Jason Paul Grant

Neo-education

A top class education is desired by most, but with so many different teaching practices now available, how do people make the right decision for future progression and prosperity. The knowledge economy is now seen as fundamental to the development of advance nations and the urgency for people to learn more is never ending. This paper will attempt to understand what is driving this agenda; the need for life-long learning, centres of excellence, and consumer choice.

The methods of privatisation and the marketization of education will be examined in relation to the ideology of neo-liberalism, providing an in-depth analysis of the opposing arguments to understand their validity. Not only drawing on the work of academics such as Wendy Brown, Bill Readings and Stuart Hall; but also Members of Parliament to gain a more insightful reading. Thus provoking thought into why education is more important today than it has ever been; not just for learners but also for parents, teachers, lecturers and administrators.

http://www.montpelerin.org/images/photos/karlPopper.jpg

The concept of neo-liberalism has been attributed to the first meeting of the Mont Pelerin Society. Their website, states that “In 1947, a group of economists, historians and philosophers were invited to Mont Pelerin, in Switzerland, by Professor Fredrich von Hayek, to discuss liberalism in regards to its state after World War II”.  http://www.montpelerin.org/mpsAbout.cfm These thoughtful individuals built the foundations for neo-liberalism, which was formulised to raise progressive nations and to protect the interests of particular members. George Monbiot wrote an interesting piece in the Guardian August 2007, regarding the recent credit crisis which he felt was linked to that meeting in 1947. He describes neo-liberalism as “maximum market freedom and minimum intervention by the state”. http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/08/28/how-did-we-get-into-this-mess/ Neo-liberalism functions through business ethics, allowing the market to define relations between services and service providers. There now seems to be no escape from the neo-liberal reforms and agenda setting in various institutions, especially public ones. W. Brown, views neo-liberalism as “a form of governmentality that reaches every citizen, through the extension and dissemination of market values into all institutions and social actions”. Moreover, neo-liberalism manages to bind itself into the logic of many decision makers through selective discourse and policies that create a situation where only market rational prevails. In a world which is governed by economics; ensuring that the market is functioning correctly, in terms of maximising profit and creating more opportunities to develop new markets, enables neo-liberalism to continue its progression.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/227/227_images/227_cartoon_wolfowitz_world_bank_small_over.gif

The World Bank has been seen as a prime endorser of neo-liberalism and the market agenda. L. Levidow depicts how “the World Bank promotes the global reform agenda in higher education, through privatisation, deregulation and marketization”. The World Bank advocates the need for market controls on higher education, rather than public or government to dictate the type of learning that would be experienced. More students would acquire work related skills and institutions would manage finances more economically, faced with competition from the market. Students and parents would have more choice as universities would have to compete to retain the brightest students, whilst ensuring that satisfaction is maintained throughout every course. The World Bank views teachers as the main threat to the market-based agenda. So by allowing students to become customers, they would have less connection to education for its intrinsic value and view education as a product that would lead them into a career. Thus enabling business and administrators to become the main partnership, the teacher-student relationship gets redefined into a more casual relationship. Similarly neo-liberalism can be viewed as an innovative way of developing economic models that enable society to enjoy its activities independently from the control of the state. A. Barry et al, discuss how neo-liberalism is a response to the uncontrollable systems of social welfare that many governments have allowed countries to fall into. They argue “this governmental apparatus has become an economically and socially costly obstacle to the economic performance on which it depends”. So neo-liberalism can be viewed as the only alternative to the dependence mentality of welfare states. As many social services need to be supported through taxes, by allowing the market to control services; standards get raised through competition and failing services can be eliminated. The market can also rout out those services that are no longer in demand, thus saving wasted money.

