What you study in school shapes your voting choices in adulthood

Across Europe, education has become one of the biggest dividing lines in politics, and educational qualifications are now one of the best predictors of vote choice in Britain. This is particularly the case for new parties that compete more on cultural issues, including Reform and the Greens, who attract voters from different ends of the educational spectrum.

In the most recent UK general election in July 2024, 18% of voters with no formal qualifications voted for Reform – two and half times as many as among those with a degree. On the flip side, degree-holders were three times as likely to vote for the Green party than those without qualifications.

Our study shows that the link between education and politics starts far earlier than degree level, however. We’ve found that what you study at school affects your political choices both in adolescence and adulthood.

We looked at the political views of young people aged ten to 18, and then followed them into their 20s. Young people who were studying humanities subjects in school, namely history and art, became more likely to support more socially liberal parties.

Those studying a technical GCSE subject, such as design and technology, became more supportive of more radical right parties. Given that we see this pattern before students leave school, it can’t only be explained by socialisation in the workplace, which makes us think that at least part of the association emerges in school.

Taking a GCSE in business studies meanwhile meant that someone became more economically rightwing in their vote intention. When they were 16 and had finished their GCSE in business studies, these young people were two percentage points more likely to say they’d vote for the Conservatives than when they’d started at age 14. This might seem small, but small differences add up over the course of a person’s life.

People develop their political orientations during adolescence, so parental socialisation of course matters a great deal. But much of those formative years is also spent in the classroom. And a student of history encounters different ideas and develops different skills to one studying physics – even if they both eventually end up with the same number of GCSEs or A-levels, or a university degree.

For instance, a physics class might focus on the scientific marvel of splitting the atom and nuclear power, whilst a history student would consider the catastrophic effects of these weapons in the second world war. As a result, the history student and the physics student might emerge from their studies with different perspectives on the world, which might ultimately lead them to support different parties.

It’s unlikely that these findings relate to teachers indoctrinating students into supporting particular parties or ideologies. It’s more likely that certain subjects that focus on different human experiences – such as history or art – might lead students to recognise the importance of a variety of perspectives, and so be more favourable towards socially liberal parties. Likewise, studying economics might incline a young person to support a party that champions free markets.

Alternatively, it could be explained by the differing peer groups across these subjects, whereby the attitudes held when students select into these subject are mutually reinforced.

We also found that the differences we identified persisted in early adulthood, long after school had finished. Adults who had taken drama, music, art or history were more likely to vote for socially liberal parties such as the Greens or Liberal Democrats.

Some of these differences were very large in adulthood, even when we adjusted for other factors that might explain them, like overall educational attainment and income. For example, an adult who had taken an A-level in economics or business studies was 14 percentage points more likely to support the Conservative Party and six points less likely to support Labour than someone who had not.

It’s also notable that students who took any of history, geography, foreign languages or religious studies were more engaged in politics. They were more likely to name a party they would vote for, rather than saying they wouldn’t vote.

Our findings may add a different angle to debates about curriculum reform. Recent governments have favoured increasing participation in STEM subjects, often to the detriment of subjects like the creative arts and languages. Our study suggests that this might in turn have consequences for young people’s politics.

Either way, our results show that what you learn in school is likely to shape your world view beyond the classroom.

Ralph Scott currently receives funding from the Leverhulme Trust and his research was previously funded by the ESRC.

Nicole Martin and Roland Kappe do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.