Another Education is possible!

In all European countries (and also in other countries) education is changing rapidly. Since the mid-eighties the neo-liberal tendencies have achieved a big influence on the paradigm shift in the education policy.

In several countries there has been resistance towards single steps, e.g. the increase or introduction of studying fees, but towards the neo-liberal restructuring of education in its entirety there has hardly been any resistance. Yet the resistance is increasing…

The first European Education Forum takes place from 18th till 20th September in Berlin. This forum, which takes place simultaneously with the European Higher Education Summit 2003, is also a preparation for the second European social forum in Paris. During this forum there will be informative workshops about the neo-liberal restructuring of education policy, but also plenary sessions and workshops, which intend to encourage to develop our own vision of the future of education. During the European Higher Education Summit there should also be some actions and on Saturday, 20th September 2003, the forum will end with a big demonstration.

According to the UNESCO two billion Dollars were spent worldwide on educational purposes in 2002. About 20% went to private companies and this percentage will increase. So we are talking about a lot of money and the private companies are longing for a bigger slice of the cake. And it’s worth their while: The German government for example kindly subsidized private schools and universities, like the International University of Bremen, a branch office of the Rice University from the United States of America. German Universities, which are starting branch offices in foreign countries (as private providers) receive subsidies as well (The German Ministry for Education finances the program “Export of German study-offers” with 10 million Euro). Of course the big companies are involved in the background. On the convention-fair “World Education Market”, which took place in May 2002 education-providers from more than 70 countries offered their products. (1)

The Centre for University Development and the Bertelsmann´s foundation

The CHE (Centre for University Development), founded in the 1990s by the association of Universities and Other Higher Education Institutions in Germany and the Bertelsmann foundation has a key role in the neo-liberal restructuring in Germany. The CHE, based in Gütersloh, where both the Bertelsmann foundation and its parent company Bertelsmann have their headquarters, is a relatively autonomous power (it is only bound to the capital invested by the parent company Bertelsmann) and thus not controlled by parliament. During the German Lower House of Parliament’s 23rd legislative period (1994-1998) CHE´s director Professor Detlef Müller-Böling already had a close relationship to Jürgen Rüttgers (Christian Democratic Union), then Minister of Science. Rüttgers appointed Müller-Böling for the round table where the new framework law on higher education was developed. There was also contact to Roman Herzog (Christian Democratic Union), then-Federal President, who was patron of the Initiative Circle for Education. This was supposed to give the CHE proposals for education’s renewal. The CHE also works on Federal State level; it leads the Advisory Council in Lower Saxony .(2) It works patiently with the long-term objective of weight-shifting from state-run, normative, public law media of control to a monetary, non-parliamentary and contractual one . (3) The CHE stands for a kind of university which has to compete for financial means by both public-private partnership and tuition fees and a university which is allowed to choose the students on its own. That means that government and parliament no longer define who is authorised to go to university but the university itself, being “autonomous” from the parliament bound to economy’s sponsoring (and by that in no way autonomous). On the primary education level the CHE works as a founder of the Bertelsmann foundation. The Bertelsmann foundation developed the project “Independent School North Rhine Westphalia” in cooperation with the Department of Education NRW. The Bertelsmann foundation is the project’s leader and finances the project’s office. In NRW 237 schools are participating in this project, which is less than expected. Bertelsmann completely controls the project; in a brochure it is for example said:

“The MSWF and the Bertelsmann foundation consent on engaging mutual an employee of the Bertelsmann foundation for the project management. The responsibility of the project management comprises the carrying out of the project according to the description of the project, the cooperation agreement and the basic agreement of the board of the project, the coordination with external evaluation, the controlling of the project, the documentation of the course of the project and the results as well as the management of the project office.
The management of the project and the project office take up their at the beginning of the year 2002 at latest. The public relations work of the pilot project takes place in agreement with the MSWF and in consultation with the Bertelsmann foundation and the regions.“ (4)

Two of the most important forces, encouraging the neo-liberal restructuring of the education sector with effective lobbying are the Union of Industrial and Employer’ Confederations of Europe (UNICE), founded in 1958, and the European Round Table of Industrials (ERT), founded in 1893. UNICE has published on 29th March 2000, just before the EU summit in Lisbon, a position paper with the title: “Education and Training: policies which foster competitiveness and employment: UNICE's seven priorities”. This position paper reveals that the UNICE promotes the economization of human behaviour and a new meaning of education, which is orientated exclusively towards the requirements of the companies and of the labour market. Other objectives, for example social or ecological objectives, are not intended. The ERT, a think-tank, whose members include managers of the biggest European companies, has the same aims. (5)

Confusion of language

Autonomy sounds quite good, better than dependence from the state. But as just described, a school or university which is dependent on sponsoring is not autonomous. The neo-liberal Think-tanks have been working on a language, which sounds like fantastic to many people: Autonomous school, rise of quality, new learning-structure, evaluation and the populist guarantor of success from the neo-liberals: efficiency and reforms. A flood of publications and appearances in the media was poured out on the people in order to specifically influence the public opinion. Step by step, the thoughts of the neo-liberals get to trickle into the heads. But there is no discussion about who is going to control a school which is dependent on money from private industry. What about equal opportunities? What about the influence the companies may have on the curriculae? And what is actually meant by education-vouchers, which in Germany are called study-accounts?

Meaning and consequences

I can’t describe every single consequence in detail, but I try to make them clear by means of two examples. The lobby-groups are working hard on restructuring education. But what exactly does this mean? Often mentioned and vaunted are the „Public-private-partnerships” and other forms of school sponsoring, because they might fill the empty tills of schools and universities. But what is hardly mentioned, is that the one who pays has the right to decide, that the “public-private partnerships” are the beginning of the end of the public education-system. Beside the famous example of the nineteen years old boy, who had to leave his school in Daffke (Texas, USA), just because he was wearing a Pepsi-shirt at the coca-cola-day of his school (which was of course sponsored by the so called company), we can find many others. Gita Steiner-Khams, in her researches made in the USA, has found out that, groups, who are reducing the balance of performance of the company “school”, are often excluded. What we already know today i.e. is that schoolmasters try to get rid of problematic pupils, will be even more dramatically in days of free competition. (6)

In Germany, some federal states are introducing study accounts. Study accounts, also called education vouchers, have already been introduced in 1980 in Chile. This system of tuition fees according to the model by Milton Friedman was absolutely not to the advantage of families with low incomes. (7) Study accounts are of course a covered form of tuition fees and should serve as means of control:

„A study account should, according to the model of education vouchers, represent a formalised and fixed individual legal right to education services at universities, where the credit is ‘paid in’ by the federal state. The aim is the constitution of an education market: The financing does not take place directly between the state and the university, but indirectly between students and university. Thus these students become „demanders“, who purchase a „commodity” on the „market“. In this knowledge they are supposed to use their credit where they can expect the best quality. Thus the universities should be forced to improve their offer to advertise enough „customers“. (8)

But how is quality defined in a global education market? There are many different motives to start studying at a university. Consequently, students are asking for very different offers. This is important, because otherwise all students would go to the best university and then the relation between students and teachers would be disbanded. Different offers will also lead to different prices. Through the use of education vouchers students decide about the quality of the respective university; all this according to the system of supply and demand. The change from a public education system to a system of supply and demand controlled by the market is in the long run leading to the described diversification in price and service. Thus the quality of one’s own education is depending on one’s own purse. (9) Examinations in the USA show that the curriculae of a commercialized education are orientated towards the labour market, abilities and attitudes of which economy can not immediately make use of are less asked for and therefore less offered. (10)

The summit in Berlin and the EEF

The official European Higher Education Summit in Berlin is the official Bologna follow-up conference. Between the students there are apart from many supporters, a lot of opponents of the Bologna process, which longs for a harmonisation of the European Area of Higher Education. In the call for the campaign „Education is not for sale” it says for example:

„In the Netherlands, minister Jorritsma (VVD,Dutch liberal party) has said that the universities should be judged by their market-ableness. His comment fit in the framework of the Bologna declaration of the European ministers of education and the General Agreement of Trade in Services (GATS) of the WTO. European schools and universities have to transform so they will be competitive for competitors from non European countries. In Germany the education system is getting re-structured according to the proposals of neo-liberal think-tanks like the CHE (centre for university-development which is closely linked to the Bertelsmann Group). The study-structure for example is supposed to be transformed from a more open diploma- or magister-system towards a restrictive Bachelor/Master-system. This structure means: a light version of education for everyone and special skills for some chosen few. It means more pressure to finish your studies (although 75% of the German students have to work in order to finance their studies), it means a reduction of content, especially such that can be considered as critical. The Bachelor-Master structure is part of the Bologna process. With this system the universities can easier compete with each other. They are trying to sell it to students with the slogan about mobility, but whose mobility is meant? The mobility of those who can afford it!” (11)

Education politicians are already discussing the question, whether master studies are secondary studies or not, if tuition fees could be raised in case they are. They are also discussing about restrictions on admission. Apart from some official representatives of ESIB (the National Unions of Students in Europe, http://www.esib.org), who are present at the conference, the summit takes place without a social discussion. The EEF (European Education Forum, http://www.eef2003.org ) wants to change this situation and therefore wants to unleash a discussion, and not only a discussion about the Bologna process. We’d like to develop our own vision of the future education with pupils, students and teachers from the whole of Europe. This discussion should be led by the ‚basis’ and should continue the discussions, which were started in the education workshops of the social forum in Florence. We won’t bring this discussion to an end in Berlin; we have still a long way in front of us.

René Schuijlenburg
Member of the preparation group of the EEF

More information: http://www.eef2003.org
e-mail: info@eef2003.org

1: Prausmüller, Oliver, Bildungsmarkt weltweit, http://www.oeh.ac.at/oeh/notprofit/105052578821/105070556543/105070754942 Stand 16.07.2003

2: compare: Bennhold, Martin, in Die Verkaufte Bildung – Kritik und Kontroversen zur Kommerzialisierung von Schule, Weiterbildung, Erziehung und Wissenschaft, Opladen 2002, S. 279-299

3: compare Lohmann, Ingrid in Bildungspläne der Marktideologen ein Zwischenbericht, http://www.erzwiss.uni-hamburg.de/Personal/Lohmann/Publik/18DGfE-SY.htm , Stand 15.07.2003

4: Bertelsmannstiftung und MSWF NRW in Brochüre Bildung Gestalten – Selbständige Schule NRW, http://www.bildungsportal.nrw.de/BP/Service/broschueren/broschuere27/download.pdf , Stand 16.07.2003

5: Compare: Lohmann, Ingrid, Bildung – Ware oder öffentliches gut? In: eWi-report, Zeitschrift des FB Erziehungswissenschaft der Universität Hamburg, No. 26, 2002/3

6: Thaler, Karin, Schütz, Reinhilde, Schütz, Walther, Wirkungen einer Liberalisierung des Bildungsbereiches auf die Pädagogik , http://int-protest-action.tripod.com/id46.htm, Stand 16.07.2003

7: Compare: Lohmann, Ingrid, After Neoliberalism. Können nationalstaatliche Bildungssysteme den ´freien Markt´ überleben? http://www.erzwiss.uni-hamburg.de/Personal/Lohmann/AfterNeo.htm, Stand 16.07.2003

8: Kuhlmann, Dörthe, Studienkonten, http://web.uni-muenster.de/asta/hochschulpolitik/studienkonten.php, Stand 16.07.2003

9: Himpele, Klemens, Modernes Bildungsprivileg, Verknappung von Bildung durch Bildungsgutscheine, http://www.bdwi.de/forum/fw3-02-42.htm, Stand 16.07.2003

10: Thaler, Karin, Schütz, Reinhilde, Schütz, Walther, Wirkungen einer Liberalisierung des Bildungsbereiches auf die Pädagogik , http://int-protest-action.tripod.com/id46.htm, Stand 16.07.2003

11: European network for pupils, students and teachers „Education is not for sale“, call for a EU-wide protest 2002, http://int-protest-action.tripod.com/id6.htm, Stand 16.07.2003

arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)