Equity doesn’t mean equal. (convo on equity and clumping and competition) Equity begs choice. It involves personalization. It gets at people’s needs. Needs vary as much as each thumbprint varies. So, to claim/practice equity, everyone has to be known by someone.
Equity fades/dies the more we focus on standardization. Standardization’s focus is efficiency, not needs. (supposed to’s not can’t not’s.) The achievement gap (ie: where you rank on math scores) is a misnomer when the said gap is predefined/standard. None of the data we’ve been gathering (mostly school math scores), and spending most of our time (7 hrs a day, 12+ yrs), energy, money (trillions of dollars), and people (90%-ish of people) on, has a statistically sound basis toward equity. One size does not fit all.
ie: PISA, the test most often referred to when comparing countries, has it’s main focus on math. Math, many say, is more universal because there are relatively few barriers due to language. Yet, the math on these tests are more likened to school math, than mathematical thinking. This can translate to: a competition between countries on a topic that is very restrictive and not beneficial to most people. [90%-ish of people don't use school math] Perhaps a more equitable means to monitor growth, if you must, would be a self-directed feedback loop. Something that is useful, rather than destructive/diminishing to our resources, to our people.
People have all the skills, creativity, and ingenuity they need. – Meg Wheatley
Equity will come when we free people of a predetermined outcome/label. Equity will come when we offer resources per choice and facilitate curiosities. The closer we can get to differentiating/discriminating to the point of our unique thumbprints, the less we’ll have to be prejudice toward.
a recent convo: on setting people free.
1 – people are free already. it’s legal to homeschool.
2 – then why aren’t more..
1 – because they don’t believe, or don’t have the resources.
2 – then they’re not free, it’s not equitable.
Public ed should be equitable, not equal, or standard, or normalized, or mandated, or compulsory.
We have no idea the inequity we promote daily, with our labels, our imposed mindsets of what is normal.
What if equity is more about knowing a person enough to know and help them regulate their preference for stimulation. -Susan Cain
Fair is not equal, fair is getting what is needed. -unknown
If three different people have three different types of needs (ie: one’s hungry, one’s thirsty, and one’s fine), and they each then receive a hamburger (in the name of equality), we end up with one out of three needs met. Guy 2 is still thirsty and Guy 3 has wasted a hamburger. [intro'd to this analogy via Jayeesha]
Equity involves taking care of individual needs, in order to give everyone a go – at life.
Equity begs that everyone is known by someone.
how to do that? facilitate a world where everyone is free..? let’s give networked individualism a go..
how to be you. if we’re after equity (ie: everyone getting a go) .. access to a narrative (for getting a go) needs to be 100% accessible. the most equitably accessible narrative – is the one on each person’s heart. that’s where the narrative we need is.. and we have to trust that. a narrative for 100% of humanity begs to be grounded in that. (ie: the ability to read, or to read a lengthy/academic agenda, or to understand a certain language, or to get to a place to hear the message/narrative, or to acquire some label/credential first … is not equitable from the get go. and today, it’s especially a tragedy be\cause tech can facilitate 7 billion+ curiosities. an equitable narrative. every day.)