Martin Levine, writing in NonProfit Quarterly, reviews the latest statement by the President of the Gates Foundation, Sue Desmond-Hellman, and concludes that the foundation is unwilling to learn from its mistakes.
After Bill Gates had invested hundreds of millions of dollars in creating small schools, he abruptly abandoned that idea and moved on, with little reflection.
“The foundation’s lessons learned from this experience did not result in any questioning of their core belief that the answer to building a more equitable society would be found within our public schools. They just shifted their focus to increasing the number of charter schools, creating test-based teacher evaluation systems, improving school and student data management, and setting universal standards through the common core curriculum. Each has struggled, and none appear to have been effective.
“In 2014, the BMGF supported InBloom, an effort to create a national educational data management system, shut down after parents protested the collection and storage in the cloud of data on their children. Various states withdrew their support, and NPQ reported last September on the failure of one of these Gates-funded initiatives, Empowering Effective Teachers.
“Desmond-Hellman has led the foundation as it has invested heavily in the effort to create a national set of learning standards, the Common Core Curriculum. Despite over $300 million in foundation funding, alliances with other large foundations, and strong support from the U.S. Department of Education, the effort has drawn bitter opposition and decreasing support. The strong push that the DoE gave states to implement the Common Core was seen as an unwanted intrusion of federal power into local schools. The use of Common Core to build a testing regimen for students and teachers was seen as disruptive and ineffective. Test data show little impact on bridging the inequity gap in states using Common Core.
“Would not an organization that seeks to be a learning organization want to step back and consider whether their core assumptions are on target in light of their difficult experiences? Perhaps, but not the Gates Foundation. Desmond-Hellmann remains “optimistic that all students can thrive when they are held to high standards. And when educators have clear and consistent expectations of what students should be able to do at the end of each year, the bridge to opportunity opens. The Common Core State Standards help set those expectations.” Not a word about the impact of poverty, or the trauma of community violence, or systemic racism as even small considerations.”
In a display of smugness, the Gates Foundation blames public resistance to the Common Core on the critics, not on their assumptions about school reform.
What the Gates Foundation has thus far demonstrated is the inability to say, “We were wrong.”

It’s so hard to read about this stuff. What really bothers me is that the elite do not choose this type of education for their own children. They deliberately place their children in schools with rich arts, low test pressure, free/invigorating programs that have rigor but rigor that is not defined by test results. They don’t have to worry about test scores typically because the kids at these schools are all well-resourced. How they can turn and press impoverished children into harsh conditions that discourage the joy of learning, creativity, etc. is bizarre. There are lots of false assumptions underlying this politically -connected trend. The threat and hostility in education these days is so discouraging. And we do NOT have a successful alternative model in charter schools that is proven to serve all kids. All of the successful charters sort and select….Those that are failing massively get a ‘pass’ because they are dealing with ‘hard kids’ – but the public schools are threatened because they have those same kids and can’t get sufficient results – though they do better than the charters! And they don’t lie about their data (without severe consequence). I could go on…
LikeLike
The Gates Foundation has made no mistakes — the Con-Foundation is achieving its goals right on schedule. It is only other people who are confused about the nature of those goals. No doubt misled by the PR smoke Gates, Inc. keeps blowing, but that is just the nature of the game.
LikeLike
The Gates Foundation is “optimistic that all students can thrive when they are held to high standards.” What they fail to understand is that standards are not raised by testing. Testing is measurement; it is not a program. Higher standards are achievable through a lot of planning and curriculum changes. As Camins pointed out yesterday, “reformers” want instant results without the commitment and hard work it takes to get there. They want staff improvement without staff development. Gates also believes any number of gimmicks and gadgets are what our students need. It is not that easy! Students perform best under the guidance of trained, empathetic teachers, not robots. Camins also pointed out that “reform” does not want to address the root cause of students’ problems which is often poverty, and all the dysfunction associated with it. “Reform” does not want to educate the whole child, but this is necessary to help the whole child perform better. Shortcuts will not solve our problems, and neither will policies based on false assumptions or bullying and badgering teachers.
LikeLike
Reform doesn’t want to educate all children.
They never have and never will.
