The Japanese idea of equality is that people are born with no great differences in ability, so everyone should work hard and grow into a standard. In the U.S., there are children who are born with different abilities from the beginning, so equality is to be able to receive an education suited to each individual. Without changing the way of thinking, gifted education is not possible.
I see. The “principle of equality” that “there should be no difference in natural ability” attributes differences in performance to “effort” and instead makes children non-favourable and negative about redistribution policy, which in turn makes children non-favourable and negative toward redistribution policy. →Anti-competitive education reduces helping each other? https://twitter.com/otenkiiina100/status/1130640069495181313?s=21
The most extreme form of education that emphasizes cooperation rather than competition would be to not assign rankings to various grades. In Japan, there were elementary schools that did not include a race in athletic meets, or even if they did have a race, they did not assign a rank, or in extreme cases, they held hands and let everyone finish the race together. The results of Ito, Kubota and Ohtake’s (2014) analysis are shocking. Those who received an anti-competitive education were less altruistic, more negative toward cooperation, more likely to have a less reciprocal you get beat up, you beat back value system, and more likely to be negative toward redistributive policies. Perhaps the exact opposite of what education was intended to achieve.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/ĺąłç‰ using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.