Neoliberal Education Reform and the Perpetuation of Inequality (original) (raw)
Related papers
Cogent Social Sciences
In 2001 the no child left behind act was signed into law with the promise to close the achievement gap between disadvantaged children and their white and more affluent peers. Ribbons were cut, ceremonies were held, as America set off on a new path to ensure that all children would have the tools necessary to achieve the American Dream. Children who in the past only had access to low-quality schools would now be able to attend high-quality schools and acquire the skills necessary to become productive citizens and obtain jobs that would catapult them into the middle class. They would have a "choice." The choice to attend a failing school, usually deemed "public" or the choice to attend a "charter school" the new option, which would provide them with a high-quality education. Fast forward and after fourteen years of living with the law the idea of obtaining a good public education has continued to decline while the notion of attending a high-quality charter school has continued to be popular in spite of the evidence. The purpose of this paper is to address how neoliberal policies have simultaneously led to the growth of charter schools and the persistence of educational disparities and to examine what is in store for the majority of Americans in the near future if public education destroyed.
Race, inequality of opportunity, and school choice
Both neoliberals and liberals call for mitigating inequality of educational opportunity stemming from circumstances beyond an individual’s control. In this article, we challenge the wisdom of making equality of opportunity hinge on emphasizing the distinction rather than the relationship between choices and circumstances. We utilize an empirical analysis focusing on the extent to which certain circumstances beyond the control of low-income urban Black adults (e.g. poverty and community instability) limit their eventual chances for maintaining traditional two-parent households, which in turn limits their capacity to make effective choices instrumental in improving the educational prospects of their children. We conclude from this that collectively bearing the burden of attending to differences in the quality of circumstances – in which these voluntary choices are made by poor urban Black parents – is something that we owe to each other whether we are neoliberals or liberals if we share a common normative commitment to equality of opportunity.
Racial Inequality and Education Policy in the American States
Singularly tasked with providing a roadmap to equal opportunity for all Americans, public schooling occupies a unique position in the hierarchy of U.S. social policy-making. Still, 50 years after Brown ended formal segregation in American classrooms, poor and minority students continue to trail their white and affluent peers on a host of important schooling performance indicators. As state governments play an increasingly vibrant role in confronting these persistent -achievement gaps,‖ questions about political inequality and representation are brought to the forefront. Using data on race and class-based achievement gaps across the 50 states, this study examines whether state officials are responsive to the educational needs and policy opinions of their most struggling students. We find that state education policy-making is significantly divorced from the needs of minority students, but is somewhat responsive to low-income students. These findings highlight the inherent difficulty of generating support for and enacting social policy reform when those problems are filtered through racialas opposed to class-based frames of inequality.
During the period of 1981 to 2015, the total population of Black students in CPS plummeted from close to 240,000, 60% of all CPS students, to 156,000 or 39% of CPS. This paper documents how despite their decreasing numbers and percentage in the system, the vast majority of Black students remained isolated in predominantly low-income Black schools that also became the target of destabilizing corporate reforms and experimentation. This study examines the historic and contemporary dual segregation of Black teachers and Black students in Chicago Public Schools, and how mass school closures, privatization, and corporate school reform have both transformed and deepened segregation and resource-inequity across Chicago's schools.
The Agony of School Reform: Race, Class, and the Elusive Search for Social Justice
Educational Researcher, 2003
litical commitments of its change proponents. Some of these commitments provide the backdrop for the ideological interests that subvert social justice in education. Education and Democratic Theory and The Color School Reform provide a good pair for undertaking a critical study of school reform. They share common characteristics. First, both books represent an interdisciplinary approach to school reform. Fields is an emeritus professor of political science working with a philosopher of education, Feinberg. Henig et al. are political science scholars concerned with urban school reform (see also Henig, 2001; Stone et al., 2001). These collaborations suggest that research on educational change that cuts across traditional boundaries strengthens scholars’ ability to research persistent problems through intellectual partnerships. Second, both books represent empirical studies that are theoretically grounded. The first is an ethnographic analysis of a site-based reform in Ed City, with the authors engaging models of democracy from Rousseau to Sartre; the second is an ambitious study of the impact of reform on race relations in four Black-led cities—Washington, DC, Atlanta, Baltimore, and Detroit—mobilizing a framework they call “civic capacity.” Contrary to what researchers may expect, the fact that Blacks have reached positions of city leadership is not by itself sufficient to raise the educational achievement of Black students. Third, as already mentioned, both books confront the political aspects of reform, what I have called its ideological dimensions. I will review the books thematically. This review integrates them under the themes they share with respect to the centrality of power and ideology in education.
Socioeconomic Inequalities in Education in New York and Implications
2022
The Capitalisation Effects of the Maturity stage of Urbanization in NYC did provide significant Destructive Effects that did make it easier for NYC to become the ' Most Unequal City ' of US. For example, its ' Economic upgrading ' has been associated with ' Social Downgrading ' that unfortunately has put Peripheral Populations of NYC at a greater risk of significant ' Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health, Education, Jobs, Income, Wealth and Residential Goods and Services '. Regarded to the Income Inequality, Fiscal Policy Institute (2022) found that New York State has the highest level of income inequality in the US. In a 2018 study, the Economic Policy Institute found that the average income of the top 1 percent of earners in New York was over 44 times the average income of the bottom 99 percent-the most extreme disparity of any state. Major Structural and Systemic Risks have been accountable for this widen Income Inequality. In fact, the rise of the Neoliberal Capitalism in the 80s and its associated privatization, deregulation and marketisation of the public services on the one hand and the acceleration of the Financial Globalization since the 80s on the second hand have been considered as major driving factors of the current Income inequality in NYC. Furthermore, the Top 1 percent has been more resilient to Economic and Financial Crises and other Systemic Risks such as the 1999 Internet Bubble, 2007-2009 Financial crisis, Great Recession and current COVID-19 pandemic than Lower and Moderate Incomes Workforces and Other Peripheral Populations. In fact, they've had only a temporary impact on the trend of faster income growth at the top (CBO, 2019 and James Michael Walker, 2022). Moreover, according to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) (2019), the COVID-19 pandemic has produced a multiplier effect in the rise of the income of Top 1 percent. Regarded to the Wealth Inequality, Fiscal Policy Institute (2022) finds that the subset of 78 billionaire households in New York hold 673billioninwealth.ThisplacesNewYorksecondinthenationinbillionairewealth,afterCalifornia(wherebillionareshold673 billion in wealth. This places New York second in the nation in billionaire wealth, after California (where billionares hold 673billioninwealth.ThisplacesNewYorksecondinthenationinbillionairewealth,afterCalifornia(wherebillionareshold945 billion). However, like the predominance of the Core-Periphery Configuration that tends to shape, structure and supporte the spatial distribution of economic activities, wealth and income in our Market-based Economy and Capitalistic Nations, income and wealth are concentrated in Manhattan in New York. Accordingly, Economic Policy Institute found that the above ratio of income inequality is driven by the stratospheric top incomes, which were concentrated in Manhattan. For example, Sommeiller and Price (2018) found that the borough's top 1 percent earned an average of 8.98millionperyear.Furthermore,FiscalPolicyInstitute(2022)andReisman(2022)foundthatNewYorkersworthover8.98 million per year. Furthermore, Fiscal Policy Institute (2022) and Reisman (2022) found that New Yorkers worth over 8.98millionperyear.Furthermore,FiscalPolicyInstitute(2022)andReisman(2022)foundthatNewYorkersworthover30 million who collectively own $6.7 trillion in wealth are located in Manhattan. These ultra-rich New Yorkers are just 0.4 % of the state population. Moreover, these ultra-rich New Yorkers hold about one fifth of the total wealth held by all ultra-rich Americans-the highest concentration of wealth in any state (Fiscal Policy Institute, 2022). Unfortunately, beyond the Economic and Financial Crises and other Systemic Risks mentioned above, significant Income and Wealth Inequalities in NYC but also in US and at the global level are shaped, structured and supported by much more Structural Driving Factors. In the case of NYC for example, Davis et al. (2022) finds that the concentration of wealth in NYC is largely due to New York's financial industry. Furthermore, New York City is also one of the state in US that offers the most income opportunities. For example, among