Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The myth of meritocracy essays
Advantages and disadvantages of meritocracy
The myth of meritocracy essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The myth of meritocracy essays
Meritocracy is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as a leadership role, “in which the talented are chosen and moved ahead on the basis of their achievement” (Merriam-Webster). Meritocracy is basically saying that in order for a person to move up, they must show an amount of talent in a specific area regardless of wealth and what social class a person comes from (White). Meritocracy exists in some parts of society, however in other parts of society it is nonexistent. Meritocracy does exist today however; it is not always present in today’s society. Meritocracy can occur in groups that involve military personnel, where soldiers or officers can be promoted in training, testing, as well as performance (White). The higher up a soldier or …show more content…
An example where meritocracy does not exist is within the educational system (Petersen). Envision a child that comes from an unstable home, where one of the parents does not have a job, uses drugs, and abuses the child (Petersen). All of these problems would factor into this child’s education, study habits as well as performance in school (Petersen). All in all it would be unfair to grade a child that comes from an unstable home with parents who have little or no influential power on their child, to a child that comes from a stable home with encouraging parents that have jobs and are compassionate towards their child (Petersen). The child who comes from a poor household will not be as equally educated as the child that comes from a wealthy household (Petersen). “Students [are] being graded under an inequality of conditions with the results claimed to reflect a meritocracy” (Petersen). However, meritocracy is not evident in this case because students are not retaining information and are therefore at different levels (Petersen). There is poor performance assessing in the school systems and “the fact that conditions beyond the school environment highly influence a student’s performance destroys the illusion of meritocracy in the educational system”
In May 2014, Time.com published an article that would soon become the source of no small amount of social contention (1). In the article, “Dear Privileged-at-Princeton: You. Are. Privileged. And Meritocracy Is a Myth,” author Briana Payton lashes out at classmate Tal Fortgang for an article he wrote a month prior (1). Payton, a freshman studying sociology at Princeton University and the political antithesis of Fortgang, takes issue with her classmates’ definition of the word “privilege” (1). She argues that, because Fortgang is white, society inherently affords him “privilege” (Payton 1). Payton’s main flaw is her tone — her condescending, demeaning, and arrogant rhetoric distracts from her content and diminishes her credibility. Conversely,
Arguments about fairness and justice have been up for debate for centuries. "What do we deserve?", a question that has many individuals raising their brows to their efforts in their pursuit to achieve their goals. If it is said that we are all placed on an equal standard why are there individuals struggling to stay afloat? In Arora’s essay, he examines three forms of economic modals of social justices that question that idea of why the prosperous or the impecunious "deserve" their position or stature in life. Out of all of Arora's economic modals that he presents the Meritocratic System is the fairest because it gives everyone a fighting chance.
“Making the Grade” by Kurt Wiesenfeld Newsweek magazine, June 27 1996 brings to light an issue that has been glazed over by society for some time, grade inflation. It’s highly disturbing that “we lament that schoolchildren get “kicked upstairs” until they graduate from high school despite being illiterate and mathematically inept, but we seem unconcerned with college graduates whose less blatant deficiencies are far more harmful, if their accreditation exceeds their qualifications”. The issue of grade inflation is not simply an issue of students feeling entitled to higher grades than they have earned, it is a problem that directly impacts our society in a multitude of negative ways. Perhaps the “gold star” mentality started out with the good intentions of creating children with positive self-esteem, however, a direct result is lazy adults with a sense of entitlement for no reason, who lack qualifications to adequately and safely perform their jobs.
For one thing, weighting grades gives students and colleges the ability to examine a more accurate comparison of students from various schools with varying course schedule difficulties (Clinedinst). The thing is, these benefits mainly aid the gifted, college bound students in that it makes them stand out. This brings the opposition of weighted GPAs to argue that the actual weighting does not provide an equal playing field. J. Bravin argues in his book, The Executive Educator, that “The traditional reporting method, assigning grades of A, B, C, D, and F to student work, discourages college-bound students from electing to take classes that require rigorous effort… and leads to an inconsistent standard” (40). Since weighted GPAs lead to inequalities, educators around the country have protested traditional reporting methods, saying things similar to, “The only ones being penalized by not having weighted grades are our students” (Cognard
One of the factors that create an imbalance of power within a society is a person's socioeconomic status. Often people with low socioeconomic status are undervalued in society. This imbalance can cause issues with the feelings of security and confidence. Also opportunities and choices can be limited for some people, but expanded to others. People often identify with roles of different socioeconomic status groups, based on their own socioeconomic status, and this can limit creativity and the potential of groups or individuals. If the world believes that people can go from “rags to riches” in America, then there should be an opportunity for all socioeconomic groups.
In the United States, a form of Meritocracy is employed. This system recognizes and corrects the socioeconomic disadvantages (Arora). While efforts have been made to correct the problem, many still fall flat. Many schools, for example, are not equal and some are even getting worse. Lee County School District, a district that boasted no 'F' and 'D' level schools in 2010, now have three failing schools and eight 'D' levels. The number of 'A' level schools have also fallen from 60 in 2011 to 36 in 2013 (LCPS).
The United States of America has placed low on the educational ladder throughout the years. The cause of such a low ranking is due to such heavy emphasis on standardized testing and not individual student achievement. Although the United States uses standardized testing as a crutch, it is not an effective measure of a student’s ability, a teacher’s competency, or a school’s proficiency.
Meritocracy, unlike aristocracy, is the system in which talented people are rewarded and promoted to leadership positions based on their merit. According to James Whitehurst, meritocracy “now refers to organizations where the best people and ideas win.” However, as true as it may sound, meritocracy in America is still a myth and is not a certainty. In the article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack,” McIntosh’s disdain of meritocracy when she described as “I must give up the myth of meritocracy.” She mentioned the meritocracy myth because in reality, many people who lack talents and experience can still climb the upward mobility ladder and become wealthier while the rest of
Overall “student performance was lower in the early 1900s than it is today, quite possibly because schools felt much less pressure than they do today to achieve equity and excellence among students” (Rossi, 1994, p.4). While many of the challenges schools encountered during the early 20th century are the same challenges in present day schools, they were not addressed back then because they were not a priority. The focus on equity and excellence that has been developed since the turn of the century is worthy of praise (Rossi, 1994, p.4).
The public high schools began a grading system as a way of telling an individual how they were performing. There was no interest by the public in reporting the school’s progress at teaching. Teachers, in an effort to recognize outstanding performers, looked for a way of rewarding hard-working students for their efforts The grading structure changed from superior and excellent to A’s and B’s. This placed much of the burden of recognizing academic talent on the high schools.
It sounds fair and beautiful when we succeeded or we got a good result. However, when a person failed to meet good results, the word 'meritocracy' gives that person an image of a loser who did not live hard. Meritocracy encouraged people to make good works, however, at the same time, made people suffer anxiety to feel like a
A meritocracy is a form of management or administration in which people applying for a specific position are chosen and advance in position based on their stature or ability. There are somewhat few governments in the world that are based on this principle. A more recent and modern example of meritocracy in our society is Justin Trudeau’s cabinet. Trudeau's cabinet includes an equal number of men and women, and the members were chosen based on their abilities. If you were to take a government for instance, a meritocracy would be people who are very much able and have the best qualifications and it rewards those who perform well.
Meritocracy in its purest form is a social system that gives the greatest power and highest social positions to people with the most ability, where the talented are chosen and moved ahead on a basis of their achievements. It filters people based on capability and flair rather than on class privilege or wealth. In the context of Singapore’s education system which is known to be meritocratic in nature, students’ capabilities are assessed through national examinations. Students are streamed into different schools based on their calibres. In such a system, it would mean removing the catchments where well-off children are bolstered from bearing the consequences of a lack of merit. However, does Singapore’s education system really reflect meritocracy?
The main non-merit factor which negates the theory of meritocracy is inheritance. Inheritance not only refers to the initial class placement at birth but in fact it also refers to the natural talents one is born with. “Inheritance refers more broadly to unequal starting points in a race to get ahead. The race to get ahead is like a relay race in which we inherit an initial starting point from parents” (McNamee and Miller 3). A person who is born into great wealth will definitely start way ahead of someone who belongs to a poor family. This basically means that someone from a rich family will have better opportunities in
The Oxford dictionary defines “merit” as “The quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward”. In 1868, Japanese officials revolted against what, from their perspective was a corrupt and obsolete government and restored the emperor to the throne is what is known as the Meiji Rebellion. After this, Japan was determined to “eradicate the corruption that they saw in the dying Tokugawa Shogunate by instituting a new era in which merit and merit alone, would determine who advanced in government, at work, and in society generally” (National Center On Education And The Economy). In the “Japan Overview” written by the National Center on Education And The Economy and the “Comprehensive Living Guide for Foreign