The following is a few thoughts and questions generated while reading about the “progress” of the educational system through reform. Educational reform that only produces progress for a single or certain social groups may seem unfair or discriminatory at first but may eventually lead to other social groups being motivated to bring about reform that will enhance their education also. While different groups may be progressing at different times or rates, the educational system as a whole is improving.
It is apparent that the reforms pushed by the administrative progressives only benefited those who came from urban, middle class to wealthy families. However I believe once other social groups saw the benefits or progress that this demographic group was receiving the other social groups’ value of education increased. These neglected social groups then unified and developed reform that would bring about equality but bring about equality by increasing the advantages their groups would receive. Yes it did take time for the gaps in privilege to narrow and there are still some gaps but educational opportunities have increased and improved for all social groups. It may be only possible to advance the institution of public education one component at a time. To delay the improvement in education of some groups in order to develop policies that benefit all groups, equally, and at the same time may do nothing but prevent the advancement of education and society as a whole.
If a policy is developed that would only progress certain social groups, is it unfair to withhold reform that would enable those certain groups to have more potential? If these policies are withheld will it discourage social groups from trying to find new ways to improve education? If these “unfair” reforms are implemented will it encourage other social groups to seek new policy to improve their education?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Every special interest group wants to see the proposals for the advancement of their group get support and implementation. Other groups are generally supportive of these measures, until or unless resources are taken from their group to support the new proposals. One horrible result that seems to have come from the No Child Left Behind legislation is the stagnation of gifted students, as others are brought up and over the current measurement bars. I would love to see some type of No Gifted Students Left Behind programs within all of our schools.
I think T&C would take issue with your characterization of progress as something quite so linear and inevitable. In your model, initial advantage for some groups due to reforms is justified because it sets the bar higher for all and motivates other groups to press for their inclusion. Everyone is eventually better off, because progress moves everyone forward, albeit at unequal rates.
I don't think T&C would agree. Progress is always a relative term, relative to one's initial position and goals. Thus, some groups may define progress as maintaining the oppression of others, or maintaining their relative advantage over others through increased educational opportunity.
An excellent post, as it deals with the argument the text puts forth in a serious way while advancing a counter-argument.
Post a Comment