In response to a post about Bill Gates’ prediction about the future of American education, a reader writes:
| “Corporate society takes care of everything. And all it asks of anyone, all it’s ever asked of anyone ever, is not to interfere with management decisions.” – Rollerball (1975) |
I didn’t see “Rollerball” when the film was released in 1975. It is a dystopian film about the distant future in 2018. It is not so distant anymore.
Dystopian films and novels are warnings, not predictions.
I just finished re-reading Brave New World, which I must have read fifty years ago. There is so much about the novel I didn’t remember. It bears re-reading. I was struck by the planned rank-ordering of people. No need to test them to put them in their status as Alpha or Beta or Gamma or Epsilon. The rankings were selected at the time the babies were conceived in giant incubators. Every child is conditioned to believe that his ranking is just right for him. Those at the top look down on those at the bottom. And those at the bottom are happy they don’t have the responsibilities and burdens of those at the top.
Testing works like that. It gives each child a test score and says that she is “advanced” or “proficient” or “basic” or “below basic,” or some other terminology. There is some movement up or down to keep children hopeful that maybe next time….But eventually everyone understands which label they have, and it defines them. They are “advanced,” and they go to an Ivy League school. They are “proficient” and they get into a good state university. They are “basic” and they go to community college. They are “below basic,” and they drop out or get a GED if they are industrious.
The genius of our system is that students are taught that they get what they deserve! They are their ranking. This echoed as I read Brave New World?
In the novel, the entire state is planned to make everyone happy all the time, to have no time to think or criticize or dream. Like Bill Gates, the planners of this world want everyone to be busy all the time and engaged all the time. That’s how society works best, when dreamers and individualists are outcasts, and everyone else is busy and engaged.
The other thing that makes this world work well is its emphasis on consumerism. Everyone is taught from infancy that old things are worthless, everything must be new. Toys are multi-part, complicated and costly. Reminded me of my last foray into Toys R Us. Every toy had many moving parts, the parts could easily be broken, and the whole thing was made of cheap plastic. I didn’t want to buy anything. I got restless and left as soon as possible. At my grandson’s fifth birthday, he got 20 gifts, each of them a complicated thing in a box. At one point, as he was opening them, he said with a note of disappointment, “Oh, it’s another box.” I understood what he meant. O Brave New World.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Gattaca is another excellent film along these lines.
Is Brave New World still read in high school? I’ve heard that the Common Core places more emphasis on non-fiction reading. Will this affect students’ exposure to Brave New World and similar books? The connecttions that you’ve drawn from your re- reading illustrate the importance fiction has for students trying to make sense of their world and themselves. I hope the pull away from classic fiction in high school English is just a rumor.
Yes, at least at my high school along with 1984, Animal Farm and Fahrenheit 451.
If you think reading fiction about a planned society is scary stuff, try reading about the reality of it actually in the making. Secretary Duncan tweeted this last night:
“Arne Duncan@arneduncan
2 great #highered articles. 1 high tech, 1 high touch- both designed to increase completion rates http://nyti.ms/QdHuSz http://nyti.ms/MxRzXd”
Here are the links to the two articles well worth pondering.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/education/edlife/colleges-awakening-to-the-opportunities-of-data-mining.html?_r=2
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/education/edlife/the-new-community-college-cunys-multimillion-dollar-experiment-in-education.html
I have written many reflections on these issues over the years, but have shared very few of them. It seems appropriate to share this one now though since I am not alone in my thoughts….sorry for the length- not sure how to put a doc in here.
Parallels to Dystopia
I was never a big science fiction fan, but Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 keeps creeping into my thoughts as of late. I read Bradbury’s classic as a teenager and was bothered by his futuristic society where books are outlawed and television has replaced independent thinking. People in this Bradburian society are numb to the basic human need to connect with each other, and blind to the beauty of nature. I remember thinking how unrealistic and ridiculous the plot was. I’m not so sure about that anymore.
The book’s main character is a fireman named Guy Montag, whose job is to burn the forbidden books when they are discovered. One day he responds to an alarm where he finds an old woman who would rather be burned alive with her beloved books than give them up. He wonders why, if books are so bad, she would be willing to sacrifice her life for them. His curiosity compels him to steal a book from her house. Unable to forget about the woman, he soon questions the value of his profession and his blind loyalty to the rules. Eventually, Montag becomes a hunted fugitive and finds refuge with a small group of people committed to saving the written word.
