Neoliberalism is a large set of policies, most of them introduced independently and even in ignorance of other policies, No one person, committee, think tank, or Association ever 'planned' it in advance. It got named when enough of those more or less unrelated changes began to evince a direction, and capitalist intellectuals (and perhaps policy makers) then began to nurse it along in their heads. But it is really unhelpful to personify it as "wanting" this or that.
Carrol
\ Dissenting Wren:
Some kinds of innovations are welcomed by neoliberalism with open arms. Look at how happy Wall Street was to create and adopt complex new financial instruments.
In general, capitalism is more welcoming of innovation than any previous mode of production - but not all innovations are welfare-enhancing. As far as education goes, read Karen Ho's story (in _Liquidated_) of how Wall Street recruited at Harvard, Princeton, and a handful of other schools. They weren't particularly interested in technical training; at the entry level they were hiring freshly minted BA's with degrees in the liberal arts and sciences. The attraction of these bright young things, as far as I can tell, is that they learned quickly, would work incredibly long hours, valued their high salaries and bonuses, and were tractable. The notion that really-existing educational institutions produce either upward mobility for the downtrodden or create critical thinkers with a commitment to egalitarianism is a conceit that makes people with my job feel good, but isn't well grounded.