Social justice in education: how the function of selection in educational institutions predicts support for (non)egalitarian assessment practices

Abstract

Educational institutions are considered a keystone for the establishment of a meritocratic society. They supposedly serve two functions: an educational function that promotes learning for all, and a selection function that sorts individuals into different programs, and ultimately social positions, based on individual merit. We study how the function of selection relates to support for assessment practices known to harm vs. benefit lower status students, through the perceived justice principles underlying these practices. We study two assessment practices: normative assessment—focused on ranking and social comparison, known to hinder the success of lower status students—and formative assessment—focused on learning and improvement, known to benefit lower status students. Normative assessment is usually perceived as relying on an equity principle, with rewards being allocated based on merit and should thus appear as positively associated with the function of selection. Formative assessment is usually perceived as relying on corrective justice that aims to ensure equality of outcomes by considering students’ needs, which makes it less suitable for the function of selection. A questionnaire measuring these constructs was administered to university students. Results showed that believing that education is intended to select the best students positively predicts support for normative assessment, through increased perception of its reliance on equity, and negatively predicts support for formative assessment, through reduced perception of its ability to establish corrective justice. This study suggests that the belief in the function of selection as inherent to educational institutions can contribute to the reproduction of social inequalities by preventing change from assessment practices known to disadvantage lower-status student, namely normative assessment, to more favorable practices, namely formative assessment, and by promoting matching beliefs in justice principles.

The Experience of Low‐SES Students in Higher Education: Psychological Barriers to Success and Interventions to Reduce Social‐Class Inequality

“…Therefore, in this intervention, the exam was presented either as a tool to improve knowledge (i.e., a learning tool, “This exam has been designed to help students in their long‐term learning in statistics”) or as a tool to identify differences in students’ abilities (i.e., a tool for selection, “This exam has been designed to compare students regarding their long‐term learning in statistics”). Consistent with the idea that current exam practices foster the social‐class achievement gap (Autin, Batruch, & Butera, ), results showed that when the exam was presented as a tool for selection, low‐SES students performed worse than high‐SES students. However, when the exam was presented as a tool for learning, low‐SES students performed just as well as high‐SES students.…”

Social justice debate and college access in Latin America: merit or need? The role of educational institutions and states in broadening access to higher education in the region

“…Metaphors associated with this view of fair competition are "leveling the playing field" and "starting gate equality" (Roemer & Trannoy, 2015). Policies such as merit-based admission decisions and meritbased financial aid are deemed to be the most effective in guaranteeing equality of opportunity as all applicants are assessed by the same objective criteria (Autin et al, 2015;Mickelson, 2002). Implicitly or explicitly, these policies recognize that it is possible to empirically determine the two basic components of merit in each student: talent and effort (Young, 1958).…”

Etudier, Mesurer et Manipuler la Classe Sociale en Psychologie Sociale: Approches Economiques, Symboliques et Culturelles [Studying, Measuring and Manipulating Social Class in Social Psychology: Economic, Symbolic and Cultural Approaches]

“…La place assignée à l'école dans l'établissement d'une société méritocratique lui confère deux fonctions distinctes: une fonction de formation qui viserait à développer les savoirs et compé-tences de tous les élèves; une fonction de sélection devant permettre d'orienter chacun vers différents types de formations (e.g., professionnalisante ou générale) et à terme vers la position sociale qui lui conviendrait le mieux au regard de ses aptitudes et motivations (Autin, Batruch, & Butera, 2015;Darnon, Dompnier, Delmas, Pulfrey, & Butera, 2009;Dornbusch, Glasgow, & Lin, 1996). Au-delà de l'idéal d'une sélection basée sur le mérite des individus, la réalité montre que la fonction de sélection s'opère au détriment des élèves de classe populaire, qui sont exclus des formations les plus valorisées (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1970;OCDE, 2014;Palheta, 2011).…”