Lately I can’t help but wonder just how far we are from Bradbury’s dystopian society where free thought is not only discouraged, but actively suppressed. I still have the freedom to put these thoughts on paper, but I do so with the knowledge that asking questions and voicing dissent is considered by many to be troublesome. People rely on their televisions for information, unaware or indifferent to the fact that they are inundated with controlled messages in the form of mainstream news. The internet, despite its distortions, still offers us a means to seek the truth through research. Sadly, most people show little desire to delve deeper than the surface of an issue. They seem content to accept simplistic, unsubstantiated claims as gospel truth, suggesting that reality and fiction are closer than we believe.
As a teacher, I notice many parallels between Bradbury’s book and current education policies. I have watched the damaging waves of education reform surge forward like a tsunami, reforming nothing but destroying everything. Misguided solutions are sold to the public as vital to our economic survival, and the only way to fix a troubled education system. Concerned citizens are asked to trust and embrace these changes while the media dutifully reinforce the message. The reliability of both the data and the methods, wielded by policy makers with their own agendas, is rarely questioned. What’s even worse is, as the collateral damage to our most vulnerable children becomes increasingly apparent, it is ignored. There is no outrage from the citizenry, no demand for fairness and compassion. The only stirrings are the stifled protests of a few brave souls. Speaking out against authority has become a rebellious act of heresy.
As a result, I find myself questioning the value of what I do, much like Montag did. My students, surrounded by poverty, violence, neglect and other social ills, desperately need critical thinking skills. Their survival depends on their ability to question and challenge the circumstances that shape their living conditions in order to visualize a better world. They need to be creative problem solvers who understand the importance of their role in humanity. It’s my role to foster these skills.
Yet, my instruction is confined and controlled by inadequate curriculum and leadership. I fail to maximize their potential or properly equip them for the struggles ahead. Instead, I teach them to regurgitate evidence from a text to support their answer on an open response question. I teach them to find the “correct” answers, pre-determined by well-paid publishing companies, leaving little room for personal interpretation and creativity. I teach them to completely fill in bubbles, and to use the process of elimination on multiple choice questions. I teach the required skills and strategies, and I record all the data. At the end of the day, I am painfully aware of an emptiness created by the craving to inspire a thirst for knowledge and a passion for self-expression. I am left craving the autonomy to teach.
When I first realized that test prep was the guiding force behind every decision our schools were making, I did not remain silent. Naively, I believed I could join the professional organizations that influence policy and reason with them. I volunteered for dozens of committees and became involved in the local and state teachers’ union. I wrote letters, sent emails, spoke at public hearings, and met with elected officials in an attempt to educate those whose misguided views were destroying the profession I love. In the meantime, however, I did far too much of what I was told to do in my classroom, even though I knew I could, and should, give my students much more.
I tried to rationalize my compliance by saying I was following directives, much like Montag was told to burn books. But I am awake enough to know that what’s happening is morally wrong, and I have crossed the line where I can simply dismiss it as part of the job. My guilt over inaction heavily outweighs my fear of risk. So I find myself becoming increasingly vocal and resistant in an attempt to advocate for my students and my profession. Some of my colleagues wonder why I want to make waves by asking questions. They tell me we cannot change things. Others join me in my outrage. But most sit by silently and fearfully, waiting for someone to give them a voice.
Montag found refuge with the “book people” while he witnessed the demise of his whole world. Likewise, I need to connect with others who want to tell the truth about the loss of humanity and reason in our schools.
I don’t know if there is a happy ending to this story. Maybe someday we can build a new and better education system from the ruins that inevitably lay ahead. All I know is that I want to be a part of that.
You have come to the right place.
The resistance is safe here.
RAC, my experience parallels yours in many ways. I remember raising the issue of ALEC and the new VAM procedure instituted by our district at a faculty meeting last year. Out of the 50+ people present only 3 came up to me and asked me for more information. The rest seemed to think I was a conspiracy theory nut. Most had no idea what I was talking about and challenged me with the perennial “this too will pass, like all empty-headed reforms. When I pointed out that NCLB had not passed on they were silent and walked away.
I thought that I would be safe discussing these issues in a professional manner and by backing my arguments up with detailed research. Now, I’m not so naive. After years of sitting on committees and being asked to participate in district initiatives I found myself suddenly isolated and passed over and I realized that by talking about the reforms and questioning their validity I had developed a reputation as a troublemaker. With people being let go right and left I understand the fear and reticence but I don’t understand the total passivity.
My biggest fear is that teachers will be caught completely unawares and when the firings start decimating our ranks it will be too late to do much of anything to challenge the system. I have been fascinated by how people whom I respect as professionals with good common sense have jumped on the bandwagon and become cheerleaders for reforms that are clearly designed to eliminate them altogether.
