Social promotion is the act of promoting a person to the next social order even if that person may not have passed the requisite test or requirement. It is most common to students and the academic life, in the sense that the student could be promoted to the next class of learning even if the same student failed the requisite test of the previous class. It is argued and held that the act is aimed at enhancing the esteem the student because making the student repeat classes would make that student lose confidence, esteem and value of self-worth. I will discuss the arguments in favour of the act and those against it, herein below.
On the contrary, social promotion has disadvantages, to the extent that it would be using weak social reasons to promote a student at the expense of talent, skill and qualification. This is a bad training because in life there is no room for pity. It is strict; one either passes the requisite test to get a job or any other thing and nothing less. Promotion to the next class should be based on merit and nothing less. If a student realises that he or she will not move to the next class without passing, the student is likely to work harder and put more effort in his school work. If schools embrace the culture of meritocracy, it will encourage the spirit if hard work and competitiveness. If anything, these are virtues and values that are relevant in the real life.
Conclusively, I support the ban so that all students are subjected to the same level playing field in order to compete. If the ban is lifted, it is highly likely that a student may not put a lot of work in his or her school work, due to the knowledge that he or she would be promoted to the next class regardless to his nor her performance. The ban would encourage hard work.
Our writers will create one from scratch for
Bryk, Anthony S., et al. Ending social promotion: Results from the first two years. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research, 1999.