Equity and Equality Aren’t the Same Thing. What Does That Look Like in Education?

Today’s post is another in a series helping educators distinguish the differences between “equity” and “equality.”

‘Striving for Equity’

Jamie Wallace and Elaine V. Howes are co-editors of the book Culturally Responsive and Sustaining Science Teaching: Teacher Research and Investigation from Today’s Classrooms:

The terms “equity” and “equality” are often conflated. There are nuances and complexities in their interpretations and uses, further complicated by historical socio-cultural-racial inequities and structures of power and privilege in the United States. In our imperfect understanding of these ambiguous concepts, equality can be interpreted as “sameness,” particularly regarding opportunities and resources for students (Brayboy et al., 2007). This sameness or uniformity requires an eradication of all kinds of discrimination for equality to truly exist; thus, while equality is ideal, it is unlikely given long-standing histories of oppression and racism (Banks, 2021).

Equity refers to “fairness” and “justice” at a systemic level, regarding how individuals are seen and treated. In education, inequities are often viewed as unequal access to resources and opportunities. Yet, this interpretation omits the systems and processes that sustain inequities (Cochran-Smith & Keefe, 2022).

Thus, what is equal (same or uniform) differs from what is equitable (fair or just). In using an equality perspective, we would attempt to provide all students with identical opportunities. In striving for equity, we celebrate the multiple aspects of diversity in our pluralistic society and use these to center all students, especially those who have historically been poorly served by our education system.

Considering these terms, we highlight insights from our professional learning group (PLG) of teacher researchers exploring the equity pedagogy of culturally responsive and sustaining education (CRSE) in science. We draw on research by Ladson-Billings, Gay, Paris and Alim, and others to describe CRSE as valuing and connecting to students’ cultures and communities as assets; integrating them as resources; holding high expectations for learning; and adopting and supporting developing a critical stance (Howes & Wallace, 2022; Wallace et al., 2022). In our PLG, teachers research their own science teaching through a CRSE lens, working toward transforming teaching while addressing complex educational and social-cultural problems.

In our current climate with book bans and political attacks on discussing race, ethnicity, gender, power, and privilege in schools, equity-oriented, assets-based work like CRSE is critical. Below, we share examples from our work to help illuminate equity-focused approaches.

Imagine you are teaching in an urban high-need school and are responsible for preparing students for a standardized exam. Your students are recent immigrants and multilingual learners from numerous countries. You are teaching a lesson on natural hazards (earthquakes, tsunamis).

One option might be to take an equality-based perspective: Use a textbook outlining types of disasters, lectures about plate boundaries, and videos of volcanoes erupting. Alternatively, you could modify your teaching to support the students in your class, drawing on their diverse backgrounds, and meeting them where they are.

For instance, a teacher in our PLG developed a group research project in which students chose a natural hazard about which to design pamphlets detailing preparation and safety procedures. Students developed pamphlets in their primary language and English to support science and language learning.

This project incorporated students’ language assets and connected to their lived experiences, as students related firsthand interactions with natural disasters in their native countries and thought critically about the sociopolitical processes in places where hazards hit. This project communicated to students the importance of using their languages, experiences, and multiple identities as assets to support their learning. Modifying teaching in this way illustrates an equity-based approach to support all students’ learning.

Another teacher in our group taught about maps in a Manhattan high-need high school. She began with students developing memory maps of their neighborhoods and experiences. Using their memory maps, students learned about topographic changes accommodating modern infrastructure (including water sources), science specific to their communities, and inequities such as higher rates of asthma in cities. This place-based activity centered students’ identities by valuing and affirming their experiences and infusing them in learning.

Activities like these provide opportunities for students to integrate their lived experiences and communities into learning, creating spaces to uplift students’ stories and address social-justice issues. These approaches are customized to the individual students in the room, rather than an imaginary “every student,” setting high expectations and providing multiple entry points and worldviews. As Gorski (2016) argues, equity pedagogies must center students and their individual cultures, along with all students’ rights to equitable and just educational opportunities.

References

‘Equitable Access’

Courtney Rose, Ed.D., is a professor, educational consultant, culturally relevant/responsive educator, founder of Ivy Rose Consulting, and author of the upcoming book, Woven Together: How Unpacking Your Teacher Identity Creates a Stronger Learning Community. She currently serves as a visiting assistant teaching professor in the Educational Policy Studies department at Florida International University:

Much like “schooling” and “education, ” “equality” and “equity” get used interchangeably. In fact, in both cases, folks often actually lean into using one more often than the other. In the case of schooling/education, everything learning-related often gets lumped under education, and when it comes to equality/equity there is a far greater use of the word “equality,” with many pinpointing it as THE goal.

