“Whose Markets, Whose Knowledge?” focuses on the various political power struggles within education. As the United States attempts to win the financial markets back from countries such as “Japan, Mexico… [and] China,” it also moves towards building a stronger sense of nationality (Apple 2016: 258). Political movements such as neoliberals, neoconservatives, and authoritarian populists have, through the educational system, “[reinstall] a vision of a common culture… more emphasis in the Western Tradition” (Apple 2016: 258). Neoliberalism envisions schooling and education as a product of a consumeristic world, while the students are the “human capital” (Apple 2016: 258). Education as a product then leads to the idea that there is a choice, much
…show more content…
The first is that of Mr.Anderson’s Honors World History course, in which multicultural education is pushed aside. The second is that of Mr.Davis who taught “two secret classes… one section of Harlem Renaissance and one section of African Studies (Au 2014: 85).” It is explained that Mr.Anderson’s class, though extremely respected throughout the school, worked against diverse educational achievement because it pushed aside the lives and the experiences of the students (Au 2014: 84). Mr.Anderson 's classroom did not promote multicultural education because it was not “grounded in the lives of the students” as there was not dialogue or room for modification (Au 2014: 84). Though Mr.Davis class was hidden from most of the school’s student population, it did a much more accurate job of representing what a proper multicultural education was. Throughout Mr.Davis’ class there was great discussion on what is means to lives in a “Eurocentric” society, just as well, the “classes embodied multicultural education: [i]t was grounded in the lives, identities, and histories of students; it provided critical and alternative perspectives on history”(Au 2014: 86). The piece goes on to explain how perceptions on the rigor of multicultural education are often false, once more using Mr.Davis and Mr.Anderson as comparaisons. Mr.Anderson’s classroom though heavily focused on the workload and memorization was not exactly intellectually challenging, while Mr.Davis’ diverse approached forced the students to deeply and critically think about the world they lived in (Au 2014:
The first is that of Mr.Anderson’s Honors World History course, in which multicultural education is pushed aside. The second is that of Mr.Davis who taught “two secret classes… one section of Harlem Renaissance and one section of African Studies (Au 2014: 85).” It is explained that Mr.Anderson’s class, though extremely respected throughout the school, worked against diverse educational achievement because it pushed aside the lives and the experiences of the students (Au 2014: 84). Mr.Anderson 's classroom did not promote multicultural education because it was not “grounded in the lives of the students” as there was not dialogue or room for modification (Au 2014: 84). Though Mr.Davis class was hidden from most of the school’s student population, it did a much more accurate job of representing what a proper multicultural education was. Throughout Mr.Davis’ class there was great discussion on what is means to lives in a “Eurocentric” society, just as well, the “classes embodied multicultural education: [i]t was grounded in the lives, identities, and histories of students; it provided critical and alternative perspectives on history”(Au 2014: 86). The piece goes on to explain how perceptions on the rigor of multicultural education are often false, once more using Mr.Davis and Mr.Anderson as comparaisons. Mr.Anderson’s classroom though heavily focused on the workload and memorization was not exactly intellectually challenging, while Mr.Davis’ diverse approached forced the students to deeply and critically think about the world they lived in (Au 2014: