Social justice, like most social constructs, is not easily given to ubiquitous definition. Griffiths (1998) provides a starting point in her "working definition" of this term, a key point being that the good of each individual is balanced against the good of all, and vice versa:

"It is good for the common interest, where that is taken to include the good of each and also the good of all, in an acknowledgement that one depends on the other.

The good depends on there being a right distribution of benefits and responsibilities" (p.89).

Certainly, there are many expressions of belief in the need to have social justice permeate our decisions and the operation of our institutions:

"AIf we believe in equity and justice, we will structure our schools one way. If we believe that our children are entitled to succeed on the backs of others, we will structure them differently. This is the choice before us." (Maude Barlow and Heather-jane Robertson, 1994, cited in Canadian School Boards Association, 1997, p. 4).

"Poverty is the enemy of education ... Schools are not primarily responsible for poverty... But there are things schools can do to counteract the deleterious influences of poverty" (Benjamin Levin, 1995, cited in Canadian School Boards Association, 1997, p. ii).

"We must measure our progress by the standard of care that we set for the least privileged among us [...] The true challenge of leadership is to rally a nation to its unfilled promise. To build a society based on equality, not privilege; on duty, not entitlement. A society based on compassion and caring; not on indifference or neglect." (Paul Martin, Prime Minister-Elect, Toronto, November 4, 2003, cited in Campaign 2000: 2003 Report Card on Child Poverty in Canada, p. 1).

Levitas (2003) suggests that the larger construct of social justice may be understood through social inclusion and social exclusion. Her understanding of social inclusion is based on the assumption that most political and social agendas in the developed world have an inherent or underlying sense of a better world. She believes that such a world is more likely to be attained through a utopian, rather than an ideological stance. This is a transformative idea and not unlike feminist postmodern theory. Utopic (idea or orientation) would act as an analytical tool in terms of excavating and rebuilding a better world or just society inherent in political and social doctrine. In order to move towards a utopia of social inclusion, it is necessary to confront social exclusion. One kind of social exclusion described by Levitas is redestributive discourse (RED), which shuts people out from accessing certain social benefits. She maintains that social exclusion is a consequence of poverty but cautions against the simplistic notion that raising income will reduce exclusion, just as the simplistic notion of raising literacy standards will put all people to work. Social exclusion is much more complex: "... it is dynamic, processual, multi-dimensional, and relational" (p. 2).

Part of the complexity lies in a misunderstanding of "excluded" groups in society, or even a non-awareness or non-acceptance that such groups exist. For example, how many families on social assistance can take advantage of Registered Education Savings Plans for the future education of their children? How many can take advantage of a similar purpose of the Learning Bonds, announced during the 2004 Federal election? Other factors that add to the complexity of fighting for social justice is that the very people for whom it is desirable may feel harmed by the struggle for it. As Griffiths (1998) points out, "... there is a fine line be to trodden between 'giving a voice' to subjects and betraying them" (p. 41). Translated into reality this means that many people on low-incomes are proud, resourceful people, and do not wish to be pawns in the system, even if the intent at times is to help them. Historically, the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians never had much money but felt secure in what they had, lived comfortably according to their standards, and had an extended network of family support. Therefore, terms like "poverty" or Ailliteracy" are seen to be hurtful for the very people for whom they may be used to advocate better conditions.

The Fourth World

During the 1980's the notion of a Fourth World was frequently addressed in academic and political circles. Hamadache (1984) describes the Fourth World as: "underprivileged categories of society, especially the poor living in the marginal city districts, or on the outskirts of cities and in rundown areas, migrant workers and their families and certain minorities or underprivileged groups" (p.23).

The goal behind the discussion was to highlight the erroneous belief that if the Third World could be brought up to Second or First World standards all would be well. Hamadache and others wanted to point out that conditions within First World countries are crying out for attention, especially within inner cities. These are the excluded B the unemployed, the underpaid, the underhoused and the undereducated, all of which equate to poverty. The consequences of poverty, as they relate to learning are summarized in the report Literacy and Poverty: A View from the Inside by the National Anti-Poverty Organization (1992):

• Poverty produces hungry children who cannot concentrate in school; Poverty often produces crowded living situations - - no private, quiet spaces where children can study;
  
• Poverty can fill a home with worry, stress and tension, making it difficult for children to concentrate;
  
• Schools frequently steer children from low-income families into dead-end courses;
  
• Native people, persons with disabilities and other minority groups also receive
  unequal treatment;
  
• Poor, undereducated parents often lack the confidence to challenge the school system; schools are often unresponsive when these parents seek better treatment for their children (pp. 21-22).

Levitas (1998) believes that opportunity is a key concept in challenging social exclusion and social injustice. Opportunity is not a "quick fix", such as Amake work projects "as a panacea for long term gainful employment. Opportunity for inclusion is not a Atreatment by removal" plan, such as the attempt to deal with youth social problems in some Aboriginal communities by removing the children from their communities for treatment. Opportunity for inclusion is not removing children in school from participating in the expected learning outcomes (curriculum) set down by the Provincial Government, when there is no sound and solid basis for doing so.

