by Paul Thomas from the Guardian.
The best part of this article are the citations to research that shows that schools can only, at best, have a limited positive impact with children who suffer the disadvantages of poor backgrounds. Such studies are always ignored in US mainstream media--for obvious reasons.
Under capitalism society exists to serve one class, those who"own" and control all significant economic enterprises in the economy. The tendency for direct corporate involvement in education, in my opinion, reflects the general shift to more direct control by the ruling class of all institutions in society. For education specifically they probably see this involvement as necessary to downsize the greater commitment to education that existed previously.
The increasing global nature of capitalist rule necessarily means the abandonment of commitment to the home base. Highly educated and skilled workers can be moved around the globe at will by corporations regardless of worker origins, and be paid much lower wages which, of course, enhances the wealth and power to this class.
The subtitle, "The trend for appointing CEOs to the top jobs is symptomatic of a declining commitment to public education and social justice", provides a liberal slant to their piece by suggesting that there has been a time when there was a true commitment to education and social justice. Education under the rule of this class always served their needs for obedient, non-questioning, well indoctrinated, and skilled workers. And, of course, social injustice is built into the system of class rule. The ownership and control of the wealth produced by working people, that is bestowed under the rules of capitalism to a class of investors, is inherently unjust.