Perhaps you could clarify what you wrote. Are you simply saying she
shouldn't be so surprised, given it's been an ongoing thing?
The blog piece was more focused on undeserved power handed over to
corporate moguls to direct and control public (American) education.
Corporatization's ill effects on curriculum, and the nationalization of
the corporate agenda to ensure business and technology as the overriding
pulse of young minds.
Online learning has its advantages, but most of what is worthwhile
cannot be taught online. Availability of publications is a large part of
the problem because of corporate decisions to promote texts only
suitable to corporate mindset. This control spans crushingly above the
humanities publications, redirects the populace away from the arts,
nature and abstract thought towards money, power and technology geared
towards immediate gratification.
Natalia
On 5/6/2011 2:32 PM, pete wrote:
I don't understand the consternation here; as I understand it,
private consultants and publishers have been charting curriculum
in US states (each state seems to be able to specify its own
curriculum to a large degree) for over a decade. There are
state committeees or commissions, but in reality the choices
are driven by the availability of texts, and the texts are
determined by the essentially private corporate system in place
in big client states like Texas, which selects texts subsequently
purchased by the smaller states.
-Pete
On Thu, 5 May 2011, D and N wrote:
*Diane Ravich, Ed Week* - [Concerning] the agreement between the Gates
Foundation and the Pearson Foundation to write the nation's curriculum.
When did we vote to hand over American education to them? Why would we
outsource the nation's curriculum to a for-profit publishing and
test-making corporation based in London? Does Bill Gates get to write
the national curriculum because he is the richest man in America? We
know that his foundation is investing heavily in promoting the Common
Core standards. Now his foundation will write a K-12 curriculum that
will promote online learning and video gaming. That's good for the tech
sector, but is it good for our nation's schools?
Oh, and one more outrage: The Gates Foundation and the Eli Broad
Foundation, both of which maintain the pretense of being Democrats
and/or liberals, have given millions to former Florida governor Jeb
Bush's foundation, which is promoting vouchers, charters, online
learning, test-based accountability, and the whole panoply of corporate
reform strategies intended to weaken public education and remove
teachers' job protections.
The scariest thought is that the Obama administration welcomes the
corporatization of public education. Not only welcomes the rise of
educational entrepreneurialism, but encourages it. U.S. Education
Secretary Arne Duncan's chief of staff Joanne Weiss, who has experience
as an education entrepreneur, wrote the following in a blog for the
Harvard Business Review:
"The development of common standards and shared assessments radically
alters the market for innovation in curriculum development, professional
development, and formative assessments. Previously, these markets
operated on a state-by-state basis, and often on a district-by-district
basis. But the adoption of common standards and shared assessments means
that education entrepreneurs will enjoy national markets where the best
products can be taken to scale."
Yes, indeed, lots of opportunities for new businesses, smart investors,
and a national marketplace for entrepreneurs. I would expect to read
this sort of thing from the public relations department of Pearson or
McGraw-Hill or one of the other industry leaders. But the chief of staff
to the U.S. secretary of education?
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
