Surreptitiously Subjugating Our Locus of Control: Whose Choice?

Tracking what is really going on in education through what is being legally mandated means I frequently know what is crucial long before I fully grasp why the shift in practices is so important. It lets me know through the decades and all over the world, that whatever the current name and given rationale, certain aspects of people’s Identity formation, the basis for their decision making as they live their lives, and what motivates them to act and guides their perceptions are being systematically targeted. When I wrote Credentialed to Destroy I had grasped that Transformational Outcomes-Based Education (Tranzi OBE) and constructivism targeting how the world and reality is viewed were being pushed all over the English-speaking world in what appeared to be a coordinated effort to drive now drive human evolution, along with its institutions, via planned changes to culture rather than genes.

Genes just take too long for transformation plans apparently and if I have learned anything in just this year’s posts alone, we have many people in a hurry to redesign how the world works. Just last week was “Forty Years of Wicked Problem Solving” that will really make use of the new HOTS mandate in the US federal ed law that was designed to be virtually impossible to Opt Out of. Why must everyone be subjugated to such a prescription of what concepts they use to analyze wicked problems that have no fixed answer or have never been taught to the student? I think Brian Head supplied that answer in the above paper when he admitted that “the nature and significance of the policy problem is shaped through debates on ‘framing’. [No need for debate if the frames are mandated learnt predispositions set out in learning standards]. This is crucial for how the debates about problems, contexts and responses are represented…framing [is] a way of selecting, organizing, interpreting and making sense of a complex reality to provide guideposts for knowing, analysing, persuading and acting.”

So nice of governments now to dictate that, isn’t it? All in the name of High Standards and Success for All we get our very subjectivity itself mandated and then put under regular surveillance via poorly understood assessments for compliance. Apparently if someone doesn’t get caught as a K-12 student there’s always higher ed and management leadership retreats targeting that very same locus of control. Everybody suddenly wants to get at and manipulate our “perceptions, values and interests” that control “how issues are scoped” and how we will likely interpret our daily experiences. Over and over again we come across a belief that in the 21st century we must all ultimately have “shared understanding and shared meaning about the problem and possible solutions.”

What better way to do that than to use learning standards and competency framework to:

“develop this psychological capacity…to not only model and manage its external environment, but also to model and manage its internal adaptive processes. It can develop mental models of the pre-existing physical, emotional, and mental adaptive processes that determine how it behaves and acts. The models will enable it to understand consciously how its pre-existing adaptive processes operate, what useful effects they have, how they might be modified, and what the consequences might be. Through self-knowledge they will develop the capacity to gain control over their internal adaptive processes. Increasingly, this will enable them to manage their physical actions, emotional and motivational states, and their beliefs and other mental processes in whatever ways are necessary”

to fit with whatever learning experiences a school mandates and whatever objectives and outcomes it now imposes. That passage really struck me because the Principals and School Supers most aggressive in pushing this vision tend to be the ones being promoted now to ever more lucrative job opportunities. Is this what any parent imagines as higher student achievement? Yet every legal instrument from statutes, to charters, to what HOTS assesses, actually gets at manipulating, and then tracking via data whether the desired adaptions are occurring to these internal adaptive processes. If the same new prescribed “norms, moral beliefs, and other rules of behaviour” can become instilled across a large group as “learnt predispositions” governments will have successfully created a common internal manager guiding future behaviour with nary a heads up, much less consent.

If that seems to be overly ambitious, let me quote that “a distributed internal manager is formed of a set of hard-wired predispositions that are reproduced in each of the members of a group of organisms…[Student-centered learning sounds so much better,doesn’t it?] A distributed internal manager clearly has the potential to organize a group cooperatively…so that they treat others in the group as self… or by hardwiring specific cooperative behaviours in individuals.” In other words, all these plans we keep encountering from UN Sustainable Development Goals to supposedly Balanced Communitarian visions in the name of Founding Principles, Learning Liberty, or a New Golden Rule can all be put into effect through the right type of prescribed learning experiences.

In this vision “each individual is controlled by its particular set of predispositions”, which he or she may not even know were instilled intentionally from preschool through higher ed. The group as a whole can only be controlled and coordinated if a “common set of predispositions is reproduced across the group.” How does the Common Core ever actually go away if it is about hardwiring learnt predispositions? If we wonder why, we have a confession that “if we had different emotional goals and motivations, our technology would be different, as would our systems of government and other social arrangements.”

