Developing the school financial audit mo

Jour na l of U S-China

Public Adm inist rat ion

Volume 7, Number 11, November 2010 (Serial Number 61)

Contents

Theoretical Investigation

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

1 Alexander Dawoody

Anonymous electronic identity in cross-border and cross-sector environment

16 Libor Neumann

The world after financial crisis

28 Esko Kalevi Juntunen

Practice and Exploration

39 Oscar Frausto Martínez, Max Welch Guera

Indicators of the Habitat Agenda in Mexico: Local urban observatory programme

Developing the school financial audit model

46 Khalid Ismail, Kamisan Gadar, Mohd Shoki Md Arif

Internet as a source of information for tourists—The case of Croatia

56 Nada Zgrablji ć Rotar, Mili Razović, Josip Vidaković

66 Samaneh Sorournejad, Amirhassan Monadjemi, Zahra Zojaji

A model for adoption of mobile banking services using classification and regression trees

Special Research

From local to global: Can local journalism be a new approach to environmental awareness?

74 Şule Yüksel Öztürk, Şerife Özgün Çıtak

Educational figures as models for empathetic communication at school: An exploratory examination of an integrative assessment model

85 Yuval Wolf, Ronit Peled Laskov

Foreign ownership of land in Phuket, Thailand

92 Chompoonuh K. Permpoonwiwat

Nov. 2010, Volume 7, No.11 (Serial No.61) Journal of US-China Public Administration, ISSN 1548-6591, USA

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

Alexander Dawoody (Faculty of Public Policy and Administration, Marywood University, Scranton PA 18509, USA)

Abstract: This paper compares the educational system in the United States with those in two other countries. One is Sweden, a developed country that enjoys peace and social tranquility; the other is Iraq, a developing country that is torn by wars and tyrannical political systems. Based on such comparison and while acknowledging historic differences between the three countries, this paper will identify “cost of education” as a major causal agent in producing two social groups. The first group is a small, elitist cluster emerging as the leading force in all aspects of society and governance; the second group is a larger under-educated cluster, suffering from insufficient resources and forced into marginalization as voiceless, non-productive, non-competitive and expendable segment in society while plagued by poverty, or under unemployment, crime and economic hardship. In recognizing the limitation of access to education by the second group as the primary causal element in such disparity, this paper recommends “free access to quality education” as a fundamental right for all Americans and as an equalizer in correcting the American regime values in order to remain competitive in challenging.

Key words: access; cost; performance; decentralization; autonomy

1. Introduction

Education is a fundamental right of every human being. An educated citizen is the primary ingredient for the assurance and defense of freedom. No citizen should be denied access to education because of cost, location, disability, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, culture or nationality. One of the important tasks of any government is to assure such access and continue to provide resources to improve the quality, progress and development of educational performance. Without education, citizens will be deprived of opportunities to improve their lots in life, secure their individual freedoms and rights, and hold government accountable to the public.

This paper compares the educational system in the United States with that of two other countries. One is Sweden, a developed country that enjoys peace and social tranquility; the other is Iraq, a developing country that is torn by wars and tyrannical political systems. Based on such comparison and while acknowledging the historic differences between the three countries, this paper suggests that the concepts of cost, funding and performance are intertwined in educational sphere and are impacting the issue of access to education. By creating an environment that nourishes disparities in funding while refraining from shifting cost of education to society from the individual citizen, a condition is created whereby a two-tiered social system is emerging. One tier, although small in size but possessing all elements of power in the country; the other tier, although larger in size yet lacking access to power and the decision-making process in governance. The larger group is increasingly marginalized as voiceless, non-productive, non-competitive and expendable segment that is plagued by poverty, under/unemployment, crime and economic hardship.

Alexander Dawoody, Ph.D., assistant professor, Faculty of Public Policy and Administration, Marywood University; research fields: nonlinear and systems studies, Middle Eastern studies, foreign policy and national security studies, public policy analysis and political philosophy.

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

The research design of this paper is qualitative in its nature. It uses a content analysis of selected documents, archival records, studies and articles to compose themes that will answer the following questions: (1) What is the emerging challenge facing the education system in the United States? (2) How do cost and educational funding create disparities in the American society? (3) How does the shifting of educational cost directly from the citizen to the society help in creating an

egalitarian community? (4) What can America learn from countries that shift cost of education from directly to the citizen toward indirectly to the society? (5) How can the United States remain competitive in today’s globalization? (6) Is education a fundamental human right issue? The assumption in this paper is that access to education is vital in maintaining an egalitarian society that

allows all its members to contribute to the overall progress of the collective while advancing individual freedom and prosperity. In order for such an access to remain equitable, it must be designed based on a formula that would assign cost to the public and shift the direct cost of education from the citizen/student to society as a whole. In applying cost-benefit analysis to issues of cost and performance and by looking at a comparative analysis of the educational systems in the United States, Sweden and Iraq, this paper suggests that the allocation of educational cost indirectly to society will yield far greater goods and benefits to the country than if cost applied directly to the citizen/student. Such benefits can create a knowledge-based society that will transform the United States from a two-tiered societal nation into more of an egalitarian country based on equality and social justice. An egalitarian and knowledge-based society is able to remain competitive at global level, move toward peaceful and collaborative engagements with other nations in the world, strengthen its national security by abandoning archaic and costly militaristic tendencies, and diffusing the negative consequences generated by engagements in wars and militarism.

