Dec 2015
Dr. Marta Sánchez described her education reform research in Mexico through a series of emails to me this December 2015:
I spent 10 days in México City and the state of México interviewing teachers (~9), parents (4), preservice teachers (2), university students (2), school principals (~3), retired teachers (~5 and 3 pending), researchers (1 and 2 pending), and others (2 and 2 pending) about education reform in México, namely the one introduced in 2013.
Overwhelmingly, those interviewed stated that this was not an education reform given that there are no stated aims for what the future of Mexican education should be; the reform currently focuses on teacher evaluation without knowing the aims of the evaluation except to use the outcomes in punitive ways against teachers. Specifically, respondents noted that teachers are faced with three options: refuse to take the evaluation and be fired; take the evaluation, fail it and be fired, or take the evaluation, pass it and eventually be fired because upon taking this exam, teachers must also sign away their tenure. Because of this, respondents to the interview called the reform an administrative and labor reform that also represents a political blow to the national teachers’ union, el SNTE and la CNTE, which is an organization within the SNTE that seeks to democratize the SNTE and which is considered leftist and dedicated to transforming not only the union but Mexican society and education as well.
Additionally, respondents were not only worried about job security but about the escalated militarization of the country starting on November 14, 2015 when the Mexican government deployed thousands of soldiers to oversee the evaluation of teachers in diverse states, such as Chiapas and Oaxaca. One example of this escalation is that in Chiapas, where 800 or so teachers were going to be evaluated, 5,000 soldiers were deployed. The soldiers use a tactic called ‘encapsular’ or encapsulate. That is, they cut off a larger area where the teachers are then close off groups of protesters by surrounding them. In Chiapas, this had tragic consequences as teachers tried to break out of the capsule and started throwing rocks at soldiers in riot gear on one end while on the other side they were being corralled in by soldiers on the other end. In all of this, one teacher died. In other parts of the country, in the state of Michoacan, 52 normal students were arrested because of blocking a street during a protest and have not been released. Twenty female students were also incarcerated, then released and re-arrested. They remain incarcerated. The normalistas I interviewed noted that the recent law that was passed that bars marches and protests has been allowed to move ahead because of what is called ‘ponderance’ in the law, that requires you to balance the rights of groups vis-a-vis other groups, such that if a march blocks the free flow of traffic, then the marchers lose their constitutional right to protest. The normalista students found this to be a spurious argument, citing that candidates, joggers, religious pilgrims, and even cyclists block traffic all the time, and the city itself allows for the Avenida Reforma, a central avenue in México that is highly transited, to be closed off on weekends so that wealthy city dwellers can bike along its route. In other words, there is a trampling of all sorts of civil and human rights in the name of law and order, and under the discourse of reform and development. None of the teachers and others interviewed oppose reform in general or the evaluation of teachers and children but insist that such efforts cannot be standardized given the vast cultural, linguistic, ethnic, and class-based diversity of México as well as a new type of culture that has emerged in urban areas, ‘la cultura urbana popular,’ all groups that defy the measurement by preset standards. Teachers, especially, insist on reforms that are holistic and focus on the happiness of children and the school’s ability to form an engaged citizenry to keep building a democratic society. They reject reforms that are punitive and focus solely on discrete components such as labor agreements or student outcomes without first stating what the aims of education are. They note that from their vantage point, this reform seeks to reduce student knowledge in ways that create low-level workers for the technology industry and managerial classes. They reject this type of ‘new social being’ promoted by the Mexican government with the backing of the OECD and American foundations that would convert México into a nation of ‘curiosidades’ [curiosities, novelties].
In subsequent emails, I asked her about the role of technology and how gender is interpreted within this context. She replied:
Technology has been a mediator since the beginning of the telesecundarias (distance middle schools) because of the difficulty in staffing more remote places; however, now technology in a broader sense is being considered as a replacement for teachers and not as an augmentation of services. Also, teachers complained of the dilution of the curriculum, offering examples that before when teaching, for example, algebra lessons, the guidance was to spend 2-3 days on a concept, and now teachers are told they can only spend 50 minutes on any given concept. They called this ‘embarradas’ or smears of knowledge (like spreading butter on bread) or ‘salpicadas’ (splashes of knowledge) rather than truly teaching and aiming for comprehension and deep knowledge.
In México, the teaching force is not female dominated. It’s pretty balanced male and female. I would say that the conjuncture in México (and this is a very raw analysis still) is gendered but it is gender writ large: the paternalistic state serving as the master patriarch, is overreaching into the lives of teachers, children, families and communities in punitive ways, like an Hacendado (hacienda owners who would beat, whip, rape, kill, etc. with impunity), it seeks to denigrate, shame, and terrorize into compliance teachers, who have historically been the leaders of social movements in México. It is gendered (phallic as in invasive and penetrating and not generative) power, but from the state to the citizenry that includes male and female educators. @Dr. Sánchez
Awareness of contextualized events such as Dr. Sánchez described continues to raise understanding of global events for all of us.
Dr. Marta Sánchez described her education reform research in Mexico through a series of emails to me this December 2015:
I spent 10 days in México City and the state of México interviewing teachers (~9), parents (4), preservice teachers (2), university students (2), school principals (~3), retired teachers (~5 and 3 pending), researchers (1 and 2 pending), and others (2 and 2 pending) about education reform in México, namely the one introduced in 2013.
Overwhelmingly, those interviewed stated that this was not an education reform given that there are no stated aims for what the future of Mexican education should be; the reform currently focuses on teacher evaluation without knowing the aims of the evaluation except to use the outcomes in punitive ways against teachers. Specifically, respondents noted that teachers are faced with three options: refuse to take the evaluation and be fired; take the evaluation, fail it and be fired, or take the evaluation, pass it and eventually be fired because upon taking this exam, teachers must also sign away their tenure. Because of this, respondents to the interview called the reform an administrative and labor reform that also represents a political blow to the national teachers’ union, el SNTE and la CNTE, which is an organization within the SNTE that seeks to democratize the SNTE and which is considered leftist and dedicated to transforming not only the union but Mexican society and education as well.
Additionally, respondents were not only worried about job security but about the escalated militarization of the country starting on November 14, 2015 when the Mexican government deployed thousands of soldiers to oversee the evaluation of teachers in diverse states, such as Chiapas and Oaxaca. One example of this escalation is that in Chiapas, where 800 or so teachers were going to be evaluated, 5,000 soldiers were deployed. The soldiers use a tactic called ‘encapsular’ or encapsulate. That is, they cut off a larger area where the teachers are then close off groups of protesters by surrounding them. In Chiapas, this had tragic consequences as teachers tried to break out of the capsule and started throwing rocks at soldiers in riot gear on one end while on the other side they were being corralled in by soldiers on the other end. In all of this, one teacher died. In other parts of the country, in the state of Michoacan, 52 normal students were arrested because of blocking a street during a protest and have not been released. Twenty female students were also incarcerated, then released and re-arrested. They remain incarcerated. The normalistas I interviewed noted that the recent law that was passed that bars marches and protests has been allowed to move ahead because of what is called ‘ponderance’ in the law, that requires you to balance the rights of groups vis-a-vis other groups, such that if a march blocks the free flow of traffic, then the marchers lose their constitutional right to protest. The normalista students found this to be a spurious argument, citing that candidates, joggers, religious pilgrims, and even cyclists block traffic all the time, and the city itself allows for the Avenida Reforma, a central avenue in México that is highly transited, to be closed off on weekends so that wealthy city dwellers can bike along its route. In other words, there is a trampling of all sorts of civil and human rights in the name of law and order, and under the discourse of reform and development. None of the teachers and others interviewed oppose reform in general or the evaluation of teachers and children but insist that such efforts cannot be standardized given the vast cultural, linguistic, ethnic, and class-based diversity of México as well as a new type of culture that has emerged in urban areas, ‘la cultura urbana popular,’ all groups that defy the measurement by preset standards. Teachers, especially, insist on reforms that are holistic and focus on the happiness of children and the school’s ability to form an engaged citizenry to keep building a democratic society. They reject reforms that are punitive and focus solely on discrete components such as labor agreements or student outcomes without first stating what the aims of education are. They note that from their vantage point, this reform seeks to reduce student knowledge in ways that create low-level workers for the technology industry and managerial classes. They reject this type of ‘new social being’ promoted by the Mexican government with the backing of the OECD and American foundations that would convert México into a nation of ‘curiosidades’ [curiosities, novelties].
In subsequent emails, I asked her about the role of technology and how gender is interpreted within this context. She replied:
Technology has been a mediator since the beginning of the telesecundarias (distance middle schools) because of the difficulty in staffing more remote places; however, now technology in a broader sense is being considered as a replacement for teachers and not as an augmentation of services. Also, teachers complained of the dilution of the curriculum, offering examples that before when teaching, for example, algebra lessons, the guidance was to spend 2-3 days on a concept, and now teachers are told they can only spend 50 minutes on any given concept. They called this ‘embarradas’ or smears of knowledge (like spreading butter on bread) or ‘salpicadas’ (splashes of knowledge) rather than truly teaching and aiming for comprehension and deep knowledge.
In México, the teaching force is not female dominated. It’s pretty balanced male and female. I would say that the conjuncture in México (and this is a very raw analysis still) is gendered but it is gender writ large: the paternalistic state serving as the master patriarch, is overreaching into the lives of teachers, children, families and communities in punitive ways, like an Hacendado (hacienda owners who would beat, whip, rape, kill, etc. with impunity), it seeks to denigrate, shame, and terrorize into compliance teachers, who have historically been the leaders of social movements in México. It is gendered (phallic as in invasive and penetrating and not generative) power, but from the state to the citizenry that includes male and female educators. @Dr. Sánchez
Awareness of contextualized events such as Dr. Sánchez described continues to raise understanding of global events for all of us.