Working-class researchers have more to prove

“Academics from working-class backgrounds are a very select group,” says researcher Maria Keil.

She works at Leuphana University of Lüneburg and has published a study on the impact of social class background on the careers of German academics. When Keil examined which researchers struggled most in their careers, the findings were surprising: conformist researchers from a middle-class background.

The study is based on interviews with 26 researchers from across Germany, mainly postdoctoral researchers and professors. (Read more in the fact box.)

The few academics from a working-class background who made it so far were often able to thrive and establish a distinctive profile in academia.

“Some had been fighting for their education ever since primary school, and, as a result, they had developed self-confidence and an awareness of what they knew and could do.”

“This gave them resources that later helped them to find their place in academia,” says Keil.

Like fish out of water throughout their careers?

Keil explains that we already know a great deal about inequality and access to higher education.

“But we know far less about what happens afterwards.”

Research has shown that first-generation students – students whose parents have not completed higher education – often feel like ‘fish out of water’. Keil was keen to find out whether this experience also held true for people from a working-class background who managed to remain in academia.

Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of ‘habitus’ was a focal point in the debate.

“It’s about the very way we exist in the world. It’s about how we speak, how we think – adaptations that impact how we navigate the academic world.”

Keil found Bourdieu’s concept of the ‘ideal academic habitus’ particularly interesting.

“There is an idea of how academics should express themselves. The ideal academic is sophisticated, charismatic, highly skilled at engaging students and is perceived as intellectual.”

She wanted to test the theory empirically, and asked: What characterises the dispositional patterns of the most productive researchers?

Explained their careers in reverse

In the interviews, the researchers were asked to look back on their careers. From primary school, through higher education and into academia.

“How did the researchers build networks? What was their approach to publishing and applying for research funding?”

After the interviews, the participants completed a short questionnaire. Information about their parents’ education and occupations, was then used to define their social class.

Keil also obtained the researchers’ academic CVs.

“I used the CVs to understand the position the participants actually held in their fields. Did they have a lot of academic capital? What were their publishing patterns?”

For the postdoctoral researchers, this could also indicate their prospects of securing a permanent professorship. The interviews provided insight into the strategies the researchers had chosen, while the CVs were used to assess how successful those strategies had been within their respective fields.

Random adaptation? Hardly.

In the material, Keil identified three patterns that summarised how the researchers approached and navigated academia in relation to their own class background.

She calls the first one an ‘adaptive pattern’. It was particularly associated with researchers from upper-middle-class and upper-class backgrounds. They were familiar with the unwritten rules and were good at adapting to different areas of academia.

“They have a feel for the game and know the rules. They know what the ideal academic disposition – the habitus – looks like in different fields of research and can adapt accordingly. They found the right networks, presented their work at the right conferences and published in the right journals.”

“That’s how both the researchers and their research gained visibility in their field,” says Keil.

The adaptive researchers also often described their academic path as being rather random or ‘natural’ for their group.

“It just happened. However, this portrayal obscures the hard work and strategy that actually lie behind it,” according to Keil.

Conformity didn’t work in the long run

A more surprising finding concerned researchers from the middle class. Many of them started out with what sociologists call high cultural capital.

“These were people who had done very well at school, had been supported by their parents and teachers, and had come a step further in their education than their parents.”

Nonetheless, some of them found themselves stagnating in academia. They followed a line of reasoning that had worked well while they were studying, but which wasn’t necessarily rewarded in the academic labour market. They were ‘conformist’, as Keil puts it.

“Their way of thinking was that ‘if I do a good job, do as my supervisor says and what my supervisor asks of me, I will eventually be rewarded’,” explains Keil.

What they lacked was what Keil calls ‘self-entrepreneurship’.

“To succeed as a researcher, you need to be able to present yourself, build an independent profile and position yourself strategically.”

“The idea that you can stay in one organisation, do everything you’re told, and then get promoted simply doesn’t work in the German academic labour market.”

Turned resistance into a strength

Keil found the third, ‘resistant’, pattern to be most evident among academics from working-class backgrounds. According to Keil, this was a highly select group.