But as two of my favorite podcasters often say, words mean things, and understanding the definitions and distinctions between terms is the first step in aligning our goals with the policies and practices designed to attain them.

A clear, and highly discussed, example of the potential misalignments that can occur when one isn’t clear on whether they are working toward equality or equity is baked into the New York City public schools’ admissions process. For those who aren’t familiar, every 5th grade student in the district gets an application with a list of middle schools across the city they are eligible to attend, and they apply by ranking the schools in order of preference. Students then repeat this process in the fall semester of their 8^th grade year to apply to high schools. The process was designed to address the N.Y.C. school system’s long-standing position as one of the most segregated districts in the country. In fact, according to one 2018 study, New York City’s is the most segregated district for Black students and the second most segregated district for Latino students.

The admissions process is designed to level that playing field, opening up doors for students beyond their neighborhood school and utilizing “unbiased” programs that assess students’ eligibility based on attendance, grades, test scores, location/distance from schools, and availability of seats. However, with families spending years hiring tutors and touring schools in order to secure seats at the top schools in the district, many feel as though the system still prioritizes a wealthy and predominantly white subset of the population and maintaining educational inequities.

In the wake of the impact of COVID-19, which only exacerbated disparities and inequities, the district has partnered with organizations like IntegrateNYC to more accurately assess the disproportionate impact COVID-19 had across the district. Although it is not fully functioning as of yet, the new algorithm would use additional location-based and individual student circumstances to generate an admissions “priority score.” The higher the score, the more schools the student becomes eligible for.

While there are certainly many more questions to be answered, most of which won’t be determined until the new algorithm has been fully functioning for some time, the attempt to shift and redesign the algorithm shows the district’s acknowledgement that applying the same metrics across the board may create a system that seems to give students an equal shot at attending the best school for them but not equitable access or opportunity to secure a seat.

‘Differentiation Is a First Step’

Angela M. Ward, Ph.D., is an anti-racist educator with over 25 years of experience in education. She is a professional learning connoisseur focused on creating identity-safe schools and workplaces. Follow her @2WardEquity on Instagram and X and visit http://2wardequity.com/blog/ to subscribe to the 2Ward Equity newsletter:

The root word for equality is equal. If two students have different needs, yet the school provides the same or equal amounts of support, they are focused on equality for both students. One student will not receive support if another student does not receive the same support, otherwise known as fairness. Laws like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Title IX, and Title VI, for example, were passed to assist districts and other educational institutions with equity, not equality or fairness.

Equity acknowledges that every learner is not the same; that each learner’s lived experience is not the same; that location, space, and place is different for each; and, therefore, each learner will need something to support their learning that may differ from the needs of other learners. Special education students receive the most support with laws that ensure they receive equitable access to an education that directly meets their learning needs.

Differentiation is a first step to providing equitable access to a high-quality education to all students in a general education setting. Teachers differentiate strategies and engagement with students to provide each student the best chance at success with academic content. The Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) is focused at the general education student who has not been labeled with an identified learning need. The MTSS provides educators with a process to learn more about supporting the learning needs of students, thereby offering students equitable access to a high-quality educational experience.

Public schools are required to educate all students. In addition to following the law and engaging in a successful MTSS, an equity-centered school district focuses budgets, staffing, buildings, and all resources on equitable distribution to ensure all students receive what they need to succeed in school regardless of social or cultural identity.

To learn more about equity and the law, visit Individuals with Disabilities Education Act , Education and Title VI, and/or Title IX and Sex Discrimination.

Thanks to Jamie, Elaine, Courtney, and Angela for contributing their thoughts!

Today’s post answered this question:

It’s not unusual for districts, schools, and educators to confuse “equality” with “equity.” What are examples, and ways, you would help them understand the difference?

Part One in this series featured responses from Jehan Hakim, Mary Rice-Boothe, Jennifer Cárdenas, and Shaun Nelms.

In Part Two, Karen Baptiste, PJ Caposey, and Denise Fawcett Facey contributed their perspectives.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at lferlazzo@epe.org. When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo.

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email. And if you missed any of the highlights from the first 12 years of this blog, you can see a categorized list here.

Disclaimer: The copyright of this article belongs to the original author. Reposting this article is solely for the purpose of information dissemination and does not constitute any investment advice. If there is any infringement, please contact us immediately. We will make corrections or deletions as necessary. Thank you.