Early school leavers: Intersectionality in the Icelandic Youth Research Survey

Abstract

Early school leaving from upper secondary education remains one of the most pressing challenges facing education systems worldwide. In Iceland, dropout levels remain high compared to other OECD countries, with around one in five students leaving upper secondary education without completing it in recent years. The consequences of dropout are significant for individuals, who face reduced access to employment, lower lifetime earnings and fewer educational opportunities. This study aimed to expand the current understanding of upper secondary school dropout in Iceland by examining how social and economic factors shape young people’s likelihood of leaving school and their visions for the future, while also considering the role of gender through an intersectional, feminist framework. The study used data from the Icelandic Youth Research Survey conducted in the summer of 2022, which included 878 participants aged 18–24. The sample was stratified into two groups: those currently enrolled in or having completed upper secondary education (“in-school group”, n = 602) and those who had never enrolled or had withdrawn without completing upper secondary education (“dropout group”, n = 272). Logistic regression analyses was used to examine the predictive value of financial background, parental education, parental encouragement and gender on dropout likelihood. Furthermore, chi-square tests and effect size measures were used to examine differences in the two groups’ future outlook. Findings confirmed well-established gender disparities: boys were significantly more likely to have dropped out (40.1%) than girls (19.3%). However, the authors emphasise that gender alone does not explain dropout risk. Financial and social resources were powerful predictors. Young people who reported strong financial support were least likely to have left school. In contrast, those with weaker financial backing were far more likely to belong to the dropout group, demonstrating that economic security remains a key enabler of educational continuity. Similarly, parental education was strongly associated with dropout. When both parents held university degrees, the dropout likelihood was only 15.4%. In contrast, when neither parent had higher education, the probability increased to 39.5%. These findings align with theories of cultural capital, suggesting that families with higher levels of education are better equipped to guide children through the school system and instil academic expectations. Parental encouragement also emerged as a significant factor: participants who reported receiving little support during compulsory education were considerably more likely to have left school later on. Notably, encouragement itself was socially stratified, i.e. students with strong financial backing or university-educated parents were far more likely to recall high levels of parental support, suggesting that advantage clusters within families and compounds over time. The study additionally explored how social inequalities shape students’ imagined futures. When asked about optimism, dropout participants were less likely to report having recently felt hopeful about the future, and fewer believed they would have a job they enjoyed by age 30. Although gender differences were less pronounced in future expectations among girls, boys in the dropout group were significantly less optimistic than boys still in school. The authors interpret these outcomes through the lens of critical futurity, arguing that schooling not only influences present access to learning but also shapes the futures young people are encouraged, or discouraged, to imagine as possible for themselves. Grounded in feminist theories of intersectionality, the study challenges simplified narratives that portray dropout chiefly as a problem among boys. While boys are over-represented in dropout statistics, girls and gender-diverse youth experience their own pathways to marginalisation, including barriers related to vocational education access, caregiving expectations, discrimination in work-based learning and limited visibility in public discourse around dropout. The authors argue that education systems are not neutral; they are structured around existing social hierarchies that can reinforce inequalities for young people whose identities, resources and families differ from the norms schools implicitly privilege. Overall, the results show that dropout in Iceland cannot be understood solely as an individual choice or a matter of academic performance but must be considered within a broader social context. Financial, cultural and emotional support from home – deeply intertwined with gender and social class – shape whether students remain and succeed in upper secondary education, and how they view their own futures. The study concludes that policy measures aimed at reducing dropout must not only target academic outcomes, but actively dismantle systemic barriers that limit belonging, support and opportunity for marginalised groups. Doing so is essential to creating an equitable school environment where all young people can imagine and pursue fulfilling futures.