Justice, Equality and Fairness in general (and especially in the education system)

Recently, I heard that a letter was written to the press pointing out that richer kids who could afford tuition had better chances of entering prestigious schools such as Anglo-Chinese School (Independent), Hwa Chong Institution or Raffles Institution, and doing better when they grew up. As such, the letter said, it can be seen that the education system is stupid and unfair and will make poorer kids have less chances of leading a better life and will make them end up as bottom-feeders on the dirtiest and darkest alleys in Singapore (or something to that effect).

Well, is this fair or not? It depends on the POV. I like to use the following analogy:

WARNING! COMPLETELY INCOMPREHENSIBLE INFORMATION BEGINS HERE!

Fairness can be described as a bar that has to be filled. Different parties involved in the situation must fill up the bar according to how many parties there are. In this ideal scenario, all parties happily contribute the needed generosity, or “giving” to fill up the portion of the bar that is their quota (When two parties are involved equally, each have to “give” 50% of the bar). No problem. Err… never mind if this is absolutely incomprehensible, just go on to the next section.

Arguments over fairness and justice arise, however, when the environment causes the size of the bar to increase from 100% to well…more. Thus, the parties start arguing over which party is to “fill up” the last whatever percent, causing the argument.

END OF INCOMPREHENSIBLE INFORMATION

Of course, this analogy doesn’t always work. But the basic idea is the flaws in the environment twist our sense of fairness and justice and prevent us from acting totally fairly.

Anyway, my point is, depending on your POV, this matter can be fair or unfair.

Government/State POV: Prestigious schools like RI and HCI are there to provide better and faster education to those who can cope with it, as can be seen from their PSLE/EOY scores. Better students will have better education and can contribute to state in the future. Thus, it doesn’t matter if selection for better schools is biased towards richer kids, because they will still do better and contribute to State in the future.

Individual POV: Richer kids have better chances of getting into better schools. This means that they will be able to do better in life and poorer kids do not have worse chances for a better lives, and even if they work harder than richer kids, they will not get as far.

As seen from above, adopting a State POV (and leading to a more socialist-oriented state) would prevent complications from occurring. It is also more practical. Thus, one can see the EVILNESS OF DEMOCRACY AND FREE MARKET!!!

I digress. And I’ll post whatever solutions to this problem I can think of in my next (ok, fine maybe not next) post. Comments are welcome!