The
nearly four decade-long effort to restructure public education along Neo-Liberal
guidelines has accelerated since President Barack Obama assumed office.
Neo-Liberalism is an ideology that calls for �limited government�
and a market-driven economy. This project is being carried out on
the federal, state, and local levels, while targeting publicly-financed
K-12 schools and higher education.
Some of the objectives for restructuring
public education include:
1)
shifting the cost of education on to students, while increasing their
debt burden to the benefit of banks;
2)
promoting the expansion of privately-managed charter schools;
3)
deepening the access to public educational resources for corporate-interests;
4)
smashing teacher unions, thus weakening the political power of those
unions, and cutting the cost of teachers; and,
5)
eliminating multicultural, revisionist, inter-nationalist, and critical
perspectives from the school curricula.
On
the K-12 level, this agenda has been promoted under the guise of �competitiveness;�
�national standards;� �accountability,� �basic skills,� �excellence,�
and standardized testing; while the assault on higher education includes
budget reductions, �assessments,� �merit pay,� and curriculum reform.
The 2008 collapse of the financial system, amplified by chronic
overlapping federal, state and local budgetary crises, has provided a
�window of opportunity� to intensify this assault.
What are the roots of the assault on public
education?;� How has that assault been manifested?; And, Why has that
assault accelerated in the past two years?
During the late-1960�s industrial-based corporations
began to experience falling rates of profits. The reasons for this
decline are complex, but at the core were:
1) exhaustion of the automobile-industrial-complex
profit accumulation model; and,
2)
deficit spending the Johnson administration carried out fighting the
Vietnam War and promoting �Great Society� reforms.
This
resultant structural economic crisis caused both stagnant growth and inflation.
Simultaneously, United States� post-World
War II global economic dominance was being weakened. Causes for
this weakening include:
1)
the United States defeat in Vietnam;
2)
the emergence of West European and Japanese economic competition; and,
3)
the rise of Third World economic nationalism.
This structural economic crisis led to state
and local governments experiencing chronic deficits, leading to recurring
cuts for public services, including public education.
This reality was felt in California as early
as the late-1960�s. In fact, in 1967 Governor Ronald Reagan made
cuts in education spending, impacting both higher education and K-12.
In response to the chronic fiscal crisis the University of California,
the state colleges, and the community colleges began to increase tuition
and rely on non-union part-time teachers. The University of California
also sought more corporate and government funding for research purposes.
K-12 schools had to regularly lay teachers off; expand teacher-student
classroom ratios; and cut curriculum offerings, such as art and physical
education. The education crisis in California would become chronically
acute after 1978 when Proposition 13 was passed, significantly reducing
the local property tax base.
Furthermore, the structural economic crisis
led corporations to search for a new accumulation model to generate acceptable
profits. The profit accumulation model between 1932 and 1970 was
based on government managing and regulating the industrial-based economy,
while promoting redistribution of wealth to the working class. The
hegemonic ideology which shaped that period was Corporate-Liberalism.
The accumulation model settled on by the
late-1970�s consisted of:
1)
shifting the manufacturing sector to the United States Sun-Belt and
the Third World, where labor was non-union, costs were cheaper, and
there were no labor or environmental regulations;
2)
restructuring the country into a non-union service-based economy;
3)
promoting the expansion of credit;
4)
carrying out conglomerate mergers;
5)
expanding real estate speculation; and,
6)
intensifying financial speculation.
This
model was underscored by massive military spending, providing profits
for arms producers and commercial banks.
Implementing the new accumulation model also
involved constructing a new hegemonic ideology that would rationalize
the new model. Thus, Neo-Liberalism was constructed during the
1970�s to serve that purpose. As David Harvey explains in Neo-Liberalism:
A Brief History, this �consensus building� process involved corporations,
foundations, media, public relations firms, and Republican politicians,
combined with the emerging Right-Wing forces, including the Sun-Belt wealth,
�free-market� economists, anti-tax activists, the Religious-Right, and
Neo-conservatives.
The policy guidelines Neo-Liberalism established
are:
1)
deregulation;
2)
reducing the public sector;
3)
cutting taxes for the wealthy;
4)
privatizing public services; and,
5)
smashing unions.
The
political implementation of these guidelines aimed to transfer income
from the public sector and the working class to the wealthiest people
in the country. The Reagan administration institutionalized Neo-Liberalism,
a hegemonic ideology which has shaped United States politics since.
The move to restructure public education
in the interests of corporate-dominated Neo-Liberalism came into fruition
in 1983 when the Reagan-appointed National Commission on Excellence in
Education issued A Nation at Risk. The report assessed the decline
in student achievement scores and warned that that decline was an �internal
threat that was more serious than Soviet Union communism.� Using
language not unlike Reagan�s Cold War rhetoric, the report added that,
�the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded
by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a nation
and as a people.� The report aimed to restructure the governance,
organization, and curriculum of public education. This would be accomplished
by changing educational values and curriculum goals.
