuchen, Abhilfe zu schaffen. Am Beispiel der selektiven geisteswissenschaftlichen Studiengänge (Kunst, Literatur, Sprachen, Geisteswissenschaften) wird gezeigt, dass die Auswahl zu einer Diversifizierung der zugelassenen Studierenden hinsichtlich ihrer sozialen Herkunft, aber auch hinsichtlich ihres schulischen Profils führt. Es sind vielmehr die Unterschiede zwischen den schulischen Einrichtungen, als der Selektionseffekt, die erklären, warum Studierende, die in selektiven Bachelor-Studiengängen zugelassen werden, eher in ihrem Zulassungsfach bleiben und häufiger das 3. Studienjahr abschließen als Studierende, die in einem nicht selektiven Bachelor aufgenommen werden.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathieu Rossignol-Brunet, 2022. "Geisteswissenschaften ? Vergleich zwischen selektiven und nicht selektiven Bachelorstudiengängen [Is selection at university entrance a guarantee of further study ? Comparison between selective and," Post-Print hal-03726195, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03726195
    DOI: 10.4000/formationemploi.10729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:hal:journl:hal-03726195. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.