Whom Must We Treat Equally for Educational Opportunity to be Equal?

Abstract

Americans never argue about whether educational opportunity should be equal. Egalitarians say equal opportunity is not enough. Pragmatists say it is unattainable. But no significant group defends unequal opportunity, either in education or elsewhere. Instead of arguing about the desirability of equal educational opportunity, we argue about its meaning. We all assume that equal opportunity is compatible with our vision of a good society. Since we disagree about what such a society should be like, we usually disagree about the meaning of equal educational opportunity as well. Everyone's conception of equal educational opportunity requires that educational institutions equals equally. But we have dramatically different views about whom educational institutions should treat equally and whom they can legitimately treat unequally. Indeed, the enduring popularity of equal educational opportunity probably derives from the fact that we can all define it in different ways without realizing how profound our differences really are. This paper discusses five common ways of thinking about equal educational opportunity, each of which draws on a different tradition and each of which has different practical consequences.1 To illustrate both the differences among these five conceptions of equal opportunity