Nearsighted Reform

If you listen in on academic discussions– online, in electronic lists, and conferences– you quickly see the ways that proprietary education has become a kind of stand in for the ongoing problems in U.S.higher education. The destruction of tenure, rising tuition, student debt, less access for working class and poor to educational capital. These are all problems endemic to our system but too often it sounds as if proprietary education invented all of them.

The dangers of this shortsightedness is reflected in the ongoing response to new regulations designed to “rein in” proprietary education. As it turns out– no one should be surprised by this– it’s not just the for-profits that have been given a free regulatory ride (“As Costs of New Rule Are Felt, Colleges Rethink Online Course Offerings in Other States“). The public schools have flaunted regulations too and the shift to the new regulations is going to be expensive for everyone.

We don’t need rules to “rein in” proprietary education and we certainly don’t need a nightmare regulatory scenario– parallel to the history of the credit card industry–in which states “compete” to be the higher education friendly state” and so  on. We need  a federal system that addresses problems shared by public and for-profits alike: the availability of affordable, online education for working class people and the poor, the over reliance on loans, the loss of full-time positions and tenure.

Standardized Corruption

Here’s the right-wing plan for our schools: First,  cut off as much money as possible so that schools have to fight for every penny of funding. Second, destroy the teachers unions to destroy tenure and seniority.  Teachers will then have to fight to keep their jobs from the first day they are hired until their last day of work. Third, judge the resulting competition almost solely on a single measure: the standardized test.  Fourth,  wherever possible, dismantle public schools when you can and sell them off to private interests.

Last, exaggerate  and publicize the failures of the public schools while obscuring the failures and exaggerating the successes of the charter schools. This is not a conspiracy. This is simply the practical results of a “market-based” approach to public education rooted in a system of so-called “accountability.”  It’s hyper-competition. Markets are a-moral; ethics matter only if ethics can be used to increase profits. Markets are also never free; they are shaped by the participants in that market to maximize profitability. Right and wrong is secondary.

If the participants in a market are allowed to fully maximize their potentials for profit, that is, to fully deregulate the market, corruption is inevitable. The financial markets were radically deregulated– on the behest of Wall Street– and it led to the rescission and to ongoing fiscal crises all over the world. That’s what is happening more and more in the increasingly “market driven” public education system (see here and here).  If the corruption of financial capital caused catastrophic problems, imagine the results of this corruption of human capital.

Whitewashed History

I have to agree with the letter writer who complained that the Chronicle of Higher Education ought to cover recent events in Arizona more thoroughly (“Controversial Arizona Law Deserves Scholars’ Attention“). A new law, HB 2281, represents the cutting edge in the long-expressed desire of the right-wing to eliminate ethic studies, as a part of their larger drive to end diversity programs in education. It’s another example of the irrationality of white supremacy, its profound fear that if it does not fully assimilate the other, its own unique identity will disappear.

In Arizona, the formula is very simple: either the people who are ethnically Mexican– most are not recent immigrants, of course–drop their own language and culture and adopt European American (“white”) cultural traditions and the English language or European American culture– and the English language–will be lost forever, at least on the American continent. White culture, this assumes, isn’t strong enough to co-exist with other cultures. Ethnic studies are designed to remedy this profound paranoia about the danger implicit in other cultures.

It’s not automatic or necessarily easy, but multiple cultures can and do co-exist peacefully.The “white” paranoia, too, is rooted in a profound misunderstanding of American history that downplays if not ignores the dynamics of multiple cultures that has shaped U.S. history, for good and ill, from the central role of slavery in the early U.S. economy to the Indian genocide to the Civil Rights movement to La Raza. H.B. 2281 is trying to create a dangerous institutionalized amnesia, the very opposite of what it means to be educated.

Unions and the Future of Proprietary Schools

I was happy to hear that the National Labor Relations Board is proposing new rules that would make it easier to conduct union elections at private colleges (“NLRB Proposes Speeding Up Unionization Votes at Private Colleges”). I expect that there will be the usual howl of disapproval from the usual sources: those libertarian business types who believe any restrictions on their ability to conduct business is harmful. It’s an outdated, dysfunctional idea.

I’ve said before that unless the proprietary education embraces strong certification processes and reasonable regulations, we’ll never mature into a legitimate sector of the higher education market. These certifications and regulation are far from archaic; they are the institutional structures that underwrite the legitimacy of what we do. We cannot compete in the educational system until we accept the necessity of rules. You can’t play baseball without baselines and umpires.

The fight over unionization is sure to be protracted and it’s utterly unnecessary. The proprietary schools ought to take a leadership role in promoting unions and in creating a culture that emphasizes workplace democratic institutions. We won’t be able to compete for the best teachers unless we have the best working conditions. We rely on public funding and that is not going to change; public money mean public responsibility. We cannot afford to repeat the corporate past.