Broken Promises

Education, we are told, is about opportunity. It is about young people gaining the skills needed to get ahead in the new post-industrial economy. Whether Republican or Democrat, our political leaders tell us that schools are the way into a brighter future. But what if that future is determined, in fact, by how jobs get constructed and distributed in the new global economy. And if that means that more and more good jobs are fleeing the older industrial countries, then schools in those countries are not about opportunity but instead function as gate-keepers to a shrinking pool of rewards.

from College and social class: the broken promise of America
Cross Currents, Spring, 2006 by John Raines, Charles Brian McAdams

This is from a piece Raines and McAdams wrote last year; it’s a well-researched, passionate plea for change, although in all honesty they seem a little lost about what should be done. I do like their ideas about need-based funding and access, given the ongoing attacks on affirmative action and the apparent failures of ‘percent programs’ to diversify admissions either by class or race. And I certainly agree that we need to learn to ‘see’ class and to teach it in the classroom.

On the other hand, the writers never mention the class hierarchies and privileges built into their own (university) system, including the labor exploitation that underwrites the prominence of research institutions, in everything from low-paid staff to over use of adjuncts to over-paid administrators. Ironically, (tenured) professors themselves are becoming the “gate-keepers to a shrinking pool of [educational] rewards” in their own departments.

Most academics have this ‘outward gaze’ that seems to implicitly accept that what goes on where they work is less noteworthy than what goes on in other workplaces. The result is a focus on teaching about class rather than an attempt to directly challenge the class relationships they encounter and embody. It’s one thing to write papers that document inequity; it’s quite another to organize a card drive to create a faculty union.

I think its time the professors begin to clean up their own houses. In many senses, they are the ones who made the promise so famously broken. A recent Chronicle of Higher Education survey, for example, found that “112 presidents of traditional four-year public and private institutions, and systems, had compensation packages totaling at least $500,000,” an increase “in that level of compensation” of “53 percent.” Amazingly, even as funding for universities is shrinking, compensation for administrators is rising.

I continue to be astonished at the way academics who write about class seem to act or think as if they themselves are not participants in a system (or subsystem) of merit and class privileges that can and should be dismantled. This energy for reform needs to be turned inward, as it were, towards fully democratizing the University itself. Once the professors are organized (hopefully working with university staff and graduate students) then there might be a fighting chance at challenging the larger inequities Raines and McAdams lament.

Social Explorer: Coles County, Illinois

Social Explorer is a premier U.S. demographics website. Our online tools help you visually analyze and understand the demography of the United States through the use of interactive maps and data reports. Our primary product is a web-based application that creates fast, intuitive, and visually appealing maps and reports. Our software gives anyone with an Internet connection access to census data that was previously the domain of social science experts.

from About Social Explorer

One of my favorite teaching websites is the American Fact Finder, which is the online portal for official U.S. census data. The AFF is an embarrassment of riches, but as such it is also intimidating for some students. I was happy to hear about the Social Explorer, then, which draws on Census data to create a much simpler, easier to navigate set of data.

The freely available information is limited– they sell data to various organizations to make money– but nevertheless extensive. You can zoom in on a map to see the demographic composition of your town or neighborhood. You can contrast 1950 data to 2000, too, and see how radically the population has aged (in 1950, 5-10% were 45-49; in 2000, the lower two thirds of the county included a population that was 25 to 35% aged 45-54). Or, in Coles County, Illinois, where I live, you can see the way the population clusters around two towns, Mattoon and Charleston, surrounded by relatively empty farmland.

Zoom in further and you can see how, according to 2000 census data, the small Black population is concentrated in two pockets: on the west side of the county (around and west of Mattoon: .5 to 5%), and then in Charleston, around Eastern Illinois University (5 to 10%). Interestingly, the small Asian population is concentrated on the east (around the university and east of Charleston: 5 to 10%); and the small Hispanic population (5 to 10%) is equally distributed around the county. The majority white population is somewhat thinner along the corridor that connects Mattoon and Charleston (75 to 90%) than in the surrounding countryside (95 to 100%).

This is a long standing pattern: it’s not until the 1990 census that the minority population registers at all in any significant way. Perhaps not surprisingly, Charleston has the wealthiest neighborhoods, largely clustered around the university ($40 to $45,000) and then farther east ($30 to $35,000). Mattoon has a pocket of relative wealth surrounding the country club ($30 to $35,000). Most of the county, though, particularly to the west, is relatively poor ($20 to $25,000). I imagine that these numbers have risen in the last seven years, although perhaps not as fast for every group.

I was listening to an interview with Michael Yates on the Progressive Magazine pod cast the other day, and he talked about how little most of us know about the ethnic and economic make up of our communities. We just don’t see poverty anymore; the rich are walled off; ethnic groups live in isolated enclaves. The Social Explorer is a great corrective tool.

America’s Best Colleges 2008

America’s higher education system was built on an important public policy consensus: Investing in higher education is good for everyone. Beginning with the GI Bill and reaching its peak in the 1960s and 1970s, this policy consensus resulted in strong state support for public institutions and an impressive array of two-year, four-year and graduate programs, as well as an extensive system of federal financial aid to equalize educational opportunity. Our nation attracted the best faculty and staff in the world because our institutions of higher education provided good jobs and the freedom to work without outside interference.

August 07, 2007, Chicago
AFL-CIO Executive Council statement

I have to be careful not that this site doesn’t become “annals of of the underemployed…” Still, since I work in education I wanted to note the AFL-CIO’s recent statement here because it hints at a new agenda for the union movement in which education plays a key role. I would argue that education has to play a central role in any successful progressive movement. It’s helpful to contrast these ambitions with the banality of the U.S. News “best colleges” report, issued today.

It’s also important to emphasize that the role of education in a progressive agenda necessarily has two sides: one, making higher education accessible to everyone (It should be free, of course, and we are getting there very very slowly) and two, ending the ongoing exploitation of teachers generally and university teachers in particular. It would great to have a ranking that focused on those two factors. Exploitation is not too strong of a word, either.

“Today, 48 percent of all faculty serve in part-time appointments, ” according to the American Association of University Professors, “and non-tenure-track positions of all types account for 68 percent of all faculty appointments in American higher education.” It’s a ‘class war from above‘ that has succeeded in creating a hollowed out education system. Imagine the outcry if almost half of the doctors in hospitals were hired part time without any job security or benefits. We need unions and a union movement more than ever.

Too Much: Greed at a Glance

Each and every week, Too Much explores excess and inequality, in the United States and throughout the world. We cover a wide swatch of economic and political territory, everything from executive pay and lifestyles of the rich and famous to the latest research insights on how staggering income and wealth divides are impacting our health and our happiness.

About Too Much

As an official member of the underemployed, it’s spooky to read Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, claim that “a recession is likely, because of the enormity of the housing bubble and the impact of its collapse.”

He compares our current situation to the last recession in 2001, caused by the stock market bubble burst. The current bubble in question is the housing bubble of course, which Wesibrot notes “is much more widely distributed: most Americans still have most of their assets in housing and little or nothing in stocks.”

And it’s even spookier to read Sylvia A. Allegretto of the Economic Policy Institute (caution PDF link) note that underemployment has risen from 6.9% to 8.2% since 2000. Allegretto notes too that the productivity rate is now fully divorced from incomes. Historically, if productivity rose so did income; that stopped in the mid 1970s and has accelerated dramatically since 2000 or so.

Of course, none of this really matters in the end for the people– the class– documented at Too Much. I suppose it is possible to imagine another depression in which thousands of the rich loose everything they own, but it seems unlikely. Given the destruction of the estate tax, this inequity is likely to persist in some form for generations.