Although South Africa committed itself to the achievement of the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals, progress in education has been hampered by controversies about equity and excellence. Although some believe that the equity vs. excellence tension will and should never be resolved, this paper’s point of departure is that learner achievement will be made less difficult when equity and excellence are prioritized correctly. The paper proposes that prioritization is possible through the natural law theory, yet few if any studies have explored that perspective in South Africa. Four research questions then shape the arguments. Following a dialectical approach, the paper shows that since Aristotle’s time, the notion of natural law has been accepted as one of the most fundamental concepts of our civilization. Through the natural law theory, equity is not only viewed as the highest form of law but is also the highest form of any good or pleasure, hence excellence. This implies that in education, without actualizing learners’ potential or excellence of their nature, equity has not been achieved for them. Through the theory, the paper shows South Africa’s behaviors that violate natural law. However, this is not sustainable as it only provides the nation with temporary happiness instead of true happiness in accordance with nature. This according to Aristotle’s natural law theory is hedonic happiness instead of eudemonic happiness. Contrary to beliefs that violators of natural law go scot-free, nature is red in tooth and claw and its punishment is evident in the vicious cycles, such as a low happiness index, high crime rates, high unemployment rates and poor service deliveries that plague South Africa. In terms of theory, the natural law theory allows for more precise definitions of equity and sustainable development which are currently lacking in all the previous debates. In terms of practice, both the natural law theory and sustainable development converge in the capability approach to education. The relation between the capability perspective and education is acknowledged in the 2002 UNESCO Report “Education for all”, and its distinctive feature, the human capability approach is its assessment of policies not on the basis of their impact on incomes, but on whether or not they expand the real freedoms that people value. This approach and its conversion argument say that these internal converting capabilities are highly diverse among people, which weakens the supporting argument for a resource-based equality. The conversion argument says that the importance of primary goods or resources [external conversion factors] is derivative of the individual capability [internal conversion factors] to convert them into valued functionings. A recommendation coming from such observations is that our future depends crucially on how we educate the next generation of gifted people, especially in the mathematical sciences. The paper concludes by providing an example of how a critical mass of gifted people or excellence could create equity as knowledge cascades down in an organization or society. Singapore is an example that achieves equity through its gifted education programs. The paper recommends a similar approach if South Africa were to achieve the equitable and sustainable education it aspires for its learners.

1. Wolf A. Does Education matter? Myths about Education and Economic Growth Financial Theory and Practice. Penguin Global; 2005.

2. Hanushek EA. Education Production Functions. In: Bradley S, Green C (editors). The Economics of Education, 2nd ed. Academic Press; 2020. pp. 161-170.

3. Schreyer P. OECD Manual: Measuring Capital. Paris: Organisation for Economic Development and Cooperation; 2009.

4. Hanushek EA, Wößmann L. The Economic Impact of Learning Losses. OECD; 2020.

5. Department of Education (DoE). National Strategy for Mathematics, Science and Technology Education in General and Further Education & Training. Department of Education; 2001.

6. Department of Basic Education (DBE). Dinaledi Schools: Presentation to Portfolio Committee. Department of Basic Education; 2012.

7. Department of Basic Education (DBE). National Strategy for Mathematics, Science and Technology MST Education in GET & FET (2019-2030). Pretoria, Department of Basic Education; 2018.

8. IEA. TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement; 2013.

9. McCabe KO, Lubinski D, Benbow CP. Who shines most among the brightest?: A 25-year longitudinal study of elite STEM graduate students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2020; 119(2): 390-416.

10. Friedman HS, Martin LR. The Longevity Project: Surprising Discoveries for Health and Long Life from the Landmark Eight-Decade Study. Hudson Street Press; 2011.

11. Lubinski D, Benbow CP, Kell HJ. Life Paths and Accomplishments of Mathematically Precocious Males and Females Four Decades Later. Psychological Science. 2014; 25(12): 2217-2232.

12. Heuser BL, Wang K, Shahid S. Global dimensions of gifted and talented education: The influence of national perceptions on policies and practices. Global Education Review; 2017.

