Power, Voice and the Public Good: Schooling and Education in Global Societies: Volume 6

Power, Voice and the Public Good: Schooling and Education in Global Societies comes at a most propitious time in our tumultuous world. With the dawn of the new millennium, our global problems of poverty, hunger, disease, war, inadequate schooling, abuse and exploitation, homelessness, and natural disaster have become ever more challenging. That such issues have profound consequences on children across the globe is of no small consequence. It would appear that issues of social equity, social justice and democracy have been subverted in the quest for profit, dominance and social control. Amidst it all, we have become borderless societies where problems from one nation state encumber the resources and priorities of other nation states. Power, Voice and the Public Good: Schooling and Education in Global Societies, while focusing largely on schooling and education in global contexts, provides a lens to view the nexus between schooling and many of the aforementioned global problems which confound us all. Many years ago, the noted anthropologist Margaret Mead stated “There is no greater insight into the future than to recognize that when we save our children, we save ourselves” (Mead, 1991, p. 2).¹ Her statement is as true today as it was many years ago. The chapters in this volume present challenges, but they also present opportunities for all of us to bring our best judgments and efforts to confront the very interdependent cultural and material dilemmas whose resolutions are necessary for global survival and growth.

The purpose and significance of Power, Voice, and the Public Good: Schooling and Education in Global Societies aim to highlight the defining nature and impact of globalization in contemporary educational policy and praxis with particular attention to changing relations in local, state, national, and international contexts, from pre-school to postsecondary education. While globalization impacts major issues such as poverty, social justice, terrorism, citizenship, immigration, language, and human rights, the nature and appropriation of education and schooling remain at the center of these issues (Suárez-Orozco & Qin-Hilliard, 2004). That is, educational systems, policies, practices, and praxis in Mexico, Thailand, India, Korea, the United States, the West Indies, and other nation states addressed in this edited volume require responding to and engaging with the new challenges, conflicts, opportunities, and costs of globalization.

My framework is based upon a grounded analysis (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) of a review of the existing social science and education literature regarding globalization and peace from approximately 1960 to the present. My review consisted of identifying emergent themes in the literature and from these identifying conceptual categories and the relationships among them that could explain some of the ways in which globalization, peace, and educational processes are linked. I approached the literature as a “cache of documents” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), that is, as bodies of literature reflecting certain sensibilities regarding globalization and peace. My framework is based upon an analysis of how these sensibilities have influenced the reproduction of inequalities through the education sector as a socialization and policy context.

Canada is a country with ten provinces and three territories, each of which boasts its own set of unique characteristics. Education is constitutionally defined as a provincial responsibility. Although several federal government departments have some responsibilities in the area of education, there is no federal department of education. Thus, it is difficult to examine educational policy at a national level.

United States immigration policy is one of the most dynamic and fiercely argued public policy issues today – often including questions of how many and from where. Poor economic conditions overseas, perceptions of a relative abundance of opportunity in the United States, flight from persecution and upheaval, and revolutions in communication and transportation are often cited as the major factors explaining historic and current waves of immigrants (legal and illegal) to U.S. shores (Batchelor, 2004; Borjas, 2004; Porter, 2006). U.S. immigration legislation is also a key factor in determining the numbers and composition of America's new residents. The focus of this chapter therefore consists of the costs associated with providing illegal immigrants with the benefit of free, public schooling within the context of globalization. More specifically, given the broader social, political, and economic parameters of the immigration debate and its meaning, the chapter discusses the legal and educational issues faced in the United States by those undocumented students who desire to attend public schooling, as well as the ways current state and federal laws both empower and discourage them.

Through political decisions – in the North mostly willed decisions, in the South decisions forced on them by monetary institutions in the North – governments have dismantled national controls with capital movements, profits and foreign investments. By this willed or enforced political choice – the consequences of which has seldom been spelled out to the electorates – political leaders have removed those legal and administrative tools which might have protected local economic and social systems. Directed by Western interests the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have used and continue to use their creditor powers to pressure first the poor debtor countries of the South and then the collapsing members of the former Soviet Union to turn their own battered economies into the same kind of unrestricted markets. Last but not the least the World Trade Organization (WTO) has become a vehicle for assuring that practically the whole world is opened for the unhindered operations of private capital. This ideology, which I here term globalization, leads to a democratic deficit, increases income differences and forces new groups into poverty.

In recent years, about one in five American children-some 12 to 14 million-have lived in families in which cash income failed to exceed official poverty thresholds. Another one-fifth live in families whose incomes were no more than twice the poverty threshold.⁸Today's economically based reorganization of the U.S. society is reshaping family structure through distinctive racial patterns. Families mainly headed by women have become permanent in all racial categories, with the disproportionate effects of change more visible among racial ethnics.⁹

The recent trend in globalization has had a positive impact on international education, in that it has compelled many societies to transcend national boundaries in an effort to exchange knowledge and expertize in teaching, curriculum and education policy. The practice of cultural borrowing and lending, in which one country adopts or borrows policies and practices from another, is a significant feature of international education, and has been accelerated by these globalizing trends. According to Tilly, internationalization of “capital, trade, industrial organization, communications, political institutions, science, disease, atmospheric pollution, vindictive violence, and organized crime has been producing a net movement toward globalization since the middle of the twentieth century” (Tilly, 2004, p. 13). In the area of international education, an intensification in international communication and cooperation has had a positive impact on educational research, planning and policy development (Schriewer & Martinez, 2004), and may, as some have argued, brought about a convergence of patterns in the organization of education across national boundaries. Nevertheless, globalization in education carries with it the potential to undermine developing and transitional societies in their efforts to maintain indigenous approaches to educating future citizens – a potential that may contribute to the “clash of localities” that is inherent in the globalization process, in which local tradition is frequently at odds with international trends (Mitter, 2001). A measured approach to transnational projects in education development will ensure that the process of cultural borrowing does not lead to the inadvertent export of ideas and values that are at variance with a given country's social, political and historical context, while simultaneously allowing for knowledge transfer across borders. Cultural borrowing is a necessary element in the transfer process, as it may provide the transitioning society with a model in the form of a curriculum, set of standards, or practices. However, as Dewey points out in Democracy and Education, any model or “ideal” must be adapted to meet the needs of the local context:We cannot set up, out of our heads, something we regard as an ideal society. We must base our conception upon societies which actually exist, in order to have any assurance that our ideal is a practicable one. But, as we have just seen, the ideal cannot simply repeat the traits which are actually found. The problem is to extract the desirable traits of forms of community life which actually exist, and employ them to criticize undesirable features and suggest improvement. (Dewey, 1997, p. 45)

For indigenous peoples around the world, schooling and education are fraught with extreme challenges within the current realities of globalization. Indigenous knowledge, perspectives, and pedagogy in Africa, Asia, and the Americas are rarely included in books and courses that deal with history and philosophy of education, and there is widespread belief that non-Western and indigenous educational traditions and realities are not comparable to Western educational traditions and have little to offer discussions about education (Reagan, 2005). That is, the larger discourse of educational thought and practice, as Timothy Reagan suggests in the quote preceding this introduction, has been extremely biased in its treatment of anything non-Western; instead simplistic misunderstandings and misrepresentations reify the larger effects of cultural and epistemological ethnocentrism, colonialism, and Western imperialism.

This chapter examines the complex influences of globalization on higher education in the United States, and specifically considers how globalization has increased the international influence of American college and university student movements. We briefly describe various conceptions of globalization and look at the ways in which a capitalist-oriented form of globalization is infringing upon the social good purpose of higher education. This chapter primarily focuses on “globalization from below,” the ways that oppositional social movements, in this case led by students, use the mechanisms of globalization to promote social equity within, through and beyond higher education. Using the cases of the anti-sweatshop movement and the Sudan divestment movement, this chapter examines how student activists use mechanisms of globalization, particularly global economic connections and technology, to counter aspects of neoliberal globalization, and promote justice and democratization for marginalized people throughout the world.

In the past couple of decades, higher education systems have been in transition in sub-Saharan Africa. The phenomenal growth of private, for-profit higher education institutions is almost universal. The global trends in higher education have affected the universities in sub-Saharan Africa as well. This chapter critically examines the rapid growth of private universities as a result of globalization and its impact on society. Although the research covers only Anglophone sub-Saharan Africa, the findings have broad implications for the whole of sub-Saharan Africa (Jokivirta, 2006). The chapter is divided into four major parts, namely globalization and the knowledge economy; the evolution of private higher education in the region, using two of the oldest universities as examples; the growth of private universities and the challenges facing them; and the linkages between foreign institutions and local ones. The empirical research on which this chapter is based is part of a longitudinal study, 2001–2006, of higher education in sub-Saharan Africa.

This chapter will discuss the relationship between globalisation and higher education, focussing specifically on the University of the West Indies (UWI) as its case study. This work will examine how closely the present policy objectives of the UWI are linked to the changing structures within higher education systems in the global arena. An argument is being made that currently, there are two overarching conditions which are transforming the structures and practices of higher education, namely globalisation through its policy affiliate, neo-liberalism and the incorporation of new information and communication technologies into the knowledge activities of research, publication and pedagogy. Through globalisation, higher education and knowledge production are thwarted as the neo-liberal positivist discourse champions the market-centric approach and higher education becomes embroiled in mass consumption and commodification. The globalisation of higher education therefore encompasses such issues as life-long learning, web-based delivery and distance education. However, this piece will not speak about the issues of technology and its impact on higher education, but address the impact of neo-liberalism on higher education.

Globalization has impacted societies around the world in numerous and varied ways; the impact is economic, political, cultural, and educational. Globalization helped spur a major transformation of the U.S. economy beginning 1980s. The transformation of the U.S. economy began at a time when persons of color were continuing their fight to gain access to the nation's colleges and universities. The battle for access to postsecondary education involved legal battles for access to selective public institutions. The battle for access also coincided with a larger struggle among persons of color to overcome unequal primary and secondary education and gain access to colleges and universities of all types. In many ways the legacy of segregation continued to be an obstacle to persons of color.

This chapter examines the complex issues surrounding international education of foreign student study in the United States and the role such issues play in global societies. Analysis centers on the rationale surrounding international education, its development, its protagonists, and antagonists. In effect, who gains and what are the externalities of international education. The chapter further discusses international education as far more than a study abroad program for it encompasses a host of complex social, political, and economic variables that have impact, not only for schools, but for global societies, in a climate of global tension and uncertainty. While data on foreign student study in the United States complements the study's analysis, larger focus will be upon the international dimensions of foreign student study. Summary discussion concludes the chapter as well as projections with respect to international student enrollment across the globe.

Fujikane (2003) indicates that there are three goals of globalization as educational imperatives. They are: (1) the intensity of interdependence in all aspects of human life, (2) the changing pattern of actors on the world stage, and (3) the growing moral sense of “oneness” transcending national borders. The new worldviews behind the contemporary movements are fundamentally different from the rationalists’ perspective, which supported early educational efforts for international education (Fujikane, 2003). That perspective intended to develop national citizens who could understand, sympathize, and help others in order to create international harmony. In contrast, the revised imperatives are now embracing the idea of new world citizens who acknowledge interdependency, act independently of their own nation states, and are constructing universal morality in order to create a more just global society (Shin, 2003).

The situated appropriation of the content of globalization by Navajo people and institutions in their unique U.S. Southwest context is the focus of this chapter. The local is transforming the content of the global for local ends; this conversation narrative posits situated cultural exchange rather than a conversion narrative that implies a uni-directional mode of cultural assimilation. Reflections on cultural change in both formal and non-formal educational contexts based on the author's years of experience in the Navajo Nation provide data to freshly examine a conceptual framework for explaining cultural change amid contemporary globalization. The concepts of situated appropriation, adaptive intelligence, and mutual appropriation are employed in the analysis of cultural conflict and change in this chapter.

In recent years, there have been major changes in educational governance and the organization and management of primary and secondary education. This is particularly the case as indicated by debates and deliberations over notions of “good governance” and “public management,” accountability, transparency, effectiveness of public services, performance, and the generation of benchmarks and cross-national comparative data. Among these trends is the debate over educational decentralization, which in the past several decades has become a mode of governance strongly advocated by international policy organizations, such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural (UNESCO).

Throughout the course of its history, Thailand has thrived on international commerce and interacting with global forces. During the past two centuries, Thailand has faced a progression of events threatening its self-definition requiring very conscious educational and cultural reform policies to offset the advances of globalized movements. The first series of reforms began to take place in the late 19th century and served as a defensive measure to fend off the onslaught of European colonial activity and to unify a disjointed society. This reform was used to primarily centralize the cultural and religious authority and power of the kingdom, while assimilating the local/regional/rural areas through education. The most recent reform in late 20th century was devised to fend off global market forces and to unify a disjointed society through a strategy of decentralization and educational reform. Both these reforms were countered with strong resistance movements that reflect a resistance heritage that aspires to civil society.

Migration is one of the most significant domestic, development and foreign policy issues in the world today. According to the International Organization for Migration, 1 out of every 35 persons worldwide is an international migrant. This chapter discusses the complex issue of international teacher migration, and reports findings from empirical research conducted in the UK to illuminate the socio-cultural and economic contexts of teacher migration in both industrialized nations and in developing countries. This research, commissioned by the Commonwealth Secretariat, served to inform development of a Commonwealth Teacher Recruitment Protocol, which was adopted by 53 countries in late 2004. This chapter serves to disseminate the results of this research to a larger international audience. It also provides an analysis of the process in which educational research informs international policy development.

In this chapter I argue that education cannot escape being influenced by the economic, political and cultural effects of globalization. Through an examination of the policies of national governments, agenda of international organizations such as the World Bank and UNESCO, the global practices of privatization, accountability and managerialism, I demonstrate that education is being used as a tool of neo-liberal economic reform, a process that increases inequalities and marginalizes the already unheard voices. I argue that any analysis of globalization and its impact on higher education requires stepping back from all interactions and practices and asking basic questions about what these terms imply, why they function the way they do, and whose interests they serve. A critical analysis of the transformation of universities and thus the knowledge produced is essential as it affects and infiltrates our very consciousness. I argue that while higher education is being restructured under the neo-liberal economic rationality it is important for educators to find out what will be gained and what will be lost before going ahead with such restructuring. I also contend that the neo-liberal economic rationality of globalization has framed the restructuring of education in such a manner that its function has changed from production of knowledge to production and management of wealth. As a result of accepting the dominant discourse of the globalization agenda without much critical analysis or debate regarding its consequences, education has lost its basic function of producing democratic citizens.