Democracy in Education - Essay Example

Democracy in Education Democracy in Education Democracy is among the critical ethos in modern societies. Governments and institutions champion for the democratization of operations to enhance transparency and equity. The American constitution ranks as one of the most democratic of all nations, with constant improvements hoping to improve it. In my opinion, the world being what it is, democracy is relative rather than precise. In fact, one field, which is experiencing a democratic dilemma, is the American education system. American society put emphasis on education as a determinant of the type of jobs and eventual success level of people. Therefore, parents and guardians struggle to enroll their children in prestigious schools to gain a quality education. The phenomenon has created a situation in American education industry where some institutions consider themselves better than others have. This article evaluates the concept of democracy in modern society, especially American education system. Democracy of education provision in American society and other parts of the world face a trial of fairness as well as equity. Ideally, democracy refers to a system of governance, especially voting and representation, that promote equitable distribution of resources (Jones, 2012). With democracy, aspects, such as bill or rights, freedom of speech, and liberty form part of the regular lifestyle. However, lack of it would see a particular section of the society, underprivileged, deprived their fundamental rights or equity. More explicitly, democracy is a fair distribution of power in society, where people have the liberty of choices. Education is a right as well as a resource that influence politics, financial, health care, and politics of a country. Therefore, I think democracy in education provision is very critical to any society, which facilitate equality and fairness. The democratization of education is not something near perfect, especially in American society. Explicit description of democracy in an educational context is a system of organization and learning that allow each person to maximize their potential without financial or social limitations. In other words, individuals may express themselves without consideration of art, invention, lifestyle, or writing (Hall, 2013). From another perspective, democracy in education should allow people to form rewarding and meaningful relationships with their cohort without restriction regarding political or religious affiliation. I suggest that educational democracy should have four principles, that is, autonomy, interactivity, diversity, and openness. Autonomy law provides that structure of education systems and resources should maximize autonomy. Learners should have adequate guidance, and eventually guide themselves depending on their personal goals, objectives, values, and purposes. More explicitly, it should recognize that people should share values with others freely and according to their beliefs or reasons. Without forgetting, diversity is also another critical trait of democratic education. Education systems and resources should not produce same graduates with similar characters but rather diversified individuals, which foster creativity among learners (Bragg, 2012). Diversity roots from the fact that individuals have unique personal experience, and abilities. Moreover, openness is the principle of educational resources and structures that encourage free entry as well as exit from the system. Similarly, ideas, and artifacts should flow freely within the system, but with respect to privacy. In short, individuals should not experience any barrier that shuts them out of the system entirely (Harrison & Risler, 2015). Lastly, interactivity paradigm holds that education systems should recognize that learning is due to immersion in a community, which makes it a product of cumulative societal interactions. Knowledge represented in a particular language should pose collective insight. I view that the above four principles are what should act as models for schools to use while implementing democracy in their programs. Right from kindergarten through K-12 schools, parents in the United States scramble for space in schools they believe is a direct channel to universities, such as Yale and Harvard. Indeed, an individual’s location may influence the kind of schools one attend. For instance, Children of the rich in the USA attend particular schools irrespective of their academic capabilities. The students from other regions have to fight it through an unfair and corrupt process. In fact, some law firms or companies only employ graduates from certain universities. Additionally, K-12 schools have different powers in sending students to universities of their choices. I think that Kids in intercity schools might not get as good of an education as kids from the middle to high-class suburbs. Clearly, people do not have equal chances of succeeding in life because discrimination starts as early as K-12 days. According to Spring (2003), education is a form of consumerism because firms make significant efforts to market education through paid advertisements. Notably, even standard testing is under commercialization to give options for people who feel bored by the regular school tests. Furthermore, companies such as Coca-Cola and PepsiCo use schools as advertising grounds. Some companies, especially food manufacturers target children as their consumers. Joel Spring alludes that education consumerism is an increasing trend, which piles pressure on educational democracy. Indeed, education should be a fundamental right but its commercialization and consumerism nature brings out