13. OECD. A Literature Review on the Policy Approaches and Initiatives for the Inclusion of Gifted Students in OECD Countries. OECD; 2020.

14. UNESCO. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (United Nations, 2015). Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf (accessed on 30 December 2024).

15. Schleicher A. Equity, Excellence and Inclusiveness in Education. OECD; 2014.

16. Schleicher A, Zoido P. The Policies that Shaped PISA, and the Policies that PISA Shaped. The Handbook of Global Education Policy; 2016.

17. Haley UCV, Haley GT. Think Local, Act Global: A Call to Recognize Competing, Cultural Scripts. Management and Organization Review. 2016; 12(01): 205-216.

18. Gardner J. Excellence: Can We Be Excellent and Equal Too?. New York: Harper & Row; 1961.

19. Reddy V, Hannan S. TIMSS in South Africa: Making global research locally meaningful. Sociology; 2021.

20. Howie SJ. The involvement of African countries in the IEA studies over 50 years. In: IEA 1958-2008: 50 years of experiences. IEA; 2011.

21. Department of Basic Education (DBE). Action plan to 2019: Towards the realisation of schooling 2030. Available online: https://www.education.gov.za/Portals/0/Documents/Publications/Action%20Plan%202019.pdf?ver=2015-11-11-162424-4 (accessed on 12 December 2024).

22. Mhlolo MK, Ntoatsabone MJ. An Evaluation of the Dinaledi Schools: Project Using a Framework of Enablers of Creativity. Creative Education. 2022; 13(6). doi: 10.4236/ce.2022.136125

23. Huff D. How to Lie with Statistics. W. W. Norton & Company; 1991.

24. Department of Basic Education (DBE). Annual Report 2018/2019. Pretoria, Department of Basic Education; 2019.

25. Malherbe EG. Education in South Africa 2:1923 75. Wynberg: Juta and Company; 1977.

26. CDE. From laggard to world class: Reforming maths and science education inSouth African schools. Centre for Development and Enterprise; 2004.

27. Brown EF, Wishney LR. Equity and Excellence: Political forces in the education of gifted students in The United States and abroad. Global Education Review; 2017.

28. Coiera E. The standard problem. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2023; 30(12): 2086-2097.

29. Gardiner T. What is Mathematical Literacy?. Available online: http://michel.delord.free.fr/tony.pdf (accessed on 12 December 2024).

30. Gallagher JJ. Public policy in gifted education. CA: Corwin Press; 2005.

31. Gardinier MP. Looking Back toward the Future: Reflecting on the OECD’s Global Educational Influence. In: The Impact of the OECD on Education Worldwide. Emerald Publishing Limited; 2017.

32. Pirsig RM. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values [ZMM]. Toronto: Bantam Books; 1974.

33. Schaefer TE. One More Time: How Do You Get Both Equality and Excellence in Education?. Journal of Educational Thought /Revue de la Pensée Educative. 2018; 24(1): 39-51.

34. Almeida LF, de Almeida PCA. The contemporaneity of the Aristotelian concept of equity and its relevance to the construction and effectiveness of equitable education. International Journal of Development Research. 2022; 12(2).

35. Angioni L. Aristotle’S Contrast Between Episteme and Doxa in Its Context (Posterior Analytics I.33). Manuscrito. 2019; 42(4): 157-210.

36. Boeker R. Locke on Education, Persons, and Moral Agency. International Journal of Philosophical Studies. 2023; 31(2): 202-210. doi: 10.1080/09672559.2023.2250179

37. Donelson R. Natural Punishment, North Carolina Law Review. Available online: https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol100/iss2/6 (accessed on 12 December 2024).

38. Follesdal A. Natural Law: Current Contributions of the Natural Law Tradition to International Law. SSRN; 2022.

39. Haara H, Saastamoinen K. Esteem and sociality in Pufendorf’s natural law theory. British Journal for the History of Philosophy. 2024; 32(2): 265-283. doi: 10.1080/09608788.2022.2075824

40. Terman C. “Judgments of Nature”: James Wilson’s Natural-Law Jurisprudence. The Review of Politics. 2024; 86(2): 152-175. doi: 10.1017/s0034670523000669

41. Marske CE, Kofron CP, Vago S. The Significance of Natural Law in Contemporary Legal Thought. The Catholic Lawyer. 1978; 24(1).

