The New Right and Education
NEW RIGHT SOCIAL THEORY:
Functionalism grounded a new sociological approach which is used in right-wing politics: New Right theory.
These thinkers are a contemporary branch of right realist thought.
Particularly prominent time of their approach was in the 1980s when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister of the UK and Ronald Reagan was president of the USA.
Has distinct ideas about the role that education plays in ensuring social order.
Idealise and promote the nuclear family, on the grounds that it’s a useful mechanism for social control by providing stability and gender role socialisation.
CHARLES MURRAY:
Outlines the consequences of not having a nuclear family – being characteristic of what he identified as an underclass.
This term refers to a social group that’s hierarchically considered below the working class, and includes the unemployed, those dependent on welfare and lone parents.
Uses ideologies of meritocracy and individualism to see those in this category placed there as a result of lifestyle choice, and views it as the problem and fault of the individual, not the state or structural elements.
Refers to the underclass as the ‘New Rabble’ in contrast to what he calls the ‘New Victorians’.
New Rabble: Characterised by lone-parent families, educational underachievement, welfare dependency and viewed as an ‘underclass’.
New Victorians: The group in society who are middle class, married, in employment, pay tax and provide gendered socialisation for children.
‘New Victorians’ are rewarded and promoted within New Right policies, and are seen as the ideal to work towards, whilst the ‘New Rabble’ are blamed for their situation and often overrepresented in the media and blamed for other social ills.
NEW RIGHT PERSPECTIVE ON EDUCATION:
Advocates for minimal state intervention, and a market-based approach to educational institutions.
Chubb and Moe’s research and conclusions support these policy frameworks.
CHUBB AND MOE:
Looking at pupils in the USA, argued that parents should shape educational institutions, not the state.
This is because schools must be flexible and adapt to the needs of the pupils: if changes are required, New Rights argue that change from the state is ineffective and slow.
Therefore advocate for minimal state control, and maximum governance by local communities and staff.
Look to the private school model to shape their policy, arguing their better results in comparison to state schools stem from the fact that private schools, as fee-paying schools, are required to meet the demands of the consumers (parents).
Schools as institutions are, therefore, encouraged to be flexible and adapt to pupils’ or parents’ needs.
With minimal state interference and public spending, New Right theorists outline the role of the state to provide league tables which may facilitate market principles to apply to educational institutions.
With a free-market landscape for schools to compare against, it’s argued that competition will increase, which will raise standards, make schools work harder and close any unfit schools.
CRITICISMS OF A NEW RIGHT PERSPECTIVE TO EDUCATION:
Whilst it’s had success in the political realm and in shaping public policy with Conservative governments, many criticise these free-market principles and minimal state intervention strategies:
Having a system dependent on parental choice opens education up to be a location of reproducing class inequalities, in both a structural and cultural tense.
E.g Gillborn found that marketisation and increased competition among schools led to working-class and ethnic-minority groups experiencing marginalisation.
Those who support, or work in, the educational sector would argue that their jobs are already a lot to deal with, and that the extra pressure and stress to provide results wouldn’t be conducive to a healthy workspace.
This emphasis on results (to use in league tables) orientates teaching and students towards exam-based knowledge, which eclipses many of the other functions and socialisation that schools are supposed to provide.
In criticisms of Chubb and Moe, it can be argued that other variables, such as socio-economic status and class, enter the relationship of fee-paying schools to attaining higher grades than state schools.
WHAT DO THE NEW RIGHT THINK THE GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IS?
The state should impose a framework for schools within which they have to compete – publishing Ofsted inspections, reports and league tables of exam results.
WHY IS THIS NEEDED?
The state ensures that schools transmit a shared culture – by imposing a National Curriculum.
This curriculum should affirm the national identity.
The aim is to integrate pupils into a single set of traditions and cultural values.
The New Right opposes a multicultural education that reflects the cultures of the different minority groups in Britain.
CRITICISMS OF NEO-LIBERAL/NEW RIGHT APPROACH:
Gernitz and Ball argue that competition between schools benefits the middle class, who can use their cultural and economic capital to gain more access to more desirable schools.
The real cause of low educational standards isn’t state control but social inequality and inadequate funding of state schools.
There’s a contradiction between the New Right’s support for parental choice on the one hand, and the state imposing a compulsory National Curriculum on all its schools on the other.
Marxists argue education doesn’t impose a shared national culture, it imposes the culture of a dominant minority ruling class and devalues the culture of the working class and ethnic minorities.