http://www.zmag.org/FCKFiles/image/dec08zmoimages/Wuerker-FreeMarketAct.jpg

Many governments around the world are implementing the World Bank strategy of reducing education policy into economic logic. A. Puiggros suggests “the Bank recommends privatization and abolishing teachers’ contracts in the name of generating more income, whilst reducing public investment”. There is also a need to realign paternalistic governments into a more driven market economy, which only supports profitability. One of the underline problems when this ideology is applied to higher education is that theoretical subjects are no longer desirable and potential students plan their career route from the moment they fill in their application forms. In Britain, there has been two distinct phases of neo-liberalism. The first wave came under the Thatcher regime which was then carried through into the Blair administration. The way in which the state has related to the market, and the positioning within the wider global world has forced Britain to compete on an international level. For example, in relations to the creative industries, in which Britain is a leading exporter around the industrialised nations, the Blair government has allowed businesses to merge with the arts to create a distinct relationship. Moreover, D. Steinberg and R. Johson explain “when New Labour refashioned cultural endeavours into the creative industries, this enabled a harmonious partnership between business and the arts”. This new association provides the arts world with the funding to promote and produce more work and facilitates businesses in acquiring cultural capital through their sponsorship of exhibitions. Likewise it is not just the arts world that has been implemented with this agenda; education is another former public service that has been opened up to the market. C. McCaig states that “New Labour has overhauled a comprehensive education system designed to meet the needs of its new individualistic and the aspiration voter base”.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/07_02/classroomDM1707_468x363.jpg

The governments’ education policy on higher institutions has been placed within a limited economic view which essentially places institutions into market logic for all of its affairs. Moreover the language that is being used in relations to what universities should achieve is exposed by a report into the economic role being placed upon institutions. In particular the HE sector is being urged to “modernise, adapt, diversify, marketize, and become entrepreneurial, competitive, efficient and more effective”. http://www.pjb.co.uk/npl/bp6.htm There is also a need for new forms of governance, management, and new administrative systems that allow businesses to fund failing schools to provide alternatives to state funded education provision. There has been a strong movement by the government to introduce city academies in underperforming areas around the country. Gordon Brown, prime minister wrote in the observer in February 2008 “400 planned academies in disadvantaged areas (will provide) not just exclusive opportunities for the few, but a new means of advancing opportunity for all”. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/feb/10/gordonbrown.education

Likewise, Andrew Adonis minister in the department for children, schools and families, spoke at the National Academies conference in February 2008 announcing “Academies are engines of social mobility and justice: schools of aspiration for all, striving for excellence”. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/speeches/speech.cfm?SpeechID=749 So with the full support of the government, the neo-liberal agenda can continue to provide almost valid alternatives for educational provision. There are many critics of this new direction within education policy. Most notably Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and Colleges Union describes the current situation whilst addressing a union congress as “This is not education policy. This is a catalogue of misaligned objectives each with unintended but entirely predictable consequences. The reality of government policy for too many UCU members is job insecurity, increased casual employment and higher workloads.” http://www.ucu.org.uk/index.cfm?articleid=2592

http://www.campusaccess.com/images/education.jpg

These neo-liberal reforms have had a huge impact upon higher education, from the introduction of student fees, to the abolition of grants in favour for the student loans company. So whilst the government has increased the amount of students who are now entering higher education, it has created a market for loans, debt and league tables. S. Hall comments “New Labour has allowed businesses to influence and shape the current social agendas. Entrepreneurial values such as efficiency, choice and selectivity are being enforced upon the public sector in order to operate like private corporations”. This process allows private investment into public institutions which in turn directs universities to market themselves in order to attract more students who will pay for their education. For example Goldsmiths, University of London has recently re-branded to compete for students more affectively. The college website states “Goldsmiths operates in an extremely competitive market, not just within the UK, but competing for students and funding on a world-wide basis. As competition has increased, many UK universities have considered the importance of their brand and their identity. Our key competitors have already been through such an exercise, which has helped them position themselves successfully in an area that should be occupied by Goldsmiths”. http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/brand/faq.php

The college uses all of the business language that has been implemented within the neo-liberalism era. From “achieving academic excellence, embracing complexity, respecting the individual, embracing diversity, radical thinking and creating change, locally and globally”. http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/about/strategy2.php

The case against public funded education is very powerful and can convince many of the immediate benefits that schools, colleges and universities will receive, if they reform their practices and align with the neo-liberal governance structures. S. J. Ball describes the argument against state intervention in education in relation to client’s satisfaction, a move away from standardised teaching practices, wasted resources and controlled by interest groups instead of the students and parents. Moreover government funded institutions are not linked to the satisfaction of the consumers as if a school underperforms, they would still receive funding. As there is no requirement for managing finances in relation to competitive targets, there is no real drive to maximise profit. Only people who have a vested interest in the school can be allowed to participate in the decision making processes, normally without any need to consult parents or students. Institutions waste resources through insufficient management and are not responsive to parental concerns. The uniformity within state schools means there is no drive for excellence and student’s needs are not considered as individual, so are not best met within a system that lacks choice and viable alternatives. Lastly when individual students and parents need to address their issues, they are normally faced against the powerful unions, professional organisations which crush all perceived dissidents. Ball explains the solution using private schools as the preferred option; the incentive to please students and parents, which is directly linked to the amount of funds the school can bring in, allows them to be more responsive to the individual learners’ needs. Furthermore a process of natural selection will allow unpopular schools to be forced to change or close down. Another dimension to this position is exemplified by D. F. Laberee who suggests the market allows consumers to acquire superior educational credentials that will have a much more effective use value, in their pursuit of social advantage, whilst distinguishing them from the rest.

http://media.economist.com/images/20090307/D1009FN2.jpg

The market theory brings problems and difficulties that the proponents of neo-liberalism would fail to acknowledge. There is a danger in becoming lost in a sort of market utopia, where schools perform better when placed in a competitive environment and the competition provides extensive choice from the consumers. In particular with universities, B. Readings states that lecturers are conducting less teaching in favour of research, which does not relate to the interests of society as a whole, and is more likely to be set towards the business interests who are funding the projects. Some of problems outline how universities are becoming centres of excellence which turns students into customers who buy into degree programmes solely for the value that they would have in the employment market. In regards to general schooling experiences, the market is totally redefining the approaches that schools take in selecting students. G. Whitty and S. Power relate that schools are only actively seeking students who are talented and gifted, who are usually middle class, girls or children from South Asia who boost exams results, which in turn moves the school up the league tables. Children from working backgrounds are viewed as undesirable and challenging, so the types of schools that they can attend are usually difficult places for them to learn. Another example of schools following a market agenda with detrimental affects can be found with the teachers. J. Kwong analyses how the work load and class sizes have increased dramatically which almost makes no time for personal contact with pupils. Schools adopt outsourcing strategies, allowing private companies to provide school meals and cleaning services in order to continue to cut costs. Schools are being used to promote the neo-liberal agenda from the start of a child’s learning experience. The most notable subject that these ideals are being implemented through is (ICT) Information and Communication Technology. L. Levidow argues that ICT has become the most essential learning tool for schools to use which will equip learners for their working lives. The way in which it accomplishes this task is by allowing individualised and flexible learning, of which the learner is solely responsible for what they achieve. ICT also removes the teacher from being the primary bearer of knowledge, so learning can become mechanical and more efficient which relates directly back to business needs.

http://www.azlanmclennan.com/content_images/propaganda_2007/Landscape/neo_liberalism.jpg

So neo-liberalism can have some detrimental consequences for society, especially in relation to learning. One could argue that buy allowing everyone to become more business minded, the economy will continue to provide wealth and prosperity for all. The fundamental flaw with that particular argument is that within business, a few people benefit whilst the majority contribute to the few. Neo-liberalism has become embedded within the framework of our society and the need for individuals to relate to the market seems to be the only viable option left available. The current political institutions and legislation actively endorse neo-liberalism while dismissing any other alternatives. By becoming more individualised consumers, we are only really concerned with what we can get out of any situation. Moreover, if people fail within the system, then the blame is firmly placed upon their own ability to compete. Neo-liberalism has defiantly become the dominating ideology and the need for people to create an alternative that is not reactionary, but allows the pacifists to understand that change is needed is of the most urgent importance if we are ever going to achieve any hope for all of humanity.