Democratic Equality And Social Mobility Analysis

The purpose of education in the United States has changed since its beginning. As a growing republic, creating good citizens was a common goal for early education. Curriculum focused on the glory of the United States and valuing hard work and family life filled the one room school houses (Reese 2001). Although this may have been the original purpose of schooling, the change in people’s perceived purpose of education ultimately leads to curriculum, policy, and reform. Labaree described three main purposes of education in his article as democratic equality, social mobility, and social efficiency. In this paper I will describe the benefits and negatives of each and provide evidence as to why I believe democratic equality is an important purpose …show more content…
The idea behind this approach is that each student is responsible for their own success and a society filled with successful people leads to a successful economy. Ideally, every student is granted the ability to achieve any amount of success they are willing to work for, levelling the playing field and allowing for individual determinism of success. However, the option of upward mobility is not an equal possibility for each student. By approaching education as a competition, irreversible inequality is an inevitable outcome. While the approach is meant to level the playing field among students, the reality is much different. Resources are highly influential when it comes to the academic success of students, whether those resources are access to good teachers, good schools, monetary resources, or support from family, they are affecting the success of the student either positively or negatively. Again, certain groups are being denied any upward mobility (Labaree …show more content…
Using education to teach values raises the question of “Whose values are these?” An approach like this offers a possibility of assimilation of culture into an “American” only culture, which would ultimately lead to inequality of those who do not fit into the category of “American.” The design of this approach would need to be carefully constructed and allow for cultural differences and teachings of cultural differences as well (Labaree 1997). However, Labaree makes another point in the article to say that all these approaches are politically charged in their own way and that each offers both negatives and positives. An approach that combines these purposes would be more ideal than focusing on a singular purpose for education, and these purposes will change through time as society does. An important take away when discussing the purpose of education is to realize the consequences an approach could take, particularly when it is possible for it to affect