I just finished reading the review of Reign of Error in Commonweal, a magazine edited by independent lay Catholics, and I am speechless (almost). Written by Jackson Lears, a cultural historian at Rutgers University, the review brilliantly explains the underlying effort to transform public education through “creative disruption” and turn it into a commodity.
Why have our society’s leaders fallen in love with the idea of “creative destruction” or “creative disruption,” he asks.
Like journalists praising war from the safety of their keyboards, economists celebrate the insecurities of entrepreneurship from a comfortable distance. The prototype was the Harvard economist Joseph Schumpeter. In the bucolic solitude of his Connecticut estate, he coined the term “creative destruction” to refer to the role of entrepreneurial innovation in capitalist development: the inevitable mass firings and factory closings that accompanied the adoption of labor-saving technology.
Yes, indeed, it is “creative,” because it is not their jobs that are lost, not their sons and daughters who are suddenly unemployed.
Ah, but forget the job losses and the human devastation. Just focus on the “creative” aspect.
Lears writes:
Everyone wants to be creative, especially our destroyers. Free-market ideologues celebrate the freewheeling entrepreneur and dismiss any concern about the social ravages of unregulated capital. Worried about the catastrophic impact of plant closings? It can’t be helped—protracted joblessness, ruined families, and abandoned communities are the necessary price of progress. Capital must be free to flow where the investment opportunities are; any constraints on it obstruct the creative entrepreneurship that drags us, despite our doubts, into a better future.
“Creative destruction” is often awkwardly allied with techno-determinism—the belief that “technology” is reshaping our society and there is nothing human beings can do about it. Hence the headline in InformationWeek reporting the takeover of the Washington Post by Amazon.com’s CEO, Jeff Bezos: “Creative Destruction of Internet Age: Unstoppable.” Somehow this bleak vision is conveyed in a rhetoric of dizzying personal possibilities. It remains to be seen how creative anyone can be in a world where fundamental changes are engineered by (allegedly) impersonal forces. The entrepreneurial notion of creativity is confined to half a dozen techno-visionaries (such as Bezos and Steve Jobs) and defined in narrowly monetary terms, while the destruction that so often accompanies it is wide, deep, and real. “Creative destruction” is the perfect euphemism for our neo-liberal moment. Schumpeter must be smiling, somewhere.
Having read many reviews of Reign of Error, I must say that this was the one that startled me by its deep understanding of the underlying forces that are destroying the public sector. This review nailed the banner of neoliberalism to the so-called “school reform” movement. Critics of the book like to say that I painted with too broad a brush. They say that some of those pushing the agenda of school closings, mass firings, charters, vouchers, and incessant disruption really do have good intentions.
Jackson Lears sees something else. He sees what I see.
Please read this brilliant review.
http://www.realhartford.org/2013/11/07/n-is-for-no-community-speaks-against-closure-of-clark-school/
Sent from my iPad
You’re right… it was a brilliant review! I especially liked this phrase: “Celebrating better schools as a panacea is a way of not mentioning unmentionable policies that might challenge existing power arrangements.”… I have one problem with the pushback against “disruption”… I believe the system we have in place whereby students are grouped by age cohorts and “promoted” through “grade levels” works against the opportunities that now exist for students to progress at their own rates without feeling “left behind” or “getting ahead”. This change cannot be made without disrupting things…. and one of the major impediments to making changes to the structure of schools is this: by and large those in power were identified as “successes” by the system in place and they therefore believe “the system” is good.
“. . . by and large those in power were identified as “successes” by the system in place and they therefore believe “the system” is good.”
No doubt WGerson.
This is subjectivization as outlined by Foucault and reiterated in Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error”:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
Wow, Diane, you weren’t kidding! This essay should serve as an intro to your amazing book. This quote struck me especially: “Michelle Rhee, in the fawning film documentary Waiting for “Superman,” seemed to derive an almost erotic charge from the prospect of firing a teacher on camera.” An “erotic charge” is exactly the icky descriptor of Rhee’s firing that hapless principal.
I worked in a school district as an elementary music teacher for 12 years. A referendum wasn’t passed, by six votes, so elementary music jobs and other teachers were eliminated.
The superintendent called all of us who were loosing our jobs into the district office. He called us one by one into his office to give us notice. He was, in my opinion, thrilled to have that much power. He was literally beaming while telling us to leave.
Good one…”erotic charge.”
Wow, and wow again. That’s a magnificent essay, even if it wasn’t a review of my favorite living education writer. Diane, your book is a resource for lucidity on all fronts. Reading this review is definitely a plus for your health, but are you resting?
This follows a letter last month sent out to every bishop in the US, by a constellation of 130 Catholic scholars and intellectual leaders. That message used humanistic as well as religious concerns to oppose the move by some Catholic schools to adopt the Common Core. Here’s an update on the fascinating discussion, still building steam:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholic-scholars-voice-concern-over-common-core-curriculum/
“Sister John Mary Fleming, executive director for Catholic education at the U.S. bishops’ conference, told the New York Times that the criticism was misconceived – that the standards should be regarded not as a ceiling, but as a floor.”
She said what? How did a nun start taking boilerplate corporatese?