“These people had really fought hard for their education and their academic careers. Some had even experienced family crises or had literally left their families in order to continue their education. They could, for example, be people from a farming background who were expected to take over the farm.”

Keil explains that people from this background are usually filtered out as early as upper secondary education, and particularly during the transition to higher education.

“As they had already begun to challenge class barriers while at school, they were later well equipped to navigate the academic world and find their place within it.”

Their journey into academia turned out to be a positive experience:

“Perhaps they realised that they were well-educated, intellectually or naturally curious, and very good at acquiring knowledge. This gave them the resources they needed to find their place in academia and continue to develop, against all statistical odds.”

Discrimination against women

In the study, Keil interviewed both women and men.

“How were the various patterns – such as the conformist pattern – linked to other social factors, such as gender and ethnicity?”

“Gender obviously plays a part in who gets a permanent position,” Keil replies.

In a number of contexts, female academics found themselves being discriminated against simply because they might become mothers. They had to accomplish more to be taken as seriously as their male colleagues.

“One factor that comes into play here, and which may be similar to the situation in Norway, is that when women have children, they are often away from academia for a while. And women are usually away for longer than the child’s father.”

“This reduces the productivity and visibility of female academics, and is a consequence they have to deal with in academia.”

A Norwegian study reveals a different pattern

“The study’s findings make logical sense,” says Marte Mangset, a professor at the Department of Sociology and Human Geography at the University of Oslo.

She has conducted research on social class in Norwegian academia. In a 2024 study, she and Julia Orupabo interviewed 60 academics at the early or mid-stage of their careers, from a variety of class backgrounds. They looked at the strategies the researchers used to succeed.

The pattern they found was more conventional:

“If you came from a working-class background, it was harder to succeed,” says Mangset.

The study was qualitative and therefore does not provide a representative picture. Nevertheless, researchers from middle-class backgrounds were generally better placed to pursue a career in academia.

“They had more resources to cope with the uncertainty – both psychological and financial – that comes with being an academic. It takes a long time to find a permanent job,” Mangset points out.

They also found that having academics in the family was an advantage.

“It made it easier to understand what the ‘game’ was all about. They became aware earlier that there was a game to be played. That you should publish in certain journals and apply for funding in certain ways. All of this comes on top of to having to excel in your own field.”

“Not enough just to be good”

“The other researchers, who didn’t have the same advantages, found that being good in just one area wasn’t enough. By the time they realised they hadn’t played the game, it was too late. They had fallen behind,” says Mangset.

Nor was the decision to pursue an academic career equally well received in all circles.

“You don’t get filthy rich working in academia, and many people are a fair age before they get a permanent job. Many people from working-class backgrounds felt greater external pressure to justify their decision to remain in academia as a meaningful choice.”

“Did you find any link between social class and gender?”

“This issue of justifying the decision to become a researcher came up among both genders, not least among men.”

“There were quite a few men from working-class backgrounds. They didn’t say it explicitly, but there was a sort of expectation hanging over them to be ‘the male breadwinner’, i.e. the main provider.”

“It became difficult for them to cope with the uncertain financial situation. Some people found it hard simply because they felt a strong sense of responsibility towards their family,” says Mangset.

Tough times in Germany

“Keil, isn’t the academic system a bit different in Germany?”

“Well, yes, Germany does have a rather distinctive academic system. It is characterised by a lot of temporary employment. Many people take a PhD because it often pays off in the labour market outside academia.”

At the same time, almost no permanent positions are available once you’ve completed your PhD, according to Keil.

“Only professorships – and there aren’t many of those either, so there’s a lot of competition," she says.

Believes temporary positions are also a class issue

“Is there anything we can or should do to counter these trends and support vulnerable groups? Or is this just part of the game, and you just have to play along?”

“A bit of both, I would say. One important point I think we should bear in mind is the uncertainty in the labour market. In Germany, there is a real dearth of permanent positions. And in countries like the UK, attention has been drawn to a trend of more temporary and uncertain positions in academia,” says Keil.

“In another publication, I argue that this uncertainty reinforces the significance of social class. The more precarious the situation, the more important economic capital becomes.”

Translated by Totaltekst.