FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Corporatizing of Rural Schools

“As of 2009–10, there were a mere 785 rural charter schools across America, representing just 16 percent of the national charter schools sector, and most of these schools were located in ‘rural-fringe’ communities, just outside of more populated areas. But about 1.2 million students live in “rural-remote” communities, those areas farthest away from larger towns and cities. Just 111 charter schools across the country are in these areas (and 11 of these are online or ‘virtual’ charter schools).”

This statement is found in the report A New Frontier: Utilizing Charter Schooling to Strengthen Rural Education, released in January of 2014. In it, school reform leader Andy Smarick, of the Fordham Institute and the Bellwether Education Foundation (funded by Bill Gates, Teach for America and Goldman Sachs), outlines the challenges to opening charter schools in rural areas, and how policymakers can overcome them. This report is indicative ongoing corporatization of education and privatization of public schools in urban and suburban environments, however rural areas have remained relatively immune as rural schools generally have too few students and can be too remote to make charter schools or voucher schemes profitable.

Recently, advances in technology have changed the landscape and opened up rural schools to neoliberal venture philanthropy. Venture philanthropy, is described by Kenneth Saltman in The Gift of Education as “Educational philanthropy that appears almost exclusively in mass media and policy circles as selfless generosity poses significant threats to the democratic possibilities and realities of public education.” The result is generally to increase private control of public schools, limiting union power, and relaxing teacher certification standards, despite a lack of evidence that any of these strategies have been effective.

The charter school movement has gained support from both Democrats and Republicans as the policymakers in general have accepted the business model of improvement and believe choice and competition will produce better education results. Urban school districts have borne the brunt of the charter movement, as seen in districts such as Chicago and New York, where the battles are ongoing, and New Orleans, which now has completely privatized its public education system. Rural schools, though not as prevalent in the discussion about the forces of privatization as urban, are under no less a threat of corporatization as distance education and virtual classrooms are now arising as options for rural youth.

Returning to Smarick’s report, what may be most troubling is how open it is about the corporate agenda. The report clearly outlines the ways to weaken the public in public education. He begins by suggesting there be equitable funding for public and charter schools but goes on to suggest there be additional funding sources for charters only, as well as grant programs that favor new charter schools. It goes on to tip the scales further by declaring public districts would need to provide transportation for charter students, as well as facilities. Again, these are all ways for charters to save money while having the public district financially support them. The report does not suggest what the public schools do when they are no longer able to provide for their own students.

After the policy recommendations begins the attack on certified teachers and unions. The report recommends charter schools be exempt for teacher certification requirements, and allow for organizations such as Teach for America to provide staffing. It also pushes forth the notion of teachers using online classrooms, so they would not even have to go the school site. This is referred to as the creation of an “elite remote teaching corps” who would provide the actual classroom instruction for rural students, and any schools left open would serve simply as computer labs staffed by tutors.

It is becoming clear that what is being established is a new form of school consolidation. An issue that has affected many rural communities, consolidation is the occurs when the state (or county) determines the local school is too small to be cost effective, another in a long line of capitalist solutions to capitalist problems. Students are bussed out of their communities to large regional centers. The consequences of consolidation are variable, but more often than not it creates further social and economic stress on communities, where the school not only creates employment opportunities but also serves as a source of pride for residents. Consolidation generally increases outmigration unemployment, as Thomas Lyson found in his research of school closures in upstate New York.

What is unclear is the future and sustainability of the corporate model. The goal of all neoliberal ventures are obvious, to make a profit. A profit can be made off rural schools by laying off teachers, hiring new non-union teachers for lower pay, selling technology to rural schools, closing the smaller, less cost effective schools, and using public money to fund all these ventures. What is the plan then, when the schools are gone and all students are taught by the remote teaching corps? More importantly, what happens to the community?

While these questions certainly present a dim future for rural America, there is hope. Rural communities are, and will continue to be natural sites of resistance. Rural scholars have shown that schools can have considerable effect on the value rural youth place on their communities. By bucking the neoliberal trends and providing students an education contextualized to the rural environment, rural youth can be empowered to not only take pride in their community, but also push back against the corporate capitalist ideology that has been internalized in the education system in general. Neoliberalism is an ideology of placelessness, devaluing any connection between people and their homes. A place-based education for rural youth encourages students to become political actors. By taking up causes and making change in their own communities, they can overcome the hegemony of neoliberalism and affect global change.

More articles by:

Jason Cervone is a student in the UMass Dartmouth Educational Leadership doctoral program. He works for UCLA Center X, Northeast Region.

June 18, 2018
Paul Street
Denuclearize the United States? An Unthinkable Thought
John Pilger
Bring Julian Assange Home
Conn Hallinan
The Spanish Labyrinth
Patrick Cockburn
Attacking Hodeidah is a Deliberate Act of Cruelty by the Trump Administration
Gary Leupp
Trump Gives Bibi Whatever He Wants
Thomas Knapp
Child Abductions: A Conversation It’s Hard to Believe We’re Even Having
Robert Fisk
I Spoke to Palestinians Who Still Hold the Keys to Homes They Fled Decades Ago – Many are Still Determined to Return
Steve Early
Requiem for a Steelworker: Mon Valley Memories of Oil Can Eddie
Jim Scheff
Protect Our National Forests From an Increase in Logging
Adam Parsons
Reclaiming the UN’s Radical Vision of Global Economic Justice
Dean Baker
Manufacturing Production Falls in May and No One Notices
Laura Flanders
Bottom-Up Wins in Virginia’s Primaries
Binoy Kampmark
The Anguish for Lost Buildings: Embers and Death at the Victoria Park Hotel
Weekend Edition
June 15, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Dan Kovalik
The US & Nicaragua: a Case Study in Historical Amnesia & Blindness
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Yellow Journalism and the New Cold War
Charles Pierson
The Day the US Became an Empire
Jonathan Cook
How the Corporate Media Enslave Us to a World of Illusions
Ajamu Baraka
North Korea Issue is Not De-nuclearization But De-Colonization
Andrew Levine
Midterms Coming: Antinomy Ahead
Louisa Willcox
New Information on 2017 Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Deaths Should Nix Trophy Hunting in Core Habitat
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Singapore Fling
Ron Jacobs
What’s So Bad About Peace, Man?
Robert Hunziker
State of the Climate – It’s Alarming!
L. Michael Hager
Acts and Omissions: The NYT’s Flawed Coverage of the Gaza Protest
Dave Lindorff
However Tenuous and Whatever His Motives, Trump’s Summit Agreement with Kim is Praiseworthy
Robert Fantina
Palestine, the United Nations and the Right of Return
Brian Cloughley
Sabre-Rattling With Russia
Chris Wright
To Be or Not to Be? That’s the Question
David Rosen
Why Do Establishment Feminists Hate Sex Workers?
Victor Grossman
A Key Congress in Leipzig
John Eskow
“It’s All Kinderspiel!” Trump, MSNBC, and the 24/7 Horseshit Roundelay
Paul Buhle
The Russians are Coming!
Joyce Nelson
The NED’s Useful Idiots
Lindsay Koshgarian
Trump’s Giving Diplomacy a Chance. His Critics Should, Too
Louis Proyect
American Nativism: From the Chinese Exclusion Act to Trump
Stan Malinowitz
On the Elections in Colombia
Camilo Mejia
Open Letter to Amnesty International on Nicaragua From a Former Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience
David Krieger
An Assessment of the Trump-Kim Singapore Summit
Jonah Raskin
Cannabis in California: a Report From Sacramento
Josh Hoxie
Just How Rich Are the Ultra Rich?
CJ Hopkins
Awaiting the Putin-Nazi Apocalypse
Mona Younis
We’re the Wealthiest Country on Earth, But Over 40 Percent of Us Live in or Near Poverty
Dean Baker
Not Everything Trump Says on Trade is Wrong
James Munson
Trading Places: the Other 1% and the .001% Who Won’t Save Them
Rivera Sun
Stop Crony Capitalism: Protect the Net!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail