White Elephants

If you spend a little time reading around on the education media, you get a strong sense of impending doom. The private, for-profit universities are facing powerful new regulations that may well shut them down or curtail operations; at least one, Kaplan, is already announcing lay offs. The private, not for profits, long almost completely unregulated, face increasing calls for regulations and accountability. Everything’s up for grabs; the room’s full of white elephants.

The public universities have been in an almost constant state of financial crisis for many years, and even the money-printing athletic conferences are, in fact, often operating in the red. The long festering problems centered around the destruction of tenure and the over reliance on part time faculty are beginning to be reflected in increasingly clear ways in the research into college teaching. Educators love to use the rhetoric of crisis, but it may be justified now.

The Clot at the Top

Doug Henwood, the economist behind the Left Business Observer, has long claimed that one of the most intractable problems in U.S. culture and economics is our loss of an upper class with some sort of long term point of view beyond next quarter profits. Capitalism, Henwood suggests, has forgotten that domestic economic inequity is self-destructive.

Any reasonable oligarch would be unconcerned by the end of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy; they don’t threaten long term profits. Any reasonable oligarch would want to shrink the gap between rich and poor, and wages to rise; if workers are poor economic growth is impossible. Any reasonable oligarch would favor the huge money saved through a single payer health care plan.

I am not sure the rich were ever really helpful but they did allow most of the New Deal to get through and Medicaire and so on. Reading this piece from a California professor, I feel the same way about university administrators. As a class they once saw their interests and the interests of the professors and students as aligned in some fundamental sense.

Now, as the writer points out, they’ve swallowed so much of the business and market Kool Aid, it seems almost impossible to imagine how they might change, short of being forced by a well organized faculty. That would provide the necessary counter-weight, but I am not sure that it would solve the more fundamental cultural problems. What is good administration?

Meet the New Boss / Same as the Old Boss

I won’t mince words. I think that the Tea Party is, in essence, David Duke’s KKK reborn. It’s anti-intellectual, sexist, xenophobic, and racist. It’s the ugliest side of U.S. culture and politics, and it could only have arisen to such prominence because of profound American paranoia about the decline of white patriarchal culture. All that said, it’s hard to figure out if they are going to have any impact on education. There’s an interesting pair of articles in the Washington Post (here and here) that illustrates the dilemma nicely.

I think that the future of education is very much up in the air, not least because the Obama administration has long embraced a very conservative agenda rooted in a reactionary Cerberusian program: a desire to break the teachers’ unions, to force pedagogy into the narrow box of the standardized test, and to privatize huge swaths of the public education system. If this were simply a matter of the Republicans gaining power, then the old No Child Left coalition would simply keep thing going in the same direction they’ve been going.

The Tea Party, though, is a wild card. To start, at least in theory they are against any federal intervention in the public school system. Will they vote for an expensive program like “Race to the Top“? They are also in favor of cuts in government programs in general, which is likely going to lead to mass lay offs, particularly in education. They want tax cuts, even for the very wealthy, which could lead to calls for more program cuts and more lay offs. It’s a recipe for disaster for conservatives. Republicans have got some thinking to do.

The Key Word is Stick

Every year, it seems, we move just a tiny little bit closer to imposing the terrible ideas to colleges and universities that have been so disastrous in our public schools. We’ve spent three decades or so pretending that standarized tests, in particular, are the best way to improve education. The focus on so-called assessment allows us to ignore the radical class inequities that continue to undermine public education. It’s much easier to test than to redistribute money.

We don’t stop at testing. In K-12 we demoralize teachers and break unions by privatizing schools via charters and voucher programs. Similarly, in universities teachers have been demoralized mostly by the almost complete destruction of the profession in favor of using casual labor and adjuncts. We seem no more willing to address the root problems of higher education than we are wiling to address the inequities which continue to undermine the entire project of public education.

That’s why it’s so depressing to hear more about the Obama administration‘s use of the idea of accountability and assessment to try to shape the development of higher education. Assessment is one of those ideas or words that sound so reasonable, even scientific, but it’s largely a myth when it comes to education. (See this piece for a great example of the myth of assessment and accountability.) Or, rather, the myth is the idea that an education can be “measured” in an objective fashion like, say, average summer temperature.

In Asimov’s Foundation series of novels, a kind of hybrid of sociobiology and mathematics can essentially predict the future. That was the great dream of mid-20th century science. It’s failed again and again. Perhaps most famously, the science of intelligence (if that’s the word) developed first an ‘intelligence quotient’ or IQ test (deeply rooted in racist assumptions) and then a standardized test that was designed to predict the future performance of students at college.

More than seventy years of research has shown that the standardized test simply cannot do what it was designed to do. What’s worse, the often well-intentioned desire to “prove” that a person is educated, or intelligent, has time and time again become both a distraction from real problems as well as a stick used to beat up on teachers. Imagine if the Obama administration tied federal higher education grants to administrative efficiency or to full to part time employment ratios…