Meritocracy and Individualism in the Neoliberal University

• In Event: Difference and Dissidence: Im(Possibilities) Within the Neoliberal and Imperial Educational Complex

Abstract

Purpose: While discourses of education as equalizer still abound, the preeminence of narratives of meritocracy in tandem with neoliberal influences on education seriously undermine higher education’s capacity to incite positive social change. This paper exposes the relationship between elite white androcentric values and difference and the possibilities to disrupt these values.

Perspectives: Scholarship has problematized the prevailing meritocratic ideal as producing a class of elites characterized by pedigree, rather than by goodness, thoughtfulness, or a commitment to social improvement or democratic values. Guinier (2016) argues that the behaviors and achievements rewarded by educational institutions are competitive and individualistic, notoriously reflected in a focus on standardized testing that turns out to be an indicator not of academic ability, but of wealth. Definitions of merit are determined by the current class of elites, and the assignment of merit bestows an entitlement to entitlement. Admission to an elite university, the ultimate indicator that an individual is among the “best and brightest,” has come to represent deserved membership in the elite class. Deresciewicz (2014) explains that this sense of entitlement—indeed, of personal virtue—serves to absolve individuals of responsibility to contribute to the greater good, and to justify an educational and professional focus on the accrual and maximization of personal wealth. Rivera (2016) explains how elite professional service (EPS) firms, which offer new graduates the highest salaried positions, bolster the social status quo by hiring almost exclusively from elite universities and over-valuing resume items that are emblematic of the white upper class. Today, she argues, EPS firms apply and propagate a merit metric that promotes individualism, competitiveness, and pedigree, rather than teamwork, collaboration, and a commitment to others.

Methods: This paper uses textual analysis to delve deeply into the contexts and activities of a meritocratic framework and its relation to difference. Textual analysis generates rich meanings of larger sociopolitical processes (McKee 2002).

Sources: This paper analyzes three works from scholars outside of the field of education: Excellent sheep: The miseducation of the American elite and the way to a meaningful life, by William Deresiewicz; The tyranny of the meritocracy: Democratizing higher education in America, by Lani Guinier; Pedigree: How elite students get elite jobs, by Lauren Rivera.

Point of View: Using these scholars’ work on meritocracy in higher education as a guide, this work highlights the standards of merit that serve to reproduce not only the elite class, but the white androcentric values associated with it. These evaluative criteria have significant implications for minority students. This framing sheds light on the complexities to examine difference within a meritocratic hierarchy.

Significance: This paper contributes to the knowledge of meritocracy and difference in the neoliberal educational institution. It also contributes perspectives to push back against the neoliberal influences that normalize competition and individual profit-seeking.

Author

• Rebecca Shamash, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities