TY  - JOUR
AB  - Dominant theories of educational justice—adequacy, equality of opportunity, priority, and capabilities—share an overlooked implication: they offer no affirmative reason to continue educating children once they are thriving. Under these frameworks, flourishing students become residual claimants, their education contingent on the absence of more urgent needs. This paper argues that such a view is normatively misguided and traces the practical consequences of treating public education as a purely redistributive project. Drawing on principles of democratic equality and respect for human potential, I contend that all children, including those who have surpassed adequacy thresholds, retain a claim to meaningful public education. These principles explain why withdrawing enrichment for all children is not a benign omission but a deprivation the state has a duty to prevent. While recognizing universal claims raises tensions in policy design, especially in balancing enrichment with priority for the disadvantaged, the core insight stands: public education is not a residual service but a constitutive project of democracy and human development.
AU  - Shores, Kenneth A.
PY  - 2025
ST  - "Send Them Home?" Rethinking What Public Education Owes to Flourishing Children
TI  - "Send Them Home?" Rethinking What Public Education Owes to Flourishing Children
UR  - http://www.edworkingpapers.com/ai25-1274
ER  -