Introduction by Matthias Smalbrugge

Education has been considered for a long time as one of the major mechanisms enhancing social mobility. Indeed, one of the leading ideas of the Enlightenment was the conviction that knowledge could benefit the whole of society in many respects. Knowledge was regarded not only as a theoretical framework allowing us to understand the surrounding world, but also as a tool of social dynamics. Knowledge, once it was shared, belonged to no one in particular, it was common property. In that sense, knowledge was one of the key elements of desired social equality. Your background did not matter any longer in a debate, what mattered was your knowledge. It was for that reason that Napoleon stimulated education for all and tried to forge a national education system that would also produce equal opportunities and hence social mobility.

That was the 19th century and one might hope this would still be the case. Unfortunately, it is not. Gradually we became aware of the fact that education is no longer producing equal opportunities, but rather functions nowadays as a highly sophisticated selection tool. Its aim once was to create such equal opportunities by focusing on individual qualities and merits, supposing these qualities existed without being obliged to take into account one’s environment or context. This proved to be a very unfortunate misunderstanding. Personal qualities and merits were indeed personal, but persons were not objective entities that could be isolated from their context. On the contrary, individuals were not that individual but were deeply influenced by the context they lived in.

This discovery had two consequences. On the one hand, the context in which one lived either stimulated or slowed down one’s personal qualities. On the other hand, education proved to be unaware of the blind spots it suffered from due to the selection process. Having as a consequence that knowledge itself could no longer be considered as an objective common ground that could be shared with everyone as long as one had the capacities to acquire this knowledge.

Education became a sieve that selected the best. Meaning, those who had the right background and fitted into the system they were already prepared for. Those who did not have the right background obviously had less chance to be selected. The danger was a clear one. Knowledge and those who mastered knowledge belonged to a certain class, forming their own bubble. What once started as a great project to foster equality, had become an instrument of selection. Did women have the same chances as men, did people of colour have the same chances? Probably not. 

All this seems to be a tragic development and many deplore it. But this is only half of the story. For, notwithstanding the exclusive character of education (in particular higher education), selection is widely considered as needed and as inevitable. Especially when it comes to education. In sports, at the conservatories, art schools and ballet academies, the best are intentionally selected. Moreover, universities also practice more and more selection at the gate. 

Hence, education cannot only be blamed for being transformed into a selection tool. It is also what we are striving for. We do have in our society a contradictory attitude towards equality and selection. Apparently, we need both, we want both. At the same time, we obviously prefer not to address this difficult combination of these contradictory approaches. These conflicting attitudes have caused a crisis in our education system. That is why we organise this round table.

A last element that needs to be mentioned. Is there any relationship between religion and education? Of course there is. But in general Christianity has followed the societal tendencies it partly shaped itself. It found itself back in the same contradiction as the rest of society insisting on the equality of all men, but at the same time recognising the need of selection.  

Therefore, welcome to this roundtable on education and many thanks for your participation. We are looking forward to a stimulating dialogue.

Matthias Smalbrugge