I was
recently sent a rather long article written by Henry Giroux. I struggled to
read it but I believe it is important to share the ideas he writes about if the
true aims of education are to realised. Giroux sees education as central to the
development of a just and democratic society currently under attack by neo
–liberal thinking.
There is no
doubt that current political leadership, influenced by a neo –liberal
philosophy of small government, individualism and the need to privatise of all
aspects of living has led to the erosion of the belief in the common good
resulting in a growing gap between so called ‘winners and losers’.
The winners
are the financial and corporate elite - the one percent.
The
corporate and financial elite, right wing think tanks –and extreme
fundamentalist political groups (the Tea Party in America and the ACT party in
New Zealand) are increasingly focusing on privatising education for their own
profit. There is big money to be made!
The
neo-liberal authoritarian (‘big brother’) political landscape does not
encourage questioning and those who dare are regarded as mischievous or
ignored. This has been the fate of respected educationalists that have criticized the National Party’s imposition of National Standards which are more
about political than education ends.
To open the way for privatisation (Charter
Schools) there is a need to compare schools (to prove school failure) so data
is required – unfortunately data only gathered from a narrow range of learning
areas resulting in a narrowing of the curriculum and eventually teaching to the
tests.
Since the
1980s there has been an intensification of the anti-democratic pressures of neo
–liberal governments of the Anglo West. The welfare state is being dismantled,
social services reduced and, as a result, creating growing unemployment, crime
rates and environments that see people as disposable and, in some cases (unemployed
youth), a problem rather than an opportunity. Poor minorities and vast numbers
of the working class, and increasingly the middle class, are
denied social support. Keeping up with
the Joneses has been replaced with the struggle to simply survive. According to
Giroux we have moved ‘from a society of producers to a society of consumers’.
Young people
in particular, says Giroux, no longer see much hope in such an unfair society
with its ethos of greed. ‘The mall and the prison’ he writes, ‘have become the preeminent institutions for symbolizing what the future hold for them
as they suffer the soft war of commodification or the hard war of
hyper-punishment and possible incarceration’. This marginalisation of youth can
be seen in in any city and town in New Zealand. The belief in the common good
with its shared social bonds, established
after the Great Depression (in America by Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ by the Welfare
State established (and at the same time by the first Labour Government in New Zealand)
have been replaced by rampant selfish individualism. In response, around the world, young
people are taking things into their own hands (the 99%) demonstrating against
this creeping authoritarianism – about the pernicious effect of corporate
influence in all aspects of life.
'Greed is good!" |
The shared
destiny and collective
responsibility of a decent life for all
of earlier times has been ‘replaced by a market driven ideology that now
privatises, commodifies, atomizes and taints most everything it takes’. Today right wing politicians happily demonize
people on welfare (‘the poor have it too easy’) and the unemployed (too lazy) –
such people are seen as a burden – a problem they wish would go away forgetting
it was their polices that created the situation in the first place.
The savage
neo-liberal worldview that has a grip on American society has its grip equally in New Zealand. The
‘cheerleaders for neo- liberalism’, Giroux writes, ’live in circles of
certainty and are deeply suspicious of anyone who dares think critically, asks
damaging questions, holds power accountable, or challenges the existing order’.
Giroux calls this a ‘hardening of the culture’ …. ‘ushering a spirit of meanness’
where ‘bonds of trust are replaced by bonds of fear and humiliation’. We now
live in an environment in which mass surveillance by Governments (coming soon
in New Zealand) makes it clear that the distinction between the innocent and
the guilty has broken down. The ‘nanny state’, so despised by the neo-liberals,
has been replaced by Orwell’s ‘big brother’ state.
As a result
of these undemocratic forces Giroux believes that education as an alternative
liberating force needs to be taken seriously. ‘No democracy,’ he writes, ‘can
survive without an education system that
offers the public the opportunities to broaden their knowledge, skills and
values in ways that enhance and expand their capacities to think critically,
imagine otherwise, create the conditions for shared responsibilities’.
This takes
the educational debate well away from the current narrowness of National
Standards. In contrast Giroux sees schools as ‘enabling people to be able to
assume the role of critical agents, thinking subjects, and critically engaged
citizens willing to learn how to govern ….able to care for others’. This is the intent of the all but
side-lined 2007 New Zealand Curriculum.
Education as
a means to provide the conditions to produce an informed citizenry is the last
thing Giroux believes the financial and corporate elite would want. They prefer,
for the masses, the ‘idiocy of celebrity culture….embraced by a commodity based
culture, the privatisation of all services, possessive individualism (‘me first’),
and crass materialism’. What the
corporate elite want is a compliant unquestioning world with pedagogy that that
produces political quietism served by the repressive surveillance view of
education that schools that are being forced to comply with.
To escape
this world view, which is increasingly being taken for granted, there needs to
be a collective transformation of consciousness and values. ‘Until people
unlearn values’, Giroux writes, ’neoliberalism and other forms of oppression
will be normalised, viewed as common sense, self-evident ,and removed from
critical inquiry’.’ Without a change of consciousness, it becomes
difficult for people to recognise the predatory
and pernicious ideologies and effects of a savage casino capitalism that has
real stake in producing injustice…and a full-fledged assault on the environment’.
