IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0326021.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The meritocracy trap: Early childhood education policies promote individual achievement far more than social cohesion

Author

Listed:
  • Katarzyna Bobrowicz
  • Pablo Gracia
  • Ziwen Teuber
  • Samuel Greiff

Abstract

Governments worldwide have reformed early childhood education (ECE) to equip young people with competitive skills for an increasingly specialized workforce. These reforms have coincided with a widespread acceptance of meritocratic beliefs holding that talent and effort, rather than uncontrollable factors (e.g., luck, social context), determine individuals’ lifetime success and achievement. This study examines whether recent ECE reforms may have promoted an economic meritocratic mindset that favors skills linked to individual competition for future achievement. Data came from a total of 92 documents published between 1999 and 2023, including ECE advisory reports from international organizations and government-endorsed ECE curricula from 53 countries across Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and Oceania. A step-by-step thematic analysis was conducted through combining qualitative text coding with statistical analyses applied to the emerging themes. Findings show that: (1) while experts and policymakers recognized the importance of ECE access and quality, they defined social cohesion primarily through economic indicators; (2) ECE documents prioritized cognitive skills and –mostly among international organizations– socioemotional skills as key for individual achievement, but citizenship skills were largely omitted; (3) individual agency and responsibility within ECE contexts were defined as central to educational and lifetime success, while uncontrollable factors (e.g., intergenerational transmission of advantage, family origin) were largely neglected; (4) both international organizations and governments strongly embraced an economic meritocratic mindset in ECE, implying that life outcomes mainly depend on talent and effort, obscuring the role of support and solidarity from peers, relatives, communities or institutions. Overall, this study suggests that ECE reforms have globally reinforced the pitfalls of meritocracy by promoting educational policies that prioritize competition over cooperation, individualism over solidarity, and the widespread notion that talent and effort, rather than uncontrollable factors such as luck or social context, determine individuals’ lifetime success in society.

Suggested Citation

  • Katarzyna Bobrowicz & Pablo Gracia & Ziwen Teuber & Samuel Greiff, 2025. "The meritocracy trap: Early childhood education policies promote individual achievement far more than social cohesion," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(7), pages 1-23, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0326021
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0326021
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0326021&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0326021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0326021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.