Equality and Social Justice
It is well known that a good education results in a wide variety of positive outcomes in a person’s life. Because educational outcomes for children are so uneven, positive outcomes for their lives are very uneven as well. Examining this is important in the case of vouchers, as vouchers are traditionally targeted at the least advantaged in our society.
In America, equality is not yet realized. This is apparent through a look at statistics such as this:
- Around 20 percent of American children live in poverty.
- Children who are racial minorities are far more likely to live in poverty: 38.2 percent of black children live in poverty, and 32.3 percent of Hispanic children live in poverty.
- The poorest children are those who live in a single-mother household: 47.6 percent of children with a single mother live in poverty.
- Poverty affects children their whole lives: The longer a child lives in poverty, the more likely they will live in poverty as adults. Out of all of the children who spend at least half of their childhood in poverty, 45 percent of them will be living in poverty at age 35. But if children spend less than half of their childhood in poverty, only 8 percent of them will be living in poverty at age 35. However, these statistics change based on race, as minority children who experience poverty are much more likely to be poor in adulthood than white children who experience similar levels of poverty. (See graph below.)
Why do we need to talk about poverty?
The numbers of children living in poverty matter in relation to education because the less advantaged a student is, the more likely it is that they will not succeed in school. Both race and class affect educational achievement, though class seems to affect academic success more. However, making this distinction is not completely useful because minority children are much more likely to be poor, so the factors of race and class are intertwined. Equalizing success for all students regardless of race or class matters because there are competitions for goods in life. Socially produced goods, like income, wealth, status, and health, are all at least partially determined by a student’s educational success, and the better one student does in comparison to other students, the worse off those students left behind will be. For example, if achievement is increased for some students who attend voucher schools, this only makes life outcomes worse for those students left in failing public schools because all of these students are peers who will be competing in the future. On a less tangible note, an opportunity to formulate and achieve dreams is also partially determined by a student’s educational success. Ultimately, students of race and class backgrounds that do not have high rates of educational success will have lower income, wealth, status, and health, among other goods.
A social justice viewpoint mandates a responsibility of the state and its citizens to do the best for the worst off. In theory, this is a simple statement that most people could generally agree sounds like a reasonable plan. Most lawmakers and citizens, no matter their political affiliation, will agree that excellent education of youth is of utmost importance, and that many of the most poor and disadvantaged students are either not receiving or are not benefitting from the American education system. However, the applications of social justice around education are complicated and fraught with argument. Beyond the bipartisan agreements that poor and disadvantaged students are not benefitting from education as they should, the applications of social justice in relation to education are full of disagreement.
Many feel that the best way to achieve social justice in education is to rate schools and implement voucher programs, both of which result in giving students and their parents a choice to attend the best schools. Many others feel that the best way to achieve social justice in education is to improve public schools and help students who are socially and economically disadvantaged succeed within these schools by providing more resources to these schools and students. An aspect of social justice not often discussed within this argument is the reality that the students with the least social capital (a usual accompaniment to being the least advantaged in society) are the least likely to have parents who will attempt to enter their children into choice and voucher programs. This means that schools accepting vouchers will often not receive the students who are the most disadvantaged, and therefore the most difficult to educate, so the public schools (which are often deemed failing) will be left with the most challenging students. This is a reinforcement cycle of inequality with large implications for policy if social justice and high achievement are some of the goals of those working on education reform.
A social justice viewpoint mandates a responsibility of the state and its citizens to do the best for the worst off. In theory, this is a simple statement that most people could generally agree sounds like a reasonable plan. Most lawmakers and citizens, no matter their political affiliation, will agree that excellent education of youth is of utmost importance, and that many of the most poor and disadvantaged students are either not receiving or are not benefitting from the American education system. However, the applications of social justice around education are complicated and fraught with argument. Beyond the bipartisan agreements that poor and disadvantaged students are not benefitting from education as they should, the applications of social justice in relation to education are full of disagreement.
Many feel that the best way to achieve social justice in education is to rate schools and implement voucher programs, both of which result in giving students and their parents a choice to attend the best schools. Many others feel that the best way to achieve social justice in education is to improve public schools and help students who are socially and economically disadvantaged succeed within these schools by providing more resources to these schools and students. An aspect of social justice not often discussed within this argument is the reality that the students with the least social capital (a usual accompaniment to being the least advantaged in society) are the least likely to have parents who will attempt to enter their children into choice and voucher programs. This means that schools accepting vouchers will often not receive the students who are the most disadvantaged, and therefore the most difficult to educate, so the public schools (which are often deemed failing) will be left with the most challenging students. This is a reinforcement cycle of inequality with large implications for policy if social justice and high achievement are some of the goals of those working on education reform.
Sources:
- Fass, Sarah, Kinsey A. Dinan, and Yumiko Aratani. Child Poverty and Intergenerational Mobility. Rep. National Center for Children in Poverty ;Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University, Dec. 2009. Web. 7 May 2013.
- Friedman, Milton. "The Role of Government in Education." Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1962. 85-107. Print.
- Schouten, Gina, and Harry Brighouse. High-Commitment Charter School Paper Draft. Working paper. N.p., n.d. Print.
- United States. U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Department of Commerce; Economics and Statistics Administration. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2011 Current Population Reports. By Carmen DeNavas-Walt, Bernadette D. Proctor, and Jessica C. Smith. N.p., Sept. 2012. Web. 6 May 2013.
- United States. U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Department of Commerce; Economics and Statistics Administration. Child Poverty in the United States 2009 and 2010: Selected Race Groups and Hispanic Origin. By Carmen DeNavas-Walt, Bernadette D. Proctor, and Jessica C. Smith. N.p., Nov. 2011. Web. 6 May 2013.