From the U.K. to Liberia, the school privatization movement gathers steam.
Aug. 9, 2016,
For the past
three decades, critics of public education in the United States have
assailed it and used its flaws to promote publicly funded privatization.
Corporate and political interests have attacked the very concept of public
education, claiming that the private sector is invariably superior to the
public sector.
These developments are by no means limited
to the U.S.; the same movement to privatize public schools is occurring in the United Kingdom,
Africa and other regions – with troubling implications
In the U.K., the
Conservative Party government wants to turn all public schools into private
academies, funded by taxpayers. The British multinational corporation Pearson
has ambitions to open for-profit schools using its products in many nations
across the world. In Africa, a corporation called Bridge
International Academies (BIA) is opening for-profit schools in poor
countries that cost $1 a week. Liberia is considering outsourcing its entire elementary program to BIA, which is funded
by American billionaires Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and others from Wall
Street.
The Economist magazine wrote a glowing article about BIA's plan to make low-cost
schooling available in Africa, because existing public schools are so poorly
resourced. The potential market of hundreds of millions of children is alluring
and sure to be profitable. Teachers in the Bridge schools are uncertified; They teach a scripted curriculum from a notebook computer. Many
families cannot afford even $1 a week, especially if they have more than one
child. Meanwhile, the state is relieved of responsibility to supply what is
being outsourced to private enterprise.
Many of the plans to privatize education
globally can trace their beginnings back to ideas and funding that started in
the United States.
In the U.S., the
attack on public education can be traced to a 1983 report by a commission
appointed by the Reagan administration. Titled "A Nation at Risk," it
warned that the public schools were so mediocre that the future prosperity of
the nation was endangered by them. Advocates of privatization saw an
opportunity to advance their cause and joined in the attack on public schools.
Thirty-three years after the report, it is obvious that its predictions of
economic disaster were wrong. The U.S. has the strongest
economy and military in the world.
Yet the privatization advocates kept up the
drumbeat of failure. In 1990, a few states began to experiment with charter
schools, which are privately managed but publicly funded, and free of most
state regulations that apply to public schools. Today, almost every state has
endorsed and opened charter schools. About 90 percent of these schools are
non-union; one-quarter of the nation's charters have received financial support
from the right-wing Walton Family Foundation, which was created by the family
that owns Walmart.
Charter schools
claim to be public schools, but the only thing "public" about them is
their funding. They are run by private boards that do not hold open meetings,
as elected boards of education do; they are neither transparent nor accountable
in their finances.
At the same time
they were pushing for charter schools, U.S. privatization advocates pushed for
publicly funded vouchers that students could take to any religious or
independent school. Once considered an extreme right-wing idea, vouchers have
been enacted by nearly half the 50 states in the U.S., even though most state
constitutions mandate that public money must be dedicated only to public
schools.
A quarter
century after privatization began in earnest, it is clear that its main effect
has been to undermine the public schools. Actually, that has always been the
goal of the privatization movement. Their propaganda campaign – which now spans
from Kenya to the United Kingdom – blames public schools for the persistence of
poverty and for the low test scores of children who grow up in poverty, without
adequate food or medical care.
The
privatization movement has cleverly and deceitfully branded itself as a
"reform movement." As they divert resources and students from public
schools, which still enroll the vast majority of students, they congratulate
themselves for leading a civil rights movement and introducing market
discipline into what has traditionally been a government responsibility.
Who is behind
the privatization movement? A lot of money and influence. Hedge fund managers
are big supporters of charter schools; they clearly prefer the private sector
to the public sector, though they like the secure cash flow from the public
coffers. Major foundations, such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,
the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation have
poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the charter movement.
Who would have imagined that public
education in the U.S., U.K, Africa and elsewhere around the world would become
a target for a hostile takeover by corporate interests? The outcome is
predictable.
Two nations – Chile and Sweden – have
demonstrated what will happen. Students use choice to self-segregate by
religion, social class, race, and family income. The neediest children do not
benefit. Educational results are negligible. The most admired school systems in
the world, such as Finland, have not promoted school choice or privatization.
They have concentrated on creating a highly professional teaching corps,
funding public schools adequately and ensuring that children and families have
a good quality of life.
The question for
the coming decade is whether privatization will undermine and enfeeble public
education in the U.S. and elsewhere.
