The idea that citizens’ advancement should depend exclusively on merit, on qualities that deserve reward rather than on bloodlines or wire-pulling, was among the Founding ideals of the American republic, Joseph F. Kett argues in this provocative and engaging book. Merit’s history, he contends, is best understood within the context of its often conflicting interaction with the other ideals of the Founding, equal rights and government by consent. Merit implies difference; equality suggests sameness. By sanctioning selection of those lower down by those higher up, merit potentially conflicts with the republican ideal that citizens consent to the decisions that affect their lives. In Merit, which traces the history of its subject over three centuries, Kett asserts that Americans have reconciled merit with other principles of the Founding in ways that have shaped their distinctive approach to the grading of public schools, report cards, the forging of workplace hierarchies, employee rating forms, merit systems in government, the selection of officers for the armed forces, and standardized testing for intelligence, character, and vocational interests. Today, the concept of merit is most commonly associated with measures by which it is quantified. Viewing their merit as an element of their selfhood—essential merit—members of the Founding generation showed no interest in quantitative measurements. Rather, they equated merit with an inner quality that accounted for their achievements and that was best measured by their reputations among their peers. In a republic based on equal rights and consent of the people, however, it became important to establish that merit-based rewards were within the grasp of ordinary Americans. In response, Americans embraced institutional merit in the form of procedures focused on drawing small distinctions among average people. They also developed a penchant for increasing the number of winners in competitions—what Kett calls "selection in" rather than "selection out"—in order to satisfy popular aspirations. Merit argues that values rooted in the Founding of the republic continue to influence Americans’ approach to controversies, including those surrounding affirmative action, which involve the ideal of merit.
"This book club in a box contains 7 stand alone titles of Colleen Hoover.
Despite these measures, however, the share of students from low-income families at selective colleges has changed little since 2000 and in some cases has drifted downward. The percentage of “first generation” students (the first in ...
Ajantha Subramanian challenges this belief, showing how the ideal of meritocracy serves the reproduction of inequality in Indian education.
Suppose, for example, you meet Adam Major at a party. He introduces himself as a student who pays his ... (b) infer that Mr. Major is crazy, boring, or dangerous and excuse yourself to freshen your drink? (c) conclude that Mr. Major is ...
"Mantles of Merit - Chin Textiles from Myanmar, India and Bangladesh is the product of many years of research on the history, culture and textiles of the Chin, a heterogeneous...
Pay for Performance is the best resource to date on the issues of whether these concepts work and how they can be applied most effectively in the workplace.
The Merit Myth shows the way for higher education to become the beacon of opportunity it was intended to be.
Christ's merits are applied through faith , 122 , 157-158 , 162-165 since the Fall , all graces have come through faith in Christ , 157-158 , 160-163 . FATHERS OF THE OLD LAW , Christ merited for the F. of the , O , L. , 49 , 159-161 ...
When Joe came by Merit's crate again, she instinctively bolted toward the back of her cage. Then Merit realized that Joe was letting Gypsy out, so ran to the front of her cage, straining to see Gypsy. As Joe handled Gypsy, Merit saw ...
biblical theology of justice and merit. instead, “strict merit” serves to uniquely identify the merits of Jesus Christ which were historically accomplished on behalf of his people, in the fulfillment of his active and passive obedience.