If you are a parent or grandparent, you know that little children need less screen time, not more.
In this alarming post, blogger Wrench in the Gears quotes from transcripts where some deep thinkers (including Nobelist James Heckman) discuss ways to lure the little ones online, to give them digital badges, and scheme to come up with the right ways to sit them in front of computers.
She begins:
“This is another post with clips culled from talks given at the Center for the Economics of Human Development’s working group, Measuring and Assessing Skills: Real Time Measurement of Cognition, Personality and Behavior. It was held at the University of Chicago in February 2018. I previously shared a segment called from “Math to Marksmanship” with Nobel Prize economist James Heckman, Gregory Chung of UCLA-CRESST and Jeremy Roberts consultant to PBS Kids.
“Below are ten additional excerpts from that talk. I watched all two hours and pulled highlights, so you don’t have to. Topics covered include: game-based learning for pre-schoolers; how to get pre-readers to create online accounts; how digital games can be used to identify “Big Five” behavior traits; and a real doozy, Dr. Heckman’s half-joking suggestion that gamification and incentives of pornography for adults could encourage parents to have their children use online games more often. No, really.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
FYI: The first link is bad. You want this one: https://wrenchinthegears.com/2018/06/30/incentivizing-pre-k-online-gaming-with-digital-sticker-books-and-pornography-for-the-adults-says-heckman-half-joking/
Thank you WitG for you diligent research and astute writings.
I just think it’s silly how they insist on marketing this stuff as if it isn’t product.
I really prefer old school toy salespeople. At least they don’t pretend to be working for the Good of Humanity.
Buy it or don’t buy it but just don’t be snowed. They’re selling product to children thru parents or teachers or gullible school leaders and that is not new or innovative at all.
They invented the whole thing. There are no “digital natives”, they have no earthly idea if any of this has any value at all, and the supposed “gatekeepers” who might provide some real information are all captured. Let the buyer beware. You’re SURROUNDED by salespeople.
The federal government launches another publicly-funded marketing blitz selling charters and vouchers:
We’re all paying for this ad campaign. They return absolutely no value to the 90% of students who attend public schools, but they have endless time and energy and resources to direct towards selling the schools they prefer.
There isn’t a public school student or family in this country who would notice if any of these people simply stopped showing up for work. They’re completely irrelevant to 90% of the public.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/02/28/trump-school-choice-students-education-options-scholarships-tax-credits-column/3002868002/
Sickening. It’s all about getting kids ADDICTED. Shame on these
Meant SHAME on THESE PREDATORS. Shame! Shame! Shame!
What’s really a shame is that the parents go along with this. When you are out and about, just take a look at all the small kids sitting in shopping carts playing mind numbing “educational” games/apps so that the parents can shop in peace. When the parent takes away the game/app, the child starts screaming and crying and then the parent will give it back. It boggles my mind! The parents are addicts and so are the kids. Brain washing at best….nothing educational about it.
imagine being a pre-school/kindergarten teacher in days when kids come already addicted to screens
Better than soma!
I don’t know if you have seen the latest echo chamber craze:
“Former Florida governor Jeb Bush outlined one vision for such a system earlier this year at an event hosted by the American Enterprise Institute. A high school student could pay for a half-day’s attendance at a conventional school, come home and take an Advanced Placement class online, and round out the educational experience with an online music course offered by the Juilliard School.”
They rebranded the “backpack voucher” – pulled the idea directly from Jeb Bush and slapped a new name on it. Of course, it’s entirely fanciful. There’s absolutely no consideration for what happens SYSTEMICALLY when students pull funding from public schools and spend it on thousands of contractors.
Is this why universities cost so much? Why tuition goes up every year and their students are absolutely drowning in debt? Because the people who work there spend all their time marketing stale slogans from Jeb Bush and conservative think tanks?
This is what we’re paying for? Op eds in echo chamber platforms? Is that why public universities quadrupled tuition over the last decade? Maybe they should clean up their own side of the street instead of “reinventing” K-12 schools.
https://www.the74million.org/article/analysis-what-if-we-personalized-education-funding-how-routing-dollars-to-students-instead-of-schools-could-fund-a-more-nimble-system/
Most of Jeb’s Funders are tech vendors.
He was the commencement speaker at the now-bankrupt ECOT school in 2010.
“A high school student could pay for a half-day’s attendance at a conventional school”
I love this assumption. No consideration or analysis AT ALL of how the “conventional school” continues to stand ready for that high school student when 3/4’s of their funding has been distributed to private contractors. How many students are in this mythical half day? One? 71? 231? If it’s “11” can the high school stay open and provide a seat and a teacher? Don’t count on it! God knows none of these genuises have considered it.
They can’t be bothered with these details. Instead they’ll just make promises to the public they can’t keep.
The “traditional schools” standing ready to absorb the risk of ed reform schemes is the foundational myth of ed reform. It’s what all the experiments rest on.
