An egalitarian educational system is necessarily opposed to meritocracy and reward for achievement. It is inevitably opposed to procedures that might reveal differing levels of achievement.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
You can't have a competitive, egalitarian meritocracy if only some of your citizens have the opportunity for a good education.
The more that everyone has access to the same educational opportunities, the more society will tend to accept some receiving disproportionate rewards. After all, they themselves have a chance to be winners.
Egalitarian policies are the best way to unite and empower people, and are also a necessary counterweight to the sometimes detrimental influence of market forces.
Higher education should be based on quality, not quantity; receive merit-based funding; and be free of unnecessary bureaucracy. Not the least of the benefits of educational reform is to foster the pride of achievement at national and international levels.
Standardization of our educational systems is apt to stamp out individualism and defeat the very ends of education by leveling the product down rather than up.
Education is a method whereby one acquires a higher grade of prejudices.
Since I have difficulty defining merit and what merit alone means - and in any context, whether it's judicial or otherwise - I accept that different experiences in and of itself, bring merit to the system.
The gap in education in this country, the unfairness of the schools, is one of the great unfairness in this society.
Is class snobbery a social reality in the United States? Absolutely, and the kind that's codified by meritocracy is probably more toxic than the old-fashioned kind based on bloodlines.
The highest result of education is tolerance.
No opposing quotes found.