2
Excellence and Equity
The future well-being of all countries is dependent on ensuring excellence in education and equity of outcomes for all students. Leaders from business, industry, and labor, as well as policy makers and parents, are asking their governments to ensure increasing success for all students, regardless of background or personal circumstances. Demands for greater accountability in investments in education are reverberating as politicians make promises to constituents to provide value for money and to bring about change with a sense of urgency. There is an expectation that school systems will achieve both excellence and equity and will ensure that more students graduate from high school.
Excellence and Equity
Achieving excellence and equity requires that educators raise the bar and close achievement gaps. There must be discernible improvement for all groups along the achievement spectrum. It means that schools are expected to create the conditions for success for all students, especially those who have not seen success in large numbers in the past. This includes groups such as students in special education programs, immigrants, boys, and students living in poverty. The primary intent is to ensure that schools help students overcome any barriers or limitations placed on them by virtue of background factors.
One of the ways to determine if we have an equitable system is to disaggregate achievement data along demographic and other lines that divide people in society. The notion is that intelligence exists in all groups. If, indeed, we believe that all children can learn and achieve with proper supports, then it is our responsibility as educators to ensure that students from all backgrounds are represented along the continuum. If any group is clustered at the bottom of the achievement ladder, it is evidence enough that the system is not an equitable one. One of the primary purposes of schools is to ensure success for all students.
One of the most popular discussions today is that a good education includes what are being described as 21st century skills. Wagner (2008) refers to some of these skills as survival skills. He advocates strongly for the schooling that students will need if they are to be prepared to function in a global economy. This schooling would focus on the following skills:
1. Critical thinking and problem solving
2. Collaboration and leadership
3. Agility and adaptability
4. Initiative and entrepreneurialism
5. Effective oral and written communication
6. Accessing and analyzing information
7. Curiosity and imagination
The 21st century learning movement has gained momentum in recent years. There are some individuals, including educators, who believe that schools have always taught these skills, which can be found in one form or another in curriculum documents written over the last 15 years. Others will admit that, at best, they are platitudinous statements that have never been made concrete or resulted in practical and relevant skill-development initiatives. In any event, these skills are back on the agenda with extensive support that they should be taught in a systematic and intentional manner to prepare students to compete in the global community.
Sternberg (2008) posits that the way we define excellence determines our path toward achieving it. He discusses four models of excellence and concludes that excellence means achieving above average. Valiga (2010) asserts that excellence is a habit or way of life, a process. It involves challenging ourselves to do things beyond what we have mastered. It also means having a growth orientation.
For us, excellence is about constantly pushing the boundaries to reach higher—stretching oneself to achieve ever-moving targets and soaring to the zenith of possibilities. It is about doing one’s personal best and having a strong belief that only the best is good enough. It is about what grandparents would have said many years ago when lamps were in vogue and electricity was not in widespread use. Those who strive for excellence were willing to “burn the midnight oil.”
VanTassel-Baska (1997) approaches excellence from the vantage point of the individual’s habits of mind, as well as the process of working toward an ideal standard and attaining a consistently high standard of performance in an endeavor that is socially valued and accepted.
There are still some educators who see equity and excellence as polar opposites and who claim that they cannot be pursued or achieved simultaneously. Our experience tells us that they must both co-exist. If, for example, a school system is to be described as excellent, it means that all students are achieving at their highest potential. The notion of raising the bar and closing the gaps is the excellence that equity requires. VanTassel-Baska (1997) agrees that these concepts are both necessary and must be held in “creative tension.” At the very least, we see these as complementary approaches.
Gross (1989) equates excellence with the need to achieve success and the motivation to learn at high levels. Gardner (1961) defines excellence as striving for quality in all areas of a society. Roeper (1996) views excellence as a standard for gifted students to achieve in psychic terms, learning to develop as ethical and moral human beings.
Silverman (1993) maintains that excellence cannot be defined solely as success because our culture refuses to recognize the contributions of many disenfranchised groups, particularly women, who attain excellence in areas like homemaking and childrearing. Thus, excellence may be conceived of as a synonym for success, achievement, or psychic growth, depending on one’s definitional structure.
There are three seminal writers in the field of equity in terms of their discussion of what is described as culturally responsive pedagogy. They are Gay (1990), Asante (1991), and Hilliard (2008). It is the perspective of Gay that, for students to be successful, curriculum must be pluralistic in its content and methodology. Teaching is a socio-cultural process in which success for culturally different students requires certain skills and awareness on the part of the teacher.
These skills include the conceptualization of equity in terms of comparability or equivalence of learning opportunities for diverse learners instead of as the same treatment for everyone. Gay (1990) seeks to encourage teachers to become aware of their routine teaching behaviors, which militate against educational equity, and to modify instructional procedures to accommodate cultural differences. She emphasizes that knowing how to differentiate instruction to make high-status knowledge accessible to all students is the essence of equity. Certain types of knowledge should not be the sole province of students who are fast learners. Teaching with equity means that all students must gain fluency in their ways of knowing, studying, asking, answering and understanding, cogitating, expressing, and engaging others. Furthermore, it means helping students from diverse backgrounds to broaden their repertoires of learning strategies and skills.
One of Gay’s (1990) most important contributions to the understanding of equity is her caution against confusing educational means with educational ends. We are not to equate the differentiating of instructional methods with the lowering of educational standards—a stance often taken by individuals who are not yet convinced that differentiation is essential in the teaching and learning process. Equity and excellence, far from being polar opposites, she observed, are inextricably intertwined. In fact, they are two sides of the same coin.
Hilliard (2008), who also wrote extensively on the topic of culturally responsive pedagogy, stated that if curriculum is centered in truth, it is pluralistic—that such a curriculum presents a truthful and meaningful rendition of the whole human experience for the simple fact that human culture is the product of the struggles of all humanity and not the province of a single racial or ethnic group. He was forceful in his conclusion that “curriculum catechism” and “cultural totalitarianism” are more associated with propaganda than with truth.
Asante (1991) says that educators must ensure curriculum equity if we are to center students in ways that make learning interesting and intimate. Centering can reduce feelings of dislocation engendered by a curriculum that does not enhance the self-esteem of students who do not belong to the dominant culture. It is Asante’s view that respect is an essential component of empowerment. In turn, students feel empowered when they are part of what they create and they can relate to the information used in the classroom.
Asante (1991) observes that schools have a profoundly mono-cultural approach to information and knowledge. This worldview, he emphasizes, does not capture or grasp the attention of students of diverse background—many of whom, after some time, refuse to learn. He asserts that students must become agents rather than subjects and that it is necessary for them to develop an “organic relationship” with the subject matter. It is wrong for some children to go through school with no positive identification with their own cultures. As educators, it is important for us to continue to ensure that curriculum reflects the life experiences of our students. One may begin with illustrations, references, and examples from the students’ cultural backgrounds. Congruence between the world of the student and the curriculum can increase motivation, and, in turn, can contribute to student success and retention.
The statement that the curriculum should not alienate the student must be considered when we educate in diverse settings. Often, books or knowledge that are considered to be the “classics” for dominant groups are seen as sources of pain and shame for racialized groups. Educators committed to equity may well heed the saying “Where you stand depends on where you sit.”
The need to solicit the feelings of students and the impact of the curriculum on their sensibilities is an important aspect of educating for equity, diversity, and inclusion.
