Mercedes Schneider has undertaken an immense task.
She decided to spend her free time–when she is not teaching–trying to figure out how much the Gates Foundation paid various organizations to write, develop, implement, promote, and advocate for the Common Core standards.
This is a herculean job because the foundation has been so free-handed with its money. To its credit, the Gates Foundation has a website that enables researchers to identify their grants over time. At a certain point, as you go through the list of who got how much money to “promote” the CCSS, you start to wonder “who DIDN’T get Gates money?”
This is her first post, where she shows that the Gates Foundation underwrote the organizations writing the Common Core standards: the National Governors Association, Student Achievement Partners (David Coleman), the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve. She sums up what she found: “In total, the four organizations primarily responsible for CCSS– NGA, CCSSO, Achieve, and Student Achievement Partners– have taken $147.9 million from Bill Gates.” This first post also includes a list of think tanks and major education organizations that received funding from Gates to promote the CCSS.
Her second post lists organizations that influence state and local decisions, to encourage them to promote CCSS.
The third post lists the state education departments and local school districts that have received grants from the Gates Foundation to implement CCSS.
The fourth post lists sixteen universities that received Gates’ funding to promote CCSS.
The fifth post lists the foundations and institutes that have received Gates’ funding to promote CCSS.
In her sixth and final post in the series, Schneider lists the businesses and nonprofits that have received Gates’ funding to promote CCSS.
Schneider writes: “My desire is that the information I have presented in this series (and elsewhere on my blog) might be used as ammunition in the hands of those oppressed by the likes of Gates and his reform purchasing power. Contact your legislators. Attend those school board meeting equipped with information about the driving forces behind CCSS and other detrimental so-called reforms. Speak out, and when you are ignored, speak again.”
The larger question is posed at the first post:
Bill Gates likes Common Core. So, he is purchasing it. In doing so, Gates demonstrates (sadly so) that when one has enough money, one can purchase fundamentally democratic institutions.
I do not have billions to counter Gates. What I do have is this blog and the ability to expose the purchase.
I might be without cash, but I am not without power.
Can Bill Gates buy a foundational democratic institution? Will America allow it? The fate of CCSS will provide crucial answers to those looming questions.
The bottom line is that the U.S. Department of Education badly wants national standards, but it is prohibited by law from influencing curriculum and instruction in the nation’s schools. So, a deal is struck. Gates pays to create the CCSS, and Arne Duncan uses the power of the federal purse to push states and districts to adopt them, then uses his bully pulpit to warn that the future of the nation is in peril unless these very standards are swiftly implemented. The problem is that all this happened so swiftly, and with so little public understanding, that the public is in the dark. A recent Gallup poll showed that most people never heard of the CCSS and had no idea what they were. Instead of taking a decade to build consensus, the Gates Foundation and the Department of Education plunged ahead. Instead of developing a democratic process in which teachers, teacher educators, scholars, specialists in the education of children with disabilities, specialists in the education of English learners, and specialists in early childhood education were consulted at every step in the process; instead of trying out the standards to see how they work in real classrooms with real children, the Gates Foundation and the Department of Education took a shortcut.
Now, they are paying a price for taking the shortcut. In the absence of knowledge, evidence, experience, and a genuine consensus, ignorance is feeding the flames of distrust and suspicion. Conspiracy theories abound. People make wild claims about the standards, saying they will “dumb down” the children, or saying whatever they want because so few people–aside from the ones who are on Gates’ expansive payroll–have read the standards and have any idea how we suddenly came to have national standards that every district and every school must adopt. Some states have dropped out of the assessment consortia that Arne Duncan created to test the CCSS with a grant of $350 million of federal dollars. Some districts and some states may drop the CCSS if the opposition continues to build.
Twenty years from now, will CCSS exist? It is hard to tell at this point. If history is any guide, teachers will adapt the standards to conform to what they already know. They will be changed, they will be revised on the ground. If the CCSS assessments continue to fail large majorities of students, as they did in Kentucky and New York, parents will turn angry at the assessments, not their schools or their teachers.
It is a mess, and it gets messier every day.
In a country as diverse as this one, in a country with fifty state systems and a high degree of decentralized authority, there are no shortcuts to the democratic process. When historians look back, that is very likely the conclusion they will draw.

The lack of information, or easily accessed information, has made education as formidable as medicine in our society. We can only hope that parents and teachers will talk to each other and work to enhance education and take the business out of the system…putting real learning in its place
LikeLike
“If history is any guide, teachers will adapt the standards to conform to what they already know. They will be changed, they will be revised on the ground.”
Gates should have suspected this from his experience rolling out business software. The end users almost always devise work-arounds to deal with local problems that the engineers couldn’t or wouldn’t anticipate. Of course, a national curriculum is that much more complicated to implement technocratically and it, too, will be revised on the ground.
As an aside, greatschools.org (which I believe is funded by the Gates foundation) has a short 2 question survey that pops up when you visit the site. 1- How much do you know about the common core standards? and 2 – What is your opinion about the common core standards?
LikeLike
More Common Core news: There’s a very important article in this month’s Education Researcher. “Challenging the Research Base of the Common Core State Standards
A Historical Reanalysis of Text Complexity” systematically refutes the idea that forms the foundation of the Common Core for English Language Arts–namely that the reading materials in school have gotten easier over time (and therefore we need to raise the bar). This new study shows that, on the contrary, reading materials in school have INCREASED in difficulty over the past several decades. If this study is correct–and it certainly looks like a solid piece of work–then the whole basis for the CCSS for ELA is seriously flawed. In addition, the study pokes some holes in the entire public school decline narrative.
LikeLike
Thank You! I’ve been saying this in all PD and told that I am wrong
LikeLike
Thanks for posting this info. Here’s a link to the study: http://edr.sagepub.com/content/42/7/381.full.pdf+html?ijkey=JV4K0MyCHPsyE&keytype=ref&siteid=spedr
David Coleman has made other big claims about current practice in writing and literature study that won’t stand up to scrutiny. The whole “CCS” enterprise (at least for language arts) is riddled with false claims and false assumptions.
Informed teachers will adapt and work around the flaws, but it would be better if they spoke up right now about the shaky foundation of CCS. It’s a shame so many people are being paid so much to build an edifice that’s doomed to crumble and fall. And what about the kids who’ll be buried in the rubble?
When will these “reformers” start paying attention to neuroscience and common sense? Inappropriate academic tasks and tests that are too frequent, too long, and too difficult for little kids will cause negative stress. Undue stress interferes with learning and turns kids off to school. So does the drudgery of practicing the same pointless exercise over and over until a student can perform well on a (poorly constructed) test. But that’s what Coleman’s prescription amounts to. And that’s what Bill Gates bought for America’s children. It’s a crying shame.
LikeLike
Business-types like Gates and Duncan are frustrated that after AT LEAST 25 years the “education establishment” has not been able to adopt standards (you may have had a seat at the table for Goals 2000, which was the first time I recall hearing the call for high standards at a national level… and I’m sure all readers recall A Nation At Risk which was the first time I recall hearing that our schools were “failing”)… and the frustration of the business-types is not completely unwarranted… look at our record: for the past several decades we’ve had internal reading wars, math wars, constructivism vs. traditional stand-and-deliver, social promotion vs. high standards; etc etc…. not to mention the battles on our flanks over “controversial” books, evolution, and an array of social issues that impinge on our efforts to engage in serious discussions about instruction… Oh, and let’s not forget each school board’s annual debates on bus routes, budgets, and building improvements… And as we’ve fired salvos at each other and dealt with parents who don’t like Harry Potter books because they are anti-Christian (this really happened to me!), the business world moved from main frame computers, land lines, and faxes to handheld technology and from organizations full of middle managers and professional staff to lean-and-mean organizations who outsource as much as possible… and those business leaders who led the charge to introduce technology, downsize and outsource are frustrated that those of us who work in democratic organizations haven’t followed suit… and the business-types are capitalizing on the current crisis in public funding to inject their ideas in ALL publicly operated entities (i.e. privatization of parking meters, road construction, national park concessions, etc)
We who support public education need to get our act together or we will be overrun by an alliance of the frustrated tech entrepreneurs/businessmen like Bill Gates and the anti-“government-schools” crowd in the Tea Party… We’ve got our work cut out because while the public may be buying the anti-privatization argument they are still buying the “no new taxes” argument and their confidence in the government is waning with every passing day… and providing the kinds of remedies we all support (pre-kindergarten, accessible post-secondary education, equitable fundings for schools, etc) require additional resources, political will, and confidence in our governments at all levels…
I DO think public education will prevail because it is grounded in democracy, and democracy seeks to do the greatest good for the greatest number.
LikeLike
In the last 6 months we have beaten the billionaires 3 times now going on 4 times with the corrupt iPad fiasco. I am sending the LAUSD Board of Education all these articles on other school districts paying up to over $2,500 for an iPad. This is the larges corrupt rip off of students ever. Overpriced toys are what they are. 32GB of memory is junk. Why Apple when 98% of business’s worldwide use Windows. Now, I hate windows 7, but, this is what is used. So why have them learn on what they will not use unless into art, video or music. At those Apple excells. The rest, my cheap laptop runs circles around those top of the line MacBooks the board members have, so what advantage do they have except they are KOOL. The most stolen item today is the iPhone because it is a status symbol. Not many people really need one, they are kool if they do have one.
First, after two years of joining the black and brown communities against MTA we got lucky and all joined with Beverly Hills which was beyond their political imagination and we stopped a 1/2 cent sales tax until 2069 for $90 billion, $300 billion with interest with almost no money just hard work. Then we got Zimmer elected without one cent by convincing another candidate to give their votes to Zimmer to prevent the super charter school privatizer financed by the billionaires from getting in. Third, we got Ratliff elected by getting the Ravich readers and Diane to get out and support Monica Ratliff again against the billionaires. The Ravich people doubled her money and national support and both Zimmer and Ratliff squeaked by with a 1.8% advantage. Any win is good to stop the billionaires. Now we are taking them on with a full attack on the iPads and the corruption there. This blog and the posts have given us dramatic ammunition on this with the stories about the failures here and in England. I guarantee you after being on the David Cruz Show on talk radio twice in one week and these other failures which are immediately sent to the board they will crumble or they will be driven out for being dramatic failures and being bought and sold. No rational person could continue with this otherwise.
We thank all of you for the information and ideas gained by reading and commenting on the Diane Ravich Blog.
LikeLike
Mercedes Schneider, we cannot thank you enough for–as I see it–continuing with Diane’s detailed, scholarly work. All of us can write here, can read & analyze, can forward blogs and e-mails (& some of us are excellent bloggers!), can spread the word and can teach and parent.
But–as we’ve seen from Diane’s example, not many (if any!) of us are skilled to the point of being educational historians–fact gatherers and impeccable statisticians–in order to beat the more ignorant reformers at their own game, which is cherry-picking history (if, even, taking it into consideration at all) & providing false data based, in part, upon extremely flawed and invalid, unreliable tests & other such nonsense.
A million kudos to Mercedes, Education Hero Extraordinaire!
LikeLike
Thank you, Retired. I appreciate your enthusiastic words. 🙂
LikeLike
Yes Dr. Schneider, the taxpayers really need your investigative reporting. The issue is so complex but goes to the heart of who and what our country will become. Is a public / private partnership worth anything if “the public” is never part of the conversation? The “public” was never part of the Race ToThe Top/Common Core decision. Rather than slamming the Tea Party (not you) on this issue we might ask ourselves why they are the loudest ones defending parental consent and opposing unfunded mandates while our President pretends he doesn’t even know this conversation is taking place. Rotten to the core – politicians are all for sale – Democrats too.
LikeLike
“When historians look back, that is very likely the conclusion they will draw.”
I hope so.
I hope some already are.
LikeLike
Thank you, Mercedes Schneider! I continue to share with otherw what I learn about Gates and Common Core.
LikeLike
Important information that all teachers should know in depth. Excellent reference material for this fight. Thank you SO much!
LikeLike
Work-arounds will be sorely needed because the new CCSS in ELA are a mess, and so are the tests based on them. Mercedes Schneider is a national treasure!!!
LikeLike
Mercedes, read my post about inBloom, attached to Diane’s post on “Andrea Gabor: inBloom, Student Data: Follow the Money.” I think that the funding of the Common Core by Gates was part of an overall strategic plan. In that post, I lay out the reasons why I believe this to be true.
It all comes down to this: Arne Duncan’s chief of staff tells us that “The new standards are about creating national markets for products that can be brought to scale.” That’s one of those moments when the truth slips through. That’s the key to the whole “reform” movement.
The national standards are an essential part of a strategic business plan. inBloom is, too. The whole plan was basically laid out in the “Blueprint” for K-12 education that Arne Duncan published at the beginning of his tenure. He has been the facilitator of this plan.
LikeLike
In that blueprint, Duncan called for implementation of the new standards, implementation of computerized tests based on those, a new nationwide database of student responses and test scores, adaptive curricula linked to that database, and, of course, a computer for every student to make it all possible. The new national database (inBloom) was to be the gateway, the toll-gate-keeper and toll-taker. Curricula were to be delivered online, based on those student responses, with the owners of the database taking a cut and having monopoly control because such a database would not be replicable by any other group.
LikeLike
For that to work at the envisioned scale, there would have to be a single set of national standards. Delivering those new adaptive curricula, via that one curricular portal, based on 50 different sets of standards or based on the desires of free local communities able to make their own decisions about standards and curricula wouldn’t work. For the strategic business plan to work, there had to be a set of national standards first. Those they managed to push through with no national debate, no national discussion. Now they are on to phase 2.
LikeLike
and there they will hit the wall.
LikeLike
I truly hope they hit the wall. The entire vision is unconstitutional to say the least, and quite horrific in the grand scheme. No single governmental entity should have that much centralized control and power over the entire present and future of our children based on such ephemeral information as test results.
LikeLike