Paul Krugman on
Prisons, Privatization, and Patronage
* * * * *
Recently, Gov. Kasich signed a “sweeping education bill that
seeks to strengthen the ties between the state’s employers and public schools .
. .” You may have missed it because the blurb was tucked into a side item on p.
6 of The Canton Repository, our local paper.
As an educator of fifteen years, I can surely understand the
impulse for schools to embrace any opportunity that will bring needed funding
into the system, but this is not the way to go about it.
First, why weren’t all the stakeholders involved? Educators
who spend all day educating our children weren’t invited. If you were truly
serious about educational reform, why wouldn’t you invite the experts into the
discussion? Because, as most of us suspect, it’s not really about reform; it’s
about continuing the slide toward privatization. It’s about directing public
dollars to private pockets, as this Governor has sought to do repeatedly
(Liquor Control, a handful of Prisons, the Turnpike, JobsOhio, TeamNeo,
drilling in state parks, etc.)
Now, some of you may like this concept. Our students
continue to slip in world rankings and something has to be done, right? One of
the provisions in the new bill requires that teachers from lower-performing
schools must be re-tested. I’m not sure what this punitive measure will
accomplish. What it will do is dissuade talented teachers from wanting to teach
in challenging areas—why risk it? There is no correlation between this
compulsory re-testing and an improvement in the teaching that goes on. Just
like the standardized tests we use now in Ohio do nothing to educate students,
but it does direct tax dollars to testing companies that donate to campaigns
and serves as the “evidence” of those who seek to break up public
education.
Everyone wants a quick fix, but it’s often apples to oranges
when we compare schools. Some private or public schools in affluent areas ask
their teachers to teach as few as 50 students. I did my pre-student teaching in
a public school though where the English teacher taught 210 students every day.
Imagine what awaited her when she assigned a research paper.
And please don’t tell us that these teachers don’t have to
stay in education if they don’t like these requirements. What kind of solution
is that? If folks quit every time something was going on they didn’t like, we
would still be living in a feudal system. Come to think of it, proponents of
these policies seem to long for a return to such days.
The gas and oil companies are gaining traction in the
area (Stark State College and Marlington High School—which allows fracking beneath
school grounds—will be offering courses pointed toward this new industry); what
incentive would these companies have for phys ed? Art? History? What’s their
incentive to teach anything beyond what will directly benefit their business?
Will they study the robber barons of the last century? Will they read Rachel
Carson? What is their incentive to offer a content-rich, broad-based education? Generosity? As much
as I enjoy art and music and believe in their value, I don’t want them to be the only decision-makers when
it comes to public education, so this is no anti-business diatribe.
Critical literacy, a healthy and informed skepticism, an
ability for problem-solving—these are the characteristics of a good,
contemporary education; how will this be met by the new business-infused
education? It’s like going to a store and shopping in only one aisle—you have
no idea what else is in the store.
Admittedly, our current education system is inherently
inefficient—why? It’s labor-intensive and we take everybody. By law, Ohio schools
must educate all Children. Some European countries (Slovakia, e.g.) skim off
30% or so of students who are either deemed too high-needs or incorrigible.
What might our society start to look like if businesses who have little
interest in sunk-costs or spending money on things that won’t lead to profit
(that is, after all, what they do—make money) call all the shots for our public schools?
Should businesses be involved in public education? By all
means, yes. But business needs to be just one of many stakeholders. Educators,
parents, post-secondary institutions, the children themselves, and others need to be in
the room when these decisions get made. Even if it’s just for buy-in, you have
to include the people who will be impacted by these decisions. It’s Leadership
101. Yet the Governor, as he always has done, rammed his agenda through. At the
end of his term and the years beyond, we won’t recognize our state, although it
may bear a striking resemblance to Mississippi (or Louisiana, or Florida . . .
).
Opportunities are already here—students can track into
vocational training beginning their junior year. How much more do you want
business leaders dictating your children’s learning? 8th grade? How
about 3rd grade? What if that industry moves? Becomes obsolete? Is
it really a good idea to lock teenagers’ into their choices at this young age?
A broad-based education allows students to reasonably choose their life’s
direction at the post-secondary level, an age when we allow them to vote and
enter into a contract.
Letting businesses dictate what is taught in our public
schools and how it is taught is a recipe for disaster and seems destined to
steer us away from an education that has the purpose and potential for the common
good. It threatens our very democracy.
And with the voter suppression efforts, a multitude of
wide-ranging legislation to limit women’s health decisions here and elsewhere,
a desire to quash Obamacare, and concerted efforts to stifle unions—is it any
wonder our Governor is adding another sad chapter to the contemporary
Republican playbook? Let’s call it “How to Destroy the Middle Class and They
Won’t Even Whimper.” 
