Why the United States Is Destroying Its Education System

signalmankenneth

Verified User
Monday 11 April 2011
by: Chris Hedges, Truthdig

A nation that destroys its systems of education, degrades its public information, guts its public libraries and turns its airwaves into vehicles for cheap, mindless amusement becomes deaf, dumb and blind. It prizes test scores above critical thinking and literacy. It celebrates rote vocational training and the singular, amoral skill of making money. It churns out stunted human products, lacking the capacity and vocabulary to challenge the assumptions and structures of the corporate state. It funnels them into a caste system of drones and systems managers. It transforms a democratic state into a feudal system of corporate masters and serfs.

Teachers, their unions under attack, are becoming as replaceable as minimum-wage employees at Burger King. We spurn real teachers—those with the capacity to inspire children to think, those who help the young discover their gifts and potential—and replace them with instructors who teach to narrow, standardized tests. These instructors obey. They teach children to obey. And that is the point. The No Child Left Behind program, modeled on the “Texas Miracle,” is a fraud. It worked no better than our deregulated financial system. But when you shut out debate these dead ideas are self-perpetuating.

Passing bubble tests celebrates and rewards a peculiar form of analytical intelligence. This kind of intelligence is prized by money managers and corporations. They don’t want employees to ask uncomfortable questions or examine existing structures and assumptions.

They want them to serve the system. These tests produce men and women who are just literate and numerate enough to perform basic functions and service jobs. The tests elevate those with the financial means to prepare for them. They reward those who obey the rules, memorize the formulas and pay deference to authority. Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts—those who march to the beat of their own drum—are weeded out.

“Imagine,” said a public school teacher in New York City, who asked that I not use his name, “going to work each day knowing a great deal of what you are doing is fraudulent, knowing in no way are you preparing your students for life in an ever more brutal world, knowing that if you don’t continue along your scripted test prep course and indeed get better at it you will be out of a job. Up until very recently, the principal of a school was something like the conductor of an orchestra: a person who had deep experience and knowledge of the part and place of every member and every instrument. In the past 10 years we’ve had the emergence of both [Mayor] Mike Bloomberg’s Leadership Academy and Eli Broad’s Superintendents Academy, both created exclusively to produce instant principals and superintendents who model themselves after CEOs. How is this kind of thing even legal? How are such ‘academies’ accredited? What quality of leader needs a ‘leadership academy’? What kind of society would allow such people to run their children’s schools? The high-stakes tests may be worthless as pedagogy but they are a brilliant mechanism for undermining the school systems, instilling fear and creating a rationale for corporate takeover. There is something grotesque about the fact the education reform is being led not by educators but by financers and speculators and billionaires.”

Teachers, under assault from every direction, are fleeing the profession. Even before the “reform” blitzkrieg we were losing half of all teachers within five years after they started work—and these were people who spent years in school and many thousands of dollars to become teachers. How does the country expect to retain dignified, trained professionals under the hostility of current conditions? I suspect that the hedge fund managers behind our charter schools system—whose primary concern is certainly not with education—are delighted to replace real teachers with nonunionized, poorly trained instructors. To truly teach is to instill the values and knowledge which promote the common good and protect a society from the folly of historical amnesia. The utilitarian, corporate ideology embraced by the system of standardized tests and leadership academies has no time for the nuances and moral ambiguities inherent in a liberal arts education. Corporatism is about the cult of the self. It is about personal enrichment and profit as the sole aim of human existence. And those who do not conform are pushed aside.

“It is extremely dispiriting to realize that you are in effect lying to these kids by insinuating that this diet of corporate reading programs and standardized tests are preparing them for anything,” said this teacher, who feared he would suffer reprisals from school administrators if they knew he was speaking out. “It is even more dispiriting to know that your livelihood depends increasingly on maintaining this lie. You have to ask yourself why are hedge fund managers suddenly so interested in the education of the urban poor? The main purpose of the testing craze is not to grade the students but to grade the teacher.”

“I cannot say for certain—not with the certainty of a Bill Gates or a Mike Bloomberg who pontificate with utter certainty over a field in which they know absolutely nothing—but more and more I suspect that a major goal of the reform campaign is to make the work of a teacher so degrading and insulting that the dignified and the truly educated teachers will simply leave while they still retain a modicum of self-respect,” he added. “In less than a decade we been stripped of autonomy and are increasingly micromanaged. Students have been given the power to fire us by failing their tests. Teachers have been likened to pigs at a trough and blamed for the economic collapse of the United States. In New York, principals have been given every incentive, both financial and in terms of control, to replace experienced teachers with 22-year-old untenured rookies. They cost less. They know nothing. They are malleable and they are vulnerable to termination.”

The demonizing of teachers is another public relations feint, a way for corporations to deflect attention from the theft of some $17 billion in wages, savings and earnings among American workers and a landscape where one in six workers is without employment. The speculators on Wall Street looted the U.S. Treasury. They stymied any kind of regulation. They have avoided criminal charges. They are stripping basic social services. And now they are demanding to run our schools and universities.

“Not only have the reformers removed poverty as a factor, they’ve removed students’ aptitude and motivation as factors,” said this teacher, who is in a teachers union. “They seem to believe that students are something like plants where you just add water and place them in the sun of your teaching and everything blooms. This is a fantasy that insults both student and teacher. The reformers have come up with a variety of insidious schemes pushed as steps to professionalize the profession of teaching. As they are all businessmen who know nothing of the field, it goes without saying that you do not do this by giving teachers autonomy and respect. They use merit pay in which teachers whose students do well on bubble tests will receive more money and teachers whose students do not do so well on bubble tests will receive less money. Of course, the only way this could conceivably be fair is to have an identical group of students in each class—an impossibility. The real purposes of merit pay are to divide teachers against themselves as they scramble for the brighter and more motivated students and to further institutionalize the idiot notion of standardized tests. There is a certain diabolical intelligence at work in both of these.”

“If the Bloomberg administration can be said to have succeeded in anything,” he said, “they have succeeded in turning schools into stress factories where teachers are running around wondering if it’s possible to please their principals and if their school will be open a year from now, if their union will still be there to offer some kind of protection, if they will still have jobs next year. This is not how you run a school system. It’s how you destroy one. The reformers and their friends in the media have created a Manichean world of bad teachers and effective teachers. In this alternative universe there are no other factors. Or, all other factors—poverty, depraved parents, mental illness and malnutrition—are all excuses of the Bad Teacher that can be overcome by hard work and the Effective Teacher.”

The truly educated become conscious. They become self-aware. They do not lie to themselves. They do not pretend that fraud is moral or that corporate greed is good. They do not claim that the demands of the marketplace can morally justify the hunger of children or denial of medical care to the sick. They do not throw 6 million families from their homes as the cost of doing business. Thought is a dialogue with one’s inner self. Those who think ask questions, questions those in authority do not want asked. They remember who we are, where we come from and where we should go. They remain eternally skeptical and distrustful of power. And they know that this moral independence is the only protection from the radical evil that results from collective unconsciousness. The capacity to think is the only bulwark against any centralized authority that seeks to impose mindless obedience. There is a huge difference, as Socrates understood, between teaching people what to think and teaching them how to think. Those who are endowed with a moral conscience refuse to commit crimes, even those sanctioned by the corporate state, because they do not in the end want to live with criminals—themselves.

“It is better to be at odds with the whole world than, being one, to be at odds with myself,” Socrates said.

Those who can ask the right questions are armed with the capacity to make a moral choice, to defend the good in the face of outside pressure. And this is why the philosopher Immanuel Kant puts the duties we have to ourselves before the duties we have to others. The standard for Kant is not the biblical idea of self-love—love thy neighbor as thyself, do unto others as you would have them do unto you—but self-respect. What brings us meaning and worth as human beings is our ability to stand up and pit ourselves against injustice and the vast, moral indifference of the universe. Once justice perishes, as Kant knew, life loses all meaning. Those who meekly obey laws and rules imposed from the outside—including religious laws—are not moral human beings. The fulfillment of an imposed law is morally neutral. The truly educated make their own wills serve the higher call of justice, empathy and reason. Socrates made the same argument when he said it is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong.

“The greatest evil perpetrated,” Hannah Arendt wrote, “is the evil committed by nobodies, that is, by human beings who refuse to be persons.”

As Arendt pointed out, we must trust only those who have this self-awareness. This self-awareness comes only through consciousness. It comes with the ability to look at a crime being committed and say “I can’t.” We must fear, Arendt warned, those whose moral system is built around the flimsy structure of blind obedience. We must fear those who cannot think. Unconscious civilizations become totalitarian wastelands.

“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,” Arendt writes. “For human beings, thinking of past matters means moving in the dimension of depth, striking roots and thus stabilizing themselves, so as not to be swept away by whatever may occur—the Zeitgeist or History or simple temptation. The greatest evil is not radical, it has no roots, and because it has no roots it has no limitations, it can go to unthinkable extremes and sweep over the whole world.”
 
While I am not a fan of "bubble tests" I can't help but think that the author of this diatribe has other problems with the powers that be other than their views on education.

Excerpt...Paragraph 12:
The truly educated become conscious. They become self-aware. They do not lie to themselves. They do not pretend that fraud is moral or that corporate greed is good. They do not claim that the demands of the marketplace can morally justify the hunger of children or denial of medical care to the sick. They do not throw 6 million families from their homes as the cost of doing business. Thought is a dialogue with one’s inner self. Those who think ask questions, questions those in authority do not want asked. They remember who we are, where we come from and where we should go. They remain eternally skeptical and distrustful of power. And they know that this moral independence is the only protection from the radical evil that results from collective unconsciousness. The capacity to think is the only bulwark against any centralized authority that seeks to impose mindless obedience. There is a huge difference, as Socrates understood, between teaching people what to think and teaching them how to think. Those who are endowed with a moral conscience refuse to commit crimes, even those sanctioned by the corporate state, because they do not in the end want to live with criminals—themselves.

What a load of stuff that was, huh?

And then this:

Exerpt...paragraph 4
...They reward those who obey the rules, memorize the formulas and pay deference to authority. Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts—those who march to the beat of their own drum—are weeded out.

I don't see a problem with this. People who obey the rules and respect authority should be rewarded, IMO. And I wholeheartedly disagree with the 1st portion of this paragraph.

I have a very emotional vested interest in the educational system of this country and understand many of the problems that exist within it, but the writer of this hooey has exposed the fact that he has a plethora of problems that bounce all over the arena of politics and government.
 
While I am not a fan of "bubble tests" I can't help but think that the author of this diatribe has other problems with the powers that be other than their views on education.

Excerpt...Paragraph 12:


What a load of stuff that was, huh?

And then this:

Exerpt...paragraph 4


I don't see a problem with this. People who obey the rules and respect authority should be rewarded, IMO. And I wholeheartedly disagree with the 1st portion of this paragraph.

I have a very emotional vested interest in the educational system of this country and understand many of the problems that exist within it, but the writer of this hooey has exposed the fact that he has a plethora of problems that bounce all over the arena of politics and government.


Please point out the "stuff" in paragraph 12 which you disagree with.

Nevermind. I don't give a fuck what you think or why since you don't have a problem with "Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts being weeded out.

Talk about a ration of shit, have you ever had an independent thought?
 
Please point out the "stuff" in paragraph 12 which you disagree with.

Nevermind. I don't give a fuck what you think or why since you don't have a problem with "Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts being weeded out.

Talk about a ration of shit, have you ever had an independent thought?

Just so you understand.... I seem to recall that leaningright is a teacher.... my guess is, he has more accurate insight into the problems in the dept of Education than the rest of us.
 
Please point out the "stuff" in paragraph 12 which you disagree with.

Nevermind. I don't give a [bleep] what you think ...

Oh well, if you don't care...well, I think I'll point it out anyway... :)

Paragraph 12 is in a sense saying, "The government of the United States is corrupt and has been for a long time and the only ones who know this are the educated or 'enlightened' ones." It really appears that that is what the whole article is pointing to....which is nothing more than a political stance, and a far left one at that, and not really a post on the ills of education. Might as well put it in one sentence instead of a long, bloated article: "We (the government) don't want the masses really educated because they'll then see that we're a bunch of crooks and oppressors of the innocent." GMAB...

I like checks and balances placed on government officials but I'm not ready to don a tinfoil hat and cry that they're all crooks and oppressors.

...or why since you don't have a problem with "Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts being weeded out.

Talk about a ration of [bleep], have you ever had an independent thought?

I'm sorry if it offends that I think people ought to learn to play by the rules ... but maybe I should have clarified considering the "weeded out" part of the article.

Rebels - If a kid "rebels" in my class to the point that I cannot conduct normal classroom instruction he is costing the other 29 kids a day of education that their parent's (through their taxes) have paid for. If he cannot behave and continues to be a "rebel" this kid needs to have his rear tossed out of the public classroom and be provided an alternate educational opportunity...and if that doesn't work then make his parents solely responsible for his education. You can place iconoclasts in this category as well.

Artists, independent thinkers (unless they are on plane with rebels and iconoclasts) and eccentrics should be provided an alternative to regular education classrooms as well, if they cannot achieve in that setting. These kids, as opposed to rebels and iconoclasts, would normally take advantage of the alternative.

What I proposecontinually to my legislators are real reforms to education, providing alternatives for all types of learners that aren't provided now. Right now, we test the mentally retarded, the "eccentric" and the overachiever with the same standards and objectives. It shouldn't be that way. But what alternatives does the writer of the diatribe above provide? What solutions? All I see is a rant about how bad and oppressive we in the United States are....and how only the truly educated can see it and that the government doesn't want the people to be truly educated....or something like that.
 
Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, iconoclasts, those who march to the beat of a different drummer are weeded out.

"I don't have a problem with this."

I do have serious problems with this. Both of my children have been "weeded out". My older son received an award for his artwork in second grade from Mitt Romney (then Governor). Yet by 9th grade he had been "weeded out". His I.Q. is in the low 140s.

My second son is in the process of being "weeded out" as we speak. He is in eigth grade. I have big problems with this.

What kind of a country will this be when artists, inovaters, and free thinkers have all been "weeded out"?
 
Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, iconoclasts, those who march to the beat of a different drummer are weeded out.

"I don't have a problem with this."

I do have serious problems with this. Both of my children have been "weeded out". My older son received an award for his artwork in second grade from Mitt Romney (then Governor). Yet by 9th grade he had been "weeded out". His I.Q. is in the low 140s.

My second son is in the process of being "weeded out" as we speak. He is in eigth grade. I have big problems with this.

What kind of a country will this be when artists, inovaters, and free thinkers have all been "weeded out"?

Can you elaborate.... what has been done to your sons that they have been 'weeded out' in your view? Just not sure I understand this fully. Thanks in advance for clarification.
 
The article is not about education, it is about education being a political football, and the direction the ball is and has been being kicked, and the end results of said kicking.

The ONLY chance this country has is a better (than now) educated populace. Dumbing down the populace serves the right. It is not surprising therefore, that "leaning right" does'nt have a problem with this.
 
Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, iconoclasts, those who march to the beat of a different drummer are weeded out.

"I don't have a problem with this."

I do have serious problems with this. Both of my children have been "weeded out". My older son received an award for his artwork in second grade from Mitt Romney (then Governor). Yet by 9th grade he had been "weeded out". His I.Q. is in the low 140s.

My second son is in the process of being "weeded out" as we speak. He is in eigth grade. I have big problems with this.

What kind of a country will this be when artists, inovaters, and free thinkers have all been "weeded out"?

