Steven Singer has noticed some striking similarities among corporate reformers: they didn’t do well in school. Others have noted that most of them went to elite private schools.
Scott Walker dropped out of Marwuette University with only a year to go; no one knows why. His grades were mediocre.
Campbell Brown went to private schools and was kicked out of her high school.
Bill Gates, as is well known, dropped out of Harvard.
Singer wonders whether they are angry at teachers because of their personal failures.
He wonders:
“Are these former bad students more interested in fixing the perceived problems they see with the system? Or are they consciously or unconsciously seeking revenge against a system that found them to be inadequate?”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
You may add Andrew Cuomo to this group. His actions and rhetoric point to a middle school issue he must have had.
No, his deal is that he failed the bar examination four times.
Gates dropped out of Harvard with his parents’ blessing and a big chunk of seed money for his new business. That that experience would cause him to resent K-12 public schools and teachers seems a bit far-fetched.
Tim,
I agree. Gates is not angry with teachers. He just looks down on them and treats them like ants. I would love to see him try teaching for a week. He might have a different perspective.
Cuomo passed first time according to Perdido street school:
http://perdidostreetschool.blogspot.com/2015/05/its-good-to-hear-andrew-cuomo-passed.html
This thought has often crossed my mind. In Ontario Canada we had a provincial premier (like a Governor in USA) who was a failed teacher. Did incredible damage to education 1995-2003.
One of my ed school professors was a self-professed failed k-12 teacher. I think many of them are. It’s not just know-nothing reformers who are deforming education. The majority of ed school professors, lacking true wisdom, peddle false doctrines and mess us up insidiously. One example: my ed school professors dunned it into our heads that “telling” was the worst form of pedagogy. Totally wrong. “Telling” is what every human community for time immemorial has used to educate its young kids. It’s what professionals do for their kids. That’s why their kids have a 30 million word head start over welfare kids. When I TELL my students things, they understand much more clearly and quickly than if I hand them a text to read. Telling is not only not the worst, it may be the best form of pedagogy. But ed school professors, lacking good sense and wanting to peddle something fancy and modern-sounding –like cooperative learning — do not tell us this. They tell us falsehoods –and we learn them well. Because they told us.
I suppose they were trying to describe lecturing, which, I rather suspect, is what they were doing! Now with writing, it was popular for awhile to admonish the kids to “show me” rather than tell me what was going on in a narrative. (“Her eyes shone with the dew of sadness” rather than “She was crying.”) The same could be emphasized with teaching although I don’t think lecturing and modeling should be mutually exclusive but part of a well crafted whole depending on the age of your students. A three year old I am going to hand a child sized broom and let them sweep. They will imitate what they have seen. If I want a teenager to damp mop a floor, I might have more specific instructions beyond what they think damp mopping involves. I find I am much more wary of people who think they have “the answer” the older I get. Life allows for more wiggle room than I think we want at times. “Just tell me what to do, and I’ll do it,” has a certain appeal on occasion.
Unfortunately, “tell what to do and I’ll do it” has changed to, “who do you think you are to tell me what to do? If you want it done, do it yourself…”
Wow! What imaginings! I Dropped out of school when I was 14. MY choice, nothing to do with teachers. To make the assumption that people drop out because of teachers is pretty careless. Most people that drop out of high school do so by choice of because of certain circumstances – not because they have a dislike for one or more teachers.
Education in the U.S. has been losing ground way, way before the charter schools started. So just because these people (and some of your other favorite targets, like the Waltons and such) are looking for other ways to make eduation work, does not mean this is because of either greed or hatred of teachers.
Sorry to disappoint you Rudy…The US has not been losing ground regarding education…rather, the wealth gap has widened…if you did your research you would find that nations with the highest test scores have the lowest poverty rates. As a matter of fact, if you took out poverty among our student base, the US is number 1 in education in virtually all statistical categories. We have major funding issues to the have nothing school districts. The Waltons and such are not looking for ways to make education work. They are looking for ways to make money! With education spending nearly 9% of Americas GDP, these deformers want a piece of the pie. It’s uneducated people (regarding educational issues) like yourself who are being tricked by the deformers.
OECD report says different. And they have no bones to pick
Having been aware of Walton moneys and education for almost 40 years, I beg to differ. I know though experience that Walton scholarship and donations to at least private universities have nothing to do with making money off the process/donations.
Its called tax write offs rudy…the donations from the Waltons to universities are not out of the goodness of their hearts..I wonder what your occupation is rudy?
