Bill Gates released an advance copy of his speech to the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, and as reported in the Huffington Post, he defended the Common Core standards as the key to creativity in the classroom.
The article says that the Gates Foundation had spent $75 million on the standards, but we know from Mercedes Schneider’s study of the Gates’ website that the foundation has spent nearly $200 million to pay for every aspect of the Common Core: the writing, the reviews, the evaluation, the implementation, the promotion and advocacy by numerous groups inside the Beltway and across the nation.
Gates told the teachers:
“Gates argued that America’s education system currently does not prepare students adequately for college, because it’s not asking enough of them. So the transition to the new standards is hard because it has to be, he said, and asked teachers to explain the standards to local families.
While the initiative was supported by most state schools chiefs and governors, a recentpoll from Achieve, a group that supports the Core, found that almost two-thirds of American voters have heard “nothing” or “not much” about the effort.
Gates went on to address critiques that the Common Core represents a national curriculum, a federal takeover or the end of innovation. He said these claims are false and distract from teaching — and that teachers can provide the most effective response to critics.”
This blogger created an infographic to show “how Bill Gates bought the Common Core,” relying on the information gathered by Schneider from the Gates Foundation website. She says the total spent by Gates was closer to $300 million.
Of course, $300 million is not much to a foundation as large as the Gates Foundation, but it is not peanuts either. Clearly, Bill Gates believes that if everyone in every school studies the same material, then there will be equity for all. That is a theory that has yet to be demonstrated.
And in any discussion of the rapid adoption of the CCSS by 45 or 46 states, it is best to be frank and acknowledge that this movement was not spontaneous; it occurred because the U.S. Department made adoption of the standards a requirement for states to be eligible for a piece of $4.3 billion in Race to the Top funding.
There seems to be a concerted effort on the part of Common Core advocates to halt the erosion of support that is occurring in states across the nation. In the past week or so, major editorials have appeared in many newspapers defending the Common Core, and the Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable have agreed to redouble their campaign to persuade opponents to support the CCSS.
What Gates’ presentation demonstrates is that he really doesn’t understand the reasons for the pushback in many states, some of it coming from the right (fearful of a federal takeover of local schools), some from the left (opposed to standardization), some from parents who don’t understand why it is a good thing to make standards and tests so “hard” that most students are bound to fail them. Nor does Gates understand that there is scant, if any, evidence that high standards alone are enough to produce either high achievement or equity. If we expect everyone to run a four-minute mile, that won’t make everyone run a four-minute mile. Some will, most won’t. What we know from the states that have tested the standards is that the majority of students fail the tests and that the failure rate for English language learners, students with disabilities, and children of color is staggeringly high. In New York state, for example, only 3% of English learners passed the ELA exam; only 5% of students with disabilities passed it; only 16-17% of African American and Hispanic students passed; and overall, only 31% of all students passed in grades 3-8. Will that change in years to come? Let’s hope so, or we will have a vast army of young people without high school diplomas.
it was even worse live. As part of his justification for the need for standards he claimed that standards are what promote innovation and used as an example – I am not kidding – electric plugs.
Teacher Ken, I wish you would write about it, especially the reaction among teachers present.
Yes, teacherken. please write!
Whoa! Hey, teacherken, can I get a transcript? Or, see the video? I’m in the middle of a series of editorials on this issue in our Tennessee county paper (population about 100k), and I just think that a ‘kids need to be electric plugs’ statement might be just what is needed to raise a few hackles down here.
Careful. Gates did not DIRECTLY compare KIDS to electric plugs. In arguing on behalf of CCSS he said that having standards promoted innovation and cited standardized electric plugs as an example
Teacher Ken, please explain: in what way can learning be compared to a standardized electric plug? This suggests that teachers must follow standardized lessons and pour standardized content into standard students who all learn the same way and progress at the same pace.
I don’t think it can be. Made comment just to clarify gates not compAring plugs to kids rather standards for plugs to standards for learning
TeacherKen,
Comparing standards for learning to standards for electric plugs makes no sense because of children are not standard, nor is teaching or learning.
Well said, Diane. That is the KEY notion that the deformers do not understand. Kids are not widgets to be milled. A complex, diverse, pluralistic society needs kids whose differing propensities are developed in differing ways by schools that recognize those differences and build upon them. Kids come into classes with VASTLY different abilities, proclivities, personalities, and backgrounds. Look closely enough at any two kids who are having problems in mathematics or reading and you will discover that the kinds of problems they are encountering vary DRAMATICALLY. The bullet lists of standards and standardized tests based on those lists are far too crude to identify these, and so are the computer-adaptive learning programs based on those lists.
This series of comments makes me wonder if you all have read the CCSS? As a math specialist, I was relieved when I first read the standards. I finally felt freedom in teaching again! The 8 standards for mathematical practices were especially exciting because the focus came away from the teacher and toward the students. Common Core allows teachers to stop “factory” teaching – as if all students are the same – and allows for differentiated instruction! Our state, for political not educational or research-based reasons, re-wrote our standards. But our educators who are familiar with NCTM’s standards, which have been around for decades, understand the value of the CCSS for math. Understanding math rather than just “doing” math made math a less scary place for students.
Gotta admit, electric plugs come in polarized, three or two prong, 240v, and those weird ones no one seems to know what they are for.
The problem is that those fabulous unproven, untested, unabridged CCSS standards are meaningless. The true standards are the PARCC tests.
Well said, MathVale!
The PARCC/SBAC/Pearson tests are the spear point of the invasion.
teacherken: Strangely [?], when I went to the Lakeside School website—you know, where Bill Gates and his children went/go to school—I found not a single mention of Common Core, standardization and electric plugs. Not to mention that they weren’t coupled with terms like “innovation” and “teaching.”
Worse yet, not a single mention of how “college and career readiness” has been lacking there up until now either. Am I missing something? Anyway, let’s see what sort of institution crippled Mr. Bill Gates.
Let’s start with “About Lakeside.”
First, their mission statement:
[start quote]
The mission of Lakeside School is to develop in intellectually capable young people the creative minds, healthy bodies, and ethical spirits needed to contribute wisdom, compassion, and leadership to a global society. We provide a rigorous and dynamic academic program through which effective educators lead students to take responsibility for learning.
We are committed to sustaining a school in which individuals representing diverse cultures and experiences instruct one another in the meaning and value of community and in the joy and importance of lifelong learning.
[end quote]
Second, “Mission Focus”:
[start quote]
Lakeside School fosters the development of citizens capable of and committed to interacting compassionately, ethically, and successfully with diverse peoples and cultures to create a more humane, sustainable global society. This focus transforms our learning and our work together.
[end quote]
Link: http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=120812
“Academics Overview” with the subtitle “A Commitment to Excellence”:
[start quote]
Lakeside’s 5th- to 12th-grade student-centered academic program focuses on the relationships between talented students and capable and caring teachers. We develop and nurture students’ passions and abilities and ensure every student feels known.
The cultural and economic diversity of our community, the teaching styles, and the approaches to learning are all essential to Lakeside academics. We believe that in today’s global world, our students need to know more than one culture, one history, and one language.
Each student’s curiosities and capabilities lead them to unique academic challenges that are sustained through a culture of support and encouragement. All students will find opportunities to discover and develop a passion; to hone the skills of writing, thinking, and speaking; and to interact with the world both on and off campus. Lakeside trusts that each student has effective ideas about how to maximize his or her own education, and that they will positively contribute to our vibrant learning community.
