Metamorphizing the Function of the Human Mind Invisibly through Catchy Slogans and Phrases

The original version of this post used the term School Choice instead of Catchy Slogans and Phrases, but that seemed to imply I was picking on the Dearest Policy Desires of our new federal Secretary of Ed. So I broadened the title to make the same point. I may be able to read the School Choice layout and her AFC reports and see the plans of both Uncle Karl and what is called the systems view of education at play, but hopefully she does not. Like many people Mrs DeVos may falsely believe that her personal intentions and understandings of terms guide what they really mean and how they work in practice. That’s a dangerous belief that those surrounding her will likely encourage so let me explain why I recognize this as the Systems View of Education.

While I am at it, let me lay out a few more Catchy and Melodious slogans that are widely repeated AND headed in a different direction with a specific aim whatever the personal intentions of the advocates–Personalized Learning, Excellence, Reaching a Child’s Full Potential, and Quality Learning are a start. One more clarification as well on what I mean when I write about targeting a person’s decision-making capacity.  Another transformationalist put the importance of understanding subjective experience quite well in his book Global Mind Change. Willis Harman wrote that education and “science should now accommodate consciousness as a causal reality.” So crucial a point to target that Harman even italicized it just like that.

Boulding considered “the primacy of inner conscious awareness as a causal reality” to be so crucial if Man was to Become a Maker of History and a Driver of the Future that he gave this internalized realm of core values, concepts, and guiding perspectives the nerdiest phrase ever–noogenetics. The odd name though should not distract us from the role Boulding gave this realm in his 1978 book Ecodynamics: A New Theory of Societal Evolution. Boulding wanted to create common “mental structures and images” that would be transmitted as “learned behavior coded in nervous systems.” That’s what noogenetics and full potential means because the “biogenetic structure contributes only potential.” He told us why targeting what is internalized within a student’s mind and personality was so crucial so let’s listen:

“It may well be that biological evolution is approaching its end and that it will be succeeded by an evolutionary process wholly dominated by noogenetic processes directed by human values.”

See how Making Man Moral and Accountability fit right in with these transformational plans unless that aim for education is well disclosed and not shrouded in catchy phrases about Classical Learning, Character, or Virtuous Living? If anyone is tired of me bringing up Uncle Karl like this was a pinball game and I get 50 points for each mention, let’s listen again to what Boulding said was the purpose of what he and all the others I have now tagged to this post called General Systems Theory.

“The evolutionary vision, however, must be seen quite clearly as an alternative to Marxism as a general theory. The general idea of an overall theory of social and historical dynamic processes owes a great deal to Marx, but his particular theories are quite inadequate to describe the complexities of reality and must be relegated to the position of a rather unusual special case.”

I think that statement should have the Slogan “New and Improved” attached to Systems Science covers the relationships among all these education phrases we believe have just an innocuous, common-sense meaning. Following up on the implications of my last post’s citing of both the Right and Left public policy think tanks and academics embracing  Boulding pulled up a relevant paper written by Bela Banathy from the early 90s called “Systems Inquiry and its Application to Education.” The paper was “dedicated to the memory of my dear friend and colleague, Kenneth Boulding, one of the founders of the systems movement and the first president of the Society for General Systems Research.” As an aside, SGSR (created at Stanford) merged into ISSS–International Systems Science Society, so all this ties now too to the Laszlos, GELP, the MIT/Skolkovo 2030/2035 Project, and so much more.

In other words, this is not a history lesson and the goals Banathy laid out are still pertinent. Best then to examine the Systems View of Education since we and our children have been Ground Zero of the systems to be transformed. One more point gets clarified for those of us wondering why Mind Arson has become so common and why relatively few concepts and principles are now to serve as Knowledge, instead of a body of facts. Boulding believed systems science needed people to “develop ‘generalized ears'” that could make for common connections of understanding that would “overcome the ‘specialized deafness’ of the specific disciplines.”

I have encountered this before where what we call reason and logic or the Axemaker Mind is regarded as in the way of revolutionary social change. John Dryzek called for something very similar–communicative rationality–to accommodate the defeat of ‘capitalism’ in favor of a more economically just society he called democracy back in 1996. Last week, the Cooney Center (funded by Sesame Street revenue), the Frameworks Institute, and the New America Foundation released “STEM Starts early” that called for much the same if we read the small print, or in this case, Appendix B. It called for a “two-science approach” because “policies are the product of politics, and politics is the product of culture.” I could add that culture is an aggregate of what gets shifted when education becomes about targeting individual consciousness and what guides it, but let’s get back to quoting.

“Determining the narrative needed to engage the public…requires research. A coherent narrative can only be developed by mapping the cognitive terrain so that communicators know which ‘pictures in people’s heads’ they wish to evoke and which to bypass.”

That intrusive analysis, whether obtained by survey or student assessments looking for Higher Order Thinking Skills, is in either case carried out so that politicians, academics, think tanks (the paper keeps quoting the head of Heritage, Jim DeMint), and others “to predict what policy prescriptions are likely to ‘fit’ people’s operative cultural models.” So education operates to manipulate those internalized cultural models and also pushes Generalized Ears and communicative rationality so that “policy science can be coupled with communications science.” Well, that “two-science approach” or “systems science” is indeed a new, not appreciated enough in the least, form of self-governance. Each approach:

“emphasizes using social science to understand where ordinary Americans part way with experts, what this means for public support of [desired] policies, and what kinds of narratives help people engage, reconsider, and endorse meaningful policies.”

It is tempting to add ‘meaningful’ to whom and to wonder how we can get a job as one of those ‘experts’. Let’s get back though to Banathy’s confessions. After all, if my analysis that School Choice, as pushed by all the think tanks we have tied to PEPG and the Atlas Network, is actually a shroud covering what Banathy called GSTE–Guidance System for the Transformation of Education–we need to know its aims and elements. Banathy told us that “working with human systems, we are confronted with problem situations that comprise a system of problems rather than a collection of problems. Problems are embedded in uncertainty and require subjective interpretation…Our main tool in working with human systems is subjectivity: reflection on the sources of knowledge, social practice, community, and interest in and commitment to ideas, especially the moral idea, affectivity, and faith.”

Readers of my book Credentialed to Destroy should recognize that I have boldfaced words that fit with what the phrase Rigor actually means now and also much of what is assessed for in its name. Can we repeat Not. A. Coincidence. before moving on. Banathy did not just want to redesign and transform education, he wanted to redesign all social systems to fit the “new realities of the current era.” People, and especially children, were merely a start and the way to effect the desired change without popular outcry. Anyone implementing the systems view of education template unwittingly because they fail to understand what these catchy phrases really mean is still engaged in:

“systems design in the context of human activity systems is a future-creating disciplined inquiry. People engage in design in order to devise and implement a new system based on their vision of what that system should be.”

With only Generalized Ears and carefully instilled guiding Core Values, Ideas, and Perspectives we can all grasp that few students will be in a position to appreciate what actually cannot be as we are all encouraged to help design better tomorrows. When I was so concerned about that Roadmap for the Next Administration I uncovered before the election, this is precisely the assumption built into that Roadmap. Bela must be so pleased his and Boulding’s work endures so, even if it is dangerously wrong to be pushing via education.

“Social systems are created for attaining purposes that are shared by those in the system [see values, ideas, and perspectives above]. Activities in which people in the system are engaged are guided by those purposes. There are times when there is a discrepancy between what our system actually attains and what we designated as the desired outcome of the system. [Data, especially with respect to what counts as Learning]. Once we sense such discrepancy, we realize that something has gone wrong, and we need to make some changes in the activities or in the way we carry out activities. The focus is changes within the system.  Changes within the system are accomplished by adjustment, modification, or improvement.”

Now Banathy was talking about more than a student and education in that quote on redesigning systems, but both are included in the systems to be purposefully redesigned at the level of what creates purpose, motivates action, and guides perception. That’s what the systems view of education does under whatever catchy slogan it uses in any generation to stay under the radar of public scrutiny. It has been known as Tranzi OBE (covered in my book) and is now more commonly called Competency-Based Education. It is enshrined into the federal Every Student Succeeds Act and how states and localities must redesign education to get its funding. Both Mrs DeVos and President Trump need to accept that reality and decide what kind of a country and polity we will have with this vision of education and the “two-science” approach to managing the public that was funded by American taxpayers via the National Science Foundation.

That’s the beauty of systems science under whatever its current name acting as a cloaking device. Personal intentions can only become the point again when the elements that make education a ‘system’ designed to control what each student has internalized at a neurobiological level are grasped. Remember noogenetics? We have to understand that control over the decision-making capacity of a student so that their future behavior is now predictable and plannable is what gets touted as Evidence-Based Education grounded in science. That aim is what makes a student assessment “high-quality”. Controlling Learning at this level is what gets a charter renewed and access to federal money to expand into new states.

Where’s the Actual choice in any of these visions with this common aim?

Systems Science is really ceasing to be a catchy slogan. Best to grasp its essence before it gets yet another new name.

56 thoughts on “Metamorphizing the Function of the Human Mind Invisibly through Catchy Slogans and Phrases

  1. Between Betsy Devos and the Teachers Union…which leads to more freedom of thinking and choice? Which system teaches HOW to think over WHAT to think?

    • Noogenetics certainly teaches one what to think in the name of new kinds of teaching and it was Banathy who used the Metamorphosis terms. To the extent School Choice is implementing the systems view of education then so is Secretary DeVos and President Trump. They simply may be unaware of the true nature of the tool they are using.

      Individual teachers only get to shift away from the change-the-child from the inside-out template if its existence becomes known. Again that is precisley what this posts does.

      As for teachers unions, the NEA has been on board with this transformational Humanist Psychology vision since they were cosponsors of Abraham Maslow’s book back in 1962. I covered that here. http://invisibleserfscollar.com/psychological-approach-to-a-humane-politics-restructuring-the-west-quietly-and-effectively-via-ed/

      Randi Weingarten of the other teacher’s union was part of the Convergence Center’s task force on reenvisioning ed so check there too on top of her inflammatory statements in her introduction of Wade Henderson of the Leadership Conference several years ago.

