For the most part, teachers should be striving towards equal outcomes. In that they want all of their students to equally master the class curriculum.
Because your post specified educational levels other than college, I will share the following -
... recent research from Johns Hopkins University... The study’s authors estimate that 20 to 40 percent of elementary and middle school students perform at least one grade level above their current grade in reading and 11 to 30 percent score at least one grade level above in math.
For the 11 to 40 percent of students who have already mastered the class material and are performing at least one grade level above their current grade...
a goal of "equal outcomes" translates to no growth for these pupils, while the remainder of grade level cohort catches up.
In this age of "equal outcomes" many gifted pupils experience their growth being capped.
To the degree that teachers/schools/programs may be rated/ranked based on generating grades which report "equal outcomes"
some pupils in a class may experience stagnant growth while
other pupils in the same class may experience grade inflation.
This may occur at college/university levels where inbound, formative, and summative (outbound) assessments may be conducted.
To decry "equal outcomes" in an individual classroom would be akin to arguing that we should be striving to fail kids...
Seeing the goal of grades which report "equal outcomes" as being flawed is NOT the same as striving to fail kids. Some may say that an appropriate goal for grades is to provide honest and meaningful feedback on a student's grasp of the material.
The classroom's goal should be equal outcomes.
Some may say the classroom's goal should be one term's growth for each pupil and/or an honest measurement of growth for that pupil throughout the term.