Having gone to a college where SAM Walton was a generous donator, and having had the opportunity to visit with him, I can assure you that tax write offs were never the reason for his generosity.
The Walton Family Foundation is devoted to the privatization of public schools across America.
If the Waltons were generous, they would have paid their workers minimum wage long ago
All in the family are billionaires
That is a non-argument. If Obama were truly so concerned about poverty, he would hand his income over to the poor people makes just as much sense.
Economics 101 – Money makes money. By simply leaving it in the bank I make money and get richer. If you want to have fun, watch “Brewster’s millions.”
Walton (Sam) always had the motto that he “makes money faster than he can give it away.”
yes rudy…but the oecd report includes our nations high poverty rate…bring it down to finlands poverty and the number would be very different
“To make the assumption that people drop out because of teachers is pretty careless.”
Your argument misses the point, Rudy. It is not that these people dropped out because of their teachers. That is NOT the assumption. These people know that they were the prime movers of their actions.
The explicit assertion in the article is that these people resent reflecting on why they dropped out for whatever personal reasons they may have had. And now they are projecting their animus on the education establishment to somehow ease their psychological guilt.
I do not know if I agree with the argument myself, but from what you have written about education, it seems as if the argument might apply to you, too.
TheMorrigan: thank you for stating the obvious—
The posting was food for thought. It helps put things in perspective. You help put things in perspective.
And it reminds us how one of the most striking characteristics of the leaders and enablers and enforcers of the self-styled “education reform” movement is the lack (for whatever reason[s]) of self-reflection, self-correction and humility.
Proven failure simply spurs them on to ever greater failure. They don’t learn from their own mistakes because, as they see it, they don’t make mistakes—we do, because their ideas and policies are wonderful and amazing, but we mere hewers of wood and drawers of water are just too dimwitted and coarse to properly implement their towering aspirational goals.
Thank you again for keeping it real.
Not rheeal.
😎
I am not so sure the schools were ever “failing.” The evidence is not there to show that as pointed out on other posts.
I have no idea why these people dropped out. I would guess they had other “priorities.” They may not recognize they are outliers and felt that an academic life was not for them. So what.
Many public schools are quite successful, even by the standards of these critics. The schools most educators of any side of the issue (except those in it for real estate gain) are worried about are in the inner-city serving students relatively isolated from achievers. Students who are achieving in these schools do not realize how their peers are academically different. And the underachievers do not understand what it takes to achieve.
My son, when attending a community college in the Bronx, was questioned by fellow students how he was able to earn an “A.” He could only reply that he studied. He had gone from being an underachieving student in Santa Monica, to being as he put it, “like his SMCC Asian classmates.”
What if these schools are really being as successful as they can be? If you do not look at the school average, you find many students are successful. At one middle school at which I taught in an inner city of L. A., the highest scoring students were the students who read for pleasure and the next highest scoring were the Advanced ESL students. Among the high scoring students, nearly all moved to higher economic neighborhoods after one or two years, taking their achievement with them.
In addition, at this second lowest scoring school were students who later enrolled at some of the top schools in the country–MIT, UC.–they had had the support of being clustered while at the school.
There are better and less expensive options than charters, vouchers, etc. to reach everyone: economic integration; social support; networked, personally-selected teacher development. The success now reported among charters from my experience is that most charters simply avoid in many subtle ways not to have any low achieving students enrolled or to have them dropped before testing. No new methods, no new motivational tricks, no different instruction. And the real inner-city charters’ scores show it.
But the evidence IS there! That argument keeps amazing me! Since I have been working in the U.S., I have worked for school districts, starting in 1996. That is BEFORE NCLB came in, and definitely before Obama’s boondoggle saw the light.
Educational results in the U.S. have been sliding for several decades, as both international comparisons and national research shows.
There is nothing wrong with admitting these facts, it’s not an attack, it is a reality.
The question is: What can be done about that?
Whether or not you like the reasoning/funding behind charter schools, some things they do right! Focus on academics instead of “extra’s” like music and sports and such. The amount of both time and money wasted on those is enormous.
My kids wanted to play baseball and soccer when we lived in Holland. Good – but I had to pay for that out of my own pocket.
When you see how many hours kids spend today on externals, no wonder their study habits are atrocious. There are few kids than can carry such a schedule – and still do good in school.
Look back at the classical education in this country. Much more time was spent on academics rather than extras. When the argument is made that “Well, Johnny has to be part of the football team otherwise he won’t come back to school…” we have lost something valuable!
I teach both kids and adults on a regular basis (outside a school system, an hold your horses, nothing to do with charter schools or any such thing). I see the difference! I hear the whining from the kids when there is an expectation for homework.
Our kids have lost the art of learning – and schools allow that to happen, and to increase the size of that loss… rather than forcing kids to stay focused, we give them more and more gadgets (and therefore, options! – Heard of a district not to long ago finally closing access to Netflix!) which allow them to stop paying attention.
Throw out the emphasis on technology, go back to old fashioned education! And, I am speaking against my own profession here!!!
Rudy,
“But the evidence IS there! That argument keeps amazing me!”
Since it is so clear to be amazing to you, could you please provide some specific evidence? Most people will need to see the actual evidence to fully believe it. Many people claim their belief is amazing but in most cases, it only turns out to be alarmist shadows on the wall fluff. While the evidence may blind someone such as yourself, many of us have yet to even see it to be blinded by it.
While it is possible that the US has been slowly “sliding for several decades,” I have not seen evidence to support this assertion. In fact, the only evidence I have seen on this suggests that we are doing about the same, improving in some corners, or plateauing in some areas. Is that what you mean by “sliding”?
I’m sorry, but what led to the no child left behind act? was that just because some bureaucrats were bored?
NCLB was passed so that G.W. Bush would have a “legacy,” and to get businesses’ hooks into the large amount of money that flows to public education. It was never about “failing” schools, which have supposedly been “failing” for so long that it would seem like we’d all be dragging our knuckles on the ground by now. The U.S. has NEVER placed well in international assessments, and this “failing” mantra has been going since at least the 1950s.
You really need to read Diane’s book, “Reign of Error.” She documents all of this constant bleating of “Failing schools! Failing schools!”
And the CIA killed Kennedy. And the 9/11 events were caused by the government.im sorry but I am a bit more open minded than ascribing this to a conspiracy.
You will need to prove your point with specific evidence. Implying a point proves nothing. In fact, as you point out above, it is technically a “non-argument.”
If your claim is so amazingly true, there should be plenty of data/evidence to prove your point without having to resort to anecdote or implication in order to prove your point.
I suggested a slightly different theory:
It seems to be a matter of people who discover that they excel at exactly one skill. This has two effects:
1. It makes them think they are experts on every other subject under the sun.
2. It makes them useful tools for the oligarches trying to re-engineer society.
“they excel at exactly one skill”
You mean BS-ing?
That’s how Gates made his game-changing deal with IBM — telling them he had an OS when he didn’t.
…and then relied on his partner Paul Allen to actually make it happen
BS or SB, it’s Pinheads all the way down.
After reading the article, I got a little miffed. Poor Campbell Brown who had awful teachers. I think we’ve lost the idea that STUDENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR LEARNING. When my parents (in their 80’s) went to school, THEY were responsible for their work and their parents had the attitude that school was important. Teachers taught. Now, students have no responsibility whatsoever. It’s ALL the fault of the teacher. Hey! Students don’t even have to come to school and the teacher is penalized for that. They can click away at their computerized tests or fill in whatever bubble they want and it is STILL the teacher who gets punished. Something’s wrong with this system, people! But I think this whole thing is more about privatizing education and making money. That’s what these three have in common.
Ironically, Campbell Brown’s “awful” teachers were at a private school, and yet she goes after public schools.
The theory is plausible maybe even probable. I still believe the biggest motive behind their actions is money. They are being paid under the table by money people support their ideas, good or bad.
I lived through the Scott Walker surge to power in Wisconsin. The best information at the time was that he was kicked out of Marquette for cheating. The rumor was that he cheated in a campus election and/or in his courses. Someone should investigate. I’m now a Wisconsin ex-pat living in Nebraska.
Did you read Steven Singer’s blog? He addressed the Cheating allegation. There’s no publicly available evidence that lets us know what really happened. Just the allegations of people there at the time, Marquette unable to give more information, and Walker’s silence right now.
While having insight into the character of ones adversaries can be useful in thwarting them, it is not a replacement for educating, organizing and mobilizing against their depredations.
I don’t really care about the character and deep, psychic motivations of these despicable people: I want them stopped from destroying the public schools and the lives of teachers and children.
Let’s stop them, and drive a stake through their hearts (politically speaking). After that, we can urge them to get the help they need.
I agree.
Gates, Broad, and Bloomberg might have good motivations for what they are doing. But that’s scarcely relevant. Good motivations are only a small element in making good policy, for education or anything else.