[end quote]
Link: http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=120814
Let’s switch gears—or at least websites. Even more strangely, I found that stuff like class size matters:
[start quote]
Finally, I had great relationships with my teachers here at Lakeside. Classes were small. You got to know the teachers. They got to know you. And the relationships that come from that really make a difference…
[end quote]
More of this nonsense [?] can be found in the link below, like the fact that Lakeside School has a student/teacher ration of 9:1 and average class size of 16.
Link: http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/bill-gates-tells-us-why-his-high-school-was-a-great-learning-environment/
Well, I could on and on but I fear we need to rescue the little tykes in the Gates family from such horrors as, well, feast your eyes on this bit of barbarity regarding the Study Year Abroad:
[start quote]
Since 1964, School Year Abroad has sent high school juniors and seniors to study abroad in distinctive cities and towns throughout Europe and Asia where their safety and security is a priority. Widely considered the ‘gold standard’ of high school study abroad programs, SYA’s rigorous academic curriculum, paired with complementary educational travel and varied extracurricular activities, ensure students are in an optimal position to return to their home schools or proceed to college.
[end quote]
Link: http://www.sya.org/s/833/index.aspx?sid=833&gid=1&pgid=1001
“Nuff said. Will you be joining Eva M and the pro-charterite/privatizer commenters on this blog for the upcoming “Save the Children of the Poor Millionaires & Billionaires Rally: A New Civil Rights Movement For The Truly Downtrodden” — catered, don’t you worry, by Wolfgang Puck.
I hope the above will put you at ease.
😎
The CC$$ are not about education. They are about training for the proles. The defomers assume that MOST teachers are stupid and should be replaced by computer-adaptive systems (or relegated to the status of operators of instructional systems designed for them). And they think that those systems are “good enough” for the proles and better than what we have now, for which they have UTTER CONTEMPT.
Such contempt is born of isolation in the alternate parallel reality that the very wealthy inhabit, a reality in which they are always right (“Yes sir. Right away, sir.”) and the answers are always simple.
Here are JUST A FEW OF MY MANY reflections on Gate’s talk – yes, I was there yesterday… he mentions that he is not “politically sophisticated” to George Stephanopoulos… really???? It must be a miracle how his money is always directed in ways that REQUIRE politicians to “listen”.
Stephanopoulos mentioned his own kids lack of attention span when reading long text but their ease at getting hooked to a computer screen. Gate’s response is to put the books on the screen! That “you can see how much time they spend on the page and how much reading they do”. So, parents (teachers too) role will be that of a “specialized” security guard – watching computer monitors to measure and gauge??? Limited human interaction???
Stepahanopoulos asked Gates about his feelings on the flipped classroom. Gates comments, ” technology can help teachers have a smaller classroom” – yes he said this and I failed to see the connection as he did not expound further! But is this not in direct contrast with his widely publicized comments that a good teacher can teach a large class (extremely large)??? He continued to answer the flipped question by saying that with technology and students working on line at home and in class, teachers can see “who goes on line and who doesn’t, who is quick to understand and who is not”. He plugs Khan on line regularly throughout the lecture.
Stepahanopoulos asks how we lead the world in global technology but are sliding in global ranking. Gates commented that US students are in the bottom tier of rankings on international tests. But he ignores what happens when you actually look at performance by the family income variable (his comment is nothing new but seems to always be his mantra). Gates continues to answer the global slide question by saying our top schools are really good but not taking in inner city students.
I noticed weak clapping at certain points in his talk and could not for the life of me understand why some people were clapping. But it was not a large forceful clap in this VERY LARGE audience. I heard a teacher nearby my seat mutter that this man is clueless about the realities of teaching. I chatted with a teacher from Fairfax County (whom I had never met) when I exited the auditorium and she dared Gate’s to come to her classroom and teach for a day.
And then there was the concluding plenary … Arne Duncan… maddening!
*X
Forgot to mention that Gates comments that our top schools consist of mainly foreign students when asked about the global slide at yesterday’s “Teaching and Learning” conference in DC.
I wished Stephanopoulus asked just one question:
1) Why don’t your own children learn through the virtues of CCSS?
Why don’t Jennifer, Phoebe, and Rory take the CC tests?
So Gates thinks that national standards will provide equitable outcomes for all students. This is false, and it’s provable. We have statewide standards yet there is variance between districts at the state level. Might wonder what could cause that? Go even further, where things are even further standardized, within school districts there is variance between schools. Could something other than a standardized curriculum be used to explain? Let’s go even further, where standardization is guaranteed, the classroom. Each kid in my class is taught the exact same way, I mean let’s face it they sit right next to one another even, hearing the same words, seeing the same things, can’t get more standardized than that right? Yet, surprise surprise, there is variance (therefore inequality) in outcomes. Some kids pass, some fail. Ok, most pass, but you understand my point right? At best, Common core is a solution in search of a problem. And one more thing, just because you’re rich doesn’t mean you know more than me about everything. When it comes to teaching and learning why would we trust a college drop out no matter how much money he has?
Such a simple truth. Children cannot be standardized.
For Twitter: Copy, Paste and Retweet as often as possible
Bill Gates dumb
about #CommonCore
#NoChildLeftBehind
#RaceToTheTop
like asking everyone to run faster than a bullet
http://bit.ly/1qEAnlu
The real issue is the lack of background knowledge of poor students.. This 200 million bucks could have given poor students trips to Europe, Africa and Washington DC. That is what rich kids get. But instead, urban students get “standards.”
That’s one big issue. But there are others. A short list of the major ones:
a. A 30-million-word gap in exposure to language, in all its complexity, before the age of 4 (see studies by Hart and Risley)
b. Lack of motivation for the kinds of tasks that school requires (see the studies of using M&Ms to motivate young takers of IQ and aptitude tests; these show breathtaking improvements of 1 to 1.5 STANDARD DEVIATIONS)
c. Enormous stresses in home lives, with kids at different places in their reactions to those, from current engagement with those stresses to disengagement taking the form of anger and/or withdrawal
d. Less self assurance and confidence due to less nurturing and love resulting from having caregivers who are themselves very, very stressed out/challenged by economic insecurity, addiction, lack of economic and social stability
Secondary students who cannot read/cipher need remedial/developmental reading instruction. All over the USA this is neglected.
The question is whether this is because of a failed educational system or a failed social system. My opinion, after 20 years of teaching, is that the blame falls mostly on the latter. Yes, I’ve seen some bad teachers, but they are solidly in the minority. The NY State Standards were very good, though they needed some tweaking in the area of special education.
Gates wants to involve the private sector. He figures that the goods will roll in and everyone will prosper. But the problem is that you can’t standardize kids. He doesn’t understand that. And no amount of “differentiation” will change that in a national standards base with so many variables in the student populations.
Millions of secondary USA students cannot read/cipher. It takes remedial/developmental reading/math to rectify these individual problems.
Even if we take your statement as fact, where is the evidence that CC will rectify that problem. I also find it difficult to believe that the obsession with “the test” is the solution and CC only makes test worship a larger problem.
My thoughts, too may people go to college that just shouldn’t. We’ve developed this culture where it’s college or bust and that is just not accurate. What happens is folks that shouldn’t even be there in the first place wind up saddled with debt chasing a white rabbit. We are not doing a service to these kids by enaimg this idea. Every person has a unique set if skills and attributes. We should identify and nurture these so that each child can use those unique skills and attributes to fulfill their opportunities. The uniqueness of the child is not allowed to be nurtured the further away from that child decisions about her education is made. National standards are as far removed from the child as one can get. No way it solves the problem you identify.
