Page 105 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 1-2: The Language of Neoliberal Education, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 105
m. sardoč ■ an interviw with henry giroux
initiate and expand a national conversation in which higher education can
be defended as a democratic public sphere and the classroom as a site of de-
liberative inquiry, dialogue, and critical thinking, a site that makes a claim
on the radical imagination and a sense of civic courage. At the same time,
the discourse on defining higher education as a democratic public sphere
can provide the platform for a more expressive commitment in developing
a social movement in defense of public goods and against neoliberalism as
a threat to democracy. This also means rethinking how education can be
funded as a public good and what it might mean to fight for policies that
both stop the defunding of education and fight to relocate funds from the
death dealing military and incarceration budgets to those supporting edu-
cation at all levels of society. The challenge here is for higher education not
to abandon its commitment to democracy and to recognize that neoliber-
alism operates in the service of the forces of economic domination and ide-
ological repression. Second, educators need to acknowledge and make good
on the claim that a critically literate citizen is indispensable to a democra-
cy, especially at a time when higher education is being privatized and sub-
ject to neoliberal restructuring efforts. This suggests placing ethics, civic
literacy, social responsibility, and compassion at the forefront of learning
so as to combine knowledge, teaching, and research with the rudiments
of what might be called the grammar of an ethical and social imagination.
This would imply taking seriously those values, traditions, histories, and
pedagogies that would promote a sense of dignity, self-reflection, and com-
passion at the heart of a real democracy. Third, higher education needs to
be viewed as a right, as it is in many countries such as Germany, France,
Norway, Finland, and Brazil, rather than a privilege for a limited few, as
it is in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Fourth, in
a world driven by data, metrics, and the replacement of knowledge by the
overabundance of information, educators need to enable students to engage
in multiple literacies extending from print and visual culture to digital cul-
ture. They need to become border crossers who can think dialectically, and
learn not only how to consume culture but also to produce it. Fifth, facul-
ty must reclaim their right to control over the nature of their labor, shape
policies of governance, and be given tenure track lines with the guarantee of
secure employment and protection for academic freedom and free speech.
Why is it important to analyze the relationship between neolib-
eralism and civic literacy particularly as an educational project?
The ascendancy of neoliberalism in American politics has made visible
a plague of deep-seated civic illiteracy, a corrupt political system and a
103
initiate and expand a national conversation in which higher education can
be defended as a democratic public sphere and the classroom as a site of de-
liberative inquiry, dialogue, and critical thinking, a site that makes a claim
on the radical imagination and a sense of civic courage. At the same time,
the discourse on defining higher education as a democratic public sphere
can provide the platform for a more expressive commitment in developing
a social movement in defense of public goods and against neoliberalism as
a threat to democracy. This also means rethinking how education can be
funded as a public good and what it might mean to fight for policies that
both stop the defunding of education and fight to relocate funds from the
death dealing military and incarceration budgets to those supporting edu-
cation at all levels of society. The challenge here is for higher education not
to abandon its commitment to democracy and to recognize that neoliber-
alism operates in the service of the forces of economic domination and ide-
ological repression. Second, educators need to acknowledge and make good
on the claim that a critically literate citizen is indispensable to a democra-
cy, especially at a time when higher education is being privatized and sub-
ject to neoliberal restructuring efforts. This suggests placing ethics, civic
literacy, social responsibility, and compassion at the forefront of learning
so as to combine knowledge, teaching, and research with the rudiments
of what might be called the grammar of an ethical and social imagination.
This would imply taking seriously those values, traditions, histories, and
pedagogies that would promote a sense of dignity, self-reflection, and com-
passion at the heart of a real democracy. Third, higher education needs to
be viewed as a right, as it is in many countries such as Germany, France,
Norway, Finland, and Brazil, rather than a privilege for a limited few, as
it is in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Fourth, in
a world driven by data, metrics, and the replacement of knowledge by the
overabundance of information, educators need to enable students to engage
in multiple literacies extending from print and visual culture to digital cul-
ture. They need to become border crossers who can think dialectically, and
learn not only how to consume culture but also to produce it. Fifth, facul-
ty must reclaim their right to control over the nature of their labor, shape
policies of governance, and be given tenure track lines with the guarantee of
secure employment and protection for academic freedom and free speech.
Why is it important to analyze the relationship between neolib-
eralism and civic literacy particularly as an educational project?
The ascendancy of neoliberalism in American politics has made visible
a plague of deep-seated civic illiteracy, a corrupt political system and a
103
