Educational Equality

Taking equality seriously means that we ought to consider the ways in which persons are not only unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged from the start – e.g., through genetic inheritance, wealth, or a parent’s educational background – but also how opportunities and rewards that result from these basic inequalities are later exacerbated in the distribution of goods and opportunities. The basic point of equality as a normative principle is not that everyone have similar things or achieve similar outcomes, that would be undesirable both for reasons having to do with individual liberty as well as social need.

This Report of a Committee of Experts chaired by Justice Dr. Saleem Marsoof, and consisting of Senior Professor Janitha A Liyanage, Ven. Professor Magammana Paññananda Thero, Rev. Dr. Benet Shantha Fernando, Senior Professor Narada Warnasuriya, Dr. Chandra Embuldeniya and Mr. Prasantha Lal De Alwis PC, was submitted to the University Grants Commission of Sri Lanka (UGC) on 31st August 2020. The Report was titled, “Redressing Victims of Ragging & Providing a Regulatory Mechanism to Prevent Ragging Related Abusive Conduct in Sri Lankan State Universities and Higher Educational Institutions”.
Every intake of students to Sri Lankan state universities and other institutions of higher learning have in one way or another highlighted the breakdown of value system and discipline in our society through an increasingly phenomenal menace called “ragging”.  The enactment by the Parliament of Sri Lanka of legislation entitled the Prohibition of Ragging and Other Forms of Violence in Educational Institutions Act No. 20 of 1998 has not succeeded in curtailing this phenomenon. Despite the enactment of legislation, during the first two decades of the new millennium we continued to hear of new entrant students dying or suffering serious injuries due to ragging or related violence. Many students have reportedly dropped out of these state universities and higher educational institutions, and many other eligible students have refrained from opting to study in these institutions due to ragging related abusive conduct. This has not only adversely affected the students and their families, but also deprived the state of valuable human potential that could have been harnessed for national development.
It is in these circumstances that on the instructions of the then Minister of Higher Education, Hon. Dr. Bandula Gunawardana, this Committee was appointed by the University Grants Commission (UGC) by its letter dated 31st January 2020 to specifically address the issue of providing appropriate relief to students who have been deprived of their education due to ragging in state universities and higher educational institutions coming within the purview of the UGC during the academic year 2014/2015 onwards. This Committee was also required to propose a regulatory mechanism to prevent ragging to ensure that the affected students do not suffer the same fate when re-admitted to an academic institution. The initial reporting period of 3 months was extended by another 3 months due to the advent of Covid-19 which affected the work of the Committee, and the Report of the Committee was handed over to the Chairman of the UGCV on 31st August 2020 withing the said reporting period.

In this paper I present and defend a highly demanding principle of justice in education that has not been seriously discussed thus far. According to the suggested approach, “all the way equality”, justice in education requires nothing short of equal educational outcome between all individual students. This means not merely between equally able children, or between children from different groups and classes, but rather between all children, regardless of social background, race, sex and ability. This approach may seem implausible at first, due to the far-reaching implications it entails, primarily its requirement to deny better-off children their advantage for the sake of equality. However the paper argues that all-the-way-equality, in fact, does a better job realizing the goals of justice in education than alternative conceptions of justice. It is further argued that at least some of the principle’s most radical consequences, those that make it seem counterintuitive, can be mitigated by balancing all-the-way-equality with competing interests.

The aim of this article is to present an overview and a comparison of the Greek and German educational systems from an educational and sociological perspective. It purports to provide a synopsis of the educational systems pointing to areas of convergence and divergence. It especially emphasizes on two aspects of educational policy: tracking or ability grouping and the teaching of foreign languages. The choice of these features was determined by the fact that they are linked to the issue of equality of educational opportunities and participation in globalized knowledge societies. The article is organized in the following way. First, it presents the educational system in Germany. This is followed by a description of the Greek educational system. Finally, we present a comparison of the educational systems in these two countries, pointing to areas of convergence and divergence and focusing on the potential of the educational systems to address the issue of educational equality.

In this chapter I argue that school desegregation efforts face difficult challenges given the sorts of tensions that arise between the exercise of individual liberty and the social aims of equality. I challenge the idea that educational integration is necessarily the best way to improve equality by considering the case for voluntary separation.