On the Gates’ Foundation website is the following statement, which I am not making up: “Common Core will make ALL students college ready.”
The problem with what you and Mr. Gates are both saying,Paul, is that what keeps one child from being able to read or do mathematics well is going to differ from what keeps another child from being able to do so. And, beyond a very elementary level, the ways in which it is possible to develop as a reader or mathematician diverge dramatically and in ways not envisioned by the CC$$ bullet list.
This is what Bill Gates NEEDS to do—him and all the other billionaire oligarchs. They have to go through Teach for American’s five-week course to make sure they are all certified as exceptional teachers and then they teach at schools where at least 80% or more of the students live in poverty. They don’t get to select the school. Real teachers who are still teaching in public school (picked at random through a lottery) select the schools they teach in. Oh, and none of these robber barons are allowed to bribe the students to cooperate. After all, there are laws against teachers doing that. No double standard allowed.
After a full school year, if they survive, let’s see what they have to say. Let’s add Obama and his Secretary of Education to that list too.
I’m tired of people who haven’t walked in a teacher’s shoes for at least five years of full time teaching telling the rest of us who have how to teach.
Children that live in low income homes and poverty begin school with 30 million less words than other students. Unfortunately, they are unable to close this deficit throughout their education. The money and efforts spent on standards and testing would have been better spent on early childhood education for these children that include—High quality day care, preK education, wrap around services, quality prenatal and child healthcare, and affordable housing. Until the discussion and money spent sifts in education from high stakes testing and standards to addressing childhood poverty these children will be at a disadvantage throughout their academic careers.
Great point.
The importance of such EARLY wrap-around services to provide compensatory environments cannot be overestimated. NOTE THAT THAT 30-million-word gap occurs BY AGE FOUR and that its has been shown that WHILE STILL IN THE WOMB, children are unconsciously piecing together the neural models of the grammar of the language that they will be born into!!! See Roeper, Tom. The Prism of Grammar: How Child Language Illuminates Humanism. Cambridge, MA: MIT P., 2007.
The computer industry is sponsoring mandatory pre-school which will consist of drill — shouting — number and letters. The numbers are 20 words. The letters are 26. This is the same old reductive, militaristic/ advertising-based approach that has been used to not-so-good effect by Sesame Street.
What these young children are not getting are the 30-million words imparted to upper SES children through gentle, quiet, one-on-one conversation. That is what these children need — serenity, quiet, cooperation, and individualized attention. The industrial model can never work here. It’s not rocket (or computer) science.
It is the same old same old. I would never put a pre-schooler in a school with work sheets and inappropriate academic drill, but would run the other way as fast as I could.
You said a lot there, Harold. Yes, those 30 million words have to come in the form of spoken interactions that are nurturing and encouraging and inspiring and in stimulating contexts.
Not drill.
I’m curious. Where do those 30 million words come from? The English language only has about one million different words in its vocabulary and English is the largest language on the planet.
French has the second largest number of words at a quarter million. Most languages have 30 to 50 thousand words.
Am I missing something?
@Lloyd. Hart and Risley are talking, there, about the total number of words heard. Low SES kids, before the age of 4,hear 30 million fewer total word tokens, not types. As you noted, by most counts, there are far fewer than 30 million distinct words in English.
But the research by Hart and Risley goes deeper than that, into types of sentences, for example. Low SES kids don’t get engaged, early on, in a lot of question and answer, and they get exposed to many fewer distinct morophological and syntactic structures. And, importantly, they are exposed to structures and terms that are not from the dialect(s) prized in school.
BTW, the 1 million figure is sketchy at best, as I am sure you know. Counting words (types) turns out to be REALLY difficult. Do we count inflected and derived forms? Are saw and see different words? How about intent and intention? Do we count separate meanings of the same string of letters or sounds? 464 different meanings are given for the word set bythe Oxford English Dictionary, and I’m sure that they missed some and that some have developed since the last edition. Do we count technical terms like mandrel (self-closing rivet) and novel but reasonable constructions like batrachophagous (“frog eating”)? As you can see, depending on what we mean by word, the counts can vary ENORMOUSLY.
cx: morphological
sorry about the typo
Bill they can get that through authentic experiences like travel. It can help them see what is out there. And yes, my students’ home lives are incredibly stressful.
First grade 3-8 exams in New York were not more rigorous. The passing scores were set at mastery levels. Set high school Regents exam passing scores at 85 and we know 27 percent will pass and 73 percent will fail. Stop the madness in testing. Create fair criteria referenced test for students that help teachers and school leaders redesign instruction and help more children find success on reasonable measures of what they should know,
First grade 3-8 exams in New York were not more rigorous.
Depends on your definition of “rigorous”
Last years CCSS aligned, Pearson developed exams were certainly were more confusing, more convoluted, more tiring,more frustrating, and more subjective than previous NCLB exams.
Yes, they certainly required the kids to be quite gritful.
“. . . on reasonable measures of what they should know,”
There are NO “MEASURES” of the teaching and learning process whatsoever that even come close to being accurately and logically a “measuring device”. Just can’t happen. See Wilson’s “Educational Standards and The Problem of Error” for further explanation.
All measurement systems include measurements of error. Helpful measurements indicate how groups perform and not individuals. They estimate how an individual score might represent knowledge of a criterion that all students properly instructed might perform. I believe all of us know that New York State 2013 ELA and Math exams for Grade 3-8 set cut scores at levels that test designers knew would produce 70% failing rates. So what do serious educators oppose? False proficiency scores? Over reliance on tests to evaluate good teaching? The failure of school leaders to take responsibility for inadequate teaching and make a difference for children? The failure of local state education departments and governors to intervene in highly challenged schools? The phony state intervention systems that propose to reform schools that need no interventions and harm those schools that need intensive help? The CCSS are not the problem. Schools can address and surpass them. The testing model is the problem.
Robert,
Yes CCSS are THE PROBLEM as by definition they are tied to standardized tests (See KrazyTA for comments stating so).
They are also a problem because they are epistemologically and ontologically invalid due to the many logical errors as shown by Noel Wilson in “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
I ask that you read the whole study to understand why.
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A quality cannot be quantified. Quantity is a sub-category of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category by only a part (sub-category) of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as one dimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing we are lacking much information about said interactions.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. As a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it measures “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
The way to innovation is through centralization and standardization via bullet lists promulgated by distant, self-appointed authorities.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
The Model T Ford was the epitome of standardization. Each car coming off the assembly line was more innovative than the identical black car before it. Gates must think we are idiots.
I recommend the book Shop Class as Soulcraft by Matthew Crawford. At one point, he describes how the skilled carriage builders and craftsman walked away in disgust when they were shown the Ford assembly line and the Taylorist principles that would allow the poorly skilled to construct cars.
The book will really resonate with fellow blog-posters here. He says much about standardization, education, and creativity, and he addresses the whole “everyone must go to college and become Dilbert” thing.
Amen, Alan! And thanks for the recommendation.
I’m a bookish guy. Always have been. An egghead. One of those guys people hated because he was so good at taking standardized tests. But I ran across, years ago, a wonderful line in an essay by Ralph Waldo Emerson in which he says, “Give me a man who can write a great Horatian ode AND build a good barn.” (I’m quoting from memory here, so I am certain that that’s garbled, but you get the message.) That essay by Emerson blew me away. It made me recognize how STUNTED I risked becoming by being so left-brain. Ken Robinson, bless him, says that academics think of their bodies as mechanisms for carrying their heads around, for getting their heads to conferences. LOL. Spot on.
