The
“Roll Over” and Potential “Roll Under” Phase of Neoliberalism: Critical Thinking as a Workforce Development
Strategy
ABSTRACT
Under
the increasingly dominant hegemonic ideology of neoliberalism, workforce
development training policies at the national level have increasingly focused
on worker educational efforts supporting locally specific industrial
clusters. An examination of current
workforce development training policies, and discourses of the Minnesota Governor’s
Workforce Development Council (GWDC), the inspiration for the national
Workforce Investment Act (WIA), indicates an emphasis on increasing the scale
of workforce development training into realms outside of the normal perview of
such policies. This “Roll Over”
phase/space of neoliberalism advocates increasing the range of workforce
development training beyond the traditional scale of the unemployed, and
including K-12 education as well as college and university subsidies for
occupations deemed worthy by the GWDC based on the industrial cluster
model.
Alternative workforce development
strategies have been put forward focusing on
training for occupations rather than industrial clusters. Markusen suggests creative occupations within
the arts have benefits for an entire regions economy. Florida goes further to
claim that all areas must compete for such creative workers or face economic
stagnation. Such discourses open up a
space for a more even Gramscian workforce development policy outside of the traditional
win/lose scenario of neo-smokestack chasing, and ostensibly in a neoliberal
guise. This “Roll Under” phase/space of
neoliberalism advocates for an increased emphasis on critical thinking in all
education due to its potential beneficial effects on a regions economy from
increased worker innovation and workplace creativity. Further, training in critical thinking has
the potential for benefits outside of the economic.
KEYWORDS: Neoliberalism, Workforce, Critical Thinking
The “Roll Over” and Potential “Roll
Under” Phase of Neoliberalism: Critical
Thinking as a Workforce Development Strategy
By D. Tyler McKay
“In the
final analysis, we cannot talk our way out of poverty; we cannot legislate our
way out of poverty, but this nation can work its way out of poverty. What American needs now is not more welfare,
but more “workfare.” (President Richard
Nixon, televised speech, August 1969; quoted in Nathan, 1986: 107. and in Peck,
2001: 90)
AN
INTRODUCTION TO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
On
May 8th of 2003, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the
reauthorization of the Workforce Investment and Adult Education Act. The measure, which passed 220-204 on a highly
partisan vote, is part of the reauthorization of the 1998 Workforce Investment
Act, which provides $6.6 billion in job training programs and services to more
than 19 million people through One-Stop Career Centers. The chief sponsor of
the bill, Rep. Buck McKeon R-Calif, stated “With hundreds of thousands of
Americans searching for new jobs, we must take action to strengthen job
training opportunities for American workers, (Committee on Education and
Workforce, April 9, 2003) Bush administration officials say their plan
“transforms bureaucratic, ineffective job training programs into targeted,
flexible funding to meet specific needs of communities and employers.”
According to committee chairman Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, the legislation
seeks to provide unemployed workers “with the tools, the training and the
resources to help them find what they really want – meaningful employment”
(U.S. Department of Labor, 4/30/03).
This
bill replaces specific training programs for certain populations of jobless
workers with block grants, which, can be used at the states discretion in job
training programs for both unemployed and employed residents. The goals are to provide “enhanced
employment, retention, and earnings of individuals, increased occupational
skills attainment, and improved national economic growth through increased
productivity and competitiveness.” (U.S. Department of Labor, 4/9/03) The bill
specifically stresses, “enhancing the role of employers” (U.S. Department of
Labor, 3/13/03) Rep. McKeon is quoted as describing the change, from the former
programs, as “Improving these programs by strengthening partnerships and
eliminating waste and inefficiency” They state that the previous programs
“contributed to the growth of a confusing patchwork at the state and local
level. Governors and state and local
officials need the flexibility to target these resources toward the unique needs
of their communities” (U.S. Department of Labor, 4/30/03).
Bush
administration Secretary of Labor, Elaine L. Chao stated, “We look forward to
working with all members of the education and Workforce Committee to continue
to transform and further integrate the One-Stop Career Center delivery system
into a cohesive and demand-driven workforce investment system. We share the goal of improving the system to
better respond to the changing needs of workers, business and the demands of
our new economy. Together, we will work
to improve links with the private sector and with post-secondary education and
economic development systems to prepare the 21st century workforce
for career opportunities in high-growth sectors” (U.S. Department of
Labor. 3/13/03).
Strangely, the same press release describing the benefits of this bill
also try to quicken passage by apparently pointing to its failure. Although the One-Stop Career Centers were
approved back in 1998, the “unemployment rate now stands at 5.8%” while “the
unemployment rate was only 4% as recently as 2000 (U.S. Department of
Labor. 3/13/03). The
reason for this apparent contradiction lies in the fact that this legislation
is based on the specific dominant hegemonic ideology of neoliberalism rather
than its apparent practical benefits.
Neoliberal ideology has been described as, “the belief that open,
competitive and unregulated markets, liberated from all forms of state
interference, represent the optimal mechanism for economic development” (Brenner,
N. and Theodore, M., 2002, p. 350).
Using
language such as “the changing needs of our workforce” or “prepare the 21st
century workforce” are attempts to make the new workforce training strategies
appear to be inevitable, to construct a view of reality offering only the
authors solutions to the authors posed questions. Simply asserting that previous programs,
which apparently led to a 4% unemployment rate, as out dated and ineffectual
appears to be a clear act of ideology over objective reality. Although there are a wide range of ways
workforce training could be changed, stressing the need for “meeting the
specific needs of communities and employers”, “increased productivity and
competitiveness” and “cohesive and demand-driven” are all language choices
which make vase assumptions that a “worker” considers “meaningful employment”
that which can benefit the employers and the state. (U.S. Department of
Labor. 3/13/03)
By
looking at the specific case of workforce development training in Minnesota,
the very case which inspired the above national workforce development practices
and discourse, I will demonstrate how the dominant hegemonic ideology of
neoliberalism reproduces itself through legislation and through
non-governmental institutions promoting neoliberal goals. I will first
summarize some useful conceptualizations of Gramsci, which will further
illuminate the interactions of workforce development policy in public and
private institutions. I will then
perform a critique of the mainstream workforce development theories and polices
with the aim of developing a new workforce development paradigm, a paradigm
that has the potential for awakening a critical awareness of the very ways our
workers are managed and funneled into very specific occupations and industries.
HEGEMONY
In
Selections from the “Prison Notebooks”, Gramsci describes how the state forms a
political hegemonic power. “If every
State tends to create and maintain a certain type of civilization and of
citizen (and hence of collective life and individual relations), and to
eliminate certain customs and attitudes and to disseminate others, then the Law
will be its instrument for this purpose (together with the school system, and
other institutions and activities).”
(Gramsci, 1990. p. 246) In this
way, the state disciplines its citisens through positive and negative forms of
sanction. Leaders hold a balance between
various interests of “civil society” in a hegemonic form, moving the state in
one political direction while containing elements of its more “traditional”
past. In “The Study of Philosophy”
Gramsci describes how various philosophies of conceptions of the world exist
for individuals to choose from. A vanguard
that uses repetition to publicize arguments and produces elites of intellectuals
can have a great effect on these choices.
(Sassoon, 1989)
Hegemony has been defined, in the strictly
Gramscian sense, as “a social condition in which all aspects of social reality
are dominated by or supportive of a single class” (quoted in Mayo 1999). These
aspects of social life are made acceptable to people through the exercise of
influence and the winning of consent.
This involves a process of learning.
For Gramsci, every relationship of hegemony is essentially an
educational one. The agencies that
engage in this educational relationship are the institutions forming civil
society, constituting the cultural bedrock of power. Gramsci argues that, in Western society, the
state is surrounded and propped up by networks of ideological social institutions,
which form civil society. As such,
social institutions like schools and other educational establishments are not
neutral. They serve to cement the
existing hegemony and are therefore intimately tied to the interests of the
most powerful social groups. (Mayo,
1999)
For
Gramsci, hegemony is characterized by a number of spaces for counter-hegemonic
activity. It has a non-static nature, is
constantly open to negotiation and renegotiation. Hegemony is therefore to being renewed and
re-created. It is also incomplete, and
there exist moments wherein the whole process undergoes a crisis. There are also excluded areas of social life
that can constitute a terrain of contestation for people involved in counter-hegemonic
activities. The terrain wherein hegemony
can be contested is the very terrain that supports it, namely that of civil
society, which is conceived of as a site of struggle (Sasoon, 1989).
He
argued that, because it is propped up by the institutions of civil society, the
state cannot be confronted head-on by those aspiring to transform it in order
to develop a new set of social relations.
Gramsci refers to that kind of confrontation as a “war of
maneuver”. The process of transforming
precedes the seizure of power. People
working for social transformation had to engage in a “war of position”, a
process of wide-ranging social organization and cultural influence. It is through this process that the group
creates, together with other groups and sectors of society, a historical bloc,
the term Gramsci uses to describe the complex manner in which classes and their
factions are related. “Every revolution
has been preceded by an intense labor of criticism, by the diffusion of culture
and the spread of ideas among masses of men who are at first resistant and
think only of solving their own immediate economic and political problems for
themselves who have no ties of solidarity with others in the same condition”
(quoted in Mayo, 1999).
In Gramsci’s view, the agents who
play a pivotal role in the ‘war of position’ are the intellectuals. Intellectuals are of two types. First, are the “great intellectuals” whose
purpose is to preserve the status quo.
To this end, they help fashion a cultural climate commensurate with the
hegemonic group’s interests. The second
type is the “subaltern intellectuals”, such as teachers, priests, or
functionaries, who by and large, work in favor of the prevailing political
system (Sassoon, 1989).
Another kind of intellectuals are
the “organic intellectuals”, who emerge in response to particular historical
developments, as opposed to traditional intellectuals whose “organic” purpose
is over as society enters a different state of development. If they are organic to the dominant class/group,
they serve to mediate the ideological and political unity of the existing
hegemony. Alternatively, if they are
organic to the subordinated group or class aspiring to power, they engage in
the “war of position” that enables it to secure the alliances necessary to
succeed. If they are organic to the
subaltern group, part of the task is to contribute to an “intellectual and
moral reform” which Gramsci felt was necessary in his native Italy to lay the
foundations for a socially more just society (Mayo, 1999).
NEOLIBERALISM
Currently,
the dominant hegemonic practices and discourse is that of neoliberalism. In, “Workers in a lean world”, Kim Moody
describes neoliberalism as “…a mixture of neoclassical economic fundamentalism,
market regulation in place of state guidance, economic redistribution in favor
of capital (known as supply-side economics) moral authoritarianism with an
idealized family at its center” Further, she states, “What distanced
neoliberalism most from the older pragmatic conservatism, was that it was
highly ideological; that is, market-based policies were carried out because a
very abstract, idealized economic doctrine said they should be. Neoliberal ideology attributes to the market
almost mystical powers to cleanse the sick world economy” (1997: 119-120).
Peck and Tickell add, “while
rhetorically antistatist, neoliberals have proved adept at the (mis) use of
state power in the pursuit of these goals” (2002: 389). After two decades, the global hegemony of
this mode of political rationality appears all encompassing, as the “common
sense” of our time. Brenner
distinguishes between “actually existing neoliberalism” and neoliberal
ideology, “in which market forces are assumed to operate according to immutable
laws no matter where they are unleashed.
“Actually existing” neoliberalisms are contextually specific
interactions between inherited regulatory landscapes and emergent neoliberal,
market-oriented restructuring projects.
Within the “neoliberal heartlands” of North American and Western Europe,
we can get a telling glimpse of the concrete forms of neoliberalism as well as
its discursive production. This critique
takes into account the ways in which ideologies of neoliberalism are themselves
produced and reproduced through institutional forms and political action, since
“actually existing” neoliberalisms are always hybrid or composite structures
(Brenner, 2002).
According to Peck and Tickell, the “roll back” phase of neoliberalism
includes the dismantling of welfare programs, whereas the “roll out” phase of
neoliberalism can include “workfareism” or other new market-centric programs
(2002: 401). Workfare is part political
ideology, part policy program, part moral crusade, workfare lies at the
emblematic center of the contemporary attack on the principles and practices of
the welfare state. Peck defines workfare
as “a political-economic tendency, one that is associated with a variety of
discursive representations, restructuring strategies, and institutional forms”
(2001: 241). Among the discourses are
“welfare dependency,” that construct the causes of poverty and
un(der)employment as individual failings in an attempt to legitimate
restructuring strategies to cut social services. Workfareism tells a story about the failings
of the poor and the virtues of hard work, a compelling story neoliberals wish
to hear, and make heard. In this deeply
politicized process, a policy “problem” was redefined before being
“solved”. Discursively, workfareism is
wrapped in language of reciprocity, self-sufficiency, and independence through
work, and workfare is presented as a salvation to those enslaved by a
“dependency culture” (Peck, 2001).
In this new variant, which I refer to as the “roll over” phase of
neoliberalism, even members of society who don’t necessarily have employment
needs, are not considered safe from the states efforts to control the form of
employment and educational choices they can make. The state, beyond just “rolling out” new
policies to regulating the already regulated spaces of the unemployed, goes
further to “roll over” the entire employed and unemployed population of the
state. A “roll over” phase of neoliberalism can be defined as policies, which
go above and beyond the spaces of those policies previously “rolled out”. Imagine the policy realm as a map, or more
specifically as a map of welfare policies.
New workfare polices which are expanded beyond the range of the previous
“rolled up” welfare polices in effect “roll over” areas they were not
previously linked to. These new workfare
polices go beyond assistance to the unemployed, but seek to dictate employment
options for those either too young to be currently employed, or those who are
already employed make up the spaces of “roll over”. This is a rather clever way of slipping in a
policy as an “updating” of “old” and “outdated” policies when in fact these
“updates” are completely different. Spaces of
“roll over” increase the effective range of the structural “roll back”
of a regime of social entitlements, supportive institutions, and acceptable
norms of labor-market behavior. I conceptualize “roll over” as a space as much
as a phase because “roll over” polices can by their very nature overlap areas,
which have not yet reached a previous “roll up”, or “roll out” phase.
I will first detail some examples of the “roll over” phase of
neoliberalism outside of workforce development training in order to give a more
contextual view of this phenomena, these include mandatory requirements of
community service for already employed residents of public housing, an
increasing rate of prison labor as well as the increasing percentage of the
population in prison, and an increase in the numbers of people forcibly
occupied in the military.
Title V, of the “ stipulates a new 8 hour monthly community service
requirement for continued public housing or face eviction. This program affects
more than 350,000 people nationwide, single mothers who already work up to 30
hours per week (Lamport, 2004). The
local states decide on what is considered to be acceptable for community
service (Hunt, 1998). This is another
way that the state is increasing its control over the workforce outside of
traditional unemployment work policies.
A number of states are implementing programs in which tenants of public
housing can include voluntary policing of their community as the community
service requirement (Housing Finance Agency State of Minnesota, 2000; Housing
and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii, 2003; Chen, 2004).
The increase in “criminology” (Braitwaite, 2000) and the recent increase
in prisons (Urban Institute, 2004) has been the largest in history. Aside from being a boom for the prison
construction and guard industries, prison work has been increasing as states
assign those incarcerated to various occupations in the public and private sector.
Minnesota in 2001 had 17,073 inmates in state prisons, almost twice the number
of five years earlier, who were enrolled in “sentencing to service” programs in
which they work during the day at job selected by local officials, and go home
to jail at night. Again, Minnesota is just part of a national trend (Kilborn,
2002). Nationally, the Incarceration
rate has seen a four-fold increase over the last 25 years. Over 2.2 million people were in prison in
2003, up from 218,000 in 1974 (Urban Institute, 2004). This is in the context of a declining crime
rate. Crime fell 35 % from 1992 to
2002. From 1994 to 2003 there was a 16
percent drop in arrests for violent crime, including a 36 percent decrease in
arrests for murder and a 25 percent decrease in arrests for robbery. Further, the average time served by prison
inmates rose from 23 months in 1995 to 30 months in 2001. Experts say mandatory
sentences, especially for nonviolent drug offenders are a major reason the inmate
population has risen for 30 years. Drug
offenders now make up more than half of all federal prisoners. Terms have also increased, life sentences are
up 83 percent from 1992 to 2004 (Butterfield, 2004).
During the second Persian Gulf War, the U.S. Army notified formerly
retired and discharged soldiers who were not only no longer members of the U.S.
armed forces, but were not even members of the National Guard or Reserves.
Eligible candidates from a list of 118,000 were involuntarily recalled to
active duty for service in Iraq and Afghanistan to fill certain high-priority
skill areas (Burns, 2004). If they do
not report, they are considered absent without leave, or AWOL even after years
of civilian life (Rutgers, 2005). The
term “backdoor draft” was popularized during the 2004 election to describe the
struggle of those who filed suit to stop the forced retention of men and women
who have fulfilled their service obligations yet were required to extend their
service due to “stop-loss” orders from the U.S. Military (Tanner, 2004). Thousands of reservists lost their civilian
jobs while away. Their civilian careers
were sacrificed in the name of state let occupational mandates. This is despite
a 1994 law requiring employers to give equivalent positions back when soldiers
return (Margasak, 2004). Governors
complained of the severe manpower shortages.
Not only for possible national disasters such as floods or fires, but
also in the various occupations reservists formerly held, often as police or
other public servants. (Kershaw, 2004)
As Peck says, “if
workfarism is to be effectively understood, let alone effectively opposed,
careful mapping of a range of contemporary workfare experiments is
essential. This means tracing the
incipient regulatory logics of established and emerging workfare strategies.”
(2001: 3) Although all texts create
subject positions for its readers, this perspective is not always obvious. An
analysis of the Governor’s Workforce Development Plan can give greater insight
into the attitudes of the state’s hegemonic discourse and its correspondence
with a neoliberal perspective. Further, this analysis can bring to the
forefront the neoliberal “roll over” spaces within workforce development
training policies.
MINNESOTA STATE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
In
1996, the Minnesota Governor’s Workforce Development Council (GWDC) was created
by then Republican Governor Arne Carlson.
Two years later, the national Workforce Investment Act (WIA) was modeled
on Minnesota’s workforce development efforts.
Minnesota’s one-stop job centers and the authority given to the
governor’s council were integral. The
WIA mandate was that the council should be constituted with a mixture of people
from various parts of the community.
Specifically, “the WIA mandate was that the majority of people on the
council should represent business.” The
principal concern at the time was to address the state’s serious and growing
worker shortage. This was considered to be the single biggest issue in
Minnesota due to the historically low unemployment rate at the time of 2.5
percent. Business leaders saw this as a
long-term problem. As Hale, the chair of
the (GWDC) said, “this is not a problem that’s going to be solved by a little
economic downturn” (Legal Ledger, 1999).
Hale
wished to deal with “underemployment” which he defined as “people who are in
jobs which they think are ok, but are nowhere near as good as some of the jobs
that are available and screaming for workers.”
“A person working for $11 an hour doesn’t realize that they, with a
little bit of training, or just knowing about it, might qualify for a $13, $15,
or $16 an hour job” (Legal Ledger, 1999).
Specific industries in Minnesota, such as the printing industry, medical
devices, manufacturing-machining-metalworking, health services, and finance
were found by Hale to have the tightest labor shortage. A primary area of disconnect, as Hale sees
it, is people who mistakenly think the way to succeed in life is to get a
four-year degree. “They don’t even know
why they do it. Sometimes they come out
of a college after four years and don’t really know what they want to do. Perhaps this education is wasted when they
figure out after five, six, seven, eight years that they actually only wanted
to be an auto mechanic” (Legal Ledger, 1999).
Hale goes on to stress the importance of employment now as a priority
above job satisfaction. “It might be a good job or might not be a good
job. But the alternative is there right
now” (Legal Ledger, 1999). Hale suggests
that the private part of working training should be decreased. Hale wishes to use his position to push
forward an agenda focusing on a shortage of job skills. Hale stresses that this
simple message must be “pushed, pushed, pushed”. Rather than finding jobs for workers,
workforce development policy is to find workers for jobs. Further, he believes
that “there’s a pile of money that’s sitting there that’s dealing with old
programs and old initiatives” (Legal Ledger, 1999). These new policies are a distinct departure
from efforts to get unemployed people into the job stream, a departure from the
retraining necessary when a company shuts down or relocates.
The
first major report by Hale’s Governor’s workforce council explains the new
emphasis of workforce development on currently employed Minnesota’s who may or
may not be working at a level below their potential, as measured by their
salary. The council wishes to expand the
reach of workforce development efforts beyond the traditional categories of
“individuals who are disadvantaged, disabled, at risk, or in some other
targeted category.” finding that, “nearly 40 percent of the Minnesota
population earns less than $10.00 per hour”.
The report also states, “we need a plan that reflects the new realities
of the workplace.” Further, “by focusing
on what is necessary and effective, the state can strategically place its
investments to ensure a workforce that will make Minnesota a world-class
competitor now and in the coming decades.”
It states that concentrating on only the unemployed, who “make up less
than five percent of the Minnesota labor force” as virtually ignoring the vast
majority of state workers. (Departments
of Economic Security and Trade and Economic Development, the Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities system, and Minnesota Planning. February 2000)
Included among the primary
recommendations of the Governor’s workforce development council (GWDC) report,
is the goal of establishing an “Emerging Worker Program”, which would emphasize
to secondary school students post-secondary options in technical curricula
(Departments of Economic Security and Trade and Economic Development, the
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, and Minnesota Planning,
February 2000). Although Peck has documented a history of state sponsored job
training efforts within the new workforce development ideology of workfareism
to ensure that, “active market regulation of the welfare system have
restructured to make work schemes for the unemployed so as to more closely meet
‘local market needs’” (Workplace 1996, p. 212). The emphasis on state residents
who may not yet be considered employable due to child labor laws is an aspect
of this neoliberal “roll over” phase which seeks to include all who have been
schooled at the “states expense”.
The next recommendation of the GWC
is to take funds for the directives of this report from the Dislocated Worker
Fund, which specifically targets the unemployed, as opposed to targeting anyone
who isn’t in the “right” kind of occupation.
These occupations would have an alignment “with the marketplace,
including the needs of critical occupations and industries.” They go on to say that “all programs,
incentives, and resource expenditures be based on market needs as reflected in
critical occupations and industries.”
The rationale is again due to “new economic realities”. It goes on to give “enhanced electronic
communication” and the seemingly inevitable phenomena of ”globalization” and
the increased competition resulting, as an explanation for the change in
policy. (Departments of Economic Security
and Trade and Economic Development, the Minnesota State Colleges and
Universities system, and Minnesota Planning, February 2000) According to Brenner, it is neoliberalism,
which has become the dominant political and ideological form of capitalist globalization. Neoliberal policies are characterized here as
both the cause of the problem, and its solution. (Brenner, 2002)
Another goal of worker training
stated in this GWDC report is “realigning programs to meet demand”. This section seeks an approach in which
“workforce programs are created and maintained to meet the needs of the workers
and employers who utilize them.”
Although this sentence would indicate both the needs of workers and
employers would be taken into consideration, looking into the further indicates
specific priorities. It states, “a
better means of guiding the workforce development system is to listen to the
needs of both the employers who hire, and the workers who seek improved
economic opportunities for themselves.
The business community can, and should, be assisting the workforce
development system with decisions on how to direct resources toward meeting the
emerging skill needs of today’s rapidly-changing economy” (Departments of Economic Security and Trade
and Economic Development, the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system,
and Minnesota Planning, February 2000). This is one of many examples of the
document discursively creating a vision of reality in which the interests of
both employer and employee have been taking into account, but the employer
makes decisions as to what occupations are important to them, the employees
apparently have no such needs.
This section further states, “To
advance overall state economic growth, it may be wise to focus workforce
development programs toward high-growth, high-wage industries. Organizing workforce development programs
around specific industries may also encourage business involvement in defining
the needs of the workforce development system must meet. Moreover, because industries employ many
different types of occupations, information on industry-specific workforce
needs may help illuminate good job opportunities. Appendix G provides a list of high-wage or
high-growth industries in the state.
This industry list is by no means definitive, but should be considered a
starting point for focused attention.”
(Departments of Economic Security and Trade and Economic Development,
the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, and Minnesota
Planning. February 2000)
The goal here is of subsidizing the
training needs of specific clusters of industries, in the name of greater
earning potential of the employees, with no importance as to the kinds of
occupations the residents of the state desire.
One main difference however is that this policy document has the power
to put this ideology into action in the many workforce development institutions
already present in the State. The goal
is to mobilize into concrete reality the ideology of neoliberal market centric
policies. For example, the Minnesota Job Skills Partnership facilitates
partnerships between employers with specific training needs for their
employees, and accredited educational institutions who can train the workers to
meet their employers’ needs. This GWDC
report suggests increasing the grants available for the job skills partnership
by $ 4 million per year, with preference to “the critical industries or
occupations in an area”. (Minnesota
GWDC, 2003).
Another recommendation is “to
increase the alignment of public educational resources with the marketplace,
including the needs of critical occupations and industries.” (Departments of
Economic Security and Trade and Economic Development, the Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities system, and Minnesota Planning, February 2000). The language of this recommendation
specifically suggests students are not the ones who should be making the
choices about the course work they take.
“We believe that the educational system of the state is not producing
enough graduates to meet the needs of many high-wage occupations and
industries. For example, Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities’ (MnSCU’s) course program structure is built around
student choice, and funding is allocated by the Legislature on a course
registration basis. But course
registration numbers don’t always reflect the demand for the skill or
occupation in the marketplace. Under
this system, the state sometimes subsidizes training for which there is limited
employment demand” (Departments of Economic Security and Trade and Economic
Development, the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, and
Minnesota Planning, February 2000).
Interestingly, the report attempts to suggest
these recommendations are in the name of the students, but with unemployment at
an all time low in the state of Minnesota at the time of this report, why would
it logically be necessary to change the present system away from allowing the
students more choices? Again, the
reasons is this document is not a manifestation of any objective research or
study. In the place of this kind of
methodological rigor, is ideological rhetoric of the dominant hegemonic
ideology of neoliberalism. This is the
very same ideology of the state and the business leaders who are, the leading
intellectuals in this attempt at securing consent and hegemony.
This recommendation goes on to
state, “We recommend that MnSCU align tuition levels to correspond with demand
for training in priority industries and occupations. For example, MnSCU campuses should reduce student
tuition for programs for which there is high occupational demand (e.g.,
computer courses) and increase student tuition for programs for which there is
a low occupational demand (e.g., taxidermy).”
Further, “MnSCU should cap enrollment in programs for which there is a
low demand for employees relative to supply so that the state no longer
subsidizes training for which there is little employer demand.” (Departments of Economic Security and Trade
and Economic Development, the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system,
and Minnesota Planning, February 2000).
In this “roll over” phase of neoliberalism, the student who is neither
unemployed, or even yet a part of the workforce has increasingly had their choices
for their future careers made for them by wealthy business owners as
represented by the state. This is
another key example of the neoliberal process of erasure of public goods, such
as education, into private goods such as occupational training.
Although the attempt to use
taxidermy, as an example of an occupation for which there is more supply than
demand, in reality this suggests any course work, which is not intended for
certain state selected “cluster industries” might become beyond the financial
reach of an increasing number of students.
Other coursework which may not be a part of the local “cluster
industries” may be quite varied, from philosophy to art, and from English to
geography. Courses excluded might have
been the very course which would allow a detailed examination of these policies
from another worldview, and ask critical questions which this report clearly
never identifies as relevant such as ‘what do workers want to learn and
do?’. But again, this report seeks to
limit the realm of questions to be asked and answers given. The question asked is, what kinds of courses
would not be considered of “value” to employers of the state of Minnesota. The answer is taxidermy, and similar courses. Obviously courses in humanities, history,
cultural studies, or any social sciences would be unlikely to fit into the
state approved “cluster industries”, but this is not an area the report has any
interest in taking its reader.
Finally, a very telling
recommendation in this report suggests a strategy of recruiting workers from
other states. “The private sector has
had some success in promotional campaigns recruiting workers to Minnesota,
particularly former residents of the state.
Minnesota business should examine these efforts and pool its resources
to consider a targeted campaign” (Departments
of Economic Security and Trade and Economic Development, the Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities system, and Minnesota Planning, February 2000). The reason this section is so enlightening as
to the world view of this report, is the fact that it gives no relevance to the
importance of the social bonds and bridges which are so important to each
community. What is of vast importance is
the construction of a more “flexible” workforce, a supremely mobile force of
workers who can be placed in any empty occupational slot in any geographic
local.
Workers are considered as movable
pieces of the economic machine, and each state is in competition for a larger
share. To the GWDC workers have no
individual preferences, or family, or social links to any community giving
relevance as to where they should decide to work and live. This is the worldview of the industries and
businesses in Minnesota who want to increase the number of employees in
“cluster industries” in which they are scarce, because to lower the scarcity
would allow a lowering of the average wage.
The state also has this worldview, because they have increasingly become
the source through which Minnesota businesses and industries craft policy for
their own needs, and because the state simply sees an increase in employed
residents and/or higher wages increases the amount of taxes collected, for yet
more workforce development initiatives.
The 2003 GWDC inventory of workforce development programs shows a
continued emphasis on the threat of labor shortages dispite changes in
employment from low 1990s rates to relatively higher 2000s rates of
unemployment. “Unemployment rates have
jumped from under three percent to over four percent and initial claims for
unemployment insurance from 194,000 claims in 1999 to 326,000 in 2002. As a result of the economic downturn, the
dialogue on workforce development has moved from concern over a growing worker
shortage towards efforts to retrain more dislocated workers and to extend
unemployment benefits. With the future
economic recovery, we expect widespread labor shortages to return.” (Minnesota GWDC, 2003)
The 2004 GWDC report to the
Minnesota state legislature continues with the rational of a worker
shortage. “Our primary economic
advantage in a global economy is a productive skilled workforce. We risk losing that advantage if we do not
act now to address the coming skill and labor shortage. This Advisory provides information on key
trends among several economic, workforce, and education indicators and makes
the case for a strong focus on skill development across our workforce
investment portfolio. Skill development
refers broadly to academic skills, job specific skills, and career exploration
skills” (GWDC, February 2004)
Again, strategic investment objectives for Minnesota workforce
investment portfolio to the GWDC are to focus education, workforce, and
economic development resources to meet market demand in three key business
sectors statewide: health care, manufacturing, and biosciences. They also stress a sector-specific approach
to focus resources to address specific skills gaps. The report states, “There is widespread
agreement that Minnesota’s single strongest competitive advantage in a global
marketplace is our skilled workforce.”
It continues, “evidence is abundant that skill development is valuable –
particularly if targeted for high-demand, high growth business sectors and
focused on segments of the population which can benefit most from a specific
investment” (GWDC, February 2004, pp. 6).
The
investment recommendations suggest specific sectors for expanding
enrollment. In the health care sector,
it recommends making funding available to expand enrollment in registered
nursing education programs to address shortages. In the manufacturing sector, it suggests
investment to expand education training capacity for manufacturing, which
includes the articulation of manufacturing and engineering curricula with
Minnesota high schools and apprenticeship programs. And in the bioscience sector, it seeks to
target grant dollars towards workforce training in the bioscience technologies
industries, the majority of which going to Minnesota state colleges and
universities to maintain cutting edge capabilities in bioscience education. Further, funding should be made available to
Minnesota state colleges and universities to develop an education-industry
partnership to respond to the future workforce needs of present and emerging
companies in the biosciences industry because curricular design processes need to
be dynamic and flexible in response to new industry discoveries. Further investment recommendation is to
expand secondary educational programs that are oriented to specific
occupational areas and connect business to education. This is to provide incentives for independent
school distracts to align with current industry standards and increase
collaboration among educational institutions and businesses (GWDC, February
2004).
This
report also directly connects its policy directions to an organization outside
of the state government, “The Citizens League”.
“To address job-specific skills, the GWDC has identified specific
sectors with current and future skill shortages requiring attention. In
addition, the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities and Minnesota
Department of Employment and Economic Development have recently created a new
analytic tool to identify specific skills gaps in key industries and how state
colleges and universities can align educational offerings to meet these skills
gaps. When implemented, the recommendations in this document would require
continual use of such a tool by those two state organizations as well as other
state and local partners to best assess strategic gaps and implement meaningful
solutions. The GWDC Executive Committee has previously discussed the value of a
“workforce coordinator” position which could also be established at the state
level to help guide sectoral work and ensure cross-agency collaboration to
focus on skills development as discussed here. Although no specific
recommendation is being advanced at this time, there has been previous work on
this topic (see 1999 Citizens League report) that could be developed as a
gubernatorial recommendation in the coming years” (GWDC, February 2004, pp. 8).
This connection to the advocacy organization, “The Citizens League” will be
explored more in the next section.
AN INTELLECTUAL VANGUARD OF
“CITIZENS”
In
the above mentioned November 1999 report by “the Citizens League Committee on
Workforce Training” titled, “From Jobs for Workers, to Workers for Jobs: Better Workforce Training for Minnesota”, a
number of policy changes are recommended.
If we would attempt to do an Althusserian inspired “symptomatic” reading
of this document, we may find indications of a ‘hidden text’ full of the
dominant hegemonic ideology of neoliberalism encompassed within this
organization. Using this technique, we will find the activist groups “The
Citizen’s League” can very much be considered what Gramsci described as a
vanguard who publicizes arguments and produces elites of intellectuals who are
attempting to promote a neoliberal hegemonic ideology as the norm for policy
debates and decisions. It asks
questions to its own problems and leaves out alternatives from other
ideological frameworks seeking hegemony.
This reports discourse is also strongly aligned with the state
Minnesota’s workforce development efforts, indicating similarly their common
alignment with neoliberalist policies and the success of this private
organization in dictating the state’s policies.
The
Citizens League committee on workforce training chair, Rodger Hale, (who was
previously CEO of the Minneapolis-based Tennant Company producing office
cleaning supplies which no doubt might have had trouble finding voluntary
employees who wished to have training with harsh chemicals) was appointed the
chair of the Governor’s workforce council.
While the citizens league committee met from April 27, to September 28
1999, Mr. Hale was appointed by the Governor July 14th, of
1999. He effectively held the same
position within a business advocacy organization as well as the state of
Minnesota.
This
Citizens League report places the workforce development argument in a context
of “the emergence of a global, technology-driven, skills-based economy” and “a
continuing shortage of skilled labor”.
The creators of this report state explicitly, how developing a
world-class training system for Minnesota’s workers and businesses, “is
critical to keeping our state stay competitive” (The Citizens League Committee
on Workforce Training, November 1999).
Discourses of neoliberalism represent the world of market rules as a
state of nature. These discourses are
self-actualizing in nature because of their alignment with the primary contours
of contemporary political-economic power.
This “new” workforce development
trend is assumed here as an inevitable product of advances in other assumed
inevitable forces of globalization and technological innovation. Entrepreneurial cities are by definition speculative
as opposed to rationally planned with coordinated development (Harvey, 1989).
Although this may be in the best interests of investors, who find it easier to
send finances from one geographic local to the next, the residents of these
cities find themselves in competition with each other in a downward spiral of
decreased wages, benefits and workforce training options outside of those
deemed by these think tanks, such as the Citizens League, as important to the
local industrial clusters within the economy.
Among the findings of this report is the need for students in the K-12
system who, “need stronger career counseling, direction, and exposure to enter
the workforce”. This is to “play a
critical role in aligning the supply of new workers with employers’ skill
demands”. (The Citizens League Committee
on Workforce Training. November
1999) The report goes on to say,
“critical gaps exist in the supply of skilled workers in key industries.” The reason for this they claim is “a strong
cultural bias in favor of traditional four-year colleges, even though other
training options can lead to high-skill, high-paying careers” (The Citizens
League Committee on Workforce Training, November 1999). Strangely, nowhere is it mentioned the needs
of these students who have decided to attend these “traditional” colleges
instead of the other training options, which could lead to “high-paying
careers”. Clearly, this is another
indication as to the opinion of the creators of this report, that there is
little value in an education besides the amount of money to be made from the
eventual occupation connected to it. Any
other purpose for education is not even part of the ‘worker training’
conversation.
This report also has specific
recommendations to the Minnesota legislature. Recommendation number one is to
coordinate policies to meet the state’s current and future workforce
needs. Recommendation number two goes
further in suggesting “The Legislature should develop alternative funding
sources to support training for incumbent workers” (The Citizens League
Committee on Workforce Training, November 1999). This is a direct call to subsidize training
for those who are currently employed, rather than have their employers pay for
what in the end is to their own benefit. Also, these policies are clearly
aspects of the “rollover” phase of neoliberalism because they do not regulate
the spaces already affected by workforce policy, the unemployed.
It goes on to state, “Public
dollars should be targeted at key industry clusters “. It further states, “The Citizens League has a
long record of support for reorienting public investments, and economic
development toward Minnesota’s strategic industry clusters. Supporting industry clusters is not about
picking winners and losers or directing the state’s economy. Rather, a successful cluster-based
development strategy directs public support to those clusters that emerge from
market forces.” (The Citizens League
Committee on Workforce Training.
November 1999) Anticipating critique, the Citizens league ironically
suggests rewarding businesses who have “emerged from market forces” while
effectively ending or strongly effecting the future clusters who may also
“emerge from market forces” unhindered by competition from industries who are
not categorized as industrial clusters worthy of these state sponsored training
subsidies.
The Citizens League’s website
states “the citizens league promotes the public interest in Minnesota by
involving citizens in identifying and framing critical public policy choices,
forging recommendations and advocating their adoption” (The Citizens League
Citizens Shaping Minnesota’s Agenda for More Than 45 years, 2004). This organization adopts some of the language
and rhetoric of a grassroots, activist organization, as exemplified in this
quote from the group’s statement of purpose: “The American citizen is being
convinced…that democracy is failing because government is controlled by the
politicians, and the individual citizen is left bewildered.” Yet, the roots of the Citizens League
admittedly goes back to the early 1940s, when “a group of young Minneapolis
business leaders, concerned about the overpowering impact of government on
individual citizens, decided to work together to influence elected officials
and government procedures and actions” (The Citizens League Citizens Shaping
Minnesota’s Agenda for More Than 45 years, 2004).
This organization is more than
simply the dominant class attempting to exert a moral and intellectual
leadership. One of the most important aspects of Gramsci’s definition of
hegemony includes a dominant class who will exert a moral and intellectual
leadership, and will go beyond its own “economic-corporate” interests in order
to ally itself within a social bloc of forces, a “historical bloc” which represents
a basis of compromise and consent. By
attempting to put this document in the context of being for both businesses and
employees, it is seeking to redefine the compromise equilibrium to be formed
within the current historical bloc, which according to Gramsci’s has a common
political ideology with contributions of its different social groups, or
“subaltern classes” (Mayo, 1999).
People relate to the conditions of existence through the practice of
ideology. Contradictions are smoothed
over and real problems are offered false though seemingly true solutions. The “citizens league’s” report is attempting
to create a mythology, of a compromise between workers and business leaders,
yet that compromise interpollates workers interests solely as making a higher
wage than the average, and goes so far as to suggest all a worker really needs,
or even wants is to be more useful to their employer.
By attempting to color the reader’s perceptions of reality and of the
relations between employer and employee in the terms of the employer alone,
this report can be defined as ideology.
At no point do they identify any membership as employees, or any kind of
labor organization, not is their report in consultation with any employee or
labor organization. Their point of view
is clear, once you read between the lines, yet they are adept at the
mystification of a pseudo grassroots organization, in actuality, this may in
fact me astroturf, or false grassroots, in an effort to gain consent among the
working class. To intepellate those who
read its text as being one who has the same narrow goals as the report, to
become a worker trained into any occupation the larger state economy “needs” as
defined by the state with aid of local business elites.
INDUSTRIAL CLUSTER CRITIQUE
The much-touted industrial cluster
approach to workforce development training emphasizes the sectors in a regions
economy with a high productivity ratio and a recent history of high
growth. Michael E. Porter of the Harvard
Business school, arguably one of the foremost experts as well as proponents of
industrial cluster theory, describes industrial clusters as geographic
concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service
providers, firms in related industries, and associated in a particular field
that compete but also cooperate.
According to Porter, more than single industries, clusters encompass an
array of linked industries and other entities important to competition. This assumes “economic development seeks to
achieve long-term sustainable development of a “standard of living”. This is determined, in this model, by the
productivity of an area’s economy, which is measured by the value of the goods
and services produced per unit of human capital and human resources. (Porter, 1994)
There are a number of problems with
this cluster theory based policies, foremost in importance to our discussion is
the obvious lack of worker advocacy for their own employment and needs of
fulfillment. (Sawicki, D.S., &
Moody, M. 1996). Porter himself points
out some of the limitations of the cluster model. He has found policies that promote clusters
could hurt deserving non-cluster firms who sometimes have higher wages or
benefits (Porter, 1995). Another main
concern with the cluster approach is the fact that some industries may have a
limited lifespan. Employees who are
training in these industries may find themselves out of work at the next
technological revolution (Johnson, J.H., Farrell W.C., & Henderson, G. R.
1996, Fall/Winter and Harrison, B., & Glasmeier, A.K. 1997, February).
Finally, the decision as to which “clusters” are truly destined to grow is a
difficult one, and growth does not always correlate with superior wages or
benefits for all employees. (Hill, E., & Brennan, J. 2000, February).
A past example of a short-term
cluster economy in Minnesota is the mainframe computer industry, which was
booming until the personal computer era made many of their operations
obsolete. These jobs quickly disappeared,
and employees had to be retrained in other fields to find gainful employment
(University of Minnesota and The Metropolitan Council. 1995, July). A similar situation has also occurred in many
high tech fields since this report was originally published before the
recession of 2000. What has become
called the ‘dot com bomb’ has substantially decreased employment in information
technology clusters. Even within the
intensively clustered high tech economy of Silicon Valley, many residents are
finding themselves unemployed and in need of yet more retraining or
relocation. (Saxenian, 1994) (Scott,
1994) (Henwood, 2001).
Markusen’s article, ‘Sticky Places
in Slippery Space: A Typology of Industrial Districts’ discusses the ways
geographic areas can be slippery to business investment due to the increased
flow of capital. These areas want to be
sticky, to hold people with good jobs.
She further critiques the use of industrial districts in economic
development analysis by cautioning the singular enthusiasm for flexibly
specialized industrial districts, especially the high tech variant, as ill
founded on the grounds of growth, stability and equity. There are a multitude of reasons why certain
areas are successful compared to others.
Sticky places are complex products of multiple forces, their success
cannot be studied by focusing only on local institutions and behaviors because
their companies, workers and other institutions are embedded in external
relationships both cooperative and competitive that condition their commitment
to the locality and their success there (Markusen, 1996)
Markusen suggests economic and
community development planners should expand their range of targeting solely
based on industries to include occupations as well. Specific occupations can have high employment
growth rates, fit with underemployed workforce groups and the potential for
self-employment and entrepreneurship.
She argues that industrial targeting efforts often disappoint their
purveyors because they focus on firms, the individual members of an industry,
as the central agents of economic development.
Diagnosing the competitive status of individual firms and convincing
them to come or stay in a specific geographic area is often a very difficult
and expensive proposition. With global
economic integration and new technologies, local economies are under pressure
to specialize and export more than ever.
This ability is based on talents and synergy in the local economy
(Markusen, 2001).
Firms will choose where to locate
due to the quality of workers, says Markusen, although development is also
strongly linked with increased education, also known as ‘human capital’. Training by individual companies is too
expensive because job commitment has waned and workers can shift in tight labor
markets with short notice, thus training is externalized in regional
institutions, and this training is best better organized by occupation rather
than industrial clusters. She also
stresses that entrepreneurial activity accounts for new local specialization
and job growth. Identifying
entrepreneurship by occupation is significantly harder than in industries. She uses an example of the arts occupations
(Markusen, 2001). Markusen elaborates on
this thought in an article titled “The artistic dividend, on the artists hidden
contributions to regional development”.
She suggests that the productivity and earnings of the regional economy
do rise because creativity and specialized skills enhance the design,
production and marketing of products and services (Markusen, 2003).
Another economic development
theorists in the realm of the impact creativity has on a regions potential for
economic growth is Richard Florida. He
discusses the distribution of talent, or human capital and how it’s an important
factor in economic geography. Talent, he
suggests, must be attracted to a geographic region because it has positive
effects on the location and development of high-technology industries and with
them comes increased regional incomes.
Talent is defined as individuals with high levels of human capital,
measured as the percentage of the population with a bachelor’s degree and
above. Florida hypothesizes that talent
is attracted by diversity and the diversity index, which measures the
proportion of gay households in a region, can be complimented by the coolness
index, which measures the cultural and nightlife amenities, which can also
complement the high-technology industry and increase regional income. Talent is associated with the diversity
index, furthermore, the economic geography of talent is strongly associated
with high-technology industry locations generating higher regional incomes
(Florida, 2002).
Florida stresses that cities and entire nations must learn to compete
for these creative workers or risk stagnation.
Any advantage the United States has “lies in its ability to attract
these economic drivers from around the world.
Of critical importance to American success in the last century has been
a tremendous influx of global talent” (Florida, 2005 p 5). Nations that invest in their people by
creating open and tolerant societies will win in the global competition for
human resources. He refused to see such
competition between cities as a zero-sum game reinforcing inequalities between
cities.
Glaeser finds the urban lesson of
Florida’s book “The Creative Class” is that cities that want to succeed must
aim at attracting the creative types who are the wave of the future. Glaeser confirms that Florida is correct,
creativity is becoming a more important part of the economy. The importance of idea-generation is nothing
new, Adam Smith emphasizes the importance of knowledge-creation, followed by
Alfred Marshall, Jane Jacobs, and Paul Romer.
(Glaeser, 2004) High skilled
people in high skilled industries come up with more new ideas. (Glaeser, 1994) Using Florida’s own data, Glaeser shows that
the percent of adults with a college education and also the super-creative core
employees are highly correlated. His analysis
also shows that while schooling has a positive and significant correlation with
economic growth, the gay population has a slight statistically negative
impact. As much as one may wish
diversity to conclusively be a positive impact on economic development and
higher wages, it demonstrably and simply is not (Glaeser, 2004).
Despite
these critiques, the “Creative Class” theories of Florida have found a large
amount of support among policy makers.
The Citizens Leagues most recently published report on higher education
also stresses the need for creativity in workforce development training
(Citizens League, 2004). According to this report, higher education is a
resource, which should be available to take part in every Minnesotan’s
life. The goal should be, to be the
best-educated and innovative workforce in the world. One of the reforms to this end is to raise
the expectation of at least two years of post-high school education. They also stress the difficulty for low
income and minorities who seek higher education. This is a welcome change in the discourse,
but they still place emphasis on advanced science and engineering degrees. There is also still discourse on the
importance of how “Minnesotans should be alarmed over our eroding competitive
advantage in the knowledge economy” (Citizens League, 2004, pp. 9). Among the competitive factors included in
the Citizens League’s discourse is the new acknowledgement that “Minnesota’s
knowledge economy also demands a significant and growing number of graduates
with strong skills in the liberal arts, including critical thinking, creative
problem solving, and strong written and verbal communications skills.” Further, “promoting democratic values and
preparing students to be good citizens are among the statutory objectives of
higher education. They recommend the
recent work on the “creative economy” by Richard Florida, author of The Creative Class, links the economic
success of regions to their ability to attract and retain these workers”
(Citizens League, 2004, pp. 26)
Workforce training
discourse appears to be moving in a direction acknowledging the contributions
of creative workers. Although the emphasis on the ways these kinds of workers
contribute to the economy are no less neoliberal than the previously envogue
policies emphasizing industrial clusters, this new focus does offer possibilities
for alternative paths for workforce legislation and practices. Also, once the state intervenes by
subsidizing the training expenses of these industrial cluster businesses, the
rational for increased interventions to stimulate the local economy with, tax
breaks, cheap credit, procurement of sites or any verities of state support of
private enterprises in the name of economic development are not far
behind. Thus cities and regions are
forced to compete by offering similar subsidies. This unspoken viewpoint of the crafters of
these policy documents offers a glimpse of their real motivations for such
policies, the enrichment of their membership, not necessarily the workers who
are affected by such policies. With this
ideology firmly in place, a space needs to be found in which alternative voices
can be heard. For the possibilities for
a worker workforce development and a worker agency, I will now turn back to
Gramsci.
GRAMSCIAN
ADULT EDUCATION CRITIQUES
To find a theoretical framework
allowing for some amount of advocacy by those who are not a part of the
dominant hegemonic neoliberal ideology, we can return to Gramsci and his modern
day advocates. There is a virtual
plethora of modern day academics and adult educators who are using the theories
of Gramsci in their every day practice (Mayo, 1995). One of the most prolific of these
‘Gramscians’ is Peter Mayo. In “Gramsci,
Freire & Adult Education: possibilities for transformative action”, Mayo
criticizes the recent propagation of a discourse essentially technical-rational
and focusing primarily on ‘what works’, meaning a strong emphasis on the
marketability of the worker as ‘flexible’ and ‘adaptable’ rather than concern
for issues of interest to individual workers such as social justice, self actualization
or simple worker satisfaction. These
neoclassical arguments involve justifications of this emphasis due to the
flight of capital across different geographic boundaries with the
intensification of the globalization process since the early 1980s administrations
of Reagan and Thatcher. (Mayo, 1999)
“Neo-liberal ideology in adult education, as
well as in other spheres of activity, can easily lead one to think and operate
within the logic of capitalist restructuring.
This process is generally characterized by such features as that of
converting what were once public goods (adult education among them) into
consumption goods, as the ‘ideology of the marketplace’ holds sway.” According
to this ideology, “focus is on production without any preoccupation about what
we are producing, who benefits, and who it hurts.” Freire, a Brazilian educator and advocate of
the “Gramscian Turn” in adult education, also argues, “there is no such thing
as a neutral education. Education either
functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate the integration of
generations into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity to
it.” On the other hand, education has
the potential to “become the means by which men and women deal critically and
creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation
of their world.” (Freire, quoted in
Mayo, 1999)
To these theorists, education can
be either domesticating or liberating.
To concern ourselves with the transformative and emancipating dimension
of adult education, Mayo points out the fact that we must engage in the logic
of the capitalist system in order to be effective. Civil society is an arena
which consolidates, through its dominant institutions, the existing hegemonic
arrangements, but which also contains sites of resistance, often within these
same dominant institutions themselves.
Through what Gramsci describes, the ‘war of position’ these arrangements
are constantly renegotiated and contested.
(Mayo, 1999)
Gramsci himself, was devoted to the education of workers, both as a
journalist and as an adult educator in the factory council movement in an
effort at the formation of intellectuals who are of the oppressed, or “organic”
to the “subaltern”. Mayo believes this kind of alternative transformative adult
education should be grounded in a critique of mainstream educational
systems. This critique would include a
process of analysis tying educational
systems to systemic and structural forms of domination in the wider society,
without denying a “relative autonomy”.
It also entails a form of dialectical engagement exposing the
contradictions that lie behind the veneer created by the dominant, hegemonic
discourse. Specific efforts should pose
questions as to how politicized education is, and are the concerns expressed
‘neutral’, or relating to the dominant powers interests and configurations in
society. The important question being,
is their room for a critically conscious agency among the workforce being
developed?
Throughout Gramsci’s writings on
the state and civil society exists a critique of education. Educational establishments play an important
role in cementing the existing hegemony, by establishing consent for the ruling
way of life. Compulsory initial
learning, mandated by the capitalist Italian state during the Fascist rule, is
problematised by Gramsci in his critique of the Riforma Gentile. His critique was of the Fascist regimes
separation between ‘classical’ and ‘vocational’ schools. He argued for the provision of a broad
education, with a strong humanistic basis for all, rather than any kind of
differentiation or classes of schools.
Only an education, which would not jeopardize ones future as a result of
early and narrow professional specialization, would be acceptable. Gramsci insisted that professional schools
should not be “incubators of small monsters, narrowly instructed for a specific
occupation, lacking in ‘general ideas’, a ‘general culture’ and ‘a soul’, while
being in possession only of an ‘infallible eye’ and a ‘firm hand’.” (Gramsci, quoted in Sassoon, 1989: 231) Current policies and practices must be
similarly criticized as to their narrow focus and lack of allowing options for
its citizens. This is especially true
under the current ‘flexible accumulation’ regime of capitalism entailing a
focus on skill development in a time of rapid destruction and reconstruction of
skills (Harvey, 1990)
As a crucial area of civil society,
adult education itself can also play an important role in this ‘war of
position’, entailing wide-ranging counter hegemonic cultural activity. Gramsci’s factory councils movement was
conceived as an adult education movement through which workers were ‘educated’
as producers rather than simply as ‘wage earners’. For Gramsci, the factory councils were
intended to allow the workers to educate themselves, and gain an awareness of
their place within the larger social structure. He further believed in
education through praxis, and an absolute fusion between education and the
world of production. In the factory
council movement, workers were to experience the unity of the industrial
process and see themselves as an inseparable part of the whole labor system,
which is concentrated in the object being manufactured. The knowledge acquired at the workplace could
lead to a greater understanding of the workings of society. (Mayo, 1999)
Adult educators engaging in
counter-hegemonic cultural activity are intellectuals organic to the
‘subaltern’ groups aspiring to power.
This implies that they should be politically committed to those they
teach. Gramsci's criticism of Italian
education was that the educators were not organic to the subaltern, and
dissemination of culture was not carried out in the context of an attempt to
transform their social and cultural conditions, merely to reinforce the status
quo. Furthermore, he also questioned the
approach to learning adopted by the teachers, who failed to connect with the
learners’ background and framework of relevance. Modern day adult educators, especially in the
many institutions of workforce development, must similarly seek guidance from
the students as to what areas of knowledge they seek for their own self
actualization as opposed to those defined by the dominant hegemonic neoliberal
ideology. (Mayo, 1999)
Gramsci also believed any dialogue
or other elements of a participative education not grounded in solid facts and
rigor would be detrimental to the working class. Any such dialogue would be merely rhetoric. Facilitation, without critical analysis keeps
the learner locked in the same paradigm of thinking. He also advocates mastery of the dominant
hegemonic language by members of the ‘subaltern’ classes so that they do not
remain at the periphery of political life, and be able to more effectively engage
with the intellectuals who were the mouthpieces for the dominant hegemonic
ideology. (Mayo, 1999) Only by
understanding neoliberal ideology can we begin to contemplate ways to change
policies in favor of worker rights and away from policies which pigenhold
worker potential into specific occupations in industries who happen to have
geographical proximity. Further, an
emphasis on critical thinking will allow a greater proportion of the population
to realize the importance of solid facts and using rigorous methodology when
analyzing elements as diverse as work practices, to interpersonal
relationships. If there is ever to be
any kind of radical potential in the thinking of the population, it must, as
Gramsci would say, begin with critical thinking.
POTENTIAL
“ROLL-UNDER” PHASE OF NEOLIBERALISM
Of course, if ideology is materialized
in institutions that are part of the state apparatus, the role of institutions
in a process in which the state apparatus is abolished or even minimized, is a
very problematical one. However, adult
education practitioners do have the ability to facilitate a stronger
contestation of the current dominant ideology of neoliberalism. The goal of eventually transforming the
current workforce development strategies into a method by which students can be
the judges of what they learn, and what they do with that education rather than
having their goals thrust upon them by a state working purely in the interests
of the market, is a possibility worth pursuing.
A potential “roll under” phase of
neoliberalism would include an effort to bring into the workforce training
discourse an emphasis on critical thinking in all education rather than
training for either specific industrial clusters, occupations, or skill sets. This “roll under” phase of neoliberalism
would deemphasize the most alarming aspect of many workforce training efforts,
including that of Florida’s so called “creative class”, the creation of a
scenario with distinct winners and losers among both workers and their employers
beyond that already endemic to the logic of capitalist relations. Education emphasizing specific cluster
industries, occupations, or skills not only limit choices of those seeking
education and meaningful employment, but it also limits the possibilities of
competing businesses whose workforce training goals are not prioritized by the
state. Efforts to seduce either
“creative” workers, or workers in much valued “high skilled” or “high paying”
occupations create a vacuum of these professions in the geographic areas they
flee. The key is to create more valuable
workers in all geographic areas rather than seduce them from other geographic
areas. These policies would appear to be
outwardly neoliberal because workers would also happen to have the qualities
most valuable to businesses, that of innovation. The importance of innovative workers can
ironically be shown through a closer reading of one of the primary proponents
of “industrial cluster” based economic development strategies, Porter.
In “The Competitive Advantage of Nations”, Porter, stresses, “A nation’s
competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and
upgrade” (Porter, 1990. pp. 73).
Further, “companies achieve
competitive advantage through acts of innovation. They approach innovation in its broadest
sense, including both new technologies and new ways of doing things” (Porter,
1990. pp. 74). Further, “much innovation
is mundane and incremental, depending more on a cumulating of small insights
and advances than on a single, major technological breakthrough. It always involves investing in skill and
knowledge. Some innovations create
competitive advantage by perceiving an entire new market opportunity or by
serving a market segment that others have ignored. Information plays a large role in the process
of innovation and improvement – information that either is not available to
competitors or that they do not seek” (Porter, 1990. pp. 74). Innovation can come from investment in research
and development or market research, but “more often, it comes from effort and
from openness and from looking in the right place unencumbered by blinding
assumptions or conventional wisdom. This
is why innovators are often outsiders from a different industry or a different
country" (Porter, 1990 pp. 75).
Although Porter seems to
acknowledge the importance of individual worker innovation, he moves into the
direction of promoting “industrial clusters” when he states “a nations success
largely depends on the types of education its talented people choose, where
they choose to work, and their commitment and effort. The goal’s of a nation’s institutions and
values set for individuals and companies, and the prestige it attaches to
certain industries, guide the flow of capital and human resources – which, in
turn, directly affects the competitive performance of certain industries”
(Porter, 1990. pp. 81). He goes on to
say that the place for government is not to create competitive industries, only
companies can do that. “Government
policies that succeed are those that create an environment in which companies
can gain competitive advantage” (Porter, 1990. pp. 86). He suggests, “the factors that translate into
competitive advantage are advanced, specialized, and tied to specific
industries or industry groups.
Mechanisms such as specialized apprenticeship programs, research efforts
in universities connected with an industry, trade association activities, and
most important, the private investments of companies ultimately create the
factors that will yield competitive advantage” (Porter, 1990. pp. 87).
Government can most importantly create pressures for innovation rather than
promoting specific worker training. He
goes on to say that in nearly every successful competitive industry leading
companies, rather than the government, take explicit steps to create
specialized factors like human resources, scientific knowledge, or
infrastructure. He suggests that “our
polices and programs have fallen into the trap of redistributing wealth. The real need – and the real opportunity – is
to create wealth” (Porter, 1995. pp. 56).
An innovation is, “an idea,
practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of
adoption” (Rogers, 2003, p. 12). The
innovation-development process consists of all the decisions, activities, and
their impacts that occur from the recognition of a need or a problem. Other terms are often used as a synonym for
innovation, such as technology or invention.
The most important part of innovation is the ability of an individual to
come up with or recognize new ideas.
This is why R & D workers occasionally chance upon an invention
while pursuing research to find a very different invention. Post-its, Rogaine, Penicillin, DDT, were all
serendipitous discoveries of new ideas which occurred to the general public as
well as the much glorified scientists and inventors (Rogers, 2003). Hippel (1988) has found that the basic
assumption that manufacturers are the ones who produce innovations, but its
usually lead users who are thinking up new innovations for their own self-driven
purposes. Nonetheless, large businesses
attempt to establish innovative environments such as ‘Skunkworks’ because time
has proven the ability of creative environments to create profits. These innovations further have positive
externalities for the rest of the economy when the knowledge spillovers benefit
other sectors (Black, 2004)
Markusen (1996) also connects the
artistic creativity and innovation to economic development, and Florida agrees
with the importance of creative thinking to economic progress enough to suggest
efforts to lure these “creative workers” from other geographic locations lead
to successful geographic areas. He suggests broadening the very definition of
creativity, one that would ennoble and encourage the everyday efforts of
“ordinary” occupations allowing workers to be more self-actualized. Florida also quotes innovation expert Paul
Romer when explaining how investments in innovative ideas have extraordinary
rates of return and promise to pay incredible dividends because they are public
goods whose benefits are conferred broadly and reverberate throughout the
entire economy. He suggests that human
creativity should be cultivated in our school systems (Florida, 2005). Further,
Porter stresses the ultimate importance of innovation to increasing
productivity, wealth and therefore economic development. Yet, teaching innovation is rarely mentioned
as a goal. Even the previously mentioned
Citizens League has begun to see the need for improved critical thinking and
creative problem solving in higher education in its most recent report on
workforce development and education (Citizens League November 2004), although
the Governors Workforce Development council has failed to follow suit. The Citizens League are vague about any
goals, but refer to the work of Florida as providing the links between economic
success and the “creative economy”.
Critical thinking has become increasingly
important in higher education. This is
because critical thinking skills have been proven to lead to success in
academia and in every day life. Carson
(1995) says that this is because it gives people the ability to rigorously
analyze logical questions and engage in deeper questions of knowledge. Hanley
(1995) also suggests that critical thinking skills can help students solve
everyday problems constructively. This
is of crucial importance to spurring innovation because “provocative teaching”
allows students to examine and question their own beliefs and the conditions
under which these formed. Mills (1998)
explains that critical thinking leads students towards the goal of
understanding that conditioning or early learning alone is not sufficient
justification for holding a belief. Sanches (1995) states emphatically that
many students lack critical thinking skills because they have been encouraged
to concentrate on learning content in coursework. Not even a huge amount of conveyed
information will be useful if individuals can not use this to reason about
complex and novel topics. Coursework which emphasizes superficial knowledge of
material, simple recall, and other lower-level thought processes allows for
technocratic thinking, which in turn allows for dominant discourses to remain
unchallenged and unexamined. Most valuable of all is the fact that critical
thinking skills can be transferred and spontaneously used in different settings
while also facilitating the most productive forms of innovation economic
development policy experts could ask for.
More specifically, critical
thinking allows human beings to recognize egocentrism and self-deception in
thinking. Most uncritically accept much
of what they hear and read, especially when it agrees with their own intensely
held beliefs. Critical thinking allows
us to autonomously consider ideas which conflict with those that dominate our
society because fair-minded thinking and non-conformity would be valued. Thus, typical educational standards focusing
on learning facts rather than questioning them would also have to be questioned. Currently, students do no more than memorize
isolated statements in the history textbooks in order to pass exams. Some of these statements students neither
understand, nor can they explain, but thus they become part of the students
inert information or activated ignorance.
Its also easier to exam students on “high-level” decision-makers
(great-person accounts) rather than social processes or circumstances. Their agendas thus become histories agendas.
The emphasis on critical thinking
in education should be an easy one for neoliberal market centric business
leaders to understand. Many gurus of the
business elite already stress it in their books and lectures on maximizing
profits (Amamson, 2005;Robbins, 2004;Smith, 2003). Management courses use critical thinking
exercises to increase productivity and efficiency (Braun, 2004). If critical thinking already fits into the
paradigm of the dominant hegemonic ideologies discourse, it should be all the
easier to mobilize workforce education at the state level to jump on the
critical thinking bandwagon.
The reason I consider this to be
the “roll under” phase of neolibealism is because it is a potentially
progressive phase which can be ushered into the public policy realm under the
guise of neoliberal economic development policies, when they in fact have the
potential for real long term effects on the ways people question authority,
power and methods of control such as workfare.
Like the “roll over” phase of neoliberalism, the “roll under” phase has
the potential to go beyond the space of traditional workforce development
policy. As critical thinking penetrates
all levels of society, people will continually think of questions about how
their lives could be better and how the world they live in could be improved. As always, this strategy runs the risk of
stabilizing and empowering the neoliberal regime, but I will put my faith in
the potential of rigorous critical thinking to empower people to better create
the world they live in.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adamson, Walter. (2005)
“Breaking Down the Barriers to Exit Using Critical Thinking”. Digital Investor. (http://refresher.com/!wabarriers.html)
Albo, Gregory.
(2001). The Economy: Myth and Reality. Monthly Review. 52(11)
American
Federation of State, Counter and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO
(March 19,
2003) Urging of Opposition to the
“Workforce Reinvestment and Adult Education Act of 2003” Press Release. Charles M. Loveless
Associated Press “Veteran
Sues After Being Called to Duty”. U.S.
National Associated Press. March 12,
2004
Brenner, N. and Theodore,
M., (2002), Cities and the Geographies of “Actually Existing Neoliberalism”
Antipode 34 (3) 349-79.
Brenner, Robert. (2000). The Boom and the Bubble. New Left Review. 6
Braithwaite, John. “The New
Regulatory State and the Transformation of Criminology”. Brit.J.Criminol. (2000) 40, 222-238
Burns, Robert. “Army to Call Up Retired, Discharged
Troops”. Associate Press. June 29, 2004.
Butterfield,
Fox. “Almost 10% of Prisoners Are Serving Life Terms”. New York Times. May 12, 2004.
Butterfield, Fox. “Despite
Drop in Crime, an Increase in Inmates”. New York Times, November 8, 2004.
Callinicos,
Alex. (1976) Althusser's Marxism.
Published London : Pluto Press
Carlson, E.R. (1995). Evaluating the credibility of sources:
A missing link in the teaching of critical thinking. Teaching
of Psychology, 22(1), 39-41.
Chen,
David. “In Public Housing, It’s Work, Volunteer or Leave”. New York Times. April 15, 2004.
The
Citizens League Committee on Workforce Training. (Novemeber 1999) From Jobs for Workers to Workers for
Jobs: Better Workforce Training for
Minnesota http://www.citizensleague.net/default.htm
The
Citizens League Citizens Shaping Minnesota’s Agenda for More Than 45
years. http://www.citizensleague.net/cl/default.htm
Citizens League. November 2004. Trouble on the Horizon: Growing Demands and
Competition, Limited resources, & Changing Demographics in Higher
Education. The 2004 Citizens League
Report on Higher Education in Minnesota.
Committee
on Education and Workforce. (March 13,
2003) Boehner, McKeon Introduce
Workforce Reinvestment and Adult Education Act. Press Release. Washington.
http:edworkforce.house.gov/press/press108/03mar/workreinvestment031303.htm
Committee
on Education and Workforce. House Education
and Workforce Committee. John Boehner,
Charman. (April 9, 2003) Workforce Reinvestment and Adult Education
Act. (H.R. 1261) Bill Summary. http://edworkforce.house.gov/issues/108th/workforce/1ia/billsummary.htm
Committee
on Education and Workforce. John A.
Bochner, Chairman. (April 30, 2003) House Approves Major Special Education
Reform Bill with Bipartisan Support
Press Release. http://edworkforce.house.gov/
Crow,
Graham. (1997) Comparative sociology
and social theory : beyond the three
worlds New York : St. Martin's Press.
Departments
of Economic Security and Trade and Economic Development, the Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities system, and Minnesota Planning. (February 2000) The Governor's Workforce Development Plan:
The Governor’s “Mini Cabinet” Report.
Educational Resources Information Center (1988). Critical
thinking skills and teacher education. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Teacher Education.
Florida, Richard. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class: and How it’s
Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
Glaeser, Edward. 1994.
Cities, Information and Economic Growth.
Cityscape 1(1): 9-47
Glaeser, Edward. 2004. Review of Richard Florda’s “The Rise of the
Creative Class”.
Glaeser, E. and A. Saiz (2004) The
Rise of the Skilled City,” Brookings-Whanton Papers on Urban Affairs.
Governor’s
Workforce Development Council. January
2003. Minnesota Inventory of
Publicly-Funded Workforce Development Programs.
State of Minnesota.
Governor’s
Workforce Development Council. January
2003. Minnesota Workforcce Center
Strategic Plan. Six Dimensions, Multiple
Lenses: A Guide to Local Decisionmaking.
State of Minnesota. Minnesota
Workforce Center.
Governor’s Workforce Development
Council. February 2004. Report to the
Minnesota State Legislature. Findings
and Recommendations on Minnesota’s Workforce Service Area. State of Minnesota.
Governor’s Workforce Development
Council. August 2004. Investment Advisory. Minnesota’s Workforce Investment Portfolio. State of Minnesota.
Governor;s Workforce Development
Council. February 2004, Report to the
Minnesota State Legislature. Findings
and Recommendations on Minnesota’s Dislocated Worker Programs.
Gramsci,
Antonio. (1990) 1891-1937. : Selections from political writings (1921-1926)
University
of Minnesota Press,
Gramsci,
Antonio (1990) 1891-1937. Selections from political writings, (1910-1920)
University
of Minnesota Press,
Haas, P.F., & Keeley, S.M. (1998). Coping with faculty
resistance to teaching critical thinking. College Teaching, 46(2), 63-68.
Hanley, G.L. (1995). Teaching critical thinking: Focusing on
metacognitive skills and problem solving. Teaching
of Psychology, 22(1), 68-72.
Harrison,
B., & Glasmeier, A.K. (1997, February). Response: Why Business Alone Won’t
Redevelop the Inner City: A Friendly Critique of Michael Porter’s Approch to
Urban Revitalization. Economic
Development Quarterly
Harvey, D. (1989) From managerialism to entrepreneurialism:
the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism, Geografiska Annaler
B. 71: 3-17
Henry, M. C. (1996, Fall/Winter). The Porter Model of Competitive Advantage for
Inner-city Development: An Appraisal. The
Review of Black Political Economy.
Henwood,
Doug. (1999). Booming, Borrowing, and Consuming: The U.S. Economy in 1999. Monthly Review. 49(4)
Henwood (2000). Working-Class Households and the
Burden of Debt. Monthly Review. 52(1)
Henwood,
Doug. (2001). The “New Economy” and the Speculative Bubble: An Interview with
Doug Henwood. Monthly Review. 52(11)
Hill, E.,
& Brennan, J. (2000, February). A
Methodology for Identifying the Drivers of Industrial Clusters: The Foundation of Regional Competitive
Advantage. Economic Development
Quarterly v14, n1.
Housing
and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii, “Implementation of Public
Housing Resident Community Service Requirements”. October 31, 2003
Housing Finance
Agency, State of Minnesota Office memorandum.
Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act (QHWRA). November 7,
2000.
Hunt, Louise.,
Schulhof, Mary., Holmquist, Stephen., “Summary of the Quality Housing and Work
Responsibility Act of 1998 (Title V of P.L. 105-276) Office of Policy, Program
and Legislative Initiatives. Office of Public and Indian Housing. December 1998.
Identity
: essays based on Herbert Spencer
lectures given in the University of Oxford (1995) Oxford
: Clarendon Press ; New York :
Oxford University Press.
Johnson,
J.H., Farrell W.C., & Henderson, G. R. (1996, Fall/Winter). Mr. Porter’s ‘Competitive Advantage’ for
Inner-city Revitalization: Exploitation
or Empowerment. The Review of Black
Political Economy.
Kershaw,
Sarah. “Governors Tell of War’s Impact on Local Needs”. New York Times. July 20, 2004.
Key
sociological thinkers
(1998) edited by Rob Stones.
Published New York :
New York University Press.
Kilborn,
Peter T. “Towns With Odd Jobs Galore Turn to Inmates”. New York Times. March 27,
2002.
Kodras,
Janet E. “The Changing Map of American Poverty in an Era of Economic
Restructuring and Political Realignment” Economic Geography Vol. 73. No. 1
January 1997. 67-94
Lamport,
Joe. “The Community Service Requirement In Public Housing”. Gotham Gazette.
January, 2004.
Legal
Ledger. (8/27/99). Q & A with Roger Hale, Chair of the Workforce
Development Council. Fisher, John.
Margasak,
Larrry. “Many Reservists Losing Civilian Jobs”
U.S. National Associated Press.
August 16, 2004.
Markusen, Ann and King, David. July
2003. The Artistic Divident: The Arts’
Hidden Contributions to Regional Development.
Project on Regional and Industrial Economics.
Markusen, Ann. Economic Geography, Volume 72, Issue 3 (Jul.,
1996), 293-313. Sticky Places in
Slippery Space: A Typology of Industrial
Districts. Clark Univesity.
Markusen, Ann and Schrock, Greg. October, 2001.
Occupational Advantage: Detecting and Enhancing Occupational Mix in
Regional Development. Project on
Regional and Industrial Economics.
Mayo,
Peter. (1995) The ‘Turn to Gramsci’ in Adult Education: A Review. International Gramsci Society
Newsletter. Number 4 (April, 1995):
2-9.
Mayo,
Peter, (1999) Gramsci, Freire, and adult education : possibilities for transformative action
London ; New York : Zed Books ;
New York : Distributed in the USA
exclusively by St. Martin's Press.
Magdoff,
Fred (2002). The New Face of Capitalism: Slow Growth, Excess Capital, and a Mountain
of Debt. Monthly Review. 53(11)
Mandel, M.
(2000) The Coming Internet Depression. New York: Basic Books
Mills, J. (1998). Better teaching through provocation.
College Teaching, 46(1), 21-25.
Minnesota
Department of Economic Security. (2003).
Minnesota Job Skills Partnership pamphlet.
Minnesota
department of trade and economic development.
(2001) Positively Minnesota. A
letter from the state where business prospers. St. Paul, MN.
Moody,
Kim. (1997) Workers in a lean world
: unions in the international economy
Published New York :
Verso.
Peck, J.
and Tickell, A., (2002) Neoliberalizing Space Antipode 34 (3) 380-404
Peck,
Jamie. (1996) Work-place : the social regulation of labor markets
New York
: Guilford Press.
Peck,
Jamie. (2001) Workfare states
foreword by Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward. Published New York :
Guilford Press.
Piven,
Frances Fox. (1993) Regulating the
poor : the functions of public welfare Frances Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward.
Edition Updated ed.
Published New York :
Vintage Books.
Porter,
M. March/April 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Harvard Business Review.
Porter, M.
(1994). Location, Competition and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 14,
No. 1.
Porter, M
(1995). The competitive advantage of the
inner city. Harvard Business Review,
vol. 74.
Reuters.
“Army Orders Further Involuntary Troop Call-Up”. U.S. National Rutgers. March 23, 2005.
Robbins,
Steven. (May 30, 2005). “The Path to
Critical Thinking”. Working Knowledge
for Business Leaders. Harvard Business
School.
Rosenfeld,
S.A. (2000, February). Community
College/Cluster Connections: Specialization and Competitiveness in the United
States and Europe. Economic
Development Quarterly.
Sassoon,
Anne Showstack. (1989) .Gramsci's politics. Edition 2nd ed.
Minneapolis : University of
Minnesota Press,
Salamini,
Leonardo, (1981) The sociology of
political praxis : an introduction to
Gramsci's theory London ; Boston :
Routledge & Kegan Paul,
Sanchez, M.A. (1995). Using critical thinking principles as
a guide to college-level instruction. Teaching
of Psychology, 22(1), 72-75..
Sawicki,
D.S., & Moody, M. (1996, Fall/Winter).
Deja-vu all over again: Porter’s Model of Inner city Redevelopment. The Review of Black Political Economy.
Saxenian,
A (1994) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and
Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Steinberg,
Jacques. (2002, May 2). More Family
Income Committed to College. The New
York Times
Scott, A
(1994) Technopolis: High-technology
Industry and Regional Development in Souther California. Berkeley:
University of California Press
Smith,
Gerald F. (2003) “Beyond Critical
Thinking and Decision Making: Teaching Business Students How to Think”. Journal of Management Education, Vol. 27, No.
1, 24-51. The Organizational Behavior
Teaching Society.
Tabb,
William K. (2001) New Economy…Sale
Irrational Economy. Monthly Review. 52(11)
Tanner,
Adam. “Soldier Sues U.S. Military Over Extended Service”. Reuters. August 17th,
2004.
Underwood, M.K, & Wald, R.L. (1995). Conference-style
learning: A method for fostering critical thinking with heart. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 17-22.
University
of Minnesota and The Metropolitan Council. (1995, July). Regional Report on the Twin Cities
Industry Cluster Study.
U.S.
Department of Labor. (3/13/03) Statement
of U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao on Introduction of the ‘Workforce
Reinvestment and Adult Education Act’.
News Release. Washington. http://www.dol.gov.opa/media/press/opa/OPA2003134.htm
Urban
Institute. “The New Landscape of Imprisonment: Mapping America’s Prison
Expansion. Justice Policy Center. April
2004.
Wade, C. (1995). Using writing to develop and assess
critical thinking. Teaching of
Psychology, 22(1), 24-28.
No comments:
Post a Comment