Sounds like learning standards and competency frameworks then prescribed for the vast majority of students would be a highly effective way to invisibly alter ‘civil society’, just as so many of my links have laid out is the current aim. Just have education or that weekend seminar or management retreat target the “internal adaptive goals” of students, an executive team, or all too often, the elected members of your local school board or private school trustees go through learning experiences that are actually designed to alter their ‘psychological software’, even if the supplied promotional materials and consent forms deny that. It’s the practices that matter and when those practices and participatory experiences whether in a school, woods, or luxury hotel are designed to force someone to “drop their emotional attachments to any ideas, attitudes, beliefs, norms, values, religious systems and moral principles,” we have a targeting of this psychological capacity to change internal adaptive processes.

This ‘distributed internal management’ is an excellent way to prescribe planned and coerced transformations starting at the level of the individual mind and personality without their being the telltale levers of control of a gulag or overt censorship. We should all be alarmed to know such plans exist and that they fit how learning standards work so well. “The hold of the manager over the individual would be greatly strengthened if the individual’s mental modelling of the world led him to believe that the codes and norms were in his best interests” is not a phrase any parent wants to read as the school year starts, but it is essential to grasp how these plans actually work. This is not just a matter of the UN and admitted progressives wanting to use education to fulfill John Dewey’s desire to instill the habits and dispositions essential for his vision of democracy.

I have been looking at Classical Education for a while and the deceitful narratives designed to support it. It too, at its core, seems to want to alter the fact that “particularly in the last two hundred years, a significant proportion of individuals in more complex human societies has developed a strong capacity to use internal linear modelling to critically evaluate their own beliefs.” Apparently that will not do, because our “behaviour is now guided largely by internal reward systems that are mostly self-centred, except for the legacy of the kin selection and reciprocal altruism mechanisms.” Those don’t reconcile us to the desired communitarian ethos prescribed for the 21st century so we get the Good, True, and Beautiful instilled for us and new definitions of Freedom and Liberty. It’s for our own good you see. Needed to solve those wicked problems as a matter of public policy.

Learning standards, properly understood, have “the potential to change how each of us sees ourself, what we do with our life, and the meaning and purpose we see in our individual existence.” Too important to be a matter of personal choice, these have become a matter of prescribed public policy imposed surreptitiously using the law to force compliance with a vision that isn’t our own in most cases.

Shouldn’t we all be aware? If “our thoughts, beliefs, motivations and emotional states, as well as the methods we use to influence them, must become objects of consciousness” so that we can be forced to develop new “psychological software”, don’t we get to at least see what is to be altered and why?

Isn’t actual knowledge, instead of prescribed conceptual ‘frames’, the only way to avoid what has been quietly put in place in a most coordinated manner? Especially with the commencement of the new school year?

Parents may well be rejoicing in achievement that can quite frankly be more accurately seen as brainwashing when properly understood.

What happens to the student or adult who is forced into adopting “new psychological software” despite their reluctance to change?

Somehow it seems likely to be more impactful than a notation “doesn’t have a Growth Mindset”?



11 thoughts on “Surreptitiously Subjugating Our Locus of Control: Whose Choice?

  1. Hey Robin, I came across something yesterday I think you might be interested in. I was listening to Jordan Peterson’s “Maps of Meaning” on audio and toward the beginning of the book, He mentioned some Russian Communist social engineers and that their focus was on teaching “behavior”, vs the traditionally Western goal of education focus is on “what is out there”. This global bunch that has infiltrated US education are noticeably focused on “behavior”; trying to turn our citizens into Pavlov’s drooling dogs and they are succeeding by the looks of the results. What I really like about Jordan Peterson is that he seems to be able to untwist verbal attacks from “behavioral” based (ideological) thinking on the spot. It is something to watch. The entire book is about this subject.

    • I would disagree with the reference to Pavlov as being the basis for Soviet psychology. He was certainly Stalin’s favorite psychologist because like Lysenko it was a material conception, not ideological. Luria became a medical doctor during those years to save his life vs accusations of non-pure psych speculation and Vygotsky was long since dead of TB. It is Luria and Leontiev’s research that is the basis for transpersonal psych techniques where ever they occur. is a journal that has launched within the past year that relates to cultural historical activity theory and its push to control the human ‘meaning-making’ apparatus that learning standards also aim at.

