Why do we refuse to learn from successful nations? The top ten high-performing nations do not test every child every year.
Why aren’t we willing to learn from educational disasters in other nations? Take Chile, for example.
In this post, two scholars–Alfredo Gaete and Stephanie Jones–explain what happened in Chile when national leaders imposed the free-market ideas of two libertarian economists, Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.
Inspired by the ideas of such neoliberal economists as Hayek and Friedman, the “Chilean experiment” was meant to prove that education can achieve its highest quality when its administration is handed over mainly to the private sector and, therefore, to the forces of the market.
How did they do this?
Basically by creating charter schools with a voucher system and a number of mechanisms for ensuring both the competition among them and the profitability of their business. In this scenario, the state has a subsidiary but still important role, namely, to introduce national standards and assess schools by virtue of them (in such a way that national rankings can be produced).
This accountability job, along with the provision of funding, is almost everything that was left to the Chilean state regarding education, in the hope that competition, marketing, and the like would lead the country to develop the best possible educational system.
So what happened? Here are some facts after about three decades of the “Chilean experiment” that, chillingly, has also been called the “Chilean Miracle” like the more recent U.S. “New Orleans Miracle.”
First, there is no clear evidence that students have significantly improved their performance on standardized tests, the preferred measurement used to assess schools within this scenario of the free market.
Second, there is now consensus among researchers that both the educational and the socioeconomic gaps have been increased. Chile is now a far more unequal society than it was before the privatization of education – and there is a clear correlation between family income and student achievement according to standardized testing and similar measures.
Third, studies have shown that schools serving the more underprivileged students have greater difficulties not only for responding competitively but also for innovating and improving school attractiveness in a way to acquire students and therefore funding.
Fourth, many schools are now investing more in marketing strategies than in actually improving their services.
Fifth, the accountability culture required by the market has yielded a teach-to-the-test schema that is progressively neglecting the variety and richness of more integral educational practices.
Sixth, some researchers believe that all this has negatively affected teachers’ professional autonomy, which in turn has triggered feelings of demoralization, anxiety, and in the end poor teaching practices inside schools and an unattractive profession from the outside.
Seventh, a general sense of frustration and dissatisfaction has arisen not only among school communities but actually in the great majority of the population. Indeed, the ‘Penguins Revolution’ – a secondary students’ revolt driven by complaints about the quality and equity of Chilean education – led to the most massive social protest movement in the country during the last 20 years….
The ‘Chilean Miracle’ – like the ‘New Orleans Miracle’ – it seems, is not a miracle of student growth, achievement, equity, and high quality education for all. Rather, it is a miracle that a once protected public good was finally exploited as a competitive private market where profit-seeking corporations could receive a greater and greater share of public tax dollars.
It is also a miracle that such profit-seeking private companies and corporations, including publishing giants that produce educational materials and tests, have managed to keep the target of accountability on teachers and schools and not on their own backs.
Their treasure trove of funding – state and federal tax monies – continues to flow even as their materials, technological innovations, products, services, and tests fail to provide positive results.
Why are we allowing philanthropists, entrepreneurs, and the U.S. Department of Education to force us to follow the same path as Chile? Are we powerless? No. Show your displeasure by opting out, speaking out, contacting your elected representatives. Organize demonstrations and protests. Make them notice you. Stop them.

A perfect model for Jeb Bush!
LikeLike
All this privatization glop was introduced once the blood stained tyrant, Pinochet, took power. This love affair with Pinochet gives the lie to libertarianism, it shows what libertarianism is really about. It’s certainly not about limited government; there was nothing limited about the cruelty, torture and authoritarianism inflicted on the Chilean people by Pinochet. Pinochet also privatized the Chilean version of social security and it has also been a disaster for the great mass of the Chileans, the 99%. The Chilean army retained the traditional pension system, it was not privatized.
LikeLike
This irresponsible idea was also tried in Honduras. Now it is so unsafe you have to have private security to do anything. Even basic services don’t work! Here’s a link to the story of a visit to the privatized town. http://www.salon.com/2015/03/02/my_libertarian_vacation_nightmare_how_ayn_rand_ron_paul_their_groupies_were_all_debunked/
LikeLike
The true end of Thatcher’s “there is no society”.
LikeLike
Jeb Bush’s privatization lobby shop now offers online classes for lawmakers, so they can sell the Bush/Obama reforms to their constituents.
The “teachers” are the usual closed-loop ed reform “movement” heavies (no dissenting views allowed!) but I thought it was remarkable that John King is among them.
Is this okay with people? That an employee of the US Department of Education is featured on behalf of Jeb Bush’s (former) lobbying org?
Is there anyone in DC who acts as an advocate for public schools? Can we maybe pool our funds and hire one? This is ridiculous. We have 100% of the lawmakers and staff we’re all paying promoting the 5% of US schools that are charter schools.
I know the Bush Brothers and the Obama Administration prefer the charter and private school sector, but can we ask them to maybe put aside their personal “movement” preferences for that “sector” and work on behalf of the other 95% of schools? I’m pretty sure it’s part of the job description, and we are all paying them.
http://excelined.org/courses/
LikeLike
I wish I were more hopeful that we’ll retain a public school system, but this DC consensus on privatization reminds me of the DC consensus on deregulating the financial sector and lousy trade deals and undermining labor unions and a whole host of other issues where they all jumped off a cliff together.
I don’t think ordinary people can stop the big PR/ politician/media machine once it gets rolling. There was plenty of opposition to all those other bipartisan disasters, and the Best and the Brightest plowed ahead anyway.
I think part of the problem is “bipartisan”. There’s no dissent. The mistakes are huge because there’s no dissent or debate when both Parties sign on. There’s no political check and balance.
LikeLike
Chiara: you have made this point before, but it bears repeating.
Thank you.
😎
LikeLike
I also think a large part of the problem is that to much private money is underwriting public servants.
LikeLike
The most important thing we can do now may be a concentrated campaign directed at Hillary Clinton. As the presumptive Democratic candidate, she is always in the spotlight. She may be unreceptive, since her activities are funded by hedge fund people. Or she may recognize this is an issue to run on–an issue that joins progressives and conservatives. Either way a campaign directed at her would certainly get valuable media coverage.
We can blast Hillary at one very public e-mail address, for instance info@clintonglobalinitiative.org As Andrew Cuomo’s dad once put it, “Whaddaya say?!?”
LikeLike
I’m sort of curious how Bush/Clinton handle Ohio. This state has had this whole menu of ed reforms for 17 years. They can’t just parachute in here with the charter/testing mantra. We’re liv’in the ed reform dream in Ohio. There is (finally) genuine skepticism.
The vow of more and more and more charters won’t be met with universal acclaim, and the cowardly, technocratic dodge of “we’re agnostics!” probably won’t fly either.
It isn’t 2000, or 2004, or even 2008. This agenda isn’t rubber-stamped anymore.
LikeLike
Hillary is in bed with Wall Street. The only reason she would be remotely likely to listen to public education advocates would be if it became clear to her that a significant enough block would vote third party if she didn’t listen. Are you willing to make that threat (and mean it)?
LikeLike
I plan on making it clear to all the candidates sending me begging notes, including the parties, that I will not support them regardless of how awful their opponent is. In fact, the local Dem chairman sent a letter out here, I sent them a flyer from the Green party and said before I gave them a dime they would have to make me a better offer than the Greens. I will not vote for the lesser of two evils, I am tired of voting for evil. I will cheer for gridlock, and will vote for some people I don’t support on many issues if they will be the logjam needed on other issues.
LikeLike
Great, meaning sad, example of what Naomi Klein warned us about in Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.
“The Shock Doctrine follows the application of these ideas through our contemporary history, showing in riveting detail how well-known events of the recent past have been deliberate, active theatres for the shock doctrine, among them: Pinochet’s coup in Chile in 1973, the Falklands War in 1982, the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989, the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Asian Financial crisis in 1997 and Hurricane Mitch in 1998. ”
Shock Doctrine indeed: Shock and Awe(ful)! And if the crisis does not exist, as in education, create one! The same principles apply.
LikeLike
Chile may seem physically and politically remote from us, but is closer than we might like to think:
1: It was not only the schools in Chile that were privatized at the point of a gun; the retirement system was also privatized, something that is still the primary objective of neoliberals everywhere. The hostile takeover and privatization of the schools (along with the destruction of the Postal Service as we know it) here is intended as the penultimate victory of neoliberalism; the real gem is Social Security. Just as the pubic schools have been attacked and scapegoated for thirty years, Social Security is likewise the target of a well-funded effort to discredit it and falsely make people believe it is “bankrupt.”
2. The AFT was directly involved in instigating the fascist coup in Chile (“The First 9/11”), at the the behest of Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger and the CIA, via Albert Shankar’s overseeing of the Association for Free Labor Development (AFLD), a CIA front group funded through the AFL-CIO, which paid Chilean teamsters to engage in a transport strike that crippled the Chilean economy and undermined Allende’s government.
The AFT’s involvement with the neoliberal project, symbolized today by Randi Weingarten’s enabling the so-called reformers and neutralizing the union as an effective defender of teachers and the public schools, is not a recent development.
LikeLike
Sorry for an error, but that should be AIFLD, The American Institute for Free Labor Development.
LikeLike
Few know the historical facts that you bring up Michael. Thanks and excellent connecting of current Vichy AFT in destroying the profession.
LikeLike
I live and work in Colombia. The same was tried here. Perhaps Colombia drank the “Chilean miracle” koolaid, or perhaps it’s simply that Colombians tend to think anything that comes from abroad (particularly if its roots are in the US) must be golden. The private system insisted it could and would provide better education than the public schools, so the government provided funding for what we would call charters, but here are really just private schools. Among the results: lots of fraud, lots of tiny primary schools opening and closing in garages, often leaving kids with no chance to get into other schools until the next term…if they were lucky, since private schools don’t have to let them in, and there aren’t enough seats in the public schools any more. Inequality is very high, even though the government includes some aspects of social democracy, like nearly universal health care and a progressive tax policy. (The pension system was privatized too, and that’s been a disaster for most people, but I digress.) I can’t speak to whether inequality is actually greater than before the education reforms, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case. Certainly the public schools lost funds, as anyone who had enough money to pay tuition (yes, not only did these schools get government funds, but they were allowed to charge tuition), enrolled and still enroll their kids in “private” schools on the assumption that public schools are the worst possible option, even though public school kids regularly win scholarships to attend public universities of excellent quality. Since I moved here in 2006, scores on international tests like the PISA, have dropped. The sorely underfunded public schools have continued to produce most of the top scorers on the ICFES, a national exam required for university entrance, similar to the SAT of ACT. That wasn’t enough to open the government’s eyes. It was the drop in scores on international tests that finally did it. As a result (YAY!), recently, the government stopped funding the private/charter schools. I don’t know if this means the public system will get more funding – I hope it does, because they need a big infusion. Since I’ve been here, there aren’t enough public schools to provide an education for all the children whose families can’t afford a private one. Now, finally, the push is on to build enough to solve that problem. It’s not like our education policy leaders would have to go far to see what NOT to do: Colombia’s a mere four hour flight from Miami. There are none so blind as those who will not look, much less see.
LikeLike
Case studies have their place. And Chile is certainly one when it comes to neo-liberal ideas. At the same time, I do not know if Stephanie Jones actually lived in Chile, but I am not sure she reads the nation correctly. After the military dictatorship the center left government that was in power with the exception of one brief interlude of 4 years ever since, pushed for increased coverage in a nation that stretches some 2670 miles. You can imagine that was not an easy task. Thus, privates were invited. I know several teachers who themselves turned their humble houses into schools. With years of hard work they managed to build up schools with a student body size of about 4oo to 800 children. And they have just enough to get by. I know these people by name, first hand. I have been living here for the last 15 years. These are hardworking teachers that love their schools and have dedicated their lives to their ideals. Yes, there are elite schools, fully private, but I do not think they are the result of neo-liberal ideas. And yes, there are individuals who are doing this for the money. Rather, Chile’s education crisis is symptomatic for a serious social fault line that predates neo-liberal policy. Gaete/Jones point would be akin to suggesting such anachronisms as blaming Reagan for racial problems. I do not know where Gaete and Jones got their facts from, but I don’t think that anybody here in Santiago argues that privatizing education is responsible for increased inequality. To me, there seems to be confusion over cause and effect when one blames education models for poverty. Fourthly, I don’t know many schools that have spare budget for marketing strategies. What would that be? Seriously, I have not seen any High School producing marketing material. About standardized testing, there is such a testing scheme in Chile and it is hotly debated. But it is not comparable to the US scenario. Yes there is negative backwash. Students get prepared for test taking, which is abysmal. At the same time rather than reducing the test subjects, authorities have included PE and there is some talk to include English. Point six addresses teachers, when I moved here, having been in education in Europe, I was told that I should not hope to be anywhere near the social echelon I enjoyed at home. Teachers have very little prestige in Chile. They are poorly paid. In turn, teaching is very poor. Again, I know this first hand. How can we change that? Yes, student protests have partially provoked the current government to return to state owned education, which at least is the agenda. The battle cry right now is that education is a right, and thus should be free. In principle this sounds attractive. But how this is implemented, i.e. financed, is another question. Also, I read Death and Life of the Great…, and what people often do not get here is what Diane writes on page 162/3, that “parents are primarily responsible for their children’s behavior and attitudes” and that it takes effort to learn. Sometimes, it seems, people confuse getting an education with running water. It takes more than simply turning on the faucet. The US falls back on myths of the frontier, the rugged individual, and pro-activity, and bootstrapping, ideas that are not part of Chile’s experience. Here one finds the idea of the patron. Be it the patron saint or the landowner, the simple mind appeals to deus ex machine to overcome ones problems. There is more to the Chilean case than suggested in the article. Much more. Maybe the original Gaete/Jones’ paper, if available, provides a finer grained analysis.
LikeLike