Skip to main content

‘Invasion’ of Educational Universe by Neo-Liberal Economic Thinking: A Global Casualty?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Indian Metamorphosis
  • 110 Accesses

Abstract

In the preceding part of the book, we have shown how a decided neglect on the part of Indian political leadership towards the importance of ideational and social revolutions in line with Western Enlightenment ideas and values has contributed to holding the country in a state of perpetual metamorphosis, and also how India’s school educational thinking during the prime formative decades after Independence laid a foundation of a distinct legacy of bypassing a crucial task of imparting—through inter alias suitably designed curriculum and textbooks—the core Enlightenment values including the supremacy of reason, rationality, secularity and universalistic humanism into young impressionable minds, outlook and attitudes.

This chapter draws partly on Arup Maharatna (2014), ‘Invasion of Educational Universe by Neo-Liberal Economic Thinking: A Civilizational Casualty?’ EPW Vol. 49, Issue No. 37, 13 September 2014.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We would consciously avoid using such currently popular categories as ‘post-modernism’ or ‘post-structuralism’ for the sake of maintaining the steadfastness of our argument and exposition.

  2. 2.

    The growing and pervasive applications of mainstream neo-classical economic premises, approaches and methods of analysis since the late 1950s not only into the field of education but also into other social science branches such as sociology, anthropology and political science have been subsequently christened as ‘economic imperialism’: ‘The most aggressive economic imperialists aim to explain all social behavior by using the tools of economics’ (Lazear 1999: 6).

  3. 3.

    A key role that was played historically by the state in supporting and maintaining standard, quality and rigour in academies and higher educational institutions got reaffirmed in the late nineteenth century when Britain—though one of the pioneers in the Industrial Revolution—experienced relative declines in industrial economy and its international competiveness vis-a-vis other and newer industrial economies marked by far more extensive state involvement in higher education than in England (Hobsbawm 1999).

  4. 4.

    Indeed, even today the oldest and renowned universities of the world such as Harvard still announce, while seeking to attract prospective young minds/students, their zeal for liberal education—‘an education conducted in a spirit of free inquiry undertaken without concern for topical relevance or vocational utility. This kind of learning is not only one of the enrichments of existence; it is one of the achievements of civilization’ (italics added; see www.admissions.college.harvard.edu, accessed in 2012).

  5. 5.

    We are, of course, ignoring some (arguably) nebulous civilizational visions such as the one of launching a ‘new form of civilization’ virtually cut-off from the questions of what and how has our existing civilization been in place or how we have become what we presently are: ‘we may be on the threshold of the emergence of a new form of civilization, as billions of world citizens interact together, unconstrained by today’s monopolies on knowledge or learning opportunities’ (Duderstandt 2012: 594, emphasis added).

  6. 6.

    Taken from New York State Education Department (2009), Federal Education and the States, 19452009, Albany: New York State Archives; p. 7.

  7. 7.

    This field has, sometimes, also been called ‘economics of human capital’ seemingly in recognition of the fact that the notion and scope of education is much broader than the one connoted by the term ‘economics of education ’, which is generally circumscribed by economic motives and calculations, economic benefits and costs alone (Tilak 2006). In fact, some authors initially preferred using the term ‘human wealth’ in place of ‘human capital’ (Teixeira 2000: 260).

  8. 8.

    Labaree (1997) calls this ‘social mobility’ goal of education, which does not mesh well with the two other major goals of education, namely ‘democratic equality’ and ‘social efficiency’.

  9. 9.

    A slightly revised version of this paper was subsequently brought out as a NBER Working Paper in 2010 and then published as an article in Review of Economics and Statistics in 2011.

  10. 10.

    For instance, marks are often not deducted for poor and wrong grammar and spelling (Green et al. 2005: 11).

  11. 11.

    Several studies that exist, or are being undertaken of late point to the similar educational trends in other developed and developing countries too (Pritchett 2013).

  12. 12.

    The situation has come to such a pass that the number of teachers, who even commit—in their bid to escape management’s frowning or a threat of job loss—such offences as giving pupils ‘inappropriate assistance’ on coursework and whispering advice during exams, is increasing exponentially even in country such as UK (Osborne 2017).

  13. 13.

    This refers to the following famous sentence written by Lord Chesterfield of the eighteenth century England in one of his innumerable letters to his son who was studying in a public school far away from home: ‘Due attention to the inside of books, and due contempt for the outside, is the proper relation between a man of sense and his books’.

References

  • Arum, R., and J. Roksa. 2010. Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arum, R., and J. Roksa. 2011. Are Undergraduates Actually Learning Anything?. The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 18. Accessed from http://chronicle.com/article/Are-Undergrduates-Actually/125979/on 15 November 2013.

  • Babcock, P., and M. Marks. 2007. The Falling Time Cost of College: Evidence from Half a Century of Time Use Data. (mimeo), Institute of Government Affairs, University of California, Davis. www.iga.ucdavis.edu/Research/EJS/…labour2007/.

  • Barber, B.R. 1972. Science, Salience and Comparative Education: Some Reflections on Social Scientific Inquiry. Comparative Education Review 16 (3): 424–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Ronald. 2003. Beyond All Reason: Living With Ideology in the University. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaug, M. 1968. Economics of Education, vol. 1. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, A. 1987. The Closing of the American Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, W.G. 2012. The “Cost Disease” in Higher Education: Is Technology the Answer? The Tanner Lectures, October, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Challahan, R.E. 1962. Education and the Cult of Efficiency. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chappell, B. 2013. US Students Slide in Global Ranking on Maths, Reading, Science. National Public Radio. www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/12/03. Accessed on 21 November 2017.

  • Chomsky, N., others. 1997. The War & The University. New York: New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D.K., and B. Neufeld. 1981. The Failure of High Schools and the Progress of Education. Daedalus 110 (3): 69–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R. 2007. “Whose Education Is It Anyway”: Why It Is Important That Teachers Understand and Question the Broader Contexts Shaping Curriculum. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work 4 (1): 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desai, Meghnad. 2002. Public Goods: A Historical Perspective. In Providing Public Goods, ed. UNDP. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Duderstandt, J. 2012. The Future of the University: A perspective from the Oort Cloud. Social Research 79 (3): 579–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterly, W. 2001. The Elusive Quest for Growth. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education Counts. 2014. Reading Literacy Achievement: Senior Secondary Schooling. https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/statistics/indicators/main/education-and-learning-outcomes/reading_literacy_achievement_-_senior_secondary_schooling. Accessed on 21 November 2017.

  • Edwards, D. 2014. American Schools Are Training Kids for a World That Doesn’t Exist. Wired www.wired.com/2014/10/-on-learning-by-doing. Accessed on 21 November 2017.

  • Gatto, J.T. 1992. Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling. Chicago: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, A., and S. Bandyopadhyay. 2018. ASER 2017 Shows India’s Secondary Education is Failing to Impart Basic Skills. WIRE, 20 January. Accessed from www.thewire.in/215653/aser.

  • Gibney, Elizabeth. 2013. Robbins: 50 Years Later. The Times Higher Education, 24 October.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilead, T. 2013. Educational Policy and the Methodology of Positive Economics: A Critical Examination. Paper Presented at the Annual Conference Organised by Philosophy of Education Society, New College, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. 1988. Schooling and the Struggle for Public Life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. 1998. Education Incorporated?. Educational Leadership 56 (2): 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • GoI, MHRD. 1993. Learning Without Burden: Report of the National Advisory Committee Appointed by the Ministry of Human Resource Development. New Delhi: MHRD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace, Gerald. 1989. Education: Commodity or Public Good. British Journal of Educational Studies 37 (3) (August): 207–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, D., A. De Waal, and B. Cackett. 2005. Education: Better Results and Declining Standards? Accessed from www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/educationBriefingDec05/ on 12 November 2013.

  • Guisbond, Lisa. 2012. NCLB’s Lost Decade for Educational Progress: What Can We Learn from This Policy Failure? (With Monty Neill and Bob Schaeffer). Available at http://fairtest.org/NCLB-lost-decade-report-home. Accessed on 25 November 2017.

  • Hobsbawm, Eric. 1999. Industry and Empire: The Birth of the Industrial Revolution. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyslop-Margison, E.J., and B. Graham. 2003. Principles for Democratic Learning in Career Education. Canadian Journal of Education 26 (3): 333–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyslop-Margison, E.J., and A.M. Sears. 2006. Neo-Liberalism, Globalization and Human Capital Learning: Reclaiming Education for Democratic Citizenship. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazamias, A.M. 1963. History, Science, Comparative Education: A Study in Methodology. International Review of Education VIII: 383–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazamias, A.M. 1972. Comparative Pedagogy: Assignment for the ‘70s. Comparative Education Review 16(3): 406–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazamias, A.M., and K. Schwartz. 1977. Intellectual and Ideological Perspectives in Comparative Education. Comparative Education Review 21 (2/3): 153–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirp, D.L. 2004. Shakespeare, Einstein, and the Bottom Line: The Marketing of Higher Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krassén, P. 2014. The Importance of the Signalling Mechanism in Higher Education. In Blue Skies: New Thanking About the Future of Higher Education, ed. L. Coiffait. London: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. 1999. How Are We Doing? Tracking the Quality of the Undergraduate Experience, 1960s to Present. The Review of Higher Education 22 (2): 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaree, D.F. 1997. Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goals. American Educational Research Journal 34 (1): 39–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazear, E.P. 1999. Economic Imperialism. Hoover Institution and Graduate School of Business Stanford University (mimeo).

