Monday, August 25, 2014

Review: Basu, Ranu. (2004). The Rationalization of neoliberalism in Ontario's public education system, 1995-2000.

Basu, Ranu. (2004). The Rationalization of neoliberalism in Ontario's public education system, 1995-2000. Geoforum, 35, 621-634.

Well I had to scrape myself off the ceiling a few times while reading this article. It made me furious to read the strategies enacted in order to rationalize, and thus introduce inequities into, the high school system in Ontario. It further infuriated me as I recognized these same strategies occurring within the university educational system and currently, at our local university.

Basu (623) discusses the "unique local specificities of public schools in Ontario that are not usually considered during the design and implementation of 'universalistic' neoliberal policies (623)," an idea which may provide some insight into the differentiation process currently being applied to universities across Ontario. The neoliberal establishment is perhaps trying to avoid some of the resistance that occurred within the secondary school system?

1. Schools are "publicly funded community resources" and at the secondary school level are present in many neighbourhoods in the city and vary based on socio-demographic composition, history and culture of their neighbourhood (623). At the university level there may be many or only one university present within cities but they do vary based on the same points Basu noted (though I lack citations as proof, those within the system are very well aware of the reputations attached to the various universities that may be considered outcomes of the points noted). 

2. "[T]hough the primary purpose of these public institutions is educational, schools can also be thought to be centres for civic renewal since they provide a space for neighbourhood integration (623)." Do universities? They are civic renewal if they graduate critical citizens prepared to engage in society; there is a growth industry, economically, in that neighbourhoods are created around universities to supply goods and services not necessarily available within the university itself. A space for neighbourhood integration? Perhaps regional integration for those universities that pull a majority of their student body from a specific region or regions.

3. "[S]chools are essentially political in nature and can often be the battleground for larger social change (623)" which is a statement many will recognize as common to the university.

4. The last point is that "schools are intrinsically spatial in nature (623)" and the presence or absence of schools have "direct effects on the welfare and status of the neighbourhood (623)" ... Or city.

Because or for all these reasons a standardized approach to education will not work. I believe this applies at the university level also, and, as mentioned above, may reflect the neoliberal focus on differentiation. Unfortunately I need to do more reading in order to better compare and contrast the approaches.

The author presents three periods of neoliberalization: "a period of aggressive implementation whereby using a variety of techniques and strategies neoliberal reforms were introduced in areas of governance, finance and curriculum...[then] a period of dissent and chaos to finally a period of quiet anticipation...(623)."

Basu notes the players, mostly state actors, the rhetoric of fiscal efficiency, economic rationalization and accountability to the public, the move to centralized control, the introduction of supposed independent agencies as regulatory bodies intended to monitor, shape and control institutional behaviour, unions as impediments to restructuring and prosperity. Strategies: the creation of NGOs "where 'objective' advice was in reality geared towards legitimizing neoliberal economic rationalization (632)," "implementing policies through a 'stealth approach' (632)," noted as occurring in university senate including facile consultations and by-laws to quantify faculty activities as "accountability", and rhetoric to create doubt and reduce confidence in the existing system, to demonize unions and university processes "unions are a problem", "teachers don't spend enough time in the classroom", and we need to "put children [students] first (632)."

Importantly, the author notes that informal action works better than formal (union) collective action and that "[l]ocal residents do not usually organize in response to macro-societal changes and general conflicts, but typically around specific issues perceived as critical at the local level (632, citing three other studies)."

The author does not promulgate or emphasize a moral high ground, nor is it an argument for democracy against neoliberalism unless you consider the dishonesty inherent in the stealth approaches taken by the neoliberal establishment. Her focus is on the mechanisms used by the neoliberals to implement their agenda in the Ontario public education system. Exposing the strategies improves our awareness of what may happen or be happening in other educational systems. Turk's book Universities at risk (2008) and Deem,  Hillyard and Reed's work on the changing management of universities in the UK (2007) all add to our understanding of neoliberalism's strategies or activities re: engagement with their various constituencies.

Friday, August 22, 2014

Review: the Demise of the library school: Personal reflections of professional education in the modern corporate university, LJ Press

Richard Cox's book (2010) The Demise of the Library School: personal reflections of professional education in the modern corporate university, LIbrary Juice Press, presents various arguments, in some instances anecdotal, based on his experience as a faculty librarian and administrator within the LIS graduate school system, and on his extensive reading about higher education. 

The authors speaks from a position of higher education as a public good, within the context of democracy with democratic goals and purposes underpinning and permeating the very existence of the Western university system. Cox (2010: 11) states the concerns of professional schools (including LIS schools) "naturally embrace concerns of public policy and a societal good." 

Ironically, the author consciously notes in his introduction (and the title of his book) that his book is a personal picture and not a research paper while later in the book (120) speaks of views that "are missing the social, political, economic, and other contexts," pointing out the greatest weakness in his tome. He speaks of the changes and offers numerous quotes and opinions to support his various positions on issues, but does not speak to the very contexts that drove and continue to drive those issues. 

This approach isolates Cox's arguments from the very changes he notes, reducing our reading to merely a spectator sport or perhaps more appropriate to his archival profession, just a record of what happened from his point of view. In doing so he cheats readers of a broader understanding of threats to the system and thus potential ability to respond to such changes at a critical level. Though it must be noted he does provide a multitude of citations for the various arguments and texts for those willing to pursue the various knowledge presented.

His reflections, while he never mentions neoliberalism, do confirm that strands of neoliberalism found within higher education appear within professional schools within academe. Some of the strands noted are: pursuit of knowledge/educating vs credentialism/vocational training; community engagement vs service; preservation of memory vs Baez's bibliocaust or annihilation of memory (66); public good vs business; measures that support or reflect core functions vs accountability; the university as a social institution vs a business/industry; critical thinking vs branding/marketing/ranking; debate vs censure; democracy vs other; qualitative vs quantitative; long term investments and results vs short term; reading, writing and reflection vs increased teaching loads, increased assessments, increased time spent developing and responding to measures of accountability; insight and inspiration and knowledge vs "information and skills necessary to find employment (96);" faculty as source of knowledge vs faculty as delivery mechanisms; citizens vs careerists; diversity in creativity vs standardization/bureaucratization; students vs customers; transformation vs adjustment; faculty governance vs management by administration; contributing to a body of knowledge vs delivering scripts developed externally. Cox also notes (227) the existence of "scrutiny, supervision, regimentation, discipline,...censorship" under the corporate university model.

So where do we go from here? How does one come to terms with the competing visions of democracy and neoliberalism with the continuing change to the corporate university model? Is there a way forward that retains the best of both and jettisons the worst of both?

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Books, information and their Exchange value and use value under neoliberalism

Books, regardless of format, have both an exchange value (exchange it for what? $? very neoliberal, need for profit) and a use value. Books also have an intrinsic value as they encompass expressed knowledge/understanding. Information has both an exchange value and a use value. 


Books and information differ in that the use value of books is subsumed, an integral part of the knowledge expressed in the book, and also an external value attached by the user. Information only has a use value that is attached by the user at point of use. It has no intrinsic value. 


True? False?

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Review: Barbarians at the gates of the public library

D'Angelo's book (2006) Barbarians at the gates of the public library: how postmodern consumer capitalism threatens democracy, civil education and the public good, elegantly describes and documents the degradation of "deliberative democracy" (92) under the assault of "deregulated monopoly capitalism" (93), a "postmodern information economy" (84) and "market populism" (63). It takes an historical and philosophical perspective documenting structural and conceptual changes from a deliberative democracy to an other. By taking this position the author has weighed the benefits of capitalism against the other and found the other wanting. The other, in my opinion, is neoliberalism.

His compare and contrast highlights the best of deliberative democracy against the worst of neoliberalism, which begs the question, is there nothing in neoliberalism worth keeping and nothing in deliberative democracy worth throwing away? The strength and the weakness of this book is that it is an argument for democracy. It does not weigh both systems with their concomitant strengths and weaknesses, allowing one to better understand the nuances of both. As a result it does not offer us a way forward but by the very structure of its argument, tells us we should return to deliberative democracy. In doing so he takes a moral stance. 

D'Angelo does not conflate public libraries with democracy but does perceive the existence of public libraries as a physical and intellectual public or common good (in the process of or almost thoroughly gutted by market populism) and necessary, under the original intentions of the deliberative democracy, for the common good, and for deliberative democracy to flourish.

It's relevance to higher education libraries? The strategies being used to gut public libraries of their common good that are noted in this book, parallel strategies I have read about in higher education. Deem, Hillyard and Reed's book (2007) on the changing management of UK universities, and Turk's book (2008) detailing threats to academic integrity, for example, note strategies that parallel those found within public libraries. They also parallel strategies experienced by this author within at least one academic library setting.

Further, the documentation of the rise of market populism, etc. is a societal/cultural change that does not impact the United States alone but is impacting many different nationalities. The philosophies, etc. on which deliberative democracy was founded are commonly found in university education in both the US and Canada. A compare and contrast would show many points of similarity between the two cultures.

An excellent book for its elegant argument.