My students,
One is always judged by their output, and these judgments can often define a person’s success. As a child I always battled the thought, “am I good enough?” Like many children with siblings think, it seemed as though my brother was always favored. I thought, and still think, his favor is due to his accomplishments. He was a straight-A student, saved money, worked hard, and kept his room clean. To earn my parents favor, in return, I fought hard to accomplish as much as him; however I always seemed to fall short. What I learned from this experience is that what a person does or accomplishes will reflect their value.
The use of the word, “value” as previously stated, the thought of “am I good enough?” and the marketing philosophy of successes and actions reflecting worth, all lead for me to view my own classroom and the position of the school in general as a business. While I am not proud to admit to this metaphor nor do I necessarily think this is good, I am realistic and view the system for what it is. And with realizing and admitting to this metaphor, I acknowledge its position as a central form in my language of practice, and an embodied expression for my actions and practices (Connelly & Clandinin, 1988, p. 71).
In an observation from my principal this year, he noted that I run a “very business-like” atmosphere in my classroom. In some ways I found my “business-like” atmosphere to be fitting and appropriate. The truth of the matter is that the climate of consumerism is now seeping into daily instruction. Though this may make me uncomfortable, it may also be a reality, given the present climate of education. Schools and teachers are in a more vulnerable state than ever, with the ever-growing focus on test scores, the implementation of school of choice, and the increasing number of charter schools. My insecurities with “being good enough” and my awareness of my value being determined by my output (test-scores) amplify this consumerism dynamic that is becoming more apparent in schools.
First I would like to zoom out to examine the idea of consumerism in education as a whole. From the curriculum and politicians who choose the curriculum to the global competition of school systems, education is diminished to products. Much like how the success of businesses is determined by how popular their products are; curricular choices are being made to make our “products” (the students) more popular, mainly in business but also in politics.
When thinking about curriculum, specifically, the Common Core State Standards are designed to standardize the product. This has its benefits; standards help control product quality so that no school or business can produce less acceptable products. In the same way, standards can be limiting; in that they could restrain better means to producing even better products. With standards, this is where the difference between products of business and products of schools become clear. Specific standards in business help regulate product quality, however specific standards in schools are not capable of regulating quality. Students are not lifeless products, no matter how much our system may operate and function in that way, students are people. We cannot simply regulate the quality of educated people by defining specific standards. Education cannot be reduced to systems of business, yet that is our reality.
In The Aims of Education, Nel Noddings noted in regard to the development of standards in education, “the underlying aims seem to be (1) to keep the United States strong economically and (2) to give every child an opportunity to do well financially,” (p. 431). The value of our country resides with our ability to be competitive globally in business and government. To be competitive globally in business and government, we need for our people to be educated in such a way that we have superior understanding over citizens from other countries. Here again, at a global view, education is reduced to a need for business.
Now if we zoom back in to look at the school level, the idea of business is just as present. School districts are competing for funding by competing for students and families to enroll, and are therefore looking for ways to increase their value. In the business world, competition typically means cutting costs to increase revenue and company worth along with having strict demands on the system for the creation of competitive products. This is all in the effort to obtain more customers, which in return feeds more money back into the system. I can’t honestly say that there is much difference in the educational system when it comes to competition. Schools and school districts need to attract more customers (students and families) to increase funding. But when funding is currently limited or dismal, many districts are looking for ways to cut costs whether it be by hiring teachers at lower salaries, shopping around for cheaper textbooks or other curricular aids, settling for less than ideal technologies or less than ideal learning conditions yet they impose strict demands for students to achieve higher test scores. In business the products or the process to create the products can be improved with clear fixes. However in education, we again are not working with products but rather people, which lends itself to being much more ambiguous and multidimensional. Higher test scores are not achieved by simply having higher thinking standards, or better classroom technology, or even simply better teachers; rather it is a collection of those variables along with many others that may lead to higher rates of success. But even then, there is no guarantee. School districts cannot offer a lifetime guarantee with their services, education is much more complex.
