On Social Justice and Education

Every morning, diverse groups of American students – rich and poor, black and white, rural and urban, gay and straight — begin the school day by rising, facing the flag, and pledging allegiance to a country that claims to be indivisible, ensuring liberty and justice for all. Students learn about the core democratic value of equality, which dictates that Americans have the basic right of equal treatment regardless of background, belief, economic status, race, religion, or sex. In addition, they learn about the core democratic value of justice, a fundamental belief that American society offers the same benefits and has the same obligations to all of its citizens. While both of these values teach students that individuals and groups are not favored over other individuals or groups, we need not look further than the very system that champions these tenets of social justice, the American education system, to recognize that disparate inequalities not only exist, but continue to be perpetuated.

In 21st century America, there is an ever-widening gap between the haves and the have-nots, a situation exacerbated by a combination of the deregulation and trickle-down economic policies instituted by the Reagan administration, the anti-worker legislation enacted during the Clinton administration, as well as the continued support of  big business and tax breaks for the rich to the detriment of the middle and lower classes by the Bush II administration. Where America should have been moving toward an enlightened society, its policies have ushered in a New Feudalism where other industrialized nations have instituted much more progressive policies. Social justice in education implies that all students have equal education opportunities. My experience as a classroom teacher tells me this is not the case. In a school that has a distinct socioeconomic disparity, where a contingent arrives at school each morning driving new cars – it’s not uncommon to see a BMW or new SUV in the student lot – and another arrives by bus, students are offered the same curricular and extra-curricular choices, but socioeconomic conditions – students’ access to money and their ability to pay for, among other things, Advanced Placement tests, ACT or SAT exams, private tutoring, pay-to-play sports, field trips, and yearbooks – highlight a very real distinction in opportunity. Very often, it is the low SES students who populate remedial and special education classes, while their counterparts schedule college preparatory classes. To say that every child has the same educational opportunities may be correct on paper, but this is not a reality.

But the inequality that exists in our education system should not surprise anyone.  For years, research has indicated that socioeconomics are a significant factor in educating. Cultural Psychologist Jerome Bruner, in The Culture of Education (1996), explores “the impact of poverty, racism, and alienation on the mental life and growth of [children]” (p. xiii) explaining that “effective education is always in jeopardy either in the culture at large or with constituencies more dedicated to maintaining a status quo than to fostering flexibility” (p. 15). And the status quo has always been driven by political motivations to perpetuate an underclass to support industry.

Throughout the 20^th century, when the American economy relied on manufacturing, industry required workers who could perform simple, repetitive tasks requiring little or no education; it was not in manufacturers’ best interest to cultivate an educated work force. In contrast, the 21^st century’s shift to an information-based economy necessitates a work force that is highly literate, technologically adept, and able to think critically to problem solve, goals that are not readily achieved by all students given the schools’ rampant inequities in funding, teacher preparedness, school environment, and a host of other issues. While the most successful schools spend more money per student than the least successful, a function of economic and geographical segregation, in the last eight years the federal government decided that it would rather mandate what it deemed to be a solution of higher standards for all students through No Child Left Behind’s unfunded legislation than address systemic issues like poverty and racism, which are at the heart of the problem.

In order to address these issues, we must ask ourselves if we are ready to change the status quo. Bruner points out, “Education is risky, for it fuels the sense of possibility. But a failure to equip minds with the skills for understanding and feeling and acting in the cultural world … risks creating alienation, defiance, and practical incompetence” (pp. 42-43).  

For much too long, the American education system has functioned as a divisive tool where the wealthy received a liberal education to perpetuate the ruling class, while the workers received enough education to make them functional components of industrial productivity. Inherent inequalities in schooling have persisted and have been maintained, because equal education for all Americans is a dangerous proposition that could very well upset the status quo.  Dewey believed that education was crucial to shaping a society, because intelligence, behavior, and knowledge can change (Fishman, 1998).  It is time to facilitate change in our schools to afford equality and justice for all.

 

References

Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Fishman, S. M. (1998). Dewey’s Ideology and His Classroom Critics. In S.M. Fishman, & L. McCarthy, John Dewey and the Challenge of Classroom Practice (pp. 57 – 67). New York: Teachers College Press.