VIEWPOINT
THE PRICE OF THE FREE MARKET Education and the looming threat of privatization By Mark Tagliaferri
O
ver the Christmas break, while aimlessly flipping through TV stations, I stumbled upon that old holiday movie classic: Michael Moore’s “Sicko.” In all seriousness, as you may know, Moore’s 2007 documentary details the grim realities of the American medical system, and the negative, sometimes life-and-death consequences of privatized health care. After my standard “aren’t we lucky we’re Canadian” reaction, I started to think more deeply, and more generally, about the topic of privatization. In the days leading up to my impromptu viewing, I had come across a few newspaper articles that had given me pause: one, a pre-budget piece, explored the usefulness of Teach for Canada as a potential antidote to the problems of Aboriginal student education; a second article, from Ontario, praised the early ventures of a private company that offers for-credit high school courses abroad; and the third, an opinion piece from the US, made the case for “educational choice,” following the nomination of Betsy DeVos, a fierce proponent of private charter schools, as President Trump’s education secretary. A few years back, political philosopher Michael J. Sandel warned, “The reach of markets, and market-oriented thinking, into aspects of life traditionally governed by nonmarket norms is one of the most significant developments of our time.” As I finished “Sicko,” I thought about that quote, and the three articles I had read. We tend to frame discussions of privatization in sensationalist terms, and thus tend to gravitate toward topics like health care, where the consequences are most stark and obvious. But there is also danger in the more subtle, seemingly innocuous advances. And perhaps nowhere has this reality loomed larger in recent years than in education. Part of the problem with confronting the elusive dangers of privatized education, or “Edubusiness” as it’s sometimes called, is that it takes so many forms. It isn’t just the big charter schools that undermine public education, writ large; it also comes in scaled-down versions, like credit courses offered by private companies, or third-party organizations that promise to “clean up” board management issues. It’s helpful to remember that, at its core, privatized education seeks to do one thing: transfer responsibility for providing, regulating, and financing
28
@ OECTA
| FEBRUARY 2017
education from government to individuals and private companies. Now, I don’t blame companies for wanting to enter this space. As CTF President Heather Smith notes, “Wall Street investors… see education as a potentially profitable investment, with an estimated global value of four trillion dollars.” And you can almost make an intellectual case from the consumer’s perspective. If we live in a free market society, and competition in most areas is deemed to improve choice and quality, shouldn’t parents have a choice between a variety education systems, just like they have a choice between varieties of laundry detergent? Who cares if your daughter learns history from a qualified teacher, or on the lido deck of Breaker High? (Bonus points if you get that reference.) Many of you will instantly note the error in this line of thinking; namely, the argument is based on the flawed premise that education is a consumer good, rather than a public good. But with privatized education creeping more and more into the public sphere each year, it is no longer enough to simply dismiss the argument out of hand, as logical fallacy. It’s worth thinking about some of the real-world consequences of privatized education. It is easy enough to make the case against charter schools, as research shows that this form of privatization promotes social and cultural inequalities. The introduction of admissions fees, however small, disproportionately impacts poor and vulnerable segments of society, as wealthier locations will receive more resources, in aggregate. In Canada, such a system would significantly disadvantage poorer regions. In some cases, such as with Canada’s Indigenous people, entire populations would suffer, and the system would serve to reinforce existing inequalities. If education is a public good, and