1

Ripples of change: Redefining democracy and fostering resistancein the classroom

Emily A. Daniels

Introduction

Dialogue in many ways constitutes both a political and

pedagogical vehicle for developing our capacity to not only know

the world, but to know ourselves and each other as social agents

of change, as well as dreamers of a world that could be. (Darder,

2012)

Public education at all levels is under attack today: “The

assault on education is multifaceted, nuanced, complex, and very

well-funded. Many of those who are affected by the forces that

seek to dismantle and disinvest in public education feel

powerless and desperate” (Gorlewski & Porfilio, p. xv).

Education is a target as well as a commodity in the corporate

arena, used simply to provide knowledge that the workforce seeks.

It is surrounded by discourses of “competition” and “workforce

2

readiness”, and the potential for growth, humanity, and societal

enhancement are easily overshadowed.

This is evidenced throughout the many forms of assessment

and control of teachers (Annual Professional Performance Review

APPR, Common Core in the United States) and the economic battle

grounds such as Race to the Top initiatives which seek to reward

individual states financially for adherence to problematic

mandates. These mandates embody Neoliberalism at its core. For

example, the Race to the Top initiative rewards states for

actively competing for funding from the United States Department

of Education. The funds come with stipulations which are centered

on educational reform such as privatization through charter

schools, increases in testing and accountability “standards”, and

teacher promotion or removal based on annual test scores (Onosko,

2011). This approach is argued to be a continuation of earlier

crisis discourses which originated under “A Nation at Risk”

(Costigan, 2013), that contribute to negative rhetoric about

public schools, teachers, and schooling, and may lead to their

ultimate demise. The policy discourse which has been occurring

3

during the past 30 years has created a deep tension around public

education that has escalated with further movements towards

“accountability”. This rhetoric has systematically blamed

teachers and schools for being “failures” (a hotly contested term

in itself) and has offered further tests and accountability

mechanisms to “solve” this “problem”.

At a minimum, the language of possibility within higher

education has energetically been replaced by an instrumentalist

approach and is education is reduced to a series of exchanges

between consumers. This narrows the potential of education to

test-preparation skills needed to comfortably fit into the larger

cog of a neoliberal society, “As the market-driven logic of

neoliberal capitalism continues to devalue all aspects of the

public interest, one consequence is in the ways in which the

educational concern with excellence has been removed from matters

of equity while higher education, once conceptualized as a public

good, has been reduced to a private good.” (Giroux, 2010, p.

715). Education becomes obscured within this complicated context,

and through a critical lens we see the creativity, nuances,

4

humanity and transformative elements evaporating in the face of

privatization and neoliberalism. Within this sphere, conceptions

and enactment of democratic education seem remote and perhaps

even naïve.

The process of mutation of educational spaces is both

frightening and disorienting, and yet there are places to offer

resistance despite our frustrations and even potential

desperation. Seeking hope in our stories of resistance and

challenge to neoliberal policies, practices, and infiltration of

the academy (as well as our souls) necessitates critical

approaches and academic analyses as well as deep connections to

and belief in the possibilities for change. Sharing stories of

resistance offers a space to develop our analyses as well as

sharing our truths.

In the Freirean sense when we strive to educate as the

practice of freedom, we face the bitter realities of corporate

and bureaucratic control that I have touched upon here so far.

How do we engage criticality in fostering change in a deeply

oppressive educational environment where critical discussions on

5

education and meaning are being sabotaged? (Darder, personal

communication, September, 2014).

Autobiographical Research; Exploring Neoliberalism and Democracy

I am a teacher educator immersed in a comprehensive public

higher education institution in the state of New York, which has

been notably influenced by Neoliberalism. For example,

assessment, analysis, and student test scores have become

dominant in the language surrounding our department and our

goals. In addition, we have been told directly, “unless (y)our

student test scores rise, (you) may no longer have a program”.

The sole basis of our merit is reduced to a numerical assessment

of questionable value. When our voices are silenced, and we are

told that our program may be eliminated, and we must work “not to

offer our own experiences” in the classroom- what then? When the

walls close in, how do we resist? Acknowledging this disturbing

reality, we must simultaneously work towards possibilities to

counterbalance this trend- What are the “untested feasibilities”

6

(Freire, 2005) that we can envision for our classrooms and our

world?

