Showing posts with label higher ed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label higher ed. Show all posts

Friday, July 27, 2018

An Introduction to Neoliberalism in Higher Education and the Community College

In this series of blog posts, we address an introduction to a conversation on neoliberalism and how it affects the college's students and the workers. As a series of blog posts, we do not expect to explain all the complexities or deep ramifications of neoliberalism, but we hope that the union members can see the connections of global, national, state, and LSC System policies and attitudes, damaging both the community and the workers' future. We will provide multiple resources for additional reading. Ultimately, we want to uncover how neoliberal ideologies are practiced in the college so that we can slow down or resist administrative polities.
Source: Awantha Artigala

Definitions

Though David Harvey, writing in 1990, described the late-20th century economic system as "post-Fordism," showing contrast with classical industrial (and education) economic models of early the 20th century, today we recognize neoliberalism as "an economy built on just-in-time production, the internationalization of capital, the deregulation of industry, insecure labor, and the entrepreneurial self" (Iber). Whereas Enlightenment (classical) governments fostered capitalism but highlighted personal liberty (read: liberalism), neoliberal governments "act in the interests of capital, since, if businesses do not like a certain country’s policies ... they can disrupt the economy by abruptly withdrawing from that country," and therefore "preserving the rights of capital is the goal, even when that means sacrificing democratic demands" (Iber). Usually, when folks refer to neoliberalism, we look back to the University of Chicago in 1970s when, in response to revolutions in South America, academics advised the Chilean dictator Pinochet.
Most of those who oversaw the savagely abrupt dismantling of the Allende government’s economic policies and their replacement by austerity budgets, privatization of state enterprises and the state pension system, abolition of price controls, abandonment of most foreign trade restrictions, and demobilization of the labor unions did not call themselves “neoliberals.” Some Chilean economists had picked up the term from their German reading. (Rodgers, emphasis added)
But this economic model had already been influential to American politics, and a major actor (literally and metaphorically) has affected American higher education. In 1967, California Governor Ronald Reagan (who had never completed a university program, himself) told reporters that taxpayers shouldn’t be “subsidizing intellectual curiosity" (Berrett). This hostility towards higher education continues in our national and local antipathy for both universities, colleges, and faculty. Reagan's call for austerity instead of intellectualism has been the framework for Texas higher education since the 1980s and, we argue, is the foundational culture of Lone Star College System.

We can see how U.S. government moved in 1970s, then especially under Reagan and all presidential administrations (all -- including Clinton and Obama)  have prioritized forms of capitalism instead of personal liberties. Yes, we can discuss some expansion of personal liberties since the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Rights Movement, and important events such as reproduction rights and marriage equality, but a) every of these are being threatened by the increasingly conservative political scene, often mimicking classical calls for "liberty" but b) ultimately are benefited by the powers of production. We'll come back to this. But now, here, focus on the weakening of labor unions and the use of higher education with neoliberal government mindset.

Applications in Higher Ed

Under neoliberalism, the ultimate game is profit, privilege, and power -- not liberty. Neoliberal governments (remember, international, national, U.S. state, university systems, and college districts) “configures human beings exhaustively as market actors, always, only, and everywhere as homo oeconomicus,” explained by Wendy Brown in her Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism's Stealth Revolution. Specifically, in neoliberal governments
  • The state remodels itself as a firm
  • the university as a factory, and 
  • the self as an object with a price tag. (Rodgers)
We can see how the LSC administration practices this: the marketing, the enrollment process, the press releases, the "professional development" rely on corporate-speak and the discussion of college survivalism is always framed in terms of bodies, not minds. Each semester, we hear either praises for enrollment numbers (when higher) or in distress (when lower) but we rarely discuss student learning. The college models the administration as a corporation instead of a place of learning and the Board expects to reduce the tax rates though student success is not increasing; the college functions as a factory with input, cost-saving measures (obviously: contingent faculty, but also consider overcrowded classes, lack of sufficient student tutoring, and more); the administration markets large billboards to the community as a "cost-saving" opportunity -- it's all a price tag.

For now, we recommend that you watch a 43-minute video "Neoliberalism in Higher Education" produced by Critical Political Education on Vimeo.com:

Neoliberalism in Higher Education from Critical Political Education on Vimeo.

Practices in Community Colleges

The obvious symptom of neoliberalism in Texas is the decreasing funding support of the state. Whereas the American public higher education system had been founded for education for the masses through collective shared responsibility, Texas biennial budget plan is to decrease funding in each recent cycle (see, for example, Texas Monthly's "Senate Budget Slams Texas’s Colleges and Universities"). The rhetoric of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, the Senate and Legislation all call for austerity, using terms such as "belt-tightening" and "personal responsibility." Meanwhile, textbook prices increase, LSCS tuition has increased, while community students struggle with tuition, food, transportation, and child care.
Source: Lone Star College "Tuition/Fee History"

Similarly, the LSCS contingent (adjunct) labor rate is merely $41.75, while New York State community college contingent labor rate averages at $65. The college Administration argues that the Houston "market" compares HCC, and San Jac, while New York cost of living is higher. But that's the point: we know our adjuncts are struggling in Houston, but the Administration uses market-driven arguments instead of those of personal liberties, namely ... living.

This is just the conversation.

In Future Posts:

In future posts, we will address
1. Neoliberalism action in the State of Texas
2. Neoliberalism action in Lone Star College Administration and Board
3. Effects of neoliberalism in the classroom and student success.

What We Can Do

  1. We must learn more about neoliberalism in Texas: reading circles, on-line discussions, and on-campus scholarly forums to better inform. We call each union member to lead this call for on-campus informed discussion of state policies that affect our students and our working lives.
  2. Share our stories. Share our stories of how college policies affect our students. Share our stories of adjunct faculty. Share our stories with overcrowded classrooms. Share our stories of "disappearing" students. Share our stories of faculty load, exhaustion, frustration, and anxieties.
  3. As we expand our own learning, we must meet with our legislators regularly to resist the pervasive and emerging neoliberal practices, laws, budgets, and rationalization. 
  4. Very specifically, we must press our senate faculties, our campus presidents and vice presidents, and ultimately with the Board of Trustees to demonstrate how these ideologies are harming our communities. This should be a concerted discussion, informed discussion, and persistent discussion.

Suggested Reading

Monday, May 7, 2018

UC System Workers Prepare to Strike


American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299, the largest union in the University of California system, plans to begin a three day strike this week. AFSCME is the largest workers' union in California, and the UC system is the largest state employer, so the ongoing negotiations and the coming strike are important and have huge potential to affect all of California's workers.

AFSCME represents largely lower-income workers, including gardeners, cooks, drivers, custodians, lab techs, and nurse's aids, and these employees are disproportionately women, people of color, and immigrants. An expected 25,000 AFSCME workers will strike, with an equal number expected to join from the California Nurse's Association and the University Professional & Technical Employees union. (UC has requested, and obtained, a restraining order that bars "essential employees," including pharmacists and respiratory therapists, from joining picket lines.) The union that represents graduate student workers is not officially on strike because of contract agreements, but many graduate assistants and tutors are also expected to exercise their individual rights to join the strike.

The action is taken in response to a recent study and report written by the AFSCME Local 3299 which showed a widening income gap between the highest and lowest wage earners in the system, including the particularly damning statistic that the "share of total payroll cost for UC’s top 10% of wage earners grew from 22% to 31%, while the share for the bottom 50% dropped from 24% to just 22%." The study also found that "UC's highest-paid administrators include a higher proportion of whites and men than the State of California while its lowest-paid workers are mainly people of color and women."

The scale of income disparity, especially as that disparity is so obviously skewed along racial and gender demographics, is unconscionable and particularly egregious in the UC system, though it should be noted that such disparity is not abnormal within academic institutions.

AFSCME's requests in bargaining with the UC management were for wage increases, benefits protections, job security, and ending this discrimination. The raises that have been offered, paired with other cuts within the system, have been deemed unacceptable, and the union voted to strike back in April.

In addition to the large nature of the union action, this strike is also important because it represents solidarity from higher paid workers, such as those represented by the CNA, with the lower-wage workers of AFSCME. Workers with higher salaries and better protections within the institutions are joining the fight, an absolute necessity for true change. 

We stand in solidarity with workers in the UC System as they fight for equality and fairness in the workplace.