      Your comment implies these people are on opposite sides in what is hoped for in the classroom. That’s not necessarily true, even if the rationales for the sought changes differ. It’s also highly probable given the Senate testimony before confirmation that Mrs DeVos is unfamiliar with the true meaning of some of the terms she has previously advocated for.

      If education supplies the categories, themes, perspectives, and principles to guide thought and assesses for their presence at least annually and insists that classrooms and activities must be experiential under the UDL mandate in ESSA and also defines the personality traits desired while calling them Attributes or Dispositions, governments are IN FACT teaching students both what to think, how to think, and wanting it to operate at a subconscious, emotional level as a habit.

      This is not necessarily an either/or scenario.

      • Thanks for your response. When you say “If Education supplies the categories, etc”, WHO/WHAT is “Education” in this case? My assumption is that “Education” encompasses the governmental body that determines what is to be taught, along with the testing organizations etc. Wouldn’t this be DeVos and the DOE?

        • Where do the categories come from? It is what HOTS–Higher Order Thinking Skills–that each student is assessed for at least annually is looking for. Some of the concepts were listed when Lynn Erickson, who created the related phrase with its own tag–Enduring UNderstandings–laid it out in a speech in Europe tied to the IB Programme. I also watched the Georgia DOE instructing Social Studies teachers in Ms Erickson’s work.

          The Next Generation Science Standards explicitly lays out the DCIs–Disciplinary Core Ideas and CCCs–Cross-Cutting Concepts and Themes and that and the C3 Social Studies Framework come into ELA via Writing Across the Curriculum and other interdisciplinary programs. Close Reading is also about applying concepts. This post from late November should also help. http://invisibleserfscollar.com/uncloaking-mandarins-oxymorons-and-the-leap-frog-straight-to-wave-4-education-reforms/

          This is something I have been developing in the last several months as virtually all sides stepped up and said “this is also our view of what education reforms have always been about.” I began to feel a bit like Caesar saying Et Tu, Brutus?”

          I doubt if Betsy DeVos really understands what HOTS is or what ESSA mandates and how it ties to what has been pushed for decades and is going on globally. I am very worried and with good reason even though all my kids have now graduated from K-12.

          I just added one more point that fed ED was a partner with IB during Arne Duncan’s tenure. Those employees are likely not appointed and can easily keep such alliances in place. I have the hard copy proof somewhere around here from several years ago.

        • Here is another example of where categories come from. https://www.commonlit.org/texts A parent from another state with kids in Catholic schools unhappy that there were no longer textbooks asked me what I could tell from this site the school was using.

          Not only did I go to this part of site and notice a pattern, it became even more apparent when we click “themes” on the right hand side.

          When you read or hear someone refer to something as a ‘conceptual lens’ they are providing the tool to guide perception and interpretation. It becomes a habit after repeated use. You can also go to the Frameworks Institute and who funds them and their very graphic explanations of how to get people to accept their “desired narratives”.

          In the Classical Education model Barney Charter and others are using it is the ideas that constitute what they call Good, True, and Beautiful. Maybe they are but as a lens without a body of facts, this is a way to see the world ideologically and inaccurately. Every psychologist and poli sci doctorate wanting fundamental transformation in the last 100 years seems to have been told that in classes we did not take and books that we were never assigned. I have grasped this deeply enough for long enough now to have ferreted out what was said in those classes and conferences and what was laid out in the assigned books. There is NO dispute about intentions where I am. There is only a dispute as to whether advocates are knowing change agents or inadvertent ones.

          My gut is that Betsy DeVos is a mixture in part because she and her husband invest so often at the venture stage in companies that will benefit from being a vendor for this particular, poorly appreciated, new kind of education.

        • Anon-this is the part of fed Ed that pushes the School Climate theory that is straight out of Urie Bronfenbrenner and his ecological systems metaphor. https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/

          Is DeVos even aware of the policy implications of the listed February 23 seminar on Education as a Social Determinant of Health? We have covered what that means on this blog and it is how to achieve the Marxian ‘meeting human needs’ Human Development Society that is also known as little c communism without using those alarming terms. Social Determinants of Health is also a global push tied to achieving the SDGs and Equity for All by 2030.

          It is dangerous now not to appreciate where ed fits into these broader plans or the implications of the Mindset Scholars Network being at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences. I have the original plans developed there in the late 50s for enacting the HDS surreptitiously.

          This from the Frameworks Institute talking about the same STEM report I warned was not learning in the conventional sense has confirmed just that. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-02-10-setting-tension-explanation-metaphor-a-storytelling-approach-for-early-stem-learning

          It also explains how the values and metaphors to guide perceptions works in practice and how deliberately manipulative it is. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-02-10-setting-tension-explanation-metaphor-a-storytelling-approach-for-early-stem-learning Notice it is also grounded in a BEST perspective.

    • Yes and how timely are the confessions in this article http://www.theecologist.org/magazine/features/2988560/living_networks.html

      How useful is it now to state “For the first time, we have a scientific theory that unifies mind, matter and life.” Remember when we looked at Donald Schon and his push of what he called Generative Metaphors? Fits with Communication Science and communicative rationality too.

      After all, this politically useful model for transformation insists that “the self-organizing activity of living systems, at all levels of life, is mental activity.” Make education about controlling and manipulating that is precisely how you accomplish Authoritarian Goals shrouded in catchy phrases that do not offend. Even the hype over choice masks the lack of it at the essence of this Systems View of Education to yield steerable systems subject to legal edicts and Preachments as Boulding called it of what is to be believed and valued.

  2. “Determining the narrative needed to engage the public…”

    Or more honestly:

    “How to spin the lie and manipulate the serfs so that they buy-in and do our bidding imagining it was their own idea all along ”

    Two Science Approach. Guffaw. Sounds like keeping two sets of accounting books.

    • At a neurobiological level.

      How is the snowstorm there? Heard power was out in Long Island and some of the snow came with thunder.

      • Not too bad here in Westchester County, about a foot, somewhat heavy, it froze hard today but we had time yesterday to shovel out and rake the edges of the roof.

        Tomorrow (warmup + rain) could be a challenge for people if they get ice dams in their gutters, which used to happen to us before we got the roof rake.

      • That’s a trip, they’re saying plainly that we need someone like George Soros to step in and fix government in his typical way, via target corrupt bargains, if it does the wrong thing.

        • Funny you should mention old George because it turns out he has created INET–the Institute for New Economic Thinking. An alert California reader noticed that Vernon Smith–Mr, charters are a type of Experimental Economics, Science of Consciousness, let’s train judges in ‘economics’ that won the Nobel with Daniel Kahnemann in 2002 for marrying the psychological and economic is speaking at USC next Monday. Turns out the home of Damasio as in Descartes Error and Immordano_Yang of brain-based learning, has a joint venture center with INET that emphasizes “decision theory” and “network theory.” In other words, it is grounded in the manipulation of consciousness and decision-making and another word for systems science.

          It truly is all coming together and we are not supposed to see that. I just have finished that 307 page 2017 World Bank Report and they really are using the law, in a new envisioning of what its role can be to force the Human Development Society. Plus the Back Cover, if someone just wants to skip to the end, states that “policymaking and policy development…take place in complex political and social settings in which individuals and groups with unequal power interact within changing rules as they pursue conflicting interests. [Me:I want. You Have. Gimme] The process of these interactions is what the Report calls governance.

          Under Boulding’s definition of what constitutes a system is interacting parts, governance and systems science suddenly become synonymous. How fascinating, huh? No wonder there is so much deceit and the 9th Circuit and way too many on SCOTUS think the US Constitution is now irrelevant except for certain themes.

    • I was just reading that Mike Pence had named Mark Calabria as his Chief Economist. Turns out he is involved with What Works America from his perch at Cato. http://www.whatworksforamerica.org/our-experts/

      Since all the rest are admitted Progs, why are we to believe this is anything other than a means to push “the market” as just another “designable system” subject to public policy.

  3. Dear Robyn,

    Did you read Kunstler’s Friday blog today? James Howard Kunstler -Clusterfuck nation- it is a beauty and read his link to Katherine. w
    I was interviewed by Jasun today- we spoke of education and you were mentioned.

    Do enjoy? your posts. The whole education thing could not be more horrifying!

    • Subjects no longer exist now for the most part except as cover to impart the desired abstract concepts, ideas, and categories to guide perception.

      Have you downloaded that Framework Finland is using? Yet in his Common Core book created with the Mackinac Center (an Atlas member) ;s Kyle Olsen we get pimping for Finland’s vision of education. I read Diana Furchgott-Roth’s piece last week for the Manhattan Institute hyping School Choice and misrepresenting PISA and what it does. So I look up her background and find this glowing piece from 2012 from Swarthmore. http://bulletin.swarthmore.edu/bulletin-issue-archive/archive_p=946.html I know Limited Government and Free Markets are actually not what drives the Atlas Network members like Manhattan or AEI or Heritage, APP, and Pioneer apart from rhetoric, but social justice Swarthmore writing a glowing review of their alum tells me they are in on the ruse of how to steer and shift the MH template into “systems”.

    • Must be my lucky day as CtD is also touted here today. http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/13/todays-riot-prone-mobs-product-americas-cult-like-education-system/

      The Amitai Etzioni/ Robert George connection has once again borne fruit as The Monochrome Society both are connected to lays out precisely how to control future behavior via the “internalization” of desired social norms. The theory laid out in that 2001 book fits precisely with how Tranzi OBE and Competency-Based Ed really work. That explains the deceit around both those terms I have noted as well as SEL Standards, Constructivism, and Conceptual Frameworks a la APUSH.