Significantly, ANAR blamed the performance
of public high schools for the economic crisis, while ignoring global
and national economic, political, social, cultural, and technological
factors that, in fact, were more to the point.
The report called for: �excellence;� making
schools and teachers �accountable;� national curriculum standards; �core
courses;� and standardized testing. The report also called for federal
leadership and more corporate involvement in public education; confronting
educators (and a public) who wanted to promote more democracy and diversity.
ANAR established an outline for a nationwide
educational reform movement which would permeate schools at all levels.
Very quickly most states and local school districts began to formulate
and incorporate ANAR recommendations. Also, numerous educational
associations and unions endorsed aspects of the report.
Thus, a new national consensus was being
established claiming that public education was in crisis and that corporate-oriented
Neo-Liberal reforms were necessary. Moreover, the uneven, but persistent,
state and local fiscal crises, which had begun in the 1970�s, continued
to starve public education for resources. The assault on public
education would occur on two-symbiotic tracks: the promotion of national
policy and restructuring owing to budget crises.
Presidents George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton,
and George W. Bush expanded on the outlines of ANAR. The role of
Clinton in the education reform movement reflects the Democratic Party�s
shift from New Deal-driven Corporate-Liberalism to �bi-partisan� acceptance
of Neo-Liberalism. Bush I proposed legislation, under America 2000:
An Educational Strategy, aimed to standardize curriculum, and embrace
school �choice.� The America 2000 legislation died in the Senate,
but funding for education under Bush I increased substantially.
The Clinton administration�s education policy
was framed in Goal 2000: Educate America Act, issued in 1993. That
report aimed to further establish a national consensus on goals, curriculum,
and standards of achievement.
George W. Bush intensified the Neo-Liberal
policies. This was initially seen with Bush II�s massive tax cuts
for the rich. After 9/11 occurred, Bush II deepened that ideology
in to United States foreign policy. Moreover, Bush II�s education
policy, called No Child Left Behind, ratcheted up the assault on public
education.
NCLB legislated:
1)
improved teacher training and test-based licensing;
2)
annual testing in reading and mathematics in elementary schools;
3)
the chance for children in �failing� schools to transfer.
Despite
the inadequate funding the program received and growing criticism from
the education community, NCLB was the law of the land.
The 2008 Presidential election occurred during
the worse economic crisis since the Great Depression. The economic
shock devastated state and local budgets, causing massive reductions in
public services, lay-offs, and housing foreclosures. California, already
dealing with deficits and structural political impediments, experienced
the most severe budget deficit of any state. Since the crisis began
in 2008 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state legislature have
made deep education cuts.
A major reason for the 2008 financial collapse
was Clinton�s repeal of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall regulatory regime
in 1999, which allowed commercial banks to pursue unregulated mechanisms,
such as �sub-prime mortgages.�
Furthermore, corporate-interests recognized
the crisis was so severe that to accumulate profits they needed government
to intensify the transfer of public resources to them. This would
mean that funding for programs which benefit the working class, elderly,
youth, the disabled, and education would be transferred to the ruling
elites in the form of bailouts, subsidies, and debt servicing. This largely
explains why the assault on public education (as well as the rest of the
public sector) accelerated since fall, 2008.
Within that context Barack Obama was elected
President. Obama has intensified the Bush II revised version of
Neo-Liberalism: �limited government� except for Wall Street and the corporations.
Obama�s education policy is a clear example.
This is reflected in a statement he made, in February, 2010, after
the Central Falls, Rhode Island school district fired 93 unionized teachers,
alleging that they were responsible for �failing� standardized test scores.
In what could be considered Obama�s PATCO Moment, he stated: ��if
a school continues to fail its students year after year after year, if
it doesn�t show signs of improvement, then there�s got to be a sense of
account-ability,�� Just like Reagan opened the door for the attack
on unions when he fired 13,000 air controllers in 1981, unionized teachers
now are increasingly vulnerable.
Obama�s education policy is called �Race
to the Top,� although its objectives are no different than the aforementioned
Presidential educational policies.
Obama�s
policy also exposes the conundrum that teacher unions face supporting
the Democratic Party.
In conclusion, under the current hegemonic
ideological and economic framework, there is no end in sight to the assault
on public education.
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator George Wright , PhD is the author of The Destruction of a Nation: United States' Policy Toward Angola
Since 1945 (Pluto Press, 1997) and Stan Wright - Track Coach (Pacifica Sports Research Institute, 2005). He in Professor
Emeritus from the Political Science Department, California State University,
Chico. His research interests include: International Political Economy,
African International Relations, and the Politics of International Sport. Click
here to contact Dr. Wright. |