According to an article entitled “What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland's School Success” in the The Atlantic magazine: “Since the 1980s, the main driver of Finnish education policy has been the idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background, income, or geographic location.” Today I will be discussing to the objection to this argument that it is unfair to wealthy parents to deny them the option of paying more access to better education for their children. The merits of this objection are that it points out areas of unfairness and restricting access to minorities. The weaknesses of this argument are that it does not address the inequalities of the education system and how that …show more content…
In order to justify restricting wealthy parents from using their resources, you must prove that both the poor and wealthy will benefit from this restriction. If not, refusing access is proven unfair and will not solve the problem of inequality in the education system. By decreasing what the rich have access to, it will not elevate what the poor have in any way. In this, the problem is not the amount of money people have in the education system, but it is the inequality of access for the haves and the have-nots. Here, there is a tension between the ideas of taking from the rich to level them with the poor and raising the amount of access the poor have to better educational resources. Singer’s response to this tension is the idea of fairness as compromise. He would claim that fairness as compromise is the least intrusive method of settling the tension between educational access between the rich and the poor. It is the least intrusive because it evens out this tension because it is a procedure that does not use political power to make a party “worse off”. If there is no fairness as compromise, Singer would say that a refusal to abide by the laws would be justified: “…to obey (…) is to ask (the rich) to give up (their) claim to power completely, without any reciprocal concession from the other party.” (Singer, 37) If the government decided to restrict access through legislation, …show more content…
Like Singer, Rawls believes that all parties need to benefit from an action performed in a democratic society. Furthering Singer’s point, he also believes that all parties must do their part within society to receive any benefit from that society. He claims that: “fair terms of cooperation specify an idea of reciprocity or mutuality (where) all who do their part as the recognized rules require are to benefit as specified by a public and agreed upon standard” (Rawls, 6) If the standard of the society is that everyone receives the same high level of educational access, then it is fair to restrict the rich from using money to gain more access, however, if the standard of society is to have unequal standards of education across socioeconomic areas then it is not fair for a wealthy family to be restricted. This thought comes from Rawls argument of individual rational advantage where claims that “what counts as a benefit must be from the perspective of our own conception of the good” (Week 12 Handout, 4). Like Singer, Rawls believes that a decision must benefit all parties and not just one party: “The idea of rational advantage specifies what it is that those engaged in cooperation are seeking to advance from the standpoint of their own good” (Rawls,
Overall, over the past century there have been many policies which have helped to reduce social class inequality. However, it isn’t always positive. For example, the replacement of grants with loans may have deterred working-class students from entering higher education, as those from poorer backgrounds are more likely to fear getting into debt. In addition, there are many factors that can affect educational achievement outside of the classroom, such as problems at home. Educational policies can only help to improve educational experiences within school, and are not always successful (e.g. Marketization of education).
Here one might think Rawls has missed the point. For what is problematic about his liberalism, it might be argued, is that it will prove non-neutral in its effects on doctrines and ways of life permissible on its own account of political justice. But Rawls has not missed the point. Rawls’s liberalism does not rest on a commitment to the value of, nor does it require, a social world maximally diverse with respect to comprehensive doctrines or ways of life willing more or less to accept liberal principles of political justice. Of course, Rawls’s liberalism would be in serious trouble were it to lead to a social world only weakly diverse. But so long as Rawls’s liberalism permits a healthy degree of diversity, to claim that its non-neutral effect on some comprehensive doctrine or way of life is unfair is to presuppose rather than establish the correctness of some competing conception of justice.
On the other hand, Carnegie understands that there exists inequality, but he believes that the superior can cooperate with the inferior to gain equality. In fact, it the document he clarifies, “There remains…only one mode of using great fortunes…in this we have the true antidote for the temporary unequal distribution of wealth, the reconciliation of the rich and the poor−a reign of harmony” (Carnegie, 54). Carnegie does not particularly consider inequality a problem. He understands that in order for wealthy to facilitate the lives of the poor, there must be inequality to establish status, but he also discerns that by helping the poor they are given a chance to reach equality. In fact, Carnegie says, “Individualism will
Out of this experiment Rawls provides us with two basic principles of rules of: 1) every person should have equal opportunity to access a justice system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all and; 2) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both; a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged offices and b) positions opportunities should be made available to all under fair and equality conditions (242).... ... middle of paper ... ... I would opt against some other economic society, not knowing whether or not it would satisfy the conditions of providing the best opportunity for the least in my society.
