Neoliberalism

The subject of Neoliberalism is a frustrating one because once one understands it, they realize that both Republican and Democrat are working along the same binary, both are starting from the same presumptions, and neither even begins to address the real issues in education. In short, the two parties are busy arguing over how best to arrange the deck chairs on the HMS Titanic.

It is somewhat pointless to even think of this topic in terms of Republican and Democrat. But, as that is the easiest way for me to understand it, that is where I will start.

But first, some definitions:

Pauline Lipman defines neoliberalism as, "An ensemble of economic and social policies that promote the primacy of the market and individual self-interest, unrestricted flows of capital, deep reductions in the cost of labor, sharp retrenchment of the public sphere, and withdrawal of government from providing for social welfare." (Lipman, 45).

Michael Apple states, "For neoliberals, one form of rationality is more powerful and an "ethic of cost-benefit analysis are the dominant norms. All people are to act in ways that maximize their own personal benefits. Indeed, behind this position is an empirical claim that this is how all rational actors act." (Apple, 38).

Both definitions remind me of the insane ramblings of Ayn Rand, a person whose ideas I deeply despise. I'd rather not say any more about her.

Republicans, in general look to the market forces to solve the problems of education. Their solution to everything is to privatize, so that the rich and giant corporations can make a profit. It's already been done with many things that were once publicly controlled, such as the prison system, and to a large part, the military. George W. Bush attempted to do it with Social Security, but luckily America wasn't buying that flim-flam. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration was able to begin the process of privatizing the education system with passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law, (which a disturbing number of democrats in Congress also voted for).

It is clear to me, by the rhetoric, platform, and recent candidates for president, that the Republican party is actively at war with education, while glorifying ignorance and disengagement as a virtue (i.e. Sarah Palin). An educated populace will too easily see through the Republicans' lies and ignorant fearmongering, and reject their policies as regressive and destructive to democracy. So, it is the goal of Republicans to make sure education fails as many students as possible. NCLB is designed to ensure that once schools begin to fail (as defined by low standardized test scores). They will have the excuse they need to hand the schools over to for-profit corporations, like this one, called Edisonlearning. Fortunately, it seems this particular company is beginning to be exposed for the scam that it is, as the linked article states:

"Despite initial promises of costs reductions client districts reported higher costs for their Edison schools.^[10] Edison's claims about academic improvement failed to live up to the company's promises. A July 2002 New York Times analysis of Edison's claims found that the troubled Cleveland, Ohio, school system achieved higher gains than Edison's schools when analyzed with the methodology Edison applied to its own schools' achievement.^[11]"

but that is cold comfort, because many more wait to turn education into big business. Schools will tend to their bottom line, and education will be measured in test scores and dollars. They will churn out the model Republican voters -- ignorant, uninformed, gullible and pliable, lacking even a modicum of critical thinking ability, ready to believe Glen Beck's every word.

But all that's fixed now, right? Barack Obama is president now, a Democrat, highly educated, an educator himself, he even "pals around" with the education studies scholar, Bill Ayers. Surely President Obama will repeal NCLB, and put schools on the right track. Well, not so fast, because even the Democrats are married to the neoliberal mindset. While few Democrats advocate the destructive privatization model, the public sector is often little better and bound by the same principles of neoliberalism. The public model still attempts to turn schools into test-mills, reducing education to the raw scores on high stakes tests, which can easily be compared with those of other countries and called success if they are higher. What students learn, the skills, and thinking abilities required to be an informed and aware citizen of the world is still not a factor. It is clear from President Obama's website page for education that only minor changes to the system and to NCLB are in store. This is hardly the new paradigm necessary for sweeping change.

But allow me to be clear, before this post seems too cynical. If a choice must be made between private or public versions of the neoliberal model -- public is by far the preferable. Public schools are bound by law, and must act constitutionally because they are government actors, unlike private corporations, who are only bound by a number of statutes which provide limited protection to "consumers" of education. Politicians are still, to some degree, answerable to the people, unlike the boards of directors who would run schools in a privatization model. Public schools are by far not perfect, but that is the model that has been in affect for over a hundred years. It is a model we have the power to fix, while privatization is merely surrendering education to the market.

Truly, what is necessary is a new model all together, but I have no solutions and no silver bullets for this post.