Whenever the subject is education, you can be sure that the issue will be equality, whether in the form of opportunities, outcomes, or both. Its latest version is consumed by the umbrella term “meritocracy” (“American Universities Must Choose: Do They Want to Be Equal or Elite?” Time, Sep. 12.)
I’m going to restrict my comments in today’s column to higher education, although my views have relevance as well to K-12. I don’t think it’s possible for colleges and universities to be simultaneously equal and elite. Until fairly recently, they have had no trouble being seen as elite. For example, prep schools have always paved the way for their graduates to have a leg up for entrance into college. That was their primary purpose.
But today, prep schools, as well as colleges and universities, are under attack for their exclusivity. In other words, they are not democratic enough. The fact that they differentiate in their admissions is considered unfair. Yet there will always be unequal outcomes even if there are equal opportunities because people are by their very nature different. Some are inherently smarter and willing to work harder. Some make better choices than others.
I also don’t buy the argument that poverty is the No. 1 cause of unequal outcomes. Yes, it plays an important role, but it is not an absolute determinant as reformers claim. For example, Asian students continue to excel academically even when they come from low-income families. How to explain that? Is it their culture?
(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)