Challenges Faced by Educators due to Neoliberal Globalization and Development - Literature review Example

Challenges Faced By Educators Due To Neoliberal Globalization and Development Name Institution Date Introduction Neoliberalism is a market driven model to both social and economic policy and is based upon neoclassical theories of economies that emphasize the effectiveness of liberalized trade, private enterprise and relatively open markets, and thus seeks to maximize the function of the private sector in determining the economic and political priorities of the nation. The conditions of globalization have resulted to a fast expansion of a global education market, based upon the discourse of worldwide competition. This phenomenon has been principally commercial and economically motivated. It’s the procedure that has been highly fuelled by neo -liberal economic that has become a dominant paradigm for so much of the world over the past decades of the twentieth century. According to neoliberal economics, provision of education as a public good paid for via taxation is unjustified and is replaced by the argument for placing education on the user pays basis and deregulation of education institutions so that they may vie for the educational dollar of the clients or students (Tiffin & Rajasingham, 1995: 164). Challenges faced by educators due to neoliberal globalization The forces associated with globalization, whether social or economic, have conditioned the context within which educators operate, and intensely changed people’s experience of both informal and formal education. Hutton and Giddens (2001: 96-97) note that colleges and schools have for instance become locations for branding and targets of business expansion. Neoliberal globalization has resulted to commoditization of education and the development of trials to standardize educational products so as to find economies of scale. The extension of higher education in Northern Ireland and Britain, during this time, for example, entailed restructuring of programmes to enhance their marketing. This entailed marketing novel courses like MBAs, modulization so as to attain economies of scale, and increased utilization of distance and part time learning programmes so as to target those already in operation. This has posed a challenge for educators because they are supposed to spend their free time teaching the part time and distant learning students (Knight, 2000: 145). According to Richard (1998: 249-251), neoliberal globalization has resulted to important moves towards corporatization in schooling as well as non formal education. In 1980s and early 1990s this was originally carried forward by rise of managerialism in numerous western education schemes. The people who were in authority were trained and encouraged to view themselves as managers , and reframe the difficulties of education as practices in delivering the appropriate results. However, as a result of neoliberalism, the disposition and language is management swiftly shifted into the classroom through initiatives like UK national curriculum (Green, 1997: 57-60). Additionally, there has been the wholesome strengthening of market in numerous education systems. Giroux (2000: 6) notes that learning institutions have to compete for learners so as to extend and sustain their funding. This has in turn implied that schools are required to market their activities and develop their individual brands. Therefore schools sell the learning experience and the positive qualities of their institution and their educators. The outcome has been the drive towards the accomplishment outcomes and adoption of standardized teaching models which educators are not trained for and used to. The emphasis is less on equity and community, but is more on personal advancement and the want to gratify influential consumers and investors. This has made education as well as educators to resemble a private, other than a public good (Torin, 2005: 57-60). According to Stiglitz, (2002: 101), due to marketization of education, there has been the general trend towards reduction of per capita public funding, particularly in higher education in spite of the ongoing expansion in student enrolments, resulting to financial crisis in learning institutions. The burden of funding education is been shifted to the shoulders of individual learners and even public universities are being increasingly financed by non governmental sources, particularly through student tuition , donations from alumni, and direct payment from the business for services offered by these institutions. The philosophy underpinning this change is the presumption that education is a private matter of personal choices and individual benefits attained by learners for the employment market. Behind this view is an education model that devolves the obligation for the universal good to the cumulative of atomized personal choices. This approach has resulted to the spirit of competition amid the diverse education institutions, driving them towards the presumed incentives and rewards of market place and away from the conventional notion of the academic community of educator and learners devoted to the pursuit of learning (Mittelman, 1999: 138-140). Stiglitz (2002: 157) notes that under the neoliberal globalization, the impact of public thrift in diminishing funding of learning institutions, accompanied by the usually haphazard increase in the number of students has bee harmful. Across a variety of nations, the superiority of educational teaching has suffered in reducing student contact, particularly with the senior staff, who usually appears occasionally and whose standards of teaching might lose much via the continuous repetition and due to the lack of updated teaching materials. Globalization and marketization of education is having an immense impact on learners, as the international and the need to learn the 21st century skilled have increased the academic bar. The novel human capital paradigm is not about having extended durations of schooling so as to prepare learners for industrial jobs, but is about deep disciplinary understanding, content mastery and attaining soft skills of communication , resilience, initiative, problem solving abilities and group dynamics. The novel distractions provided by novel technologies are putting pressure on teachers and educators to make schooling both meaningful and relevant and is calling for new form of teaching form. This implies that there is the need for new modes of teachers preparation and novel enabling conditions in learning institutions to assist teachers to handle the intricate challenges of enhancing student learning (Torin, 2005: 102 -105). How educators can respond to challenges of neoliberal globalization Neoliberal globalization transformed education from a learning activity a money making activity and has required educators to be competitive in market place. Thus educators can respond to marketization and commodization of education through realizing that money can be obtained from formal education by use of learning institutions as an advertising medium. This will in turn help these institutions to represent a captive market. As educational schemes and institutions become more marketized, schools, and colleges, as well as formal educational agencies are supposed to build relationships based highly on seeing students as consumers or customers other than participants. The major function of the teacher should to manage the classroom and educational practices as market based practices and to simply view learners as consumers of educational information (Giroux, 2000: 15). According to Dai et al (2007: 425-427), teaching in the context of the swiftly changing technology based economy needs immensely skiful teachers; educators need a rethink of the concept of teacher professionalism. Thus teachers can redefine and strengthen their professionalism so as to possess the 21st century characteristics that are vital enablers for them to continue doing demanding and intelligent work in classrooms. Educators should recognize that the profession as a whole requires fashioning and owning the redefined professionalism and that foundations for it needs should be laid in initial programmes of teacher preparation (Darling-Hammond, 2000: 7-8). Bereiter and Scardamalia (2005: 105) argue that redefined professionalism will move teaching from old paradigm and firmly place their work as being based upon specialized skills and knowledge. In order to enhance student learning, teachers are require to possess both a broad body of knowledge, as well as the capability to appropriately use this knowledge in a wide range of institutional contexts. Teachers should therefore be equipped with numerous distinctive categories of knowledge such as knowledge of educational situations, ranging from the functioning of the classroom, the financing and governance of school districts to character of culture and communication and curriculum knowledge, with particular grasp of programmes and materials that act as tools of trade for teachers. Redefined professionalism is linked to the issue of accountability and autonomy. A worldwide trend is that governments are required to place on accountability in education since the development of human capital through education needs huge resources and the governments naturally want to assurances of responsible and effective use. This is being interpreted into a sustained effect to goal setting, measure achievement, and to hold schools and teachers accountable to these goals. The academic and teaching fraternity can respond through advocating for empowerment and deregulation of schools for teaching to result to better outcomes (Flessner & Zeichner, 2002: 210). According to Flessner and Zeichner, (2001: 296), from ethical dimension, there have been numerous efforts by teacher educators in numerous nations to prepare tutors as agents of social change who will work with local communities and colleagues to ameliorate the difficulties of injustice and inequality in schooling and within the broader society. Today, the phrase social justice teacher education has come to be utilized to describe social reconstructionist oriented teacher preparation programs. Social justice teacher education such as reflection has become a novel slogan in teacher education amongst teacher educators who classify themselves with a progressive agenda. It has come to point out where it is highly hard to get a teacher education program anywhere that doesn’t claim that possesses a social justice agenda and it prepares teachers to fight against inequities in society and schooling. Goodson and Hargreaves (1999: 65) argue that increased responsibility and opportunity to exercise open judgment over teaching issues, care and curriculum that should remain with the school and teacher. This is because scholars are in a good position to appreciate and identify student diversity, to better judge how excellently their teaching strategies are functioning, and to identify no- school factors that might influence the academic performance of their students. Therefore, new teaching professionals will need to acknowledge responsibility for academic outcomes of learners through setting proper goals, developing empowering environments and guiding and assisting learners. Conclusion It is important to conclude that neoliberal globalization has resulted to commoditization and marketization of education and educators have been required to standardize educational products so as to get economies of scales in market place. This has posed a challenge for educators as learning institutions are required to compete for learners through marketing their activities and developing individual brands and in order to achieve this educators and institutions sell the learning experience and turn students into consumers. Therefore, educators can respond to these challenges by viewing students as consumers other than participants of education. Additionally, educators can redefine their professionalism to attain the knowledge and skills required in the highly changing technology based economy which will in turn enable them to continue with the intelligent and demanding work in the 21st century classrooms. References Bereiter M., & Scardamalia, M., (2005). Beyond bloom’s taxonomy: rethinking knowledge for the knowledge age. Malden, MA: Blacwell. Dai, C., Denslow, D., & Rosenberg, M., (2007). Economic analysis and the design of alternative route teacher education programs. Journal of teacher education, 58(5) 422-439. Darling-Hammond, L., (2000). Teacher learning that supports learning. Educational leadership, 55(5), 6-11. Goodson, I., & Hargreaves , A., (1996). Teachers’ professional lives: Aspirations and actualities. London: Flamer Press. 238 Flessner, R., & Zeichner, K., (2002). Educating teachers for critical education. New York: Routledge. Knight, J., (2000). Internalization of higher education in Asia Pacific countries. Amsterdam: The EAIE. Mittelman, J., (1999). Globalization: critical reflections. Boulder Colorado: Lynne Rienner. Richard, E., (1998). Different discourses, discourses of differences: Globalization, distance education and open learning. Distance Education, 16 (2), 241-255. Tiffin, J., & Rajasingham, L., (1995). In search of the virtual class. Education as an information society. London: Routledge. Giroux, A., (2000). Stealing innocence. Corporate culture’s war on children. New York: Palgrave. Green, A., (1997). Education, globalization and the nation state. London: Macmillan. Hutton, W., & Giddens, A., (2001). On the edge. Living with global capitalism. London: Vintage. Field, J., (2000). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. Stoke of Trent: Trentham Books. Torin, M. (2005) Globalization, Technological Change, and Public Education, New York: Routledge. Stiglitz, J., (2002). Globalization and its Discontents. London: Allen Lane. 288 pages Read More