equally. For example, I went to Kelly High School, which is a public high school that was on probation and had a great deal of violence and gang problems. Everyday instead of worrying about homework and exams, I was worried about my safety. Mainly all the teachers in that high school made a hasty generalization regarding the students because they believed that all of them were immature and didn’t care about school; however, the few students that did care, like me, were deprived of having a decent quality of education. I wish I had gone to a high school that had exceptional facilities and outstanding teachers in order to focus more on my classes; however, high schools that had high standards were private, hence, they were luxurious and expensive.
…show more content…
This limitation puts on emphasis the idea that the meritocracy is just a fallacy. Although we assume that rewards on today’s society are given out based on merit, the reality is that most people will not advance from their current social class; however, when social vertical mobility does occur, it is mostly based on on social class, gender, or race/ethnicity rather than on merit. From my experiences, I have seen that people on the lower classes face various drawbacks and limitations in social institutions such as in the work force and schools that people in the upper class never experience. More often than not, people in the upper classes have extra resources and networks available to them which allow their future generations to keep their status at expense of the other classes. Furthermore, the lower classes are working exhaustively to obtain success while nearly all of the upper class is literally getting handed that success. This problem goes back to the conflict theory perspective where the upper class controls most of today’s capital, hence, it is in their interest to keep their power by restricting other classes to achieve upward mobility. Finally, something needs to be done in order to stop this cycle in order to establish meritocracy as the most viable way of achieving success and
This limitation puts on emphasis the idea that the meritocracy is just a fallacy. Although we assume that rewards on today’s society are given out based on merit, the reality is that most people will not advance from their current social class; however, when social vertical mobility does occur, it is mostly based on on social class, gender, or race/ethnicity rather than on merit. From my experiences, I have seen that people on the lower classes face various drawbacks and limitations in social institutions such as in the work force and schools that people in the upper class never experience. More often than not, people in the upper classes have extra resources and networks available to them which allow their future generations to keep their status at expense of the other classes. Furthermore, the lower classes are working exhaustively to obtain success while nearly all of the upper class is literally getting handed that success. This problem goes back to the conflict theory perspective where the upper class controls most of today’s capital, hence, it is in their interest to keep their power by restricting other classes to achieve upward mobility. Finally, something needs to be done in order to stop this cycle in order to establish meritocracy as the most viable way of achieving success and