In order to act freely, the subject must be shaped, guided and moulded into one capable of responsibly exercising that freedom through systems of domination, Subjection and subjectification are laid upon one another. Each is condition of the other... On the one hand [advanced liberal practices of rule] contract, consult, negotiate, create partnerships, even empower and activate forms of agency, liberty and the choice of individuals, consumers, professionals, households neighborhoods and communities. On the other hand, they set norms, standards, benchmarks, performance indicators, quality controls and best practice standards, to monitor, measure and render calculable the performance of these various agencies. The position of ‘freedom’ on advanced liberal regimes of government is exceedingly ambivalent (p.46).How is the concept of freedom is challenged under the dominant discourse of neoliberalism?
The article below is focused on neoliberalism in education in the United States. However, many schools in Canada has been adapted and implemented early intervention with high-quality school readiness programs.
Neoliberalism in Education
Market-Style Pressures Inform Content of Race to the Top Policy
Jan 21, 2010 Candace Cofield
Since the 1980s, multiple neoliberal policies have been implemented in education, social welfare, and the economy to shrink “big government,” and redistribute wealth upwards to stimulate economic recovery and growth.
Major examples include the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which includes sanctions and punishments for students and schools that don’t achieve “adequate yearly progress “or high standardized test scores; The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which is also known as welfare reform; and the Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994, which assisted in deregulating the banking industry.
Neoliberal Influence in Race to the Top
Today, the neoliberal agenda for education is supported by both Democrats and Republicans. It continues to dominate federal policies such as Race to The Top, which is an education policy that offers 4.35 billion in education aid to states that meet most or all of its nineteen measurements of competitiveness for the funds. It echoes neoliberal, market-driven themes including merit pay based on student test score achievement, school choice, and the proliferation of fast-track training for teachers.
- Merit Pay: Teachers compete to get a pay increase or bonus based on their success rate with increasing student achievement as measured by standardized test scores.
- School Choice: Schools compete for students based on their ability to maintain their school charter.
- Alternative Routes to Teaching: Teacher preparation programs compete to attract students by incentivizing a fast route into the classroom.
How education is seen in the article and how "freedom"(p.46) regulates and governs not only children but also teachers? Why is freedom taken for granted? How can schools maintain as loci of ethical practice rather than ethics being a matter of prescribing, transmitting and applying a code of rules(p.12)?
Burbules, N. (2004). Ways of Thinking About Educational Quality. Educational Researcher. Volume 33, No.6, pp.4-10
Cofield, C. (2010). Neoliberalism in Education. Market-Style Pressures Inform Content of Race to the Top Policy. Retrieved from http://www.suite101.com/content/neoliberalism-in-education-a192209
Dahlberg, G. & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics in early childhood education. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
When you refer to ‘The Race to the Top policy’, it brought me back to the discussion I lead on Dahlberg and Moss’s chapter on “What Ethics”. One of my provocations was a preview for a documentary on the educational system in the U.S. in which students and teachers voiced their opinions and feelings on the current system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uem73imvn9Y&feature=related
ReplyDeleteIronically enough the documentary is called “Race to Nowhere” and it introduces issues to things such as pressures to perform, how students are trained from a script, and how creativity has been abolished. This lead our discussion around the content of the documentary comparing the ideas of universalistic ethics and ethics of care from Dalhberg and Moss (2005). We asked ourselves, how do prescribed curriculums and outcomes compare to Levinas ideas of being responsible to the other? How can we say we are being responsible to these students when they are telling us how unhappy they are?
Even though we are often engulfed in this Neoliberal society which may seem impossible to escape, it is important to challenge it. The documentary is a way of doing that. Perhaps it will allow more to question or resist a dominant discourse of education. What would happen if we made this a point of discussion with other educators, parents, students, children? This is not always easy and can often make us uncomfortable, however we need to come to the decision that it is alright to feel like this and that we can responsibly seek other alternatives through this state of being. “Our situation as ordinary people is both exhilarating and scary, stark and complex…We recognize that we have to make choices between good and bad without seeking shelter in a universal code. We must take responsibility for the choices we make” (Dalhberg & Moss, 2005, p.71). If we can begin to grasp these ideas, then we can make room for difference, new possibilities and changes.
We might ask ourselves how this can be done. Can it be done? And why bother? When I hear the voices of the students and educators in the documentary, it becomes apparent to me that it is necessary for me to investigate these questions further. I read about the pedagogical work, especially the ‘pedagogy of listening’ in Reggio Emilia, Italy (Dahlberg & Moss, 2005), and the ‘politics of difference’ in the Sheffield Children’s Centre, England, and I begin to see the possibilities that can occur when we choose to resist what we have become accustomed to. In both the Reggio and Sheffield centres, there are still struggles and uncertainties, however they have chosen to accept that “human reality is messy and ambiguous” (Dahlberg & Moss, 2005, p.71). And it is through this acceptance that they are able to be truly responsible to the other. They have begun to let go of prescribed curriculum, outcomes, and solutions and have accepted conflicts and struggles as welcomed challenges that enable for continued open dialogue. This truly empowers me find solace in encountering families, children and education through new lenses that I am less accustomed too.
Reel Links Films (2010). Theatrical Trailer Race to Nowhere [u tube video].
Dahlberg, G. Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics in Early Childhood Education.
London, New York: RoutledgeFalmer