Good policy is judged by outcomes and justice. I think so-called education reform is failure on both counts, which is covered by lies.
Given that the actions of Gates, Bloomberg, Broad, et. al. correspond so closely to their interests, whether their personal financial or class interests, I think their motivations and sincerity are irrelevant. It has far more to do with class than with character.
Sure, these people “believe” in what they’re doing, but since those beliefs, and the actions that follow from them, are tied so closely to their interests, they should transact at close to a 100% discount.
On a lighter note,…
The authors of the article, “What Doesn’t Kill You Will Only Make You More Risk-Loving: Early-Life Disasters and CEO Behavior,”
were just awarded a 2015 “Ig-Nobel” prize in Management:
“for discovering that many business leaders developed in childhood a fondness for risk-taking, when they experienced natural disasters (such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and wildfires) that — for them — had no dire personal consequences.”
http://www.improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2015
I think they have subconscious resentment issues…roots of bitterness that are blossoming into attacks on public schools and teachers.
His quote below always stuck with me, why would a 58yr-old choose to remember a peer as a ‘moron’?
“Gates, who is 58, was wearing a rumpled blue monogrammed shirt. He is slim and speaks in a sort of nasal staccato, often adding exclamation to sentences that might not seem to require them. But his curiosity about education is innate and at times obsessive. Without prompting, he recounted getting a bad grade in an eighth-grade geography course (“They paired me up with a moron, and I realized these people thought I was stupid, and it really pissed me off!”) and the only C-plus he ever received, in organic chemistry, at Harvard (“I’m pretty sure. I’d have to double-check my transcript. I think I never ever got a B ever at Harvard. I got a C-plus, and I got A’s!”).”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/magazine/so-bill-gates-has-this-idea-for-a-history-class.html?_r=0
I suspect Bill Gates has the same problem that many if not most of us have: we see things from our own perspective and are not even aware that there might be another way of looking at something that is of equal value. I think I would love taking a Big History class as a cross disciplinary class, but if I was interested in studying some segment of Asian history or even a world history survey, big history would leave me with “big” gaps because of its different agenda. I’m not sure why one course has to replace another; they both seem to be of value as introductory classes.
Maybe they do have sub-conscious resentments because they are all “know it all” drop-outs with agendas.
I don’t buy the revenge theory. It’s elitism and seriously puffed-up, power-drunk egos. Most play-ahs in the ed reform game never attended a public school or university. I suppose part of the appeal of charter schools to this faction of reformers is that they think – naively – that charters offer a semblance of a “private school” experience to the masses.
Sharon in NYS: your last sentence—
TAGO!
Another part of its appeal to the heavyweights of the self-proclaimed “education reform” movement?
The owner of this blog quite aptly put it: “vanity projects.”
Thank you for your comments.
😎
I must be stupid! I have a slight speech impediment, therefore, I was not allowed to achieve an education degree. (I was told I would harm a student because I had a slight issue.) Instead of being mean spirited and supporting vouchers and testing – reform, I am stepping up the plate and show that I belong in public education – maybe not as a teacher – but as an investor. I am working hard to develop a district-wide alumni association to help support public education. I hope that it leads to the develop of other support efforts in districts across my state.
Perhaps you could have taught highly academic high school students. They wouldn’t be mean and probably not confused.
Hi Diane,
You’ve seen my ramblings here before, not really well thought out because of too much to say with too much emotion getting in the way of a good post. However, I’d just like to say that I’m tired: tired of the Wealthy and their middle management (politicians) railroading us Little People into fearing for our livelihoods. I’ve been teaching for ten years, I finally found a profession I’m good at because I love it and these people simply want to take it away from me. Essentially, they want the money I spent years of education and experience to earn, no more. In addition to Opt Out, I’m ready for slightly more direct action, things such as sit-ins, teach-ins, marches, door-to-door rallying. The political process simply does not favor–let alone work for–us little people, us teachers. I’m tired of it. Any advice?
I’ve been badgering my district to unite those of us on Long Island to pick a near future date where every educator takes an unpaid day to protest together. Yes the students will not have teachers for a day but this fight is larger than that. Imagine every Long island school educator together in Times Square?? 20,000 to 30,000…surely the governor would be forced to talk or risk having tens of thousands of students either packed in a school supervised by a few or roaming the streets
Perhaps parents and students would join you!
Thanks! I did tutor students, refugees and immigrants, under a local program to boost test scores. ALL of my students raised their state scores by 25% – no simple feat – In part to my instruction.