So, I studied woodworking and luthiery. I learned how to build guitars and violins. And I learned to paint and to do graphic design and I took yoga and dance lessons. AND these experiences VASTLY expanded my world AND dramatically influenced my INTELLECTUAL life.
The problem with ed deform, in a nutshell, is that the deformers have no understanding of how much society as a whole would benefit from schools that recognized and developed dramatically divergent potentials, dramatically divergent ways of being proficient, ways of being accomplished as writers, readers, mathematicians, thinkers, creators, builders, nurturers.
I know the theory that he’s working from. He would say, I think, that when you give people standardized parts, they can combine these in exciting new ways, and it’s the standardization that makes that possible. You build one thing with the Tinkertoys or Legos, and I build something else. But that analogy FAILS here because there are many, many learning progressions and approaches to teaching and learning, appropriate to differing kids, that are PRECLUDED by these “standards,” and many that are REQUIRED, inappropriately, by them as well. These standards are like enforcing one standard means of locomotion on paramecia, amoebas, cuttlefish, snakes, eagles, cheetahs, and marathon runners.
The Model T only got put together in ONE way.
Interesting you should mention the Model “T”. A friend of mine told me that Ford was involved in the design of the classroom as arranging students into rows to mimick and acclimate them to factory work conditions.
Gitapik, kids were sitting in rows in the 19th century, often (in cities) with 100 in a classroom. They usually shared desks.
Thanks for the clarification, Diane. I’ll pass it on to my friend.
Bob, This is another example of a reformer (Gates) repeating a talking point that, with just a few seconds of critical thinking, falls flat on its irrational face. They really do think we are idiots.
Claims so incredibly preposterous (standardization breed innovation) that people believe it. They can’t fathom the great and powerful Gates actually uttering a STUPID claim.
One of the problems, here, is that people need to be very careful about what the require because requirements have opportunity costs. I am not opposed to standards per se. I just think that they have to be broad enough to provide the degrees of freedom within which real innovation can occur, and they have to be flexible and voluntary and continually revisited. It would be a great think if we threw out the CC$$ bullet lists and replaced these, in mathematics, with SUGGESTIONS FOR alternative learning progressions and, in ELA, with a small handful of very broad guidelines like these:
Nurturing, compensatory spoken language environments will be provided for low-SES students, from birth on, to ensure development of internalized grammatical competence.
Students will do a wide variety of types of extended, substantive reading and writing within particular knowledge domains that they find engaging intellectually and emotionally.
Vocabulary will be studied in context and in semantic groupings within those knowledge domains.
All students will have IEPs, in recognition that students DIFFER, and schools and districts will work to maximize the alternative tracks that students can follow.
Students will be taught, in concrete situations, specific, operationalized, transferable heuristics for thinking, writing, speaking, listening, research, and creation of creative products.
Students will have opportunities to study and emulate models of highly specific structures and techniques used by accomplished speakers and writers.
Students will have experiences that enable them to create broad mental maps, or models, of areas of study so that new learning can be connected to those maps.
Pedagogical approaches will be as varied as possible and include lecture, discussion, workshops, demonstrations, self-directed, and collaborative learning.
Assessment will largely disappear into instruction and take the form of self- and peer-checking; summative assessment will be chosen by the student and others overseeing his or her IEP from among a wide menu of alternatives, including concrete portfolios.
Local communities will draw upon professionally prepared, alternative lists of concrete background knowledge essential to comprehension of later texts that students will encounter to be incorporated into and imparted by K-6 curricula; however, work toward attainment of that background knowledge will comprise no more than 40 percent of the entire K-6 curriculum, in recognition of the fact that schooling has, as its primary goal, helping students to discover and pursue unique tracks that they find intrinsically motivating.
And those general guidelines should be continually debated and revised and adopted AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, not at the state or national levels.
Diane discusses the factory model stuff in illuminating detail in your brilliant Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms. If you haven’t read it, treat yourself. This is a book that she wrote before the evidence led her to break, decisively, from the deformers, but it remains one of the three or four best books on education ever written.
“The problem with ed deform, in a nutshell, is that the deformers have no understanding of how much society as a whole would benefit from schools that recognized and developed dramatically divergent potentials, dramatically divergent ways of being proficient, ways of being accomplished as writers, readers, mathematicians, thinkers, creators, builders, nurturers.”
Excellent commentary, Robert!
I might/would include athletics (no, not the bastardized hyper-competitive ones) in with the arts, music, and the “manual” (meaning working with one’s hands) trades to complement the academic areas.
I remember when I took the ACT. The counselor then told me with my scores, I should think of vo-tech or clerical. I just laughed. I have an Associate, B.S., M.S. and now a Ph.D.
Bill Gates thinks “Truth In Advertizing” means Advertize It Enough And It Will Be True.
Certainly, the PR machine has been working nonstop as late. We’re seeing an all-out attempt to drown out the fast-growing opposition to the Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth.
yes. trying to drown out the noise of opposition
In Michael Bloomberg’s interview with Katie Couric posted today, he states, “To condemn our kids, your kids, my kids, everybody else’s kids to a life where they can’t compete is just, it’s sick….” He thought he was supporting charter schools. Isn’t he really describing New York’s experience with Common Core Standards?
It’s just sick when kids are condemned so they can’t compete.
The man brings tears to my eyes — he’s a regular bleeding wallet liberal.
Has anyone heard what Gates’ plan for the Amish is?
Yes; math tests will be taken on the abacus.
ELA to be taken on iPads using the slate n’ chalk app.
If we took the top 30% of test scorers and then sent them to exclusive public schools resembling elite boarding schools, it could work. It would be better for our society to focus on the kids who are the brightest. These schools would model themselves on the best Day and boarding schools in the country with the full spectrum of possible subjects, the arts, etc. That idea appeals to me a lot. These academies would be free for the top achievers. This is similar to the math and science academy in Illinois or the magnet schools in big cities. That may be the future, and I like it.
This is not the future. It is the past — in a totalitarian state, or Imperial China. And it does not produce creativity, much less “competitiveness,” but conformity and sclerosis. Why? Because dull and dutiful conformists (not to say cheaters) are the ones more likely to thrive in regimented, test-ridden educational environments. The truth is that talent is not easily predictable.The great composition teacher, Nadia Boulanger, used to say that someone can be a prodigy at any age. And virtually all experienced teachers will agree. Thomas Edison, Bill Gates even, these people did not show any particular academic talent, for example. It is more rational as well as more just and humane to treat everyone as if potentially talented and fund education adequately — no, generously, for all.
Well said, Harold!
Eugenics. But I think you are describing a great storyline for a teen dystopian novel. You idea is simplistic and circular. There are many intelligences and, in fact, debates over what we mean by intelligence. What is judged intelligent or college-ready is determined by people previously judged intelligent college-ready. A massive self-referential bias coupled with overly confident views of the effectiveness of psychometrics.
Well said, MathVale!!!
There is no single thing that we can call intelligence. There are not 6 or 7 “intelligences.” There are hundreds of thousands of them, at all kinds of design levels, at work in any brain at a given time, and they are continually developing, morphing, hooking up, and forming new intelligences.
I am having a lot of fun identifying the howlers in the Common [sic] Core [sic] State [sic] Standards [sic] for English Language Arts. Here’s one for your amusement:
“Reading anchor standard” 8 reads as follows:
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
And then we are told in the literature “standards” that this anchor “standard” is “not applicable to literature.”