I am reading a new book: Be the Parent, Please by Naomi S. Riley that tackles the topic of how parents can/must limit screen time. A good addition to your PTA library for parents.
My god, the cynicism of this!
This research is excellent and heartbreaking. This needs to be addressed by AOC and the crew. Anyone have any connections? WHO IS PROTECTING THE CHILDREN?
The hyperlink isn’t working, so here it is:
https://wrenchinthegears.com/2018/06/30/incentivizing-pre-k-online-gaming-with-digital-sticker-books-and-pornography-for-the-adults-says-heckman-half-joking/
It used to be that the “bad guys” would leave children, old people and the infirm alone. It was taboo to mess with the most vulnerable of society. Once “they” fully privatized healthcare, the only thing left to privatize are the vulnerable groups. Children have no say because they do not vote and their parents are distracted from the madness trying to make a living in this dreadful world. Heck, most people don’t even realize what all of our politicians (both sides) have done to us over the past 20-30 yrs…sold us (the common tax payer) out so that they could have lots of money/power! At least the elders have AARP to keep the fight alive for them. The big teacher’s unions have sold out the kids, so what else can we expect? It’s sick!…all of it.
AARP funded ALEC until a public outcry. AARP said it would stop the affiliation but, subsequently, AARP state directors were shown attending ALEC meetings.
AARP was part of the selling of long term care insurance policies which now have a very poor reputation.
AARP featured articles about what a great place Mexico was for retirees to live.
In one issue of an AARP publication, they wrote in favor of public pensions and raising minimum wage. A few pages prior, there was a puff piece about Bill and Melinda Gates, who oppose raising minimum wage and who spoke out against public pensions.
In the past few months the AARP President was on T.V. telling people they could expect to live past the age of 120. AARP recommended people save for life expectancy of age 105. Five- tenths of 1% of Americans live to 105. During the same time period, statistics showed Americans were dying at earlier ages. The average age of death is 78.
I didn’t know that about AARP. I’m glad that you enlightened me. I guess all the power hungry, money grubbing higher ups are nothing but wolves in sheep clothing. DINO, RINO…all of them are corporate goons.
Every time I read “Wrench in the Gears,” I get angry. ESSA is no more than a pork barrel for corporations. Parents should be alerted to protect their young, vulnerable children from such exploitative activities. Not only is screen time developmentally inappropriate, there is no legitimate research on the long term effects of screen time on developing eyes and brains. It is reckless for parents to allow their children to be digitally conditioned in order to make money for corporations. All these programs do is collect data and provide a cheap, alternative to legitimate intervention services. They will most likely serve the most disadvantaged and largely minority students. The main objective is the following:
“Children are being turned into data so the debt associated with funds allocated to provide education and social services to them can be traded on global markets (like bundled mortgages prior to the 2008 crash).”
Parents should be very upset that children are line items in rich people’s portfolio. It is also likely that young children will derive much benefit from such inappropriate instruction. Every time a parent hears of a “public-private partnership,” they should be very wary and skeptical. There is no evidence to show that on-line learning is helpful to special education students or those with reading difficulties. A variety of so-called programmed reading approaches have been implemented for decades, and each one of them has crashed, burned and wasted students’ time.
AWrenchintheGears,com website provides amazing investigative work that pulls together
disparate operations into a whole sickening view of Silicon Valley’s plotting.
One of the articles connects the most well-known, privately funded charities, education spending by villainthropists, mega churches and, the biggest financial firms to a broader sphere of data collection,….As the Wrench blogger states, “people have no idea”.
Like Diane, the Wrench blogger can see the whole picture and how the pieces fit together in a terrifying subversion of democracy, the common good and individual rights.
I think:
Capitalism like it is being practiced in the US today — thanks to Milton’s Friedman’s seriously flawed trickle-down theory of greed is good, or did he say greed was god? — is terminal cancer just like pure Communism and Socialism are also malignant and flawed.
I think:
The best system is the one AOC has described as a balance between socialism and capitalism like we see practiced in the Nordic countries.
Thank you for circulating the excellent work of Wrench in the Gears on the financial products called pay for success contacts or social impact bonds.
These are being marketed as means to save the gov’ment money, but they are designed to put profits in the pockets of investors.
Child care and preschool are easy targets but not the only ones. I strongly recommend that readers of this blog, and Wrench in the Gears, ask every Presidential candidate and office-seeker—federal, state, and local—if they approve of these financial products.
Obama helped to incubate federal Pay for Success contracts in 2010. A brief history of that initiative is here, along with a list of some early investments. https://socinnovation.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/white-house-social-innovation/
With little effort, I found that Elizabeth Warren co-sponsored a bill that offered one of the first (2013) and largest pay-for-success programs in Massachusetts. The program was intended to reduce juvenile recidivism in Massachusetts.https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sens-warren-markey-announce-nearly-12-million-federal-grant-to-reduce-juvenile-recidivism-in-massachusetts
I have not found any record of the “success” of this project. The closest thing to an evaluation is a “lessons learned” report from Third Sector, dated 2015, and praising Massachusetts for its dedication to “innovation in government.”
The Third Sector report is about the structure of the Pay for Success program and especially the flaws. Among these were unclear roles of :(a) the service provider ROCA; (b) the “intermediary” or manager of the pay for success program, Third Sector Capital; (c) the facilitators from the Harvard Social Impact Bond Lab; (d) The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, responsible for the payout; and (e) the various funders including Goldman Sachs; Living Cities; New Profit, Inc.; The Kresge Foundation; Laura and John Arnold Foundation; and Boston Foundation. A diagram on page 2 in this report is intended to show the architecture of project. I have seen similar versions in other projects.
A 2015 Government Accounting Office Report on federal pay for success contracting is filled with red flags about these “relatively new” financial products. Appendix II provides an overview of some federal programs and how they were structured. https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/672363.pdf
Red flags are no problem.
In 2018, Congress passed the Social Impact Partnerships to Pay for Results Act (SIPPRA). The sponsor was Sen. Todd Young (R-IN), Cosponsors were Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), and Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO); Christopher Coons, (D-DE); and Cory Booker (D-NJ). The full text is available here https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/963/text.
A summary of the bill clearly states: At least 50% of all federal payments made under such agreements (Social Impact Bonds, Pay for Success Contracts) must be used for initiatives that directly benefit children. SIPPRA endorses the idea that government social service projects merit support only if they achieve “certain agreed-upon outcomes resulting in both social benefit and federal savings.”
SIPPRA sets up a new bureaucracy to manage these agreements, “Treasury must consult with the Federal Interagency Council on Social Impact Partnerships and the Commission on Social Impact Partnerships (both newly established by the bill). Treasury may transfer to another federal agency the authority to administer the agreements. The Government Accountability Office shall evaluate, and report to Congress on, social-impact partnerships funded under the bill.”
SIPPRA identifies twenty-one eligible projects, provided that they “produce one or more measurable, clearly defined outcomes that result in social benefit and Federal savings.” Like all pay for success program, means are separated from ends. The prime values are not really social benefits but budget cuts, especially in programs for poor people, persons who have special needs, child-welfare programs, and education.
Here are eligible SIPPRA projects that bear on children and young people.
–Increasing employment and earnings of individuals who have attained 16 years of age but not 25 years of age.
–Reducing the dependence of low-income families on Federal means-tested benefits.
–Reducing teen and unplanned pregnancies.
–Improving birth outcomes and early childhood health and development among low-income families and individuals.
–Increasing the proportion of children living in two-parent families.
–Reducing incidences and adverse consequences of child abuse and neglect.
–Reducing the number of youth in foster care by increasing adoptions, permanent guardianship arrangements, reunifications, or placements with a fit and willing relative, or by avoiding placing children in foster care by ensuring they can be cared for safely in their own homes.
–Reducing the number of children and youth in foster care residing in group homes, child care institutions, agency-operated foster homes, or other non-family foster homes, unless it is determined that it is in the interest of the child’s long-term health, safety, or psychological well-being to not be placed in a family foster home.
–Reducing the number of children returning to foster care.
–Reducing recidivism among juvenile offenders, individuals released from prison, or other high-risk populations.
–Improving the educational outcomes of special-needs or low-income children.
–Improving rates of high school graduation. (Note the open invitation to earn profits from online programs, some of these known to be ripoffs.)
Other projects target social welfare programs for individuals with disabilities, including “mental, emotional, and behavioral health needs.” You see the cynical desire to avoid universal health care programs by substituting this outcomes driven project for low-income families:
–Reducing rates of asthma, diabetes, or other preventable diseases among low-income families and individuals (in order) to reduce the utilization of emergency and other high-cost care.
Here are some other projects:
–Increasing work and earnings by individuals in the United States who are unemployed for more than 6 consecutive months.
— Increasing the financial stability of low-income families.
In addition to the unrelenting focus on money, money, money (echoing Trump’s primary concern in his ill-conceived North Korean Summit) SIPPA and like programs undermine democratic decision making, and longstanding moral imperatives to care for one another and look after the common good.
See also this:
https://nonprofitquarterly.org/2014/10/17/does-pay-for-success-actually-pay-off-the-roi-of-social-impact-bonds/
Our country is FOR SALE to the highest bidder in so many arenas. It’s totally sick.
People like these make policy. See below. 🤮
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/02/dark-money-group-led-by-trump-judicial-adviser-scotus-picks/?utm_source=CRP+Mail+List&utm_campaign=9fb70d20db-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_02_28_02_30&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9df8578d78-9fb70d20db-211707553