Mercedes Schneider has been working hard to understand Bill Gates’ view of the origins, development, andurpose of the Common Core standards.
In this post, she reviews his short speech at the American Enterprise Institute, an institution to which he has generously contributed. She must have watched this six-minute video repeatedly because she discovers nuances and contradictions in his version of how the CCSS came to be, even though he has put more than $2 billion into making it happen.
Watch along with Mercedes.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
My comment “Is Bill Gates lying or just clueless?”
He did give us Windows.
He “gave” us Windows, or he made certain that we would have a hard time obtaining anything else?
Gates’ drive for control and monopolization is as evident in his so-called philanthropic efforts as in his business practices.
Windows, this gift that keeps giving.
Blue screen of death, anyone?
😉
Oh my… what a can of worms you’re opening…. lol. I used to buy a new PC (Windows) about every two years or so when the previous one would give out. Then one day I decided to give Mac a try. I’ve had the same MacBook since 2009, and it still works quite well (updated software and all).
My “computer-ish” friends get upset with me when I make those comparisons. However, one of them claimed that Microsoft has often released new software and let the end users find the “bugs” that need to be fixed. I’m not sure if that’s true, but if it is… gosh… Of course that would never happen with something to which all of our children would be subjected right?
Hi Joe,
You know the saying…
“once you go Mac, you never go back”
My experience has been fewer problems, much less frequent machine replacements/upgrades. Very easy OS updates that do not crash the whole shooting match.
I have also heard the “end user bug find” story. The guy who told me works for Microsoft. But still, possibly urban legend.
Yes, Apple is a” huge multi F-ing national con F-ing glomerate”, (apologies and thanks to Dario Fo) just like Microsoft .
For me, there is some value in the fact that as far as I know, no one form apple is running around the country actively influencing (destroying?) public education.
Gates owns a lot of Apple stock. Apple, of course, is notorious for making use of what amounts to slave labor in the developing world and doing nothing about addressing those conditions.
“Gates owns a lot of Apple stock.”
If by “a lot” you mean major share holder, voting stock, control the company, nope. There is no evidence of this.
The largest single share holders are the officers. Steve Jobs (estate) Sina Tamaddon, Ron Johnson, among others.
Over 70% of Apple is owned by institutions and mutual funds.
You may be thinking of the Microsoft investment in Apple from the late 90s. In 1997 Microsoft, purchased $150 million of Apple stock (non voting shares). This has been sold (2001) and Microsoft no longer hold Apple stock. At the time, the companies had an agreement to make Microsoft’s Internet Explorer the default browser for Apple’s Macintosh computers. Some say the investment was involving an antitrust lawsuit.
The Bill Gates owns Apple rumor (and all its derivatives ) have been circulating urban legend for quite some time.
My apologies. I missed that Microsoft had sold its Apple stock.
And now he has given us the amateurish, unimaginative, hackneyed, prescientific, curriculum-and-pedagogy distorting Powerpoint Bullet List for U.S. education: the Common [sic] Core [sic] State [sic] Standards [sic]. Unsurprising.
I had windows on my Mac long before Gates stole it and made it the nightmare that is Windows.
Windows is not original. Apple, DEC, IBM, and Xerox to name a few had prior implementations and technically superior in many ways. But Windows was marketed well.
If Bill Gates was one of my graduate students and was assigned to do a presentation on the CCSS and this was his presentation, he would earn a letter grade of “C” or lower. He clearly doesn’t have his facts straight, cannot present a logical and thought out rationale, and relies on “BSing” his way through his presentation. Someone needs to “give him the hook.” If ever there was a way to kill the CCSS, it’s allowing him to continue speaking about its value. Between Bill Gates and Arne Duncan, Harvard University doesn’t come off as an elite institution.
See also this important piece by the indefatigable Ms. Schneider:
I have often said the same thing about the CCSS. If a group of students gave me this as a project, I would commend them on their effort and explain that they had a LOT to learn before they attempted anything this ambitious because the material was, well, not informed, an example of one’s reach exceeding one’s grasp so far that almost nothing of substance was grasped at all. Admirable work for freshmen students of education. Not acceptable as national “standards.”
I’m curious about release of data from CC testing. This is Louisiana, selling the tests by issuing press releases on student surveys taken in the course of CC testing. Are the testing consortiums doing partial releases of the results of student surveys, or are states like Louisiana just cherry-picking and releasing positive spin to “validate” (their word) decisions adults made re: CC testing?
It doesn’t give me a whole lot of confidence on how testing data will be used by states. I think they’re already politicizing it to promote ed reform. Will there be partial releases of some data that states can then use to push a political agenda (in this case, ed reform)? I think that’s a problem. Students are mandated to take these tests. Should (partial) student survey results be released and then used politically, as Louisiana seems to be doing here?
http://www.postsouth.com/article/20140508/NEWS/140509600
I suspect this is a pretty misleading survey question. Sure, it’s easier to take a test on computer than using paper and pencil. Doesn’t tell you anything about the test itself. And when we’re seeing that students are finishing early, I’m assuming that it’s because 75% of the questions were skipped. Of course, without getting to look at the test itself (or even the wording of the survey questions), we really can’t learn a thing about what is going on here. You can count on anything coming from White and Roemer in Louisiana to be as disingenuous as anything from anyone anywhere about PARCC.
Well, the state press release is blatantly misleading because only half the students took the survey, so the real number is “80% of the 50% of students who took the survey”. The initial news reports had it as “12,500 of 25,000” which later morphed into “25,000”
Yet. They’re using “80%” which generates a really nice headline and allows the adults involved in this to say they were “validated” by the student survey, which really bothers me.
My understanding was we were going to be using this info they captured from students to benefit STUDENTS, not ed reform politicians in Louisiana. Are they going to release partial results? Because that will be spun, and used politically. I don’t know a thing about testing, but I do know how political spin works, and this release of a blaring “80%” headline (one that ignores that it’s 80% of 50%) seems manipulative and a misuse of what was a good faith effort by students to comply with a mandate. I don’t know if it’s PARRC or the state doing this, but it’s an issue for me because I don’t want my kid’s responses used to push a political agenda. That’s not fair to him.
I mean, come on. They’re using a partial release of the student surveys politically:
“The night before lawmakers were set to debate the merits of purchasing a Common Core-related standardized test for Louisiana, state education officials released parts of a survey about the assessment, showing that students prefer the computerized version of the exam.”
Is this a valid use of data they collected from students, particularly because they didn’t mention only half the students took the survey?
What other cherry-picked and politically-timed releases will we get? I thought this was all “pure science” and they’d use this stuff responsibly and fairly? Did the kids know they’d be part of the political strategy to fund CC testing?
Sample size is irrelevant if the sample isn’t random. If the sample isn’t random, the data are worthless. With random samples the margin of error depends on sample size. About 1200 gives a margin of error of 3%
I think it’s going to be up to individual public school decision-makers and school boards to resist the products associated with the Common Core. Obviously, there will be a huge sales push but there’s no reason responsible adults have to sign on to every gimmick that comes down the pike, despite the fact that lawmakers are basically openly pushing product at this point. This is an area where they DO have some discretion, unlike so many other ed reform mandates.
It’d be a good way for local public school people to take some control of this process. Be the person who says “no thanks, we’re not buying that”. I’d certainly appreciate it if my superintendent and school board used some prudence and discretion and resisted spending half the budget on new product and I don’t think I’m alone in that.
Chiari, if you find any of those “responsible adults” in decision-making positions, let me know.
I know some in local government. We just had a series of community meetings (we’re building a new school) and I was pleasantly surprised at how skeptical people were of magic tech bullets for schools. There was a LOT of concern about screens replacing teachers and a LOT of concern about cost and value.
I thought I was going to have to make my case, I was all ready to fight, and then I realized most people agreed with me 🙂
Apparently they’re not as sold on this as Arne Duncan is.
Great news! And where are you?
Gates is a MARKETER of BAD products pure and simple. He does not care nor does he have a clue. He is a wrecker and an ego maniac.
I’m reading a story from circa 1900 by Owen Wister that is surprisingly related to the current education reform. It’s called “How Doth the Spelling Bee,” and the plot is about a plutocrat named Masticator B. Fellows who is trying to simplify spelling to phonetic form. He has secretly convened 20 sympathetic professors from around the country (to his college) to fix and simplify the spelling of English. Here’s his speech to the professors: “Dear friends,” he said, ” be welcome. I am worth two hundred and forty-five millions. Thank God you are not. Thank God that you are poor. Thank God for your scanty meals and clothing, and your ceaseless failure to make both ends meet. Pray God you die poor. How I envy all your blessed privilege of struggle! Thank God, and now now to business.”
“Everything is getting better. Man is getting better. Woman is getting better. Life, Liberty, and Happiness — all getting better. And chickle [this is his newest venture — chewing gum]. Better and better. Then why not English Spelling? Dear friends, I expect results from you. Let us sing the Ode [a version of “My Country ‘Tis of Thee”].”
I may put another excerpt later.
delightful. Here’s the story, for those interested:
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23923
Peter Smyth
May 13, 2014 at 9:43 am
Great news! And where are you?
Rural Ohio. The whole thing was really interesting, because the district hired a consultant to “facilitate” the meetings (there were three meetings, about 40 people, parents, teachers, community members, etc.)
I felt the consultant was selling ed tech/blended learning too hard so I was really wary and was ready to push back the following day after his initial presentation, but I really didn’t have to. Most of the people there were skeptical.
I’m just fully confident in the ability of the tech industry to sell product. I don’t know why lawmakers and policy people would be selling it for them. If any of the the stuff is great, has value, it will eventually come into widespread use all by itself. We don’t need President Obama and Arne Duncan to sell it to us. I think the role of lawmakers and the public is to be skeptical of sales promotions that rely on public funding, not join in and cheerlead. We have a private sector and a public sector. There’s a LINE there for a reason.
Also? Bill Gates and Co. will be FINE. They will sell plenty of ed tech without a volunteer sales force made up of media and politicians 🙂
http://www.thenation.com/blog/177675/ted-mitchell-education-dept-nominee-has-strong-ties-pearson-privatization-movement#
“Ted Mitchell, the chief executive of the NewSchools Venture Fund, was nominated in October by President Obama to become the Under Secretary of the Department of Education.
As the administration continues to reshuffle its team, and confront new regulatory challenges, some view Mitchell’s nomination as a move towards greater privatization. In the coming months, the Department of Education will release “gainful employment” rules to rein in for-profit colleges, an experiment in proprietary education that many see as an unmitigated disaster.
As head of the NewSchools Venture Fund, Mitchell oversees investments in education technology start-ups. In July, Zynga, the creators of FarmVille, provided $1 million to Mitchell’s group to boost education gaming companies. Mitchell’s NewSchool Venture Fund also reportedly partners with Pearson, the education mega-corporation that owns a number of testing and textbook companies, along with one prominent for-profit virtual charter school, Connections Academy.”
He’s been confirmed, because apparently it’s important we not hear any diverse opinions at all in the USDOE and we hire people from the same narrow pool of 250 high-profile, celebrity ed reformers. God forbid there’s a public school person, right?
So, anyway, people would want to watch this, and see if the Obama Administration continues to fail to regulate for-profit edu-providers and whether this appointment has any intersect with that failure to regulate. We obviously have a huge regulatory capture problem in this country, and this revolving door isn’t helping.
State attorneys general have some prosecutorial power on for-profit rip-offs (which they have been using) but that’s not enough.
The common core = Educational dog food
Tender moist nuggets of cut and paste gibberish
Such a pithily accurate assessment!
Full of toxic residues and waste products.
Michelle Schneider deserves a MacArthur grant.
Media reported on April 28 that the “U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security advised users to stop using Microsoft Internet Explorer until patches are made.” If the reports aren’t flawed, a greater focus on quality products is merited. And, caution should be applied in the adoption of proposed Pearson/Microsoft educational packages.
Mercedes. But I definitely agree. However, the MacArthur grant is only given out, these days, to folks whose work is perceived to advance a neoliberal oligarchical agenda in some way.
Often in very subtle ways
After watching the tape of Gates’ response to CCS, his body language was a dead give away in demonstrating deception and lies. He seemed uncomfortable (squirmy) and inarticulate (reaching for words in attempt to bulls@#% his way through answering the question).
Schneider points out that he consistently errs on the details, suggesting that he is not fully engaged or interested. The fact is that these CEOs delegate everything to high paid consultants and thus can disown responsibility for success or failure. High paying (and I mean *very* high paying) consultancy — that’s privatization at work. No wonder consultants like it.
Which is how we got Windows.
And the school districts who hire “consultants” at $1,000 an hour are also just buying cover. If it doesn’t work out they can say, “Hey, we hired the best consultants. It’s not our fault.” Look at Bloomberg.
The cluelessness about fundamentals illustrated by this interview is typical of the ed deform crowd. These are people who think that ELA is just like math and that in both cases you can just make a list by grade level of everything that kids need to know and test to make sure that they know it. The devil, here, is in the details. But, some basics:
There are different kinds of learning and acquisition, and those have to be formulated differently, not in identical ways, as was done for these “standards.”
In the early grades, kids are on very different developmental timetables.
In the later grades, kids need to pursue, as part of their studies, unique paths both because that is how one nurtures intrinsic motivation and because a complex, diverse, pluralistic society needs–students find different paths. Kids are not widgets to be identically milled.