Hence, this paper identifies cost and its direct applicability to the citizen/student as the pivotal challenge to the education system in the United States, especially when such cost is intertwined with issues of funding and performance. To meet the rising cost of education and the continuous decrease in external funding, for example, most learning institutions in the United States are forced to raise the rate of students’ tuitions and fees in order to meet their operational needs (Yudof, 2002, p. 1). This rise in cost negatively impacts those who have to bear its direct burden: the citizens/students and their families (Chubb & Moe, 1990, pp. 16-19). The result will impact the issue of access to education and force many students to drop-out and join the massive unskilled labor force (Stone, Pirone & Paxton, 2008, p. 1).

According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, access to private schools and higher learning institutions is virtually impossible for many Americans despite government-supported loans, grants or scholarships (Strauss & Howe, 2005, p. 1). According to the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, access to public education is also becoming increasingly expensive (Twigg, 2005, p. 1). Many school districts and public institute of higher learning have inadequate funds necessary to improve teachers’ training or provide sufficient supply for teaching (Allen, 1997, p. 1). This is in addition to problems of deteriorating school buildings infrastructure in poorer districts (Herbert, 2008, p. 1; Hopkins, 1998, p. 1), overcrowded classrooms in large urban areas (CBS News, 2009, p. 1; Eberts, Schwartz & Stone, 1990, p. 138) and outdated curriculum on a whole (Duncan, 2009, p. 1; Headden, 1997, p. 1). Coupled with these problems is the issue of ineffective bureaucratic top-down mandates, such as “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) policy. According to Federal Education Budget Project, such policy is paralyzing local school districts and depriving them of autonomous decision-making capacity (Federal Education

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

Budget Project, n.d., p. 1) by forcing them to place importance on teaching for testing (Neill, 2003, p. 1) while punishing the poorer districts for lack of performance caused by low funding (University of Washington-Bothell, 2005, p. 1). Figure 1 demonstrates the circular logic of NCLB:

decreased funding

withholding of

funds

2. Increased local expenditure

Figure 1 The circular logic of “No Child Left Behind”

Source: Dawoody, 2008, p. 4.

The diagram illustrates that the logic of NCLB leads from one failed situation to another. When a school district is performing low, for example, due to lack of funding, teaching and technical capacities or curriculum, NCLB penalizes this district for such a failure and federal funding will be withheld. This punishment will continue until performance is improved. To address such a challenge school districts will have to rely on local funding in order to improve their performance. When local funding, however, is not capable of meeting the demands of improving public education or NCLB requirements, performance will further deteriorate, a condition that will lead to more cuts in federal funding up to shutting down the targeted low performing school (Dawoody, 2008, p. 4).

On the flip-side of the coin, families who are able to save money for their children’s education or secure financial means to fund their children’s education by enrolling them in private institutions (Heller, 2009, p. 1; Kafer, 2004, p. 1) are able to witness better results in their children’s educational performance (Geller, Sjoquist & Walker, 2001, p. 1). The outcome of this phenomenon is a cadre of professionals capable of securing good quality of life (Lemann, 2001, p. 1; Manning, 1999, p. 1) who, nevertheless, remain minority in comparison with the larger group that lacks the means to benefit from the privileges of good education (Fauth, Brady-Smith & Brooks-Gunn, n.d., p. 1; Kozol, 1992, pp. 27-34).

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

In an increasingly competitive globalized economy, the under-educated group finds itself threatened with menial, low-paying jobs or unemployment. The educated elitist group, on the other hand, finds itself benefiting from utilizing its education in pursue of happiness in life. The emerging society, as a consequence, is a non-egalitarian society that rests its decision-making process at the hands of its elitist group (Fogel, 2000, pp. 312-330). Public policy hence becomes an arena for social construction to benefit the interest of the elitist group (Schneider & Ingram, 1993, pp. 342-346).

Not all aspects of public education in the United States, however, lack excellence in educational performance. The Center on Education Policy, for example, suggests that there are some public education schools and institutions of higher learning that match private learning institutions in educational quality and output (Wenglinsky, 2007, p. 1). These, nevertheless, are exceptional cases that witnessed increase in performance associated with increase in funding generated by higher fees applied to students (Yudof, 2002, p. 1).

By re-emphasizing one of the paper’s core question regarding what to do in order to transform the United States from a country dominated by the elites (Henry, 1995, p. 5) to a true egalitarian nation of the people, by the people, let us look at the educational performances of two other systems in the world and compare them with that of ours. The comparison ought to give us a better perspective on how to remedy the problem of cost, secure our future, and remain competitive at global level. One of the two educational systems is located in Sweden, a developed democratic country in Europe that enjoys peace and social tranquility. The other is in Iraq, a developing country that is torn by wars and tyrannical governments.

Although both of these two countries have great social, political and historic differences with the United States and are much smaller in size and less heterogeneous, they, nevertheless, give us perspective on the concept of quality educational performance that is not burdened with direct cost applied to the student. The aim is not to replicate the educational models in these two countries or adopt them to the United States, since each country is unique in its particularities. The aim, however, is to learn from these models and uncover through cost-benefit analysis that when cost of education is shifted directly from the citizen/student to indirectly toward the society, the emerging benefits will outweigh the associated cost and will be far greater than benefits gained to if cost is applied directly to the individual citizen/student.

2. The education system in Sweden

In Sweden, the educational system is free of tuitions and fee cost to all citizens from kindergartens to universities (“Sweden education system and policy handbook”, 2009, pp. 12-22). Students have no direct obligation to cover the cost of their education and have free access to all levels of education supported by taxes (Hudson & Lidstrom, 2002, pp. 36, 67-90). As a result, Sweden is considered as one of the world’s leaders in free-market education (Herve, 2008, p. 1; Wagner, 2006, p. 1).

Consequently, Swedish economy is thriving with collective actors (Schenk, 2007, p. 1) and excellence in global economic performance (Ryner, 2002, pp. 99-120). Swedish citizens equally enjoy the benefits of progressive social and labor programs for many decades (George & Taylor-Gooby, 1996, pp. 72-90; Rosenthal, 1967, pp. 3-12; Sebardt, 2006, pp. 64-69), such as universal healthcare (Anell, 2008, pp. 5-9), five weeks of paid vacation (Yanuck, 2003, p. 6), 15 months of paid maternity leave at 75% of salary (O’Neill, 2004, p. 1), and higher percentage pension and unemployment benefits (Sianesi, 2003, p. 1). Crime is relatively low, prisons and the number of the incarcerated are smaller in comparison with that in the United States (Winslow, 2002, p. 1), and

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

civic engagement to hold transparent and accountable governance is very high (Milner & Ersson, 2000, p. 1). The Swedish Government’s domestic policy, as such, is dictated horizontally by citizen voices in most aspects of life (Milner, 1985, pp. 15-39; Olsson, Nordfeldt, Larsson & Kendall, 2005, p. 1). There is no elitist mentality and the country’s foreign policy shies from military engagements or involvements in wars (Government Offices of Sweden, n.d., p. 1). This non-militaristic approach toward foreign policy is making Sweden one of the most respected and admired countries in the world (Swedish Trade Council, n.d., p. 1). The basic formula for this success is Sweden’s recognition of education as a fundamental human right issue for all its citizens regardless of income, gender, age or region.

3. The education system in Iraq

According to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the educational performance in Iraq prior to the 2003 Iraq War was considered as one of the best in the entire region (2003, p. 56). This is despite the problems of top-down administrative structure, centralized curriculum, lack of electronic and state of the art teaching materials, low students/teachers inputs and inadequate teachers continuous training. The number of elementary, secondary and university students, as well as teachers and professors of both genders continued to increase (Asquith, 2003, p. 1). Government provided free public education through a centrally organized school system that included a six-year elementary level and six-year of secondary level, and consisted of three years intermediate and three years of preparatory levels. Graduates of these schools were able to enroll without paying for tuition, fees and cost of housing or books to any vocational and technical institutions, colleges or universities throughout the country (Iraq’s Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation, 2005, pp. 8-12).

After the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, problems of corruption (Corn, 2007, p. 1), security, sectarianism, kidnapping (O’Hanlon & Livingston, 2009, p. 1), attacking and killing of students, teachers and professors (Adriaensens, 2007, p. 1), absenteeism, internal migration and external displacement (International Rescue Committee, 2008, p. 1) had collectively reduced Iraq’s educational performance to a lower standard. Adding to these problems were issues of insufficient school facilities, poor conditions of damaged school buildings and lack of clean water and electricity (Paley & DeYoung, 2007, p. 1). This is in addition to lack of labs, equipments, teachers, staff, and outdated curriculum (Adriaensens, 2009, p. 1).

The invasion also created an environment for fraud in Iraq’s educational measures and exams (Khadduri, 2008, p. 1), increased the need for private tutoring (Issa, 2009, p. 1), and exacerbated the problems of inflation and unemployment. Collectively, these issues caused large number of educated Iraqis to either flee Iraq to other countries (Brulliard, 2007, p. 1) or forced them to accept work in unskilled fields, such as driving taxi cabs. In Baghdad alone, for example, there are more individuals with Ph.D. working as taxi drivers than any other place in the world (Al-Shawi, 2006, p. 56).

