Emily Talmage describes the fight against the edtech industry in New England. The resolutions passed by the Massachusetts Teachers Association are a landmark in teachers’ efforts to block privatization, data mining, and replacement of teachers by machines. Most of the pressure to capitulate, she says, emanate from the Nellie Mae Foundation.
The odd fact about the drive to promote blended learning is that the evidence base is non-existent.
The successes in Massachusetts show that an awakened public and teaching profession can beat the powerful forces of the edtech industry.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Our children are not dogs. They deserve more than to be trained. They deserve to be taught and educated. The EdTech movement can only train and collect data. Teachers can teach and educate a free populace.
LikeLike
Go MTA! Show us how to support education. This is great news.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here is my take on my brush with a blended learning middle school in Providence, RI. Nellie Mae and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, among others, have been pouring money into RI to make it the first personalized learning lab state. If only our RI teachers unions would follow the lead of the MTA.
See especially Alison Hawver McDowell’s thoroughly researched blog post: https://wrenchinthegears.com/2017/04/02/dear-rhode-island-that-april-fools-day-blended-learning-conference-is-no-joke/
LikeLiked by 1 person
It baffles me why the adults are so convinced children want to spend all this time on devices at school.
Why did they all swallow the “digital natives” nonsense whole? It seemed so clearly a marketing ploy. These adults really believe children are fundamentally different as human beings with the advent of the Chromebook?
Is it the tech industry itself? They think this industry is somehow “better” or more noble than others? I know that’s how the tech industry wants to be perceived but you’re not supposed to just swallow that. It’s really brutal and cut-throat! Like every other commercial venture, ever.
I’m amazed by it. No one ran around claiming Henry Ford was a humanitarian. He sold cars and part of how he sold cars is ran ads that equated cars with autonomy and freedom. Nothing wrong with selling cars but no one kidded themselves he was REALLY about “empowering people”.
Do they treat food producers like this? The people who make and sell processed foods and sell it to schools have a noble goal other than selling processed food? Of course not. Everyone treats them like they’re vying for huge public contracts, because that’s what they are doing.
The “free!” thing is a really old marketing idea. You give them the lowest tier product free and then upsell them on the product you charge for. This is like circa 1860, yet for some reason if tech companies do it we all ooh and aah. They want you dependent on the systems. Once you are they’ll sell you one that works better to replace the clunker they gave you. Maybe that’s worthwhile and maybe it’s not but it’s just selling product.
LikeLike
Well said, Chiara. Most of my 11-15 year-old students would give throaty approval to your opening two paragraphs.
LikeLike
YES. So confusingly true: when the tech companies do ANYTHING, we seem to have no power but to ooh and ahh.
LikeLike
“These adults really believe children are fundamentally different as human beings with the advent of the Chromebook?”
Yes, of course they are! Ever since the great Billy Gates decreed such!!
LikeLike
Let’s not lose sight of the nuances. There is indeed a wealth of evidence supporting the benefits of blended learning. Nonetheless, the fight against the edtech entrepreneurs is an important one. It pivots on who controls the learning situation, whether, and exactly how the technology is used to support the pedagogy and genuinely reinforce learning.
Ed tech, in the hands of well-trained lifelong educators, can support pedagogy and bolster learning—of this there can be no doubt. I compare the situation to placing music software and MIDI hardware in the hands of those who have not been trained in music theory and don’t play an instrument. They’ll almost certainly be able to make sounds that at some level can be considered “music.” That music will almost certainly not approach the level attainable by trained players and composers of music. The same can be demonstrated by comparing the use of Photoshop and Illustrator, or Blender and various software animation tools by those who can draw, and study art history and composition, vs. those who can’t, and don’t.
Do parents and society at large really want to hand over their children’s formative years to people whose first concern is the marketing and profitability of their product? If software engineers aren’t willing to work with experienced professional educators to conceive, design and implement tools we can prove genuinely support student learning, should anyone trust them?
LikeLike
“There is indeed a wealth of evidence supporting the benefits of blended learning.”
Post a bit of that wealth here, wouldja? Thanks.
LikeLike
To clarify, if you’re talking about using computers as tools in the learning process (for example, learning to code, or using the internet for research, or doing computerized animation or film editing, etc.), you’re right, there can be great benefits. I think very few would argue with that and few oppose the use of tech in schools for those purposes.
But that’s not what “blended learning” is. “Blended learning” is when students have a blend of being taught by a teacher and being “taught” [sic] by computer, in terms of being plugged into “individualized” learning modules that may or may not “adjust to the student”. That is what most of us here object to. Computers cannot teach and students do not “learn” from them, any more than they “learn” from a hammer. Computers are tools to be used.
LikeLike
“is when students have a blend of being taught by a teacher and being “taught” [sic] by computer,”
Correct Dienne77! A student is trained by computers in a Skinnerian/Pavlovian fashion to do the bidding of the person(s) who made the program, not “taught (sic) by a computer”. There is no teaching involved as the word “teaching” implies a teacher and a student, not a student and computer. Indeed language does matter.
LikeLike
Richard, I can see your point; it is the hyper marketing of these technology “tools” for learning that goes way overboard. In the 70s we had a discussion about “individualized education” as part of a research grant with Malcolm Provus (and NEA). we came to the suggestion that “individually guided’ was a better way to frame it because to promise something that we couldn’t deliver as teachers would be unfair to students. The technology as evaluated by Henry Levin I can support based on his studies but then the marketers take this and say “aspirin works , my product is like aspirin or “better than” aspirin so therefore buy my product.” This is not “research” and marketing studies are not research; they over-generalize with hype but the results cannot be promised the way the sales marketing is performed ad paraded.. I get angry at Commissioner M. Chester when he tells states to “uy pearson tests because they have implementation protocols”. and he tells the other states to “sign on with Jeb Bush Chiefs for Change”. and I know what happened in FL. ; we need some levity and this over-marketing of stuff is fraud but it is captured by people who do not want to fund education (or health care, or human service safety net).
LikeLike
Thank you for helping us amplify the good news, Diane!
LikeLike
Emily, you are a tough audience.
LikeLike
????
LikeLike
Tough audiences are good audiences, eh, Diane!?! 🙂
LikeLike
I hope everyone attending the Boston NEA meeting will take inspiration from the work done by the NEA and build on it. We need to keep up the momentum. I hope to see similar NBIs in the coming weeks.
For those who do not yet understand why the datafication of education is taking place, you need to recognize that public education is being transformed into a global financial market where students, schools and districts will be commodified through real-time data flows coming in via these online learning platforms. https://wrenchinthegears.com/2017/04/04/global-finance-needs-our-schools-to-fail/
Investments will be made in ed-tech using Pay for Success and social impact financing. Down the line those investments will be securitized, sold, speculated upon via derivatives, and I foresee credit defaults swaps down the road. They know this will fail, so those looking to “short” public education will win big if they time it right. Meanwhile society falls apart, and ignorance prevails.
We can’t let that happen. Follow the MTA’s lead and stop this. But please understand those behind this transition know exactly what they are doing. Austerity and public-private partnerships factor in as well This is not a matter of “educating” them. Outright resistance and refusal to comply is what will be required.
LikeLike
Sorry, that second line should read MTA
LikeLike
watch for the DFER contingent; also, Baker appointed a woman from Lawrence to an early childhood board (because she supports charters) and he appoints this man. whom I believe has serous conflict of interest…. and now they want “Empowerment” schools because the charter school ballot question went down 60/40%
“He is the Chairman of the Springfield Empowerment Zone Partnership, a groundbreaking partnership between the state and district aimed at accelerating success for middle school students. He is a Partner Emeritus at Bessemer Venture Partners where he helped entrepreneurs build biotechnology companies.
Gabrieli has served in several higher education board roles at Harvard, Boston University’s School of Public Health and Clark University.”
LikeLike
I just looked at the Nellie Mae website and decided to click on the link to the 2015 IRS 990 form.
According to the IRS form 990, this foundation put a lot of money in offshore accounts in just one year, $11,043,228 total, plus investments in “Central America and the Caribbean” valued at $75,278, 885.
Three “funds” were in the Grand Cayman Islands, three investment firms were in the Chanel Islands, add one firm each in Luxembourg and Spain. Nellie Mae also paid $63,500 to a lobbying firm to advance its legislative agenda.
$245,593 Grand Cayman Islands Ridotto Investors Blue LTD
$5,000,000 Grand Cayman Islands Knighthead Offshore Fund
$5,000,000 Grand Cayman Islands Lakewood Capital Offshor fund
$151,762 Chanel Islands, Jersey Helix investments
$115,005 Chanel Islands, Jersey Magni Investments
$144,779 Chanel Islands, Jersey Chronos investments
$116,250 Luxembourg VFC Investments
$269,839 Spain San Jose Desarrollos Inmobiliarios
$11,043,228
Click to access Form-990-2015.pdf
I am not a CPA. I am not a wizard with IRS regulations but this foundation’s 990 tax form is off the chart with influence peddling and legislative meddling comparable to that of ALEC but with small difference. Nellie Mae is using a version of “collective impact” investing forwarded by the “Education Funders Strategy Group,” and by the National Public Education Support Fund Initiative titled “Partnership for the Future of Learning.”
The basic strategy is to spread money around in order to build “public will” for a policy initiative (stories from students, parents, teachers; cash awards and other perks with high visibility press flowing to forward-thinking state, district, and school administrators and early adapters (and endorsers) of products. The aim is get lots of good feeling and publicity from so-called “stakeholders” while working on policies that are actionable in the state legislature. Nellie Mae paid for targeted lobbying. If you look at the website you can seen that these steps and few others have been the focus of the Nellie Mae foundation for the last two years. The aim is system-wide change, top to bottom, from policy to practice, as fast as possible (the accelerator principle) and at scale (forget small pilot programs). This is the “Future of Learning” Initiative.
A long time ago, I did some consulting for a new foundation. Leading this new venture was a former chairman of the SEC. In one memorable session devoted to education, he asked: “How do we create a demand for X in education?” He was an expert in matters of supply and demand. He had a huge supply of money but no clear demand for X in education! I had never thought of education that way. Silly me.
Today’s version of the problem of creating a demand for X is literally “throwing money at the problem.” Billionaires have the money and they are throwing it around like it really does matter. And it does.
The resources are being used to try every tried and true and underhanded method of building demand. In the foundation world, creating demand for X is now called “cultivating a public will” to support X–whether the X is the Common Core, college and career readiness, charter schools, “choice,” or so-called personalized learning, with competency based learning at the center of that.
Branding and meme-making is one part of the overall strategy. Personalized learning is intended to activate feelings of care and concierge-like service, but the real deal is usually depersonalized computers delivering conventional and canned content. Decisions about education are being outsourced from teachers and students and parents to designers of delivery systems that also include student management dashboards and nonstop “embedded” tests determined by algorithms.
Data? Evidence? “Nice, but not necessary.” Just fund some universities and researchers who will generate data-driven reports on impacts, outcomes, and so on.
Take some time to look at the Nellie Mae IRS 990 form for 2015. Count the number of grants Nellie Mae pushed out the door in New England states in an effort to capture public education and to create the illusion that the takeover was a matter of “public will.”
The same strategies are being used elsewhere because the template for takeovers is being refined by the “education funders” who listen to the thirty members of the “Education Strategy Group” put together by Bill Gates.
LikeLike
Thanks for a great post, Laura! Very interesting! It is so difficult to halt the forced march of the billionaires when they buy influence in every arena.
LikeLike
Laura, may I use some of your post above in a blog? You provided some really important information that we need to broadcast as best we can!
LikeLike
Of course.
LikeLike
Diane From EDTech: ISTE 2017: Google, Tech Titans to Make Their Pitches Directly to Educators
By Benjamin Herold on June 23, 2017 8:52 AM
Partial article, all quoted below then link:
The country’s largest education technology conference will kick off in San Antonio this weekend, drawing thousands of teachers and school administrators from across the world—and hundreds of companies eager to pitch their latest products.
The gathering of the International Society for Technology in Education will be the first overseen by the group’s new CEO, Richard Culatta, who formerly helmed the Office of Education Technology at the U.S. Department of Education.
The conference comes at a time of increased public scrutiny on the role of technology companies in the nation’s schools. In recent months, for example, the New York Times took a front-page look at “How Google Took Over the Classroom.” The Times also investigated the declining K-12 fortunes of Microsoft and Apple.
Also in May, EdWeek Market Brief took a deep dive into the cutthroat competition among those three tech giants, plus Amazon, for market share in K-12.
The conclusions from Market Brief’s exclusive national survey were clear: Educators are turning in droves to Google’s Chromebook devices and G Suite for Education online software tools, primarily because of the affordability, simplicity, and convenience they offer. END QUOTE more on link below:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/DigitalEducation/2017/06/iste_2017_google_tech_titans.html?cmp=eml-enl-eu-news3
LikeLike
Thanks for this info. “The gathering of the International Society for Technology in Education will be the first overseen by the group’s new CEO, Richard Culatta, who formerly helmed the Office of Education Technology at the U.S. Department of Education.” Well, as a Rhode Islander I have to add that in between those two lucrative jobs Culatta had a stint as Rhode Island’s first Chief Innovation Officer (not without controversy), appointed by Governor Raimondo.