That would be news to the speaker of Milton’s Paradise Lost, who invokes the Holy Spirit, at the beginning of his poem, to help him, via this work, to “justify the ways of God to men”–that is, to present an argument.
Go have a look at Book I of Paradise Lost. You will find, at the beginning of it, something the author actually calls “The Argument.” It’s a brief preface that serves as an abstract of the claims, reasoning, and evidence presented in the book.
Did the folks who put together these amateurish “standards” actually think that literary works don’t present arguments, make claims, use reasoning of varying degrees of validity, or present evidence of varying degrees of relevance and sufficiency?
Do they actually think that Thomas Hardy’s “Channel Firing” or “The Man He Killed,” Wilfred Owen’s “Dulce et Decorum Est,” Erich Maria Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front, Dalton Trumbo’s Johnny Got His Gun, Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, and Randall Jarrell’s “The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner” are NOT arguments against war, that they do not advance specific claims, and that they don’t employ reasoning and evidence in support of those claims?
Well, lets read a bit more CLOSELY in the “standards” to see what evidence we can find relevant to this question. Turn to the writing “standards,” and the suspicion grows that the authors of these “standards” were, indeed, that naive. The breathtakingly puerile writing “standards” neatly divide up all writing into three distinct “modes”–narrative, informative, and argumentative and encourage teachers and students to think of these as DISTINCT classes, or categories, into which pieces of writing can be sorted. Imagine, for a moment, that you read an expose that tells the story of how some people got together in a backroom and cooked up a bullet list of “standards” and foisted these on the entire country with no learned critique or vetting. Perhaps such a piece would only SEEM to be an Informative Narrative told to advance an Argument.
LOL
And, standard after standard, one encounters the same sort of simple-mindedness. One gets the impression, reading these “standards,” that a group of nonliterary noneducators, some insurance executives, perhaps, got together and made up a list based on their vague memories of what they studied in English class back in the day. (I don’t mean to disparage the literary sophistication of ALL insurance executives; Wallace Stevens was one, after all.)
Of course, what the folks behind these “standards” really did is hire an amateur who had never even taught to hack together a list based on a review of the lowest-common-denominator groupthink in the previously existing state “standards.” And this person they appointed (by divine right?) absolute monarch of instruction in the English language arts in the United States.
And they did that because they wanted ONE set of standards for the entire country to which to correlate the products that they planned to sell “at scale.” In other words, the single bullet list was a necessary part of a business plan. One ring to rule them all!
And all that ought to be obvious enough, for surely no one who thought even a bit about these matters would think that
a) this list is the best we could come up with or that
b) one list is appropriate for all students and for all purposes or that
c) these matters should be set in stone instead of being continually rethought and revisited in light of the discoveries and innovations made by the millions of classroom practitioners, scholars, researchers, and curriculum developers working in the domains that the “standards” cover.
Obviously.
But, it’s typical of a certain kind of philistine to divide the world neatly up into the objective (informative works) and the subjective (literary works) and so to think that these simple-minded categorizations in the Common [sic] Core [sic] make sense. The same sort of person thinks that one can reduce learning to a bullet list in a stack of Powerpoint slides.
And, it’s typical of such people to have a rage for order and an inclination toward authoritarianism and to desire for regimentation and to discount everyone else’s ideas. Ambrose Bierce defines “arrayed” as “drawn up and given an orderly disposition, as a rioter hanged from a lamppost.”
I suspect that the people behind these “standards”–the folks who think that standardization, centralization, and regimentation = innovation–would approve of that definition. And they would probably like to see folks like me given that sort of treatment. LOL.
“And, it’s typical of such people to have a rage for order and an inclination toward authoritarianism and to desire for regimentation and to discount everyone else’s ideas. Ambrose Bierce defines “arrayed” as “drawn up and given an orderly disposition, as a rioter hanged from a lamppost.”
So the philistine, after reviewing the common man and the base
for his strength, saw the strength originated from family, community,
and religion. The strength resisted domination. This must change.
A special group was annointed to provide order through regimentation.
A new currency was formed based upon the inventory of words and
cognitive abilities. This new currency was dispensed by
the annointed, for they have access to a truth that others fail to discern.
The philistine directed the annointed to cultivate the common man
culture to inhibit disruptive thought and actions towards their goals.
Illusory salvation was sold by perpetuating the themes and myths
that served the philistine. Their “Conventional Wisdom” or
purpose driven science, functions exactly as it was supposed to.
The “Rich” are getting richer…
Excellent posts.
Bob,
Thank you, thank you, thank you for taking the time to write this post. There are indeed “howlers” in the CCSS, though I must admit that the type of howls they generate range from howls of laughter to howls of frustration to howls of anger to howls of despair.
Your argument that literature presents arguments and evidence is insightful and true. I used two of the poems you cite (Death of the Ball Turret Gunner and Dulce et Decorum Est) with my students and much of our discussion focused on the arguments and claims of the authors. We also read Of Mice and Men with the same result. On the other side of the coin, who can read any compelling nonfiction narrative without appreciating the literary techniques of figurative language, mood, tone, irony, symbolism, and hyperbole used by the authors?
Yes, howlers abound, and not only in the CCSS. I have found them in my new Pearson literature textbook and the practice SBAC tests that I just started reviewing with my students to “prepare” them to take the field test next month. I wish I could send Mr. Gates a J.K. Rowling Howler and tell him to keep his hands off our schools. Or maybe we need an Allen Ginsberg Howl to protest the effort to stifle and constrain the voices of students, teachers, writers and readers.
It’s disturbing, after reviewing the inforgraphic, to see so many top universities contributing to Gates Foundation. Educational institutions contributing to the demise of their very own livelyhood. I rely too much on logic and common sense that I’m always hit with disappointment.
I’m sorry…it’s reaching the point I can’t even bring myself to read another thing about this. I posted a link to this Huff Post article on FB with the heading, “This man brings bile to my throat”. At this point, he does. What is going on over there? Why aren’t they hearing you, Dr Ravitch? It truly sickens me now. We need to stop it!
DITTO
BILE…YES! That’s Gates. He’s an empty person inside.
It’s not that the CCSS envision everyone running a 4 minute mile, it envisions them running the 4 minute mile when they are 12 years old and deeming them failures even IF they run a four minute mile when they are 15 years old.
agree except it is a
4 minute mile when they are 5 years old.
CC$$ and anything that comes out of this man’s mouth does too make me ill.
I so do not ant any of this man’s puppet money.
Keep it Bill and go do what you do best which is not in this field.
We saw evidence of CCSS in our tests this year and it’s not that the questions were harder or more rigorous…it’s that they were very misleading. One question we saw on a few test went on and on about the area of an object but then down below in another area asked what the perimeter of the object was. Many of the CCSS math questions seemed to be trick questions and unnecessarily complicated. Show all your work in the gray grid area but then they leave very large white areas below…which you know is where every kid is going to do their work. This whole CCSS thing is a sham. This year alone our teachers have to contend with CCSS, Danielson, writing their own evaluation measures (how we will test students 3 times a year to keep our jobs…a completely different test) and new tests. I’m so sorry I went into teaching as a second career 10 years ago…so sorry and now it’s too late to change again….
I’m so sorry I went into teaching as a second career 10 years ago…so sorry and now it’s too late to change again.
It’s so sad to read such statements. But one hears them all the time now. Mr. Gates has no notion how much damage he is doing. He lives in a bubble, in an echo chamber, surrounded by sycophants and toadies whose job it is to tell him how right he is. And he commissions studies that do that as well.
I’m glad you got into teaching later in life. So did I. It makes for a balanced viewpoint which, imo, is important for communication’s sake.
