Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
logo-Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy

Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
logo_m-Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy

    Jump To中央區塊/Main Content :::
  • About JSSP
    • About JSSP
    • Indexed in
    • Subscription Information
    • Contact Us
  • Editorial Board
  • Notes to Contributors
    • Guidelines for Submitted Manuscripts
    • Publication Ethics Statement
    • Statement Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI)
    • Review Process
    • Online Submission
  • Volumes and Issues
    • Forthcoming Papers
  • Annual Statistics
    • Submission Trends by Academic Discipline in 2014-2024
    • First Round Processing Time of Submissions in 2024
    • Top 10 Most Viewed Papers in 2024
    • Top 10 Most Downloaded Papers in 2024
  • RCHSS
中文
RCHSS
search
Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
  • Home
  • Volumes and Issues
  • 《Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy》 Volume 28, Number 03
  • Facebook
  • line
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Print
2016 / September Volume 28 No.3
Equality or Adequacy? A Comparative Perspective on Justice in Education

Number of Clicks:2953; Number of Abstract Downloads:0; Number of full PDF text Downloads:0;

發刊日期/Published Date
2016 / September
中英文篇名/Title
平等或適足?兩種教育正義觀的比較 
Equality or Adequacy? A Comparative Perspective on Justice in Education
論文屬性/Type
研究論文 Research Article
作者/Author
陳俊宏
Chun-hung Chen
頁碼/Pagination
377-412
摘要/Abstract

近年來,平等論與適足論對於教育資源分配的論辯,是教育哲學討論的重要議題。平等論主張,資源必須平等分配,教育機會不應受到個人無法控制的外在因素所影響,教育的不平等若起因於這些元素,就是不正義。適足論則主張,資源的分配應以適足性為原則,只要每個人獲得最低門檻的資源,則在門檻之上的不平等,不能稱為不正義。本文試圖從兩派對於教育目的以及教育資源分配的論辯,比較兩種理論觀點的差異,以及各自遭遇的難題。本文認為,一個完整的教育正義觀,必須有效處理兩派所遭遇的難題,本文將提出一個得以解決兩派主張的規範性觀點。

Over the past decades, there has been ongoing philosophical debate between luck egalitarians and relational egalitarians. Recently, an equivalent debate has been taking place in the sphere of education. According to the educational equality approach, justice requires prospects for educational achievement to be dependent upon a child’s ability and willingness to learn, and not on factors outside of her control. Nevertheless, proponents of what can be called adequacy approach have instead argued that the state is required to ensure all children have adequate education. Once this threshold is obtained, there is no injustice in the fact that some children have better education than others. This paper tries to address this debate. It will not only lay out at conceptual level the difference between equality and adequacy but also to show what these conceptual differences mean for educational policies.

關鍵字/Keyword
教育機會均等, 教育平等, 教育適足, 民主適足論
equality of educational opportunity, education equality, educational adequacy, democratic adequacy
學科分類/Subject
政治學
Political Science
主題分類/Theme

DOI
檔案下載/Download
Abstract full PDF text
相關文章
  • A Study of the Relationship between Entrance Channels, Family Background and Test Scores—Implications for Equality and Effiency of Entrance Channels
  • Educational Achievement and the Evaluation of the Nine-year Compulsory Education Policy: The Case of Taiwan
  • The Knowledge Effect of Civic Education: A Pilot Study Using Panel Data
  • The Effect of the Gender Equity Education Act in 2004 on the Choice of Study Fields for Senior High School Students
  • The Influence of Family Language in Childhood on Educational Achievement

  • About JSSP
  • Editorial Board
  • Notes to Contributors
  • Volumes and Issues
  • Annual Statistics

Research Center for Humanities and Social Sciences, Academia Sinica, No. 128, Sec. 2, Academia Rd, Taipei 115, Taiwan

Tel: 886-2-27898156 Fax: 02-27898157 Email: issppub@sinica.edu.tw

© Copyright 2025. RCHSS Sinica All Rights Reserved.Privacy Policy & Security PolicyVersion:V1.1.3