Week 13, November 21st
Neoliberalism, Privatization, and Globalism
The first reading this week, entitled “Local Control, Choice, Charter Schools, and Home Schooling” is an excerpt from Joel Spring’s book American Education. Spring encourages the reader to imagine an “education chair” and decide who should be in control of this chair. In other words, who gets to decide the moral instruction, the shaping of behavior, and the transmitting of knowledge that takes place in schools. Spring provides background on the different groups that hold a stake in the outcomes of public education, including school boards, charter schools, parents, online educational programs, and for-profit global education corporations. In his conclusion, Spring states that whoever we decide should hold the power of the education chair, “the political structure of education determines the content of education that in turn directly affects what a student learns” (243).
The second article, “Race, Charter Schools, and Conscious Capitalism: On the Spatial Politics of Whiteness as Property (and the Unconscionable Assault on Black New Orleans)” by Kristen L. Buras, serves as an examination of the political motives behind the educational reforms that took place in New Orleans in 2005. After the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina, an educational reform took place in New Orleans that was “designed to respond to oppressed communities and to enhance public school performance” (303). The Cowan Institute for Public Education Initiatives, which houses organizations that are pro-charter school, made the claim that failing schools were due to a mismanagement of money and that schools should be run as a business in order to minimize waste and improve performance. There was a large push for the opening of public charter schools, where stakeholders were able to swoop in and take advantage of “accumulation by dispossession”, or the redistribution of capital. The ideals behind the opening of charter schools sound promising. A sub-committee of the Bring New Orleans Back (BNOB) Commission was appointed to oversee educational reform. The sub-committee had two recommendations--that a “fair, rules-based system for placing students in their school of choice” (312) is established, and that there be a system in place for assessing the performance of the school. Sounds like a fair process that will ensure equity in the education of every child, right?
Buras makes the claim that neither one of these recommendations are in place today and argues that the system in place actually disregards working-class communities, mostly composed of African American parents and students. She says, “the charter school movement in New Orleans is closely bound to the protection of whiteness as property, as the clearest beneficiaries are upper-class white (and a few black) entrepreneurs who seek to capitalize on public assets for their own advancement while dispossessing the very communities the schools are supposed to serve” (317). She describes how the admissions process is lengthy and confusing, ensuring that only the parents with time and money on their hands are able to maneuver the system. Many charter school boards demand that their members have experience in fields such as law, real estate, or financial management, and the ability to network on behalf of the school. Many working-class parents, most of whom are African Americans, do not “possess these forms of capital closely linked to class and race status” (316) and are not able to hold any power over these public schools that their children attend.
In Spring’s article, he provides an example of how charter schools teach to the class that their students belong to- echoing Anyon’s theory of a hidden curriculum in schools. He provides the vastly different demographics of two charter schools, and describes the differences in curriculum. The “elite” charter school, mostly composed of white students of a higher socioeconomic status, are provided with a liberal arts education specifically designed to prepare students for higher education. On the other hand, the charter school catering to more of a range of races mostly from low-income households are taught character building skills, reflecting “a belief that low-income students lack character traits needed to be successful in school and in the world” (234).
The underlying message I got from these readings is that there are government policies in place that continually push out minority students into schools that are not successful and working-class communities struggle to find a voice in education. With Trump’s views on education, these communities may be at even more of a risk with the push for more charter schools. As we’ve seen in New Orleans, the implementation of charter schools is not necessarily the right answer for creating an equitable educational system for all students. John Oliver provides more information about charter schools and politics behind how they operate. “The problem with letting the free-market decide when it comes to kids is that kids change faster than the market. And by the time it’s obvious that a (charter) school is failing, futures may have been ruined ” (17:43).
The first reading this week, entitled “Local Control, Choice, Charter Schools, and Home Schooling” is an excerpt from Joel Spring’s book American Education. Spring encourages the reader to imagine an “education chair” and decide who should be in control of this chair. In other words, who gets to decide the moral instruction, the shaping of behavior, and the transmitting of knowledge that takes place in schools. Spring provides background on the different groups that hold a stake in the outcomes of public education, including school boards, charter schools, parents, online educational programs, and for-profit global education corporations. In his conclusion, Spring states that whoever we decide should hold the power of the education chair, “the political structure of education determines the content of education that in turn directly affects what a student learns” (243).