Which says someone did not know what they were talking about when they denied you a degree in education. You are a teacher.
EE, Call NJ Communities United 973-623-1828. Field organizer Roberto Cabaneas was involved in effective efforts re Newark Public Schools: trip to AEI in DC for Cami Anderson’s scheduled/ultimately videotaped speech. Also Newark Students Union sit-in at Anderson’s Board Office. Google Newark Students Union & Bob Braun’s Ledger/Jersey Jazzman/Danielskatz.net to read all they did 2014-15 school year. Good luck.
I think the problems of ed-reform are grounded more ignorance than animus. Elizabeth Bowen has suggested, “Some people are molded by their admirations, others by their hostilities.” If this is true it is possible that some reformers, Christie perhaps (don’t know enough about him to know if this is true) may be driven by their memories of a “Mr. Chips” type teacher and are trying to make all teachers like this one teacher (or group of teachers or school experience) they have romanticized As Oscar Wilde has suggested, “the truth is rarely pure and never simple.” When we try to reduce things to simple truths, especially when those truths have been romanticized, we are probably headed for trouble. As Menken has suggested, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” I think this is a problem in America that has gotten worse over time. As a nation we want to believe in simple solutions, especially simple non-costly solutions, because they are easy to grasp and do not tax our minds too much. We want to “go with our gut.” But the gut was designed for digesting food and not for solving problems. I know this is true for me and I imagine for others as well, that I am most likely to make a mistake, a bad choice, when I am convinced I am right. My conviction often relieves me of the responsibility of thinking through an issue and examining it carefully. I was raised to believe that intelligent people can disagree and there are people on most sides of an issue can make reasonable arguments for what they believe. So I know there will always be differences, but we can be reasonable and respectful. A large part of the problem with ed-reform is that the reformers think they are right about everything and that those that disagree are right about nothing. Whether those convictions are the result of hostilities or of admirations isn’t really the issue, it is the silencing of dissent which in a democracy ought to be anathema.
Cordially,
J. D. Wilson, Jr.
For the politicians it is more about their donors than their personal experiences or ideologies. However, when one grew up with a silver spoon, its hard for them to get a grasp of how the lower class live. They don’t concern themselves with the day to day minutia of how one will keep a roof over their kids heads, feed them, work 2 jobs, keep them safe in a not so safe neighborhood, stay out of jail, dodge gunshots, carjackings and homicides. This is the furthest thing from Chris Christie’s mind. He got out of Newark. He lives in affluent Mendham, and has sent his kids only to “the best” schools.
Reform is for “those” people – the kids of “those” people, and they love the no excuses charters because they are meant not only to train and punish the children of “those” people, but they feel they have to punitively push the disobedience out of those young “scholars.” They use the word scholars to mean future criminal or native savage.
I forget what piece I read, but basically it was about how charters are meant to train the kids to behave and be obedient, which is why they start out with K-1 or K-2–charters can’t train the older kids unless they get a hold of them at an early age. As they kids age, many are counseled out–perhaps they were not trainable.
Calling them scholars, keeping them in school longer, making them be silent, punishing them for the smallest detail…..doesn’t lift them out of poverty. When the school day ends, “those” kids return to a neighborhood that isn’t so great, where nothing has changed, where bullets fly, where cars are jacked, where people are mugged and beaten to get into gangs. Many of “those” kids live in fear every day of their lives. Putting them in for-profit charter schools and ignoring the facts is a true disservice–and it doesn’t make the reformers feel good about themselves–it only serves to fatten their bank accounts, and continues to allow them to feel superior.
Which political persuasion: ” They believe the current form of standardized testing advances bureaucracy more than it advances education, and hope to “use testing to advance real learning, not undermine it, by developing high-quality assessments that measure the complex skills students need to develop. We will make sure that federal law operates with high standards and common sense, not just bureaucratic rigidity.”
A little self-discipline can go a long way, so unless I experience what these militaristic charters are like, I won’t comment. However, if that is the goal, they are not successful since they eliminate those who do not behave. There are plenty of kids who will do all of the above. I sent six of thirty-six out to sit in the hall one day and had no problem. The remaining thirty stayed on task. Another day, I took twelve misbehaviors to a separate room, called one parent, and had no problem testing these students while their teacher tested the remaining twenty-four. The students who are being treated to stiff discipline probably do not even need it.