The more informed people the better. Imagine if you only knew about what you hear through the mainstream media.
This might be frustrating, but we need as many strong voices as we can get to fight this coup d’etat. And a coup d’etat it is. It goes beyond education. In the name of “The New World Order”. Such a vague term and so easily thrown about.
This is timely because my friend sent me this link last night:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/big-business-takes-on-tea-party-over-common-core-104662.html?hp=t1
Lost in all of this, for me, is the question, “That’s nice that you think this, Bill Gates, but who put you in charge, anyway?”.
@gitapik.. when you say, “Lost in all of this, for me, is the question, “That’s nice that you think this, Bill Gates, but who put you in charge, anyway?”…
That is exactly what I thought yesterday as I sat and listened to Gates expound on the merits of HIS views and what needs and is being done in accordance WITH HIS VIEWS. I angrily thought, “Why are you so self important, who made you “god” and where is your education background and years of teaching experience that enable you to make such comments as you make”
According to my local newspaper in Cincinnati, Kentucky legislators held hearings on the CCSS. No surprise that the Chamber of Commerce and other usual suspects were there to praise the standards.
But two experts from out of state, who were asked to approve the CCSS–Milgram and Slotsky ( approgimate names and spellings)–gave recorded testimony objecting to the standards.
Here is the kicker: These two well-informed critics were joined by advocates of Creationism who have set up a museum and theme park in Kentucky adided by a few tax incentives from the state. The next addition a full scale version of Noah’s Ark.
The Creationists claimed that the CCSS should be stopped because (according the the news report) these Standards “would allow schools to teach about evolution and global warming.” Source Cincinnati Enquirer,3-14-2014.
OMG, Laura. That’s awful.
Thanks, BTW, for your wonderful, illuminating posts on this blog. Always great to read.
I remember how scary it was a few months ago seeing the visualized (via youtube) link of how intricately woven the ” ed reform” movement is with corporations and politicians. I think I saw it on this blog. The author of that visual diagram certainly could find a lot of evidence to support her research from yesterday’s T & L Conference. I fortunately did find one workshop that was quite interesting (but it addressed integrated learning not “standardizing standards” and “data and measurement”.
I remember it well. It was truly ominous. And a well disguised monopoly.
Ken, did I read that correctly? Electric Plugs?
Bill Gates’ Common Core comparison to electric plugs as “motivation” brings to mind the Milgram obedience experiment that has become the most famous study in psychology’s history. There is a relationship. Today, the Common Core “obedience” from it’s supporters and promoters seems to come from people who worship Bill Gates as an “authority”. Like the Milgram experiment, the “voice of authority” can lead people to follow orders and perform in ways that goes against their own nature, even to commit cruel acts on others without conscience awareness of guilt or shame.
Bill Gates may be one of the best authorities on technology, but he is not an authority on child development, education, or psychology. In fact, my observation as an autism specialist is that Bill Gates has classic “Asperger” (High Functioning Autism). This is not to diminish the value of people with autistic qualities, including myself, but it can present some deficits in specific areas of affective functioning, and it does cause certain limitations. It may be this deficit that does not allow him to recognize the psychological distress to children caused by the CCE (Common Core Environment). It may also be the deficit that does not allow him to recognize his own limitations.
There are two conditions that determine psychological abuse: Entrapment & Control.
Both of those conditions are in place in the CCE. Children are forced to attend school, therefore they are trapped with no escape. While in that environment, they are being controlled with a rigid schedule with a domineering teacher using uninspiring, mind numbing, low level, rote memory, test drill that is like torture. They have little opportunity for creative self directed learning, cooperative learning, or imaginative self expression. This chronic stress and feelings of “never fully measuring up” in the CCE is high risk for psychological damage. It is a dismal “work” environment that is joy-less, comfort-less and heart-less. It is this same grim social denial that led to childen working in factories of New England in the 1800’s.
Sitting in a desk for seven hours without healthy physical activity and without ongoing social emotional interactions with peers causes a child to feel isolated and “punished”. The CCE is a “bullying” environment that is causing children to have chronic feelings of “victimization” that are unrecognized and repressed. Young children in this environment are learning to repress their own needs and emotions and perform according to what their teacher/parent wants. A child’s greatest fear is disappointing parents or teachers.
This “self denial” and conditioning of children to repress their emotions is the beginning of the “faux front” that will develop into a personality disorder. The child will build an internal reservoir of repressed feelings of victimization – shame, anger, guilt, helplessness, while outwardly performing well intellectually for the teachers and parents. A child in the CCE will become desensitized and emotionally flat. After some time, it can be observed that they have lost their spirit when they begin to function more robotic. At that point, they have lost imagination, spontaneity, and humor. Their behavior will become more withdrawn or irritable, bored, sad, cry easily, sleep or eating disorders, or impulsive aggression. At the time these symptoms can be recognized, the damage is already done. They are “burned out” and depressed. Without intervention, this chronic traumatic stress will manifest in young adulthood as self destructive or risk taking behaviors that will negatively impact their future and well being. Their intellect may be high from the CCE, but their social/emotional development will suffer severely.
Intellectual development (cognitive) and Emotional development (affective) do not run on the same track. In fact, they develop in different stages at different times, and not always at the same pace with each child. It is “imagination” that uses elements of each, cognitive and affective, when making decisions and perceiving one’s world. It is the emotional development that maintains a person’s “morality”, in addition to their ability for empathy or guilt, and other feelings/emotions. When imagination (spirit) goes away, there can be decisions made with intellect, but without connections to affect: guilt or shame.
When young children are “captive” in an authoritarian school environment that focuses exclusively on “performance” (reward/punishment), their intellectual development will advance, but their social/emotional development will not. Without a “safe” environment that supports healthy social and emotional development from positive behavior modeling, and when forced to function in a “threatening” demanding environment, children’s social/emotional development will not progress but will be stunted. If the insecurity from a “threatening” environment becomes chronic, a child’s emotional development will start to regress (going back to a safer place in early childhood). This delayed emotional development and/or emotional regression will become “hard wired” into a young child’s personality. This invalidating environment in public schools has intensified to what we have today as the most punitive environment in history, and we see increasing evidence in the general population of adults who cannot think for themselves, are slow to mature, and often behave like “children”.
The invalidating school environment has increasingly contributed to the problem that has become a psychological plague in American society: “covert” Narcissistic Personality Disorder. We have many highly functioning intellectual professionals (the best and the brightest) but with immature social/emotional development, which includes a deficit of morals. (think Enron, Wall Street, Politicians, Billionaires, etc). They usually perform well in their work, but their personal lives often reflect their emotional deficits via relationships of codependency. Their codependency is often “covert”, since it mostly impacts their personal relationships with people or “things”, and usually reflects an addiction to either substances (alcohol, drugs, food, sex, gambling, etc), or to work, or to their mates or romantic interests.
The punitive environment in elementary schools is causing many children to have symptoms of High Functioning Autism. This has been a mystery. Mental health professionals all over the country are focusing on the soaring increase in autism, and the co-occurring disorders of anxiety and depression. The early signs of regression and emotional dysregulation that were previously believed to be High Functioning Autism, are now being recognized by more mental health professionals as signs of “traumatic stress”. Both trauma and High Functioning Autism have similar symptoms, primarily regression, dissociation, and constriction. CCE has created an environment of traumatic stress for many children, especially the sensitive children who are often gifted and prone to high spatial intelligence. Their symptoms often include ADHD in addition to the other signs of anxiety and depression. These children, who are most often the creators, inventors, and artists, are the most damaged in the CCE. Like the reference to Einstein’s quote: These children are “fish” who are being measured on how well they can climb a tree.