Characteristics of Effective Teachers in Diverse Backgrounds
Teachers who are comfortable with diversity and who often choose to work in these contexts require certain qualities to be effective. In addition to being free of biases and prejudices, they should have
• a strong belief in the ability of students to be successful,
• a belief that the skills to educate all children successfully can be learned,
• pedagogical expertise and competence,
• commitment to collaboration,
• a willingness to explore a wide range of strategies,
• a relentless focus on improvement,
• the will to persist in spite of challenges,
• a belief that excellence and equity must co-exist, and
• a conviction that teachers of all backgrounds can develop the empathy and teaching strategies necessary to teach students from diverse backgrounds successfully and to make a difference in their lives
The Global Preoccupation With Increasing Graduation Rates
Internationally, one of the most popular goals of governments is to increase graduation rates. A good education and an educated populace are linked to economic stability, national prosperity, and social well-being, among other benefits. Parents want their children to be better educated than they were. Governments want a more educated workforce. Society, in general, wants a more educated citizenry in the quest to sustain democracy. Raising the level of education by improving graduation rates has become an international preoccupation. With that goes the clarion call to educators to work with students who need support to make it to the finishing line.
Numerous reports have shown that the investment in education improves psychological, social, and economic conditions, not just for individuals but also for society as a whole (e.g., Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009). Additionally, research has shown that the challenge to improve education outcomes is achievable in a relatively short time. We now know that we can, through targeted interventions and innovative strategies, raise the bar for all students and close the achievement gaps once thought to be insuperable. The success of the Ontario improvement strategy is one case in point.
International Comparisons
Internationally, there are many educational systems that are realizing great success in improving achievement for all students. Barber and Mourshed (2007) studied 25 of the world’s school systems, including 10 of the highest performing. Based on comparative assessments of student achievement on these international tests, Ontario was ranked as one of the top 10 high-performing school systems in the world. They examined characteristics that these top performers had in common and strategies they used to improve student achievement. They found three key factors:
1. Getting the right people to become teachers
2. Developing them into effective instructors
3. Ensuring the system is available to deliver the best possible instruction for every child
As well, they identified the following lessons learned:
In 2010, the researchers conducted a follow-up study, which showed that Ontario, along with four other jurisdictions (Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Saxony, Germany), was able to sustain the gains it had made to further improve student success (Mourshed, Chijioke, & Barber, 2010). Ontario was identified as a “great system.” According to OECD, as well, Ontario is considered across the world as one of the fastest-improving systems. What makes Ontario such an exciting international example is that, not too long ago, it was considered by many to be a system in crisis. Now, it is seen as one of the few jurisdictions that continue to demonstrate that excellence and equity can go hand in hand.
A 2011 OECD report concluded that Canada has become a world leader in improving student achievement. The report acknowledges the strides that have been made in Ontario and commends the province’s focus on capacity building and reliance on the professionalism of teachers and principals (p. 65). In addition to realizing excellence in performance, the system is given credit for achieving progress and for improved performance in spite of socioeconomic status, first language, or status as native Canadians or recent immigrants. For OECD, this shows how consistent application of centrally driven pressure for higher results, combined with extensive capacity building and a climate of relative trust and mutual respect, have enabled the Ontario system to achieve progress on key indicators.
Research clearly shows us that the highest-performing school systems are those that not only strive for excellence but are committed to equity of outcomes as well. In his research paper conducted for the UNESCO Institute of Statistics Willms (2006), points out that
successful schools tend to be those that bolster the performance of students from less advantaged backgrounds. Similarly, countries that have the highest levels of performance tend to be those that are successful in not only raising the learning bar, but also levelling it. (p. 67)
Achieving both excellence and equity was foundational to Ontario’s improvement strategy. If we are to achieve our goal of having more graduates, it is necessary to support all students, regardless of background factors, to be successful in our school systems.
When examining school achievement data, it is evident that there are groups of students who have historically underperformed. Children whose families live in poverty, who come from minoritized backgrounds, Aboriginal students, and students who may not speak the dominant language often are overrepresented in the low-performing ranks of our schools. If we are to improve our graduation rates, we must ensure that supports are in place to give these students a hand up. In recent years, many jurisdictions across Canada and other countries have been focusing on the need to achieve equity of outcomes for students from diverse populations. The need to raise the bar for all students and to close the gap for those who are not achieving is being strongly emphasized.
