Mercedes Schneider has put together the pieces and figured out what lies behind “reform.”
It is not about better education. It is about converting our schools into an assembly-line to produce workers for the economy. It is not about helping schools meet the needs and develop the interests of students. It is about fitting children into the slots where the economy needs them. Their purposes, interests, and personal goals don’t matter.
To make her case, she looks at three representative documents. One comes from Indiana Governor Mike Pence, who created a “Department of Workforce Development” to compete with and supplant the state’s Department of Education. Of course, we know that Pence will do anything to cut down State Commissioner of Education Glenda Ritz. But it is revealing that he sees the noble profession of education solely as “workforce development.”
Then she looks at a 1992 document by Marc Tucker, who envisioned “labor market boards” to align curriculum and jobs. Of course, that was more than two decades ago. Does he still see education solely in economic terms? I for one would not want to be held strictly accountable for things I wrote in 1992.
Schneider then considers an article written by a South Korean teacher who described the cruel and inhumane pressures endured by South Korean students in pursuit of high test scores. Yet, harsh as it is, Arne Duncan looks longingly at this system because of its results.
Schneider has anephany:
“After reading and meditating on these three articles today, I had an epiphany of sorts regarding privatizing utility of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).
“Now, I know a lot about CCSS. This summer I wrote a book on its history, development, and promotion. However, what occurred to me this afternoon is the reason for the business push for CCSS particularly and the spectrum of privatizing reforms in general.
“It has nothing to do with “competing in the global economy.” That’s just a distractor.
“The goal of business in aggressively promoting CCSS while bashing the teaching profession into false, test-score-riddled “accountability” is to reshape the purpose of education into streamlined, assembly-line-to-market service.
“Yes, CCSS is about corporate profits, but it is about more than companies like Pearson making potential billions off of selling CCSS products and services.
“The true business goal behind CCSS and other market-driven “reforms” is to make American education completely economic — which means completely dehumanized in its purpose.
“It is about corporate America funneling the nation’s youth into predetermined, objectified service of the corporate, gluttonous market needs. And a crucial component of that goal is to break the spirit of teachers and make us nothing more than the trainers of What the Market Requires.”
She concludes:
“There is certainly money to be made in promoting “reforms” that, ahem, “benefit the economy.” But we must recognize this “cradle to grave” shaping of the American education system for what it is: A purposed effort to separate America into two groups, the privileged and the serfs. Indeed, the privileged are trying to finesse the message of serfdom as one that “concerned citizens” seemingly cannot say no to: a falsified image of national economic health that, if ingested by the American consciousness, will prove to be nothing more than caustic gluttony that dehumanizes most members of our society and corrodes our democratic foundation.”

I think it’s worse than that. Anyone who knows what it has always taken in the past to create a vibrant economy, as utilitarian as that may be, knows that this brand of education will fail even at that.
No, the true aim of the Corporate Corp is simply to create a Corporate State.
LikeLike
Streaming students into jobs according to corporate whim does indeed create a corporate state.
LikeLike
You are not suggesting a corporatocracy are you? Because that would be a “rule by an oligarchy of corporate elites through the manipulation of a formal democracy” (Urban Dictionary). That can’t be happening . . .
Carl Gibson referred to it this way in a 11/2/11 Huffington Post blog entitled “The Corporatocracy is the 1 Percent”.
“The cancer eating America alive right now is a corporatocracy where cozy relationships between the power elite dictate policy for the 99%. Americans must surgically remove the corporate cancer from government through direct action and the voting booth, and cultivate new leaders from within the movement. When the people lead, our leaders will have no choice but to follow.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-gibson/the-corporatocracy-is-the_b_1070659.html
Duane Swacker had another name for it, it was an F word, but I can’t seem to remember what it was . . .
LikeLike
To GE2L2R: (below, but not accessible via ‘reply’):
I don’t think Duane S. had first dibs on the “F-word”. I think it was Benito Mussolini.
LikeLike
John Wund,
You are right. Duane was the first person to use the F-word in a response to my use of corporatocracy in an earlier comment.
“Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” – Benito Mussolini
Good eye! Thanks.
LikeLike
And to think, they call us communists and so on as they set up their central committees. So much for the myth of upward mobility. We will test you and slot you. Schools will serve the centralized committee and the likes of the Kochs will control the cost and availability of labor. Is this really America? Give me real collectivism then, how about health care and housing for all? Lets go all in.
LikeLike
I think that Right wing ideas are more like communism than any left, progressive ones. Left might have hints of socialist philosophy, but communism is when a small group determines what everyone gets, right?
Some old mountain guy here in western NC said it best. “Them Democrats is Socialists. But them Republicans is communists!”
LikeLike
Joanna,
I think the traditional definition of dictatorship would be more appropriate.
Communism (CCP) as it works in China is not ruled by one-man as it was under Mao. After Mao, died the CCP’s Constitution was rewritten to make sure that there would never be one-man rule again.
Leadership in China is by consensus of the Central Committee of the CCP and/or other top echelons of the CCP, that has 80-million members.
The members of the CCP who belong to the top echelon number between 300 – 400 and they are all linked with a hard-wired telephone lin—a hot line. If the elected leader of China, who may only serve two 5-year terms, picked up that phone, the other phones on that line ring all over China. What follows is a conference call to decide consensus on a given course of action.
The election of the General Secretary is similar to how a U.S. President is elected through several hundred party members voting. The only difference in the United States is that, generally, the political parties (plural) nominate Electors at their State party conventions or by a vote of the party’s central committee in each State.
Technically, a U.S. President is not elected by the popular vote. There are four U.S. presidents who did not win the popular vote but were elected by the Electoral College as all presidents are. They were John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and George W. Bush.
There are 548 electors in the Electoral College that decide who the next U.S. President will be. Some states require the electors to vote with the majority vote in their states and a few are allowed to cast their votes any way they want. Since Mao, in a bid to curtail the powers of the individual, China has relied on collective leadership, the idea that decisions will be taken through consensus.
There is the CCP’s Central Committee [the current Central Committee has 204 members and 167 alternates] and then there is the current Politburo of the Central Committee [with 25 members]. The Politburo Standing Committee [with seven members] is the highest organ of the Communist Party.
LikeLike
We’re marking the 50th anniversary of the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley. Here’s a snippet from Mario Savio’s most famous speech, given in December 1964. He’d been a freedom rider that summer. He’s speaking just before his 22nd birthday, and he saw things clearly:
“Well, I ask you to consider: If this is a firm, and if the board of regents are the board of directors; and if President Kerr in fact is the manager; then I’ll tell you something. The faculty are a bunch of employees, and we’re the raw material! But we’re a bunch of raw materials that don’t mean to be—have any process upon us. Don’t mean to be made into any product. Don’t mean… Don’t mean to end up being bought by some clients of the University, be they the government, be they industry, be they organized labor, be they anyone! We’re human beings!”
LikeLike
Wow, a great statement about the meaning of a true humanistic, liberal arts education. We teachers need to hoist this banner and march under it!
LikeLike
There really is no epiphany here. It’s been evident for some time that the privatization of public institutions (not only schools, but also prisons, for example) is basically aimed at creating obedient, non-critical thinking entities (humans) who will become future service providers (just one reason there is so much opposition among legislators & billionaires to fight the minimum wage increment) for Walmart & Burger King PLUS good, little soldiers who will fight in any war waged in the future (to save big oil companies, etc.) This is reason enough alone to keep fighting, talking, writing, collaborating, protesting, etc. to end this corporate takeover. We also must include the younger generation (the 20-35 year age group) as they will be the ones to turn this around. Too many in this age group are duped into fighting for radical movements that do not include economic recovery & ending poverty. Too many in this age group are rethinking having children because they are worried, scared, concerned about the direction the world is going, especially America.
LikeLike
An epiphany is personal, and it was one for me. That corporate reform desires profits to the degree that it will happily promote such depth of dehumanization struck me in the moment I wrote about in my post.
