Pursuing Equity in Education: Conflicting Views and Shifting Strategies

Abstract

Under what circumstances will governments in developing countries, infamous for their “bad governance” records, adopt “good governance” institutions and practices, as defined and advocated by international development and donor organisations? What meanings are attached to these initiatives in the adopting countries and to what extent are they similar to those as understood in the developed countries? These questions are discussed in this article in the context of education equity reforms in China and America. Despite their divergent histories and economic and political systems, their experience in terms of education equity reforms is more similar than one would anticipate. Penetrating these similarities is the observation that understanding the specific historical contexts wherein “good governance” reforms have evolved is essential to a proper appreciation of the meanings and significance of the reforms, as institutions and mechanisms, for the furtherance of good governance as an outcome. The nuances of tension and heterogeneity of internal developments in each country, respectively, have interestingly also exposed the parallels between the processes in both.

Key Words:

• School education
• equity and adequacy
• reform processes
• United States of America
• China

Acknowledgements

The research for this article was generously supported by a General Research Grant awarded by the Hong Kong Research Grant Council, “Demarcating the Responsibilities of Government across Tiers in China: Reform Discourse, Change Processes, and Significance” (CityU 9041606). We are thankful for the quality research assistance of project assistants Drs Liu Ying and Roger Yang. An earlier version of this article was presented at the International Workshop on “Good Governance in the Asia-Pacific Region: Civil and Political Society,” City University of Hong Kong, 9–10 December 2010. We are grateful for the comments from the participants. We are particularly thankful to Robert Gregory who was discussant to the article at the Workshop and the anonymous reviewers of this journal for their invaluable suggestions to further improve the article.

Notes

¹ Education features in, amongst others, the Human Development Index (United Nations Development Program) and Sustainable Governance Indicators (Seyfried 2011). Equity is explicitly listed amongst the three major values (with sustainable development and peace) in the World Governance Indicators (World Bank), is one of the four in the Urban Governance Index (United Nations Human Settlements Programme) (with accountability, participation and effectiveness), and one of the eight major characteristics constituting “good governance practices” (with accountability, transparency, responsiveness, effectiveness and efficiency, rule of law, participation and consensus), according to the Economic and Social Conditions Committee for Asia and the Pacific of the United States.

² Views on this matter are at best tentative, however. Lukemeyer (2003) finds that the hypothesis that courts defining their constitutions as imposing an adequacy standard were more likely to rule in favour of plaintiffs cannot be supported. While courts were more likely to accept an adequacy standard, they were also more likely to find the standard met.

³ For an example, see the controversial The Closing of the American Mind, by Alan D. Bloom (1987).

⁴ The relevance of school-related inputs and educational outcomes was once again questioned during the Chicago teachers’ strike in September 2012. The strike triggered heated debates over the need for a broader approach beyond the education/school budget to the dire inequities in educational outcomes in Chicago schools and in the US generally (see Angert 2012).

⁵ It is stated that “the focus for most localities will be to enhance equity in education within the boundary of a county-district, whilst others with the means will improve inter-county equity.” When “basic equity” is achieved by 2020, “the educational resources and quality of education in rural schools will be further improved, and the mechanisms for education equity will be further perfected” (Ministry of Education 2010, paragraphs 2 and 4).

⁶ By 2008, all 50 states had established their respective, and varied, standards for education from kindergarten through grade 12, including both content standards (which describe material that students are to learn) and performance standards (which describe the level of proficiency expected). The current debate is about options to improve state standards and how standards can best improve education results, including the development of voluntary federal standards.