Across Canada, provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and British Columbia, for example, have identified equity goals and policies for their systems.
The Ontario Ministry of Education recently published a strategy document titled Realizing the Promise of Diversity: Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy (2009). This is currently being implemented in all Ontario schools. It begins by highlighting the three core priorities of the government, asserting that the goals and intentions remain the same in the implementation of the equity strategy:
• High levels of student achievement
• Reduced gaps in student achievement
• Increased public confidence in publicly funded education
The strategy affirms the belief of Canadians in multiculturalism, human rights, and diversity as fundamental values while acknowledging that racism, homophobia, sexism, and other anti-human values still exist. It specifically mentions cyberbullying, hate propaganda on the Internet, and homophobia as issues of major concerns to parents and students alike. In recent years, there have been documented incidents of bullying, anti-black racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia. Whereas these acts are by no means pervasive, the issue is that when students attend school, they have a right to be free of harassment, violence, and malice in speech or action, and that schools have an obligation to provide a positive learning environment for all students and staffs. This reassurance is necessary given the diversity that currently exists in schools. Students who feel marginalized in any way need support to do well and to perform at their best.
The commitment to equity and diversity provides a strong statement of belief in Ontario’s diversity as one of its greatest assets. Respecting and valuing the range of differences that exists in this society is one way of realizing the promise of diversity. Likewise, the centrality of an equitable and inclusive education in creating a cohesive society and a strong economy helps to ensure and secure the future prosperity of the province. This is an important focus of Ontario’s equity strategy.
The vision for equity paints a compelling picture of an inclusive education system in which all students, parents, and other members of the school community are welcomed and respected, and every student is supported and inspired to succeed in a culture of high expectations for learning.
The guiding principles for Ontario’s equity strategy indicate that an equitable and inclusive education
• is a foundation of excellence,
• meets individual needs,
• identifies and eliminates barriers,
• promotes a sense of belonging,
• involves the broad community,
• builds on and enhances previous and existing initiatives, and
• is demonstrated throughout the system.
Ontario has set out clear goals and timelines for all school districts to follow in implementing the expectations of the provincial strategy. The Ministry of Education has provided guidance, support, and professional learning opportunities to assist with the implementation process. Each district is expected to have a clear equity policy with a lead person appointed to ensure implementation. Schools are required to ensure a safe, supportive, positive, and inclusive environment that strengthens equity and diversity.
The concrete actions that have resulted from the equity policy and the requirement that districts report to the Ministry of Education on the progress of this strategy in the annual report of the director of education (chief superintendent) provide a clear signal that the Ministry takes this strategy very seriously.
What are some of the indicators of an equitable school? A few jurisdictions have developed their own documents to assist in the identification of these indicators. The York Region District School Board in Toronto, for example, has worked on this issue over many years and has several documents on its website related to equity issues. Please refer to www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca for policies, programs, and documents, one of which addresses specifically the notion of ensuring student success by identifying antiracist indicators for an antiracist school.
The following are a few of the indicators that will help to determine if equity is being taken seriously in a school or district:
• High expectations for achievement are communicated to and expected of students and staff.
• Curriculum materials are reviewed continuously for biases such as those related to race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other grounds included in human rights codes.
• Curriculum resources, subject content, and textbooks are selected for inclusiveness, relevance, and applicability to the lives of students and are screened to avoid bias.
• The curriculum is user-friendly and does not exclude or alienate students.
• Classroom instruction is culturally responsive to the diverse school population.
• The school staff members are reflective of the larger community.
• The staff members are able to recognize and deal with prejudice in themselves and in students.
• The staff address systemic barriers that limit the life chances of students.
• The teaching and classroom practices are free of bias.
