FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Fleeing From Education

by

It doesn’t look good when States give the proverbial finger to the Washington establishment.  The old constitutional woes surface; the contest around autonomy, and the federal compact, surface.  Is the central government authorised to meddle, shape and alter what might be the purview of states?

Education remains one such area. It is absent in the Constitution. The framers may well have been privy to the role of the press, the necessity to prevent factional disagreement through checks and balances, and protect general liberties associated with the person. But the idea of a central educations system was still embryonic.

This has not stopped the Federal government exerting its control with standardised procedures, deemed a utopia of education excellence.  In 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson, during a period of heavy federalising, came up with his Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).  In 2009, President Barack Obama came up with “Race to the Top” funds.  It was, however, the 1983 publication A Nation at Risk by the National Commission on Excellence and Education that shone the brightest of spotlights on the urgency of a common state-wide platform.

Unfortunately, it has been shown that such measures, however well intentioned, can implode in its air of presumption. Programs such as the No Child Left Behind were critically deficient, mere demagoguery in action. Meddling became deconstructing.  Which brings us to the latest program – that of the Common Core national standards and curriculum, termed in some circles the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

The program has involved forty-five states, the District of Columbia, four US territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity.  It has its genesis in the work of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the National Governors Association (Guardian, Feb 10).  Given the fact that the Department of Education cannot by law, direct, control or supervise elementary and secondary school curricula, a sweetener for adopting the guidelines was added: Race to the Top Grants would be awarded to those adopting the Common Core standards.

Since its commencement, opposition from across the political spectrum, be it from disgruntled teacher unions, or politicians concerned by the usurping powers of Washington, has gathered some indignant steam.

Conservative pundits such as Glenn Beck have taken to the airwaves with suggestions that the Common Core is a Stalinist platform, a doctrinaire’s mandate: “Kids are being indoctrinated with extreme leftist ideology” (Glennbeck.com, Mar 14).  Much of Beck’s spouting is based on the staple paranoia that is indispensable to American political debate, but like all paranoid narratives, some grains of verity do exist.

On the surface of it, the revolt has been primarily from the Red states, and those associated with GOP or Tea Party sentiment.  Louisiana, Florida, Georgia, Alabama have all taken back steps implementing the program. Oklahoma has gone even further, saying it will withdraw from the program altogether. But it is worth noting that New York, that blue pocket of Democratic existence, has been resisting as well.

The problems with the common core system lie at several levels.  There is a structural deficiency – funding, matters of process, and the rationale of outsourcing.  States, seeing a chance to receive funding, swallowed the proceeds without wise implementation.  These were also states which have had a good share of poor-performing students.

As ever with management, the issue is not results in fact, but results on paper. The paper is the world, the reality, the nominal fact. The abysmal reality of education in the US is that discussions of any Common Core take place in an imposed vacuum.  Social environments, and by virtue of that, realities, are excluded in favour of artificial engineering.  The sense that Common Core was created, not through a discussion with politicians and parents, but a sterile laboratory process, is hard to dispel.

This shows.  The Common Core was, as Jose Vilson (Sep 12, 2013) put it, a “package deal with the new teacher evaluations, higher stakes testing, and austerity measures, including mass school closings.”  Funding and defunding have occurred, with standards being used as the band aid that inadequately patches the wounded patient.  Standards, as the New Jersey decisions in Abbott v Burke remind us, are on their own insufficient, the leanest of straw men.  Without resources, students might as well stay home.

Furthermore, the Gates Foundation got busy investing in a program with the guidance, not of educators and those within the school system, but corporations priding themselves on mantras of lobbying and reform.  Achieve Inc., the key drafter of Common Core, proudly trumpets itself as “the only education reform organisation led by a board of directors and business leaders” (Guardian, Feb 10).

The picture tends to get bleaker, given that the standardised tests are contracted to companies ever keen to get a profit at the expense of education.  Such companies, Pearson foremost amongst them, have become fixtures of the classroom set.  In yet another demonstration that the private sector often fails, rather than adopts, the best practices and policies, instances of maladministration, missing tests and general incompetence in handling grades have characterised the process.  Pearson has also been in the soup for using charitable funds to promote for-profit products.

The tests themselves have seen an extraordinary attack of abstraction on what should be elementary problems. Laboratory language, the stuff of test tube logic and managerialism, has displaced that of instructive pedagogy.  The management speak of Frederick Winslow Taylor has come home to roost in the school system.  Terms like subtraction and edition are ditched in favour of “decrease” and “increase”.  Children were, as Alec Torres explains, bored by “word problems” which are now replaced by “math situations”.  “Carry the one” is replaced by, “Regroup ten ones as a ten” (National Review, Mar 20).

There are also changes of emphasis that suggest the embrace of blunt, uninformed technocracy over literacy – a move away from literature proper in the form of dusty classics to the literature of management and governance (government documents, dry and dreary “informational texts”).

Things have become so dire that former Congressman Ron Paul has advanced his own model, focusing on solid areas he feels will provide ample paving for the rocky road of education.  The primary focus here is on homeschooling centred on three tracks: natural science and maths; social sciences and humanities; and business (Fits News, Jun 23).

In a country which is becoming increasingly ungovernable, education remains, along with welfare and poverty, the great handicaps of the US.  A country that has the means of deploying forces across the globe in any location in a matter of hours has troubles ensuring safe school environments and equitable access.  Bureaucrats and managers have, in their characteristic way, shown the way on a central, standardised measure, a system of splendid isolation rather than general application.  As it stands, it is bound to fall flat.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

 

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

February 09, 2016
Andrew Levine
Hillary Says the Darndest Things
Paul Street
Kill King Capital
Ben Burgis
Lesser Evil Voting and Hillary Clinton’s War on the Poor
Paul Craig Roberts
Are the Payroll Jobs Reports Merely Propaganda Statements?
Fran Quigley
How Corporations Killed Medicine
Ted Rall
How Bernie Can Pay for His Agenda: Slash the Military
Neve Gordon
Israeli Labor Party Adopts the Apartheid Mantra
Kristin Kolb
The “Great” Bear Rainforest Agreement? A Love Affair, Deferred
Joseph Natoli
Politics and Techno-Consciousness
Hrishikesh Joshi
Selective Attention to Diversity: the Case of Cruz and Rubio
Stavros Mavroudeas
Why Syriza is Sinking in Greece
David Macaray
Attention Peyton Manning: Leave Football and Concentrate on Pizza
Arvin Paranjpe
Opening Your Heart
Kathleen Wallace
Boys, Hell, and the Politics of Vagina Voting
Brian Foley
Interview With a Bernie Broad: We Need to Start Focusing on Positions and Stop Relying on Sexism
February 08, 2016
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Privatization: the Atlanticist Tactic to Attack Russia
Mumia Abu-Jamal
Water War Against the Poor: Flint and the Crimes of Capital
John V. Walsh
Did Hillary’s Machine Rig Iowa? The Highly Improbable Iowa Coin Tosses
Vincent Emanuele
The Curse and Failure of Identity Politics
Eliza A. Webb
Hillary Clinton’s Populist Charade
Uri Avnery
Optimism of the Will
Roy Eidelson Trudy Bond, Stephen Soldz, Steven Reisner, Jean Maria Arrigo, Brad Olson, and Bryant Welch
Preserve Do-No-Harm for Military Psychologists: Coalition Responds to Department of Defense Letter to the APA
Patrick Cockburn
Oil Prices and ISIS Ruin Kurdish Dreams of Riches
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, the UN and Meanings of Arbitrary Detention
Shamus Cooke
The Labor Movement’s Pearl Harbor Moment
W. T. Whitney
Cuba, War and Ana Belen Montes
Jim Goodman
Congress Must Kill the Trans Pacific Partnership
Peter White
Meeting John Ross
Colin Todhunter
Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist
Ralph Nader
They’re Just Not Answering!
Cesar Chelala
Beware of the Harm on Eyes Digital Devices Can Cause
Weekend Edition
February 5-7, 2016
Jeffrey St. Clair
When Chivalry Fails: St. Bernard and the Machine
Leonard Peltier
My 40 Years in Prison
John Pilger
Freeing Julian Assange: the Final Chapter
Garry Leech
Terrifying Ted and His Ultra-Conservative Vision for America
Andrew Levine
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
William Blum
Is Bernie Sanders a “Socialist”?
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
We Can’t Afford These Billionaires
Enrique C. Ochoa
Super Bowl 50: American Inequality on Display
Jonathan Cook
The Liberal Hounding of Julian Assange: From Alex Gibney to The Guardian
George Wuerthner
How the Bundy Gang Won
Mike Whitney
Peace Talks “Paused” After Putin’s Triumph in Aleppo 
Ted Rall
Hillary Clinton: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Gary Leupp
Is a “Socialist” Really Unelectable? The Potential Significance of the Sanders Campaign
Vijay Prashad
The Fault Line of Race in America
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail