Page 62 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

38 M.L. Bentley

now taken by our ruling oligarchy – represents the biggest obstacle to creating
schools that will further the goal of a democratic and sustainable society: “Rooted
in the primacy of property rights over human rights, corporatocracy protects the
rights of corporations as well as wealthy individuals to determine how resources
will be used, by whom, and to what ends” (Sleeter 2008, p. 139). Yet, given the
recent collapse of the economy, replete with examples of unfettered greed and
fraud, it would seem that the public might reject or at least question the business
approach to education (Glickman 2008). But the corporatocracy seems undaunted
in its project of remaking schools in the image of business. The simplistic “one-
size-fits-all” mentality of NCLB suits the corporate model because children are
seen as both raw materials and products.
With the elevation of the subjects of reading and math above all others in the
K-12 curriculum, social studies and science have suffered, often sharing the same
meager time slot at the end of the day (Brown and Bentley 2004). Children who do
not read or do math at the prescribed level and within the time limit are labeled “at
risk,” even if they might have other talents that would enable a future success in life.
Once identified as “at risk” such children receive remedial instruction and may miss
opportunities to develop other talents, such as in the arts. Worse, some children may
see their own aspirations demeaned and lose their motivation to learn (Zhao 2009).
In contrast, like Martusewicz, Lupinacci, and Schnakenberg, Deborah Meier
(2008) and others have argued for more attention to curriculum goals other than that
of producing a better workforce. To Meier, the primary goal of schooling should be
to promote civil society and democratic values. With NCLB, she points out, “(the)
focus is still unremittingly on preparing students to ‘fit into’ the future rather than
to shape it” (p. 510). She warns of the overemphasis on “content knowledge” that
we find in NCLB: “The ‘genius’ of America, I would contend, has rested on its
respect for playfulness, imagination, thinking outside the box, practical smarts, the
taking apart and putting together of objects, exploring, and inventing” (p. 509).
Moreover, Larry Cuban (2008) has argued that Americans have always sup-
ported goals for their public schools that are not related to economic productivity,
including goals related to citizenship, cultural unity, and improving social condi-
tions. Obama’s program of national standards would only continue the narrowing
of the curriculum that began with compulsory state standards, and further lead to
the deskilling of teachers who already are singularly focused on “test prep.”
Obama’s program is likely to lead to a loss of instructional continuity for students
from more curriculum fragmentation and more interventions uncoordinated with
regular classroom instruction.

Beyond Command and Control

For a school’s curriculum is not only about subjects. The chief subject matter of
school, viewed culturally, is school itself. That is how most students experience it,
and it determines what meaning they make of it. (Bruner 1996, p. 28)