Keep up the good fight! Every one of us counts at this point and more than me know.
Brian,
From a movie a while back “May the Force be with you”. I hope you continue to fight the good fight. And that struggle will never be over, unfortunately.
“I thought that I would be safe discussing these issues in a professional manner and by backing my arguments up with detailed research. Now, I’m not so naive. After years of sitting on committees and being asked to participate in district initiatives I found myself suddenly isolated and passed over and I realized that by talking about the reforms and questioning their validity I had developed a reputation as a troublemaker.”
I was forced out of one district by being a “troublemaker” or as I prefer a Mr. Teachbad certified “difficult teacher”. And in my current district I’m seen, quite frankly, by most of the staff as crazy. “Oh, he’s that crazy ol Spanish teacher, he questions everything and never has answers, he only complains”. Which is wrong because they don’t want to hear the rational, logical critiques nor listen to the answers and solutions I have, ones that will protect the students from the ongoing madness that is overwhelming teachers. One is never safe in this struggle against those who seek money, power and fame off the backs of the students.
Thanks
RAC,
¡Sigue la lucha! ¡Estoy contigo!
Continue to fight the good fight. My thoughts are with you as a fellow “questioner/dissenter” of the myriad current educational “malpractices”.
Thank you!
Newspeak and Doublethink are alive and well in the United States.
Several years ago I re-read both Brave New World and 1984 as my main summer reading.
Since, I have told every adult I know to re-read both these books as they have quite a different impact when you read them as an adult as opposed to high school or even college.
Clearly we are living in Orwellian times.
Each reading I take away something else. I teach early childhood college classes at night. My expertise, if one can call it that, is early literacy. I tell my students each semester that in 1984 words are removed each year from the dictionary rather than added. The fewer words one knows and the smaller the vocabulary, the more difficult it is to think complex thoughts. This is why there is such a huge gap in early childhood classes between affluent and poverty schools. The difference in the vocabulary of the two groups exceeds 400,000 words at the age of 4 and the gap only gets wider as the children get older. It’s not easy to think big thoughts with few words.
Diane, re-read 1984 as well.
Will do.
The definition of a classic is that it can be read again and again, and every time you read it, you learn something new.
The idea is this: “you read a classic, and the classic reads you.”
The truly ironic thing about bill gates’s plan is that if he were subjected to it, he would be placed – on the bottom!! Because he dropped out of University. Not finishing what one begins is a sign of personal weakness, ineptitude, and failure. heh.
“The genius of our system is that students are taught that they get what they deserve! They are their ranking.”
Unfortunately oh so true.
Last year I was part of a committee that was to look into implementing BPIS or is that PBISS or was it PB&J, anyway, Positive Behavior Intervention Support System. Which by the way does exactly what your statement says. They stuck the new alternative high school administrator with us-poor guy got me and a couple of other certifiable Mr. Teachbad teachers. Well we looked into and managed to get the idea killed, hopefully RIP and it’s not a zombie. They asked for our thoughts, ideas etc. . . (not a wise strategy with us teachers who will speak our minds). Below is what I wrote:
Realpolitik: When one succumbs to realpolitik speak one gives up his own agency and allows others to dictate the dialogue and hence outcomes. If one doesn’t agree with the realpolitik then one must do all in her might to oppose and attempt to change it through rational thought, dialogue and action.
What is the guiding function of public education and government in general in Missouri? One has to look to the Missouri Constitution: For public education “A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the general assembly shall establish and maintain free public schools for the gratuitous instruction of all persons in this state within ages not in excess of twenty-one years as prescribed by law.”-Art IX, Sec 1(a) And the responsibilities of governance in Missouri: “That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry; that all persons are created equal and are entitled to equal rights and opportunity under the law; that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design.”-Art I, Sec 2.
Therefore, we, in public education, need to adhere to the concept of having our policies and practices “cause no harm” in order to assure a student’s gaining essential “knowledge and intelligence” to enjoy the rights and liberties guaranteed by law. And, although, it appears that BP(I)S may be an attempt to at least cause less harm, I’m not sure. Anything less is barbarous and causes violence and harm to our students. If a policy or practice in public education does not “cause no harm” then it is wrong, period! When the laws, policies and practices of the government contradict the constitution we must oppose them. To continue a policy or practice that causes harm is to cause an injustice to the students and therefore is a failure of the governance with which we are charged.
