Education for the gifted or for the elite?

First published in L'Express on 15/03/2005


Experts generally agree that there is in every population a small percentage of gifted children (des surdoués) and that they deserve special treatment in terms of educational challenges if their talents are not to go waste or be misdirected. It is sometimes noted that gifted children who are not sufficiently challenged simply get bored and stop paying attention or else simply misbehave.


Education for the elite, on the other hand, refers to special educational facilities made available exclusively to certain privileged social classes, ethnic groups or other similar ‘elite’ groups. Public schools like Eton and Harrow in the UK and universities like Oxford and Cambridge were traditionally reserved to such closely associated elite groups. It is thus not surprising that these ‘elite’ institutions help to perpetuate the prevailing power structure. How far these have evolved is, however, beyond the scope of this article.


When certain political leaders in Mauritius argue publicly for institutions providing education for the elite, some pertinent questions inevitably arise. Is reference being made to the ‘power elite’ as defined by C. Wright Mills? Is this an attempt by the power elite to further perpetuate its historical hold on power? Does this elite belong to specific ethnic or linguistic groups? Is this elite closely associated with certain socio-cultural organisations? Are we witnessing an attempt to deliberately confuse ‘education for the elite’ with ‘education for the gifted’ and thus blurring the difference between nepotism and meritocracy? One could argue that meritocracy is as naturally associated with education for the gifted as nepotism is with education for the elite.

Are we witnessing an attempt to deliberately confuse “education for the elite” with ‘education for the gifted’ and thus blurring the difference between nepotism and meritocracy?


While one could legitimately make a case for a special education for the gifted, the same cannot be said about education for the elite especially if one upholds the fundamental principles underlying a democratic system. One should however note at the outset that education for the gifted presupposes the existence of an effective system to identify gifted children at an appropriate time. The least that can be said of the traditional CPE rat-race is that it is far from being such a system. Secondly, education for the gifted presupposes a special treatment for those so identified. This is clearly not the case in Mauritius where the same curriculum is imposed on all secondary schools without even provisions of flexibility with respect to pace (i.e., allowing some to complete the curriculum faster than others).


In view of the above it would appear that what prevails in Mauritius is in fact a system closer to education for the power elite which indirectly perpetuates its influence. The power elite would ensure that policies relating to reforms in the education system, for instance, are drafted in such a way as to enable it to disregard them at will. This can be seen in the implementation of policies relating to regionalisation, where the power elite somehow manages to get its progeny admitted to certain so-called ‘five-star’ primary and secondary schools irrespective of their place of residence. The power elite which, as expected, occupies key positions in any system also ensures that the best teachers and head-teachers are transferred to these ‘five-star’ institutions. When one realises that all this is being perpetrated using taxpayers’ money (and not private funds as is the case with “public” fee-paying schools), one cannot but question the ethical underpinnings of such practices.


What prevails in Mauritius is in fact a system closer to education for the power elite which indirectly perpetuates its influence.


One is thus not surprised by the resistance of the members of the power elite to any reform, which jeopardises its traditional privileges, which it considers to be its birthright. One should also not be surprised if some members of this same power elite deliberately sabotage certain reform measures and thus ensure that the reform attempt as initially planned is effectively diluted or fails altogether. This same power elite is also very skilful in choosing the ‘right’ sides. It collaborates with colonial powers and when it finds independence becoming inevitable, it shifts its support to the independence movement and makes sure it continues to enjoy the power it has always enjoyed. The same acrobatics are seen before general elections especially if a change of regime is imminent.


One needs to be wary about ‘education for the elite’ if one upholds principles of meritocracy and if one wants democratic values to prevail.


It has not been possible in such a short article to delve into all the complex ramifications of the subject in question, and a certain degree of caricature and oversimplification was unavoidable. However, it is hoped that readers will appreciate that this is but a ploy to provoke a debate on the issue. It is also hoped that readers will acknowledge that while one should strive for ‘education for the gifted’ (as well as for other groups with special educational needs), one needs to be wary about ‘education for the elite’ if one upholds principles of meritocracy and if one wants democratic values to prevail.