It is the unabashed willingness to openly sell the objectification of human beings that hit me.
LikeLike
An epiphany is personal, and it was one for me. That corporate reform desires profits to the degree that it will happily promote such depth of dehumanization struck me in the moment I wrote about in my post.
It is the unabashed willingness to openly sell the objectification of human beings that hit me.
LikeLike
The book that caught my attention for this reason was Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.
She describes Shock Doctrine as using the public’s disorientation following massive collective shocks – wars, terrorist attacks, or natural disasters — to achieve control by imposing economic shock therapy.
In The Shock Doctrine, Klein shows how disaster capitalism – the rapid-fire corporate reengineering of societies reeling from shock such as wars, terrorist attacks or natural disasters. The book traces its origins of disaster capitalism back fifty years, to the University of Chicago under Milton Friedman, which produced many of the leading neo-conservative and neo-liberal thinkers whose influence is still profound in Washington today.
I would suggest that the corporatists discovered that they could create the illusion of an impending disaster where none existed and use the resulting chaos to impose economic shock therapy that has been evident with NCLB, RttT and CCSS.
Shock Doctrine used against the US public school system – great economic opportunity.
LikeLike
And it’s ironic that these oligarchs don’t want critical thinking when that’s one of the “selling points” of the Common Core. More critical thinking! College and career ready! Great taste! Less filling!
LikeLike
I’ve been thinking about the term “critical thinking” as I read “Plato at the Googleplex” by Rebecca Newberger Goldstein. It can mean what Plato’s hero Socrates did daily in the agora: question everything including the fundamental assumptions on which society operates. Or it can mean problem-solving for utilitarian ends. It’s the latter meaning that Silicon Valley and the ed reformers probably mean. But it’s the former meaning that we teachers need to fight for.
LikeLike
In addition to creating compliant beings, corporate America is determined to make money from essential human services like prisons, education and health care. What they are offering is something less than you had before! Next they are coming after Medicare and Social Security. BEWARE!
LikeLike
The rhetoric of neoliberal education “reform” fits neatly into the history of fascism. Especially the merger (or alignment) of corporations and the state. There is an education crisis! Something must be done! This is something! So we must do it!
LikeLike
LikeLike
cool vid, love Billy too
thanks
LikeLike
Historically there has never been much of a middle class. It was either the ruling nobility or oligarchs, and everyone else barely subsisting. Looks like the “natural order” of things tends to that state. Having seen an explosion in a middle class after the Great Depression we seam headed for a return to massive subsistence existence for most unless people rebel against the corporate influence/takeover of government and other public institutions (schools, prisons, highways etc). With the ever increasing concentration of wealth/income this trend will continue. The public needs to become much more engaged or perhaps with new DNA technology we could clone a new Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt?
LikeLike
This is exactly the way it was when Teddy Roosevelt became president in 1901.
In 1900, 40-percent of the American population lived in poverty with a 5-percent unemployment rate, and half of the work force in many factories were children under the age of 12 and as young as 5 working 16-hour days, six days a week for much less money than an adult would earn—and there were no benefits like health care, retirement or unemployment. If you couldn’t work for any reason, you lost your job and were easily replaced.
There was so much poverty, that many American famlies had no choice but to sell their children as young as five into servitude. Some girls and boys as young as seven were sold to prostitution to work long days servicing customers in whore houses.
That was before the progressive child-labor laws that capitalists fought viciously to stop—wealthy and powerful men known as the robber barons who thought just like Bill Gates does today.
Starting with Teddy Roosevelt, the U.S. had severalprogressive presidents: Polk, Wilson, and FDR. to start. Thanks to them, by 1950, the poverty rate was down to 30.2-percent and it continued to drop until 1979 when it was 11.6-percent. Today, the poverty rate is higher than it has been in decades thanks to the bumbling agendas of G. W. Bush and the Obama administration.
LikeLike
Excellent history lesson, Lloyd. Thank you for pouring some empowering facts into my brain.
LikeLike
It’s not all correct history, though. James K. Polk was WELL before TR, so I’m not sure what Lloyd means here.
LikeLike
I stand corrected. I should have said William Howard Taft—not Polk.
LikeLike
2+2=5 Short film from Iran in 2011. Food for thought . . .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHAuGA7gqFU&feature=youtu.be
LikeLike
I think Mercedes is correct. “Streamlining” is a good word. Cutting-out the “superfluous” is what good CEOs do, and what is more superfluous from an economic point of view than instilling a love of novels or democracy? Speaking of democracy, I’m worried by what seems like a tepid reaction by Americans to the Hong Kong protestors. I bet a lot of Americans sympathize more with the efficiency-uber-alles pro-business Chinese regime than the idealistic protestors. Get a job, Hong Kong democracy activists! Three things contribute to this lack of sympathy: 1. our daily existence in mini-dictatorships (i.e. most workplaces) makes us think dictatorship is normal and good; 2. the paralysis and corruption in Washington makes us disenchanted with democracy. 3. Anti-knowledge curricula in our schools have dispensed with clear teaching about why democracy, for all its flaws, should be cherished and what it needs to be protected. The Cult of Efficiency aims to bulldoze the Hong Kong activists and liberal arts education alike.
LikeLike
Ponderosa,
A vital fact: Authorities and duties of the Governor were defined in the Hong Kong Letters Patent and Royal Instructions in 1843. The Governor, appointed by the British monarch (on the advice of the Foreign Secretary), exercise the executive branch of Hong Kong Government throughout British sovereignty and, with the exception of a brief experiment after World War II, no serious attempt was made to introduce representative government, until the final years of British rule.
If the CCP follows that example from the British Empire for most of its tenure over Hong Kong, then what’s wrong with Beijing assigning a governor to Hong Kong just like the British Empire did?
And why did the British change that after more than a century shortly before they turned Hong Kong over to the CCP?
The only thing that has changed in Hong Kong is that the masters of Hong Kong are no longer in London. They are in Beijing.
LikeLike
I remember this. OK, so it may be hypocritical for Britain to decry Beijing’s crushing of democracy. But Beijing promised “two systems” and many HK citizens stayed there because of this promise. Wasn’t the justification for America’s doing business with communist China that it would be a first step towards inevitable democratization? And now we see the opposite happening. This alarms me and it alarms me that America seems to care more about money than freedom.
LikeLike
When has America ever cared more for democracy than money? All one has to do is look at the long list of brutal dictators the United States has supported.
Over the last century, the United States government has often provided, and continues to provide today, financial assistance, arms, and technical support to numerous authoritarian regimes across the world. A variety of reasons have been provided to justify the apparent contradictions between support for dictators and the democratic ideals expressed in the American constitution.
http://friendlydictators.blogspot.com/
When I was teaching, I told my students don’t pay attention to what people say or claim. Pay attention to what they actually do.
LikeLike
Understood, but it seems we used to give much better lip service to supporting democracy. “Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue” –we’re not even paying that tribute anymore.
LikeLike
I has to fight hard this week to preserve my elementary chorus and talent show because the asst. superintendent is pretty sure all arts teachers need to be spending their time tutoring math in schools that have not met growth (which is all they consider “achievement.”). I consider achievement in elementary school to be showing loyalty to weekly chorus rehearsals, learning the music, loving the songs and giving a concert.
Teachers have to fight to keep the definition of achievement broader than what states signed on to see it as with Race to the Top.
I hope these clouds lift. It’s exhausting to teach while reality is being redefined without the input from those whose reality is impacted.
LikeLike
Had to fight.
I won with a compromise. But I preserved the chorus.
LikeLike
I am proud of you Joanna! Music education is so crucial for our children.
LikeLike
TAGO for your fight! Sending you karma!!!
LikeLike
Sounds like “1984,” “Farenheit 451” all rolled into one. Send this to USA Today as a guest editorial so the whole nation can read it.
LikeLike
corporate ed-reform, children in…………….obedient, unquestioning drones out
“Only a fool would let his enemy teach his children.” – Malcolm X
LikeLike