Volume 15, Number 2, 2024 Defending and Strengthening Public Education as a Common Good

EN:

For decades, there has been a well-coordinated effort to unmake public education in Canada and around the globe. Neoliberal reformers have undermined public education through increased privatization, marketization, and managerialism. Government austerity measures have shaped policy that falsely necessitates, validates, and legitimizes the privatization of public education. All of these forces that fuel the neoliberal reform movement diminish the collective aims, benefits, and responsibility of/for public education. Instead, the movement encourages systems that ration education. The moves to emulate business models in education systems exacerbate inequities and run counter to the purpose of public education. Indeed, attempts to marketize, commodify, privatize, and dismantle public education are well-organized and coordinated. Yet, in Canada, provincial and territorial fragmentation has veiled the well-organized rhetoric and tactics of neoliberal education reforms. As a result, community and political responses have often been confined within borders. The reformers have been centrally organized, but the resistance has not. Recognizing that provincial and territorial borders can act as barriers to collective advocacy, this special issue is intended to share activities, research, and writing from across Canada about the tactics and impacts of privatization, to recognize the efforts being made to organize a collective response to privatization efforts, and to encourage national conversations beyond borders.

EN:

This article examines a popularized term, the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM), and its underlying paradigm of neoliberalism. It elucidates neoliberalism’s maddening effects on the education sector, especially public education. To analyze these effects, I draw from and adapt Michel Foucault’s analytical approach to madness. My analysis focuses on the following maddening effects of neoliberalism on education: (1) it obstructs us from seeing inequalities; (2) it creates a desperate passion amid the rise of school choice; and (3) it eliminates reason and creates unreason in the school selection and admissions processes. My analysis is based on reflections on my decade-long research on school marketization and school choice in Canada. I conclude by suggesting that collective visions and concrete steps are needed to move toward equitable educational structures, discourses, and practices that resist or challenge the neoliberal education reform madness (NERM).

EN:

Across Canada, school districts have been confronting a backlash to their equity and social justice initiatives. Critics of public education have been arguing that the solution to these controversies is to increase school choice. Using several examples from the United States, this paper argues that the endgame of these strategies is to undermine the legitimacy of public education and increase support for private alternatives. To protect its future viability, the paper also calls on public education advocates to grapple with ongoing marginalization within school systems which make private options increasingly attractive.

EN:

In October 2022, New Brunswick Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development Dominic Cardy publicly resigned and widely disclosed his disappointment with Premier Blaine Higgs’ leadership. Using Cardy’s unprecedented public resignation letter as a primary source, this paper explores the inner workings of neoliberal governance and privatization in public education and critically analyzes data manipulation, governance shifts, and problematic conservative “hands-offism.” Applying a rhizomatic methodological framing and theoretically drawing from Bourdieu and Passeron’s (1977) conceptualization of symbolic violence and Gilmore’s (2008) notion of “organized abandonment,” we argue that neoliberal governance and privatization disproportionately affect vulnerable communities and weaken democratic processes. To understand these complexities, we utilize a rhizomatic analysis, simultaneously considering historical and geographical contexts, governance structures, and political narratives. We conclude that neoliberal governance and privatization are inherently symbolically violent, as they are used in tandem to perpetually defund and dismantle public institutions.

EN:

In this article, we draw on various critical perspectives to theorize neoliberal choice and examine how it has been deployed to market new educational reforms in Ontario. We begin by offering a contemporary framing of neoliberalism that looks at its core elements as well as its chameleon-like tendencies to draw on neoconservative elements as needed. We also furnish critiques of neoliberalism by engaging Adams et al.’s (2019) description of neoliberal “choice” as one component of a larger psychological exercise in support of capitalism. We then examine how the language of choice has been used to position three recent Ontario education reforms: (a) mandatory e-learning; (b) growth of international students; and (c) the revision of curricula according to economic ends. Finally, we argue that the implementation of these reforms ironically has produced less choice for stakeholders through austerity and standardization.

EN:

Privatization of public education in North America has long been influenced by two schools of conservative thought: neoliberalism, which seeks to create a marketplace for public services in which individuals choose the option they judge to be in their best interests and government's role is limited as much as possible to simply funding these choices; and neoconservatism, which believes that education should seek to uphold traditional religious and social values. These two strains are divided in terms of their view of how much control government should seek over education, but united in their agreement that funding should "follow the student" to the option of the parents' choice. Recently, far-right conservative groups in the U.S. and Canada have been inciting a moral panic over "gender ideology" in schools, and in particular transgender students. Under cover of this moral panic and the accompanying call to recognize "parent rights," the right is organizing to gain greater influence over public education through legislation and through the election of conservative candidates to school boards, even as it seeks greater privatization options for families who wish to opt out of public education. While this trend has been noticeable in Alberta for some time, it appears to be spreading to the rest of Canada as well.

EN:

This paper uses critical policy analysis to investigate how the concept of equity has been co-opted to promote a neoliberal agenda in education reforms in Manitoba. Early provincial reform documents contained a narrow definition of equity focused primarily on closing achievement gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. These reform documents were rejected by the public, in part due to concerns about equity. The Manitoba Education Action Plan was introduced in 2022, which more explicitly focused on achieving equity as part of the education reform process. However, the framing of equity in the Action Plan was narrow, emphasizing individualism rather than a more systemic pursuit of equity. While some recommended actions in the Action Plan have promoted a more inclusive and culturally responsive education system, other actions have advanced a neoliberal agenda focused on work-readiness and accountability, while actions to remove barriers to education have been undertaken with limited urgency.

EN:

This paper explores how advocates in Ontario have resisted neoliberal restructuring in education since the 2018 general election, which marked an intensification of market-oriented reforms. Shaped by the insights of 23 participants, this paper shows how resistance has been accessed through multiple entry points and has been spatially heterogeneous, replete with internal contradiction. It also highlights the cost of resistance for participants whose relationship to systems engender oppression and harm. Broadly, this paper calls for vulnerable reflection on fantasies of a “good life” shaped by a normative neoliberal order that interferes with collective flourishing. Through emergent strategy, which aligns action with a vision for social justice, this paper values the non-linear and manifold ways individuals are embedded in systems; the fractal nature of change, which takes place at all scales; and a love ethic, which sustains relational the spiritual growth necessary for solidarity.

EN:

In 2021, the government of Manitoba made their plans to reform public education overt with Bill 64. Although the legislation was withdrawn as a result of immense opposition from critically engaged Manitobans, the government did not abandon its neoliberal reform plans. Instead, the spectre of Bill 64 now lingers through a variety of new educational initiatives. In response, People for Public Education is working to keep the fight against the privatization of public education alive. Through consciousness raising and by constructing hopeful and imaginative visions of the future, this nascent community advocacy group strives to protect public education from the deleterious effects of neoliberalism. In this article, I reflexively interrogate and critically analyze the emergence, evolving objectives, values, and actions of People for Public Education for the purpose of inspiring future resistance against neoliberal education reforms.

EN:

This review is a critique of Sue Winton's Unequal Benefits: Privatization and Public Education in Canada. Sounding an alarm about the encroachment of privatization in the Canadian school system, Winton provides a critical review of the many ways in which neoliberal marketization of education is becoming common place in Canadian schools. Many of the examples provided by Winton demonstrate how individual choices have detrimental effects on the ideals of public education. Unequal Benefits: Privatization and Public Education in Canada encourages parents, educators, and policymakers to engage in the fight to save public education from this growing privatization.