Opportunity must be assessed in terms of expected outcome. If a cross-section of people in Newfoundland and Labrador were asked what is the "expected" education of a child entering kindergarten, what would they answer? One source they could consult would be the Curriculum Guides from the Provincial Department of Education, Division of Program Development. There, they would find Essential Graduation Learnings, General Curriculum Outcomes, and Specific Curriculum Outcomes and Themes. As an example of the latter, if one were to check the specific themes for grade 5 in the Physical Education Program, one would find nine themes. Theme 7 is: "Gymnastics: Demonstrating basic gymnastic skills in a simple routine on floor and apparatus." For each theme, there are Sample Learnings, Teaching Strategies, Student Assessment, and Resources and Notes.

However, the Curriculum Guides are not the only policy documents that decide who shall be included in, or excluded from, the intended or expected education for students. A document from the Department of Education, Division of Student Support Services, is somewhat like an amendment to the provincially approved courses/intended outcomes, and provides for four levels of modification, each level excluding a child more and more from the expected or intended outcomes. These modifications are known as Pathways 2-5, Pathway 1 being the canonical or idealized curriculum plan. Allocation beyond Pathway 1, or exclusion from Pathway 1, is done through an ISSP (Individual Support Services Plan), which involves a number of individuals who are connected to the child in some way (school, family, health, justice, etc.). But what is the procedure for excluding children from the curriculum as stated in the Provincial Curriculum Guides and on what basis is the modification supposed to be an accepted education for these excluded children?

It would seem to make sense that each and every Specific Curriculum Outcome would be assessed to determine which outcomes are not attainable by the child, with a very clear picture of why the child cannot attain them. A child's education life, and all the consequences of that, are at stake. To what extent are generic reading and writing and math tests -- and in the case of reading, often not administered by clinical reading specialists -- used to exclude children from the Provincial Approved Curriculum for Pathway 1? At one ISSP meeting, the author acted as parent advocate and the focus was the parents not wanting the child moved from Pathway 1 to Pathway 2. During the discussion, an educational representative stated that unless the child were designated as Pathway 2, he would not avail of the "proximity strategy". On enquiring, I was informed that the proximity strategy could allow the child to sit closer to the teacher.

Even if we face the reality of Pathway 1 exclusion, the next big question is what support is given to the child? If a child needs specialized help in becoming a reader and writer and this has been demonstrated by a clinical reading specialist, then how can a high school volunteer provide the kind of support needed? Would any of the readers of this article who needed the services of a medical specialist be satisfied with a helper who told them that he/she had a first aid course? Why should it be any more so in education? Once there is exclusion, as Levitas so aptly stated, there is social injustice.

Information and Opportunity

Without information, opportunity is limited. An informal survey (by the author) among parents showed that very few understood the Pathways portion of the curriculum. For example, one junior high school student was allocated to a range of Pathways B from P1 to P4 B for various subjects. The boy could not read independently at a primary grade level, and yet on a report card all of his
subject scores were above 70, with at least one subject in Pathway 1 (a subject involving reading) attaining 100 percent.

There are no standardized achievement, norm-referenced tests being administered in Newfoundland and Labrador. Yet, two editorials in the Telegram (July 14, 20, 2004) contained the words "standardized tests" and addressed the pros and cons of such tests with regard to the testing in the province. The province does administer Criterion Referenced Tests (CRT). The provincial curriculum is an outcomes based curriculum and so CRT's are appropriate for assessing to what
extent this curriculum is successful. However, what is happening is that CRT's are being interpreted as standardized tests, and results are reported on children. The 2003 results of the Grade 6 reading CRT=s showed that 35 percent or approximately 2455 children failed to meet the expected level of reading. Reading is not normally "taught" after grade 6 which means that in six years time, over 2000 older teens, if they are interested, will be enrolling in ABE classes. A social justice question is who is being excluded by these tests? No overall data of this nature are available but, from my experience, children of low-income families seem to make up a disproportionate number of the failing students. Also CRT test results are compared from one year to the next, which is impossible, since CRT results are based on different tests in different years.

The one use that could be made of CRT test results is to provide feedback to individual schools/classrooms/teachers about which curriculum outcomes need more attention. If for example, grade 5 children in Classroom R are doing very poorly on the Gymnastic intended outcome, then through analysis and reflection solutions might be developed. This is one way how in-service or professional development activities should be decided.