LikeLike
The SCREENS are making us DUMB. Yesterday after I went back to the dentist’s office to check on my root canal, my husband met me at the coffee shop. I still can’t drive from that 5 foot fall backward onto my back from the ladder. I asked the young male behind the counter what kinds of CHAI they had. The menu didn’t help. He couldn’t speak to me. And when he did he mumbled something at me as he walked away. HUH? I asked him to repeat himself and he got all upset that he had to explain the different kinds of chai offered. HUH? This is why he is hired in the first place. He made my chai and then put it aside behind some other stuff. In frustration, I asked, “Where’s my order?” He mumbled something and pointed. In frustration I asked, “Do you only text?” What an unbelievable experience that was.
A young male fell off cliffs while taxing and jogging: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Man-Dies-After-Falling-Off-Cliff-at-Sunset-Cliffs-Lifeguards-363534491.html
Woman falls off cliff while texting: https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/woman-falls-off-cliff-while-texting/
Embarrassed mom falls into Lake Michigan while texting: http://www.theblaze.com/news/2012/03/23/embarrassed-mom-falls-into-lake-michigan-while-texting/
Couple dies taking selfie on edge of cliff: http://nypost.com/2014/08/11/couple-dies-taking-selfie-on-edge-of-cliff/
SEE” those screens are making us dumb.
LikeLike
correction: NOT TAXING, TEXTING. “A young male fell off cliffs while texting and jogging” Spell checker error; I need to proof more carefully.
LikeLike
Taxing, texting, tomato, tomahto, same difference. Texting taxes one’s being!
LikeLike
Brothers and sisters in the NEA and AFT, the MTA has taken a stand, but our national leadership has taken another wrong turn. We’re facing a seemingly impenetrable wall of lies, and it will take courage and stamina, but we can and must beat it. The people need us to free our unions from corporate gravy train.
Listen to Randi Weingarten sing the praises of IBMs FAILED medical program, Watson. I’ll link a story about that in a separate comment, in hopes that something might make it past the moderator.
“This builds on our work to provide educators with relevant, quality, authentic resources created by teachers themselves and other curricula experts. It fills a void that the education industry has left —a dearth of quality resources and assistance on which teachers can rely, rather than doing everything themselves. And it’s great that the IBM Foundation is giving Watson, developed for medical diagnoses and other purposes, to teachers for free. That’s really cool,”AFT President Randi Weingarten said.”
“Litow said there are plans to make Teacher Advisor available to all elementary school teachers across the U.S. before the end of the year. It begins with assisting teachers in their ability to teach math and was developed in close collaboration with the AFT, a broad national advisory group of renowned educators, education non-profits, and providers of high quality teaching content who worked closely with IBM’s technology experts.”
http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/50656.wss
LikeLike
IBM is a partner in the personalized learning initiative we are fighting in Massachusetts.
Trojan horses aren’t free. IBM wants to “launch new products for managing medical images and making sure hospitals deliver value for the money, as well as new partnerships with healthcare systems.”
Plus, the thing doesn’t work.
From Matt Harper at Forbes:
“Well, now that future is past. The partnership between IBM and one of the world’s top cancer research institutions is falling apart. The project is on hold, MD Anderson confirms, and has been since late last year. MD Anderson is actively requesting bids from other contractors who might replace IBM in future efforts. And a scathing report from auditors at the University of Texas says the project cost MD Anderson more than $62 million and yet did not meet its goals.”
“The disclosure comes at an uncomfortable moment for IBM. Tomorrow, the company’s chief executive, Ginni Rometty, will make a presentation to a giant health information technology conference detailing the progress Watson has made in healthcare, and announcing the launch of new products for managing medical images and making sure hospitals deliver value for the money, as well as new partnerships with healthcare systems.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2017/02/19/md-anderson-benches-ibm-watson-in-setback-for-artificial-intelligence-in-medicine/#2e8843cc3774
LikeLike
Mary,
The only time your comments are not posted is when you insult me. Not allowed.
LikeLike
I repost much of your blog and it goes through fine on my Facebook page. … so far.
LikeLike