It is commonly acknowledged that children should have equal access to education. The two observations regarding education and children that inform this thesis are as follows: first, that an individual’s life chances in terms of success in the labour market, readiness for democratic citizenship, and overall human flourishing are greatly influenced by their education; and second, that an individual’s life chances should not be fixed by certain morally arbitrary circumstances of their birth, such as their social class, race, or gender. However, there is a great deal of debate regarding the exact definition of education equality opportunity and its implications (see Jencks 1988). This entry offers a critical analysis of those disagreements’ origins and nature. To provide context for the conversation, we will present three crucial elements that highlight the significance of considering educational opportunity equality separately from broader theories of equality of opportunity. These include the following: the importance of education equality in contemporary society and the plethora of opportunities it provides; the fact that many children lack access to high-quality educational opportunities; and the crucial role that the state plays in supplying educational opportunities. These characteristics set education apart from a lot of other social goods. We then give a brief overview of the evolution of legal interpretations of equality of opportunity and how it has been interpreted in the United States since the 1950s regarding educational opportunity. The issues at the heart of ongoing litigation in the United States are affected by our subsequent analysis. However, the goal of our philosophical discussion is to be more inclusive by trying to make sense of the most appealing competing conceptions of the concept.

The Importance of Learning

For people and societies as a whole, education equality has intrinsic and instrumental value. These days, it is unlikely that any child could be expected to succeed in life if they are not given equal access to education,” the U.S. Supreme Court said in its majority ruling in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). The primary objectives of K–12 education for individuals are increased access to higher education and a host of private benefits that come with a college degree, such as better health care, more vacation time, and interesting jobs; increased mobility both personally and professionally; improved decision-making abilities; and increased out Additional research indicates that wealth and health are related to education levels, an individual’s likelihood of being wealthy and healthy increases with her level of education. However, education equality is also regarded as having inherent value. Whatever the effects on wealth or health, cultivating one’s abilities and talents can be a fulfilling endeavour in and of itself, as well as a vital part of a fulfilling life. Amy at work (Institute for Higher Education Equality Policy, 1998). Education is beneficial for society in addition to being intrinsically and instrumentally valuable to an individual. Knowledgeable and productive labourers who can satisfy preferences and create social surplus are valuable to all societies. Democratic societies also need to produce citizens who can take part in the shared governance initiative. There is a clear and substantial relationship between civic engagement and educational attainment. Citizens with higher levels of education are more likely to vote because they are better informed about politics, have greater opportunities to develop and use civic skills, and are generally more interested in politics (Verba, Schlozman, & Brady 1995: 432–437, 445; Dee 2004). Consequently, it is comparatively uncontroversial to assert that education equality is an extremely valuable good for society as a whole and individuals as well, particularly in democracies. This underscores the significance of addressing the issues of the distribution of high-quality educational opportunities and who should have access to them.

Few Opportunities for High-Quality Education Equality

Given the limited resources devoted to education, concerns regarding the equitable distribution of educational opportunities are particularly difficult to answer. Education funding is always in competition with the need to provide citizens with other social goods, even in developed societies where some citizens receive free education. The cost of using education to maximise children’s chances in life would be giving up these other social goods, as Amy Gutmann states (Gutmann 1999: 129). Higher education is therefore somewhat scarce, even in highly productive societies, because public funds for education must be balanced against other basic welfare needs (such as housing, healthcare, and food) and cultural goods (such as museums, parks, and concert halls). There are numerous ways in which this scarcity of higher education within the United States, which attracts candidates from everywhere in the world, is evident. Less than 10% of candidates are regularly coming into the surprisingly selective colleges and universities in the United States, in which there may be fierce opposition to admission. In this subject, wealthy parents will on occasion go to tremendous lengths to assist their children’s applications by deciding to buy extracurricular sports, tutoring, and admissions coaching, activities that can place applicants without these resources at an enormous disadvantage all through the admissions process. The recent “varsity blues” scandal, in which affluent families paid a college coach millions of dollars in exchange for admission to prestigious U.S. universities, is a prime example of the intense competition associated with selective universities. How to access to high-quality primary and secondary education is essentially restricted to children whose families can afford housing in middle-class neighbourhoods or who have access to private schools via tuition or scholarships is a more pressing demonstration of the scarcity of educational opportunities in the United States and many other societies. A third factor that emphasizes how important it is to think about how educational opportunities are distributed is the fact that, in the majority of developed societies, the state provides and regulates the vast majority of these opportunities. It is legally required in every developed society for children to attend school for a specific number of years. This means that, in contrast to other policy levers, education equality is usually managed by state institutions and can reach children from all backgrounds, including those based on race, religion, class, and gender. Furthermore, considering all of the advantages that education offers, it is perhaps the most effective way for a state to affect the lives of its citizens. Because of this, education may be the most significant role that government plays.

A Brief Overview of US History Regarding Education Equality Opportunity

There are unique restrictions on education distribution because it is a government-mandated function and an opportunity that the government primarily provides. If justice demands anything, it is that governments show the same care and respect for all of their citizens. For instance, the state cannot legitimately give kids different benefits based on things like gender or race. Discrimination of this kind can be particularly harmful to children and is not lost on them, even when it results from indirect state actions like property tax funding for schools. Children from low-income and minority backgrounds may internalize the belief that the state is less interested in fostering their interests and abilities if they observe, for instance, that their more advantaged peers attend public schools with better resources—a conclusion that can often be reached by merely comparing the physical appearance of school buildings. Children in this situation experience the dignity injury of believing that, in the eyes of the state, they are inferior to their peers (Kozol 1991, 2005). Since the development of one’s talents is at risk, this harm is particularly harmful to one’s sense of self-respect. Rawls refers to this as “the social basis of self-respect,” and it is largely dependent on one’s ability to pursue their ideas of what is right. Considering the value of education equality to both individuals and society as a whole, the market cannot determine how education is distributed; all children, including those whose parents would be unable or unwilling to pay for it, must have access to it. Furthermore, the content of education must be specifically designed to achieve these goals if it is to help prepare young people for participation in the labour market, democratic governance, and, more broadly, leading fulfilling lives. In the sections that follow, we will discuss issues related to the content of education. First, we will examine how the concept of equality of opportunity has been interpreted in the United States, where some stark consequences result from a narrow interpretation of the concept. An analysis of important stances in discussions concerning educational opportunity equality has been provided in this entry. We first discussed the reasons for being concerned about equality in this field before reviewing discussions regarding the importance and allocation of these opportunities. As the discussion above makes clear, conflicting ideas about what equality means and other significant values that conflict with equalizing educational opportunities (like honouring family autonomy) may make it difficult to realize the ideal of equality of educational opportunity. New developments in social science have helped us better understand the reasons behind children’s unequal access to school and how those differences affect social mobility (e.g., Chetty et al., 2014; Duncan & Murnane, 2011). With this information, policymakers can focus their interventions on areas where they will have the biggest effects (such as expanding awareness of the value of early childhood education equality). However, value tensions such as those described in this entry will always exist, and as our knowledge of the origins and effects of education equality deepens, philosophers should continue to address them.

The Evolution of Petrol Logos