LikeLike
If you’re trying to use technology to support education, you’ve been failing from the start. If, on the other hand, you’re trying to use education to support the technology industry, you’ve had some $ucce$$ and will want to keep going. Just don’t call yourself a philanthropist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There it is; you’ve said it: If you think “reform” is about technology supporting education, you’ve simply got it backwards!
LikeLike
Gates doesn’t admit it’s wrong because it isn’t. Making money, in a monopoly setting, is best achieved through the strategies (1) Common Core, which is the “human capital pipeline”, described by Gates-funded Bellwether and, (2) Bridge International Academies, a retailer owned by Bill Gates et. al., that sells schools-in-a-box (The necessary interim step is charter schools, which pave the way to the public’s acceptance of BIA.)
Gates, himself says it. “…When the tests are aligned to the Common Core standards, the curriculum will live up as well and that will unleash powerful market forces…” The Gates-funded New Schools Venture Fund “marching orders…. To develop charter management organizations that produce a diverse supply of different brands on a large scale.”
If Bill Gates had the ability to, and/or interest in, making better products, he would focus on the technical end of Microsoft. He went elsewhere, fixating on a $500 bil. market, in public education, without competitors.
Gates would only be wrong if the objective was improved education and, that argument is put to rest by the choice of reformers to send their children to schools that reject their plot for the kids of the 99%.
The plutocratic media led Americans away from the profit taking truth, shifting its attention to the absurd PR of fixing schools, that they labeled, in general terms as broken.
Gates’ look-a-likes e.g. Koch, did the same thing with public pensions, creating a false scenario solved with profits on the backs of working people. It’s what colonialist do.
LikeLike
Gates was not wrong in the sense that his plan could not potentially do what he said — if everything went as planned.
But he was wrong to assume that things would work out as he planned.
In fact, he was actually very stupid to believe they would. The fellow is a fairly typical nerd who is woefully ignorant on most subjects but thinks he knows it all. I spent a good pat of my working life around twits like Gates.
Gates understands technology but he does not understand people — above all, that people do not like just being ordered around, especially not by some billionaire who believes he knows the best way to do everything, with complete disregard for the knowledge, expertise and customs of other people.
LikeLike
..and “what he said’ was that the common core standard would create markets.
LikeLike
The people who carry out his orders, shock me with their reach, in inviting people, to ask the Foundation for cash.
LikeLike
This is an amazing review to have been published in the NonProfit Quarterly. It is certainly an accurate portrayal of failure on a grand scale and indifference to outcomes in spite of much posturing about acting on and seeking evidence of outcomes.
The latest investments, in addition to tech and charters, is teacher education with the phoney Relay Graduate School of Education program one among others in Massachusetts, Michigan, Texas, and Louisiana. All of these initiatives are designed to reduce or eliminate the role of higher education in teacher preparation, reduce the engagement of teachers in content and job-specific professional associations ( e.g., National Council of Teachers of English), kill independent judgments by teachers, undermine academic freedom, put a new system for accrediting teacher ed programs based on the “effectiveness” of their graduates on the job, especially test scores.
It is not just in the “education sector,” where Gates insists he is right. A remarkable book called Pandemic speaks of the role of Gates money in shaping the agenda of the World Health Organization, with the WHO among the last to address the Ebola crisis because their major funding streams had so many strings attached to them. Same for maleria. He keeps pouring money into a program that is not working and that distracts attention from practical programs.
In these observations, I say “he” because Bill Gates seems to delight in self congratulation and being in the limelight more than Melinda (although they can also function as a well rehearsed team).
I hope that Martin Levine will also do a report on the Clinton Foundation where Bill Gates (not Melina) has a presence and where there is an evident interest in ….. ” career and college readiness,” and propagating read by grade three with the help of the Annie E Casey Foundation. That is in addition to the CF promotions of pay for success contracts and social impact bonds as strategies for addressing social services, including preschool education. In other words, address the problems that lend themselves to making profits.
LikeLike
Great post. When reading your second paragraph, I thought of the oxymoron: Diversity through standardization!
We must personalize learning but we must standardized tests and teachers functioning on set protocols. We must not deviate from our task of reaching students where they are at by evaluating them all the same way. And then making all judgments on the basis of that single data point. We must train educators to do little more than improve test scores since that is the only data point that matters.
But, don’t worry. It really isn’t all about gearing everything to standardized tests.
LikeLike
The Clinton Foundation made a mess in Haiti where Bill was appointed “economic czar.” When Hillary stated Bill would be her economic czar, it made me cringe at the thought of all the neo-liberal disasters that could be inflicted on us. Their failed Haitian experiment had top down colonialism at its core. http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2016/05/wikileaks-reveals-hillary-clinton.html
LikeLike
I have a feeling that Melinda just stays out of Bill’s way when he gets an idea in his head.
If what former business partner Paul Allen and others who have worked with him have said is the least bit accurate, Gates is not a pleasant person to work with — mainly because he believes he is always right.
I can’t imagine what it must be like to live in the same house with Bill.
His wife and kids are probably just glad that the Gates mansion is so ginormous. It must be sort of like living down the street from an unpleasant neighbor.
LikeLike
As a generalization, based on anecdote, women who need inordinate control of their environments (possibly because of an unstable situation) and, who feel denied that control, compensate by controlling their weight to, very thin levels. When they are married to competitive, egomaniacal men, they make adjustments, that would shock many of us.
Sudden publication of pseudo-interview, puff pieces, may reflect recognition of a problem/vulnerability. Or, it could be, a king using media for myth-building.
LikeLike
“The Gates Effect”
Dunning-Kruger on crack
That’s the Gates Effect
Forge ahead and hack
Minus all respect
LikeLike
You know if they hired real educators and teachers they might be successful. Apparently, they like to hire a lot of brown-nosers.
LikeLike
Thinking that the article might serve as a cautionary tale for other non-profits. Who would have thought that this was the scholarship that Gates and the foundation would advance? Hah-hah!
LikeLike
Put aside whether or not the specific policies pushed by Gates and others are worthy or not. The faulty core idea is that voluntary spending of people with money is a better way to decide and achieve social policies goals than democracy or a more progressive income tax. People with money and ideas would prefer to preserve their spending prerogatives and enhanced influence than pay more taxes and leave decisions to voters. Ideally, when elected officials spend tax dollars on ideas that don’t work or are wasteful, they can get voted out of office. When foundations do so, they say, “whoops,” and move on. Is this any way to run a country?
http://www.arthurcamins.com
LikeLike
..and it’s a two-fer* because they actually get a tax break by setting up a “foundation” and basically “laundering” the money through that.
*actually a three-fer because it allowed Gates to accomplish political goals as well. Non-profits like gates foundation are not suppose to be allowed to use their money for political purposes but Common Core initiative was highly political.
LikeLike
Thanks Poet for reminding me about the “no politics” foundation rules. That’s why Aspen’s “Senior Congressional Education Staff Network”, funded by Gates, blathers about “structuring a safe place… (that’s) non-partisan and non-ideological”. Shielding the key Congressional education staff from whatever “unsafe” bogeymen are out there, has resulted in a policy that, by happenstance, enriches Silicon Valley and hedge funds.
LikeLike
If Gates is about helping others and “empowerment” and “voice” shouldn’t they be able to point to a Gates initiative that was created by local people in these cities and districts and funded by Gates?
They’ve been at this for 20 years. No local person has ever had an idea worth funding?
LikeLike
We’d all be better off if Gates and other billionaires paid more tax so they would have to contribute to the ‘common good’ rather than misguided, manipulative pet projects to be inflicted on others. I am not saying we need to restore the Eisenhower tax rates, but those rates helped build the middle class. http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/under-eisenhower-the-top-tax-rate-was-91-percent-was-he-a-socialist
LikeLike
Based on my conversation with a former curriculum director, who wanted to apply for a Gates grant- the Gates Foundation doesn’t accept applications from people, who have not been invited to, access the Gates ATM.
Sounds like the imperial treatment, “Don’t speak unless spoken to.”
LikeLike
Linda, the Gates Foundation rarely puts out a request for proposals (RFP). The last that I know of was for teacher education in late 2015, with awards in December of that Year. The RFP came with a bunch of stipulations including a focus on the Common Core and a program design that offered proofs that it could be scaled up. So, one of the five awards went to the phoney Relay Graduate School of Education,others went to programs that reduced teacher education to learning some skill-sets with minimal oversight from university faculty.
LikeLike