      This book is cited a great deal and is pertient to what they want to use education “reform” to achieve without confessing as much so there might be an outcry. http://keithdwalker.ca/wp-content/summaries/m-p/New%20Golden%20Rule.Etzioni.EBS.pdf

      They want to use it via standards-based education, improperly understood via a coordinated effort of deceit, while not having that recognized. It all fits perfectly with that World Bank 2017 REport linked above as well as Harvard Kennedy School’s rollout last week of PDIA-Problem-Driven Iterative Adaptation. That was brought to us by the same prof who had created the behavioral science ed template. It’s all coming together and by golly I am tracking it all in real time.

    • Did you see this? http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/14/state-lawmakers-need-dramatically-increase-school-choice-now-america/

      I decided to look into the background of the “education policy expert” who had such a talking points view of how education works. She works for ALEC, which is of course an ATLAS Network member. One of ALEC’s “idea” slogans of federalism and limited government, as we know, do not quite mean what people think. Private providers of services proclaimed as Taxpayer-funded ‘needs’ by the outsourced welfare state are “limited government” as is a Universal Basic Income. Likewise, what is frequently touted as federalism now is actually ‘specious federalism’ if we go back to the writings of those involved in PEPG at HKS from the 80s when they were still at Brookings. They recognized it as decentralization, where the command is federal but the locus of implementation and some adaptability was local. Fits right in with PDIA, Data and evidence-based policymaking, and subsidiarity.

      https://www.alec.org/person/inez-feltscher/

      Have been making the same Valentines meal since hubs and I were dating. Just have to buy more filet with grown kids also expecting a treat. Doing a potato puff with food processor instead of twice baked potatoes to give the angry nerves in my right arm a break.

    • I just saw this and recognized your interest in Finnis’ work. http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/22/meet-heavyweight-moral-philosopher-mentored-neil-gorsuch/

      According to that Gorsuch’s book was published by the same New Forum series that published the Amitai Etzioni Monochrome Society discussed in the latest post.

      I am also confused as to why George teaches with Bruce Ackerman’s books in his Con Law courses if he does not advocate reading into the existing Constitution. It is certainly what Ackerman does as I have his book too.

    • You are welcome. In my head and documentation everything has truly come together. Unfortunately I have developed wrist troubles from too much scrolling. Going to an accupuncturist who used to be a prof at Emory Med School.

      The PDIA discussion is in a book Building State Capability: Evidence. Analysis. Action. that is actually about far more than Developing Countries. One of its co-authors, Lant Pritchett (harvard Kennedy School so tied to PEPG), was the author of the Oxford Blavitnik School of Government RISE–Research on Improving Systems of Education–December 2015 Working Paper called “Creating Educations Systems Coherent for Learning Outcomes: Making the Transition from Schooling to Learning”. That in turn connects to Eldar Shafir and the Kahnemann/Treisman Center at Princeton on Behavioral Sciences and Public Policy. In other words, there is a good reason for my recognition that Kahnemann’s decision-making in the face of uncertainty and use of mental models looked like the HOTS mandate in ESSA.

      Stay dry. I hear further deluges are coming.

    • Notice the complete lack of any reference to Student Unit Record. http://educationnext.org/making-evidence-locally-education-research-every-student-succeeds-act/

      For new readers Education Next is published by the PEPG program at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, not the ed school. The Lant Pritchett referred to in these comments is a prof there. EN is also funded by the Bradley Foundation that seems to have either a pretend conservative agenda as numerous posts have laid out with what they sponsor or it has redefined the concept of what “conservatism” means. That would put it in good company with what is laid out in this post and what I mentioned about ALEC and what “limited government” and “federalism” mean to a “public policy think tank.”

      Also notice the repeated subtle references to charters as labs of innovation and also a place where the black-white achievement gap can be closed. Parents just do not get told it took a redefinition of student achievement to close the gap.

    • This is a helpful discussion out today on the Accountability regulations kerfuffle. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-02-15-k-12-state-accountability-in-flux-under-proposed-rule-changes-to-essa

      And this proves that the Mindset Scholars Network is based at Stanford’s ubiquitous to the bad ideas–CASBS. http://mindsetscholarsnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/MSN-Research-Portfolio-Learning-Enviros-Mindsets.pdf

      Psychologically wise teaching is a phrase that merits looking at. That Network first popped up when the Obama White House set up the task force to use behavioral and social psychology. The head, Maya Shankar, has now moved on to UN employment creating the desired template globally.

      The last project funded “Developmental, Neural and Psychosocial Correlates of Mindset among Low-Socioeconomic Adolescents from two Cultural Groups” is tied to the BRAIN Initiative because USC’s Immordano-Yang is the PI. Remember we have discussed her work on brain-based learning and her ties to Damasio who is of course tied to IMBES and wrote Descartes Errorwanting new kinds of non-logic oriented mental models.

      It’s all tied together at the level we are at.

