« Call for Your Voice to Be Heard | Main | Los Angeles School District Cracking the Whip »
July 10, 2007
Education in Terms of Social Justice
Place yourself back in First Grade. Given the chance to choose any of the following options for your personal schooling, select the education you would like to receive for the greatest chance of success later in life:
A. Washington, District of Columbia inner city public schools
B. Los Angeles, California inner city public schools
C. Chicago, Illinois inner city public schools
D. none of the above
Was your answer D? According to John Rawls’ theory of “Justice as Fairness,” if those schools are not suitable for you in theory, then they are not suitable for low-income children in practice.
Every child in the inner city public schools has very limited opportunity. What you see is what you get. Think about this multiple choice question from your perspective. You can’t go back and change the place or the time you were born, and because of your environment and your family’s economic and social status, you had absolutely no control over the educational opportunities available to you. This is what Rawls referred to as the “lottery” – economic, social, educational opportunity is a matter of chance; a very small number of people win the lottery, and an unbelievably large number of people lose. While many contest Rawls’ philosophy, it is hugely influential in left-of-center thinking.
For a moment, put yourself behind this “veil of ignorance” in which you cannot determine the school you attend. Without knowing the odds or whether you might end up a Rockefeller or in the slums, you (and everyone else) would work a little harder to make sure that if you end up on the bottom rung, that ladder is not greased down by neglected school districts, underpaid teachers and minimalist resources.
This approach to looking at the most underprivileged school districts is non-partisan and unaffiliated with any political powerhouse – it is fact. Politicians and administrators are unable to reflect positively on such situations as:
low income children are six times more likely to drop out of school (NCES)
low-income children master basic reading skills under half the average rate
low-income children have higher rates of illiteracy
students learning from D teachers learn 50% less than from A teachers
We are called to a two-fold action: expand school choice options for all parents and completely overhaul the resource development and compensation system for teachers.
The status-quo has divorced teacher compensation, promotion and retention from any recognition of merit. We now have the ability to judge and recognize teacher performance fairly, on a value-added basis. Schools have an enormous potential to improve if they will truly treat talented teachers as professionals rather than factory workers.
Likewise, our limited experiments with parental choice mechanisms have shown an ability to improve education for both those choosing to leave, and those choosing to stay.
Answer one final multiple choice question.
Place yourself back in Twelfth Grade. Given the chance to choose any of the following options for your personal schooling, select the education you would like to receive for the greatest chance of success later in life:
A. Ivy League
B. Any Top University
C. The Perfect Match, Post-Secondary School for Your Learning Abilities and Future Goals
D. any of the above is fine
Was your answer D?
Here is the ultimate question.
What needs to happen to reform our educational system such that any child who began with the first multiple choice question would be able to have the final multiple choice question?
Answer: by putting student interests first. Until we do so, the lottery will remained fixed against disadvantaged children.
Matthew Ladner is Vice President of Research at the Goldwater Institute
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.edspresso.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/1558
