Education Free and Compulsory

Theory and Society, 1975

Theory and Research in Education, 2005

My syllabus for a graduate course on political philosophy and educational theory.

Euromentor Journal, 2019

The article discusses the problem of equality in education, particularly in the field of access to education. It presents contemporary philosophical trends in regard to this subject matter, explaining the difference between formal equality and substantive one. The conception of educational adequacy is also presented. What is more, the author shows how previously elitist views are still – in a legitimate way – part of principles governing the problem. When it comes to legal considerations, the paper delivers comprehensive outlook on provisions guaranteed in the United Nations system of protection of human rights with respect to equality in education. Inefficiency of these provisions is portrayed as one of the causes of recent changes in the area of right to education, that afflicts also the problem of educational equality.

The goal of this paper is to identify and justify a normative principle that allows for an identification of inequalities incompatible with educational justice. To reach that goal, three alternative versions of egalitarianism are discussed: luck egalitarianism, threshold (minimalist) egalitarianism, and respect egalitarianism. Respect egalitarianism can be closely linked to the model of epistemic justice, which was recently the subject of intensive, far reaching discussions in the field of philosophy of education. This paper argues that the approaches of both luck egalitarianism and threshold egalitarianism are inadequate to satisfy the aim of this paper. Luck egalitarianism entails the “bottomless pit problem” that seems to be conceptually and politically unsolvable. Additionally, luck egalitarians tend to interpret education as a positional, distributive good whose primary value is extrinsic. This stance ignores that education is foremost concerned with the growth of knowledge—a non-positional good whose worth is primarily intrinsic. On the other hand, threshold egalitarians do not offer a conceptual means of discriminating between just and unjust educational inequalities that lie above the capability threshold required by individuals to participate in the political life of society and/or to live a life of dignity. The approach of respect egalitarianism avoids these shortcomings. According to this approach, the most crucial form of educational injustice is treating select groups of students with disrespect by disregarding their beliefs, experiences, ideals, and achievements, as well as their knowledge-ability. Educational injustice appears both as a lack of empathy and cognitive respect toward students. To overcome this educational injustice, educational institutions should design and implement forms of teaching that equally include the beliefs and experiences of all students. Teachers should use these beliefs and experiences as a point of departure for addressing academic classroom content.

2021

The child has the right to be prepared for a responsible life in a free society, in a spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of the sexes and friendship between all peoples and ethnic, national and religious groups and people of autochthonous origin. Parents cannot escape the educational challenge, neither from a legal point of view, nor from an ethical and moral one, because the value of education immediately evokes the relationship between the individual and his reality and therefore his ability to be in tune with himself and with others. If education is a right, then it can and must be demanded. Consequently, in the cases where this right appears to be violated, the institutions must help children, in order to be able to replace, to some extent, the figures appointed to educate them and that have proven to be inadequate with respect to such an important task.

Theory and Research in Education, 2005

Most of the discussion about equality in education is focused on how to equalize access to and participation within different levels of formal education for different social groups . While equalizing access and participation are key equality objectives, we need a more holistic and integrated approach to the achievement of equality in education if we are to make schools truly egalitarian institutions. Drawing on extensive empirical research we have undertaken on education 1 and our work in Equality: From Theory to Action (2004) we begin by setting out the basic principles of equality of condition that we believe are essential for promoting equality in education. We then outline how these principles apply to four major equality problems in education. We suggest that equality in education can only be achieved if we recognize the deeply integrated relationship that exists between education and the economic, political, socio-cultural and affective systems in society.

Should education advance the greater common good or should it promote the individual liberties of students? This seems to be an important question in the philosophy of education and could be a starting point for the elucidation of an educational philosophy. But before a response to this question is attempted, the richness of the question itself must first be understood with better clarity. In this particular juncture, I propose to carry out this endeavour of clarifying the question, in order to attain a better understanding of its fullness, by breaking it down into the different notions it invokes, then afterwards synthesizing it into the overall tone of the question.

Research on disrupting inequality in education can benefit from situating it within the debates on varying and often conflicting meanings of equality and its perils and promises. Especially in the wake of achievement testing and resurgent biological determinism, researchers continue to equivocate between commitment to the idea that all humans are equal in their core capacities versus the tendency to attribute developmental outcomes to differences in " natural " inborn talents and endowments. This chapter examines contemporary research and theorizing to address the tenet of fundamental equality to counter biological determinism laden with mythic racial, gender, and other types of unproven assumptions and biases. Drawing on a wide range of emerging positions and evidence across neurosciences, epigenetics, developmental systems perspective, and cultural-historical framework, the core argument is that all persons have infinite potential—incalculable in advance, unlimited, and not predefined in terms of any putatively inborn " endowments. " This potential is realized in the course of activity-dependent generation of open-ended, dynamic, and situated developmental processes that are critically reliant upon sociocultural supports, tools, mediations, and access to requisite resources, especially through education. An educational policy along these lines would be centrally premised on the imperative to remedy the effects of discrimination and marginalization.