It is my observation as an educator and mental health professional, that the current school CCE is causing psychological damage to young children on a grande scale. It is causing permanent psychological damage in the form of personality disorders, especially Narcissistic Personality Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder. It is also my professional observation that those who designed the curriculum do not have the knowledge of child development or empathy to recognize the psychological damage from chronic emotional distress, which is very gradual and works on the brain like erosion works on soil.
Bill Gates and the other school reform billionaires may be the “best and the brightest” in designing technology and recognizing what constitutes intellectual development, but they are causing harm to the nation’s children by not listening to mental health experts
and child development specialists. It may be their own “narcissistic” personality traits, in combination with those of the general population, that bestowed this “voice of authority”
on them, but they are wrong about what children need. We cannot afford to allow wealth and power to buy “false authority” for determining what children need.
The nation’s most recognized researcher on Borderline Personality Disorder resides in Seattle, and works at the University of Washington. Bill Gates would be wise to consult with Dr Linehan and UW about the impact of CCE on children . This important research from UW, which shows that an “invalidating” environment in childhood leads to Borderline Personality in adulthood, cannot be ignored in light of the statistics on children’s mental health disorders resulting from the CCE. The CCE may enhance some test scores through motivation by fear and intimidation, but our nation will pay a heavy price that Bill Gates nor his cadre of billionaires cannot afford. There is no amount of money that can fix permanent psychological damage to children.
As Frederick Douglass said, “It is easier to care for a child than to fix a broken man.”
If Bill Gates and the other Common Core “voices of authority” continue to ignore children’s greatest needs, and fail to recognize the psychological damage from CCE, they are in effect practicing what the Milgram experiment proved.
What an outstanding post, Mimi!!!
Thank you.
I would definitely concur that Bil Gates has some type of disorder whether it be personality or Asperger’s syndrome. Though I haven’t met him personally to confirm that, my observations when I see him speaking in front of the camera is a man on a mission with a definite message that is dictatorial, persuasive, and narcissistic (You can see it in his eyes; it’s creepy). His weapon is his money. Unlike Hitler who killed by the thousands, Gates, as you indicated, is destroying minds.
The scary thing is that many children especially in title schools already come tramatized homes with these symptoms of CCE.
@mimi.. What a wonderfully written comment that deserves to be read by families with school age children. Would love to see this in a parenting magazine!
Gates is trying to run education as he ran Microsoft. But times change. You could argue Microsoft was simply in the right place at the right time and rode a wave or we could be running CP/M. Microsoft was never particularly innovative or original. Technology like windows, BASIC, NT, Word, Excel, browsers were developed prior by MIT, Xerox, DEC, Bricklan, IBM, Apple, mozilla. What Microsoft did best was exploiting others’ innovations for the market and developing a business model that maximized profit. Hardly applicable to education. The cash cows Microsoft established cushioned such attempts at innovation as Windows ME, Zune, and Bob.
I give Gates his due place in history, but CCSS is not the next killer app in education. We need more competitive standards – alternatives teachers can compare and adapt. The standards should be just one tool teachers can use. Nearly every technical srandard in Gate’s world can be extended, reviewed, and modified through practical use. Innovative new standards are almost always a grassroots initiative rather than a rigid, top down dictum.
We need more competitive standards – alternatives teachers can compare and adapt.
yes,yes,yes
We need standards for the threads of screws.
We last thing that we need is centralization and standardization of education.
Ecologies are healthier than are monocultures.
“The standards should be just one tool teachers can use.”
Standards are THE problem. See Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” to understand why.
As a high school English teacher, one of the first things I taught my 11th grade students was to know their audience when speaking and writing; knowing about the expertise, hopes, fears, vision, etc. of the audience is essential for getting one’s message across and engaging in dialogue that can foster learning and evoke meaningful change.
As an NBCT who came to the Teaching and Learning Conference to engage in meaningful dialogue to evoke change in the teaching profession, I was insulted to see that Bill Gates did not seem to “know” the expertise represented in the audience.
I didn’t need to hear a history of, or plug for, Common Core standards. I know them backwards and forwards. The standards are actually pretty good – the demoralizing high-stakes strings attached, and the reason they came to be, not so much.
I didn’t need to hear more about the miracles of the Khan Academy. I saw the TEACH film during the pre-conference where it was plugged plenty. I get it: technology is a useful teaching tool. Duh.
I didn’t need to hear more about what a flipped classroom was. That’s called Tuesday in room 741.
What I *needed* was a flipped-conference in which NBCTs could broadcast *their* expertise out to people like Bill Gates.
I keep on hearing about how we have to become “competitive” in the New World Order (I hate that term so much more now than I did when Clinton, Carter, and Bush delivered it on national tv).
How can we compete with the incredibly low wages being offered to corporations in other countries? How can we compete with the lack of environmental regulations offered to business in other countries?
So many corporations have lost their sense of national identity. They hide money off shore in order to avoid paying the taxes that would help our nation to finance much of what we need. They hire and operate in the countries that will give them the best bang for the buck. They consider themselves “multi-national” and not beholden to the country of their origin.
“Competitive”, to me, sounds more like, “take a pay cut”.
LOL
Yup.
Have a look at the 3-minute Introduction to the Common Core video now featured on the CCSSO website. What’s it’s message:
CC$$ will make your child competitive.
It’s all about competition. It’s all about who is on top of the single leader board.
This is a Hunger Games vision of the purpose of education.
LOL
Yup.
Have a look at the 3-minute Introduction to the Common Core video now featured on the CCSSO website. What’s it’s message:
CC$$ will make your child competitive.
It’s all about competition. It’s all about who is on top of the single leader board.
This is a Hunger Games vision of the purpose of education.
http://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=402&action=edit&message=6&postpost=v2
Here’s the correct link to that post:
http://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/what-happens-when-amateurs-write-standards/
“How can we compete with the incredibly low wages being offered to corporations in other countries? How can we compete with the lack of environmental regulations offered to business in other countries?”
In a word, EDUCATION!
How many useful idiots fail to comprehend WHAT is needed for
a business to exist… CUSTOMERS
No customers, no business. No demand (customers), no reason
to hire or expand.
“So many corporations have lost their sense of national identity.”
So many CUSTOMERS have lost their sense of national identy.
American customers are the reason behind the exodus of jobs
AND source of funding for public sevices. Jobs follow purchases.
If it’s NOT Made in the USA, it’s NOT beholden to the USA.
Plain and simple. JOBS are an outgrowth of SALES, which are a
FUNCTION of aggregate DEMAND.
That concept seems to be a MAJOR blindspot in our “Educated”
country.
Gosh, if we could only understand the Economists are essentially
the priesthood of capital, and their dominant “Theory”, at any time
reflects the interest of capital, NOT nations or people.
We have the economy we “Bought” into. Mouthing, USA number one, may be fine. Putting your money where your mouth is, defines your
sense of national identy, beyond lip service.
I see your points but, to my view, it’s not so simple.
1) When you say, “EDUCATION”, do you mean the education of the American consumer or “education” within our public schools system?
If it’s the former, there are a lot of people who are out of work in our country. They’re looking for low prices. Companies like Walmart, etc, are quite ready to supply that demand with low wage products from abroad. And I don’t think that these companies are exactly advertising this fact and it’s ramifications to the consumer.
A lot of people would rather have a job than pay less at a large department store, but that’s not the hand we’ve been dealt.
