The document discusses elitism and meritocracy in curriculum development. It defines elitism as a system where a small group has more privileges and power due to their status. Meritocracy is discussed as a system where success is based on ability and talent. However, the document notes that unequal access to resources means those from higher socioeconomic backgrounds have more opportunities to develop skills and appear meritorious. It argues the curriculum should consider pluralism, egalitarianism, and reflect the diversity of society to overcome biases inherent in purely meritocratic systems.

1. Elitism and Meritocracy in curriculum
Introduction: An elite is a relatively small group of people with the highest status in a society, or in some
domain of activity, who have more privileges or power than other people due to their status. Elitism is
believing in or promoting this sort of arrangement, whether that be in the academic world, politics, art, sports,
or anywhere else.
The word elite was originally French for ‘select’ or ‘chosen’ and comes from the same Latin root, eligere, as elect.
In socio-political philosophyelitism is the belief that societies must or should be ruled by an elite, and theorists of
elitism study how the elite gain and maintain their status, and what they get for it.
• Meritocracy: Merit comes Latin word ‘Mereo’ means I earn Cracy comes from the Greek word ‘Kratos’
means strength or powers-Political power should be vested in individuals almost exclusively based on
ability and talent
• Meritorious- Merits in terms of tested competency and ability as measured by IQ
• Elite class people used Merit/Meritocracy to capture powers and created ideology
The main argument in favor of elitism is that the smartest and strongest people are the best qualified to lead and
wield power—that it is in all of our best interests to have the best people at the top.
The main arguments against elitism are that it opposes equality (egalitarianism), diversity (pluralism),
and democracy (populism). And the observation that the elite, in practice, do not actually include all or only
the best people, but rather often, simply the people from certain families. So, we will return to these arguments
against elitism in section three.
The curriculum designed and developed keeping in view of egalitarianism and diversity of our country.
We know enough about our ancient past to be able to say that most ancient civilizations, once they were big
enough to have cities, had elitism. Human civilizations have always had power relatively concentrated in the
hands of a few, and the elite have often received that status from parentage and wealth, although with many
exceptions; at times, the strongest, smartest, or boldest individuals have been able to raise themselves to elite
status. In some societies priests, intellectuals, and/or artists have had the potential to gain elite status,
although usually only in cooperation with the political and economic elite. In any case, although there have
been scattered anti-elitist voices throughout human history, elitism has been a relatively unquestioned and
universal feature of human societies until the past few hundred years.
The curriculum designed and developed keeping in view of the long evolutionary perspectives of our society
and civilization.
Types of Elitism
There could be an infinite number of types of elitism; there are elite musicians, comedians, surgeons,
physicists, athletes, and coders, as well as the economic and political elite we’ve talked about throughout this
article. However, here are a couple of the most popular kinds of elitism:

2. The curriculum designed and developed keeping in view of the different types of elitism in our country and it
should be reflected in curriculum at every stage.
a. Academic elitism
This is either the idea that people with high academic qualifications are better than others, or that they should
be given special privileges. It is a criticism often made of professional academic society, especially because the
relatively small proportion of professors who are tenured enjoy great advantages, especially job-security,
compared to the majority of professors, who work more hours for less, with no job-security.
The term academic elitism can also refer to the fact that students who graduate from high-status schools like
Harvard and Yale have better job opportunities than students from lower status schools.
b. Intellectual elitism
This is an accusation often made by social/political conservatives against “the left.” Many conservatives point
to an inherent association between intellectuals and liberal ideals, which they object to. it is true that
intellectuals and liberals are often the same people, and often have advanced degrees, however they don’t
seem to have any extra privileges or power outside of the academic world, so calling them elitists is
questionable.
VII. Elitism versus Pluralism, Populism, andEgalitarianism
The main socio-political philosophies opposed to elitism are pluralism, populism, and egalitarianism, which
share much in common—each with a different emphasis.
 Pluralism is the belief that societies should be governed by a plurality of viewpoints—the more the better. This stands in favor of
democracy and against elitism—since the members of any elite group share similar interests. Pluralism doesn’t oppose giving high
status to some kinds of people, so long as there are many different kinds of people who can att ain high status. But this would seem
to forbid the existence of one “most elite” group in a society.
 Populism is basically a synonym for democracy—rule by the majority. Unlike pluralism, populism doesn’t say anythingabout
how many different viewpoints should exist, but it is assumed that rule by the majority requires multiple choices for voters to
choose from. The idea that common people should rule themselves in any sense is directly anti-elitist.
Egalitarianism isthe philosophythatall peopleshouldhave equal rightsandbe treatedequallyin
general.So,anykindof privilege or elitismisanti-egalitarian.
Meritocracy is a socialsystem in which success and status in life depend primarily on individual talents, abilities, and
effort. It is a social sy stem in which people advance on the basis of their merits.
A meritocratic system contrasts with aristocracy,for which people advance on the basis of the status and titles of
family and other relations.
From the days of Aristotle,whocoined the term "ethos,"the idea of awarding positions of power tothose most
capablehave been a part of politicaldiscussion not only for governments but for business endeavors as well.
Many Western societies--the United States chief among them--are commonly considered tobe meritocracies,
meaning these societies are built on the belief that anyone can make it with hard work and dedication. Social
scientists often refer tothis as the "bootstrap ideology,"evoking the popular notion of "pulling"oneself "up by the
bootstraps."

3. Aristotle's Ethos and Meritocracy
In discussions of rhetoric,Aristotlerelates the epitome of his understanding of the word ethos as the mastery of a
particular subject.
Rather than determining merit based on the modern stateof affairs as exemplified by the politicalsystem in place at
the time,Aristotle argued that it should come from a traditional understanding of aristocraticandoligarchical
structures that define 'good'and 'knowledgeable.'
In 1 958,Michael Young wrote a satirical paper mocking theTripartite System of British education called"The Rise of
the Meritocracy,"declaring that "merit is equated with intelligence-plus-effort,its possessors are identified at an early
age and selected for appropriate intensive education,and there is an obsession with quantification,test-scoring,and
qualifications."
The term hascome tofrequently be describedin modern day sociology and psychology as 'any act of judgment based
on merit.'Although some disagreeabout what qualifies as true merit,most now agreethat merit should be the
primary concern for selecting an applicant for a position.
Social Inequality and Merit Disparity
In modern times, the idea of a merit-based-only system of gov ernance and business creates a disparity,as the
av ailability of resources tocultivate merit arelargely predicated upon one's current and historic socioeconomic status.
Thus, those born intohigher socioeconomic standing--those whohave more wealth--have access tomore resources
than those born intolower standing.
Unequalaccess toresources has a direct and significant effect on thequality of education a child will receive all the
way from kindergarten through university.The quality of one's education,among other factors related toinequalities
and discrimination,directly affects the development of merit and how meritorious one willappear when applying for
positions.
While meritocracy is a noble idealfor any socialsystem,achieving it first requires recognizing that social, economic,
and political conditions may exist which make it impossible.Toachieve it,then,such conditions must be corrected.
•
In the past whenthe educational landscape wasn'tsocompetitive,itworkedtoa certainextent.
You had kidswhocouldclimb theirwayoutof an underprivilegedbackgroundjustbyworking
extrahard. Educationwastrulythe social levellerthen.Buttoday,whencompetitionissuper
keenandstandardshave beenraisedtodifferentiatethe bestfromthe best,workinghardisno
longerenough.
If you have tutorsin everysubjecttoclarifyyoureverydoubtandhelpyoulearnbeyondwhat
teachersteachyou inschool,you're mostcertainlylikelytodobetterinyourexams.If your
parentscan engage a tenniscoachfor youfrom age 5, youwouldclearlybe abettertennis
playerable toleadyourschool team bythe time youhit secondaryschool.If youhave well-
educated,Englishspeakingparentswhocanbringyouoverseasonholidaytoexpose youto
differentcultures,readtoyoufromwhenyouwere aninfantand have connectionstohelpyou
landinternships,youwouldundoubtedlyhave abetterlookingportfolioandparticipate more
confidentlyininterviewsthanakidwhodoesn'tevenhave internetathome.

4. • Conclusion:
• Banard- “Educationabolishessocial rigidity,removesdiscriminationbasedonbirthanddestroys
rigidstratification.Italsostrivestoachieve higherideals,obtainshigherpositionsof prestige,
formationnof goodhabitsandinculcationof permanentvalules” Curriculumshouldbe
developed givingemphasisonthe compositionof societyandonthe reflectionof all sectionsof
societyin education.