the entrepreneurial perspective. The business aspect of education provision transforms it to a profitable venture, which makes marketing critical to owners. However, marketing seeks to attract a particular audience and categories of consumers, which implies a limitation to free choice. I think that incorporating marketing practices in schools minimize democracy in education because of profitability orientation. One particular phenomenon that roots from education consumerism is Ivy Leagues in the United States. In the last two decades, American society has narrowed down its financial, political, and business elites from leading universities, such as Yale, Harvard, which all form Ivy League (Unz, 2015). Ideally, Ivy League refers to the American’s most prestigious and private learning institutions where the quality of education is perceived to be top quality. Therefore, desperate parents would do anything to admit their children in Ivy League schools. Increased demand for these institutions produced a market niche for them, and the increased admission requirements. A keen observation reveals that Ivy Leagues are the creation of the media and societal perception. Surprisingly, the institutions adopted stringent measures for their admission because they only want students with specified parameters. Consequently, the struggle for tickets has transformed into an astonishing level, with the majority of middle and upper class investing significant time and resources. With much social and economic importance placed on degrees from Ivy League schools, the few elite schools enjoy the unrivaled power to direct leadership of American society by dictating supply of their degrees. However, allegations have emerged in the past on corrupt activities dealings that see admission parameters regarding academic prowess neglected. Reports indicate that some students fail to fit admissions in Ivy Leagues because their economic and regional backgrounds betray them despite having financial and academic abilities. If such trend continues, then noble stories such as the rise of Henry Ford from farm boy mechanic to a car-manufacturing tycoon are no more. Even successful college dropouts, such as Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates have a connection to Harvard. The above incidents only highlight how the lack of democracy in education can be detrimental to the society and sector itself. Apparently, the above cases contravene four cornerstones of democratic education. Many disadvantaged students could be missing out due to these unfair practices. If education consumerism continues to encourage commercialization and indiscriminate marketing, learning the purpose and quality is bound to deteriorate. Adoption of democratic approach to education provision is the suitable way of correcting the mess created by Ivy League. In a democratic society, students should join any school so long as they have a minimum academic qualification. Considering non-academic and non-financial measures in preventing others from accessing education anywhere is a lack of democracy. Furthermore, the democratization of education would see equality in the strength of degrees irrespective of learning institution, which give everybody a chance to succeed in life. It is morose that some people fail to maximize their full potential because of their backgrounds, economically or politically (Hall, 2013). Importantly, learners channeled out during graduation in democratic learning environments would exhibit diversity due to different experiences and backgrounds. Therefore, education democracy is a phenomenon that stakeholders need to foster for the sake of encouraging quality learning. In conclusion, democracy promotes equality and fair distribution of resources by those in power. Fundamentally, democratic education systems support four aspects, that is, autonomy, diversity, openness, and interactivity. Broadly, learning is a product of societal interaction through the exchange of experiences and abilities. Currently, American society encourages education consumerism, a factor that facilitate inequitable distribution of resources. The emergence of Ivy League institutions such as Harvard, Yale, and Brown amongst the rest is disadvantaging some sections of society members. In other words, unfair admission in these schools locks out more disserving students just because they do not meet certain criteria, which is non-academic or financial. Overall, stakeholders should redesign education systems and structures to portray democratic orientation. Otherwise, quality of teaching will deteriorate significantly as institutions give soft sport to undeserving people due to favors. References Bragg, S. (2012). Education, ‘consumerism’and ‘personalisation’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 35(2), 308-315. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2014.881054 Hall, W. (2013). Consumerism and consumer complexity: Implications for university teaching and teaching evaluation. Nurse Education Today, 33(7), 720-723. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.03.004 Harrison, L., & Risler, L. (2015). The role consumerism plays in student learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(1), 67-76. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469787415573356 Jones, K. (2012). Power, Democracy - and Democracy in Education. Forum, 54(2), 205. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/forum.2012.54.2.205 Spring, J. (2003). Educating the consumer-citizen. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Unz, R. (2015). The Myth of American Meritocracy. The American Conservative. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/ Read More