This review has been accessed
times since August 20, 2009
|
Torres, Carlos Alberto. (2008) Education and Neoliberal
Globalization. NY: Routledge
Pp. 138 $125 ISBN 978-0415991186
|
Reviewed by Carlos R. Ruano
Department of Indian & Northern Affairs,
Canada
August 20, 2009
In this book, Carlos Alberto Torres offers through a
collection of essays and academic papers, a series of pieces on
various issues ranging from No Child Left Behind to a tribute in
remembrance of Paulo Freire.Mr. Torres wrote most of the chapters
in the book between 2002 and 2006. Other themes that run through
the book are a critique of international institutions such as IMF
and the World Bank’s educational philosophies –in
particular with reference to United States pragmatism and the war
in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of his key arguments is the
contention that teachers are also “cultural workers”
and as such they have a special duty to represent the oppressed
and marginalized in their communities. The book can be read in at
least two ways: first, as a work of advocacy for specific
political agendas and educational reform grand schemes it
presents Torres views as a social critic. One may or may not
disagree with his views yet appreciate the overall analytical
value of this work. A second reading, and this is the one I wish
to take, is to look at this collection of essays as a
prescription for possible research agendas in the fields of
educational reform as well as an overall critique of a series of
practices that the author terms “neoliberal
In a rather brief space [about 109 pages excluding notes to
chapters], the book runs a variety of topics ranging from the
well worn out criticisms of institutions such as the World Bank
to somewhat simplistic “us versus them” types of
critiques of United States domestic politics such as the
Patriotic Act (sic, p.26). Torres appears to be tone deaf
to the variety of dissenting voices regarding many of the
policies he attributes to an-all encompassing and monolithic
platform of United States foreign policy. Like many other
critics, he fails to reconcile the apparent docility of American
public opinion with the vigor that he encounters in critical
pedagogy and teaching practice. In other words, if the U.S.
environment is so restrictive of dissent, how is it possible that
open defiance of the political establishment is not only
acceptable yet oftentimes encouraged by American political
debate? If the World Bank is guilty of market
fundamentalism (p. 31), why is it that it continues to be one
of the few institutional actors that actually include Human
Rights and Gender as two key elements of its education lending
policy?
Torres appears to be guilty of the same reductionism he
attributes to many of the institutions he criticizes.
Particularly problematic are his single-angle criticisms against
NCLB and how it will end up producing nothing but
“Centurions of the new century…Green Card Marines in
the imperial army” (p.51). As if the automatic destiny of
every person of color in the U.S. was to be little more than a
drone in the imperial war machine. It is this simplicity of
argument that undercuts the book’s valuable contributions.
For instance, the elegant way in which he posits a clear linkage
between teaching as a cultural acts and how these acts shape the
Weltanschauung for both teachers and students.
Furthermore, his insights in regards to teaching as part of a
political pedagogy can be quite useful in guiding an agenda for
locally-owned education reform as is his understanding of the
feminist standpoint voice as part of a retooled strategy for
engagement and collaboration among all stakeholders.
Unfortunately, these positive contributions are continuously
drowned out by notions of the oppressed as eternal victims or as
peons in a drama entirely outside of their control. His critique
of contemporary ideological positions in the United States might
be more accessible to the non-partisan reader had Torres also
looked at the birth of Human Rights as yet another European
ideological construct that has clearly superseded
religiously-based ethical notions of equity and fairness during
the latter part of the 20th century (Godelier, 1995).
In this regard, it is particularly telling that Torres does not
discuss non-Western based notions of educational thought that are
prevalent in countries that have had significant success with
their own variants of educational reform such as Korea, Taiwan
and Singapore (Le Nouvel Observateur, 2009). This is clearly this
book’s most significant shortcoming: In attempting to
address the reprehensible aspects of globalization the author
fails singularly to grasp the possibilities offered by developing
a truly comparative and global approach to education, one that
includes the values and aspirations of many peoples and cultures
on a planetary rather than parochial scale. I suspect that Mr.
Torres would be pleasantly surprised to find options for
resistance against oppression in places where both ancient and
new cultural practices are colliding with innovative visions of
teaching with the most fascinating results.
References
Godelier, M. (1995). Is Social Anthropology indissolubly
linked to the West, its birthplace? International Social
Science Journal, 143, 141-158.
Le NouvelObservateur. Comprendre les pensées de
l’orient [understanding Eastern philosophies].Paris:
Special issue, January/February, 2009.
About the Reviewer
Carlos R. Ruano is Senior Policy Advisor with the Department of Indian &
Northern Affairs Canada. He received his EdD in Sociology and
Equity Studies in Education from the University of Toronto. Previously,
Carlos worked as Education Program Specialist and Senior Policy Advisor
with UNESCO, ILO, CIDA and HRSDC. The usual disclaimer applies.
Copyright is retained by the first or sole author,
who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.
Editors: Gene V Glass, Gustavo Fischman, Melissa Cast-Brede
~
ER home |
Reseņas Educativas |
Resenhas Educativas ~
~
overview | reviews | editors | submit | guidelines | announcements | search
~