Performance and Educational Successes - Essay Example

Why Pupils Deserve Different Opportunities Introduction The concept of justice is chiefly concerned on the right ordering of people and things within a society. This concept has been subject to legal, theological and philosophical debate throughout history. In accordance to most justice theories, justice is nonetheless an important concept. Rawls for example asserts, “Justice is the first virtue of social institutions the same way as truth is the system of thought. Research has further pointed out that reactions to fairness are “stored” into the brain and that fairness is activating a similar brain part, which responds to food. This is in line with the notion that being satisfied fairly leads to satisfaction of the basic need. Aristotle in his Politics (1280a) argues that true justice is treating equals equally and unequal’s unequally with regard to the notable and relevant difference between these groups. What these means essentially is that if there is no exact difference between two persons, the two should be treated similarly. Concerning pupils and opportunities, there are many people who, in line with Aristotle’s statement observe that only the same pupils who harbor the same interests should be given admission in particular schools. On the other hand, other people suggest that schools should be open to all pupils regardless of their interests or abilities. Presently, many governments around the word are forming education policies that are geared towards comprehensive education. However, many more are establishing schools that admit only students with the same interests. In my view, there are two faces in all things and therefore, educators have to consider the specific needs of a child in educator. This paper presents an argument on why pupils deserve different opportunities and why equal pupils should be treated equally while unequal ones are treated unequally. Discussion Justice for Pupils My argument in this discussion are in line with Aristotles statement “true justice is treating equals equally, and unequals unequally with regard to the notable and relevant difference between them”. This means that giving children the same opportunities will be unjust course since they have different capabilities, interests and objectives. On the other hand, it would be considered justice to give these learners opportunities and chances that suit their interests, objectives, capabilities, and goals. Educators and guardians must understand that maintaining high expectations for the learning of children needs them to understand these children well, and focus upon their capabilities. It is apparent that some pupils will need extra support especially those who are struggling with their education. Others on the other hand, will require extension of activities, and attention. Differentiation is therefore, a critical element for effective pupil learning. This might take the form of not only the differentiated input from the teacher, but also differentiated tasks that are set for specific pupils. Additionally, some children will require a variety and differentiate resources in supporting their needs. For instance, children with visual impairment will require large written or print resources. Children with Asperger syndromes will require clear timetables and routines while gifted and talented children will require extended activities. It should be considered that the goal of equal opportunities should be to treat all pupils in different ways with regard to their needs. This is to make them achieve a similar level of experience and performance and educational successes. Some pupils would need different or more materials, resources, teaching strategies or opportunities. According to Randall, (2006) learners are effectively taught with peers who have similar needs; hence it would be wrong to group different pupils together. In this way, materials, resources and teaching strategies could be effectively and efficiently utilized in meeting their educational needs. These factors cannot be considered as discriminatory practices since the efforts are focused on creating equality by giving different pupils the same chance of success. Pupils will not succeed in an environment that does not cater for their abilities, interests or life objectives. An example can be derived from the UKs Disability Discrimination Act of 2005, which was enforced in 2006. This act puts an overall duty on public authorities including schools and higher educational learning centers to promote equality on disabled and disadvantaged pupils. The regulations and stipulations in this act mandate public officials and education authorities to prepare and publish a disability equality scheme which provides details on how disability equality is being promoted. In this regard, schools and authorities must have considerations in encouraging participation by disabled learners and all people in public life. In this endeavor, they are expected to effectively meet the needs of the disabled people even if this would necessitate a more favorable treatment. Some people would argue that giving some pupils a favorable treatment than others amount to discrimination. I also content that direct discrimination in the classroom is unjustifiable. Direct discrimination happens when a teacher treats a student with the same capabilities and interests as the rest in a less favorable