|  ElCiudadano.cl |  Noticias

El Ciudadano

Original article: Inclusión y Mérito: ¿Dos formas compatibles para pensar el sistema educativo?

By Dr. Rocío Ferrada Hurtado, Researcher at the Center for Inclusive Education Research PUCV (EduInclusiva)

During his inaugural public address, President Kast announced a significant overhaul of the School Admission System (SAE) «to re-evaluate student merit and allow parents to choose educational institutions for their children.»

He further emphasized that this demand comes directly from the community: «Let’s not ignore an obvious need expressed by parents themselves.»

The SAE is a centralized mechanism for students applying to schools funded by the state, whether public or subsidized, enabling families to identify their preferred institutions while ensuring equal opportunities for all students and preventing arbitrary discrimination.

Established under the School Inclusion Law (2016), the SAE aims to uphold the principles of inclusion, equity, and transparency in student admission and allocation to publicly-funded schools.

Historically, research indicated that schools employed discretionary practices in selecting students, raising doubts about whether families were indeed choosing schools or if schools were selectively choosing students—favoring those deemed easier to educate.

Thus, the SAE was designed to eliminate such discretionary practices, streamline vacancy allocations, and promote educational opportunities unfettered by socioeconomic, academic, or cultural family backgrounds.

In this context, academic merit has emerged—and continues to be—a prime example of an individual attribute influenced by a student’s social origin. Studies indicate that standardized academic performance measurements (e.g., SIMCE or PAES) strongly correlate with students’ socioeconomic status.

Consequently, selecting based on merit in Chile aligns with selecting on academic performance, which tends to favor students from socially privileged backgrounds.

It is evident that merit-based selection seems at odds with the principle of inclusion that shapes contemporary educational systems. Built upon the right to education, these systems should be inclusive and of high quality, providing equal educational opportunities devoid of arbitrary discrimination.

Thus, the availability of school vacancies should not rely on student performance, as this would inherently advantage those better positioned within the social hierarchy.

Yet, can institutions solely allocate resources based on a singular justice criterion, such as equality? In democratic societies characterized by normative pluralism, it is critical for this allocation to consider multiple principles. This conveys the dilemma of the inclusion versus merit debate, as both inclusion and merit represent facets of justice.

Moreover, it is part of common beliefs to base order on merit—the ideal in workplaces, public offices, universities, and schools from a certain age… Thus, merit functions as both a motivational ideal and a standard of justice.

A compromise solution is necessary, meaning an agreement that entails concessions from involved parties aimed at common good. Compromise contrasts with intransigence—or a rigid adherence to “pure” principles—where no concessions are accepted, and differs from consensus in that the latter doesn’t require concessions for its existence. Interestingly, a compromise can evolve into a consensus.

The SAE, both in its initial design and the improvements proposed by the Technical Committee in 2025, embodies a compromise that relies on different justice criteria: the algorithm allocates school placements considering equal opportunities (randomness), family connections (having siblings or relatives attending the desired school), needs (percentage of priority students), and merit (performance percentage starting from 7th grade).

This system can be reviewed and enhanced—as the Technical Committee has done—adapting to current circumstances, but it does not require dismantling the SAE, should the proposed overhaul by the President aim to do so. It stands as a just mechanism, aligned with the standards of democratic institutions.

Dr. Rocío Ferrada Hurtado

La entrada Inclusion and Merit: Can These Two Concepts Coexist in Education Systems? se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.