      • So knowing the goals coming from UN types like fabian huckster Huxley and Unesco, and professed in earnest by Aldous Huxley in his books and lectures, notably, the Ultimate Revolution, and all the NEUROgibberish out there sounding oh so sciency and intellectual, so far above mere mortals clunking brainstems, combined coincedentally with the continuous discoveries of learning disabilities and mental disorders in children requiring prescribed pharmaceuticals, put it all together and every word coming from all the links cited here and all the quoted authors and all the policy bloviators point to MIND ARSON. Its so obvious.
        We discussed this years ago, Robin, examine the Common Core logo. They are telling us what they are doing. Its child abuse. Just look at the mystery murals in Brussels, they are showing what we are seeing happening here. Combine the Mind Arson in pre-k-college with the sexual advancement coming at us through legislation, lgbt, safe schools, anti bullying, womens health rights, CSE, mandated sex ed, child rights, bills all over America in every state sneaky chipping away at parental rights and family sovereignty which really all comes down to American sovereignty. School Choice is just another brick in the wall.

        • School Choice does not have to be a brick in the wall, but it is because when anyone points out what is poisoning the given solution, the response is “so?”

          I could fix it but I know both the poisons, the delivery systems, and the toxic end game parents would avoid if they had a clue.

          This is not a reflexive “unions hate her. That’s the reason” discussion.

  4. We are noticing a HUGE effort on behalf of teachers not to assign HOMEWORK. It blows us away as there must be a significant difference in understanding material amoug kids who do homework! Can you please explain this? Teachers say it’s because alot of students just don’t do their homework, which causes a huge discrepancy in the classroom as the kids who do the homework feel they wasted their time and the teachers have to wait for all to understand material. Can you please elaborate on this?

    • In the first few months of the blog, I had written Credentialed to Destroy and knew the sought for true agenda masquerading as the Common Core. I put the manuscript aside while I reacted in real time to what was coming out of the White House on a weekly basis. It went to the actual implementation, but it was largely out of sight. Because the vision used the law to make it binding, there really was no dispute as to what was going on once uncovered.

      That was when I created the Axemaker Mind metaphor for what was no longer desired. When I edited CtD for final publication, I was able to incorporate that theme into the book as well. The mind that can be manipulated via these behavioral science techniques that seek to standardized what gets internalized, gets a serious vaccination once it can read fluently and phonetically. As my kids grasp, they could read words they had not seen before and tie into their spoken vocabulary. Homework can also create an Axemaker Mind when it goes to reenforce independent book learning and conversations within the privacy of the mind.

      That not equitable and it may well lead someone to reject using a metaphor that is a useful Guiding Fiction if social change is what is desired, but that is currently untrue as a factual matter. The well-read kid who does homework may notice. Plus homework is thought to favor those with educated parents, thereby reenforcing current material inequities.

      It’s not about mental effort and transmission of knowledge anymore. It’s really not about the individual anymore in the sense that the West historically revered.

      Having some trouble with my wrist so that’s enough typing for now, but this is an issue I have pursued in earnest until I have squeezed out confessions through time and various geographies. The consistency especially from the mid-80s on is horrifyingly apt to us now.

    • Since I am not in Dublin, Ireland I cannot make this, but the idea that the ubiquitous Cass Sunstein is lecturing there in March on “New Directions in Behaviorally Informed Policy” https://www.eventbrite.ie/e/professor-cass-sunstein-ucd-visit-new-directions-in-behaviorally-informed-policy-tickets-32084935907 and that his current project is listed as “group decision-making and the idea of liberty” should make us all shudder as to what the idea of Liberty will come to mean.

      Maybe it will be that Templeton meaning we encountered at the Constitution Center or what Amartya Sen has done to the idea of freedom. Yesterday I discovered that UNESCO in 1997 created the template for making education globally about instilling a “new set of ideas and values” to guide future behavior in the 21st Century. Have been reading the background docs, when not icing my arm, and they fit with everything we have been tracking including the deceit around SEL Standards, Tranzi OBE, Competency-Based Ed, and the purpose of Conceptual Frameworks.

    • This is factually wrong. http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/16/yes-donald-trump-can-repeal-common-core-heres/ Eliminating fed DOE would NOT eliminate the Common Core if it was properly understood. Interesting to read so much citing of connected insiders who are paid to ensure that only the deceitful narrative gets through.

      It’s fascinating really as I will hopefully be able to reveal in further depth soon. My following up on the cultural dialogue and aspirations of Robert George and Amitai Etzioni has certainly laid it all out in stunning detail. I wouldn’t have known where to look for those blueprints but for the deceit.

      Back to UNESCO. I keep remembering they are partners in the Harvard Center for Curriculum Redesign. So is Massachusetts and the hype over its ‘good standards’ certainly puts this plan to “eliminate the Common Core” in the perspective it deserves.

      • I’ve looked at this article. Pullman says that ESSA “codifies the federal government as the ultimate review board for state testing and curriculum policies.” Immediately afterwards she says that the key to dismantling Common Core is dismantling the DOE. I fail to see how regulatory action can reverse that which has been “codified” statutorily by Congress. It may be true in a historical sense that without the DOE “there would be no Common Core.” But it does not follow that eliminating DOE eliminates Common Core. There is the little matter of ESSA and its “codification.” Pullman says that eliminating DOE would require an act of Congress. She doesn’t say anything about the act of Congress required to eliminate the ESSA and all of the interlocking civil rights and IDEA tentacles it contains.

