Collective Good

(In Education)
Emily Hart
The idea that the purpose of schooling is to provide equal
opportunity for all students as well as the ability to deal with diverse
others in the public arena, a common core of knowledge, and a
common set of democratic values and practices. [1]

Equal Opportunity
The typical American Dream vouches that if an individual works
hard enough, they will be able to see the results and achieve an
amount of success that correlates to the amount of work put in. The
freedom for people in society to function with this idea in mind stems
from the educational institution providing all students with equal
funding, physical capital, opportunities, and assessment in order to
maintain a level playing field during and after completing their
education.

Diversity
Since overlap and conflict are bound to occur among individuals
in any given setting, it is imperative for schools to prepare students to
not only coexist, but also understand differences among each other.

This includes gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, political views,

religion, geographical differences, age, etc. Helping students learn and
appreciate the differences that make up our nation will hopefully
facilitate smooth pursuits of individual goals and the American Dream
without discriminatory practices or treatment that may hinder success.

Common Core of Knowledge

Just as diversity and uniqueness are to be understood, so are the
ways in which Americans are all united. Since it would be nearly
impossible to provide every single student in the nation with the same
exact education down to a T, it is imperative to at least provide them
with some type of common knowledge before they leave the
educational setting. Educators concur that graduates should not only
know the outlines of American history, but also be able to
communicate in English, be literate and arithmetically competent, and
understand basic rules of politics and society, such as the purpose of
elections and the meaning of the rule of the law. [1]

Democratic Values and Practices

Along the lines of common core knowledge, there is also a strong
urge for students to obtain social values from their educational
processes. Taking turns, being a graceful winner or loser, respecting

authority, peacefully resolving issues and independence are all

common practices taught in school. In addition to these social values,
appreciation of our country and the methods of which it operates and
maintains democracy are also seen as important knowledge.
Therefore, it is common practice to teach the Constitution as well as
the election process and other laws in American society. In addition,
while teaching these democratic values and practices will almost
inevitably bring up the concept of the American Dream.

Issues With Common Good In Historical and Current

Practice
Although the practice of Common Good within education may
have good intentions, there are several problems with this idea, and
much of it has to do with the changes in American demographic as
time has gone on.
There are huge differences between student funding in
impoverished and affluent communities. Educational funding does not
solely come from the government; in fact, nearly half of the funds
come from property taxes, which, the higher the taxes and opportunity
to tax will naturally correlate to more funding, making it nearly

impossible to create equal opportunity in terms of funding as long as

property tax remains a dominant method of contributing to student
funding. [2]
Public schooling is generally in complete compliance with the
notion of including students regardless of who they are, by law.
However, private schools are able to be selective when it comes to
admission and even curriculum, which may completely disregard any
type of diversity. Historically, we see diversity as being a big problem.
Segregation of schools was upheld until Brown v. Board of Education in
1954.
An increasingly controversial issue with the precepts of providing
a common core knowledge is with the belief that every student should
be able to communicate in English. [See entry on Linguistic Diversity]
Essentially, if we hold that knowing English is a dominant standard, it
may contradict the goal of preparing students to incorporate diversity.
A major representation of implementing democratic values and
practices into education was the use of the Pledge of Allegiance in
schools. A recent law passed in Michigan now requires the opportunity
for students to recite the pledge of allegiance, but specifically states
that no child will be compelled to say it. The passing of this bill makes
Michigan one of 44 states to require the offering of the pledge. [3]

References

[1]

Hocschild, J., & Scovronick, N. (2003). What Americans want from

public schools. In The American dream and the public schools (pp. 927). New York: Oxford University Press.

[2]

Biddle, J. & Berliner, D. (2002) Unequal School Funding in the

United States. Educational Leadership, 59 (8), 48-59.

[3]

WILX 10. Michigan lawmakers pass pledge of allegiance law.

(2012, September 20).

http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/170541746.html

Social Groups
. . . A social group is a collective of persons differentiated from
at least one other group by cultural forms, practices, or way of life.
[1]

Social Relations
Social groups only exist when related to one or more different
groups. For example, group A and group B have a social interaction
and their differences thus identify them as relating to one group or the
other. But if members of group A and B were to have a social
interaction with another group C, more differences may come into play
and the social groups may change with the addition of another
component, and members who were originally in different social
groups within A and B may now be in the same group for one reason or
another. Members of these groups tend to relate and gravitate towards
members of their own group because of the similarities that bond
them. If a group were to only have knowledge or associate among
other members of that group, they would essentially not even think of
themselves as a group. However, it is when other people with various
differences are introduced that these social groups are created.

