企業化され軍事化された学校教育モデルの解体は、オバマ政権下での最優先事項であるべきである。 残念なことに、オバマは、このまったく懲罰的で反知性的で企業化されたテスト主導の学校教育モデルを体現する人物を教育長官に任命した。

 

1980年代以降、特にブッシュ政権下では、宗教右派、企業文化、共和党右翼の一部の勢力が、公教育の無償化は大規模な詐欺か軽蔑的な失敗であると主張してきた。 これらの攻撃は真の改革要求とは程遠く、学校を公共投資から民主社会の要求や価値観ではなく市場の要請に応える私財に変えようとする試みから主に生じている。 教育史家のデビッド・ラバリーが正しく主張しているように、公立学校は過去 1 年間、「効果がないとみなされているだけでなく、公共であるという理由で」攻撃を受けてきた。 [XNUMX]企業の利益に応じて教え、学び、それらを管理することは、標準化されたテストの強調、トップダウンのカリキュラム命令の使用、学校への広告の流入、生徒の成績を「奨励する」ための利益動機の使用、学生への攻撃などを見れば明らかである。教師組合と暗記学習と暗記を重視する教育様式。

 

ブッシュ政権にとって、テストは教育と学習の複雑なメカニズムを無視して、究極の説明責任の手段となっている。 隠されたカリキュラムとは、テストが教師を単なる技術者に貶めてスキルを落とす策略として利用され、生徒も同様に熱心で批判的な学習者としてではなく市場の顧客に貶められ、常に資金不足の公立学校が失敗して教師の能力が低下するというものだ。最終的には民営化できる。 しかし、ブッシュ政権下で開始され、現在全米の多くの学校制度で導入されているこの改革には、さらに暗い側面がある。 市場の論理と「犯罪複合体」[2]が学校における社会関係の分野を枠組みづけているため、生徒たちは学校の安全という名目で学校当局や政治家によって擁護されている3つの特に不快な政策にさらされている。 まず、学生は主に学生を罰し、抑圧し、排除するために使用されるゼロ寛容政策にますますさらされています。 第二に、生徒たちはますます「犯罪複合体」に組み込まれており、そこでは警備スタッフが厳しい懲戒処分を行って、かつて教師が教室の内外で提供していた規範的な機能を奪っている[XNUMX]。 第三に、ますます多くの学校が教育と少年非行の間の空間を破壊し、刑罰教育を批判的学習に置き換え、可能性についての言説を促進する学校文化を恐怖と社会統制の文化に置き換えています。

 

その結果、都市部の学校制度では、厳しいゼロ・トレランス政策のせいで、多くの有色人種の若者が単に停学処分や退学処分を受けているだけではない。 彼らは、少年院、成人裁判所、刑務所の暗い区域に案内されます。 確かに、この企業化され軍事化された学校教育モデルの解体は、オバマ政権下での最優先事項であるべきである。 残念なことに、オバマは、このまったく懲罰的で反知性的で企業化されたテスト主導の学校教育モデルを実際に体現する人物を教育長官に任命した。

 

バラク・オバマがアーン・ダンカンを教育長官に選んだことは、彼の政権の政治的方向性にとっても公教育の将来にとっても良い前兆ではない。 オバマ大統領の変革を求める声は、今回の任命で完全に的外れとなった。それは、ダンカンが主に学校を市場ベースの懲罰的な教育モデルの範囲内で定義しているからだけでなく、学校をせいぜい企業の付属物以外のものとして理解していないためでもある。あるいは最悪の場合は刑務所。 このシナリオにおける最初の犠牲者は、有意義な民主主義の中心となる権利、公共財、サービスを拡大する重要な制度を守ることができる社会的および政治的責任の言語である。 これは、公立学校教育の問題と、その後の教育の目的、批判的知識人としての教師の役割、カリキュラムの政治性、道徳的および政治的実践としての教育学の中心性をめぐる議論に関して特に当てはまります。

 

Duncan, CEO of the Chicago Public Schools, presided over the implementation and expansion of an agenda that militarized and corporatized the third largest school system in the nation, one that is about 90 percent poor and nonwhite. Under Duncan, Chicago took the lead in creating public schools run as military academies, vastly expanded draconian student expulsions, instituted sweeping surveillance practices, advocated a growing police presence in the schools, arbitrarily shut down entire schools and fired entire school staffs. A recent report, "Education on Lockdown," claimed that partly under Duncan‘s leadership "Chicago Public Schools (CPS) has become infamous for its harsh zero tolerance policies. Although there is no verified positive impact on safety, these policies have resulted in tens of thousands of student suspensions and an exorbitant number of expulsions."[4]