In the comments, we find a familiar revelation by a Catholic activist:
“The Gates Foundation has paid $100,000 to the National Catholic Education Association to promote Common Core… I don’t see how you can “…seek an orderly withdrawal now…” without giving that money back and saying No Thank You. I won’t be holding my breath. The full exlusive story about this grant and its purpose can be found at the Cardinal Newman Society website.”
So, now the Gates Foundation is corrupting nuns and bishops, as well as union presidents. Is nothing sacred?
So I Googled for a link.
After reminding us at length that Melinda Gates is also a heroic promoter of women’s access to contraception, the Newman Society spends a couple of paragraphs following the money. I’m going to that passage in full:
“The NCEA recently launched a revised website for its Common Core Catholic Identity Initiative (CCCII), which offers resources and advice to Catholic schools planning to adopt the controversial Common Core standards. In addition to the Gates Foundation grant, sponsors of the CCCII include William H. Sadlier, Inc., a leading Catholic textbook publisher, and Riverside Publishing, a national testing company—which potentially could reap large profits from the Common Core’s adoption by Catholic schools.
The Gates Foundation has also made grants to other Catholic entities to promote Common Core. This year it granted $248,343 to DePaul University for Leading with Algebra, described by the University as “a partnership between DePaul and the Chicago Public Schools to support the implementation of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics in algebra for grades 6-8.” And in 2010, the Gates Foundation granted $556,006 to the Cristo Rey Network, in part to implement Common Core in the nationwide network of Catholic schools.”
– See more at:
http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/2661/EXCLUSIVE-National-Catholic-Education-Association-Gets-Gates-Foundation-Grant-to-Promote-%E2%80%98Common-Core%E2%80%99-in-Catholic-Schools.aspx
OY! Gates thinks his money is everything and he can control the world. If we allow Gates to purchase this country and every other country, then…fill in the blanks.
Is there anyone who isn’t on Gates’ payroll???
Most of us regular school teachers. And Diane.
It goes along with the letter written by Catholic scholars to all American bishops to disassociate their schools from the common core that was published the other day. That was also brilliant.
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater and commented:
Yes. This is at the core of what I’ve been saying – most recently (in a comment on your site) here:
I realize it’s just the comment section of a (great) blog, so I avoided getting into the particulars (economics, philosophy, the Chicago boys, the IMF, etc.) and instead attempted to focus people’s attention toward learning about neoliberalism for themselves, where fun ideas like creative destruction are there for all to see.
People can start educating themselves here:
In my last comment, I tried to emphasize the importance of getting politically active and making common cause with different people and different groups – because we’re all fighting the same enemy. Yep, I said it: Enemy. It won’t be easy because we have to reinvent the wheel of a mass movement. We need the strength that comes from solidarity. Yep, I said it: Solidarity. People need to understand the fight for public education is a battle in a larger war. We need to have a sense of urgency. Something I see lacking in most people except for the likes of Chris Hedges and Diane Ravitch (though it is tempered by her great equanimity).
As I said, in the next manufactured crisis, instead of stealing a little at a time (cutting COLA raises, etc.) as they are now, they will take all of your pension.
Understand, then, organize for radical systemic change. At this point the only other choice is letting corporations rule over and shape every aspect of our lives.
This needs to be shared. Any chance the professor would send it to the major rags as an op-ed?
Diane, you are right, this is a brilliant analysis. I agree, this needs to be shared.
“… reformers don’t talk about: the catastrophic impact of budget cuts, child poverty, racial segregation, bloated budgets for testing, increased class size, scripted curricula, teachers’ loss of professional autonomy, the absence of special-needs children and nonnative English speakers from charter schools, and the diversion of public funds to pay dividends to charter-school investors. As in health care and the prison system, what is called privatization is really a euphemism for crony capitalism—plutocrats supping at the public trough.”
The review is a “must read” for all.
Should be widely read by policymakers.
Perfect medicine for healing! Yes, definitely an incredible review of an incredible book.
Great review! I recently shared a blog I posted noting that the principle of “creative destruction” is the force fueling the reform movement. http://goo.gl/ZhtFKw . You posted a portion of my blog. My point is this concept is easily understood and can serve as the platform to launch a new perspective about the reform movement. I think it elevates the debate about education reform. Using this notion as a means to explain the movement unveils the complexities of this issue. As a lay person I get it and I think others will too.
Sounds like “creative corruption.”
The best and most profound review of Diane’s book yet.
For me, this is a particularly revealing unmasking of predatory capitalism at its worst.
This pretty much sums up why I quit my doctoral program in Instructional Technology at dissertation stage. TAing a class, the assigned reading was Christensen’s book and the push was for teacher ed classes to all be online – including preservice teacher classes who need to see teaching and tech use modeled for them – while various tech groups within the department complained about teacher’s unions and teachers impeding their “creative” progress, and not a one of them had been a teacher. I love tech, but as enhancement, not replacement. This was moving towards replacement and disruption, with no acknowledgement of what really was going on in public education. It seemed like most of them just wanted to produce the new product to replace the teacher…and make them some money. Irony was that they’d all repeat the “failing schools” mantra without proof, which I found especially hard to take from higher ed.
I will say what the modest owner of this blog won’t permit herself to say:
You can’t write a brilliant review of a mediocre book. First-rate work inspires first-rate reviews.
And whatever form it takes—
“Truth has no special time of its own. Its hour is now – always.” [Albert Schweitzer]
😎
Whew, I love the review! We need to see more of this around the nation.