42. Zimmerman E. Excellence and Equity Issues in Art Education: Can We Be Excellent and Equal Too? Arts Education Policy Review. 1997; 98(4): 20-26. doi: 10.1080/10632913.1997.9936391

43. Barr T. A Rule That Bends: Aristotle on Pathos and Equity. Philosophy & Rhetoric; 2021.

44. Shiner RA. Aristotle’ s Theory of Equity, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review. 1245 (1994). Available online: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol27/iss4/1 (accessed on 30 December 2024).

45. Beever A. Aristotle on equity, law, and justice. Legal Theory; 2004.

46. Rommen H. The Natural Law. A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy. Liberty Fund; 1947.

47. Kelsen H. The Natural-Law Doctrine before the Tribunal of Science. The Western Political Quarterly; 1949.

48. Walsh J. Locke: Ethics. Internet encyclopaedia of philosophy; 2014.

49. Zetzel JEG. Cicero: On the Commonwealth: And, On the Laws. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.

50. Vacura M. Three concepts of natural law. Filozofija i drustvo. 2022; 33(3): 601-620. doi: 10.2298/fid2203601v

51. Aristotle. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civil Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.

52. Locke J. Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.

53. Huchhanavar SS, Huchhanava, S. Introduction to Traditional and Modern Natural Law Theories. SSRN; 2018.

54. Sentesy M. Aristotle’s Ontology of Change. Northwestern University Press, Illinois; 2020.

55. Rapp C. “Aristotle’s Rhetoric”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2023 Edition). Available online: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/aristotle-rhetoric/ (accessed on 30 December 2024).

56. Woerther F. The Philosophical Rhetoric, between Dialectics and Politics: Aristotle, Hermagoras and al-Fārābī. In: Literary and Philosophical Rhetoric in the Greek, Roman, Syriac, and Arabic Worlds, Olmsted. Europaea Memoria; 2009.

57. Maistry SM. Fetishistic Disavowal and Elusive Jouissance: The Case of the South African Higher Education decolonisation Project. South African Journal of Higher Education. 2019; 33(4).

58. Cropanzano R, Molina A. Organizational Justice. In: International Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences. Pergamon; 2015.

59. Wright SC, Boese GD. Meritocracy and Tokenism. In: International Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences. Pergamon; 2015.

60. Lightfoot S. On excellence and goodness. Harvard Educational Review; 1987.

61. Petrilli MJ. The Biggest Enemy of Equity isn’t Excellence. Education Next; 2023.

62. Silber JR. Higher education in the United States. Drew University, Madis; 1985.

63. Helliwell JF, Layard R, Sachs JD, et al. World Happiness Report 2024. University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre; 2024.

64. Hendricks EA, Mutongoza BH. Drivers of Learner Aggression in Selected Schools in the Amathole District Municipality in South Africa. Southern African Journal of Social Work and Social Development. 2024; 36(1). doi: 10.25159/2708-9355/13936

65. CDE. South Africa’s failing education system. Centre for Development & Enterprise; 2023.

66. Galton F. Hereditary Genius. Salzwasser-Verlag Gmbh; 1869.

67. Kahn M. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education: A Think Piece for the Human Resource Development Council (HRDC) Summit “Skills required for the 21st century’’. Creative Education; 2021.

68. CDE. The maths and science performance of South Africa’s public schools: Some lessons from the past decade. Centre for Development and Enterprise; 2010.

69. Taylor N. The dream of Sisyphus: Mathematics education in South Africa, South African Journal of Childhood Education. 2021; 11(1): 1-12.

70. Lee HL. In: Proceedings of the Speech by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the Teachers’ Day; 31 August 2006; The Max Pavilion, Singapore Expo.