 

ダンカン‘s neoliberal ideology is on full display in the various connections he has established with the ruling political and business elite in Chicago.[5] He led the Renaissance 2010 plan, which was created for Mayor Daley by the Commercial Club of Chicago – an organization representing the largest businesses in the city. The purpose of Renaissance 2010 was to increase the number of high quality schools that would be subject to new standards of accountability – a code word for legitimating more charter schools and high stakes testing in the guise of hard-nosed empiricism. Chicago‘s 2010 plan targets 15 percent of the city district’s alleged underachieving schools in order to dismantle them and open 100 new experimental schools in areas slated for gentrification.

 

Most of the new experimental schools have eliminated the teacher union. The Commercial Club hired corporate consulting firm A.T. Kearney to write Ren2010, which called for the closing of 100 public schools and the reopening of privatized charter schools, contract schools (more charters to circumvent state limits) and "performance" schools. Kearney‘s web site is unapologetic about its business-oriented notion of leadership, one that John Dewey thought should be avoided at all costs. It states, "Drawing on our program-management skills and our knowledge of best practices used across industries, we provided a private-sector perspective on how to address many of the complex issues that challenge other large urban education transformations."[6]

 

ダンカン同氏がルネサンス2010計画を支持したというだけで、即座にオバマ氏の任命資格を剥奪されるはずだった。 この計画の中心となるのは、公立学校に希少な資源をめぐって互いに競争するよう促し、親や生徒が自分たちを民間消費者であると考えるようにする「選択」イニシアチブを導入することによって、公教育に「市場」を創出する民営化計画である。教育サービスの提供[7] この計画を支持した結果、ダンカンは地域団体、保護者、教育学者、学生らから攻撃を受けるようになった。 これら多様な批評家たちは、これを学校教育の質の向上を目的とした計画ではなく、民営化、組合潰し、民主的に選ばれた地方学校評議会の解体計画として非難している。

 

They also describe it as part of neighborhood gentrification schemes involving the privatization of public housing projects through mixed finance developments.[8] (Tony Rezko, an Obama and Blagojevich campaign supporter, made a fortune from these developments along with many corporate investors.) Some of the dimensions of public school privatization involve Renaissance schools being run by subcontracted for-profit companies – a shift in school governance from teachers and elected community councils to appointed administrators coming disproportionately from the ranks of business. It also establishes corporate control over the selection and model of new schools, giving the business elite and their foundations increasing influence over educational policy. No wonder that Duncan had the support of David Brooks, the conservative op-ed writer for The New York Times.

 

One particularly egregious example of Duncan‘s vision of education can be seen in the conference he organized with the Renaissance Schools Fund. In May 2008, the Renaissance Schools Fund, the financial wing of the Renaissance 2010 plan operating under the auspices of the Commercial Club, held a symposium, "Free to Choose, Free to Succeed: The New Market in Public Education," at the exclusive private club atop the Aon Center. The event was held largely by and for the business sector, school privatization advocates, and others already involved in Renaissance 2010, such as corporate foundations and conservative think tanks. Significantly, no education scholars were invited to participate in the proceedings, although it was heavily attended by fellows from the pro-privatization Fordham Foundation and featured speakers from various school choice organizations and the leadership of corporations. Speakers clearly assumed the audience shared their views.

 

Without irony, Arne Duncan characterized the goal of Renaissance 2010 creating the new market in public education as a "movement for social justice." He invoked corporate investment terms to describe reforms explaining that the 100 new schools would leverage influence on the other 500 schools in Chicago. Redefining schools as stock investments he said, "I am not a manager of 600 schools. I’m a portfolio manager of 600 schools and I’m trying to improve the portfolio." He claimed that education can end poverty. He explained that having a sense of altruism is important, but that creating good workers is a prime goal of educational reform and that the business sector has to embrace public education. "We’re trying to blur the lines between the public and the private," he said. He argued that a primary goal of educational reform is to get the private sector to play a huge role in school change in terms of both money and intellectual capital. He also attacked the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU), positioning it as an obstacle to business-led reform. He also insisted that the CTU opposes charter schools (and, hence, change itself), despite the fact that the CTU runs ten such schools under Renaissance 2010. Despite the representation in the popular press of Duncan as conciliatory to the unions, his statements and those of others at the symposium belied a deep hostility to teachers unions and a desire to end them (all of the charters created under Ren2010 are deunionized).

 

Thus, in Duncan‘s attempts to close and transform low-performing schools, he not only reinvents them as entrepreneurial schools, but, in many cases, frees "them from union contracts and some state regulations."[9] Duncan effusively praised one speaker, Michael Milkie, the founder of the

ノーベルストリート

チャータースクールは、まさに労働組合を排除するために、学区内のすべての学校の閉鎖と再開を公然と要求した。 明らかになったのは、ダンカンがルネサンス2010を教育改革の国家的青写真と見なしているということだが、このビジョンで問題になっているのは、公共財としての学校教育の終焉と、保守派が好む不信感と疲れ果てた新自由主義的改革モデルへの回帰である。抱きしめる。

 

In spite of the corporate rhetoric of accountability, efficiency and excellence, there is to date no evidence that the radical reforms under Duncan‘s tenure as the "CEO" of Chicago Public Schools have created any significant improvement. In part, this is because the Chicago Public Schools and the Renaissance Schools Fund report data in obscurantist ways to make traditional comparisons difficult if not impossible.[10] And, in part, examples of educational claims to school improvement are being made about schools embedded in communities that suffered dislocation and removal through coordinated housing privatization and gentrification policies.

 

For example, the city has decimated public housing in coveted real estate enclaves, dispossessing thousands of residents of their communities. Once the poor are removed, the urban cleansing provides an opportunity for Duncan to open a number of Renaissance Schools, catering to those socio-economically empowered families whose children would surely improve the city’s overall test scores. What are alleged to be school improvements under Ren2010, rest on an increase in the city’s overall test scores and other performance measures that parodies the financial shell game corporations used to inflate profit margins – and prospects for future catastrophes are as inevitable. In the end, all Duncan leaves us with is a Renaissance 2010 model of education that is celebrated as a business designed "to save kids" from a failed public system. In fact, it condemns public schooling, administrators, teachers and students to a now outmoded and discredited economic model of reform that can only imagine education as a business, teachers as entrepreneurs and students as customers.[11]

 

It is difficult to understand how Barack Obama can reconcile his vision of change with Duncan’s history of supporting a corporate vision for school reform and a penchant for extreme zero-tolerance polices – both of which are much closer to the retrograde policies hatched in conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institution, Fordham Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, than to the values of the many millions who voted for the democratic change he promised. As is well known, these think tanks share an agenda not for strengthening public schooling, but for dismantling it and replacing it with a private market in consumable educational services. At the heart of Duncan‘s vision of school reform is a corporatized model of education that cancels out the democratic impulses and practices of civil society by either devaluing or absorbing them within the logic of the market or the prison. No longer a space for relating schools to the obligations of public life, social responsibility to the demands of critical and engaged citizenship, schools in this dystopian vision legitimate an all-encompassing horizon for producing market identities, values and those privatizing and penal pedagogies that both inflate the importance of individualized competition and punish those who do not fit into its logic of pedagogical Darwinism.[12]

 

In spite of what Duncan argues, the greatest threat to our children does not come from lowered standards, the absence of privatized choice schemes or the lack of rigid testing measures that offer the aura of accountability. On the contrary, it comes from a society that refuses to view children as a social investment, consigns 13 million children to live in poverty, reduces critical learning to massive testing programs, promotes policies that eliminate most crucial health and public services and defines rugged individualism through the degrading celebration of a gun culture, extreme sports and the spectacles of violence that permeate corporate controlled media industries. Students are not at risk because of the absence of market incentives in the schools. Young people are under siege in American schools because, in the absence of funding, equal opportunity and real accountability, far too many of them have increasingly become institutional breeding grounds for racism, right-wing paramilitary cultures, social intolerance and sexism.[13] We live in a society in which a culture of testing, punishment and intolerance has replaced a culture of social responsibility and compassion.

 

Within such a climate of harsh discipline and disdain for critical teaching and learning, it is easier to subject young people to a culture of faux accountability or put them in jail rather than to provide the education, services and care they need to face problems of a complex and demanding society.[14] What Duncan and other neoliberal economic advocates refuse to address is what it would mean for a viable educational policy to provide reasonable support services for all students and viable alternatives for the troubled ones. The notion that children should be viewed as a crucial social resource – one that represents, for any healthy society, important ethical and political considerations about the quality of public life, the allocation of social provisions and the role of the state as a guardian of public interests – appears to be lost in a society that refuses to invest in its youth as part of a broader commitment to a fully realized democracy. As the social order becomes more privatized and militarized, we increasingly face the problem of losing a generation of young people to a system of increasing intolerance, repression and moral indifference. It is difficult to understand why Obama would appoint as secretary of education someone who believes in a market-driven model that has not only failed young people, but given the current financial crisis has been thoroughly discredited. Unless Duncan is willing to reinvent himself, the national agenda he will develop for education embodies and exacerbates these problems and, as such, it will leave a lot more kids behind than it helps.

 

---

 

[1] Alfie Kohn、「The Real Threat to American Schools」、Tikkun (2001 年 25 月～29 月)、p. 2008 で引用。 XNUMX. オバマ大統領と、彼が教育省長官に選出される可能性、そして学校改革をめぐる闘争に関する興味深い解説については、アルフィー・コーン著「学校の改革者たちに気をつけろ」ザ・ネイション（XNUMX年XNUMX月XNUMX日）を参照。 オンライン： www.thenation.com/doc/20081229/kohn/print.

 

[2] This term comes form: David Garland, "The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society" (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).

 

[3] For a brilliant analysis of the "governing through crime" complex, see Jonathan Simon, "Governing Through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear," (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2007).

 

[4] Advancement Project in partnership with Padres and Jovenes Unidos, Southwest Youth Collaborative, "Education on Lockdown: The Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track," (New York: Children & Family Justice Center of Northwestern University School of Law, March 24, 2005), p.31. On the broader issue of the effect of racialized zero tolerance policies on public education, see Christopher G. Robbins, "Expelling Hope: The Assault on Youth and the Militarization of Schooling" (Albany: SUNY Press, 2008). See also, Henry A. Giroux, "The Abandoned Generation" (New York: Palgrave, 2004).

 

[5] David Hursh and Pauline Lipman, "Chapter 8: Renaissance 2010: The Reassertion of Ruling-Class Power through Neoliberal Policies in Chicago" in David Hursh, "High-Stakes Testing and the Decline of Teaching and Learning" (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008).

 

[6]参照： www.atkearney.com

 

[7] 「公教育の新たな市場の創造: ルネサンス学校基金 2008 年度進捗報告書」、ルネサンス学校基金 www.rsfchicago.org

 

[8] Kenneth J. Saltman, "Chapter 3: Renaissance 2010 and No Child Left Behind Capitalizing on Disaster: Taking and Breaking Public Schools" (Boulder: Paradigm Publishers, 2007).

 

[9] Sarah Karp and Joyn Myers, "Duncan‘s Track Record," Catalyst Chicago (December 15, 2008). Online: www.catalyst-chicago.org/news/index.php?item=2514&cat=5&tr=y&auid=4336549

 

[10] (See Chicago Public Schools Office of New Schools 2006/2007 Charter School Performance Report Executive Summary)

 

[11] See Dorothy Shipps, "School Reform, Corporate Style: Chicago 1880-2000," (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2006).

 

[12] See, for example, Summary Report, "America‘s Cradle to Prison Pipeline," Children’s Defense Fund. Online at: www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/CPP_report_2007_summary.pdf?docID=6001; also see, Elora Mukherjee, "Criminalizing the Classroom: The Over-Policing of New York City Schools," (New York: American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties, March 2008), pp. 1-36.

 

[13] ドナ・ゲインズ、「学校は子供たちに憎しみを教える方法」、ニューズデイ誌（25 年 1999 月 5 日日曜日）、p. BXNUMX.

 

[14] As has been widely, reported, the prison industry has become big business with many states spending more on prison construction than on university construction. Jennifer Warren, "One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008," (Washington, DC: The PEW Center on the States, 2007). Online at: www.pewcenteronthestates.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=35912

 

---

 

Henry A. Giroux holds the Global TV Network chair in English and Cultural Studies at McMaster University in Canada. His most recent books include: "Take Back Higher Education" (co-authored with Susan Searls Giroux, 2006), "The University in Chains: Confronting the Military-Industrial-Academic Complex," (2007), and "Against the Terror of Neoliberalism: Politics Beyond the Age of Greed," (2008). His newest book, "Youth in a Suspect Society: Democracy or Disposability?," will be published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2009.

 

Kenneth Saltman is associate professor in the department of Educational Policy Studies and Research at DePaul University in Chicago. He is the author, most recently, of "Capitalizing on Disaster: Taking and Breaking Public Schools," (Paradigm Publishers 2007), and editor of Schooling and the Politics of Disaster (Routledge 2007). 

---