|
Apple, Michael W. (1996) Cultural Politics
and Education.
New York: Teachers College Press. Columbia
University.
176 pp.
$18.95 (Paper) ISBN: 0807735035
$40 (Cloth) ISBN: 0807735043
Reviewed by Dieter Misgeld
The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
of the
University of Toronto
May 21, 2001
Apple's book was begun as a text, an "outline" as he says,
for the John Dewey Lecture in 1992.
It continues themes taken up in previous publications and
once again profiles a tendency very characteristic of this
outstanding educational theorist: to find ways to connect theory
with the practice of (progressive) educators and with the
community, to connect (as he says at the end of the book) the
"global with the local" (p. 115), and to generally introduce a
perspective on education and the schools which links them very
clearly with the larger society, especially the economy, but never
loses sight of what is specific to the educational effort itself.
Thus students, young people, teachers, neighbourhoods and
parents become and remain very real in the pages of this book.
This is quite an achievement for a book which otherwise also deals
with weighty theoretical matters and includes quite a range of
empirical materials as well. Given this range, it is important to
mention that two chapters out of five have coauthors: Anita
Oliver for Chapter Three and Christopher Zenk for Chapter Four.
The book critically investigates conservative tendencies in
education with specific reference to the most recent and very
determined attempts, on the part of neoconservative and neoliberal
Movements of the Political "Right" in the United States, to
restructure education (as well as other areas of culture) and to
remove all those themes and concerns from the educational agenda
which have been introduced by the movements of the "Cultural Left"
in the U.S., by feminism and antiracism, the gay movement, etc.
Apple shows, however, that the fundamental force of the (neo)
conservative/neoliberal push for restructuring education derives
from an old and deep-seated conviction that the hierarchy of
social class in existence in the U.S. needs to be defended, indeed
to be made invincible, that class-hierarchy rests upon merit,
educational and otherwise, and that competitive market
orientations are the decisive factors propelling society onward.
These, say the conservatives, deserve to be recognized as
representing the sounder side of society. This is why Apple makes
a critical discussion of proposals for national curricula,
national testing, and marketized "choice" plans a centrepiece of
his argument (Chapter Two).
In Chapter Four, he and Zenk give a systematic review of
the "moral" crisis of the U.S. economy and of its implications for
schooling and the schools.
The "moral" crisis--if I may call it thus--consists in an
increasing gap between rich and poor, between "people of colour"
(apart, perhaps, from those of East-Asian descent) and Euro-
Americans. It consists in a growing level of child poverty ("one
out of every four children under the age of six" lives in poverty,
p. 74), which puts the U.S. behind other major industrialized
countries, including Great Britain. It includes other dimensions
as well, such as the growing rate of incarceration for Black and
Latino men, or the growth of low-paying, repetitive work.
The authors argue in this chapter that the Political
"Right" wants to ignore these problems by concentrating on
"dropouts" from the school-system and youth at risk (p. 90), and
even by launching an all-out assault on public schooling, in
favour of substituting for it a system which functions like a
market open to consumer choices through voucher plans and tax-
credits (p. 98), and by a continuous monitoring of teacher and
student competencies and learning outcomes, "thereby centralizing
even more the control over teaching and curricula" (p. 99).
Apple and Zenk complete this picture by drawing attention to the
efforts to reform the curriculum in a strongly neo-
conservative/neoliberal direction stressing family, free
enterprise, patriotism, Christianity, etc., and by "making the
needs of business and industry into the goals of education" (p.
99). Overall, public schools will be seen (in this picture from
the "Right") as responsible for the economic crisis, but also, the
authors point out, as the solution, assuming they can be
redesigned (p. 68).
The authors argue convincingly that this is an implausible
view. Neither are most economic and social problems due to what
does or may go wrong in or with the schools, nor is it the case
that the schools can make up for the failure of society to provide
meaningful jobs, decent health-care and housing, etc. The
arguments given here are direct and well-founded, even if they
will not convince those committed to the programme of the "Right."
Their strength rather lies in the ability of the authors, to draw
the attention of those critical of the programme of the "Right" to
the complexity of the situation and to show that questions of
larger social and political movements cannot be screened out from
educational theory nor should educational theory and reflection on
practice simply be reduced to political economy. In addition,
Apple in particular notes (in this and in other chapters) that the
conservative movement is one of the strongest and most
transformative of the century and therefore needs to be examined
with care and diligence, by one's taking seriously its motives and
reasons rather than replying by invoking highly theoretical
jargon. (Here an occasional critical aside against
postmodernist/poststructuralist theorizing in education may be
noted.)
The theme of the strength of the conservative movement and
the investigation of its constitution preoccupy Apple in other
chapters as well, such as in Chapters Three and Five (conclusion).
Chapter Three actually is the
most compelling and startling one, while Chapter Five has a
forthright directness rarely found in academic writing.
Chapter Three examines the emergence of a cohesive
neoconservative orientation in a particular school-district.
Anita Oliver and Apple want to answer one question: "How does the
Right get formed?" (p. 45). They take the position that the new
conservative consensus often is built in response to a variety of
accidental factors, and does not simply amount to the execution of
a master-plan, down to the particulars of educational practice in
local settings.
The authors thus move away from any conspirational theory of
the New Conservativism so common among members of the "Cultural
Left" and attempt to show that this movement gives shape to common
and popular conceptions of what is going wrong in and with
American society. It does not simply exploit these conceptions
and sentiments either.
They show that the building of "Right-Wing" consensus is a
political process, as would be the building of a "Left-Wing" one.
Thus there is no escape from a reflection on particular
actions and policies, arguments and initiatives. Oliver and Apple
develop their argument by focusing on a controversy regarding the
adoption of a text book, treating it as an instance of what counts
as official knowledge in the schools (here Apple also alludes to a
previous book of his). They show that a parental challenge to a
particular textbook to be adopted was met by a
bureaucratically/managerially preprepared response, meant to hold
grass-roots or parental criticism at bay and implying, on the part
of the school administration and of board-officials, that any such
"grass-roots" criticism could only be unenlightened and "Right-
wing" anyway.
Here the authors have identified a most important step in the
emergence of many Right-Wing movements, from European Fascism
(Nazism) to the Anglo-American "New Right": These movements avail
themselves of the protest-potential to be found among people
disappointed by bureaucracy, technocracy, and expert rule. A
political position (and condemnation) is quickly achieved, when
these structures are associated with the "State" and interpreted
to reflect a loss and erosion of community, as happens in the U.S.
(more than elsewhere at present). Thus the fear that social
solidarity might be disintegrating, is mobilized and directed
toward the constitution of an educational and moral code which is
to reestablish social cohesion. It is at this point that
"Rightist" tendencies may become dangerous and one should not
hesitate to once again reflect on Fascism (and the racism and
anti-intellectualism built into it), in order to be forewarned.
Apple and Oliver succeed in showing how a series of errors and a
lack of understanding on the part of an insensitive and powerful
administrative apparatus may mobilize and crystallize popular
sentiment such that a populist interpretation of state action
arises and a well-designed or educationally promising text becomes
seen as an undemocratic imposition and misleads people to believe
that neoconservative and (possibly) Christian fundamentalist
values are actually democratic and perhaps more democratic than
those represented by well-meaning educational specialists and
academics regularly involved in the examination of curricular
materials, etc.
Apple and Oliver show, in essence, that at bottom the
conflict is about democracy and the place of education in
democratic development. The question is how an educational
project can be defended which helps people accept and learn to be
at home in open situations such that they are not afraid of
conflict.
In the conclusion (Chapter Five), Apple addresses this issue.
For him problems of learning in contemporary schools in the U.S.
are really "about competing social visions" (p. 97). He mentions
as the greatest failing of the neoliberal/neoconservative reform-
movement that it refuses to situate its curricular and other
reform proposals in the larger context of "democratic education
and a more democratic society" (p. 97). Quite appropriately Apple
discusses how John Dewey still had a conception of such a context
and redesigned vocational education on this basis.
Apple then proceeds to praise a proposal made by the Ontario
Federation of Labour in Canada which echoes the Deweyan tradition.
He thus prepares the reader for his concluding argument that
"nonreformist reforms" (p. 107) are the best course to follow.
They are a combination of political and educational approaches
taken toward schooling. In the pursuit of "nonreformist reforms"
matters of social justice and of social equality continue to be
addressed, often by acting critically upon the daily practical
details of classroom situations. But in this approach steps
toward reform also remain linked to "a larger social vision and to
a larger social movement" (p. 109). It almost goes without saying
that this argument implies a defense of the public school in the
U.S.
I believe that Apple's book (together with his previous ones)
is very important under present conditions and helps one maintain
a perspective on educational as well as human and social
development which was first articulated by John Dewey and has
since then become an American tradition. Those living in other
countries, such as myself, have been greatly impressed by it.
Apple helps us reidentify its contours. This holds true even if
he introduces a more strongly political element than was typical
of the progressivist tradition. But this is a requirement of the
times, as much as a feature of Apple as an educational theorist.
Apple's lectures collected in this book also help one see
through the pretentious radicalism of much postmodernist and
poststructuralist educational criticism which frequently remains
unburdened by a concern for the daily detail of life in schools.
Overall the most important lesson of the book is not to
underestimate the force and coherence of the new conservative
attack on the liberal and progressivist educational agenda.
At present it matters more to come to terms with this
movement as a whole and its power of attraction than to receive
detailed practical instruction on how to respond to it. It is
this understanding which Apple helps the reader achieve, and in
quite a compelling, concrete and comprehensible way.
About the Reviewer
Dieter Misgeld
Department of Theory and Policy Studies
The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the
University of Toronto
|
No comments:
Post a Comment