manner than when the teacher treats or would treat another student because of a certain characteristic, for instance refusing to enroll a child because of the child’s race or religious belief (Boysen, 2012). Classroom Discrimination Discrimination within the classroom setting can take different forms including discrimination basing on gender, sexual orientation, religion, pregnancy or race/ethnicity. Justifying direct discrimination is impossible, and as such, it is always illegitimate. Nevertheless, there are exceptions to the provisions allowing, for instance, single-sex schools to admit students of only one gender without this being illegal direct discrimination (Randall, 2006). For a student/pupil to show that he/she has been directly discriminated against, then that student should compare what has happened to him/her to the treatment a student/pupil without their characteristic receives or would receive. As such, a gay student cannot claim that being excluded from a certain activity is direct discrimination on sexual orientation grounds unless he can show that a bisexual or heterosexual student would not be excluded from that activity. Nonetheless, a student does not necessarily have to find a real person in order to compare his/her treatment with. This is because the student can rely on a hypothetical person if they are able to illustrate that there is evidence showing that such an individual would receive different treatment. There is absolutely no need for a pupil who claims direct discrimination because of maternity/pregnancy or racial segregation to find a person to compare him/her to. Claiming maternity or pregnancy discrimination, a female student needs to show that she has been unfavorably treated due to her maternity or pregnancy, and does not need to compare the treatment she receives to the treatment of someone who was not a new mother or was not pregnant. Discrimination on racial grounds is intentionally separating people by color, race, national origin or ethnicity, and will always be illegal direct discrimination (Kidwell, 2007). Such discrimination should not be tolerated in the class room, because a part from being unjust, they are a form of unequal treatment. There is also indirect discrimination, which is another form of discrimination, and it occurs when a teacher applies a practice, provision or criterion in the same manner for all students in the sense that it has the effect of placing students who share a certain characteristic at a particular disadvantage. It does not matter that the teacher did not have the intention to disadvantage the students who have a certain characteristic in this way, what really matters is whether the action does or would disadvantage such students in comparison to students who do not share that characteristic (Wadsworth, Hecht & Jung, 2008). An example is a school requiring boys to wear a cap as being part of the school uniform. Even though this requirement applies equally to every student, it has the effect of excluding male students who are Sikh, whose religion requires that they wear a turban, not a cap. This would be indirect discrimination on the grounds of religion and belief since it is improbable that the school could substantiate or justify such an action. Discrimination can also arise from disability when a pupil is treated unfavorably putting him/her at a disadvantage. The treatment is due to something linked with the disabled student’s disability, for instance, inability of walking unassisted maybe because of cerebral palsy. The educator should on the other hand, review materials so that bulletin boards and displays in the classroom are inclusive of all people. In addition, the teacher should ensure that videos, supplemental books and other resources do not reinforce the stereotypes that exist in the society. However, when such instances are observed in academic literature, the educator needs to point them out, inform pupils accordingly and encourage students to think about them in a critical manner. McCrudden explains that there exists five types of actions that are categorized as affirmative action. Among these categories is eradication of discrimination, which necessitates a regular review of the measures taken by respective authorities, and aims to achieve the objectives. The second category is being facially neutral, but incorporation of inclusionary policies that seek to increase the proportion of underrepresented members. Authorities are expected to formulate outreach programs that are designed to attract specific group candidates from the underrepresented group. Further, there is a preferential treatment to some pupils and which involves reverse discrimination in favor of specific group of pupils. The Concept of Equality and its relation to Education It should be noted that the concept of equality has no single meaning. Equal treatment is a concept, which is regarded as the neutral approach. Equality of opportunity translates that all individuals should be treated as humans in the sense of being provided with the opportunity to compete on equal terms for the goods and services provided by the society. Equality of the results translates an equitable division of the economic cake between various groups in a particular society. In this perspective, all people should be looked at individually and assessed on the basis of their merits. In academic terms, equality therefore, implies that the needs of the pupils are addressed according to their merits. As I have already stated, giving pupils the same opportunities would be doing injustice for others since these pupils do not have the same capabilities, interests or goals. Their needs would best be made through opportunities that suit their specific needs (Fryer, Goeree & Holt, 2005, 34). Aristotle states “there is nothing unequal as the equal treatment of unequals”. In other words, subjecting all individuals in the same contexts and opportunities would be doing injustice to them since others will be disadvantaged. It is true that people are unequal and they should therefore be treated based on their merits. A positive action is the one, which regards merit while merit should not be disregarded under all circumstances. People’s differences should be identified, and given recognition as well as appreciated, not diminished. In this perspective, giving pupils equal opportunities will be disregarding their differences and diminishing their interests, goals and abilities. It would be considered unequal treatment and injustice to pass over the better qualified in favor of the less qualified. This injustice is directed at both of them since they are not being catered for. In other words, their specific needs are not being met.Aristotole reiterated this assumption by arguing that equal treatment cannot be considered equal in the case when individuals themselves are not equal. True equality may not be possible when individuals begin from different perspectives. The work of Dworkin in egalitarian claim can give us more insights on the conception of equality. He postulates that political morality includes governments treating all its citizens that are subject to it with respect and dignity. That is individuals with capabilities of forming and acting on the intelligent conceptions of how they should live their lives. In this perspective, the authorities should not only treat people with respect, and concern, but with equal respect and concern. In the classroom perspective, such treatment will involve respect and concern for the individual pupil’s uniqueness, and differences and not simply ignoring them (78). Dworkin goes on to reiterate that governments and institutions should put a focus on the interests of the members of that particular society. Only individuals are regarded as ends in themselves unlike for instance, tradition, the family, tribe, culture, or ethnic community. Further, impartiality from a moral viewpoint implies that there are no people who are considered privileged. Every individual’s life has a similar value to that of others (132). This therefore, translates that every individual’s interest are equally significant in our institutional evaluations We ought to recognize that the equality requirements pull in opposite directions. In one spectrum, we ought to allow resource distribution at any specific moment to be so as to speak ambition sensitive. In other words, it must reflect the benefit and cost to others of the decisions, which people make. For instance, people who may decide to invest instead of consuming less expensively in instead of more should be encouraged and given opportunities to do so. Other individuals may also decide to work on a lesser rather than a more profitable way. These preferences according to Dworkin must be permitted in order to retain the gains accrued from these decisions in an equal auction. On the other hand, we should not allow resource distribution at any particular moment to be endowment sensitive, in other words, one that is affected by the variations in the ability of the sort that generates prejudiced outcomes among people with similar interests and ambitions. In the perspective of education, this means that the authorities responsible should aim at provision of opportunities that are choice sensitive to pupils (456). Stated differently, the opportunities so provided should be able to support personal autonomy. In essence, the equality concept can be stated as follows: inequalities in terms of the benefits enjoyed by people owing to their choices in the good life are viewed as part of the individual autonomy and obligations and therefore, they can be considered as morally legitimate. On the other hand, inequalities in the benefits enjoyed by people that are derived from unchosen endowment features are viewed as morally arbitrary and therefore should be avoided or disregarded. In a school context, pupils should be provided opportunities, which they are comfortable with or which they affectively use. Pupils should not be coerced with particular opportunities that do not suit their interests. The idea that authorities ought to treat pupils with equal respect demands that such choices also involves individual responsibility. The autonomy of the individual pupils should be respected, and therefore, there should not interfere with personal ambitions and or preferences by either manipulation or force. Consequently, individuals have responsibilities in formulating their own aims, decisions and ambitions. The major concern in today’s perspective regarding education is the “one size fits all mentality” by educators. Striving for equality in education is a fallacy aimed at the wrong direction. As much as learning may be an individual exercise of one’s mind, the same way is teaching, which should be an individual application of appropriate methods that are