A Reflection on a Current Educational Issue in Sydney Relating to Culture and Identity: Market-Based View of Education

“Economic wealth is a basis of power in our society and that wealth can distort and use culture and education for its own benefits” (Gramsci, 1994; cited in Wadham et. al, 2007) A market-based view of Education currently dominates todays society’s teaching and learning curriculums. This market-based approach is a shift in ideologies centred upon providing students with the mandatory skills and abilities to prepare them to establish and maintain a successful career in the workforce all in order to ultimately drive economic growth. (Leaney, 2013)

A report in the Sydney Morning Herald titled “More Education Equal More Pay” (Browne, 2012) discusses and states that the lack of continuing school through to year 12 will automatically place you at a disadvantage when attempting to launch a prosperous career. They then continue providing statistics, comparing the income of those whom continue through to tertiary education. "Education does pay off," she said. "There is a return on education and you can see it in a dollar figure." (Browne, 2012) This statement epitomizes societies marketable perception in regards to education emphasizing the fact that its ultimate purpose is to acquire a well-paying job. 

www.tumblr.net

According to Gramsci (1994), intellects govern the dominant class within society and have founded ideologies, such as this marketization of education, yet mask their exploitations, making them seem ‘ordinary’, fair and rational. The way in which this masking is achieved is through hegemony. Hegemony is this non-coercive method of ruling where the ruler has been granted the consent to reign. This hegemonic ideology is reflected throughout the media and mainly the educational systems implicated within society today where wealth and the global economy hold the reigns of power. Consequently, this wealth and strive for power could warp ones culture, identity and the true purpose of education in its favor.

The newspaper article’s title “New studies reject market-based education” (Maslen, 2013) speaks for itself. It discusses the negative opinion it has towards a market-based view of education, accentuating the faults of implementing this marketization of Education, exposing the masked exploitations of the governing intellects and emphasizing what needs to me changed, embedded and focused on within education. The article states:

“Those policies being by promoted by state and federal governments have cost millions of dollars with little gain in student or teacher learning. Too many of Australia's education policies are devoted to matters that ultimately have little impact on student learning. Market-based notions of choice, competition, accountability and standardisation have been tried unsuccessfully.” (Maslen, 2013)

Their key focus was to “employ a different mix of policies and (have) ‘quality teaching’" (Maslen, 2013) as the platform for success.

I believe that this market-based view of education is both positive and negative. It is positive as I believe it does develop the intellectual skills and mindset in order to get a career and earn money to live securely, which subconsciously drives economic growth – and that I find is necessary. However, I believe it is also negative as with a market-based view of education, it is just that, a market-based view of education.  There is no room for any psychological and behavioral development or emphasis upon the social skills needed when faced with reality after school, there is only this focus on pure academics and wealth. I believe there should be a balance between the two.

References:

Browne, R. October 24 2012, More education equals more pay: report,

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/more-education-equals-more-pay-report-20121024-284eg.html#ixzz2fbxlbDjC

Gramsci, A. (1994) Letters from Prison, Columbia University Press, New York.

Leaney, G. (2013) Social Perspectives in Education: Why Educate? The Aims of Education, Lecture Note.

Maslen, G. August 9, 2013, New studies reject market-based education,

http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/new-studies-reject-marketbased-education-20130809-2rlvb.html

Wadham, B. Pudsey, J. & Boyd, R. (2007). Culture and education. Sydney: Pearson Education. Chapter 1: What is culture?

Neoliberalism and the Preservation of the Dominant Hegemony

An article in the Sydney Morning Herald by Jacqueline Maley on August 30, 2013 describes an account of Ms. Bronwyn Bishop, MP, declaring she didn’t wish for her electorate, that of the high socioeconomic demography of the Northern Beaches of Sydney, to have similar educational standards as that of Tasmania. The ambition for this post is not to denounce her point of view, rather understand it, using Apple’s (1996) Cultural Politics and Education.

The Liberal party has often declared a war on the Labor Party and its inefficiency at almost all levels of governing the country – however, each party has not cultivated much educational rhetoric in the face of the election. Nevertheless, what underpins this declaration by Ms. Bishop is her neoliberal perspective towards the privatisation of school, or rather by the neoliberal perspective, the autonomy of educational institutions.

When a member of the audience asked whether she [Ms. Bishop] wanted her electorate schools to equal Tasmania’s regarding educational results, Ms. Bishop replied, “no, thank you.” But, the question must be asked: what is wrong with Tasmania’s educational system? Or perhaps the better question is; what is Ms. Bishop attempting to contain within the educational standards of her electorate?

I move to Apple for a response. Apple declares that the white hegemony that dictates schools are essentially exploitative – neoliberal capitalism must have winners and losers. Then, evidently, Ms. Bishop wishes to contain the winning ways of the Northern Beaches exclusively.

The repercussion of this is Ms. Bishop’s neoliberal perspective towards the “distribution of wealth. That inequality is a good thing and more inequality is an even better thing” (Apple, 1996, p. 9). Ms. Bishop implicitly states her commitment towards the preservation, maintenance and continuation of the dominant hegemony within the Australian educational spectrum. The New Right is evident within Ms. Bishop, and her protection of the distribution of not only wealth, but also the educational standards and expectations of students within her electorate. The agenda Ms. Bishop argues is interesting, not due to her market –driven goals as such, but rather her wish to maintain the class, race, gender and demographic superiority of her Northern Beaches electorate – the maintenance of the dominant and dominated distinction.

This leads me to the neoliberal vision of character and, as Apple argues, the expectation of ambition, for the drive to leave behind the circumstances of the localized status quo. Ms. Bishop shows that her clear preference is neither the Australian people as a whole, nor the social mobility of those less fortunate, but the maintenance of the current and debilitating unrighteous equity and equality in Australian schools – Ms. Bishop guards the Old Way, and not for the common good. “Class dynamics are clear” (Apple, 1996, p. 12) – why change them?

References:

  

Maley, J. (2013, August 30) Bronwyn Bishop says Gonski reforms will ‘dumb down schools. Retrieved from: http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/bronwyn-bishop-says-gonski-reforms-will-dumb-down-schools-20130830-2sw1z.html

Apple, M. W. (1996). Cultural Politics and Education. New York: Teachers College. Chapter 1.