The second article, “Race, Charter Schools, and Conscious Capitalism: On the Spatial Politics of Whiteness as Property (and the Unconscionable Assault on Black New Orleans)” by Kristen L. Buras, serves as an examination of the political motives behind the educational reforms that took place in New Orleans in 2005. After the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina, an educational reform took place in New Orleans that was “designed to respond to oppressed communities and to enhance public school performance” (303). The Cowan Institute for Public Education Initiatives, which houses organizations that are pro-charter school, made the claim that failing schools were due to a mismanagement of money and that schools should be run as a business in order to minimize waste and improve performance. There was a large push for the opening of public charter schools, where stakeholders were able to swoop in and take advantage of “accumulation by dispossession”, or the redistribution of capital. The ideals behind the opening of charter schools sound promising. A sub-committee of the Bring New Orleans Back (BNOB) Commission was appointed to oversee educational reform. The sub-committee had two recommendations--that a “fair, rules-based system for placing students in their school of choice” (312) is established, and that there be a system in place for assessing the performance of the school. Sounds like a fair process that will ensure equity in the education of every child, right?
Buras makes the claim that neither one of these recommendations are in place today and argues that the system in place actually disregards working-class communities, mostly composed of African American parents and students. She says, “the charter school movement in New Orleans is closely bound to the protection of whiteness as property, as the clearest beneficiaries are upper-class white (and a few black) entrepreneurs who seek to capitalize on public assets for their own advancement while dispossessing the very communities the schools are supposed to serve” (317). She describes how the admissions process is lengthy and confusing, ensuring that only the parents with time and money on their hands are able to maneuver the system. Many charter school boards demand that their members have experience in fields such as law, real estate, or financial management, and the ability to network on behalf of the school. Many working-class parents, most of whom are African Americans, do not “possess these forms of capital closely linked to class and race status” (316) and are not able to hold any power over these public schools that their children attend.
In Spring’s article, he provides an example of how charter schools teach to the class that their students belong to- echoing Anyon’s theory of a hidden curriculum in schools. He provides the vastly different demographics of two charter schools, and describes the differences in curriculum. The “elite” charter school, mostly composed of white students of a higher socioeconomic status, are provided with a liberal arts education specifically designed to prepare students for higher education. On the other hand, the charter school catering to more of a range of races mostly from low-income households are taught character building skills, reflecting “a belief that low-income students lack character traits needed to be successful in school and in the world” (234).
The underlying message I got from these readings is that there are government policies in place that continually push out minority students into schools that are not successful and working-class communities struggle to find a voice in education. With Trump’s views on education, these communities may be at even more of a risk with the push for more charter schools. As we’ve seen in New Orleans, the implementation of charter schools is not necessarily the right answer for creating an equitable educational system for all students. John Oliver provides more information about charter schools and politics behind how they operate. “The problem with letting the free-market decide when it comes to kids is that kids change faster than the market. And by the time it’s obvious that a (charter) school is failing, futures may have been ruined ” (17:43).
I think that much of your reflection shows how damaging charter schools can be and that they don't actually have the best interest of all students at heart. One person in the video you said mentioned the pizza place analogy, which I think John Oliver said what we are all thinking - these are children, they are people, we are messing with their LIVES! But also, as I commented on Ally's blog too, when people talk about having competition so the public schools get better, they always fail to acknowledge that when parents and/or students do not meet the requirements of charter schools, they are placed back in the public school. Sometimes people recognize the purposeful difficulty of entering the lottery system, but still fail to see how even those who get in can still be weeded out.
ReplyDeleteThe accountability factor is one of the biggest issues with charter schools. As Oliver discusses in the video, White Hat Management is the perfect example. When we monetize and privatize public education, the bottom line is not what is best for the kids. When we treat kids as capital and education as a business, the goal of providing a good education is overshadowed by the desire for profits. I don't see how people would be okay with this! The last teacher said it well: that "there needs to be some filter as to who is opening up these charter schools". How about funding schools that are held accountable by the very people whose lives they affect? It's become clear that charter schools overall are misguided and do not serve the best interests of those treated as customers.
ReplyDelete"Kids change faster than the market" is a huge and important statement here! So true! We can not compare our education system and students to cars or any type of business. These are lives we are impacting. We have to have the best interests of these students at the forefront. We also have to make sure teachers are taken care of and are valued and provided with the compensation and benefits they deserve. These are important factors that are missing in several charter school models.
ReplyDelete