Please note what I said. I am not trying to be combative here. I think kids who cannot or do not achieve in the regular classroom should be provided an alternative route to an educational goal. If they are outright rebels or iconoclasts then yes, they might become their parent's responsibility as far as their education is concerned. Right now most states do not provide alternatives for the artistic or the innovater or the free thinker who might not be able (or willing) to absorb what is needed in the regular classroom. I think they should provide this route and not simply toss the kids to the curb.

I don't think that so much emphasis should be put on tests but realistically there has to be something in place to measure a teacher's effectiveness. I also don't think that all kids should be in college bound courses in high school, which is what most republican lawmakers seem to want....at least in my state.

There are a lot of things wrong with education but unless both sides (left/right...dem/repub) look at it with an open mind nothing substantive will ever be done to improve it.

However, discipline must be maintained. One simply cannot teach a class of 30 or more effectively with constant, rebellious interruptions.
 
The article is not about education, it is about education being a political football, and the direction the ball is and has been being kicked, and the end results of said kicking.

The ONLY chance this country has is a better (than now) educated populace. Dumbing down the populace serves the right. It is not surprising therefore, that "leaning right" does'nt have a problem with this.

The bolded is nothing more than a statement of political opinion....much like what the article was implying all the way.
 
The bolded is nothing more than a statement of political opinion....much like what the article was implying all the way.

We hear the dumbing down of America helps the right comment quite a bit. From strictly a political sense blacks and Hispanics tend to score lowest on standardized (sp) tests in this country. We know blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic and a majority of Hispanics vote Democratic as well. Not sure the benefit to the right to keep them 'uneducated' or under educated.

After the 2000 election the Wall St. Journal ran a vote breakdown based on education. Those with less than a high school diploma and those with an advanced degree voted a majority for Gore. Those with a high school or college degree voted majority for Bush.

Now that may have changed with this past election, I never saw a break down.
 
We hear the dumbing down of America helps the right comment quite a bit. From strictly a political sense blacks and Hispanics tend to score lowest on standardized (sp) tests in this country. We know blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic and a majority of Hispanics vote Democratic as well. Not sure the benefit to the right to keep them 'uneducated' or under educated.

After the 2000 election the Wall St. Journal ran a vote breakdown based on education. Those with less than a high school diploma and those with an advanced degree voted a majority for Gore. Those with a high school or college degree voted majority for Bush.

Now that may have changed with this past election, I never saw a break down.

Kind of my thought as well. The left just loves shouting it out because they see themselves as the 'educated and enlightened' and they see the right as 'dumb hicks'.
 
Bullshit.

Thanks for the carefully considered and highly articulate analysis, you really reached into the very heart of the article and distilled its very essence. Just one bijou [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]soupçon[/SIZE][/FONT] of a criticism though, maybe you could try using two words next time?
 
Last edited:
Just so you understand.... I seem to recall that leaningright is a teacher.... my guess is, he has more accurate insight into the problems in the dept of Education than the rest of us.

Yeah, right. We can't possibly understand how the kids are being systematically dumbed down. we must rely on the opinion of sopmeone employed by the system to point ouit the flaws. Fucking ridiculous
 
Can you elaborate.... what has been done to your sons that they have been 'weeded out' in your view? Just not sure I understand this fully. Thanks in advance for clarification.

Superfreak, you're one of the most brainwashed immoralists in the zombie brigade. You're a fascist dipshit who couldn't think his was out of a wet paper sack.
 
We hear the dumbing down of America helps the right comment quite a bit. From strictly a political sense blacks and Hispanics tend to score lowest on standardized (sp) tests in this country. We know blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic and a majority of Hispanics vote Democratic as well. Not sure the benefit to the right to keep them 'uneducated' or under educated.

After the 2000 election the Wall St. Journal ran a vote breakdown based on education. Those with less than a high school diploma and those with an advanced degree voted a majority for Gore. Those with a high school or college degree voted majority for Bush.

Now that may have changed with this past election, I never saw a break down.

Wrong.

It helps the right by providing more; Cannon fodder, Cogs, people who say "would you like fries with that?" and people too stupid to notice that their rights are being destroyed by authoritarians.
 
Back
Top