Confronting persistent and widening inequality in educational opportunity, advocates have regarded the right to education as a linchpin for reform. In the forty years since the Supreme Court relegated that right to the domain of state constitutional law, its power has surged and faded in litigation challenging state school finance systems. Like so many of the students it is meant to protect, however, the right to education has generally underachieved, in part because those wielding it have not always appreciated its distinctive forms and function. Deconstructed, the right to education held by children has been formulated doctrinally as both a claim-right, imposing affirmative duties on the state to act, and an immunity, disabling certain state action. These two strands — oft-manifested as the claim-right to educational “adequacy” and an immunity entailing “equality” of educational opportunity — once considered irreconcilable are actually interlocked by the right’s core, historical f...

Even when a black public charter school's core mission includes combatting racism and structural oppression – core progressive values – charter publics that serve minority pupils at best elicit ambivalence from white liberals. So what is going on here?

The increasing participation rate in higher education has raised its own issues, such as how to fund the growth while retaining the quality of education. In Finland, it has been argued that the tuition-free higher education policy increases equality. On the other hand, in the United Kingdom, establishing a system of tuition fees supported by an income-contingent loan system for students has also been argued to increase equality. In Australia, students also face high tuition fees for higher education, as well as a support system focused on domestic students. In addition to tuition fees, entrance examinations also play a crucial part in higher education systems. In order to examine inequalities in higher education from the students’ point of view, tuition fees are scrutinised in connection with equality, and entrance examinations in relation to cultural reproduction. Comparing examples of higher music education institutions in Finland, the United Kingdom, and Australia shows that there are large differences between the tuition fees charged for domestic and international students, as well as between countries. Entrance examinations in higher music education are similar in these countries, but may include inequalities based on long traditions in the field of music, especially in classical music. By revealing misconceptions about equity in higher education, it is possible to have a critical debate about the role of tuition fee systems as they are connected with the economics of higher education, and about entrance examinations as reproducing social class inequalities. This discussion may contribute to the redefinition and reformation of more equitable and just education systems, and promote equality in general in society.

In this article we delineate, describe, and defend what we believe are the essential features of selection and also why we need to pay equal attention to both the outcomes and the processes leading to those outcomes. Provided the selection is motivated and guided by the right reasons, as well as appropriately monitored, we argue that selection can be equity promoting.

In 2007, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that 18 Czech Roma primary school children had been unlawfully placed into special schools, designed for "mentally handicapped" children, and were subject to indirect racial discrimination. D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, a landmark piece of strategic litigation, hoped to catalyse tangible Czech educational reform; however, reports persist of Roma educational segregation. Firstly, this study briefly investigates why strategic litigation is an attractive, albeit obstacle-ridden, tool to effect societal reform. The study then conducts an in-depth impact analysis of D.H., focusing on Czech legal reactions and supranational developments and the post-judgment responses of the Czech Roma community. The study concludes that strategic litigation is a potent tool to effect social change but, regarding implementation and obstacles to its use and impact, remains vulnerable if not used in conjunction with extra-legal activism.

Achieving greater equality in education is a goal that commands widespread support in modern liberal democracies. However, educational equality can be understood in many different ways, and there are problems with the dominant interpretations of this ideal. Meritocratic conceptions of educational equality are inadequate because they allow morally arbitrary factors like natural talent to affect educational outcomes. Luck egalitarian approaches encounter a similar objection because allowing children’s choices to influence outcomes also seems inappropriate. These interpretations of educational equality tend to collapse into equality of outcome, an ideal which Tammy Harel Ben-Shahar defends in her 2015 article ‘Equality in Education: Why We Must Go All the Way’. Beyond this article, the ideal of equal educational outcomes has received little theoretical attention, so this topic warrants further consideration.

In this paper I systematically examine whether Harel Ben-Shahar’s account of equal educational outcomes, which she terms ‘all-the-way-equality’ in education, offers a viable alternative to meritocratic and luck egalitarian conceptions of educational equality. I identify a number of problems with pursuing equal outcomes in education and argue that this ideal cannot be theoretically justified. The ideal is fundamentally counter-intuitive, and ignores individual differences. Having established that equal outcomes does not constitute an appealing principle of justice in education, I briefly consider how the problems with existing interpretations can be overcome so that a sound, theoretically justifiable account of educational equality can be developed. I suggest that what matters in education is not having all children achieve equal outcomes, but rather, allowing all children to realise what they’re capable of and to fulfil their potential. This paper makes an important contribution to egalitarian literature by establishing that an ideal of equal outcomes is inappropriate in education, and moves towards a more appealing and defensible account of educational equality that can guide education policy in practice.

Educational equality, and equality of opportunity in particular, is an area of significant discussion in academic literature. Many writers assume a meritocratic understanding of equality of opportunity in education, which requires that all children have an equal opportunity to be educated regardless of their social circumstances or family background. According to the meritocratic perspective, talent and effort can legitimately affect educational opportunities but social circumstances cannot. This paper aims to determine whether the notion of meritocratic equality of opportunity is defensible when it comes to education. One of the difficulties with the meritocratic approach is that it relies on a distinction between social circumstances and natural talent. This paper examines whether such a distinction is theoretically justified in the context of education. The paper considers two intuitively appealing justifications for distinguishing between social and natural factors and identifies some underlying problems with such an approach. Ultimately, the paper aims to establish whether it is legitimate to set aside the issue of natural talent and focus on achieving meritocratic equality of opportunity in education.

In this book I argue that school integration is not a proxy for educational justice.  I demonstrate that the evidence consistently shows the opposite is more typically the case. I then articulate and defend the idea of Voluntary Separation, which describes the effort to redefine, reclaim and redirect what it means to educate under preexisting conditions of segregation. In doing so, I further demonstrate how voluntary separation is consistent with the liberal democratic requirements of equality and citizenship. The position I defend is not opposed to integration but rather is a justified response to the daily experience of frustration and disappointment with a system that has failed members of marginalized groups for too long. I argue that most voluntary separation experiments in education, far from being motivated by a sense of racial, cultural or religious exclusion, are in fact driven among other things by a desire for a quality education, not to mention community membership and self respect. As such, voluntary separation represents a morally robust pragmatic strategy that is able to answer liberal challenges concerning involuntary stratification, ethnocentrism and democratic deliberation.

The COVID-19 pandemic crisis exacerbated inequalities in education. Socio-economic status and geographical location of a student has been an underlying factor behind the educational inequalities in Kazakhstan. According to the Minister of Education and UNICEF Kazakhstan (April 22, 2020) 300,000 children didn’t have access to technology and 7398 schools transitioned to distance learning mode (Information and Analytical Center, 2020). Transitioning to distance learning revealed the digital inequalities in education, such as lack of devices, quality of internet connection, and low digital literacy skills. The pandemic has impacted 1.6 billion students worldwide, affecting 94 percent of the total population of the students and 99 percent of the students from low income families through school closures and transition to remote learning (UN, 2020).

The purpose of this study is to see the impact of COVID-19 for rural schoolchildren in Kazakhstan through an arts-based, community-based research method (CBPR) --photovoice and answer following research question: How did schoolchildren from rural Kazakhstan experience distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Photovoice is one of the qualitative methods utilized in CBPR that allows participants to use photography and their stories to describe and represent challenges they experience (Latz, 2017). In this study, seven schoolchildren from rural Kazakhstan participated as co-researchers and actively engaged in the research processes, such as data collection, analysis and sharing of the findings.

This session will discuss the phenomenon of digital inequality and showcase the process of conducting social justice research to positively impact communities.

In November 2016, Britain's High Court ruled that sex segregation in religious schools is not discriminatory per se and is allowed as long as girls and boys receive education of equal quality. This decision was reversed by the Court of Appeals (CoA) in October 2017. We critique both courts' position on a number of fronts. The High Court was quick to reject, and the CoA quick to dismiss as irrelevant, the similarities between race segregation (deemed inherently unequal) and sex segregation (which is not). The courts were also wrong to dismiss the claim that sex segregation constitutes expressive harm to women in general. We examine whether religious or pedagogical considerations may override the argument against gender segregation, and whether institutional questions (e.g. if the school is private or public or if it is publicly funded) make a difference in this respect, issues not addressed by the courts.

In recent decades political philosophers have increasingly been engaged with the issue of educational justice. The importance of education is widely acknowledged in modern liberal democracies. Education brings a range of benefits to both individuals and societies more broadly, so examining what justice in education requires is crucial. Nevertheless, there is no consensus about how educational justice is best understood or pursued. This paper will examine a number of different, competing conceptions of educational justice. Theorists variously promote the importance of distributive equality, social equality, sufficiency and priority in the educational context. This paper will argue that while many of the existing theories cannot be theoretically justified, elements from each of these ideals are needed if a coherent account of educational justice is to be developed. The paper will propose a pluralist account of educational justice that incorporates various egalitarian, sufficientarian and prioritarian dimensions, and consider how these different dimensions could work together in pursuit of educational justice. The paper argues that a pluralist account of educational justice is much more appealing and theoretically justifiable than existing theories.

The accumulated experience with immigrant children in Spain, and especially in
Catalonia, imply that we have no option but to think about those principles which regulate
the different models addressed to meet diversity and educational equality in schools. The
present article summarizes the main results obtained in the first part of my doctoral studies,
where the different educational models were carried out in Pre-primary and Primary
Education. Thus, the major sociological issue which governed the first part of my PhD
Research was that of analysing how educational programmes carried out in elementary schools
are meeting and understanding foreign students' educational diversity. In this sense, I will deal
with the following four questions throughout this article:
■ What is the origin of such diversity and which are its most relevant pedagogical dimensions?
■ Which diversity elements are identified by educational agents as educational risks for
immigrant students?
■ Which educational differences legitimate social inequality as regards foreign students?
■ What are we suppose to equal concerning foreign students' educational experiences?

This paper presents findings from an action research project that investigated the application of Multiple Intelligences (MI) theory in classrooms and schools. It shows how MI theory was used in the project as a basis for suggestions to generate classroom practices; how participating teachers evaluated the project; and how teachers responded to the professional experience. Teachers reported successful student outcomes including more interest and motivation, better recall and deeper understanding, higher attainment, improved self-esteem, and more fun and enjoyable classroom experiences. For teachers themselves, the project was a challenge. They needed more planning time, more persistence, more collegiality, and more management support. All involved in the project found the experiment worthwhile, exciting, and a stimulus for radical change in their pedagogic practice and thinking. Teachers renamed and extended existing practices to include MI approaches and this led to a methods-shift and, ultimately, to indications of a mind-shift. It was apparent in the Irish MI Project that the premising of curriculum content and delivery, state certificate assessment, school organisational practices, and attitudes on a narrow, untenable and unfair construct of intelligence can result in educational exclusion and disadvantage for many students. Thus, it is suggested that the agency of intelligence in educational failure merits attention.

In Finland for almost one hundred years until the 1990s, student halls of residence have provided accommodation near schools to 7-15-year-old pupils who lived faraway. This study was focuses on the second widest municipality of Finland, Sodankylä, and countryside pupils' possibility to study. The target period of this study covered the year of establishment of the first secondary school of Sodankylä in 1943 until 1972 when the comprehensive school system was introduced. The purpose it to describe the life span of the secondary schools of Sodankylä with special focus on the role of the student hall of residence. The following research questions were set for this study: (1) How was schooling realized in remote municipalities before the establishment of student halls of residence? (2) How was the operation of student hall of residence launched in Sodankylä? (3) What was the significance of student hall of residence for pupils and the secondary school in Sodankylä? The perspective i...

In recent decades political philosophers have increasingly been engaged with the issue of educational justice. A fair distribution of educational opportunities is generally seen to be essential if justice is to prevail. Education is considered a basic right that all children should have, and many theorists believe it is fundamentally important to distribute educational opportunities fairly given the enormous impact education has on individuals’ life prospects. However, there is no consensus about what a fair distribution of education entails. Rather, there is considerable debate in theoretical literature about how justice in education is best understood. In recent years a number of theorists have suggested that perhaps what matters most in education is giving priority to disadvantaged students. Gina Schouten (2012), for example, has developed a prioritarian principle of educational justice for the distribution of educational resources.

In this paper I will consider whether giving priority to disadvantaged students constitutes a more appealing principle of educational justice than educational equality. In public discourse, prioritising disadvantaged students is often discussed as if it is a means of achieving greater equality in education, so I suggest there is a need for more clarity about the distinction between priority and equality in the context of education. I evaluate the two arguments Schouten (2012) develops for preferring a prioritarian principle of educational justice to an egalitarian principle, and argue that both arguments are flawed. I then consider a more common reason for favouring prioritarianism over egalitarianism – levelling down – and examine the extent to which the levelling down objection applies in the context of education. I argue that the levelling down objection, and broader debates between egalitarians and prioritarians, warrant further attention from educational egalitarians.