Klaf, S. (2013). School labelling as technology of governance: Problematizing ascribed labels to school spaces. The Canadian Geographer, 57(3), 296-302. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12020

Klaf (2013) draws on a Foucauldian understanding of power and knowledge to explore the ways in which the No Child Left Behind educational reform policy is a mechanism used to label U.S. schools within a “good” versus “bad” binary. She cites that “labelling is a technique of governance used to identify, define, and classify school space and perpetuate dominant representations of schools” (p. 297). Under No Child Left Behind, which was formally signed into law under the Bush administration in 2001, schools are subjected to various mechanisms such as yearly standardized testing as an attempt to regulate teaching and learning, hold teachers and school leaders accountable, and reiterate educational objectives based on efficiency and high performance (Klaf, 2013, p. 297). Within this framework, the labelling of schools as either “good” or “bad” is imbued with power. Such power “transcends discourse and the symbolic to affix itself to places” (Klaf, 2013, p. 297).

A direct connection to Foucault’s (1979) notion of how “power is exercised without division” (p. 197) becomes evident when we recognize that our contemporary society has become accustomed to relying on the powerful to disseminate information that essentially goes unchallenged by the masses because it is representative of the dominant narrative that many take comfort in. By creating a system where teachers and school leaders must constantly fear their status within the community, a high degree of civic obedience is ensured, which is a significant win for any one-size-fits-all program such as No Child Left Behind.

Klaf’s (2013) central argument highlights how the propensity to label schools using a simple “good” versus “bad” binary assigns a perceived educational quality to the socially constructed school space. This labelling ultimately produces “geographies of school performance” (Klaf, 2013, p. 301). Thus, the socioeconomic and racial divide becomes more pronounced as “data” (which is often profoundly limited) from standardized tests is widely disseminated to the public complying with the Foucauldian notion of the normalizing gaze, which seeks to reduce students to measurable objects, effectively removing the humanity from education (Klaf, 2013, p. 298).

Additionally, the “data” which reinforces a “culture of auditing” is put to use by many, including real estate agents and the mainstream media. Therefore, the makeup of specific communities is altered by whether a school is “good” or “bad.” In this case, “bad” schools are often situated in more economically disadvantaged areas. As a result, these schools receive less funding while simultaneously being expected to increase their test scores with fewer resources. Thus, Klaf (2013) argues that a mechanism meant to “leave no child behind” actually perpetuates social unrest within society and reinforces familiar neoliberal tropes that favour competition above all else, ultimately widening the gap that education is meant to close.

Although Klaf (2013) primarily focuses on the implications of labelling schools as a technique of governance in the United States, her argument transcends borders. It raises questions about the direction of the education field globally. Her arguments should also spark concerns for many in Canada and Alberta specifically, as we continue to grapple with curriculum and policy reflecting a neoliberal agenda.

It is no surprise that neoliberal rhetoric has become ever-present in our education system. In Alberta, our Premier and Education Minister regularly cite the core tenets of neoliberalism as they profess their plans for Alberta’s education system and curriculum reform. Frankly, their harmful ideologies associated with a white-washed version of history that focuses on cementing a hierarchy of people, effectively labelling some (marginalized) groups as “low value” or unable to govern themselves, raises concerns about the future of education in the province. With an increase in the labelling of schools, teachers and students, and the obsession with measuring desired outcomes, I believe we are headed towards a significantly more unequal education system.

Looking to Klaf’s (2013) insights regarding the direction of education policy and the harmful labels ascribed to school spaces in the United States, there is a need to “unmask these collective representations that are read as factual system[s]” (p. 299). To do so, teachers must engage in radical pedagogy that works to resist neoliberalism. Unfortunately, in a post-modern, neoliberal society, it can often appear that there is less opportunity for teachers to engage in radical pedagogy, especially when bogged down with heaps of standardized assessments. However, the increasingly digital world that we find ourselves in creates new opportunities for connection and dialogue that have not been possible in the past.

References

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage.

Klaf, S. (2013). School labelling as technology of governance: Problematizing ascribed labels to school spaces. The Canadian Geographer, 57(3), 296-302. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12020