Fair Opportunity in Education: A Democratic Equality Perspective

Abstract

Recent work on justice in the distribution of educational opportunities has focused on two phenomena. The first is the shift in the United States from an "equality" to an "adequacy" standard of fair educational opportunity. Instead of making the state provide equal educational inputs to rich and poor children, advocates for the disadvantaged, courts, and policy makers have been trying to make the state educate all students to at least an adequate threshold of achievement. 1 The second is the fact that education is not just an intrinsic good for the individual but an important instrumental good with positional features. It opens up access to the most rewarding careers and leadership positions in society in virtue of endowing individuals with relatively superior qualifications. Because such high payoffs are attached to an individual's relative academic achievement in the competition for rewarding careers, one person's gain in educational achievement is another's loss of socioeconomic prospects. This consideration has led many egalitarians to reject adequacy standards for educational opportunity and insist that the stateand even parents-should constrain their educational investments in children according to an equality standard. Only so, it is argued, can individuals have genuinely fair opportunities, and only so can the state avoid unjustly injuring the already disadvantaged by effectively closing

Distributive equality, relational equality and preferences about higher education

“…This concern is central to Anderson's (2007) argument that a society of equals requires that social and political elites have an understanding of, and are responsive to, the needs of disadvantaged groups. For this reason, she argues, elites need first-or second-hand knowledge of the problems and interests of the disadvantaged.…”

Education for global citizenship in Scotland: Reciprocal partnership or politics of benevolence?

“…Caution should be exercised in the face of temptation to pass judgment on their occasional stereotyping, in judging their knowledge of a distant other by asking too much of them at a young age. Stereotypes, the sometimes crude unconsciously held heuristics (Anderson, 2007) that can exaggerate both the homogeneity of members of a particular group and the differences between groups, are likely when access to information is restricted by sheer distance, limited information and absence of close experience of life in Malawi. The degree of stereotyping reflected in the comments of our pupil participants would be less understandable if the participants had been asked to reflect about disadvantaged citizens geographically closer to home.…”

School choice and educational justice

“…Gemäß dieser Idee ist nicht in erster Linie relevant, ob Bildungschancen gleich verteilt sind, sondern inwiefern deren Verteilung weitergehenden politisch-moralischen Zielen angemessen ist. In aktuellen Beiträgen (Satz 2007(Satz , 2008Anderson 2007 ;vgl. auch Liu 2006 ) wird die volle Mitgliedschaft in der demokratischen Gemeinschaft -demokratische oder bürgerliche Gleichheit -als Ziel defi niert, dem das Bildungssystem zu genügen hat.…”