aimed at specific individual and not all learners. Proponents of equality seem to have never considered the harmful effects conceited on equal outcomes for all pupils. Such kind of contempt for the seemingly principled schools of the previous thoughts subjugates the basic knowledge requisite that is related with good, productive and effective citizens. To be a nationalist is always related with being exceptional, being among the brightest and best not only in the nation, but worldwide. True nationalism is associated with individualism, and the current flawed approach to education need to be corrected accordingly (Randall, 2006, 115). Differences and Uniqueness Of Pupils Individual differences should be identified, and recognized for effective educational programs. Education should be geared at making each person capable of making his or her unique contribution to the society. The operational knowledge of personal differences and the realization of their educational importance is the basic principle by which all the most significant practical issues of teaching, learning progress and discipline motivation depend. Self-actualization means that an individual should be allowed to be what he or she can be. A pupil with musical capabilities and talent for instance should be allowed, and given opportunities to practice the same. A pupil with artistic taste should be given opportunities to practice art. A pupil with mathematical ability should be allowed to practice mathematical problems both on and off. Others who are gifted in various extracurricular activities should be given the same (Kidwell, 2007). All pupils and teachers want self-actualization. Therefore, the teacher who aims at instruction should meet the need of self-actualization; offer differentiated curricula and manifold student activities, and plans for independent study. The teacher should provide an ail information that is obtained from observations, and tests concerning their aptitudes so that the student may be enabled to select the kind of knowledge or discipline they so desire or they are interested in. The uniformity of education has long been criticized for not meeting self-actualization needs that are supposed to give attention to individual differences. The school and the teacher should have a wide variety of goals instead of a single one of mastering subject matter. Unfortunately, most governments and schools harbor one main goal in education, and that is for pupils to obtain a specific fixed standard of achievement in various subject areas. The government and schools should instead increase the number of goals and the variety of these goals, which will assist in meeting individual differences. These will occur through provision of diversified opportunities on specific individuals (Dworkin, 1996, 45). A school system that may be considered worthy aims at eliminating individual differences. Particular classes are offered for those whose differences are marked. Ability grouping seeks to place the students where they could effectively perform with the hope of success. Remedial classes to correct individual differences should be organized either in the weekends or summer or in the long breaks in correcting academic deficiencies that may be because of causal factors. Instructions should be adapted to individual needs and differences so that all are sure to get the necessary fundamentals. These efforts should not be termed as discriminatory practices since they are geared at giving disadvantaged learners a plat form for success the same way as advantaged pupils (Vegas 1999, 456), The teacher has an obligation of reducing individual differences as well as fostering them in an endeavor of developing personal uniqueness. Many psychologist and educators have long supported this notion of fostering individual uniqueness. They assert that while mass education is significant for knowledge dissemination, true education is one, which identifies the individual, and fosters self-realization for pupils, and improvement of the society. For this uniqueness to be achieved, it is the responsibility of the class teacher (though most of them are not willing to do so) to develop and foster individual differences. Fair Treatment of Pupils School authorities should identify, and value diversity and develop a policy that is based on learning for all standards. All students are expected to respect one another, irrespective of their economic, cultural or racial backgrounds. The schools should ensure that each member of the school community feels valued, and respected. School authorities should aim to promote a context where all members feel valued, safe, happy and secure from any external threat. The school and the staff must be particularly aware on the potential for direct discrimination in the school. Any biasness or deliberate discrimination between pupils and by teachers should be seen as a serious disciplinary issue, which is likely to cause serious ramifications, and should therefore be dealt with accordingly (Vegas 1999, 456). As a matter of providing “equal opportunities” to students, an effective is the one, which is regarded as an inclusive community. The schools should consider offering extracurricular opportunities for learners interested in games, access to higher education for learners who are academically talented and foster positive attitudes for those with disabilities. These groups of people would