We've not formally tracked them. The oldest are now preparing for their senior years in high school. The ones with whom I've stayed in touch seem to be happily thriving, although because of our location we primarily serve a community of progressive, middle class families. That's a demographic that always tends to do well.
I will say that I've had kindergarten teachers tell me that they appreciate teaching children who attended WP because they "know how to take care of themselves and their friends." That's a pretty good endorsement!
I am wholeheartedly in agreement with you regarding the destructive potential of the Common Core. I am attracted to your referring to it as a curriculum, and have adopted the language myself. I also think your title is on point.
I take slight issue with characterizing market forces in general as nefarious. Market forces can serve a tremendous good. However, it is important to understand that, with respect to the Common Core, market forces are being distorted (if not totally eschewed) for something else.
When Gates talks about "unleashing powerful market forces" in this context, what he really means is, "commandeer the authority of government to eliminate the market forces of parents, children, teachers, and other educators by forcing them to participate in something many of them would not otherwise choose." That is paternalistic totalitarianism. What's perhaps even more offensive is that Gates and his ilk stand to reap tremendous profits by these forced "transactions".
This is not the first time that Gates (and those like him) have selected terms antithetical to the situation in order to manipulate their audiences (which often consist of politicians and policy makers all to eager to abuse their office to gain the favor of the rich and powerful). How many of us, if given the choice, would voluntarily set aside 10-50% of our incomes to hand over to the military industrial complex? I don't know of many personally. People who benefit from that siphoning of the fruits of our labor endlessly insist "because safety", even though the result is the exact opposite. The choice is made for us by men with guns and the companies that pay kickbacks to them. That is what is so infuriating. But those are not market forces.
Market forces are about individual choices, which is why Gates invokes them here (in an effort to mislead). But you know that the Common Core removes those choices, unleashing powerful forces, but they're oppressive forces, not market ones.
Dear TT,
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering if you have tracked your graduates as they proceed into the school systems and beyond?
We've not formally tracked them. The oldest are now preparing for their senior years in high school. The ones with whom I've stayed in touch seem to be happily thriving, although because of our location we primarily serve a community of progressive, middle class families. That's a demographic that always tends to do well.
ReplyDeleteI will say that I've had kindergarten teachers tell me that they appreciate teaching children who attended WP because they "know how to take care of themselves and their friends." That's a pretty good endorsement!
I am wholeheartedly in agreement with you regarding the destructive potential of the Common Core. I am attracted to your referring to it as a curriculum, and have adopted the language myself. I also think your title is on point.
ReplyDeleteI take slight issue with characterizing market forces in general as nefarious. Market forces can serve a tremendous good. However, it is important to understand that, with respect to the Common Core, market forces are being distorted (if not totally eschewed) for something else.
When Gates talks about "unleashing powerful market forces" in this context, what he really means is, "commandeer the authority of government to eliminate the market forces of parents, children, teachers, and other educators by forcing them to participate in something many of them would not otherwise choose." That is paternalistic totalitarianism. What's perhaps even more offensive is that Gates and his ilk stand to reap tremendous profits by these forced "transactions".
This is not the first time that Gates (and those like him) have selected terms antithetical to the situation in order to manipulate their audiences (which often consist of politicians and policy makers all to eager to abuse their office to gain the favor of the rich and powerful). How many of us, if given the choice, would voluntarily set aside 10-50% of our incomes to hand over to the military industrial complex? I don't know of many personally. People who benefit from that siphoning of the fruits of our labor endlessly insist "because safety", even though the result is the exact opposite. The choice is made for us by men with guns and the companies that pay kickbacks to them. That is what is so infuriating. But those are not market forces.
Market forces are about individual choices, which is why Gates invokes them here (in an effort to mislead). But you know that the Common Core removes those choices, unleashing powerful forces, but they're oppressive forces, not market ones.