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, F. 1970. Education and Economic Growth. Loncoln: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maharatna, A. 2014. Invasion of Educational Universe by Neo-Liberal Economic Thinking: A Civilizational Casualty? Economic and Political Weekly 49 (37): 61–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar, M., and J. Mooij. 2012. The Marks Race: India’s Dominant Education Regime and New Segmentation. In School Education, Pluralism and Marginality: Comperative Perspectives, ed. C. Sleeter et al. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKernan, J. 2008. Curriculum and Imagination. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulcahy, D.G. 2010. Praxis and Pedagogy as Related to the Arts and Humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 9 (3): 305–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myrdal, G. 1968. Asian Drama, 3 Vols. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nanda, P.K. 2018. India’s Learning Deficit Is Worsening: ASER Study. Livemint 17 January. Accessed from www.livemint.com/education.

  • Naussbaum, M. 2008. Education for Profit, Education for Freedom. Special Lecture No.1, Institute of Development Studies, Kolkata.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCERT. 2005. National Curriculum Framework 2005. New Delhi: NCERT.

    Google Scholar 

  • New York State Education Department. 2009. Federal Education and the States 1945–2009. Albany: New York State Archives.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 2011. Education at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. 2017. Number of Teachers Cheating to Get Better Exam Results Up Fourfold in Four Years, Finds Report. The Independent, 16 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preece, P.F.W. 1971. The Laissez-Faire Finance of Education. British Journal of Educational Studies 19 (2): 154–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, L. 2001. Where Has All the Education Gone? World Bank Economic Review 15 (3): 367–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, L. 2013. Rebirth of Education: Schooling Ain’t Learning. New York: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. 1998. The Politics of Curriculum Reform in New Zealand. Curriculum Studies 6 (1): 29–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Bertrand. 1926. On Education. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selfe, D. 2007. English Studies and University Experience as Intellectual Property: Commodification and the Spellings Report. Accessed from www.bgsu.edu/departments/English/econline/selfe/selfe.htm on 14 November 2013.

  • Shaffer, B. 1993. The Blinding Torch: Modern British Fiction and the Discourse of Civilization. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, P.N. 2000. A Portrait of the Economics of Education, 1960–1997. History of Political Economy 32 (suppl. 1): 257–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Conversation. 2013. New PISA Results Show Education Decline—It’s Time to Stop the Slide, 3 December.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Independent. 2016. UK Schools Falling Behind Leading Countries, New Global Rankings Reveal, London, 6 December.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Telegraph. 2016. UK Children Falling Behind in Maths Due to “Superficial” Learning, 13 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilak, J.B.G. 2006. Economics of Human Capital. Key-Note Address, 89th Annual Conference of the Indian Economic Association, Conference Volume, Indian Economic Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. 1968. Readings in the Economics of Education. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. 1996. Learning: The Treasure Within. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaizey, J. 1962. Introduction. International Social Science Journal XIV (4): 619–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, E.G. 1964. Private Versus Public Education—A Classical Economic Dispute. Journal of Political Economy 72 (5) (October): 465–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, E.G. 1965. Education and the State: A Study in Political Economy. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, A. 2002. Does Education Matter?: Myths About Education and Economic Growth. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, E.N. 2000. Human Capital Investment and Economic Growth: Exploring the Cross-Country Evidence. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 11: 433–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodfill, B. 1963. The Economics of Education: A Survey, Technical Report No. 12, Centre for Research in Management Science, University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodside, A. 2011. Challenging the Notion of Higher Education. Accessed from http://ctlt.ubc.ca/2011/02/15 on 16 December 2017.

  • World Bank. 2018. World Development Report 2018: Learning to Realize Education’s Promise. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Maharatna, A. (2019). ‘Invasion’ of Educational Universe by Neo-Liberal Economic Thinking: A Global Casualty?. In: The Indian Metamorphosis. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0797-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics