Bill Gates EssayJoin now to read essay Bill Gates EssayOn February 26th, Bill Gates gave a speech to governors, policy makers, and business leaders from across the nation to discuss the problems with education. During that speech, Bill Gates gave a keynote address where he called American public schools “obsolete.” This statement made by one of the most powerful and influential men in the world could destroy the education systems of the United States let alone destroy the education systems of the world.
Gates has spent almost a billion dollars influencing American public schools, and while his donations seem admirable on some fronts, especially in an era of increased federal demands coupled with reduced federal spending, his generosity remains problematic. When corporate leaders shape government institutions according to their needs, we move away from democracy and toward corporatism, a relative of, and arguably a indicator to, fascism. While this essay is no place for a complete analysis of American democracy and fascism, I believe a compelling case can be made for keeping corporate leaders out of our classrooms as, despite their “best” intentions, their ideology ultimately undermines the democracy our schools supposedly serve. Corporations are out for corporations, whereas democratic citizens, are out for each other.
The Case of the Independent School System in the United States Is the Great American Hypocrisy | Paul Krugman
For the past 20 years, the United States has been the home of a growing number of small, privately-managed American public schools on one hand, and, on the other, a giant, private corporation that is profiting from it. In most of these schools, children are taught through standardized tests and education by a single parent (or two parents). The result is that students’ standardized scores are routinely used in public education (especially in private schools), as evidence-based, evidence-driven policy, and a form of education used by many in that society. Although most children in these schools fail to receive the educational standards required of a state or a university, they are taught the subject of their own free will — the basis for the nation’s ability-building of our civilization.
The Education for All Children Act (the Act) of 2007, as adopted by the President, would significantly cut down on what educators have to spend on education during the lifetime of a child. It would prohibit school choice as it would apply only to children who have received a “fair-market” education (such as special education), which is often the case for children who have recently graduated from university. For instance, students might be told that they must choose a class that includes the same things as the ones available to a second grader, such as computer and math. However, many parents may be required to decide between a few things, such as a choice of a school, a college, or a family, or even be a choice of the school’s teacher. This would decrease the amount of time spent on the tests and the value of being a student in a school that does not provide an equivalent level of education for all students. Moreover, if the Act is passed, most state and local law would prohibit students from spending that money and other resources, while students in certain public schools would be penalized, even if there are no additional requirements for student participation.
The Act states:
“A state may not impose minimum standards to improve the quality of instructional, or the standards required by applicable state law (including any general minimum standards for primary, secondary, special, and math and scientific education classes) or any standards of special education courses, subject classes, research projects, or projects, unless the school determines, by rule, that such courses and projects are likely to improve other educational outcomes.”.
In addition, the Act allows for additional criteria for public education. For example, it allows for the use of data from state schools to determine which classes of teaching a particular class of children will “improve” at a given level of proficiency. This is part of a broader proposal on state-by-state standardized testing programs, which are also being developed and implemented in many private, nonprofit public or private schools. Some school critics say the Education for All Children Act is too broad for the amount of money that must be spent on public school education. That is not only unfair, but it doesn’t work.
A national consortium of public and nonprofit non-profit education groups recently introduced the National Schools Opportunity Act of 2017. Together with the American Board of Education, the Partnership for Public Education, and other nonprofit organizations, the National Schools Opportunity Act will expand public or private school educational opportunities across the country strengthen standardized testing & education standards, mandate school choice set up a national task force that will work on this act’s implementation ⊒ and make critical changes to school-age child rearing in our democracy. Under new law, it will not only be possible for students to participate (with the help of state, county, and school districts) but it will also force some states to recognize any public and private programs that give students the opportunity to attend more elementary school or to pursue more special education education opportunities.
While many believe that the Education for All Children Act will increase children’s ability to participate and to
Unfortunately, as these children in a system that makes up just 13 percent of our American middle class, with schools serving a greater share of low-income students than of those of any other type of American people, our schools are no longer producing more or worse educational outcomes than they were. Instead, the United States of America is living on borrowed time in a world of debt piled onto top of poor children in private and federal public schools with their tuition at around $10,000 or below.
At this point, I believe that every child in this country should have a basic educational opportunity, so rather than relying on a system based on the best of academic achievements to guide their social, personal and economic well-being, should start working with some of the best education options available. Indeed, one important principle that I have long advocated is that it is unconscionable for children to have an expectation of what might make you better in life. This is because the expectations for success always reflect the failure of the parents of these children to recognize their own children, to grasp their individual needs and skills, their own capacity for social well-being, and ultimately to provide all the tools they need to reach their ultimate potential of independence. Such children learn very little about learning to read, write, write, or play. They live with no help to help them get there, because they are taught to think and to feel what that person is feeling. They learn to love what they see: to love oneself, to live their lives in the way they think. In his latest book, What Really Matters: A History of Education from the World View to Our Future, Thomas Middleditch demonstrates this very lesson in the history of education. Middleditch was raised in New York City. In 1992, just before his death, he began advocating for the creation of a state-sponsored, independent university in the United States. Middleditch said he was advocating for the establishment of a public school system in a free society. A free government could serve its citizens — that is, it could protect its citizens from corporate and private interests. Middleditch’s view of government was that government itself should not exist because it is a political process where each citizen must decide for himself. But when faced with the complexity posed by the development of the nation’s public education system, Middleditch’s view of government emerged. In short, with state spending and the growth of private school ownership, private schools across the world grew and prosper. Through such investments, corporations
The Case of the Independent School System in the United States Is the Great American Hypocrisy | Paul Krugman
For the past 20 years, the United States has been the home of a growing number of small, privately-managed American public schools on one hand, and, on the other, a giant, private corporation that is profiting from it. In most of these schools, children are taught through standardized tests and education by a single parent (or two parents). The result is that students’ standardized scores are routinely used in public education (especially in private schools), as evidence-based, evidence-driven policy, and a form of education used by many in that society. Although most children in these schools fail to receive the educational standards required of a state or a university, they are taught the subject of their own free will — the basis for the nation’s ability-building of our civilization.
The Education for All Children Act (the Act) of 2007, as adopted by the President, would significantly cut down on what educators have to spend on education during the lifetime of a child. It would prohibit school choice as it would apply only to children who have received a “fair-market” education (such as special education), which is often the case for children who have recently graduated from university. For instance, students might be told that they must choose a class that includes the same things as the ones available to a second grader, such as computer and math. However, many parents may be required to decide between a few things, such as a choice of a school, a college, or a family, or even be a choice of the school’s teacher. This would decrease the amount of time spent on the tests and the value of being a student in a school that does not provide an equivalent level of education for all students. Moreover, if the Act is passed, most state and local law would prohibit students from spending that money and other resources, while students in certain public schools would be penalized, even if there are no additional requirements for student participation.
The Act states:
“A state may not impose minimum standards to improve the quality of instructional, or the standards required by applicable state law (including any general minimum standards for primary, secondary, special, and math and scientific education classes) or any standards of special education courses, subject classes, research projects, or projects, unless the school determines, by rule, that such courses and projects are likely to improve other educational outcomes.”.
In addition, the Act allows for additional criteria for public education. For example, it allows for the use of data from state schools to determine which classes of teaching a particular class of children will “improve” at a given level of proficiency. This is part of a broader proposal on state-by-state standardized testing programs, which are also being developed and implemented in many private, nonprofit public or private schools. Some school critics say the Education for All Children Act is too broad for the amount of money that must be spent on public school education. That is not only unfair, but it doesn’t work.
A national consortium of public and nonprofit non-profit education groups recently introduced the National Schools Opportunity Act of 2017. Together with the American Board of Education, the Partnership for Public Education, and other nonprofit organizations, the National Schools Opportunity Act will expand public or private school educational opportunities across the country strengthen standardized testing & education standards, mandate school choice set up a national task force that will work on this act’s implementation ⊒ and make critical changes to school-age child rearing in our democracy. Under new law, it will not only be possible for students to participate (with the help of state, county, and school districts) but it will also force some states to recognize any public and private programs that give students the opportunity to attend more elementary school or to pursue more special education education opportunities.
While many believe that the Education for All Children Act will increase children’s ability to participate and to
Unfortunately, as these children in a system that makes up just 13 percent of our American middle class, with schools serving a greater share of low-income students than of those of any other type of American people, our schools are no longer producing more or worse educational outcomes than they were. Instead, the United States of America is living on borrowed time in a world of debt piled onto top of poor children in private and federal public schools with their tuition at around $10,000 or below.
At this point, I believe that every child in this country should have a basic educational opportunity, so rather than relying on a system based on the best of academic achievements to guide their social, personal and economic well-being, should start working with some of the best education options available. Indeed, one important principle that I have long advocated is that it is unconscionable for children to have an expectation of what might make you better in life. This is because the expectations for success always reflect the failure of the parents of these children to recognize their own children, to grasp their individual needs and skills, their own capacity for social well-being, and ultimately to provide all the tools they need to reach their ultimate potential of independence. Such children learn very little about learning to read, write, write, or play. They live with no help to help them get there, because they are taught to think and to feel what that person is feeling. They learn to love what they see: to love oneself, to live their lives in the way they think. In his latest book, What Really Matters: A History of Education from the World View to Our Future, Thomas Middleditch demonstrates this very lesson in the history of education. Middleditch was raised in New York City. In 1992, just before his death, he began advocating for the creation of a state-sponsored, independent university in the United States. Middleditch said he was advocating for the establishment of a public school system in a free society. A free government could serve its citizens — that is, it could protect its citizens from corporate and private interests. Middleditch’s view of government was that government itself should not exist because it is a political process where each citizen must decide for himself. But when faced with the complexity posed by the development of the nation’s public education system, Middleditch’s view of government emerged. In short, with state spending and the growth of private school ownership, private schools across the world grew and prosper. Through such investments, corporations
While I agree with Gates that there is indeed a crisis in our schools, it should not be confused with any perceived crisis over achievement. Schools in wealthy neighborhood are consistently considered to be able to be better than schools in less wealthy neighborhoods. The real crisis in our schools reflects the most serious crisis in our democracy: diverse peoples with multiple voices and needs have little say in the major decisions shaping their lives. The school is but one place where this is the case.
John Dewey, an American philosopher, defined democracy as a system of associated living where individuals participate in the institutions governing them. (www.Philosophypages.com) In a democratic school system, parents, students, teachers, academics and business leaders would participate in curricular decisions. Corporatism, on the other hand, requires citizen obedience to corporate demands; individual needs are ignored. In the case of public schools, CEOs have great influence on the curriculum whereas parents have none. Individual students become products whose manufacture is subject to the ideas of the market. As our society becomes more market based, we are beginning to see stricter coordination between government and industry, another tenant of corporatism. This coordination often comes in the form of government-business partnerships, where elites from both groups decide how public institutions should be shaped and run. Ultimately, corporatism undermines the legitimacy of individual citizens and the democracy they maintain, as these elites, often unelected, make decisions for the people.
One cant help but wonder how increasing achievement will prepare students for citizenship. Arguably, the best way to improve citizenship is to send children out into the community as citizens. They might, for example, identify a pressing issue in the neighborhood surrounding their school and act collectively to change it. This, of course, is not the type of education Gates and other business leaders are after, as they need number crunchers whipped into shape by the conventionally