If it’s the latter you’re referring to, the fact is that our public education system is among the best in the world.
2) As to customers losing their sense of national identity: I agree to a point about this. I spoke to someone who told me he had no concerns about his portfolio’s lack of investment in our country. As long as he got his 401K fattened up, he couldn’t care less where the money was coming from is exactly what he told me. Disgusting. The area where I disagree, however, is that most of us are not hiding billions of dollars of taxable revenue in offshore accounts. That speaks volumes to me in terms of a corporation’s sense of national identity. “I got mine, now leave me alone” is what it says to me. Those tax dollars could go a long, long way in this country.
3) “The American customer is the reason behind the exodus of jobs” can only go so far when you take into account how many companies have been, are, and will continue to outsource both blue and white collar jobs in order to maximize profit. It’s been going on, with the blessings of our government, for decades.
I’d love a full boycott on Microsoft, Walmart, etc, but it’s not going to be easy getting the numbers of people needed to make a serious dent, considering the economic mess we’re in.
BTW: you don’t know me, so there’s no way that you’d know that I buy American whenever and wherever I can. It took me three reads of your post to get past the possible notion that you were calling me a moron. Although you have valid points, I hope you’ll understand that getting your point across in a discussion like this is much different than bludgeoning your opponent into submission on a football field. I just put some thought and effort into respectfully answering some of your points and I’d appreciate the same courtesy from you, should you choose to do the same.
Thanks for respectively adding your “Wiggle Room” to the points I offered. I should have posted: Putting OUR money where OUR
mouth is, defines OUR sense of national identity, beyond lip service.
The intent of my “Points” was to reveal the complicity of the people
in the economic conditions as they exist. Far too many people
bemoan Government Policies or Corporate objectives, as if they
were impotent or victims with no recourse (responsibility) in the fray.
My “Plain and simple” jobs are an outgrowth of sales, which are a
function of aggregate demand, stems from the notion that 70% of
the economy is consumer driven. The “KISS” method : Keep It
Simple Silly, was an attempt towards EMPOWERMENT, What WE
have done and what we can do.
Education, or the “Wit to connect the dots”, or pattern recognition,
would expose the shysters who have shattered any conceivable
justification for their privileged positions, and no longer have any
credibility among those that think at all.
BTW, I can’t turn you into a “moron” any more than you can turn me
into a bludgeoning football player. “Sticks and stones may break my
bones…”
Sounds good. Thanks for thanking the imd, NoBrick. Gotcha.
Dang…sometimes I can’t get anything right. No cynicism. Thanks for taking the time. I hear ya.
Diane
When are you scheduled to give YOUR talk to the Society of Software Engineers?
LOL.
Even in tech design, overemphasis on authority, centralization, regimentation, and standardization is extremely dangerous and demotivating. So, Diane would have valuable things to say to those folks.
Donald Norman, in his wonderful book on The Design of Everyday Things writes about visiting a nuclear power plant where the levers for raising and lowering the fuel rods were all identical and in neat little rows. The operators had actually purchased beer taps (Blue Moon, Heineken, Bud. Hefe Wissen, etc) and placed these over the levers so they could easily tell them apart. It makes a difference whether this lever means raise the rod or lower it. LOL. But some techie types (but not all) worship ORDER.
And all tyrants do.
I sincerely wish you could debate him in a public forum like PBS or wherever. I would love to see him have to actually defend this with someone who knows the facts and could point out key errors to him. Really Bill no literature? No discussions, of literature? etc. My friend and I were lamenting this the other day as an elementary teacher reading was the joy of the classroom and bonded us together behind beautiful stories like Trumpet of the Swan, Where the Red Fern Grows etc. How can a non educator who has never taught understand bonding, and love in a classroom and how important it is to development of a child and getting them charged up about learning.
Here is the statement about electric plugs…to me it sounds like he’s not really even trying to say that standardization is better for kids; sounds like he’s talking about how much better it is for
Pearson.
Gates is rich so some think that makes him a authority on anything. He wasn’t as good as Steve Jobs on computers and is certainly no teacher. He has the money to push something that sounds good to him. It’s propaganda. We know who knows how to fix the system, teachers. And, if you want good teachers, pay them! Oh, wait. Ronald Reagan said that already. I wonder if the Koch boys would agree to that.
But Bill Gates—because he is so wealthy—thinks he has the answer for everything. The wealth and power have inflated his ego to the size of the sun.
This seems to be a mental disease many very wealthy individuals come down with.
The Tennessean, Nashville’s newspaper has been running pro-Common Core articles for the past two weeks. A member of The Chamber of Commerce and SCORE have written about the need to stay the course (I use this phrase ironically) with CC. There has been no balance with anti-Common Core articles. I keep writing responses to their articles, but I don’t know if it’s doing any good. I don’t understand why the paper doesn’t try to present both sides of the issue. I’m sure that it boils down to money. The only good thing? Hardly anybody reads the paper anymore. I am the only person I know who has a subscription to it.
Let’s end standardized testing in grades 3-8. Let’s use those billions to use in the classrooms, instead of making testing companies and book publishers rich.
This pretty much nails it. Brava, Laureen!
The problem is that they won’t be without high school diplomas. Somehow, as schools do now, the schools will find a way to be sure the students graduate. In the meantime, standards for everyone erode, especially as we now pretend to give college courses in high schools.
Teachers generally know what they are doing. If they spend all their time dealing with what Gates thinks should be done, they don’t have time to teach. More students pass with fewer skills.
It seems every slob with a billion dollars to his name automatically becomes an “expert” on education. If Bill Gates is so gung-ho on them, why doesn’t he be the first to take one of his “common core aligned” assessments? Maybe we’d all find out that Bill”ionaire” Gates is nothing more than a 25¢ haircut on a 5¢ head.
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater.
As a former Seattle teacher turned political activist, all I have to say is F*ck Bill Gates. I can also say the same thing as an environmentalist and a website designer. Bill Gates made a fortune peddling crappy software, manipulating the law and exploiting consumers and children – with the help of his father, a sleazy Seattle attorney. The Gates Foundation is nothing but an investment firm. And isn’t it ironic that there are homeless people sleeping on the sidewalk just blocks from the Gates Foundation. Another irony: Seattle’s public schools have continued to decline under Gates’ stewardship.
You can learn more about Gates on my websites, once I get them back online. Or just search Google for “Bill Gates” + Blomstrom.
There is plenty of research which supports that teaching high standards raises student achievement. This blogger must not have Googled it… at all. Start with the work of Carol Dweck and Jo Boaler on growth mindset. Mindset, What’s Math Got To Do With It?, and Mathematical Mindsets are three books that can provide some insight. Bill Gates has provided an incredible amount of money to fund research and education. I hate to sound like I’m pushing an agenda, because I’m not. But I hate to see misinformation go unchallenged. This blog is misinformation.
“This blog is misinformation”.
That’s a very heavy handed blanket statement, Judy.
This blog has echoed my thoughts and experiences as an educator from long before I even knew it even existed.
You might not believe all that is said here (and I can respect that) but I’m getting a bit of a “misinformation” from the above quote.
Judy is either paid by the publicly funded, for-profit above-all-else, autocratic, cherry picking (children and facts), child abusing, often fraudulent corporate charter school movement to work as a troll to spread misinformation and doubt on sites like Diane’s, or she (if Judy is a she) is an ignorant, biased, easily to fool deplorable that doesn’t bother to do the necessary digging to find out all the facts (with an emphasis on “all”).