When one compares Iraq’s educational performance under the regime of Saddam Hussein, a political system that many Iraqis regard as one of the most repressive political regimes in their modern history, with Iraq’s current educational performance under the watchful eye of the most powerful country on earth that prides itself as the beacon of freedom and human rights, one wonders what is missing in this scenario? Why a brutal and repressive regime, such as that of Saddam Hussein, was able to deliver an educational system that had no matching in the region. Yet, the world’s most powerful nation is unable to do the same and is failing to produce even a sub-standard educational system in a country that is under its occupation since 2003?

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

Various responses may be given to these questions. Perhaps the most obvious answer is the issue of security. When a country lacks in security, it cannot perform well in education. Both students and teachers are afraid to attend classes due to threats of kidnapping and bombing. This is in addition to the deteriorating conditions of school building as a result of 20 years of wars and economic sanctions (Caroll, 2005, p. 1; Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2000, p. 1; Karadsheh, 2009, p. 1; Loyn, 2007, p. 1). Yet, lack of security as a justification for poor performance in education is partially true and can be challenged if another situation presented itself with similar condition (lacking security) while demonstrating improved quality in educational performance. An example of this exceptional scenario is the Kurdish educational system in Iraq.

According to Foreign Affairs, the Kurdish educational system in Iraq had suffered greatly because of conditions created by internal war and Saddam’s genocide campaign against the ethnic Kurds (Quandt, 1996, p. 1). Yet, despite these difficult conditions, the Kurdish education system in Iraq continued to perform well, uninterrupted by displacement of Kurdish citizens, daily bombardment of Kurdish towns and villages, forced migration of large number of Kurdish tribes, or economic sanctions imposed by the central government.

The Kurdish uprising of the 1970s, for example, made sure that schools in the Kurdish area under the control of Kurdistan Democratic Party, the political organization that led the Kurdish movement during that time, had encouraged students to attend class regularly and continued with their education despite the hardship imposed by the internal civil war (Dawoody, 2006, pp. 10-11). The period of the 1998s-1990s witnessed internal fighting between various Kurdish factions, mainly between militia groups belonging to Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (Stansfield, 2003, pp. 86-94). The Allied’ No-Fly-Zone and protection of the Kurds, however, helped stabilizing the Kurdish area and improve the Kurdish educational system to maintain good quality performance (Zunes, 2007, p. 1).

Today, Kurdistan Regional Government asserts that the region of Iraqi Kurdistan has numerous universities, technical institutions, elementary and secondary schools in most of the region. Kurdish students and professors are also taking part of international symposiums and conferences and engaging in study-abroad programs (Kurdistan Regional Government, n.d., p. 1). The New York Times reports that the American University has opened a new campus in Iraqi Kurdistan on October 7, 2007 (Friedman, 2007, p. 1) and the Kurdish government is responsible for paying all costs associated with education from kindergartens to graduate schools (Kurdistan Regional Government, n.d., p. 1).

It is evident here that when cost of education is shifted from students and schools to society, the overall quality of education and students’ educational performances will improve regardless of income, condition or setting. Regrettably in today’s Iraq, only students who can afford private tutoring (Issa, 2009, p. 1) are performing well. This is creating disparities in the educational performance between those who can benefit from paying private tutoring and those who are unable to do so. An emerging elites group is expected to surface in Iraq at the expense of a larger powerless group if such trend continues.

4. The education system in the United States

Education at all levels in the United States is mainly provided by public funds. Yet, there are numerous private educational institutions that compete with public education that are funded by contributions from parents, jobs, scholarships and grants (Chubb & Moe, 1990, p. 186). The quality of the education system in both sectors is good (Berube, 1994, pp. 13-62; Gabbard, et al., 2004, pp. 75-80), with private education often taking the lead in

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

performance (Geller, Sjoquist & Walker, 2001, p. 1; Kafer, 2004, p. 1). Because of this, students from various parts of the world are coming to the United States to persue their educational careers (Higgins, 2008, p. 1). According to the Times Higher Education, some of the best learning institutions in the world, for example, are located here in the United States (“Top 200 world universities”, 2007, p. 1). Many American universities are considered the world’s leading research centers and many of their members are globally recognized through prestigious awards, such as the Nobel Prize in the arts and sciences (US History, n.d., p. 1).

Yet, despite this trend in achievements, CBS News suggests that the United States lacks behind other developed countries in education (Cosgrove-Mather, 2002, p. 1). Many American students, for example, especially in the first two levels of elementary and secondary education and in some college levels continue to exhibit problems in performance (Ravitch, 2009, pp. 284-319, 453-456; Tyack & Cuban, 1995, pp. 12, 110-140). We are also witnessing an alarming increase in the production of large number of the under-educated (Toppo, 2005, p. 1), the unskilled (Harrison & Peevely, 2007, p. 1), and the drop-outs (United States Department of Education-National Center for Education Statistics, n.d., p. 1; Dorn, 1990, p. 167; McKinsey, 2009, p. 1).