Possible Approaches for Solution

Levitas (1998) states we can take either of two approaches in dealing with exclusion or social injustice: distributive or utopian. Distributive involves a shifting or moving of factors so that the problem appears to be ameliorated, such as often occurs in the Pathways solution, for if a child in need of specialized help is not provided that help, then the child is still being excluded from learning. A utopian approach involves changing the system. Levitas believes: "A utopian approach suggests the need to focus more on the kind of society we would like to build B assessing policies and programmes in terms of the contribution they make to this end, while making the yardstick itself
explicit and open to democratic debate" (p. 4 ). The starting point in a utopian approach is providing information and opportunity. Hopefully, this will lead to acceptance by the power holders and a willingness to change, as Purpel and McLaurin (2004) point out: "... the principal ingredients necessary for significant change are the acceptance of the need for significant change and the
will to make such changes" (p. 140).

Curriculum Expectation

It is necessary to understand which are the intended curriculum outcomes for children entering school. Is there a "core" or "basic" curriculum that all children should experience? Much as been said and written about school fees/charges but such fees/charges must also be understood in terms of what children can expect from their schooling. Data collected through a study on school fees/charges (Community Services Council of Newfoundland and Labrador, 2003) showed considerable disagreement at times between teachers and administrators over what counted as curriculum versus what counted as extra- or co-curriculum, and whether these experiences occurred during school hours. For example, 44 percent of teachers said that School Bands constituted curriculum (versus extra- or co-) and 34 percent of them said it occurred during school hours. Sixty-seven percent of administrators believed the School Band constituted curriculum and 35 percent stated it occurred during school hours. As another example, there was high agreement among teachers and administrators that Field Trips were curriculum (84-91 percent) and occurred during school hours; an even higher percentage stated that charges were levied for this curriculum
experience. A point is that low-income children are more likely to be excluded fom this curriculum activity, such as staying home on these days, even if the school does take extraordinary measures to include those without payment. A second point is that field trips are seen by teachers and administrators as intended curriculum, and therefore the notion of exclusion should not even be a
factor.

Informed Teachers

This is especially crucial for the next cohort of teachers entering schools. Universities have a serious responsibility to ensure that pre-service teachers do not just Atake in@ information about Government and School Board policies and practices regarding curriculum. They must develop not just a sound knowledge base of what is, but must become perceptive, critical, and reflecting thinkers in really understanding what this means in the actuality and reality of social justice. They must understand (or for some, re-connect) to the many instances of the consequences of curriculum exclusion.

Universities for teacher preparation must also continually evaluate the knowledge which beginning teachers should have. "Evaluation 101" should be a requirement for all, so that different types of tests and their interpretation are understood.

Revisiting Policy and Practice

There should be periodic review and revision of policy and practice. Some documents on the Pathway plan are now almost ten years old. This revisiting and review should not be exclusive to a few Government or School Board employees, but should provide an avenue for input from all who have been involved or impacted.

Research

Finally, a culture of research must be promoted. More and more Master's programs are becoming non-research programs, often because the candidates see research as being elusive and unrelated to their work. Teachers are in an ideal situation as "action researchers" to gather key data on curriculum implementation. Some suggested questions for research are: beir lives like 5 or 10 years after they withdraw from school? Who cares? Who cares and does something about it? Who doesn't care?

Conclusions

Children's lives (today), adults' lives (tomorrow) are at stake. From day one, when children enter the school system, all these stakeholders who have some responsibility for their experiences must understand that responsibility through the lens of social justice. All children are children of promise, but the reality is that many of them do not fulfill that promise, and ignoring that reality certainly does not benefit the children. There must be a learning climate of inclusion and this entails providing the best education for all, keeping in mind that a child, who for whatever valid reason, cannot attain idealized education outcomes, must have access to the best support.

"... school experience ought to be seen as an opportunity for the growth and learning of all (my italics) who dwell in a particular educational institution" (Purpel and McLaurin, 2004, p. 127).

References

Campaing 2000. (2003). Honouring our promises: Meeting the challenges to end
child and family poverty.http://www.campaign2000.ca

Canadian School Boards Association. (1997). Students in poverty: Towards
awareness, action, and wider knowledge. Ottawa, ON: Canadian School Boards
Association.

Community Services Council of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2003). Expanding their
universe, reshaping the future. A report on the impact of schools fees and
fundraising on social inclusion. Community Services Council, St. John=s, NL.

Griffiths, M. (1998). Educational research for social justice: Getting off the
fence. Buckingham, PA: Open University Press.

Hamadache, A. (February, 1984). Illiteracy in the fourth world: Rich countries
become aware of a disturbing trend. UNESCO Courier.

Levitas, R. (2003). The idea of social inclusion.
http://www.ccsd.ca/events/inclusion/papers/rlevitas.htm (7/19/03).

National Anti-Poverty Organization. (1992). Litercy and poverty: A view from the
inside. Ottawa, ON: National Anti-Poverty Organization.

Purpel, D. E., & McLaurin, W. M. Jr. (2004). Reflections on the moral and
spiritual crisis in education. New York: Peter Lang.

Welch, S. D. (2000). A feminist ethic of risk (Revised edition). Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press.