"Der vorliegende Aufsatz untersucht zum einen die wichtigsten Argumente in der Diskussion zwischen den Egalitariern und den Inegalitariern mit Blick auf die Fragestellung, wie das Verhältnis von Gerechtigkeit und Gleichheit genau aussieht. Zum anderen werden auf der Grundlage der Untersuchung erste Überlegungen für einen eigenen Ansatz - wie man das Verhältnis von Gerechtigkeit und Gleichheit verstehen sollte - angestellt." (Autorenreferat)
The report on the findings of extensive empirical research on equality of educational opportunities carried out in the US on a very large sample of public schools by Coleman and his colleagues has had a major impact on education policy and has given rise to a large amount of research and various interpretations. However, as some interpreters have highlighted, even more important than the findings of the survey themselves has been Coleman’s redefinition of equality of opportunity, abandoning the then prevailing conception of equality of educational opportunities as equality of starting points and replacing it with the concept of equality of educational opportunities as equality of educational outcomes. The question is, therefore, whether equality of outcomes really is one of the two types of equality of opportunity. The purpose of the present article is to show that equality of opportunity and equality of outcomes are two different types of equality. If they are different, the interpretation that Coleman has redefined the concept of “equality of educational opportunity” turns out to be incorrect. (DIPF/Orig.)
Two root concepts of equality are distinguished: equality of welfare & equality of resources. It is argued that once the various conceptions of welfare that might be adopted by the ideal of equality of welfare are distinguished, none furnishes an acceptable ideal. Modified AA.
THIS ARTICLE CONSIDERS THE COMPETING CLAIMS OF EQUALITY OF RESOURCES. THE AUTHOR STRESSES, FOR THE MOST PART, THE DEFINITION OF A SUITABLE CONCEPTION OF EQUALITY OF RESOURCES & NOT IN DEFENDING IT EXCEPT AS SUCH DEFINITION PROVIDES A DEFENSE. HE ASSUMES THAT EQUALITY OF RESOURCES IS A MATTER OF EQUALITY OF WHATEVER RESOURCES ARE OWNED PRIVATELY.