        Pullman refers to the Jeb Bush people “beginning to populate [DeVos’s] department.” My, I wonder how they got in there. It wouldn’t be because she’s a “Jeb Bush person” who, judging from her past history, buys the entire Common Core vision, would it? Airily to suggest that DeVos clean house in this way is comparable to suggesting the Barak Obama really needed to get rid of those pro-Iranian spokesmen and lobbyists clogging up the White House visitors’ log. Shoo, shoo, don’t know how they got in here…

        Finally, I note that heavy foot-noting of a document or book does not guarantee that what is written is either true or accurate. For example, Pullman links to an article by Sol Stern deploring all the progressivist approaches enshrined in Common Core — while simultaneously applauding Common Core, which he claims is closely aligned with Core Knowledge: “the Bloomberg administration signed on to the new Common Core State Standards, which call for schools to adopt a grade-by-grade curriculum that is ‘intentionally and coherently structured to develop rich content knowledge.’” And then, “Phil Weinberg offered the preposterous claim that this ‘improvement’ came about because the Common Core Standards now ask students to ‘construct their own knowledge.’ In fact, the Common Core document contains not a single reference to the progressive-ed doctrine of students constructing their own knowledge.” Stern knows better. Millions of dollars from the Gates Foundation to his employer, the Manhattan Institute, must have clouded his judgment. But he qualifies as a “cite” in Pullman’s article.

        Robin has shown that the foundations of what we now have passing for education go much further back than the Department of Education and that the vision and assumptions that undergird it have thoroughly saturated virtually every level of government as well as NGOs, “research institutions,” corporations and international agencies. As a faithful attendant at state board of education meetings, I can testify to the truth of this. Simply bucking education back to the states or localities leaves the fundamental vision intact. I am the founder of a very successful charter school, but I can tell you that most of the charter schools coming online are progressive and embraced by those state officials who approve them. These days, “choice” reminds me of Henry Ford’s dictum about cars: “You can have your choice of schools, as long as they are all the color black.”

        • Here’s a good example of the danger of this “Look Squirrel! It’s the feds!” narrative instead of recognizing that the purpose of learning standards like the Common Core globally is to get at both the internalized and externalized bases of the student’s behavior. Make it about instilling common concepts and ideas (knowledge), skills in the environment and interacting with others, and personal attributes and values and Ding. Ding. you have used the behavioral sciences to create a “system”.

          If the state and local standards continue that as the basis as this recent Ontario, Canada well-being document does http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/about/WBDiscussionDocument.pdf and you have certainly created a common core within the students neurobiologically. It fits with the purpose of the Common Core in the US when properly understood. None of the people Joy cites in that link, all of whom work for at least one Atlas Network public policy think tank, have any incentive to accurately frame what learning standards are. They can’s because the School Choice they are pushing, either privates, charters, or ESAs, is still using the essence of learning standards in determining Accountability. John Goodlad would like that Ontario template a lot if you remember what I laid out in Credentialed to Destroy as the actual, long-enduring, common core template from the 80s.

          If you simply mention meeting federal civil rights obligations in any superseding statute to ESSA, have you triggered the Equity and Excellence obligation that pulls in equal outcomes despite actual differences and the vision of Mihaly Csiksentmihalyi on what Excellence is. http://invisibleserfscollar.com/excellence-means-education-putting-what-we-feel-wish-for-and-think-in-harmony/ Csik worked closely with Bela Banathy so we are back in the admitted Systems View of Education. We are also back with their work at the same time to create a General Evolution Theory using consciousness and culture with Riane Eisler and Ervin Laszlo. Excellence is yet another catchy slogan with a demonstrable trail of non-dictionary meaning using the ISC/CtD library of ed terms.

          That Ontario template on cognitive, social, physical, and emotional needs fits with the Quality Assurance accreditation standards as I laid out in my book. Isn’ that what School Choice always wants to use as their monitor? What is really being monitored for? It’s not coming from the feds so much as what behavioral scientists and humanist psychologits have been laying out since Rogers and Maslow here in the US or Urie Bronfenbrenner who went back and forth or Michael Cole who did as well as graduate students in psychology to Luria and Leontiev and their updates to Vygotsky’s desired template for Hominus Sovieticus.

          That Ontario template is being pushed this week by the same Knowledge Works tied to High Tech High and Richard Riley (Clinton’s Ed Sec) on their Board. Does that then tie it to the Innovative Lab Network for Competency-Based Education that CCSSO contracted to create? High Tech High is a global exemplar supposedly of what innovative schools should look like. KW works closely with the Institute for the Future to create visions and fraeworks for education in the future. That’s the same IFF that employs Marina Gorbis and Jane MacGonnigal who provided her vision of what digital learning can do to the student’s internalized mental models in her keynote to the international ed tech group at their annual conference in Austin, Texas.

          Any sign of federal dictates here in what the states, local schools, think tanks, digital learning all are pushing on students. They all involve what students internalize physiologically. Is it less tyrannical if imposed by local mandates using deceit by legislators and think tank employees doing Speaking Tours? Presentations to the local Chamber?

          I will close as I am still not supposed to be typing much, but did you notice the shout-out to the creation of IFF in the post-Bellagio documents when Eric Jantsch laid out this vision of how to use the social sciences to backward map what the future might become in the late 60s? And we are supposed to now blindly accept IFF visions of how education can be used by state and local governments to do just that?

          The feds are one of the levels pushing this same vision of education, but they are actually the easiest to now remove after it has all been put in place.

        • Did you see this? https://www.city-journal.org/html/soul-democratic-capitalism-15026.html on Michael Novak’s passing?

          I also did not know Robert George used the nickname “Robbie”. His desire for Human Flourishing published in 2015 by the same Witherspoon Institute tied to the Closing the Door on Innovation organized deceit on the Common Core in 2011 turns out to be the term used throughout that Positive Education vision released by the World Government Summit this week. We are having the most alarming convergence while it hurts to type.

          This is more of the same, but completely pushing the communitarian ideal. http://dailysignal.com/2017/02/18/michael-novak-and-americas-moral-ecology/

          Fits with the offline discussion we have had from time to time.

          Plus remember when I wrote about CIRCLE in CtD with concern over its admitted agenda? Now being a change agent becomes the purpose of schools. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/sally-yatess-legacy-of-injustice.php That’s a very dialectical education being described as the exemplars.

  5. Nice graphics in that report!
    Great news!! we can change kids brains‼️
    The excuse:
    “Some research has shown that character traits like grit can be just as important as IQ in academic performance”

    IQ! Grit! My kid has to perform better academically!!!!! My kid has GRIT! SOME smarty said so! Ok. Emperors new clothes. Peer pressure! But the problem is there ARE NO ACADEMICS! Just behaviorism. Blaaargh. But do check the brain graphic..

    • http://www.ipositive-education.net/ Look at the advisors. This ties to Angela Duckworth and thus the Mindset Scholars Network headquartered at CASBS. It also makes it perfectly clear this is what constitutes evidence-based practices in education.

      Third, it is tied to the Templeton Foundation and that redefinition of Liberty and the NIH-funded Science of Virtues at U-Chicago. I have clearly watched too much “Diners, Drive-Ins. and Dives” because I wanted to say “Winner. Winner. Chicken Dinner.”

      Did you see Irina Bokova of UNESCO with her Scientific Marxism via ed was another World Government Summit speaker?

    • Thanks Beth. Your Australian Curriculum for Well-Being is tied to what is known as the Common Core in the US and Competencies globally.

      Have you looked at the Geelong Grammar School in Adelaide, Victoria? It is using Martin Seligman’s PERMA template-Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, and Accomplishment as “evidence-based, scientific” education that will enable children to “flourish”. I am beginning to hate that euphemism for human development a la Uncle Karl.

      You also have so much Positive Psychology coming into your classrooms as anti-bullying edicts.

  6. Robyn, I’ll check out Geelong Grammar education in subjectivity.
    If they read classic literature instead they could get an indexed
    guide to life ‘ambition, anger, angst, even altruism’ without mind
    arson. And of course they could study the problem situation of
    real people in History, in context, resisting the temptation, of
    course, to teach history as moral lessons or Marxist historicism
    But that would mean students thinking for themselves…

  7. Irina Bokova in perspective.

    Georgi Filipov Bokov was a member of the Bulgarian resistance movement during the Second World War. Later, he became a leading member of the Bulgarian Communist Party and editor-in-chief of Rabotnichesko … Wikipedia
    Born: January 15, 1920, Yakoruda, Bulgaria
    Died: June 1, 1989, Sofia, Bulgaria
    Children: Irina Bokova
    Political party: Bulgarian Communist Party (1942–1976)

    • Look at this acknowledgment: “Current and future BRAIN Initiative research studies aim to elucidate, and potentially influence, the mechanisms that give rise to consciousness, our innermost thoughts, and our behaviors, thereby prompting novel social and ethical questions.”

      https://brainupdate.nih.gov/2017/02/20/brain-initiative-investigators-meeting-discussion-on-neuroethical-implications-of-advances-in-neurotechnology/ People do not appreciate that for someone like a Bokova, it is not ethical not to instill the desired little c collectivist values and beliefs. I have really been working on what the word “flourish” means and the convergence of the Right and Left Pincers and where School Choice really leads and how it all ties to Mihaly Csiksentmihalyi. It is pretty clear to me that the Bradley Foundation is pushing Csik’s vision without saying so. Once you read is work though it aligns perfectly with what the Witherspoon Institute published in that Robert George/John Haldane 2015 book or what Greg Forster described in his Accountability vision for EdChoice to give just two examples.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.