Book Review: "Someone Has To Fail" by David Labaree
Consideration of Labaree's Foundation
Consumerism in American Education
According to Labaree (2010), “most educational consumers have shown preference for a school system that provides an edge in competition for jobs more than for one that enriches academic achievement” (p. 12) 1. In his “origin story” (p. 42) he presents consumerism as today’s manifestation of what he calls “republican argument for education” (p. 50) which is rooted in Rush2. (1786), moves through Jefferson, and emerges today as “school choice.” This paper explores the veracity of Labaree’s “history” and, based on his treatment of specific texts, posits that his tale is flawed. He is, as he states, offering an “origin story” - a creation myth - not a history. After this exploration, this paper will offer a differing view of the history of consumerism in general, reflect on consumerism’s impact on society and education, and suggest where we might go from here.
Labaree’s presentation of “the emerging republican argument for education” (p. 50) begins in Chapter 2 where he says the argument “had three central components” (p. 50). Although he uses the word “components,” he is really talking about “premises.” While full consideration of this matter is beyond the scope of this paper, each “component” is briefly considered here.
Labaree’s first premise is that Rush was the source of the notion of civic virtue in education. However in his treatment of the text, Labaree turns Rush’s noun, “republic,” into an adjective, “republican.” This is a meaningful rhetorical twist and one must wonder why Labaree equivocates. For his second premise, Labaree says Jefferson’s education proposal for Virginia founded the idea that education should “give individuals the knowledge and skill they needed in order to carry out their role … in the life of a republic” (p. 50). However, in the entire text of the bill, Jefferson uses neither the word “republic” nor “republican.” Jefferson instead speaks of a “liberal education” so children can “become useful instruments for the public” (Jefferson). Labaree’s use of the word “republican” is gratuitous.3. The “third goal of republican education,” Labaree says, “followed naturally from the first two …” (p. 51). This is an exercise in conjunctive logic - Premise A and Premise B combine to give Premise C. However, if Premise A and Premise B are flawed and/or untrue, their combination is as well.
Based on this evidence, one must conclude that Labaree’s description of the roots of “republican education” is a fiction - “an origin story.” It seems to be a justification for education policy decisions made over the last forty years rather than as history but proving this theory is beyond the scope of this paper. However, if this is so, where can one turn for a non-fiction description of the source of consumerism in today’s American education system? One could turn to Alexander Davis (2017). Like Labaree, Davis uses rhetorical analysis to develop his argument. However, he roots consumerism in education not in early American history but in more recent and specific political events. While consideration of Davis’ work is beyond the scope of this paper, suffice it to say that it allows me to situate education within the larger social context.
I am old enough to remember the “revolution” and saw firsthand how it undid social and community services including education. For example, as social services were defunded so the military budget could be built up, facilities for special education were eliminated so parents of special needs children, needing to school their children, turned to the public schools. Teachers at all levels now have to deal with students who come from homes that include addiction, violence, homelessness, and all manner of dysfunction and with the behavioral issues that result. Universities lost research funding damaging commercial research and development and undercutting support for both faculty and students. Programs were cut because of the lost revenue but if tuition was raised to compensate for the loss, the system was accused of financial inefficiency. I believe that the “revolution” is the root cause for the need to adjust financial aid strategies. Graduate education has become a boutique niche market for professional credentialing and to address specific market forces while academic graduate study has all but disappeared. Yet it is within academic graduate level study that solutions are to be found. Perhaps “we” really don’t want to find solutions. The “revolution” has unglued much of America’s social fabric which includes education. Perhaps regluing could begin with the public defunding of “choice” schools so the focus can return to common, public education.
It is not reasonable to say, though, that this “revolution” began or functions outside of the democratic process. According to Davis and others, whose perspectives I share, the American public was sold a bill of goods and voted for the “revolution.” Voters still vote for this bill of goods even though they are often voting against their own best interest. We, the People did this - perhaps without realizing the consequences. “We, the People” created and perpetuated this creature just as Mary Shelley and Oscar Wilde did.
The lesson of the Hindu parable (Saxe) is that the elephant has many parts and it is only by understanding all of the parts that the whole can be understood. So, answering the question, “can an education be the ‘great equalizer’ in an increasingly diverse country (Carr) if students see themselves as both competitors and citizens” cannot be answered without understanding more parts – and the answer certainly cannot be found in Labaree. A good first step might be to instill in policy makers an understanding that “democracy” is a process and “republic” is a structure or framework. Our American social fabric results from the “thread”4. - our values - being woven by the shuttle – education - on the loom of these two perpendicular – not opposing - features5.. The thread that has been woven for the past forty years has produced is ugly, unjust, and irrational fabric. A serious – perhaps seismic - values adjustment is needed if both the process and the structure are to be considered of value. And this happens first at the adult level, not in elementary school.
References
Carr, Sarah. (2016, June 5). Tomorrow’s Test: America’s schools are majority-minority. Now what? Slate. https://www.slate.com/articles/life/tomorrows_test/2016/06/american_is_becoming_a_majority_minority_nation_it_s_already_happened_in.html
Davis, Alexander. (2017). The Reagan Administration as the Origin of the Shift from Citizen Building to Consumer Building. Jean-Paul Dionne Symposium Proceedings. https://www.academia.edu/38600484/The_Reagan_Administration_as_the_Origin_of_the_Shift_from_Citizen_Building_to_Consumer_Building.
Labaree, David F. (2012). From Citizens to Consumers. Chapter 1. In Someone has to fail (pp. 10-41). Harvard University Press.
Labaree, David F. (2012). Founding the American School System. Chapter 2. In Someone has to fail (pp. 41-79). Harvard University Press.
Mann, Horace. (1848). Excerpts from the Twelfth annual report to the Massachusetts Board of Education. In Living American Documents (Vol. 1). Harcourt, Brace, & World, Inc.
Purdue Owl. (2024). APA Formatting and Style Guide (7th Edition). https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/index.html.
Saxe, John Godfrey. (1872). The Poems of John Godfrey Saxe/The Blind Men and the Elephant. Wikisource. https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=The_Poems_of_John_Godfrey_Saxe/The_Blind_Men_and_the_Elephant&oldid=13755838
Footnotes
1. I realize that the assignment says, “According to Labaree, modern schools treat students more as individual consumers in competition with each other than as citizens working together.” However, from the direct quote provided from the text, it can be seen that Labaree says, “ … educational consumers have shown preference for a school system …” The assignment says Labaree’s position is that the schools treat students as consumers when what he actually says is the consumers choose the school. The perspective of the assignment is the reverse of Labaree’s actual position.
2. It seems odd that Labaree would root his “history” in Rush rather than Mann. While the extract taken from Rush is accurate, a read of his essay reveals that his proposal is rooted in a liberal education mold, as is Jefferson’s where it is Mann who describes his expected student outcomes in professional terms. Mann expects “the grand machinery” of education to produce “inventors…discoverers…artisans…farmers…scholars…and jurists” (Mann) among others. Mann defines individuals by their labor or professional role. Rush expects education to provide “murseries of wise and good men” for “the peculiar form of our government” (Rush). He envisions “one general, and uniform system of education” which will “render the mass of people more homogeneous, and thereby fit them more easily for uniform and peaceable government” (Rush) He lays out his ideas of what subjects are to be taught, including “commerce,” but he does not mention anywhere specific professional goals.
3. It seems to be true that colonial American leaders termed the country a “republic” rather than “democracy.” Jefferson may have also done so. However, Jefferson’s goal in this particular case was to create an educational system for the State of Virginia, not for the national “republic.” One must wonder if Labaree’s repeated use of the word “republican” rather than “republic” is meant to appeal to a modern political audience rather than to accurately describe colonial American thinking.
4. The composition of the thread is where much of the complexity of education can be found. I realize that there is an urgent need to fill some serious gaps in our social fabric that would involve multi-institutional adult level crash courses in genetics and biblical studies and the unique nature of racism in this country and its religious roots and how those roots echo through today’s multi-cultural society, but, unfortunately, the scope of this paper does not permit patching those gaps. For example, we are developing in this country a segment of Black Americans who are not rooted in American slavery, so the dynamics of racism is evolving.
But teaching all of this would have to be done over time by a professional teacher – or maybe an administrator - and I’m just an unenrolled student who can’t get accepted into graduate school so I have a department funded job that requires me to enroll in a class although I certainly function as an unpaid research assistant for the professors and an unpaid adult education professor for students, some of whom are administrators. This is American education at its finest. I’m doing what I’m technically not qualified to do because I’m not niche enough to get into graduate school so even though I’m not qualified, I’m doing it and seem to be in high demand but because I’m technically not qualified to do what I’m doing, I’m not getting paid to do it even though I’m doing it although I’m not qualified. See how that works here
5. While this two-dimensional model of education serves this paper well, in reality the fabric production is a three-dimensional process occurring at all age levels, so age appropriateness is an issue, but also multi-institutional, so it must occur not only in schools but also in other important American institutions beginning with churches. In reality, education is a multi-dimensional,