Ifo and TUM study: German childcare centres replied less often to Turkish-sounding surnames
In an experiment with identical emails to German childcare centres, 66% replied to Turkish-sounding surnames versus 71% for German ones, the authors report.
Researchers from the Ifo Institute, the Technical University of Munich (TUM), the Leibniz Institute for Economic Research Halle (IWH) and the German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW) found that parents with Turkish-sounding surnames have a harder time finding a childcare place in Germany, spiegel.de reports. spiegel.de
spiegel.despiegel.deOpen source ↗ The team sent identical emails to childcare centres; only the parents' surnames differed, according to a statement from the institutions.
About 71 percent of centres replied to inquiries with German-sounding names, against about 66 percent for Turkish-sounding names. The authors call the difference statistically highly significant.
Experiment design
In March 2021, emails from fictitious parents were sent to more than 22,000 centres with places for children under three. Around 18,700 were delivered successfully, and each centre received only one email. In total, 12,547 inquiries were answered. Whether the sender had a German- or Turkish-sounding surname was determined at random, so differences in replies can be traced directly to the name.
Results and explanations
The group with Turkish-sounding surnames was offered a concrete place about 20 percent less often. Replies to them were also shorter and less helpful. spiegel.de
spiegel.despiegel.deOpen source ↗
In districts where the experiment showed stronger disadvantage, the share of children with a migration background among childcare children is lower. The inequality persisted even when parents with Turkish-sounding surnames indicated a university degree in their email signature. Co-author Philipp Lergetporer of TUM said this argues against the differences being explained solely by assumptions about families' education level.
Study author Henning Hermes of Ifo noted that many centre managers allocate a scarce number of places under heavy staff and time pressure. In his words, someone short of time may reply first to families from whom they expect less effort. Co-author Simon Wiederhold of IWH said more childcare staff and central, transparent registration procedures would probably make access fairer. Co-author Frauke Peter of DZHW said the childcare centre is the first building block of an educational path, and unequal chances at entry can carry through to university.