It was in this cut throat world of ‘winners and losers’ ‘casino capitalism’
that our current Prime Minister gained his reputation.
For many it
seems as we have no alternative (TINA); that we all have to live with the
demands of the market and that ‘sufferings, hardships and successes are simply
a function of individual choice and responsibility’. To combat this, schools
need to develop a ‘language of both critique and hope’. Only through education will
people be able to unlearn their attachments.
Giroux
writes ‘once education becomes instrumentalized, transformed into training for
the workplace, or reduced to mind numbing misery of teaching to the test those
pedagogies and values that encourages students to take risks, engage in
critical, creative and collaborative thinking, care for the other, and
cultivate a deep commitment to the public good begin to vanish from our
educational institutions’. What is being lost in this push for quantitative
measurement is not only the loss of respect for teachers, students and
professional judgement but also seeing public education as a means of sustain a
real inclusive democracy – an
alternative to the current rule by financial and corporate elites.
As in American
we have seen right wing politicians (including our Prime Minister) blame school
failure on teachers and on their unions rather than seeing them as dedicated
public servants. To combat the forces behind these attacks, if education is to
be reclaimed as a common good, these threats need to be made visible. We need fully educated citizens,
with their unique talents developed in preference to being sorted into above,
at, or below by the ‘shonky’ limited National Standards schools are being
forced to comply with; we need a personalised rather than a standardized education
system.
While the
right wing politicians blame schools for the ‘one in five failing’, ignoring in
the process the effects of the poverty their very policies have produced, the’
biggest problem’ Giroux writes, ‘is not they were failing – but that they were
public’. The so called new “reformers” want to privatise education as a ‘part
of their attack on all things public, which also includes public servants such
as teachers and especially teacher unions’, disguising their intentions by
pushing such terms as freedom and choice.
According to their rhetoric teachers are the problem because they lack
accountability and are protected by self-serving unions. Underlying their
claims of school failure there is a ‘refusal to
address how larger structural issues such as racism, income inequality
and exploding poverty impact on school failings or how education should be
reformed in light of these forces’.
The new ‘reformers’,
who push their agenda of privatisation( funnelling taxpayers money into private
schools), standardisation, high stakes testing, and school competition, are
really reactionaries intent on returning schooling to its earlier grading and
sorting role. In the process the “new reformers”, by privatising education
through charter schools, by the provision of textbooks and tests, allow vested
interests to make a lot of money. ‘Another get rich scheme shrouded in the
veneer of altruism’!
In contrast,
those who advocate egalitarian reforms, see schools as organisations that promote democracy, where
young people have ‘access to the
expertise, skills and experience that both deepen their understanding of history, the arts, the
sciences – of humanist traditions…and the new world of advanced technologies,
digital communications and screen culture’. Such an enlightened view of education
is not just for students to find meaningful work but also to ensure students
‘become critical and engaged citizens of the world.’
The message
for New Zealand teachers is to focus on implementing the 2007 New Zealand
Curriculum, place an emphasis on developing the diverse gifts and talents of
all students, and not to be side- tracked by limiting National Standards.
‘Public
schools need to be defended as public goods that benefit not just individual
children and their parents but an entire society’. New Zealand would be
well-advised to look towards Finland rather than America for their inspiration
in this respect.
‘Those market and corporate forces that now
undermine public education in the name of fixing it have little to do with
democracy and critical teaching and learning….battling against those forces puts
one on the side of genuine educational reform’.
Giroux
writes that we should be ‘fighting for smaller schools and classes, more
resources, more full time quality teachers’. And, he continues, ‘all attempts
at the privatisation and corporatisation of schools must be rejected as to make
education truly public and widely accessible’.
‘Teachers’,
he writes, ‘ need to work under conditions that provides them with the autonomy
that enables them to take risks, be creative, and draw upon a range of
educational approaches and pedagogies’. Teachers need to fight ‘against the
imperatives of standardisation and testing’. He continues, ‘we need modes of pedagogies
that enliven the imagination, create thoughtful and curious students, incorporates
an ethic of civic responsibility, and teach the practice of freedom’. He writes
that ‘we need to connect education to the lives and ideas that young people
bring to any learning situation’.
Giroux,
quite rightly, sees education as a political act helping every student come to
terms with their own powers as individual and social agents. Pedagogy is not
neutral, must treat young people with respect and enable them to develop their own voice and sense of agency, ‘a viable mode of critical
pedagogy and to do so in an environment that is
thoughtful, critical, humane, and challenging’.
Giroux,
echoing the thoughts of John Dewey, believes that ‘education at all levels is
the fundamental precondition that makes democratic politics possible, providing
the space where meaningful histories, voices and cultural differences can
flourish’.
It seems to
me that in New Zealand (as in America) we have yet to realize such a vision of
democratic schooling and, if we continue with the current standardisation, we
never will.
Such a
vision is surely worth fighting for.
What is the
alternative?
1 comment:
I am hoping that New Zealand teachers might take the time to read this blog during their July break! I thought the original article great ( if difficult) and have done my best to interpret Giroux for the New Zealand situation
Post a Comment