Foucault’s Subjectification:
. . . is concerned with the with the process of self-formation and the way conformity is achieved by problematizing student activities and opening them up to observation and punishment. What does it mean to be a “self” and how the student as an individual is pressurized into creating him/herself in a given fashion (dictated by the schools/society.) The individual student defines him/herself as normal in relation to factors such as age, gender, sexual orientation, health, race, family background, educational level and many others. This “power of the norm”-all individual actions are now within a “field” of comparison which subjects the student to various pressures and attempts to “normalize” him/her-can be overwhelming. A “normal” student then comes to view him/herself as a member of the “homogenous” society in which he/she lives. The student “subjectifies” what the school authorities have to say about and how they act upon him/her.
Hacking’s “Looping Effect”:
. . . in discussing different kinds of “subjects/objects” of scientific inquiry Hacking is concerned the how the difference of classifications in the natural sciences where the object of study has no “knowledge” of being studied or being classified and therefore cannot change its “behavior” contrasts with the classification of an individual being studied in the social sciences. To use his example, a quark doesn’t know that it exists, is named such and therefore does not change its behavior due to it being named or classified as a quark. In the social sciences, e.g., in education discourse, the knowledge of a “name or classification” by the student causes an interaction with that particular name/classification making it (the name/classification) unstable over time. And that knowledge and its interactive consequences effect the individual over time both positively and/or negatively.
Combining Foucault’s and Hackings concepts I call it “internalization”. Whether for the good or for the bad, students will internalize the way the schools describe, label, sort and separate and interact with them.
I question whether or not BP(I)S would be handled effectively to prevent “the bad” from being foisted upon the students.
Both books, “Brave New World” and “1984” are worth a re read in context of contemporary state of the world. But the one thing missing at the time of their being written, was the saturation of technology to facilitate and reinforce the behavioral manipuation and mind control. If you can find a copy of a video of the original version of a movie, “Harrison Bergeron”, it takes the prospect of the “digitizing” of humanity further.
Based on a futuristic story by Kurt Vonnegut, parallels can be seen with the two books but with a technical app to control the mindsets of the society while the victims find comfort in their prescribed level of knowledge and discernment. “Harrison” is the misfit whose thoughts won’t conform to the mindset which the controlling technological mechanism adminsitered through headbands, which used in classrooms and everyone’s lives is designed to do. Cyber curricula, Pavlovian Direct Instruction which is tailor made for Distance Learning, RFID tracking, etc. has been tested with a “toe in the water” in one form another the past few years. The “digitizing” of humanity may be the agenda which the technologic oligarchy is only too happy and willing to nurture in the name of “progress”. If government funding is available for the journey, public/private parnerships in “education” are the perfect vehicles to pursue it.
Confusion has come to reign re: the definition of public and private context of education (schools). It seems to be missed that the traditional distinction between public and private schools was related who paid for each. Public schools were financed through tax dollars, administerd by individuals whose salaries were paid with moneys generated by taxes, with policy set by elected representation. Private schools received their designation of “private” for being part of or sponsored by private organizations, individuals or religious institutions, financially supported by private organizations, indiviudals or religious institutions. Source of the funding was the defining
element which separated public schools, from private schools. Period. Once that definition became blurred with incremental change in definitions to allow private schools tto accept funding or services in the name of general welfare of students in peripheral services, Pandora’s Box was opened for the confounding of concepts bringing on vouchers, and morphing into the even more complicated concept of charters.
There is nothing wrong with the CONCEPT of private schools. The more the better, but only if private schools are defined as privately funded and administered schools. If the Gates and Foundation and others chose to set up chains of their own privately funded
“Gates” Schools, more power to them. If they offered scholarships…more power to them.
But using private money to collaborate with elected officials and unelected bureaucrats
to devise and underwrite plans for public (tax funded) schools new political definitions have been created.
Long time opponents of vouchers such as myself, do not see vouchers as privatizing of public schools, but vouchers being the vehicle to public-ize private schools. The immutable fact remains that what government funds, government ultimately controls. That is as it should be if there is anything left of a concept of taxation with representation. That is also the flaw in the thinking of charter school advocates who think that charters can be
autonomous entities operating outside the purvue of those who control the government purse strings. It is an oxymoron. Get back to original definition of what is public and what is private and layers of contemporary conflict and confusion will melt away.
Thanks Mary, My 24 year old son often reminds me that I am looking at Ed reform all wrong. You have just reminded me how wise he is. You are correct, instead of privatizing public ed, we truly are publicizing private ed. Great thought!
I am trying to keep an open mind, difficult as it is, because I have always been open to new possibilities. An open mind has always served me well, causing me to try new things and to improve as an educator. Yet I find myself feeling distrustful of these reforms. A little voice nagging me to be wary.