Everywhere I turn when I analyze the school system and education as it is viewed today, I am always reminded of the business influence and design imposed. While this is not ideal, I cannot help but let it trickle down into my classroom practices. The large influence of money and business on education has forced me to think of my classroom practices as functions of business. The heart of any business is the customer; in the same way the heart of a school’s success is often family buy-in and support. Many teachers, including myself at times, find we are avoiding to admit certain truths about a student to a parent to avoid losing their support or loyalty. It is easier more now than ever for a parent to simply transfer their student to another school, as easy as it is for a customer to purchase a better product at another business. There is often pressure on teachers to not let this happen, and when it does happen there is often an unspoken disappointment in the teacher. I find myself wanting to avoid, at times, negative feedback about grades or behavior at a rate that it should warrant because I am afraid it reflects badly on the school or myself. We are in an era with which the “customer is always right.” And no matter how many strategies I have implemented, time I have taken, and communication I have logged in effort to correct a failing student it seems as though there is always room to blame the teacher or the system.
Beyond the influence of losing customers are the daily transactions in my classroom. I feel strongly about putting more time and effort into the development for the students learning and behavior to increase their value and worth to the system. This is where my business metaphor influences my daily practices positively. In a business the quality of a product is often determined by how well it was made, its ability to last for many years, and its usefulness. I think about my students as assets to the world, and I need to increase their worth by ensuring that they are educated and responsible. Schools, parents, universities and employers will use grades and test scores as an assessment of their value at that given time. And with any business, if the product is not valuable the business fails. Additionally, if my students are not successful with tests or produce good grades, it reflects directly on me and I become a failure also to my school system. This is why many teachers cheapen assessments by making them easy to pass, or inflate grades; but this will not cheat the standardized assessment system and at some point the value of both the students and the teacher becomes evident.
Looking forward I am afraid. The capitalistic world that we live in along with a growing global economy may only strengthen this business metaphor for schools. Elliot W. Eisner elaborates on the idea of consumerism curriculum, “education has evolved from a form of human development serving personal and civic needs into a product our nation produces to compete in a global economy. Schools have become places to mass produce this product.” It would be unrealistic to expect education to ever be free of the influence of money, yet we should be more aware to the impact it has on the learning for the students. In some ways it seems as if it is what we are teaching the students, rather than content of the disciplines such as English, Literature, Science, Social Studies, etc. John Dewey (2001) stresses the impact of experience on learning (p. 109). Perhaps with my metaphor, I have provided students with the experience of business in school. In many ways I feel as though my metaphor is preparing my students for reality. No matter what they do with their lives, they will need to understand the influence of business and competition.
Additionally, I would hope awareness to this system of business within our school system could help alleviate some of the focus and control of money on learning. We are not only determining curriculum through business and money, but we have now turned our schools into places of business. Students are the products; parents are the customers in which they are free to shop around via school of choice. Teachers are forced into “sales” in which we are tiptoeing around telling certain truths to parents about their children or the school itself, so we do not lose a “loyal customer.” Learning is controlled by money, in so many ways. Whereas learning should be a natural process and a civic duty not just a means to be successful in a capitalistic environment. Yet the reality remains that money equates to power, and power leads to control and success i.e. value; and our schools are not free of this dynamic. Therefore I must succumb to this reality and prepare my students to be successful within this system.
Yours truly,
Carole Harkins
CEO of your classroom
Subordinate to the school-system
Works Cited
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as Curriculum Planners. Narratives of Experience. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Dewey, John. (2001). The Child and the Curriculum. In The school and society & The child and the curriculum (pp. 103-123). Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. (Original work published in 1902)
Elliot Eisner. (2009). What does it mean to say a school is doing well? Phi Delta Kappa, 82(5), 367-372. Reprinted D.J. Flinders & S.J. Thornton (Eds.), The Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd ed., pp. 227-235). New York: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment