Audrey Watters, writing a guest post on Larry Cuban’s blog, demonstrates the insidious nature of Jeff Bezos’ plan to create his own chain of pre-schools, where “the child is the customer.”
She writes:
“The assurance that “the child will be the customer” underscores the belief – shared by many in and out of education reform and education technology – that education is simply a transaction: an individual’s decision-making in a “marketplace of ideas.” (There is no community, no public responsibility, no larger civic impulse for early childhood education here. It’s all about private schools offering private, individual benefits.)
“This idea that “the child will be the customer” is, of course, also a nod to “personalized learning” as well, as is the invocation of a “Montessori-inspired” model. As the customer, the child will be tracked and analyzed, her preferences noted so as to make better recommendations to up-sell her on the most suitable products. And if nothing else, Montessori education in the United States is full of product recommendations.
“There’s another piece to all this, not mentioned in Bezos’s note about building a chain of preschools that “use the same set of principles that have driven Amazon”: Amazon’s own labor practices. The online retail giant is a notoriously terrible place to work – the pay, particularly in the warehouses, is so low that many employees receive government assistance. The working conditions are dangerous and dehumanizing. “Amazon has patented a system that would put workers in a cage, on top of a robot,” read the headline in last week’s Seattle Times. And it’s not so great for the white collar workers either. “Nearly every person I worked with, I saw cry at their desk,” one employee in books marketing told The New York Times back in 2015.
“The majority of the early childhood educators in the US are already very poorly paid; many preschools have incredibly high turnover rates. As research has demonstrated that preschool has a lasting positive effect on children’s educational attainment, there have been efforts to “raise the standards,” demanding for example that preschools be staffed by more qualified teachers. But that demand for more training and certification hasn’t brought with it better pay or benefits. The median pay for preschool teachers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is less than $30,000 a year. Even those with Bachelor’s degrees earn only about $14.70 an hour, about half of the average wages for all those with the same level of education.
“This is a field in which a third of employees already qualify for government assistance. And now Jeff Bezos, a man whose own workers also rely on these same anti-poverty programs, wants to step in – not as a taxpayer, oh no, but as a philanthropist. Honestly, he could have a more positive impact here by just giving those workers a raise. (Or, you know, by paying taxes.)”
Sadly, there will be parents who will get in line to have their children treated like Amazon customers, as there are parents who sign their children up for harsh and punitive “no-excuses” charters.

Audrey Watters’ posts are among the most disturbing dytopian scenarios out there. Her research and analysis are excellent and the money that is driving these schemes guarantees these experiments will be brought to fruition. Here’s one which exposes the links among Blockchain, Palantir and preschools:
LikeLike
I agree with your assessments. Audrey has been raising red flags on any issues, all supported with impeccable research. I added some information about Montessori education ( not Montessori lite) on Larry’s blog.
LikeLike
Just to clarify, the link you posted about Ronald Cohen is not by Audrey Watters.
LikeLike
Oh, I am so sorry! Please accept my apologies, and my admiration for your work.
LikeLike
Not a problem Christine. I don’t call out my name prominently on my blog. I have been frustrated that other researchers, Watters included, are not looking into impact investing given that it is being woven into all aspects of public service provision with major implications for ed-tech. She held a fellowship in education journalism at Columbia over the past year, and I tweeted her my work on impact investment in journalism from last Friday with no response/acknowledgement. It often seems there are unspoken rules about what will be covered/discussed and what will not be-though I never got any such memo and simply write what comes across my path and needs exposing.
LikeLike
I’ve signed a lot of petitions against poor practices at Amazon. Maybe the public outrage has something to do with this.
……………..
• Amazon will raise its minimum wage to $15 for all its U.S. workers, some 250,000 people, as of Nov. 1. That’s more than double the federal minimum wage.
LikeLike
I think we have Bernie Sanders to thank for putting the spotlight on the deplorable pay and conditions at the Amazon warehouses. The heat was on and Bezos caved in and offered $15/hour fig leaf (which is good). $15/hour amounts to about a little less than $30K, assuming a 40 hour work week. It’s still a poverty wage for NJ.
LikeLike
Bernie shamed Bezos into action. He introduced a bill that would have made wealthy companies pay taxes on every dollar that an employee gets from a social welfare program. That probably got Bezos attention.
LikeLike
Then Bezos got kudos for calling for a federal minimum of $15. Can’t folks see that’s not philanthropy but a means to keep his own playing field level? If Walmart has to pay their employees $15, they cannot undercut Bezos’ wage.
LikeLike
Go Bernie. I have signed petitions re: Amazon.
LikeLike
Bernie’s bill is a bad idea if you care about low wage workers. Government taxes discourage the use of the taxed good or service. This is true for low wage employees as it is for everything else. The wealthiest companies would react by working very hard to reduce their employment of these people by outsourcing and automation.
LikeLike
Right-wingers have claimed for decades that raising the minimum wage is very bad for low wage workers because there will be fewer jobs.
At a time of low unemployment, this is exactly the right time to raise the minimum wage.
Employers, including Amazon, are already doing as much as possible to mechanize, automate and outsource jobs to cut costs.
Why don’t you try living for a year on a total income of $15,000 and let us know how it goes?
LikeLike
I think everyone agrees that raising the minimum wage is going to reduce the number of jobs. If not, why not argue for a minimum wage of $25 so people would not have to live on less than $50,000 a year?
This proposal, however, is not a minimum wage but a tax on employing some kinds of workers. Suppose you are Amazon looking to employ a person for the upcoming holiday season. One candidate a 36 year old single parent of two who lives in section 8 housing, participates in SNAP and various Medicaid programs. The other candidate is a middle class teenager living in the parents home, insured by the parents insurance, and eating dinner at the parents table. Bernie’s proposal makes hiring the single parent much more expensive than hiring the middle class teenager. This proposal gives businesses the wrong incentives on hiring.
LikeLike
I heard the same arguments against raising the minimum wage to $7.25.
Oh, the moaning and gnashing of teeth!
None of it was true.
Please take my suggestion and try living on $15,000 a year. Try it for two weeks.
LikeLike
It is not the same argument.
Bernie’s proposal is to make it much more expensive to hire a poor person than it is to hire a middle class teenager. It is a mystery to me why people who care about poverty want to discourage firms from hiring people from relatively poor households and encourage the firms to hire people from relatively wealthy households.
LikeLike
Why don’t you try living on minimum wage for a week? Two weeks? $7.25 an hour. Try it.
I remember why I blocked you in the past. You are all brain, no heart.
LikeLike
If you want to do good in this world, you need to have a brain. The bill that Bernie Sanders introduced would result in poor people being made poorer. If you review my post, you will see that is my only point. I am shocked that either 1) you do not recognize this or 2) you recognize this and do not care.
LikeLike
If you want to do good in this world, you have to recognize that everyone needs decent shelter, food, medical care, and education, provided by living wages or government programs that supply those necessities. The way to enable that result is to have an equitable tax system that prevents gross inequality in wealth and income.
LikeLike
teachingeconomist: Bernie Sanders is continuously working to make lives better for average and poor people. He is fighting a battle against the corporate funded politicians who cater to the needs and wishes of the wealthy. The wealthy do not need more. Our military complex is getting way too much. Income inequality is raising and wages have stayed steady for years while costs of living have increased. Nobody should work full time and not be able to live a decent existence.
LikeLike
We are certainly in agreement that we should have policies that help everyone obtain decent shelter, food, medical care, and education. Bernie Sander’s bill is not one of those policies. If passed, it would push us further away from those laudable goals.
LikeLike
Why don’t you propose policies that would bring us closer to the day when all Americans have decent shelter, healthcare, food security, education, and the basic necessities of life, or as FDR put it, “freedom from want, freedom from fear.”
LikeLike
Sure. Here is one that I have suggested here before.
Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit. Rather than doing it annually, use the accounting apparatus the government uses to collect FICA taxes to subsidize the weekly paycheck of low income earners. This will 1) increase wages for low income workers 2) give companies an incentive to hire more low income workers because the cost to the company will be lower, and 3) give both employers and employees an incentive to work “on the books” because the wage subsidy only goes to people that the government knows are working for the company. The third point is important because workers who work “off the books” are more likely to be more likely to be exploited by the companies they work for.
LikeLike
Carolmalaysia,
My argument here is that the bill that retired teacher referenced would not make things better for poor people but instead make them worse.
Perhaps you could give an argument that that making it much cheaper for a business to hire a middle class teenager than to hire a poor head of household with several children actually helps the poor head of household. I don’t think there is such an argument, but I might be mistaken.
LikeLike
“Perhaps you could give an argument that that making it much cheaper for a business to hire a middle class teenager than to hire a poor head of household with several children actually helps the poor head of household.”
This makes no sense to me at all. Paying a person involves sending out a paycheck every two weeks. What does it matter who receives the money? A poor person who can get to work should be hired first. There are poor people overcoming huge odds to make it to work…such as riding a bus at weird hours of the night or walking several miles. With the GOP in power, it is now acceptable to take away Medicaid if someone doesn’t work. Many are now loosing their health insurance. Guess that is one way to save money if you have no compassion.
LikeLike
Carolmalaysia,
I agree that a poor person should be hired first. Bernie’s bill, however, encourages a company to hire the middle class teenager first because the bill makes it so much cheaper for the firm to hire the middle class teenager than the poor person. Bernie’s bill does not make sense.
LikeLike
teachingeconomist: “Bernie’s bill, however, encourages a company to hire the middle class teenager first because the bill makes it so much cheaper for the firm to hire the middle class teenager than the poor person.”
Care to explain why you think this way. A salary is a salary, no matter who gets it. I worked as a cashier at a department store to help pay for college. Any adult doing the same job would receive the same pay. There is no discrimination based on age.
LikeLike
Carolmalaysia,
Because under Bernie’s bill if Amazon hires the middle class teenager, Amazon pays the salary and usual taxes but if Amazon hires the 36 year old single parent of 2 Amazon pays the salary, usual taxes, AND the special tax for employing a person who receives various forms of public assistance.
Bernie’s bill introduces discriminatory taxes that would discourage firms from hiring people receiving public assistance because they only have to pay the tax when they hire people receiving public assistance.
Another effect of the legislation would likely be that people who would be eligible to receive public assistance would not apply. Refusing the public assistance would lower the cost to hire them down to the level of the middle class teenager.
LikeLike
teachingeconomist: And yes, [proposing is not passing. But unless or until we change the narrative and the dialogue on the US, the 1% will continue to get richer at the expense of the rest of us.
So it’s okay for billionaires and wealthy corporations to continue to to get richer at the expense of the rest of us? When will they have enough? Is this what you really want for America?
…………………………….
To Force Billionaires Off Welfare, Sanders Tax Would Make Corporations Fund…….
To Force Billionaires Off Welfare, Sanders Tax Would Make Corporations Fund 100% of Public Assistance Their Low-Paid Workers Receive
From the article:
Amazon CEO and world’s richest man Jeff Bezos makes more money in ten seconds than his company’s median employee makes in an entire year, and thousands of Amazon workers are paid such low wages that they are forced to rely on food stamps, Medicaid, and other forms of government assistance to survive.
“While Mr. Bezos is the most egregious example, the Walton family of Walmart and many other billionaire-owned large and profitable companies also enrich themselves off taxpayer assistance while paying their workers poverty-level wages.”
—Sen. Bernie Sanders
Declaring that this ever-growing gulf between the obscene wealth of top executives and the poverty wages of workers—which is hardly unique to Amazon—is morally unacceptable, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) announced on Friday that he will introduce legislation next month that would impose “a 100 percent tax on large employers equal to the amount of federal benefits received by their low-wage workers” in an effort to pressure corporate giants into paying a living wage.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/08/24/force-billionaires-welfare-sanders-tax-would-make-corporations-fund-100-public?cd-
LikeLike
Carolmalaysia,
Is it clear now why this proposed legislation would make it more expensive for a firm to hire a poor person who receives social benefits than it would be for a firm to hire a middle class teenager who did not receive social benefits?
LikeLike
Shall we let them starve in the gutter because they are worthless in the eyes of an economist?
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
Indeed we should not let people starve in the gutter. That is why I argue against plans like Bernie’s bill which would help put them there. It is startling that generally intelligent people can not see that a plan to make businesses pay extra taxes if and only if they hire people who collect social payments will discourage businesses from hiring people who collect social payments.
You asked about what I would propose and I suggested enlarging the earned income tax credit program both in the amount paid and the frequency of payment. Did that not meet with your satisfaction as a way to help people out of the gutter? If not, could you give a reasoned argument about why it fails?
LikeLike
If you have no income, how does a tax credit put food on the table or pay rent?
LikeLike
Indeed you are quite right that mine is not the whole answer, but a very much better policy than Bernie’s bill, which, by the way, is also exclusively concerned with people who work.
For those without I would suggest some version of a universal basic income. Would that meet your test?
LikeLike
teachingeconomist: “…I would suggest some version of a universal basic income. ” I would love for this country to care about its sickest and most suffering citizens. I would love for the US to also care about the horrors that take place in too many countries…lack of the basic needs to survive.
I’d be in favor of ANYTHING that makes life better. However, I doubt that this will happen as long as it isn’t a goal. Giving more and more money to the military and giving more and more money to corporations who don’t care about workers seems to be the current direction.
LikeLike
Carolmalaysia,
The point of my comment, which neither you nor Dr. Ravtich has actually addressed in all these responses, is that Bernie’s bill will make life WORSE for the poorest citizens of the country, not better.
LikeLike
I don’t address it because I support a living wage for every working American. At least $15 an hour.
Why have you refused to accept my challenge to live on $7.25 an hour for two eeeks of your life?
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
Bernie’s bill has nothing to do with a livable wage. It is an employment tax when a firm hires someone on public assistance. It will 1) discourage firms from hiring people on public assistance and 2) discourage people from applying for public assistance so they can more easily get jobs. Is that what you want?
LikeLike
Ever the naysayer.
LikeLike
Yup, when a proposed bill would make the poor poorer, I am against it. I have no idea why you are in favor.
LikeLike
No one ever got poorer by having their hourly wage raised from $7.25 to $15
LikeLike
Why do you keep talking about the minimum wage? Bernie’s bill does not increase it by a penny. Are you confused about the content of the bill?
LikeLike
Bernie wants to raise the national minimum wage to $15 an hour.
When Amazon agreed, Bernie was thrilled.
LikeLike
But of course Bernie’s bill that was being discussed here had nothing to do with the minimum wage. Did you not understand that?
LikeLike
I was discussing Bernie’s proposal for a universal minimum wage of $15 an hour.
LikeLike
That is not the proposal retired teacher was discussing nor the one I was commenting on. Do you have any thoughts about the proposal retired teacher was discussing?
LikeLike
I am not following your discussion
LikeLike
I’m at the point where if I have to order an item off Amazon, I can probably live without that item.
LikeLike
Me, too.
LikeLike
This is another example of the failure of government to do its job in protecting children from vulture capitalism. Our country suffers from the belief that billionaires have all the answers. It is a form of billionaire paternalism. Gates has shown that great wealth does not provide someone with all the answers, and government continuously yields to their power and wealth allowing billionaires allowing them to use our young people as guinea pigs without any regard to the needs of the vulnerable population. Social impact bonds and the like are reckless policies. As long as we have laws that incentivize and invite the wealthy to experiment on our young people, they will continue to meddle in that which they do not understand. I agree with the last couple lines of the post.
“there is no accountability in billionaires’ educational philanthropy.
And, as W. B. Yeats famously never said, charity is no substitute for justice.”
LikeLike
“For years, Chicago charter school advocates have repeatedly boasted of long waiting lists for charter elementary and high schools in the city. It’s an idea that has helped fuel an expansion of charter schools, even during a time of declining enrollment in Chicago Public Schools.
But limited data made it hard to say how popular charter high schools really were — until now. Data from a new centralized high school application system shows charters, on the whole, are not big favorites.”
Charter cheerleaders lobbied lawmakers (who were predisposed to preferring charters anyway). Hearing what they wanted to hear, that charters were better than public schools, lawmakers did none of their own research or own work and instead blindly accepted the claims of charter lobbyists.
Result? Chicago over-invests in charter schools and under-invests in public schools.
An echo chamber in action. We need to find lawmakers who do their own work and their own thinking.
We could start by allowing someone other than the ed reform chorus at the table when these decisions are made.
https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/most-chicago-charter-high-schools-have-room-for-students-who-want-to-go/eca81da9-8a3c-4f70-bb98-988cdb22901a
LikeLike
What you describe in Chicago seems to be true in many other cities as well. Much of the attention and priority given to charters is not the result of “amazing outcomes,” More often the hype and spin outshine the results. The interest in charters and vouchers is mostly from the amount of dark money from hedge funds and billionaires that buy our so-called representatives to forward the privatization agenda. Privatization is not a grassroots movement. It is a top down plan by the wealthy to crush democracy and unions while providing another stream of revenue for the already wealthy. It is class warfare.
LikeLiked by 1 person
and then add in a forever growing number of profiteering parasites happy to jump on board with privatizing movements as a means to suck up a personal slice of that massive — and ever more deregulated — public education money
LikeLike
I don’t think the billionaire education investments are worth the cost- the cost being that billionaires then run our public systems.
The cost is too high. It’s a bad deal.
LikeLike
First they bankrupt the public schools, then they generously offer to buy them at no cost, and own them.
LikeLike
It’s what happened in Russia. Oligarchs took the assets owned by the people.
Bezos and Gates are American oligarchs. Reports from the Brookings Institute and other think tanks helped destroy democracy.
LikeLike
Diane,
Thanks for pointing this out. So TRUE. The oligarchs, the entitled, want Jim Crow.
LikeLike
In a sane world, the title of this post would be “Pre-School Should Not Be ‘Just Like Amazon’.” And it would be followed by a blank page. Some things just don’t need to be studied. In a sane world, that is.
LikeLike
Let’s examine “the students are the customers” in a school setting.
Is that at all true? Will this benefit students, if we tell them they are “customers” in schools? Because they’re really not.
My son got a low grade on a history assignment last week. He’s not a happy customer! Should he or I complain to management? Switch schools?
I don’t think the “customer” frame fits school AT ALL, really. Why lie to them?
LikeLike
“U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos announced today that she will travel to four states during this year’s “Rethink School” tour, scheduled for Oct. 3 – 5, 2018.”
Ugh. Poor public school students. The DC “Public Schools Suck!” team is headed their way.
We should be able to opt out of ed reformers visiting our schools. It’s hard enough to raise decent kids without these professional public school bashers parachuting in to sell charters and vouchers.
The last time she did this she visited a magnet school. There are public schools in that same town. She spent the whole visit telling the magnet school kids that the kids across town were trapped in public schools. There’s this amazing cluelessness. It comes out of having absolutely no connection or familiarity with how public systems actually work.
LikeLike
I hope protesters greet her at every stop with “Rethink Betsy” signs.
LikeLike
See comment below. Seems it’s kind of difficult to get information on those stops, let’s say impossible so far to determine. . . and the trip has already started-today!
LikeLike
Lots of time for Betsy to “listen” during that tour through four states (MS, AL, GA, LA) in three days-Oct 3-5, eh! What’s she going to be “listening” to?:
“The Rethink School Tour challenges everyone, everywhere to question everything to ensure nothing limits students from being prepared for what comes next in their education, careers and in life. The Secretary and department officials will continue to highlight schools and visit with teachers, students, parents and local leaders who are unafraid to question the standard operating procedures that arbitrarily limit students from reaching their fullest potential. The questions raised and discussed on the tour include:
Why limit educators?
Why assign kids to schools based on their addresses?
Why group kids by age?
Why force all students to learn at the same speed?
Why measure education by hours and days?
Why suggest a college degree is the only path to success?
Why believe learning stops at graduation?”
And:
“Most stops on the tour are open press with the opportunity for several interviews with Secretary DeVos. Additional details on stops in each state will be forthcoming over the next few days.”
Considering the press release of this information was yesterday, Oct. 2 and the tour starts today and there is no other press releases on the Ed Dept site. . . . .
I wonder what kind of “answers” DeVos and her staff have already conjured up for those questions?
LikeLike
They started the tour with answers
Betsy has never listened to anyone unless they had more money
LikeLiked by 1 person
And that’s kind of hard for DeVos, eh, that “with more money”.
LikeLike
“Our team is crossing the country this year to challenge local leaders, educators and parents to rethink school,” said Secretary DeVos. “We know the current system is leaving too many students unprepared, so we must question everything about the way we do school in this country. There’s no more time for tinkering around the edges. No more trying the same things and expecting different results. I’m excited to highlight pockets of innovation around the country that are truly challenging the status quo and working to ensure all children can have access to the education that fits their learning style and prepares them for a successful future.”
Our team has decided that rather than doing our actual jobs, we’ll do this other job we prefer, which is “privatize your schools”
You’re all getting a stern lecture! That’s the value-add for this year. Another scolding from people who didn’t attend public schools, don’t work in public schools, and don’t support public schools.
And we all pay them for this. DeVos’ security detail alone would fund the music program you-all had to cut thanks to people like DeVos.
LikeLike
Rethink oligarchy.
LikeLike
No need to rethink oligarchy, it’s time to destroy it.
LikeLike
“No need to rethink oligarchy, it’s” working fine! 🧟♂️
LikeLike
That emoji was supposed to be a zombie.
LikeLike
This summer, Education Next published Grover Whitehurst’s, “More evidence that benefits of government-funded pre-k are overblown”. Skeptics might point out that research from organizations lacking demographic balance of diversity (e.g. Brookings
3 to 1 ratio of male experts to female experts), which reaches conclusions that devalue women’s work or that support elimination of pay for their work, provokes questions.
(Similar to CAP, it is odd that Brookings is identified as leaning liberal.)
Evidently, Whitehurst recognizes the research risk of conclusions based on “one study of one state program at one point in time”, for his paper this summer. Was he also concerned about it relative to his 2009 paper, “Don’t Forget about Curriculum”, which was resurrected by CAP this summer?
Education Next’s publication of the Brookings Whitehurst study is not surprising. Chester Finn (whose path to professional prominence was unusual), praised Grover this summer at the Fordham Institute website. IMO, Finn implied the two men share a controversial viewpoint. I describe the view as obstructing the role of schools in a form of government, democracy, practiced by all citizens.
LikeLike
Well, we should all be more worried now. Jeff Bezos is #1 and Bill Gates is #2 on Forbes list of the wealthiest people. Bill has been at the top for a long time and I’m sure he’s not happy about being #2….you know how it is with competition! Expect both of these bozos to come out with more money making schemes.
LikeLike
LisaM,
It’s a “pissing” contest using others to enhance their weak egos.
LikeLike
As long as Gates stays at the top of the richest men lists, a public that buys into his philanthropy bs, shows us stupid people and a self-serving media.
LikeLike
Sorry, but Bezos just surpassed Gates as the richest man in the US, and Gates is second. Sad.
LikeLike
😦 Awful . . . .
LikeLike