My own two young adult children tell me that they think this reform will be good. That I shouldnt be afraid of change. Is there a way to coexist, the old with the new? What will the resulting system look like in the end? Education has been evolving for some time now. I have done this since the 80’s. What is different this time is that the education experts, those with the actual education credentials, have been left out of the conversation. Why is that? Well, we all know the answer.
So what do we do? Fight the change, or accept it and be part of the change? How do we best educate children? I know what I believe is best for my students. Only time will tell.
Work Hard, Be Nice
How about “Work hard, be kind”? It was the school motto of one of the schools I worked in and it was a good and kind place to be.
Shirley,
Not sure if my sarcasm came across: my quote is the KIPP slogan, which I think is appropriate, since it reveals some of the ideologies underpinning the Brave New World of corporate education reform.
You quote, needless to say, is far superior, yet the values it implies are being forcibly eliminated from the schools.
Reblogged this on Kmareka.com and commented:
Diane Ravitch reflects on dystopian visions with their eerie likenesses to corporate education reform, and dishes up the truth about kids’ toys today…
Khan Academy creates 3,000 instructional videos and makes them available free to all who want them. But some in the established education hierarchy say “No ! These do not come from us. This is bad. All bad. This is dissent. This must be stopped.”
Beware those who point Brave New World fingers in an attempt to establish an alternative Brave New World of their choosing.
About your Brave New World reference, recently I have been thinking of that book a lot. My memory holds that one of the creepiest moments was near the end. When the population was so jaded by the constant “new” that they crowded around a dying man; to witness something new to them. Didn’t they then try to experience “dying” themselves? — You are correct. I should make time to re-read the book. 🙂 The reason I was thinking of BNW is the gratuitous proliferation of “reality” TV. I am afraid that my grandkids will know more about Snooki and Lindsey’s grooming habits, than they will know about the American struggle for equal human rights. Certainly they won’t learn even the Preamble to our Constitution.
That’s close. Actually, there is a special center for dying in the book and young children are sent to observe people dying so they will be conditioned not to be upset by it. One of the characters is there to hold his mother’s hand, and is grieving, and gets very upset when she is swarmed in her last moments by infants racing through the ward and larking about.
Yes, I too re-read Huxley’s “Brave New World” about a year ago. The use of testing isn’t necessarily evil. You need to find out where the kids are for diagnostic purposes But to slot them into lifelong tracks – that is wrong.
As a parent/education advocate, I am so very happy to read the comments and know there are other malcontents and troublemakers amongst the teaching corps, who see the parallels to 1984 etc…
Being called crazy for drawing attention to this situation isn’t confined only to the teaching ranks… many parents/communitymembers don’t want to go there either…
so, IF we are headed down a dystopian pathway and the foundation for that is being laid in schools and IF we agree it’s not where we want our world to go/the future we want for our children, THEN the question is, IS IT DELIBERATE? The answer to that dictates how we respond to this phenomenon…
Now me, watching what’s going on in other spheres of activity in our society… well I tend more and more to think it IS deliberate…
Sahila ChangeBringer, your observations are confirmed and documented. Samuel L.Blumenfeld writes in the forward to the Revised and Abridged Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, by Charlotte iserbyt, 2011, “One of the interesing insights revealed by these documents (contained in the book), is how the social engineers use a deliberately created education ‘crisis’ to move their agenda forward by offering radical reforms that are sold to the public as fixing the crisis—which they never do. The new reforms simply set the stage fo the next crisis, which provides the pretext for the next move forward. This is the dialectical process at work, a process our behavioral engineers have learned to use very effectively, Its success depends on the ability of the ‘change agents’ to continually deceive the public which tends to believe anything the experts tell them”…
Recently, Masterpiece aired The Last Enemy from 2008 and I DVRed it but just got a chance to watch it. If the Total Information Awareness (TIA) system portrayed there isn’t the database planned for us by Gates et al, I don’t know what is. In case you haven’t seen it, you can catch it for free on Yidio here: http://www.yidio.com/show/the-last-enemy Really scary stuff.
I dont know how many of you are into Jung and Campbell and transpersonal psychology stuff – collective unconscious, archetypes (characters AND themes/stories) and how they play out in real life and in our culture/stories (politics, books, movies, music, art etc)…
AND it’s always been a question for me, in that context, which comes first – life imitatating art or art imitating life?
WHEN one looks at what is happening in the world and in education from that view, it’s hard to deny we are well on the road to the reality presented in these books/movies…
Maybe we won’t be able to change anything until we accept and acknowledge the bigger picture being played out, of which we each are a part…
Maybe it’s time to call it for what it is, to unequivocally declare which side we each are on and to begin to do what is really necessary to turn this around ie – put it all on the line…