others, The New York's Fiscal Policy acts as ' Centripetal Force ' that attracts and retains Ultra-rich people. Moreover, significant Socioeconomic Inequalities in Education in NYC shape, structure and supporte Income and Wealth Inequalities in NYC. In fact, according to The Center for an Urban Future (CUF) (2021), 27% of Black and 20% of Hispanic New Yorkers have attained a bachelor's degree while the city's Asian and white population have attained at least a bachelor's degree at 45% and 64% respectively. Furthermore, CUF (2018) and US Census Bureau (2019) found that when broken down by neighborhood, ones located in Brooklyn and the Bronx have the lowest rates of residents with a bachelor's degree or more. Since then, the ' Educational Performance 'of Manhattan mainly for the White populations seems to be the driving factor of its ability to concentrate wealth and income because a significant share of its population has bachelor's degree particularly in Science and Engineering and other strategic fields that provide High-income. Unfortunately, despite the Educational gap, Minorities' educational system continues to be underfunded. Accordingly, Record Setting Inequality (2015) found that Schools in poor communities spend less per pupil-and often many thousands of dollars less per pupil-than schools in nearby affluent communities. As a result, they found that poor schools can’t compete for the best teaching and principal talent in a local labor market and can’t implement the high-end technology and rigorous academic and enrichment programs needed to enhance student performance. By so doing, there has been significant disparities in Graduation Rates within the poorest and wealthiest districts in New York that unfortunately also lead to significant Skills and Competencies Disparities within core and peripheral populations. In fact , Bright Beam (2020) found that in New York City, there's 39-point achievement gap between black and white students and a 49-point achievement gap between Latino and white students in math, and a 33-point achievement gap between black and white students and a 31-point achievement gap between Latino and white students in reading. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened the the underfunded of Minorities educational system. Furthermore, significant Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health, Education, Jobs, Income, Wealth and Residential Goods and Services need to be considered as Health problem as well. In fact, long before the COVID-19 pandemic, by amplifying the stressors and forcing them to adopt ' Unhealthy lifestyle ', significant Socioeconomic inequalities faced by the Peripheral Populations in New York put them at greater risk of Urban-related Diseases including Chronic Diseases, Obesity, Suicide, Mental Health and Behavioral Disorders and Drug, Tobacco, Sex, Alcohol, Gambling and Screem Addiction. Since then, the positive, strong and significant association within the Destructive Effects of the Maturity stage of Urbanization in NYC and increase of Urban-related Diseases has opened door to New Generation of Infectious Diseases such as COVID-19 Pandemic in 2020. Key Words: Capitalisation Effects of the Maturity stage of Urbanization; Economic Upgrading; Social Downgrading; Peripheral Populations; Socioeconomic Inequalities; Income Inequality; Major Structural and Systemic Risks; Neoliberal Capitalism; Financial Globalization; Lower and Moderate Incomes Workforce; Wealth Inequality; Predominance of the Core-Periphery Configuration; Market-based Economy; Capitalistic Nations; Manhattan; New York's Financial Industry; Educational Gap; Socioeconomic Inequalities in Education; Underfunding of Minorities' Educational System; COVID-19 pandemic; Urban-related Diseases.
High Stakes Education: Inequality, Globalization, and Urban School Reform
2003
1. Introduction 2. Chicago School Reform and Its Political, Economic, and Cultural Context 3. Accountability, Social Differentiation, and Racialized Social Control 4. "Like a Hammer Just Knocking Them Down" - Regulation African American Schools 5. The Policies and Politics of Cultural Assimilation 6. It's Us Verus the Board - The Enemy - Race, Class and the Power to Oppose 7. Conclusion