cross posted from post in space
Wed 4.11.12 | Education and Inequality | Against the Grain: A Program about Politics, Society and Ideas: It seems logical: if you don’t have enough education your economic prospects will be diminished, while those who have a lot are able to succeed in our purportedly knowledge-based economy. But what if that’s only partially accurate? John Marsh posits that economic inequality and poverty are not causally connected to differing levels of education. He argues that we need to reject the appealing notion of education as a cure-all and look deeper at class power and structural inequality.
For Their Own Good
Against the Grain radio show has an interview with John Marsh on the popular idea that more education will somehow fix the poverty issue. Most recently, there has been a huge push to raise compulsory attendance laws and many states have done so. The reason usually cited is that drop outs do worse on lifetime earnings and therefore, heavy police tactics to keep kids in school is actually helping them.
It is another instance where lawmakers and the schools themselves rely on policing and authoritarian practices instead of figuring why kids drop out and working with them to make system changes. Compulsory attendance laws have eliminated that feedback loop, the mechanism that makes businesses listen to their customers (though we have corporations lacking that mechanism as well).
It is, of course, clearly a matter of money as schools have tied attendance to funding and raising compulsory attendance laws at a time when states have cut school funding is clearly a way to raise revenues. Concern for the welfare of young people is not the motivation in the US where we have large numbers of teens sentenced within the justice … penal system … as adults every year.
Schooling and Poverty
John Holt wrote about the impossibility of schools changing inequality is his essay, “Schooling and Poverty.”
“The word ‘poverty’ is too general, too vague. Let me try to make it more concrete by suggesting that it has three parts: employment, income, and material standard of life. A man feels poor and is poor when he has a bad job or no job, lacks money, and can’t get the things he needs. …
In short the schools, whether by what they teach or the amount of degrees they give out, do not determine and cannot change the shape of the job pyramid. The number of jobs that exist, and the goodness or badness of these jobs and the amount of money they pay, are independent of the schools, the things they teach there, the number of people who are learning them.
It would be the most hard-headed economic and political realism for us to guarantee and provide to every American man, woman, or child, an income on which he can live decently and comfortably, whether he has a ‘job’ or not.”
More on Class Dismissed
Class Dismissed :: Monthly Review Press: “In Class Dismissed, John Marsh debunks a myth cherished by journalists, politicians, and economists: that growing poverty and inequality in the United States can be solved through education. Using sophisticated analysis combined with personal experience in the classroom, Marsh not only shows that education has little impact on poverty and inequality, but that our mistaken beliefs actively shape the way we structure our schools and what we teach in them.
Rather than focus attention on the hierarchy of jobs and power—where most jobs require relatively little education, and the poor enjoy very little political power—money is funneled into educational endeavors that ultimately do nothing to challenge established social structures, and in fact reinforce them. And when educational programs prove ineffective at reducing inequality, the ones whom these programs were intended to help end up blaming themselves. Marsh’s struggle to grasp the connection between education, poverty, and inequality is both powerful and poignant.”
And an interview with Marsh is here:
‘Class Dismissed’ | Inside Higher Ed:
“Regarding inequality, I would point to the findings of Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, who have shown that people who live in more equal countries live demonstrably better lives than those who live in less equal countries. In more equal countries, people — rich and poor alike — live longer, trust each other more, discriminate against women less, devote more resources to foreign aid, have fewer bouts of mental illness, use fewer drugs, murder each other less, have lower rates of infant mortality, suffer less from obesity, are more literate and numerate, complete more years of schooling, imprison fewer people, and enjoy greater social mobility. People in more equal countries even have fewer fistfights than people in less equal countries. As an English professor, I enjoy a good fistfight as much as the next person, but I think we could safely get by with fewer of them.” via Blog this’
background
learning about inequality: gapminder
blaming families, juvenile justice edition
schools could help us address poverty
the compulsory attendance mindset
side effects of the literacy factory model
make public schools truly public



5 Comments

Good points made about education.
However I think there’s some “gray” areas within certain aspects of these points.
1. Education is not the “cure-all” or “silver bullet” to equality or to poverty. DUH!
But Education does help in educating people, encourages critical thinking, and does lead to more educated people relying on reality-based facts versus fantasy-based delusions that are sold by many.
And this does contribute to equality and minimizing poverty.
I’m not saying you wrote the opposite. Just clarifying the point from my perspective.
2. “It would be the most hard-headed economic and political realism for us to guarantee and provide to every American man, woman, or child, an income on which he can live decently and comfortably, whether he has a ‘job’ or not.””
I love this quote. It’s the kind of nonsense straw-man argument a corporatist writes. These people honestly think the people on welfare/public assistance live the same lifestyle as the average corporatist. It’s ridiculous.
We can spare trillions for corporate welfare/bailouts/subsidies, but we can’t give a few bucks a month so that people can live with some decency without starving? I bet he’s an Xtian. Only an Xtian would have the temerity to say something so disgusting.
But of course that’s the status quo in this country. So F me.
I think our education system needs to improve its modes of student motivation more than innovating curriculum. We leave too many students behind. They can tell when they’re loosing the standard rat race to college. The kids are demoralized and depressed with the perceived defeat in achieving life’s over advertised dreams. The normal bell-curve will screen the intellectual deficient which must be re-motivated to pursue successful alternative careers, that they can be eminently happy and useful in. These alternative occupations should not be thought of as consolation prizes. Yet I see bright kids, in the middle of the curve, giving up before the race is really underway. We’ve got to fix the lack of college funding. I’m seeing really smart college material, engineer types, doing the dollar crunching (to get into and to pay the bill afterward) and postponing their dreams as not cost effective. When our society lets these good kid’s dreams go down the drain, its more than shameful, it might be sinful.
Good points.
I design schools for a living, and I can tell you that they are designed to be like prisons. It’s a similar mentality; the janitorial/maintenence staff tend to have as much, if not more, than teachers, due to budgets.
If you cram a bunch of kids into a prison for 8 hours a day, what on earth do people expect to result?
That was a great interview with Marsh. Thank you.
Good points made about education, but I still push getting the best education you can afford because your life will better the more you learn and the more you are to new learning until the day you die – IMO.
But the idea that economic benefits are tied to going to $65,000 a year Harvard is just not true – those average salaries the Ivy’s taut are coming from Dad and Mom’s place in society and contacts/mentors they gave you or showed you how to develop – with Harvard merely adding to the contact list. The smart kid that goes to Harvard coming from very poor parents gets none of that economic lift unless he is also smart as a con-man/street smart developer of contacts with a sales type personality. When I entered private industry I was taken back a bit by the 60 year olds with modest jobs that had come from poor families and somehow gotten through Yale/Harvard/the seven sisters/etc. That has not changed. Class migration is as limited in the US as it is in Britain and the EU. That is why it is news when we find it.