Editor
Language is powerful. Without it, we can’t think or communicate. It shapes our world view, and the values we bring to it. Let’s take a look at how it works. Under neoliberalism problems are solved through management. Governments subscribing to this philosophy redefine the cultural as economic. Under restructured public sectors, managerialism is the new way to operate. Current reforms occurring in New Zealand are such an example. The ideological shift means moving away from a public service philosophy of collective relations, commitment to equity, care and social justice towards managerialism with its customer-oriented culture, concern cost-effectiveness, competition and an emphasis on individual relations. For education, this means state education is marketised and privatised. The rhetoric of menagerialism is a force which challenges people to define the world of education differently. As the language changes so does the practice. The discourse becomes ‘cutting costs’. The focus shifts to achievement outcomes and results and managing change better. For schools it is about a cultural shift away from collegiality and collaboration towards individual self-promotion and competitiveness. Gewirtz and Ball (2000), leading researchers investigating managerialism in the education sector have this to say about management discourse in education. ‘For the new manager in education, good management involves the smooth and efficient implementation of aims set outside the school, within constraints also set outside the school. It is not the job of the new manager to question or criticise these aims and constraints. The new management discourse in education emphasises the instrumental purposes of schooling – raising standards and performance as measured by examination results, levels of attendance and school-leaver destinations – and is frequently articulated within a lexicon of enterprise, excellence, quality and effectiveness.’ (p. 253) It all sounds very familiar indeed and could be the basis of a blueprint for our government’s ambitions for education. The President’s Pen column in this issue certainly suggests that reforms are driven by economic not educational or ethical motivations. Understanding how the language is manipulated under managerialism is critical to countering it. In reference to New Zealand, the language being used includes words like ‘quality’, achievement, school performance and accountability and more recently terms like ‘public achievement information’ are being used. Let’s take the word ‘quality’. It has been used particularly in reference to ‘quality teaching’. Who defines what a quality teacher is? What does quality teaching look like? Is there any authority that we can call on to define quality teaching? What is the difference between
a quality teacher and a teacher who is not a quality teacher? What is required to lift the quality of a teacher? Is it bureaucratic and political intervention or professional development led by the principal? To use the term quality with no reference to what it means is to reinforce the language of managerialism and help entrench it. Achievement and its apparent antithesis ‘under achievement’ are terms that have been well over-used in the last few years. We might ask how does achievement differ from progress or learning? If a student is ‘under-achieving’ does it mean the student is failing in everything every day? If the word achievement is replaced with the words ‘learning’ or ‘progress’ how does that change the meaning, the consequences and the way we respond? How does it shift the direction away from assessment and data to focus attention on children, teachers, classrooms and the curriculum? More recently the Minister referred to the term ‘public achievement information’. What sort of learning is being referred to? What is the information parents want? Has anyone asked them? Has the Minister asked them? Are parents interested in information relating to their child’s whole learning experience or are they interested just in one or two areas like literacy and numeracy? If parents want broad information, how will information about two subjects be helpful to them? If parents want information about the whole school and the opportunities it offers how will this ‘public achievement information’ assist? Strengthening performance and accountability are two more common managerialist terms. Does performance in education mean teaching? If there is a need to ‘strengthen performance’ of teachers does it mean that they do not teach well now? If the word performance is substituted for ‘teaching’ the meaning shifts to pedagogy and practice rather than some ‘measure of appraisal’ which the word ‘performance’ implies. The word ‘accountability’ mostly refers to imposing more centralised control and limiting flexibility. But what happens if the word is substituted for responsibility? If principals are responsible for students’ learning and for teachers’ teaching practice the conversations have a different focus than if we talk of ‘accountability’ which, like performance, implies some measurement. Managerialist language shifts the focus away from thinking about individual children’s needs and teachers’ development. It directs attention to collecting and analysing data. In this way the data can be used to fulfil further managerial functions that ultimately fulfil the economic goals for which managerialism is intended in the first place. If your preference is to maintain a commitment to equity, care and social justice and if you value collegiality and collaboration, then resisting the language of managerialism is critical. Reference Gewirtz, S and S Ball (2000). ‘From “welfarism” to “new manageri alism”: shifting discourses of school headship in the education marketplace’, Discourse, 21(3): 253–68.