Unlike Iraq, we do not suffer from tyrannical government, forced migration, continuous wars, occupation, or lack of equipments and modern educational tools. And unlike Sweden, we are not exposed to large scale of taxation. So, why do Sweden rank as fifth in global educational performance (Batty, 2009, p. 1) and Finland, a

country that has similar educational system to Sweden as first, but we rank as 34th (Spencer, 2009, p. 1)? In comparing our education system with that of Swedish and Iraq, it is evident that our education system

whether public or private is expensive (Khullar, 2009, p. 1). The two-tiered social system is also impacting performance (McKinsey, 2009, p. 1). Public funding is limited (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2009, p. 1) and strangled by ineffective bureaucratic policies such as “No Child Left Behind” (Aft.org, 2004, p. 1). Scholarships and grants are inadequate. Only a few can afford the high cost of education. Such cost is higher than many developed nations, making the United States the 13th in the world in terms of educational affordability, with Sweden as the first (Usher & Cervenan, 2005, p. 1).

Perhaps we may continue producing doctors, lawyers, engineers, mathematicians, physicists and other professionals if we continue with such a trend. Scholarships, grants, loans and family savings may continue offsetting some of the cost of public and private education. Collectively, however, are these are not adequate answers to our problems. To begin with, we still have to remedy the inability of many Americans to have access to education. Second, we need to find a way to re-educate and re-train those who dropped-out and were unable to fully take advantage of our education system and remained unfit in a highly competitive world. Third, we need to find a place for the growing army of the under-educated in our country without absorbing them in the military and force employing such an army through the manufacturing of unnecessary wars (such as the Iraq War of 2003). Another issue to consider is the increasing absence of the wealthy and middle class from the military and the saturation of military forces with individuals from minority groups (Rangel, 2002, p. 1), the poor, and students who enlist to benefit from the GI bill in order to pay for the rising cost of education (United States Department of Veterans Affairs, n.d., p. 1).

According to a study conducted by the University of Florida, the increase rate of producing an army of under-educated and drop-outs is causing the United States to fall behind in global competition (Harris, Van Blokland & White, 2007, p. 1). In addition to militarization, the consequence of this problem is increased unemployment, under-employment and rise of economically-generated crime (such as theft, robbery, illegal drug sales and trafficking) that leads to diverting public funds toward recycling social ills within a dysfunctional

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

correction system (Ross, 2006, p. 1). Alongside this alarming notion is the problem of the growing influence of the military industrial complex (Raw Story, 2006, p. 1; Norris, 2009, p. 1). Such an industry is a war-profiteering system that President Eisenhower warned of its threat during his farewell address to the nation on January 17, 1961 (Eisenhower, 1961, pp. 135-140). By militarizing its economy and public policy and engaging in manufactured wars, the United States is turning global opinion against it and presents itself to the world as a war-mongering nation (Milne, 2009, p. 1; Shank, 2007, p. 1). The United States is also providing extremist groups opportunities to use its negatively-perceived image in order to monopolize sentiments and recruit terrorists to target American interests in the world (Lustick, Eland & Porter, 2008, p. 1).

5. Recommendations

Education in the United States must shift from the elitist mentality to a populist and egalitarian concept. Every American must have free access to education supported by combination of public funding, scholarships, grants and philanthropies. Government must assure that public education is accessible without economic barriers, and provide adequate resources to all levels of education in order to assure the production of highly educated Americans at all levels and from all walks of life. There ought to be no tuitions, fees or any other costs associated with education, especially in public sector. Students and parents need to focus on educational performance instead of focusing on where to get money to pay for the rising cost of education.

Public education does not eliminate private institutions. However, public education ought not to be second to private education and must continue to compete for excellence in performance while benefiting from adequate funding resources. The United States is the wealthiest nation on earth. If we, as a nation, are capable of devoting trillion of taxpayers’ money to fund manufactured wars, then we are more than capable of providing adequate funds for good quality public education.

The main criteria for progress in education ought to be student performance instead of personal or parental income. In Sweden and Iraq, for example, any student graduating from high school can apply to any college or university and complete his studies free of charge (“Sweden education system and policy handbook”, 2009, pp. 12-22; UNESCO, 2003, p. 56). Only two factors dictate the student’s educational track and progress: choice of discipline and GPA. We can learn from these models and exceed them in performance if we consider some of the following:

(1) Decentralizing our education system and leaving decisions to be made autonomously by each school district while benefiting from a network of collaboration, association and shared-expertise with other entities in the system. An autonomous school district within a collaborative network of association is an effective agent for positive change. This model is best known as the agent-based model, whereby each unit in a system is autonomous, yet connected with other units (agents) in a network of collaboration and association (Gilbert, 2008, pp. 2-6, 15-16).

(2) While supporting the autonomy of each school district, we need to revitalize and diversify the curriculum to correspond with changes in the world, teach to educate rather than teach to test, apply the learned concepts into real life situations, and avoid the “one-size-fits-all” model.

(3) Aborting the transformation of our schools into factory-style in educational process. Instead, we need to pay attention to the particularities of each student, school and region, and establish a system of accountability that is based on incentive and performance improvement rather than punitive measures.

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

(4) Integrating educational responsibility beyond the school system to include parental and societal responsiveness and involvement. (5) Continuing the use of technology, smart classrooms and visual equipments to support innovation in teaching methods. (6) Continuing the improvement of teachers’ training and teaching, and expanding pedagogical and socratic approaches toward learning through inquiry. (7) Including other world views in our curriculum instead of concentrating on western orientations and perspectives. (8) Transforming the classroom from a static forum of routine recycling of cliches toward new laboratories of awakened and interconnected human epistemology. (9) Departing from the linear methodology of observing a phenomenon (Strogatz, 1994, p. 326) and moving toward exploring the world through the prism of chaos (Holland, 1998, pp. 3-14), uncertainty (Prigogine, 1996, pp. 73-106), mutual causality and self-organization (Miller & Page, 2007, pp. 33-98). These new sciences of complexity can teach us think in multiple, nonlinear perspectives while entertaining mutual causality, network, and interconnectedness (Wheatley, 2006, pp. 17-20), instead of observing the world from an objective, rigid, top-down, controlled, authoritarian and uniform centralized perspective.

(10) Celebrating subjectivity, uncertainty, shades of gray and self-organization (Wheatley, 2006, pp. 27-70). (11) Learning ought to be measured through its applicability. What may appear to make sense in theory may

not prove to do so if put into real life test. The experimentation of the neocons through the nation-building experiment in Iraq during the Bush administration is an good example of prioritizing abstract and unexamined theory over learned experience (Lind, 2004, p. 1). The neocons’ theoretical justifications of the Iraq War, for example, and how Iraqis will welcome us with open arms if we toppled Saddam, how we can transform Iraq into democracy and along with it the entire political map in the Middle East through the domino effect, proved to be nothing but a naive political abstract that quickly evaporated once it hit the ground (Baxter, 2006, p. 1; Medved, 2006, p. 1; Winston, 2007, p. 1).

(12) We no longer can see causality in a linear progression, predict or plan for an unforeseeable future (Waldrop, 1992, pp. 198-240), and hold-on to dying and outdated systems and structures and maintain them alive through artificial engineering beyond their natural life cycle (Goldstein, 1994, pp. 39-70). Instead, we must embrace multiple perspectives and approaches toward observing a phenomenon (Wheatley, 2006, pp. 3-15). If a system is about to collapse and exhibits threshold leading to such tendency, as it was the case with our financial investment system in 2008 after the emerging of the mortgage crisis, we ought to welcome this collapse and allow it in order for a new structure to emerge that is better equipped to deal with new changes in the environment. Sustaining the older order to remain alive through artificial engineering (such as through infusing public funding into the decaying financial investment industry) will only delay its ultimate and unavoidable collapse by buying it some extra time. The difference, however, between a natural collapse and a delayed collapse caused by an artificial engineering is that the latter will result in catastrophe and the former will result in the emergence of a more dynamic system (Kauffman, 1993, pp. 237-255).

(13) We need to realize and accept that our current education system is in a dire need for collapse and for a new dynamic system to emerge that is better capable in dealing with changes in the global environment. From the death of the current outdated system, the new system will emerge randomly and without control or artificial engineering in order to respond to our needs.

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

6. Conclusion

Education is not the mere repetition of the same thing. Rather, education is an innovative and an on-going process of learning and re-learning. As Piaget had demonstrated, the objective of education is to create people who are able to do new, innovative things (cited in Schmidt, 2006, p. 1), instead of repeating or recycling the same over and over again. We need also not to consider students as blank slates who lack inputs, perspectives or experience. Galileo proved the fallacy of this by suggesting that we cannot teach a human being anything. Instead, we can only help him find it within himself (cited in “Good Reads”, n.d., p. 1).

Learning is a holistic concept. As the successful Swedish model had demonstrated, it involves the teacher, the student, the parents, governance and society as a whole. Our education system, regrettably, focuses on standardized tests that were introduced decades ago and lived out their use, applicability and function. Instead of teaching to test, we must teach students to learn and comprehend the world. Instead of dictating abstracts and emphasize wider applicability. Instead of following the model of factory production processes, one-size-fits all, standardized schedules, tasks and outputs, we need to pay attention to inputs, particularities, and the interconnectedness of issues, factors, subjects and players. And, instead of focusing on cost, we need to pay attention to improved performance in learning.

We must emphasize the need for creating new and innovative means for students’ learning. We need to encourage teachers to continue developing and expanding their areas of knowledge, expertise and teaching methods while learning from other successful models in the world. A teacher cannot teach others unless he starts by teaching himself (Gibran, 1993, pp. 17-40).