• Achievement data are disaggregated by race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other variables to ascertain specific student needs.
• Students see themselves and their cultural backgrounds reflected in the curriculum.
• Zero tolerance for racism and other human rights issues is clearly articulated.
• Parents feel welcome in the school and are encouraged to play a meaningful role in their children’s education.
• Cultural and class biases in standardized tests are recognized and are not used as a basis for decision making about program selection and placement of students.
• To an outsider, placement in programs (such as special education) and learning groups would not appear to be based on race, gender, or social class.
• Students are demitted regularly from special education programs.
• The culture and management of the school are bias free.
• Discipline is applied consistently and fairly.
• Those who graduate from the school reflect the race, gender, and socioeconomic diversity that exists in the school.
Too often, students who are at risk of dropping out of school do not feel that they are valued members of the school community. They often do not see themselves in the curriculum or recognize the relevance of material studied. When conducting research factors that cause students to drop out of school, Ferguson, Tilleczek, Boydell, and Anneke Rummens (2005) identified the main risk factors for youth from visible minorities dropping out of school. These factors included the following:
• Exposure to stereotypes and prejudice in school
• Streaming, or being “forced out” of the regular school program
• Difficult interactions with school administrators
• Higher rates of detentions, suspensions, and retentions
• Unfair and/or ineffective discipline
• Nonrelevant curriculum
• Low academic involvement
• Low familial educational levels
• Limited support for remaining in school
• Early assumption of adult roles
While the school cannot control all of these factors, it is evident that much can be done at the school level to help mitigate these issues.
We must realize that if the status quo is not working for all of our students, it is up to all educators to make changes in current policy, practices, and behaviors that will help all of our students to be successful. We need to make all students and their families feel welcome and valued in our schools. We need to reflect honestly on our own biases and attitudes to ensure our expectations for certain groups of students are not negatively influenced. Schools control many of the conditions for the success of our students, and it is through our collective efforts that we help students increase their life choices and chances. Helping all students graduate from high school opens many doors for a brighter future.
References
feAsante, M. K. (1991). The Afrocentric idea in education. The Journal of Negro Education, 60(2), 170–180.
Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top. London: McKinsey & Company.
Ferguson, B., Tilleczek, K., Boydell, K., & Anneke Rummens, K. (2005). Early school leavers: Understanding the lived reality of student disengagement from secondary school: Final report. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.
Gay, G. (1990). Achieving educational equality through curriculum desegregation. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(1), 56–62.
Gardner, J. (1961). Excellence: Can we be equal and excellent too? New York: Harper.
Gross, M. U. M. (1989). The pursuit of excellence or the search for intimacy? The forced-choice dilemma of gifted youth. Roeper Review, 11(4), 189–194.
Hilliard, A. G., III (1991). Why we must pluralize the curriculum. Educational Leadership, 49(4), 12–16.
Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C., & Barber, M. (2010). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better.New York: McKinsey Company.
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2009). Realizing the promise of diversity: Ontario’s equity and inclusive education policy. Toronto: Author.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2011). Lessons from PISA for the United States. Paris: Author.
Roeper, A. (1996). A personal statement of philosophy of George & Annemarie Roeper. Roeper Review, 19(1), 18–19.
Royal Commission on Learning. (1994). For the love of learning: Report of the Royal Commission on Learning. Toronto: Publications Ontario.
Silverman, L. (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love Publishing Company.
Sternberg, R. (2008). Excellence for all. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 14–19.
Valiga, T. M. (2010). Excellence—does the word mean anything anymore? Journal of Nursing Education, 49(8), 427–428.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1997). Excellence as a standard for all education. Roeper Review, 20(1), 9–13.
Wagner, T. (2008). Rigour redefined. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 20–25.
Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why equality is better for everyone. London: Penguin Books.
Willms, D. (2006). Learning divides: Ten policy questions about the performance and equity of schools and school systems. Montreal, PQ: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.