need different opportunities. Education providers should ensure that all students have equal access to materials and resources not only those of their interests but also in other areas so as to be exposed in these areas. Pupils should be put in a group of their own interests and evaluation done in the same way. Pupil’s evaluation both, written, or oral should be conducted in a fair environment that do not give pupils with similar interest’s particular advantage. Providers and authorities should give these pupils suitable environment for evaluations. These evaluations should be as fair as possible. In the case of an ill student or those who need special kind of assistance, education providers should look for ways on how to accommodate their needs and enable them to study well. Fair treatment necessitates that educationalist accommodate the needs of each student. This may require them to go to the extent of providing more opportunities, or support to some students in relation to others. Again, it is lawful for many countries to exclude particular sex especially girls) from some games, sports or other competitive activities on the circumstance when the stamina, physical strength or physic puts them at a disadvantage with the other sex. This translates that schools could have separate girls and boys teams some kind of games and sports as well as separate sports lessons for boys and girls. Conclusion All human beings are individuals with distinctions and differences. In this respect, it may not be proper to favor an individual on grounds of his or her group orientation, nor going on the neutral approach as to hamper to achievement of equality. In this perspective, education policies should not be aimed at minimizing the extant inequality among pupils, rather, the present state of equality should be changed. Some form of favorable treatment should be allowed to specific group of pupils who are less privileged than others are. Pupils with special interests and objectives should be given a platform to exercise and excel in their areas. However, this should not go as far as accepting an unconditional and absolute priority to some pupils without basis. Each pupil should be considered in an individualized and holistic manner. The pupil’s differences should be taken into consideration and these should be appreciated not diminished. In essence, the equality concept can be stated as follows: inequalities in terms of the benefits enjoyed by people owing to their choices in the good life are viewed as part of the individual autonomy and obligations and therefore, they can be considered as morally legitimate. On the other hand, inequalities in the benefits enjoyed by people that are derived from unchosen endowment features are viewed as morally arbitrary and therefore should be avoid and disregarded. In a school context, pupils should be provided opportunities, which they are comfortable with or which they are well suited with. Pupils should not be coerced with particular opportunities that do not suit their interests. The major concern in today’s perspective regarding education is the “one size fits all mentality” by educators. Striving for equality and uniformity in education is a fallacy that is aimed at the wrong direction. As much as learning may be an individual exercise of one’s mind, the same way is teaching, which should be an individual application of appropriate methods that are aimed at individual and not all methods to all individuals. The uniformity and equality of education has long been criticized for not meeting self-actualization needs that give attention to individual differences. The school and the teacher should have a wide variety of goals instead of a single one of mastering subject matter. Unfortunately, most governments and schools harbor one main goal in education, and that is for pupils to obtain a specific fixed standard of achievement in various subject areas. The government and schools should instead increase the number of goals and the variety of these goals, which will assist in meeting individual differences. This necessitates incorporation of a diversity of opportunities for specific pupils. Just like Aristotle, I would also conclude by articulating that, ‘There is nothing as unequal as the equal treatment of unequals.’ Reference List Dworkin, R 1996, Do Liberty and Equality conflict?, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 44 Fryer, R. G, Goeree, J. K., & Holt, C. A. 2005, ‘Experience-based discrimination’ Journal of Economic Education, 36(2), 160-170. Kidwell, S. A. 2007. ‘Discrimination in educational institutions’ Texas Law Review, 79(5), 1287-1320. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203696200?accountid=45049 Pittman, C. T. 2010, ‘Race and Gender Oppression in the Classroom: Teaching Sociology’, 38(3), 183-196. Rawls J 1971, ‘A theory of justice Randall, V. R. 2006, ‘The misuse of the lsat: Discrimination against blacks and other minorities in law school admissions’. St.Johns Law Review, 80(1), 107-143,145-151. Vegas E. 1999, ‘School Choice, Student Performance, and Teacher and School Characteristics: The Chilean Case’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2833 Wadsworth, B., Hecht, M. L., & Jung, E. 2008, ‘The Role of Identity Gaps, Discrimination, and Acculturation in International Students Educational Satisfaction in American Classrooms’. Communication Education, 57(1), 64-87. Read More