The common thread appears to be parochial and private schools. Both selective. They have no idea what goes on. Riordan thought he could make public schools like parochial schools, which he thought were more successful with the poor. He didn’t meet the kid kicked out of parochial school because his reading score was too low. I guess ignorance is bliss for reformers. I should have pointed this out to him at the time. Mea Culpa.
Only teachers understand the giant impact of selectivity. Non-teachers, we see the whole gamut of humanity in the public school classroom. The brain damaged, The psychopaths (they manifest early). The budding criminals (they manifest early). The obsessive compulsive. The (usually lovable) oddities, maniacs, barbarians, etc. Just one or two of these types of our fellow humans can derail a whole class… for a whole year. Year after year. I fluctuate between deploring and loving this inclusivity. But there’s no doubt it makes public school teaching a wild ride. It makes teaching a messy business that has as much to do with psychological finesse and compassion as subject mastery. To punish schools for not turning these non-standard humans into good test takers denigrates the real and inescapable work teachers do to socialize these kids, to care for them, and to mitigate the harms from their behaviors. Test scores may not rise, but that does not mean that a lot of valuable and essential work has not been done.
‘As Menken has suggested, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” ‘
I could have highlighted and reposted your entire comment. I chose the easy way out that while important does not give you any credit for your thoughts. I hope everyone will go back and reread what you had to say.
I think that what you chose to highlight is really the most important point and it sums up much of politics today, not just in relation to education, but to most other things as well. Thanks for the kind comments.
Cordially,
J. D. Wilson, Jr.
Thanks so much for mentioning my article on your blog, Diane. I really appreciate it. Corporate education reform just doesn’t make any logical sense. These ideas have failed over and over. Maybe the only way to make sense of them is a psychological explanation like this one. The pattern certainly is thought provoking.
I’m sorry but this is not a good argument. It assumes that a poor or mediocre “school student” has only him or herself to blame, and that there was no flaw in the institution. That poor or mediocre grades means a poor or mediocre person.
Many students do not fit into — what was to them — a rigid system. This is true for some of our most brilliant minds. Are we going to accuse them of malice and self-interest? For wanting to change the system?
I’m not saying Bill Gates is “right” about his specific methods of school reform. Like Virginiasgp, I disagree strongly with his proposed solutions. But I have no doubt that somewhere in there, both of these people have a good point. Bill Gates does have at least one noble motive to improve schools: It is quite true that our schools need to diversify and modernize.
While we’re doing “psychoanalysis,” let me flip this around. Those who made good grades in school, those who had a good time and think everything worked out fine for them — these people often want to keep things the same, because it worked out for them personally. After all, if you are socially rewarded for coloring inside the lines, it is unlikely you will find issue with whatever happened in your own schooling experience.
The school system is NOT FLAWLESS, and people who made less-than-stellar grades (or even people who dropped out) cannot be reduced to simply “rationalizing” or “revenge.” Those who didn’t do well in school are sometimes MORE qualified to see the system’s inherent problems.
This is a bad angle to attack from. It is not honest or fair. It potentially undermines some of our motive for authentic improvement — the fact that the institution is fallible, and does not serve or judge everyone well.
Hi Teacher Steven Singer:
If your suggestion is correct, then what would be an educational solution to deal with these “MINDS”?
I would be interested to learn your would-be-solution.
IMHO, due to my belief in Karma that I was brought up, I would challenge all “good intention”, but “bad consequence” business tycoons who will swear to their human conscience and to immediately accept their reward/ penalty according to their intention.
As Chris, a blogger in this website, has mentioned that karma is really real, I have also experienced my own challenge to the universal law of Karma (twice in ocean and a mild stroke) in order to pledge my conviction in humanity.
Life is very short to enjoy doing good deed but it would be very long to suffer from INTENTIONALLY doing bad deeds. I profoundly beg the authority like parents, government officials, business leaders, all administrators, and teachers NOT TO IMPOSE your own judgment whether it is good or bad OVER innocent mind due to different cultural background in the past, present, or trendy.
For example: heterosexuality versus homosexuality; high IQ vs. low IQ; fatso vs. skinny;
white vs. color; civilized vs. salvage…
People all enjoy a good company of trust, sincerity and kindness.
People will learn and adapt accordingly with true love and care in their own pace without superficial measurement.
There are always some things that are nurturing for certain people, but are poison to others. For example, praise and sweet talk are considered as a nurture to the inferior (=motivate the timidity to do better), but poison to the superior (= puff up the ego to commit the crime). Back2basic
I wholeheartedly agree, but please change the “Marwuette” to “Marquette” for our own educational credibility.