Teaching oneself before teaching others while teaching by example requires thinking. Education and classrooms must be laboratories for free thinking and transcend limitations. Memorizing theories and concepts without abilities to think on how to synthesize, apply, analyze, critique or arrive to alternative futures is fruitless. The purpose of thinking is to contemplate better ways in understanding life and applying learning toward the improvement of all lives on earth. Thinking must lead to learning, and learning must lead to thinking. Both learning and thinking, according to Confucius, are the interconnected variables of one dynamics (cited in Leys, 1997, pp. 3-5.).

Learning institutions, however, are only means to facilitate learning and thinking. On their own, they are not the medium for either learning or thinking. Emerson alluded to this by acknowledging that what we teach in learning institutions is not education but the means for it (cited in Emerson, n.d., p. 1). When these means become obstacles in front of learning and thinking, education seizes to deliver on its promise.

Outmoded structures in educational systems get in the way of learning and thinking. As Twain has warned, we do not need to allow for mundane schooling system to interfere with our education (cited in Vandermeer, 2005, p. 1). Russell echoes Twain’s warning by stressing that we are made non-thinking individuals by means of improper education (cited in Spirit and Flesh, n.d., p. 1). Einstein adds to this observation by warning against the inadequacy of an education system in strangling inquiry and free thinking (cited in Eves, 1988, p. 31).

We need to promote free thinking and learning through innovative teaching and learning methods. We are unable to do so if we keep education accessible only to the few. We can ride the threatening tsunamis of inequality by providing a threshold for the emergence of a new dynamic that can transform the republic into an egalitarian forum capable of allowing its entire citizen to compete and remain viable on a global level.

We must make sure that our educational institutions are structured in order to perform as effective means for

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

the facilitation of learning and thinking. We must also make sure that our educational system is dynamic and essential in the production of learned citizen-thinkers. This realization can be achieved through the provision of an unburdened access to education through direct cost. This type of unconstrained access is a primary ingredient in the creation of an equalizer that will play as a “kick” in destabilizing an outmoded structure and help moving it toward its collapse and the emergence of something new and dynamic that is better capable in dealing with changes in its environment.

This key ingredient that will kick the process forward toward the collapse of the current outmoded and outdated education structure will play as an equalizer not only in making education accessible to all Americans but also in transforming the republic itself into a new egalitarian forum for equality and social justice. The kick will reshuffle the mundane structure in our education system to force its shift toward disorder, restructuring through chaos new and a healthier emerging equilibrium that will bring us toward a new threshold in the creation of citizen-thinker in a knowledge-based egalitarian society.

We are writing our possible future today. Therefore, we need to consider education as a human right issue. Continuing on the current path without allowing for the key ingredient of unburdened access to education to play as a kick in changing the system will lead us to catastrophes and reduce our effectiveness in the world to mere irrelevant existence. America’s strength rests in producing a new mantra that regards education as a fundamental human right. This understanding is vital for safeguarding the future of the republic.

References:

Adriaensens, D.. (2007, April 18). Iraq’s education system on the verge of collapse. Retrieved October 14, 2009, from http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5429. Adriaensens, D.. (2009, September 15). Iraq: Massive fraud and corruption in higher education. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15214. Aft.org. (2004, July). NCLB: Its problems, its promise. Retrieved June 16, 2009, from http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/downloads/ teachers/PolicyBrief18.pdf. Allen, J.. (1997, May 2). Inequality of funding public education raises justice issues. Retrieved October 19, 2009, from http://natcath. org/NCR_Online/archives2/1997b/050297/050297a.htm. Alliance for Excellent Education. (2009, June). Reinventing the federal role in education: Supporting the role of college and career

readiness for all students . Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://www.all4ed.org/files/PolicyBriefReinventingFedRoleEd. pdf.

Al-Shawi, I.. (2006). A glimpse of Iraq. Lulu. Anell, A.. (2008). The Swedish health care system. Sweden: Lund UP. Asquith, C.. (2003, November 4). Turning the page on Iraq’s history. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://www.csmonitor.com/

2003/1104/p11s01-legn.html. Batty, P.. (2009, October 9). Ranking 09: Asia advancing. Retrieved November 2, 2009 from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk /story.asp?storycode=408560. Baxter, S.. (2006, March 19). I was a Neocon: I was wrong. Retrieved September 15, 2009 from http://entertainment.timesonline.co. uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article743213.ece. Berube, M. R.. (1994). American school reform: Progressive, equity, and excellence movements, 1883-1993. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger. Brulliard, K.. (2007, May 5). Iraq reimposes freeze on medical diplomas in bid to keep doctors from fleeing abroad. Retrieved July 18, 2009, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402359.html?hpid= topnews?hpid=topnews. Caroll, J.. (2005, April 22). Iraq’s rising industry: Domestic kidnapping. Retrieved September 29, 2009, from http://www.csmonitor. Com/2005/0422/p06s01-woiq.html. CBS News. (2009, July 27). Crowded classrooms expected for fall. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.cbsnews.com/

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

stories/2009/07/27/national/main5190593.shtml. Chubb, J. E. & Moe, T. M.. (1990). Politics, markets and America’s schools. Washington, D.C: Brookings. Corn, D.. (2007, August 30). Secret report: Corruption is “norm” within Iraqi Government. Retrieved September 13, 2009, from

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/228339. Cosgrove-Mather, B.. (2002, November 26). Poor Marks for U.S. education system. Retrieved October 5, 2009, from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/26/world/main530872.shtml. Dawoody, A.. (2006). Iraqi notes: A personal reflection on issues of governance in Iraq and US involvement. Public Voices, 8(2). Dawoody, A.. (2008). A complexity response to funding public education. The Innovation Journal, 13(3). Dorn, S.. (1990). Creating the dropout: An institutional and social history of school failure. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger. Duncan, A.. (2009, October 9). A call to teaching. Retrieved October 29, 2009, from http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10

/10092009.html. Eberts, R.W., Schwartz, E. K. & Stone, J. A.. (1990). School reform, school size, and student achievement. Federal Reserve Bank of Economic Review , 26. Eisenhower, D. D.. (1961). Public papers of the presidents of the United States: Dwight D. Eisenhower. Washington, D.C.: GPO. Emerson, R. W.. (n.d.). Poet seers. Retrieved November 4, 2009, from http://www.poetseers.org/the_poetseers/sri_chinmoy/spiritual

_poetry/phil/emerson/. Eves, H.. (1988). Return to mathematical circles. Boston: Prindle. Fauth, R. C., Brady-Smith, C. & Brooks-Gunn, J.. (n.d.). Poverty and education-overview, children and adolescents. Retrieved July

16, 2009, from http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2330/Poverty-Education.html. Federal Education Budget Project. (n.d.). No Child Left Behind—Title I distribution formula. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/no-child-left-behind-act-title-i-distribution-formulas.

Fogel, R. W.. (2000). The fourth great awakening and the future of egalitarianism. Chicago: U of Chicago P. Friedman, T.. (2007, September 2). The Kurdish secret. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/

opinion/02friedmancolumn.html?_r=1. Gabbard, D., Ross, A., Wayne, E., et al. (Eds.). (2004). Defending public schools. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger. Geller, C. R., Sjoquist, D. L. & Walker, M. B.. (2001, February). The effect of private school competition on public school

performance . Occasional paper No. 15. Retrieved June 6, 2009, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/ content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/32/92.pdf.

George, V. & Taylor-Gooby, P.. (1996). European welfare policy: Squaring the welfare circle. NY: St. Martin’s. Gibran, K.. (1993). Wisdom of Gibran. New Delhi: UBS. Gilbert, N.. (2008). Agent-based model. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Goldstein, J.. (1994). The unshackled organization. Portland, Oregon: Productivity. Good Reads. (n.d.). Quotes by Galileo Galilei. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/14190.

Galileo_Galilei. Government Offices of Sweden. (n.d.). Foreign policy. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/3103. Harris, D., Van Blokland, P. J. & White, J. K.. (2007, January). American education: Falling behind. Retrieved September 11, 2009,

from http://irrec.ifas.ufl.edu/files/student_work/ 06_12_Harris.pdf. Harrison, R. E. & Peevely, G. L.. (2007). A center for technology-based decision-making in the economics of rural education. Retrieved October 11, 2009, from http://www.tnstate.edu/learningsciences/research/ed_funding.htm. Headden, S.. (1997, October 12). Hispanic dropout mystery. Retrieved September 5, 2009, from http://www.usnews.com/usnews/ culture/articles/971020/archive_008077_2.htm. Heller, D. E.. (2009, November 5). Stop financial aid for wealthy students. Retrieved November 8, 2009, from http://www. insidehighered.com/views/2009/11/05/heller. Henry, W. A.. (1995). In defense of elitism. Anchor. Herbert, B.. (2008, January 29). Investing in America. Retrieved September 11, 2009, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/

opinion/29herbert.html. Herve, N.. (2008, November 13). Learn and study together with other students from all over the world. Retrieved September 6, 2009, from http://www.kth.se/ict/utbildning/2.3165/2.3315/1.13311?l=en. Higgins, S.. (2008, June 23). Coming to America: International students are flocking to area colleges and universities like never before . Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://www.newhaven.edu/news-events/23095.pdf. Holland, J. H.. (1998). Emergence from chaos to order. Cambridge, MA: Presus.

Education as an equalizer and challenges to the American Republic

Hopkins, G.. (1998, November 16). Hard hat area: The deteriorating state of school buildings. Retrieved May 3, 2009, from http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin089.shtml. Hudson, C. & Lidstrom, A.. (2002). Local education policy: Comparing Britain and Sweden. NY: Palgrave. International Rescue Committee. (2008, March). Five years later: A hidden crisis: Report of the IRC Commission on Iraqi refugees.