A Matter of Justice

For all the questions raised with regard to Christopher Jencks's use of statistical evidence, for all the related questions having to do with forensic social science, there is a general agreement on the main finding in Inequality. Among the many reviewers, Christopher Lasch states it most succinctly: "There is little correlation between income and the quality of schooling, and school reform can no longer be regarded, therefore, as an effective means of equalizing income. To put the matter more broadly, equalizing opportunity will not guarantee equal results." I wish to respond to this from the vantage point of an educator interested in finding ways of enabling diverse individuals to learn how to learn. Concerned about deprivations and injustices, I recognize that they cannot be overcome by treating people the same, no matter how important equality of result may seem. As I see it, "the quality of schooling" is in part a function of its fairness. Fundamental to a conception of fairness is the notion "that distinctions should be made if there are relevant differences and that they should not be made if there are no relevant differences or on the basis of irrelevant differences." It is my impression that the intention behind school reform in the last decade was to make distinctions (through compensatory and remedial education, for example) on the basis of differences in achievement due in large measure to previous neglect, segregation, humiliation, and the ravages of poverty. Hobbled by lack of support, never adequately tested, reform has not been proven to be a failure unless one insists on income equality as the criterion.