Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

University access and theories of social justice: contributions of the capabilities approach

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Issues of social justice in higher education together with a focus on access or widening participation have become of increasing importance globally. Given the complex theoretical terrain of social justice and the tensions inherent in applying social justice frameworks within higher education, and particularly in the area of access, this paper argues that it is necessary to take a step back and reflect on key theories of social justice and their implications for higher education. The paper considers three leading theorists of social justice whose work is commonly applied in higher education contexts and provides an account of the implications of this work for a specific social justice challenge, that of increasing access to university. The complexities of access and success in South African higher education are used as an illustrative case. On the basis of this conceptual analysis an argument is presented for the capabilities approach as a particularly productive theoretical approach in the context of university access for promoting more just outcomes, through a specific consideration of student agency and the interaction of this agency with institutional contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Sandel (2010, p. 154) applies this principle to the concept of fair meritocracy regarding university admissions criteria.

  2. In 2006 a special edition of the journal Educational Philosophy and Theory focusing on the application of Young’s work in education was published.

  3. In the context of adult education in OECD countries, Rubenson and Desjardins (2009) incorporate the capabilities approach within their framework of ‘Bounded Agency’ which also seeks to bring agency, social and institutional structures together in useful ways. This is done by considering the interdependence of welfare state policies and educational opportunities and barriers. A full consideration of the role of the welfare state and related policies is beyond the scope of this paper, but potentially opens up a fruitful space for further research in the South African higher education context.

References

  • Archer, L., Hutchings, M., & Ross, A. (Eds.). (2003). Higher education and social class. Issues of exclusion and inclusion. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, J., & Naidoo, R. (2008). Higher education and the achievement (and/or prevention) of equity and social justice. Higher Education, 56, 287–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CHE. (2004). South African higher education in the first decade of democracy. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education (CHE).

    Google Scholar 

  • CHE. (2012). Vital Stats. Public Higher Education 2010. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education (CHE). http://www.che.ac.za/documents/d000249/vital_stats_public_higher_education_2010.pdf.

  • Cloete, N. (2002). Policy expectations. In N. Cloete, R. Fehnel, P. Maassen, T. Moja, H. Perold, & T. Gibbon (Eds.), Transformation in higher education. Global pressures and local realities in South Africa (pp. 87–108). Cape Town: Centre for Higher Education Transformation.

  • DHET. (2010). Report of the Ministerial Committee on the Review of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme. Pretoria: Department of Higher Education and Training. Republic of South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • DHET. (2011). Green paper for post-school education and training (Green Paper). Pretoria: Department of Higher Education and Training. Republic of South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, A. (2006). Education and the politics of difference: Iris Young and the politics of education. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 38(1), 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (1996). Social justice in the age of identity politics: Redistribution, recognition and participation. Presented at the Tanner Lecturers on Human Values, Stanford University, California.

  • Fraser, N. (1997). Chapter 1. From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a “post-socialist” age. In Justice interruptus. New York: Routledge. http://www.trentu.ca/academic/philosophy/archive/200708/fraserjusticeinterruptus.pdf.

  • Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalising world. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gewirtz, S. (1998). Conceptualising social justice in education. Mapping the Territory. Journal of Education Policy, 13(4), 469–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gewirtz, S. (2006). Towards a contextualized analysis of social justice in education. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 38(1), 69–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C. S. (2008). What can young people tell us about promoting equality and inclusion through widening participation in higher education in England? Presented at the Human Development and Capability Association International Conference, New Delhi.

  • Hart, C. S. (2011). Thinking, doing, feeling: Capabilities in relation to decision-making and transitions beyond school in the UK (Working Paper). Cambridge: Cambridge University.

  • James, R. J. (2007). Social equity in a mass, globalised higher education environment: The unresolved issue of widening access to university. Melbourne: University of Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education. http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/news/lectures/pdf/richardjamestranscript.pdf.

  • Leibowitz, B. (2009). Towards a pedagogy of possibility. Teaching and learning from a “social justice” perspective. In E. Bitzer(Ed.), Higher education in South Africa. A scholarly look behind the scenes (pp. 85–101). Stellenbosch: Sun Media.

  • Marginson, S. (2011). Equity, status and freedom: A note on higher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(1), 23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MoE. (1997). Education white paper 3—A programme for higher education transformation (No. 18207). Pretoria: South African Ministry of Education.

  • MoE, (RSA). (2001). National plan for higher education in South Africa. Pretoria: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • NPC. (2011). National Development Plan. Vision 2030. Pretoria: National Planning Commission, Office of the President, South Africa.

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Women and human development. The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2003). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics, 9(2–3), 33–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities. The human development approach. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (Revised edition). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robeyns, I. (2003). Sen’s capability approach and gender inequality: Selecting relevant capabilities. Feminist Economics, 9(2–3), 61–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robeyns, I. (2009). Equality and justice. In S. Deneulin & L. Shahani (Eds.), An introduction to the human development and capability approach. freedom and agency (pp. 101–120). London: Earthscan.

  • Robeyns, I., & Brighouse, H. (2010). Introduction: Social primary goods and capabilities as metrics of justice. In H. Brighouse & I. Robeyns (Eds.), Measuring justice: Primary goods and capabilities (pp. 1–13). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rubenson, K., & Desjardins, R. (2009). The impact of welfare state regimes on barriers to participation in adult education a bounded agency model. Adult Education Quarterly, 59(3), 187–207. doi:10.1177/0741713609331548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M. J. (2010). Justice. What’s the right thing to do?. New York: Penguin Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1979). Equality of what? The Tanner lecture on human values. California: Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency & freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (2006). What do we want from a theory of justice? Journal of Philosophy, 103(5), 215–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smit, R. (2012). Towards a clearer understanding of student disadvantage in higher education: Problematising deficit thinking. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(3), 369–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tikly, L., & Barrett, A. M. (2011). Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries. International Journal of Educational Development, 31, 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. (2006). Higher education pedagogies. Berkshire: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M., & Unterhalter, E. (2007). The capability approach: Its potential for work in education. In M. Walker & E. Unterhalter (Eds.), Amartya Sen’s capability approach and social justice in education (pp. 1–18). New York: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson-Strydom, M. G. (2012). A framework for facilitating the transition from School to University in South Africa: A capabilities approach (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Bloemfontein: University of the Free State.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, J., & de-Shalit, A. (2007). Disadvantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (2001). Equality of whom? Social groups and judgments of injustice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (2006a). Education in the context of structural injustice: A symposium response. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 38(1), 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (2006b). Public debate and social justice. Maitreyee: Briefing of the human development and capability association (4), 2–3.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions have added much value to this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Merridy Wilson-Strydom.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wilson-Strydom, M. University access and theories of social justice: contributions of the capabilities approach. High Educ 69, 143–155 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9766-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9766-5

Keywords

Navigation