In Confronting Inequality, Paul Krugman discusses the cost of inequality and possible solutions. Krugman argues to say that it is a fantasy to believe the rich live just like the middle class. Then, he goes into detail about how middle class families struggle to try to give their children a better life and how education plays a factor in children’s future lives. For example, children’s ability to move into higher education could be affected by their parents economic status. Also, He discusses how politicians play a role in the inequality, because most of politicians are in the upper economic class. Finally, Krugman says how we could possibly have solutions to these various inequalities, but how America won’t get
Some people may believe that education all over the United States is equal. These people also believe that all students no matter their location, socioeconomic status, and race have the same access and quality of education, but ultimately they are wrong. Throughout history, there has been a huge educational disparity between the wealthy and marginalized communities. The academic essay “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work” by Jean Anyon, an American critical thinker and researcher in education, conveys that depending on the different economic backgrounds students have, they will be taught in a specific way. He reveals that the lower economic background a child has then the lower quality their education will be and the higher their economic background is the higher quality their education is. Anyon’s theory of a social ladder is extremely useful because it sheds light on the
What does inequality mean? Inequality is defined as not being treated equally or treated unfairly compared to another. I believe that we all experience inequality at some point in our lives. Inequality can happen because of a person 's gender, religious beliefs, culture, race, and even political views. The article written by Jonathan Kozol 's talks about inequality in American schools. He believes that many schools in America are "still separated and still unequal" when it comes to race. In the article Kozol 's provides you with facts and percentages of schools who face inequality in American education. Kozol also believes that the Blacks and the Hispanics are the only ones who suffer the most from inequality in American schools. While Kozol
Before entering into defense of the argument, it is important to communicate that the current situation is one which demands reform. It must be understood that the state of the public school system is not simply confined to the domain of education but is instead very much interrelated with the distribution of wealth. The current opportunity gap-which affords those who are middle and upper class greater access to higher quality education-is the cause of the inequality seen in the distribution of income. “Children born into the top fifth of the income distribution have about twice as much of a chance of becoming middle class or better in their adult years as those born into the bottom fifth (Isaacs, Sawhill, & Haskins, 2008)”.
John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.
Develop an argument on or some ideas of understanding about curriculum as multicultural text by relating the works of Darling-Hammond, French, & Garcia-Lopez, Delpit, Duarte & Smith, Greene, Nieto and Sletter to your experience of curriculum, teaching, and learning as affirming diversity. You could think specifically about the following questions: Is there a need for diversity in curriculum studies and designs? Why? What measures do you think will be effective in incorporating such a need into curriculum studies and designs? What is the relevance of diversity to your career goal, to education in your family, community, and school, to education in Georgia, and to education in general? In which way can you develop a curriculum which helps cultivate empathy, compassion, passion, and hope for citizens of the world, and which fosters social justice?
Rawls’ primary goal in designing the original position is to describe a situation that he believes would achieve the most extensive liberty and fairness possible to all the parties involved in his hypothetical social contract (Rawls, 1971). Rawls believes that in order to achieve this level of fairness, it must be assumed that the parties involved are situated behind a ‘veil of ignorance’ (Rawls, 1971). This veil of ignorance deprives all of the parties of all knowledge of arbitrary facts about themselves, about other citizens, from influencing the agreement among the representatives (Rawls, 1971). For example, “no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status; nor does he know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence and strength, and the like.” (Rawls, 1971, 137) Rawls argues that if rational people found themselves in this position, they would al...
In an education journal, Anyon (“Social”) provides the reader with the concept that there are four different types of schools, working class schools, middle-class schools, affluent professional schools, and executive elite schools, after observing five schools. The working class schools are made up of parents with blue-collar jobs, with less than a third of the fathers being skilled, and the majority of them being semiskilled or unskilled. “Approximately 15 percent of the fathers were unemployed… approximately 15 percent of the families in each school are at or below the federal ‘poverty’ level…the incomes of the majority of the families…are typical of 38.6 percent of the families in the United States” (Anyon, “Social”). In a more recent study conducted by Anyon (“What”, 69), she states that,
To me, equality of opportunity in public education is where every single person deserves and is entitled to an equal chance to obtain a good education, grow and make positive progress throughout their time in school, and be successful in reaching their full potential later in life. These people should be treated identically, not differently due to their gender, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status.
Promoting fairness in the classroom not only gives the teacher respect but also gives the students a sense of safeness and trust within the classroom. Creating an environment that revolves around fairness, trust and respect will be beneficial to all of the children in the class. The terms respect and trust are pretty straightforward. There doesn’t need to be a debate on what those two mean, but the same cannot be said for fairness. When one usually hears the word “fair” it is often looked at as synonymous to the term “equal” but the two are not the same, especially in a classroom setting. The term fairness on the classroom level means that the individual students are given what he or she may need in order to be successful; fairness does not
In spite of the privileged getting anything money can buy, an underprivileged person gets the important things money cant buy. Many people have heard the expression “if you give a man a fish you can feed them a day, if you teach a man to fish you can feed them a lifetime.” Well I believe privileged people are given fish and the underprivileged taught to fish.