As we consider the role of politicians, we must hope they will practice social responsibility.
This sense of social responsibility would promote an allegiance to a democratic nation, a commitment to the public's well-being, and an ability to prudently address the needs of our future generations.
It's become evident that the goal of this state, under this governor, is to move public schools into the hands of private interests. (See this article from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Online, in regards to public response.)
With that goal in mind, here are a few questions we must consider:
1. Would corporations promote an allegiance to a democratic nation or to a capitalistic structure?
Democracy and the open market of capitalism often go hand in hand. In fact, the open market will not reach its potential in a democratic state that is not a healthy democratic state. However, democracy promotes the power of the people, in fact rule by the people, wherein no one person has more power than any other. In the corporate world, that would equate to the power of the worker, in fact rule by the worker, wherein no one employee has more power than any other. Of course the corporate structure does not allow power to be shared.
In other words, do we want schools that empower all of the people or empower only some of the people?
2. Would corporations commit to the public's well-being or to the well-being of a few?
The idea of a corporation is to generate profits and display a dedication to the share holder. Corporations do not dedicate themselves to the citizen, of course, but to a select few who have a vested interest in the corporation.
As schools become corporate, would McDonald's master lunch? Would Pepsi decide diet? Would student service hours be dedicated to the greater good or to door-to-door salesmanship? We already have perfect evidence of Nike selling apparel and local businesses selling discount cards using our school's athletes.
Greater fuel efficiency in cars is a product of government law, not corporate response to consumer demands. Corporate efforts to protect the environment and to clean our rivers, streams, and lakes are the result of government law, not corporate altruism.
In our schools, we will bear witness to the profit motive taking precedence over public well-being.
3. Would corporations commit to standardizing students or to creating engaged citizens who are problem-solvers?
Already, as a product of President Bush's "No Child Left Behind", we see a narrowing of school curriculum. Would a corporate school's curriculum continue to narrow or will we see a greater emphasis on the arts, music, agriculture, creative writing, and so much else? You already know the answer to that.
Today, we see advanced placement classes redirecting from conventional assessment to one where problem solving and content depth takes priority. Today's schools are already moving away from standard, conventional methods to an approach that emphasizes creativity, innovation, problem solving, and entrepreneur-ism. The continued movement away from standardized tests would allow schools to continue to develop engaged citizens who are problem solvers.
The lesson of capitalism is "what's in it for me?"
The lesson of democracy is "what's in it for us?"
The only advantage of the corporate school is financing. Clearly, the state's citizens would have less tax responsibility if corporations take over our schools. But would it be worth the overall costs?
Remember, coming out of the American Revolution and failing to generate an effective constitution in the form of the Articles of Confederation, our Founding Fathers knew very well the necessity of paying taxes. More than ten years after Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations gave capitalism its birth, our nation's wisest men knew that its citizens had to pay taxes. In an effort for the tranquility and general welfare of the Union, our founders knew of the insurances and protections capably offered by the tax dollar.
We are at the moment when lines have been drawn and allegiances pledged.
And in the spirit of the Oklahoma land rush, territory has been staked with no willingness of giving ground.
Instead, it should be our time to build bridges, not walls.
No comments:
Post a Comment