Reclaiming our humanity, reconnecting with care and

criticality need to be centralized in our attempts to re-envision

democracy in education. This involves deeper analysis of power,

inequity, policies, and the ways in which they disassemble the

heart of education. My goals and aspirations for education

involve a critical democratic standpoint integrating awareness,

radicalism and a thorough engagement with inequalities and ways

of changing them in our society. My classes and my research

connect deeply to critical pedagogies and working to inspire and

empower myself and my students. My experiences in higher

education have inspired me to powerfully reconsider the

influences of policies and practices, based in my own witnessing

of these problematic situations. I firmly believe the current

policy and practitioner atmosphere can be deeply detrimental to

my students, their students, and the future schools they will

teach in.

7

This chapter will highlight my teaching experiences and

possibilities for generating spaces of dialogue, reflection, and

change, as well as investigate the meanings of resistance and

fostering democracy in the classroom when challenged with

complacency and lack of criticality within the college

environment. I will begin with an examination of neoliberalism

more broadly, as well as its impact on higher educational

environments. Defining this insidious and pervasive standpoint is

crucial when analyzing current conceptions of democracy and

resistance within education. Next, I will move to a discussion of

democracy as a counterbalance and space to offer alternatives to

neoliberalist ideologies, specifically incorporating Freirean

standpoints. Finally, I will draw in stories from my own teaching

practice to consider possibilities for resistance. Throughout, I

will be drawing on a criticality to interconnect the ideas and

themes within this chapter. Examining the mutation of the purpose

and spirit of education is vital if we hope to challenge this

callous approach. This is both the inherent joy and challenge of

the critical educator, as Freire (2007) writes, “The political

8

nature of education vehemently demands that teachers take a stand

for themselves as political beings, rather than as mere

technicians or persons of knowledge” (p. 60).

Neoliberalism and Domestication

Neoliberal doctrine seeks to limit education to technological

practice. Currently, education is no longer understood as

formative, but simply as training. (Freire, 2007, p. 4)

Neoliberalism is a global challenge which started roughly 30

years ago with the expansion of these types of policies under the

governments of Margaret Thatcher in England and Ronald Reagan in

the United States. The emphasis of neoliberalism is on

deregulation of corporations as well as increasing corporate

profits, and de-funding prominent social supports and programs

for the poor, as well as such as health and educational

institutions (Hursh & Wall, 2011). While this is occurring

throughout the world, in the United States this has involved the

increasing dominance of the private sector with the simultaneous

reduction of the role of public institutions. Sleeter (2008)

9

argues that this form of neoliberalism in fact has emerged as a

“corporatocracy”:

According to Perkins, corporatocracy involves linking three

powerful institutions that are run by a small elite whose

members move “easily and often” across institutions: major

corporations, government, and major banks (p. 26). Linking

these institutions concentrates power, enabling an

increasingly powerful elite to build a global empire to

which most people in the world are subservient (p.144)

This consolidation of power in the hands of the few, the

systematic dismantling of public spaces and an altering of social

supports have infiltrated our society at all levels.

Neoliberalism has also created dramatic gaps between wealthy and

poor, and impacted social interactions as well as the global

environment. It has shifted entire conceptions of collective

versus individual rights and focused intently on profitability

instead of the public good.

Neoliberalism and the control-domestication of teachers are

interrelated. This global shift has distanced education from

10

social justice and drowned the discourses of equity, empowerment

and criticality in a sea of standardization. There is a sole

focus on test scores and performance “aligned” with costly

standardized assessments created and managed by large-scale

corporations. Education may begin to lose its heart, soul, and

purpose. This is closely connected to the destruction of societal

conceptions of mutual support systems. When the market alone

becomes the priority, the public good becomes remote and

“impossible” via this poisonous discourse. Instead, competition

and profit are the currency of the kingdom. Individuals begin to

accept and comply with the values of profit and meritocratic

hegemony- the beliefs become “invisible” and “normal” which lead

to a shift in our societies and selves. Hursh and Wall (2011)

state,

In this way, neoliberalism not only transforms the purpose

of society from one in which society provides for the

welfare of individuals to one in which it supports the

pursuit of profit, but it changes the relationship between

the individual and society, and the nature of the

11

individual. Neoliberalism conceptualizes the individual as

pursuing his or her own interests in the marketplace as an

autonomous entrepreneur responsible for his or her own self,

progress, position, and success or failure. (p. 561)

This is evidenced in the ways in which Freire mentioned above-

education does not involve questioning, depth, or transformation,

but simply a nice set of workbooks, tips and tricks to manage

one’s life and profession; it is training for the market alone,

void of deeper examination or reflection. Education becomes

shallow and maybe even empty.

Within public higher education the market drives our

interactions as well. There is the hectic scramble to comply with

the most recent rapidly changing (and often mysterious)

regulations which demand complicity with these problematic

systems. Punishment is offered to those who fail to comply;

recently the commissioner of education of the state of New York

stated that there are “too many teacher education programs in the

state” and argued that based solely on the mysterious, poorly

implemented teacher certification exams and programs “that are

12

not successful should be closed”. The test becomes the panacea,

the sole determiner of that which is “highly effective” or

“ineffective”. The tests also determine the fate of those

employed in teacher education programs, which no regard to the

lack of evidence of the validity of these assessments to

determine future teaching potential.

Neoliberal policies are impacting education through market-

based approaches to education (customer-service) versus

transformation/true education. They embody domestication based on

control and surveillance. Critiques of this approach and system

are unwelcome. Recently, we received a memo from our Dean

advising us “not to critique standardized tests or the Common

Core when in public schools”. This was due to the fact that a

local principal had called the president of our college to

complain that he had overheard a teacher educator speaking

negatively about the Common Core. The principal’s reaction was to

threaten to remove access to field placements for our teacher

candidates. So the neoliberal perspective is the only way to view

education, and if this is not the case, and it is stated

13

outright- we become ‘unwelcome’ and are threatened yet again with

the closure of our program.

The economy and the deregulation of corporations become

central goals within this standpoint, which focuses on profits

and growth over humanity and genuine needs of cultures and

societies. There is however, always hope. Freire stated that

“hope is an ontological need” and in the spirit of this below I

offer an examination of democracy as well as of resistance in

order to raise questions and possibilities as antidote to

Neoliberal poisons. Democracy, when spoken with truth can offer

an antidote.

Democracy, Definitions, Education

The notion of democracy occupies a privileged place in U.S.

society. Everyone believes democracy is desirable. Indeed,

educators, policymakers, politicians, and community activists

alike pursue dozens of agendas for change under the banner of

furthering democracy. The nature of their underlying beliefs,

however, differs. (Westheimer & Kahne, 2004, p. 237)

14

The conception of democracy can be interpreted as the

ability to vote, and to accept that the majority rules. It can

involve empowerment, voice and emancipation as well. It can be

both confusing as well as easily manipulated. Democracy

theoretically engages the people in determining both the present

and the future, and yet this term has mutated into a vaguely

recognizable shadow of its previous self, “Critics argue that

increasingly the U.S. is governed not through democracy, but

rather through a particular form of oligarchy” (Sleeter, 2008, p.

144). So our conceptions of democracy need clarification as well

as debate. We are not clear as a society on what we mean when we

say “democracy”.

Democracy can also offer purpose, space and the opportunity

to challenge and engage with meaningful questions, when utilized

within education. Freire’s approach to liberatory education

complements conceptions of democracy. Freire’s revolutionary

praxis involved the potential for human beings to seek meaning

and awareness, as well as activism within the contexts particular

to their lives and understandings. These elements are closely

15

connected to a deeper form of democracy. Conscientization, or the

steps to becoming critically aware and more conscious of reality

were central to his educational philosophy. This journey through

magical consciousness (everything is determined by fate or God), to

naïve consciousness (family and culture determine life outcomes) to

critical consciousness (where an understanding of power, oppression and

inequality blossom and solidify) (Cammarota, 2012) are steps

which could be firmly interconnected with a potential vision of

democracy. Understanding how a society works and creates both

balance and imbalance are crucial elements for empowerment and

the realization of agency. This also allows for voice to become a

critical tool for change, as previously individuals were unaware

of the ways in which society is malleable.

Freire’s goals for inspiring people to become powerful in

their perspectives on injustice in the local and global sense

have impacted educators, scholars, workers and individuals from

many unique backgrounds. We can reconsider the ways in which we

understand and experience (as well as challenge) the oppressors.

He states, “I believe that, as progressive educators, we have the

16

ethical responsibility to reveal situations of oppression. I

believe it is our duty to create the means to understanding

political and historical realities so as to bring out the

possibility of change” (2007, p. 3). So critical democratic

perspectives can offer hope in the neoliberal darkness.

Schooling should be intricately interconnected with a deeper

democracy. There are ways in which education can encourage

questioning, debate, and possibilities for changing those

elements of society that are unequal. Giroux (2009) states in

fact that schools themselves can become powerful places: “This

means regarding schools as democratic sites dedicated to self-

and social empowerment. Understood in these terms, schools can be

public places where students learn the knowledge and skills

necessary to create a critical democracy” (p. 445). These skills

could be integrated and augmented within classrooms; there is

hope here for change in this perspective on education.

There are also inherent conflicts in conceptions and

implementation of the word “democracy,” especially in the

educational realm, “Teachers who are committed to democratic

17

teaching are faced with two tasks: negotiating increasingly

undemocratic systems in order to find space for democratic

teaching, and critically examining what democracy is, including

gaps between its ideals and actual practice” (Sleeter, 2008, p.

141). These ideals and practices are a discrepancy we must

continually negotiate in our classroom, especially when working

towards social justice. There can be recognition that the goals

of democracy include clear judgments and equal participation, as

well as political power. There can also be an important

discussion in the ways which considering democracy means truly

taking the needs of diverse individuals, worldviews and

standpoints to heart.

Education can augment democracy by opening the world and the

minds of those who choose to pursue it. Freire argued that

education is never neutral (2007, 2014) and that education can

potentially encourage clearer vision and the journey towards

possibilities which we have yet to envision- perhaps a society

where equality and democracy are truly interconnected and

enacted.

18

Education, while not being able to accomplish all, can

accomplish something. We have the duty, politically, to find

spaces for action, of organizing ourselves in those

spaces... the perspective of education in human rights that

we defend is this one, of a society that is less unjust, so

that it can, little by little, become more just. (Freire,

2014, p. 67)

Working towards justice is one aspect of both citizenship as well

as democracy, when viewed from a social-justice orientation.

Westheimer and Kahne (2004) posit that there are a number of

different approaches to citizenship and democracy, and that one

standpoint of the “justice-oriented citizen” focuses on ways to

“analyze and understand the interplay of social, economic, and

political forces” (p. 242). This standpoint is one which aligns

closely with the resistance and awareness I seek to foster in my

students. Below, I explore different examples of and conceptions

of resistance, and ways to nurture its development and growth

within the classroom. This form of addressing Neoliberalism seeks

19

to expand the critical consciousness of future educators, in

order to augment resistance to destructive norms and policies.

Stories of Resistance

We cannot negate the fact of power. But we can undertake a

resistance, a reaching out toward becoming persons among other

persons… We have to find out how to open such spheres, such

spaces, where a better state of things can be imagined. (Greene,

2009, p. 95)

Critical educational dialogue can offer space for change,

for speaking back, and the reinvigoration of the concept and

practice of democracy. Within the practices of education, we

must seek genuine growth and transformation. This is a dangerous

path, as it seeks to rock the societal boat and push ourselves

and those around us to question, and to become passionate and

engaged. Solidarity is crucial to our efforts to resist, as is

the need to inspire fires in the minds and bellies of those we

work with. Focusing on the self and larger community are

20

instrumental to my particular classrooms. This reflective and

critical stance is vital to encourage in future teachers, as this

is one way to work towards change.

I tend towards this with readings, video, and discussions

which strive to challenge the norms and assumptions of the

dominant society, as well as many of my students. I attempt to

light fires- with varying results- the test-dominated discourse

is powerful and has leached into the psychic water. We are

sometimes told that we need to “focus on our teaching”, (i.e.

make people happier) but this could contain toxic undertones,

which may prove both uncritical as well as undemocratic-so what

do we/I do in response? I work to question, to push, to dialog

and to revolutionize my preservice teacher education students.

An example that emerged from the opposite space involved a

student who emailed me to inform me that a chapter I had written

on resisting APPR Annual Professional Performance Review (Daniels, 2013)

had literally “given her chills”. She inquired about the ways in

which education is being manipulated and going against the best

interests of the students, and found some solace and some

21

solidarity within this chapter. She recognized and echoed with

something in this writing which allowed her to understand and

grow in her own criticality; this is a step towards conscientization.

Her willingness to engage with difficult material, with critique

of the dominant systems offers some hope; perhaps some of the

individuals who will become teachers will carry this kernel of

criticality in their hearts and also into their classrooms. Her

awareness has grown, and perhaps her ability to recognize and

implement her critical voice (in a truly democratic way) has

shifted as well.

Another student proclaimed to me with annoyance in

discussion with a classmate- “She believes in the American

dream!!!” We used this teachable moment to reinvestigate

inequities and the functioning of an inherently unbalanced

society in its quest for profit. We spoke of race, class, ability

and gender and how these realities shape the experiences and

worlds of people, and on an even deeper level- what it means that

things are so terribly unjust. Dismantling these myths is

powerful and painful work- what happens when individuals’ life-

22

views and perspectives are pushed and prodded? Some embrace the

newness, while others retreat in fear. Conflict and

contradictions are part of a democratic journey.

Another student once approached me and said “It is so

obvious that you care about your students and their learning and

growth, and that this is a democratic and progressive classroom”-

This statement inspired me as well as touched my heart- some

students are able to genuinely see the criticality and the care

with which I approach my classes. This particular student also

spent time with me discussing Freire and philosophy, and ways to

integrate criticality throughout our classes. Her recognition of

the democratic practices within my classroom was an insightful

support to me as a critical educator.

These short snippets present moments of hope, moments of

resistance, which have been planted like a seed in their hearts

and minds. These instances stand out for me, and there are also

others which force me to consider whether I am doing enough to

encourage and nurture the criticality of my students. An example

of this arose in one of my classes with several students asking

23

about the new regulations and test approaches and wondering when

we were going to learn how to take the tests. This was

maddeningly against the themes of social justice, equity and

individual and collective agency which run throughout my courses.

I am quite frank with my students about my opposition to the

“testocracy” (Hagopian, 2014) which is being currently

implemented in all aspects of education.

I was puzzled how to respond, so I honestly stated that

there was a website the students could reference, but reminded

them of the true duty of an educator- to the people in front of

them; to their well-being, growth and development, and the

nurturance and support of them, even in the face of policies

which seek to destroy them. I also reminded them that these tests

are against the very grain of true education for some of us as

critical educators; as they do not leave room for the humanity of

ourselves or our students.

Meanwhile, those of us who are critical educators are left

to swim with the uncertainties and distasteful and dangerous

mandates hanging over our heads—the sword of Damocles’

24

(regulations and test scores, accountability twisted and run

wild). The punishments are real, (for those dissenting voices)

and yet these tools of brutality often go unquestioned in some

educational spaces. Departmentally, some classes become lab

spaces for test preparation, and questions of the rightness and

value of this go unnoticed, or perhaps unaddressed. The

instrumentalist approach removes criticality by encouraging

students to comply in order to “succeed”. They are threatened

with failure if they do not comply. This pushes students (and

faculty) to adhere to the regulations closely or be threatened

(potentially) with closure, if deemed unsuccessful. Where is the

democracy here?

Resistance, where art thou?

Higher education can be disturbingly dizzying when

considering the balance of challenge, resistance, democracy, and

maintaining some sort of employment. Through discussions with

colleagues, mentors and friends, I have begun to see some of the

ways in which I, as a critical scholar, can “dance on the edge”

(as a good friend of mine put it). There are ways to engage in

25

this game in order to change it, but it involves playing to our

strengths and balancing our ideals with the challenges

surrounding us.

Some of us are subversive; we can smile and nod when

necessary, and address these contradictions in our scholarship as

well as our classrooms when we make space to do so- taking on the

larger systems of oppression involves recognizing them, naming

them, and working against them. Ways in which I choose to do this

include pushing students to examine, reflect and delve into

themselves, their identities, and social inequalities. When

challenged by friends as to what I do, I work every day to

augment my understanding, to deepen my practice as a critical

educator, and to create community with others where I can create

support when needed. In my classes, we read and discuss models

of identity development and aspects of privilege and power. We

look for discrepancies, philosophies and practices which bring in

unique perspectives, as well as multiple voices. We examine the

language of policies and practices which neoliberalism hold dear-

“college and career ready”, and other Common Core verbiage. This

26

entails commitment, redefinition, self-reflection, critique

throughout, and a sense of purpose, as well as the courage to

challenge the dominant norms.

Conclusion

In my view, “being” in the world means to transform and re-

transform the world, not to adapt to it. (Freire, 2007, pp. 4-5)

It becomes a delicate balance to understand and implement

transformation. We must examine ourselves, our students, and our

society, in interconnected ways. “Adaptation” as Freire denounces

can prove dangerous. When considering education for social

justice- it is bound to make both close kinships as well as

bitter enemies. Facing the realities of inequality and injustice

arouses guilt, denial and anger. How this is channeled,

transformed or simply embraced are all questions and choices that

the students (and we as critical scholars) can make. Steps

towards consicientization are rough, not smooth, and they often

involve the dismantling of stories and myths which people hold

27

dear. These stories involve a different kind of resistance; when

confronting dominant discourses, people will hold tightly to

them. But what do we believe to be the purpose of education in a

democracy? What happens if we attempt to critique those forces

which work to deeply disrupt equity, voice and a democracy which

arises from people believing in dissent?

Our hopes lie in transformation; the ideals and practices

which support criticality and challenges to Neoliberal doctrines.

Education for democracy can shape awareness, incite doubts, and

create possibilities as an alternative to a suffocating

Neoliberal environment. It does, however, require courage. This

element of courage entails the honest examination of those arenas

which challenge us and which we fear. Walking into solidarity

requires the courage to understand our strengths as well as our

limitations. Within our classrooms, we can touch upon these

strengths and limitations, and encourage our students to grow,

even as we grow with them. We can engage courage to speak the

truth, even when it is uncomfortable and perhaps even bordering

on destructive. Transformation demands that we challenge the

28

cruel systems of neoliberalism and work to reignite the spark of

genuine revolution with our voices and our actions, “The world

gets saved if we all, in political terms, fight to save it”

(Freire, 2014, p. 13).

29

References

Cammarota, J. (2012). Working to awaken: Educators and critical consciousness. In

L. G. Denti & P. A. Whang (Eds.), Rattling chains: Exploring social justice in

education. Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.

Costigan, A. T., (2013). New urban teachers transcending Neoliberal educational reforms:

Embracing aesthetic education as a curriculum of political action. Urban Education,

48(1), 116/148.

Daniels, E. (2013). APPR, solution or problem: A critical examination of Education Law §3012-

c. In Left behind in the race to the top: Realities of school reform (Eds. Gorlewski, J. &

Porfilio, B.). Charlotte, NC: IAP Publishing.

Darder, A. (2012). A dissident voice for democratic schooling: Writer Gabriel San Ramon

30

Interviews radical educator Antonia Darder.

Retrieved from http://truth-out.org/news/item/11739-a-dissident-voice-for-democratic-schooling-gabriel-san-roman-interviews-radical-educator-antonia-darder

Freire, P. (2005). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare teach.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Freire, P. (2007). Daring to dream: A pedagogy of the unfinished. Boulder, CO: Paradigm

Publishers.

Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of commitment. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

Giroux, H. (2010). Rethinking education as the practice of freedom: Paulo Freire and

the promise of critical pedagogy. Policy Futures in Education, 8(6),715-721.

Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2010.8.6.715

Giroux, H. (2009). Teacher education and democratic schooling. InA. Darder, M. Baltodano, &

31

R.D. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader. (2nd ed.). New York:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Gorlewski, J., & Porfilio, B. (2013). Left behind in the race to the top: Realities of school

reform. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Greene, M. (2009). In search of a critical pedagogy. In A. Darder, M. Baltodano, & R.D. Torres

(Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader. (pp. 84-96). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

Hagopian, J. (2014). (Ed.). More than a score; The new uprising against high-stakes testing.

Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.

Hursh, D. & Wall, A. (2011). Re-politicizing higher education assessment

within Neoliberal globalization. Policy Futures in Education, 9(5),560-572.

Onosko, J. (2011). Race to the Top leaves children and future citizens behind: The devastating

32

effects of centralization, standardization and high stakes accountability. Democracy &

Education, 19(2), Article 1. Retrieved from

http://democracyeducationjournal.org/home/vol19/iss2/1

Sleeter, C. (2008). Teaching for democracy in an age of corporatocracy. Teachers College

Record, 110(1), 139-159.

Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for

democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237-269.