The Power of Resistance

Rowhea M. Elmesky, Carol Camp Yeakey, Olivia C. Marcucci, Rowhea M. Elmesky, Carol Camp Yeakey, Olivia C. Marcucci

• Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781787148871
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: History of Education

Recent history has documented a phenomenal surge in global unrest. From Missouri to the Middle East, the world has watched waves of momentum build, peak, and dip around events such as the shooting of Michael Brown and the acquittal of Hosni Mubarak. There have been waves of mass protests of resistance, vivid expressions of human agency through the use of technology and social media, and the clear search for finding voice in spaces where the culture of silence has been the norm for decades. This quest for humanization has led, in some cases, to macro-level changes such as the fall of governments, the collapse of economic stability, and the production of immense refugee populations. It has also led to micro-level changes within individuals' decisions to no longer be silenced or accept the status quo. Although separated by vast geographic space, this book serves to link these struggles through developing understandings of common patterns within and interconnections across oppressive societal structures. While these dynamic forms of human agency can be studied from multiple perspectives, this book is guided through the powerful ideological frameworks of culture and social reproduction and looks specifically to the role of schooling as a vehicle for catalysing change.

SECTION 1
INSTITUTIONAL AND HISTORICAL FACTORS IN INEQUALITY

CONCEPTIONS OF EQUITY IN AN AGE OF GLOBALIZED EDUCATION: A DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF HOW THE PROGRAM FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDENT ASSESSMENT (PISA) DISCUSSES EQUITY

Nicholas P. Triplett

ABSTRACT

Over the past two decades, scholars have noted an increasing global convergence in the policy and practice of education that predominantly contains Western ideals of mass schooling serving as a model for national school systems (Bieber & Martens, 2011; Goldthorpe, 1997; Spring, 2008). A number of transnational organizations contribute disproportionately to global educational discourse, particularly the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) through its international comparative performance measure, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This study conducted a critical discourse analysis of the OECD document PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through Equity (OECD, 2013) to examine the ways that PISA and the OECD conceive of educational equity in a global context. Given the growing convergence of global educational policy, the way that transnational educational organizations address equity has crucial implications for the ways that the world intervenes in schooling to promote or diminish equitable outcomes. Analysis revealed that the OECD and the PISA foreground economistic notions of educational equity, which diminishes the role of other factors (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, immigration status, language) that mediate equity in schools. Findings and implications are discussed.

Keywords: Equity; education; discourse analysis; PISA; globalization

Education is an increasingly global phenomenon, and is nested within larger economic, political, and social forces associated with the process of globalization. The economist Theodore Levitt is credited with coining the term globalization in 1985 to describe worldwide changes in global economics affecting production, consumption, and investment (Stromquist, 2002). Globalization quickly moved beyond the realm of economics, often becoming a fixture of political, cultural, technological, and social analyses that describe ongoing processes affecting large segments of the world and its inhabitants (Spring, 2008). It should be noted that many of the processes that define globalization were underway on a smaller scale long before the 20th century (Frank, 1998; Gills & Thompson, 2006). In contemporary usage, globalization more broadly refers to the compression of the world and the intensification of worldwide social relations wherein more people across larger distances are becoming connected in more and different ways (Giddens, 1991; Lechner & Boli, 2014; Robertson, 1992).

Given that schooling is perhaps the “most commonly found institution and most commonly shared experience of all in the contemporary world” (Dale & Robertson, 2003, p. 7), it is not surprising that globalization was also quick to enter the discourse in education (Spring, 2008). In 2003, the editors of the new journal Globalisation, Societies and Education defined the field of globalization and education as the study of “an intertwined set of global processes affecting education, such as worldwide discourses on human capital, economic development, and multiculturalism; intergovernmental organizations; information and communication technology; nongovernmental organizations; and multinational corporations” (Dale & Robertson, 2003, p. 7).

Over the past two decades, scholars have noted an increasing global convergence in the policy and practice of education that predominantly contains Western ideals of mass schooling serving as a model for national school systems (Baker & LeTendre, 2005; Lechner & Boli, 2005; Meyer, Kamens, & Benavot, 1992). Scholars have used the dual phenomena of internationalization (Furlong, 2005; Goldthorpe, 1997) and convergence (Holzinger & Knill, 2008) to characterize the ways in which transnational organizations draw lessons from each other, engage in cooperative problem-solving, and practice policy emulation and promotion within a global educational context (Bieber & Martens, 2011). Spring (2008) notes how most of the world’s governments generally discuss similar educational agendas centered on “investing in education to develop human capital or better workers and to promote economic growth,” which has produced a convergence of educational discourses emphasizing “human capital, lifelong learning, the improvement of job skills, and education as a means of economic competitive advantage” (p. 332).

This convergence belies a growing overlap and an increasing influence of economic organizations and transnational corporations over policy and practice in education. Government and business groups regularly invoke the need for of schools to meet the needs of the global economy (Business Roundtable, 2005; Great Britain Department for Education & Skills, 2004; Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development, 2013). Bill Gates, the American founder of the multinational software corporation Microsoft, sums up the sentiment: “In the international competition to have the biggest and best supply of knowledge workers, America is falling behind. That is the heart of the economic argument for better high schools” (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2005).

A number of transnational organizations contribute disproportionately to global educational discourse and practice through both the internationalization of schooling policies and the influence of economic aid contingent upon educational reforms (Bieber & Martens, 2011; Odora-Hoppers, 2014). The major institutions in this arena include the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, the United Nations, UNESCO and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (Spring, 2008). In particular, the use of international assessments such as Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) as a normative benchmarking tool have contributed to global uniformity of national curricula and production and reproduction of global educational policy (Bieber & Martens, 2011; Grek, 2009; Rizvi & Lingard, 2006).

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has emerged as one of the most influential organizations in global education (Martens, 2007; Rinne, Hokka, & Kallo, 2004), primarily through the PISA as an international performance measure, and more broadly in terms of its influence on public perception (Bieber & Martens, 2011; Rogers, 2014). The PISA measures the performance of high school graduates in member nations who have completed compulsory schooling and are poised to enter the labor market (Lingard & Grek, 2007). A report authored by the OECD entitled PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through Equity opened by stating: “Equipping citizens with the skills necessary to achieve their full potential, participate in an increasingly interconnected global economy, and ultimately convert better jobs into better lives is a central preoccupation of policy makers around the world” (OECD, 2013, p. 3). As the title of the report makes plain, the OECD does not merely conduct and report upon international assessments, it uses the results of the PISA to actively engaged in the discourse around equity in global education. The OECD’s emphasis on the relationship between educational equity and the economic future of students and nations in a world of increasingly mobile capital has been echoed in similar arguments by notable American scholar Linda Darling-Hammond (2010).

However, the meaning of educational equity in a global context is contested. In contrast to the view that education is primarily a means of attaining economic competitive advantage, many stakeholders emphasize how global policy can “support educational alternatives that will preserve local languages and cultures, ensure progressive educational practices that will protect the poor against the rich, and protect the environment and human rights” (Spring, 2008, p. 336). Given the aforementioned convergence of global educational policy, how equity is conceived in global educational discourse has crucial implications for the ways that the world’s nations intervene in schooling to promote or diminish equitable outcomes.

This chapter reports on a discourse analysis of the document titled PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through Equity (OECD, 2013). It asks a rather straightforward research question: What conceptions of educational equity are forwarded by the OECD in the publication: PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through Equity? I begin by providing background on the OECD and the PISA before reviewing the literature on classical and contemporary thought around educational equity. Next, I address discourse theory (Foucault, 1970, 1989), the chapter’s theoretical framework. I then describe the chapter’s methodology, critical discourse analysis (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999; Fairclough; 1995) before turning to findings and interpretations related to the research question. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the findings and implications.

BACKGROUND TO THE OECD AND THE PISA

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is an international economic organization of 34 member countries founded in 1961. The OECD grew out of the Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC), which administered the Marshall Plan of American financial aid and economic programs for the reconstruction of Europe after World War II. While the OEEC was exclusively a European association, the OECD opened membership to non-European nations upon founding. While the current membership of the OECD includes a small number of nations from East Asia, South America, and the Middle East, the organization remains composed predominantly of European nations (Table A1). The OECD’s mission is to “promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world” (About the OECD, n.d., para. 1). The group’s primary functions are data gathering, policy formulation and implementation, and policy assessment. While the OECD began as an economic agency, it is involved in “a wide range of things, from agriculture and tax to the safety of chemicals” (About the OECD, n.d., para. 2). The OECD conducts the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), “a triennial international survey which aims to evaluate education systems worldwide by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students” (About PISA, n.d., para. 1). PISA measures students’ performance on mathematics, science, and reading. The 2012 PISA was conducted in 65 countries (Table A1). The assessment is created in English and French languages, and translated into the various languages of participating populations (42 languages in 2012).

LITERATURE REVIEW

Classical Conceptions of Equity in Education

While economic, social, and political arrangements vary widely across the world’s developed countries, all have instituted some form of mass schooling to give the public access to education (Hutmacher, Cochrane, & Bottani, 2001). The use of the term “developed” is noteworthy here, because while a full treatment is beyond the scope of this manuscript, it should be noted that in many parts of the “developing” world access even to primary education has not been thoroughly achieved (Global Campaign for Education, 2010). However, neither a lack of access in the world’s poorest countries nor universal establishment in the developed world has been sufficient to produce equitable outcomes in a sustainable manner amongst significant numbers of students (Hutmacher, et al., 2001).

Equity has been defined in education (and in other fields) in various ways through time. While current conceptions of equity eschew the anachronistic (and empirically unfounded) belief in biological factors as a basis for differential outcomes in schooling, scholars from various theoretical perspectives have remained skeptical toward the prospect of educational equity. Reproduction theories, which position schooling as an important contributor to the maintenance (reproduction) of existing social arrangements, often view equity as unattainable in the absence of global social revolution (Benadusi, 2002; Bourdieu, 1996; Bowles & Gintis, 1976). Others maintain that equity is reachable only at the expense of other more important ethical values associated with individualism and choice (Boudon, 1976). While there remains no universal consensus regarding the desirability or plausibility of attaining equity, the most diffused perspective within the sociology of education holds that barriers to equity are primarily social in nature and can be addressed through social change (Benadusi, 2002). Here, the equity principle emphasizes the independence of educational outcomes from student’s social background (class, race, gender, community, etc.) (Bloom, 1979; Perry, 2009). Some ascribing to this principle still allow for differences in educational outcomes based on notions of merit or natural ability (Rawls, 1971, 1993), while others hold firmly to the total independence of scholastic output and background variables. Benadusi (2002) proposes a middle ground, wherein “genetic factors and those related to individual discretionary choices are held to exercise an effect only on inequalities within, not among, groups … (a)s only the last ones are considered unfair.”

The Current Discourse on Equity in Education

Up to this point, this review of literature has focused on what might be termed “classical” conceptions of equity in education and society. While these theories are critical to an understanding of the equity discourse, readers might have noted that much of the above literature is not new. The rise of globalization and global education over the past two decades offers an explanation for the dearth of current theoretical and scholarly works on educational equity. There has been a perceptible shift in the equity discourse toward transnational educational institutions (such as the OECD) that favor conceptions of equity that attempt to address economic, social, and political implications of gl...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Section 1 Institutional and Historical Factors in Inequality
• Section 2 Students, Youth, and Families as Agents of Resistance
• Epilogue: The Call for Freedom
• Index