Individuals Reflect Groups

The affinity with one group or another can influence an individual
and make it more or less easy for someone to identify an individual as
a member of the particular group due to similar mannerisms,
language, aesthetics, habits, etc.
Martin Heidegger describes this notion of individuals reflecting
groups by a term called throwness. [1] An individual recognizes that

they have always been a member of one group or another because

groups have been associated with these preconceived definitions and
stereotypes mentioned above.

Group Mobility and Variations

The idea of throwness would mean that a change in ones
identity would essentially mean a change of groups, and that affinity to
groups is not permanent. Thus, someone may be able to influence the
precepts that define a group slightly (to include one thing or another),
or they may go through a change that constitutes a complete jump
from one group to another. Different branches of groups may come into
being, but they are never solely created by one person because the
initial group would have always been in existence. For example, the
different variations within the LGBT community, different tribes within
American Indian culture, or the many different levels and ranges of
disabilities.

Oppression
An inevitable result of different groups in contact with each other
is the historical and even current practice of oppression, whether it be
intentional or not. Power struggles or differences among groups have,
and may result in:
Exploitation: The work of one group solely benefits another group
instead of their own.

Marginalization: The complete disregard or disuse of people. (Includes

social disregard)
Powerlessness: The absence of ability, authority, status, or means to
function in conjunction with people of professional status.
Cultural Imperialism: When one groups ideology infiltrates society and
creates the basis of which standards are held while completely
suppressing the other groups culture. (This can occur obliviously)
Violence: The deliberate violent action toward someone solely because
they belong to a certain group.

Social Groups Within Education

There are numerous examples of social groups being oppressed
in the past, often within legality. Control of Native American education
in America began as early as 1643, and the efforts to eliminate their
language and culture really proved to be successful. The cultural
imperialism that occurred while trying to keep their different lifestyle
and language at bay have severely impacted literacy rates and
performance within Native American students when compared to how
they achieved within the tribe controlled education setting. [2]
Latino education has also seen harm due to power and political
struggles against a dominant group. Inequality due to stereotypes led
to many students being placed or treated as low ability or on a
vocational track. Their language was also suppressed by the efforts of
people in control of education throughout the years. [3]

Current Relevance
There is still a long way to go in terms of providing equality
among all social groups within education. It is important for educators
and administrators to take into account the different attributes,
historical past, stereotypes and culture of groups in order to effectively
educate and bring awareness to what makes people unique, while still
treating students as individuals when it comes to academics and not
discriminating or placing students in accordance with those
stereotypes.

References

[1]

Young, I.M. (2000). Five faces of oppression. In Adams et al.

(Eds.). Readings for diversity and social justice (pp. 35-49). New York:
Routledge.

[2]

Klug, B.J., and Whitfield, P.T. (2003). A brief history of American

Indian education. In Widening the circle: Culturally relevant pedagogy

for American Indian children (pp. 29-47). New York: Routledge Farmer.

[3]

San Miguel Jr., G. (2003). Contested learning: Latino education in

the United States from the 1500s to the present. In V. I. Kloosterman

(Ed.), Latino students in American schools: Historical and

contemporary views (pp. 1-18). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Discrimination
[Noun] The process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect
are responded to differently. [4]

Any given person or group of people has the potential to

discriminate against another with intention of harming or giving unfair
treatment to them.
Forms of discrimination include individual, institutional and
structural.

Individual Discrimination
Individual discrimination refers to the behavior of individual
members of one race/ethnic/gender group that is intended to have a

differential and/or harmful effect on the members of another

race/ethnic/gender group. [1]

Examples
Historically, obvious examples of individual discrimination
most notoriously include the KKK targeting black citizens, and other
hate crimes and actions during, before, and even after the civil rights
movement. This definitely affected schooling as well, because
segregation carried over into schools and resulted in drastic inequality
between designated black schools and their white and light skinned
counterparts. [See also institutional discrimination]
Individual discrimination may also occur in schools in the form of
bullying. A new movie released in early 2012 appropriately titled
Bully recently sparked conversation about the serious actions going
on behind the scenes in schools and buses that often gets dismissed as
typical child or teen behavior. It is not secret that discrimination for one
reason or another can, and does lead to suicide or other drastic
attempts for escape. Bully has an online movement that can be
found at http://action.thebullyproject.com/. [2]

Institutional Discrimination
Institutional discrimination refers to the policies of the dominant
race/ethnic/gender institutions and the behavior of the individuals who
control these institutions and implement policies that are intended to

have a differential and/or harmful effect on minority race/ethnic/gender

groups. [1]

Further Definition
Since dominant groups are usually those who create, enforce,
and defy rules, norms, and laws in society, they are generally the ones
who end up doing the discriminating rather than being victimized by it.
White people, and affluent white males especially are usually more or
less safe from discrimination
A common controversy regarding institutional discrimination in
education is the implementation of affirmative action. Some people
believe that while affirmative action aims to level the playing field for
those of different races, it is actually discriminating against White
people.

Examples
Along the lines of racial discrimination mentioned in Individual
Discrimination, institutional discrimination occurred legally in the form
of the Jim Crow laws during the early 1900s. The state mandated
segregation of Black and Whites is one of the most iconic means of
institutional discrimination in our countrys history.
In addition, an extremely recent example of institutional
discrimination occurred when the state of Virginias legislature decide

on their proposal to opt out of the No Child Left Behind law. They
decided upon a new set of educational goals where students would be
held to different grading standards depending on their race. This
included White students being held to the highest percentage
standard, Asians at the next down, and then Black, Latino, and
disabled students at the lowest standard. [3] This new set of guidelines
gives students non Caucasian students deliberate differential
treatment solely based on their race and the stereotypes that they see
in the academic setting.

Structural Discrimination
Structural discrimination refers to the policies of dominant
race/ethnic/gender institutions and the behavior of the individuals who
implement these policies and control these institutions, which are
race/ethnic/gender neutral in intent but which have a differential
and/or harmful effect on minority race/ethnic/gender groups. [1]

Differentiating Between Structural and Institutional

Discrimination
Whereas institutional discrimination is the deliberate intent of
discriminating against someone or some people, structural
discrimination has no intent to harm anyone when creating policies or
standards, but end up blindsiding minority groups.

Examples

The No Child Left Behind Act aims to bring student performance

up to a certain level, which will then determine funding for the
designated school. If students are not able to achieve this standard
they may not be able to advance in their education, and will be
impacted by removal or absence of funding. The intent of this act may
be good, but it is impossible to assume that every student will be able
to reach a certain standard by a designated time and has the potential
to alienate students of lower achievement capabilities or special needs.

References

[1]

Young, I.M. (2000). Five faces of oppression. In Adams et al.

(Eds.). Readings for diversity and social justice (pp. 35-49). New York:
Routledge.

[2]

Weinstein Company Movie. YouTube. (2012, February 21). Bully

Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1g9RV9OKhg

[3]

Sanchez, C. Firestorm Erupts Over Virginias Education Goals.

(November 12, 2012). http://m.npr.org/news/U.S./163703499

[4]

Discrimination (definition). Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. A

Britannica Company. Accessed December 1, 2012 from

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination

Dominance
Dominant groups, by definition, set the parameters within which the
subordinates operate. The dominant group holds the power and
authority in society relative to the subordinates and determines how
that power and authority may be acceptably used. [1]

Dominant Traits In U.S. Society

Male Gender
Able Bodied
Caucasian
Christian Religion
Heterosexuality
Wealth

Non-Dominant Traits In U.S. Society

Female Gender
Trans/Intergender
Handicap/Disability
Ethnic Diversity
Homosexuality
Poverty

Societal Implications
Policies, laws, education structure, relationship and social norms
are all determined by the dominant group in society. Often times this
involves the dominant group having the most highly valued positions in
society while non-dominant groups are automatically demeaned to
lower expectations and opportunities.

The Dominant Side

Unlike members of subordinate groups --- especially visibly

distinct (i.e., racially distinct groups --- dominant group members are
less likely to be reminded of social and cultural differences on a day-today basis, less likely to have their identity anchored in overly ethnic
institutions and social structures, and less likely to have experienced
prejudice, discrimination, or disadvantage due to ethnicity or race. [2]
Dominant traits are sometimes taken for granted because they are
seen as the norm and are not questioned.
Along the lines of this oblivion, dominant groups may not
understand the ways of life for the subordinates, but the subordinates
will be very familiar with how people with dominance live.

Conferred Dominance
Conferred dominance is the power that goes along with
dominance allowing the individual to exercise privilege over others,
simply because they are in the dominant group.

Examples In Education

Students who have dominance in the educational setting would

be able to go through without having their identities or aesthetics
questioned, and may have conferred dominance in settings where it
would constitute their word against another student of less, or no
dominant traits.
There should be absolutely no preferential, or differential
treatment given to students based on gender, race, sexuality, physical
appearance etc. This includes giving boys physical tasks and girls
cleaning tasks, for example.
It would be helpful for educators to take non-dominant traits into
consideration in order to reduce instances of discrimination, special
treatment, or ignorance that may inadvertently harm academic or
personal growth in students.
References

[1]

Tatum, B.D. (2000). The Complexity of Identity: Who Am I? In M.

Adams, W.J. Blumenfeld, R. Castaeda, H. W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, and X.

Zuiga (Eds.). Readings for Diversity and Social Justice (pp. 9-14). New York:
Routledge.
[2]

Doane Jr., A. (1997). Dominant Group Ethnic Identity in the United

States: The Role of "Hidden" Ethnicity in Intergroup Relations. The

Sociological Quarterly , Vol. 38, No. 3, (pp. 375-397).
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4121150

Linguicism

Tove Skutnabb-Kangas first defined language discrimination in the form

of lingucism; discrimination based solely on language. [1]

Language Terms
English Language Learners
Individuals whose native language is not English, but are
learning English.
Monolingual
The ability to speak only ones native language.
Bilingual
The ability to speak a native language as well as another
language fluently.
Multilingual
The ability to speak multiple languages fluently.
Limited English Proficient
An older term for English Language Learners.
Language Minority Students
Students who speak a minority language in the United
States. [1]

Language In Relation To Learning

In spite of such evidence, schools may disregard language

minority students native languages and cultures for that they believe
to be good reasons: because they link students English language
proficiency with prospective economic and social mobility, teachers
and schools may view English language learners as handicapped and
thus urge students, through both subtle and direct means, to abandon
their native language. [1] Asking students to completely subdue their
native language is both individual and institutional discrimination. In
direct correlation with dismissing someones language is dismissing
their culture and history as well.
Brenda K. Gorman debunks common myths associated with
bilingual education, especially that being bilingual does not delay
learning or cause deficit in learning. [2]

Historical Significance
The United States has had a track record of valuing the English
language as an academic stronghold and marker of capability.
Attempts to eliminate languages other than English have been
common especially with Native American and Latino people. However,
the year of 1974 marked a significant change in law regarding students
whose native language is not English, in the form of The Equal
Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA). The EEOA focuses on lessening
the challenges and language barriers in schools that would not be
offering equal opportunity or participation without it. Essentially, the

Act deemed it necessary to have bilingual education in order to combat

the academic struggle that would occur if a native speaker were not
able to have their language support while learning English.
Since use of the English language plays into loyalty and
patriotism in the U.S., some people may be wary of people who choose
to not, or just cannot speak English. A recent example of linguicism
and other discrimination occurred in Tucson Arizona. Mexican-American
Studies classes were prevented from continuing on the premise that
they promoted the overthrow of the American government etc. [3]
Selected literature was banned from schools, along with a list of about
80 books that arent banned; but are prohibited in classrooms. [4]

Examples In Recent History

In this example, an Iranian couple which are now citizens of
the United States decided that it was time to obtain their drivers
licenses. Since they had only been living in the U.S. for a few years,
their English skills were not at the level that the Bartlesville Oklahoma
Department of Public Safety expected in their standard driving exam.
The couple requested that they be able to take the exam in an
alternative form with pictures or graphic symbols, or if they could
accommodate by providing the test in the couples native language of
Farsi. The Bartlesville department refused to allow the couple to take
the test if it wasnt in English because it is the standard for knowing
the material. The couple moved to Kansas (25 miles north of

Bartlesville) and took the test with graphic symbols both individuals
passed, and then moved back to Bartlesville.
This article is both an example of how language is and is not
seen as a measure of cognitive ability. The Bartlesville department
thought that without the written test in the standard English language,
then citizens were not capable or deserving of the license privilege. On
the other hand, the department in Kansas that provided the exam with
graphic symbols proves that written language, particularly English, is
not the only true measure of cognitive ability. [5]

References
[1]

Nieto, S. (2006). Linguistic diversity in U.S. Classrooms. Affirming

diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education, 6th

edition (pp. 208-230). Boston: Pearson Education.
[2]

LinguaHealth YouTube. (2012, February 9th) Myths About Bilingual

Children. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=LVYhpCprtzQ
[3]

Siek, S. CNN In America. (2012, January 22). The dismantling of

Mexican-American studies in Tucson schools. Retrieved from

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/22/how-tucson-schoolschanged-after-mexican-american-studies-ban/
[4]

Gina Ruiz. (2012, January 20). Banning History In Arizona:

Banned Book List. Retrieved from

http://banninghistory.blogspot.com/p/banned-book-list.html
[5]

The associated press. (2008). Tulsa World: Iranian immigrants

want Farsi-language Oklahoma driver's license testing. Retrieved from

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?
articleID=20080401_1__OKLAH23086