      Lauren Resnick, who was on the Common Core steering committee and was co-head of the New Standards project in the 90s with Marc Tucker was also involved in the 80s when Higher Order Thinking Skills were originally hatched. is also involved with ISCAR.

      lays out the documentable USSR psych plans for us reflected in this post and how it ties to Urie Bronfenbrenner.

  2. Thanks again for updating on the accelerating efforts of self-appointed global education transformationalists!

    Marc Tucker is certainly one of the “leaders” trying to bring this about. Here he is trying to cheer on the troops in my province, British Columbia, Canada. Actually, he is acting like an “enforcer”, reminding people of the history and general GELP plan.

    Interesting, this comes on the heels of a report from the teachers’ union. A survey found that only 15% of K-9 teachers fully support the redesigned curriculum: “Teacher comments illustrate a stark divide between those who support and those who are critical of the direction of curriculum change.” These are some of the comments quoted in the 50-pg report

    – “I am not convinced that inquiry is appropriate for all students. I feel this approach is being forced on us, and the result may be devastating.
    – “Participating, but feeling like participation has been superficial or tokenistic, can lead to frustration with both the process and the resulting curriculum.”

    The report’s strongest paragraph states: “Teachers who are not supportive of the redesigned curriculum expressed strong anger, frustration, and stress. Broadly there were three major reasons given for their lack of support: (1) disagreeing with, or not knowing, the purpose of the change, (2) feeling that research does not support the changes, and (3) perceiving that the change has resulted in a less academically rigorous curriculum.”

    Parents and public are still generally in the dark about both the Tucker piece and the BCTF (teacher union) survey results.

    • You are welcome. Here is yet even more confirmation that this is all about the evolution of new forms of consciousness globally, including tying it all to our good friend Pavel Luksha

      Also,if you look at page 9 of this pdf you will see Luksha is tied to the Triple Helix vision, which is the new 21st century name for the Turchenko vision for the West laid out in Credentialed to Destroy. Clearly the former capital C Communists love that template they hatched.

    • I suggest you may want to look at this article.

      If it’s not just education that is grounded in Dewey’s ideas and aspirations, but all public policy being pushed systematically by higher ed over the last fifty years, everything really does fall into place. It also fits with my intuition that evidence-based policymaking is simply a new name for Sidney Hook’s conception of what Karl Marx intended to transform in the name of Dialectical Materialism. Fascinating, huh?

      Dewey developed a holistic philosophy that sought to improve rationality in human agency by integrating the scientific, democratic, moral, and ecological dimensions of reasoning. This holistic perspective was lost as policy science developed with a more narrow technical and empirical focus. There is now growing interest in reclaiming Deweyan pragmatist philosophy as a comprehensive blueprint for public policy and democratic practice (Bernstein 1998; Dorstewitz and Kuruvilla 2007; Evans 2000; Joas 1996; Mousavi and Garrison 2003; Ryan 2000; Shields 2003; Shook 2003; Snider 2000; Westbrook 1991). The objective of this article is to transpose rationality as envisioned in pragmatist philosophy to policy science. In order to do this, a new model of rational public policy is developed.

      If you remember I used that Westbrook bio in CtD to appreciate how ed really fit into Dewey’s vision. Westbrook is tied to Cornel West so we do have lots of things coming together suddenly.

      • ” it’s not just education that is grounded in Dewey’s ideas and aspirations, but all public policy being pushed systematically”


        “In his poem Human Pride, Marx admits that his aim is not to improve the world, reform or revolutionize it, but simply to ruin it and enjoy it being ruined:

        With disdain I will throw my gauntlet full in the face of the world,
        And see the collapse of this pygmy giant whose fall will not stifle my ardor.
        Then will I wander godlike and victorious through the ruins of the world
        And, giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator. [p.24]

        …The overriding reason for Marx’s conversion to Communism appears clearly in a letter of his friend Georg Jung to Ruge. It is not the emancipation of the proletariat, nor the establishing of a better social order. Jung writes: “If Marx, Bruno Bauer and Feuerbach associate to found a theological-political review, God would do well to surround himself with all his angels and indulge in self-pity, for these three will certainly drive Him out of heaven…” [p.24]

        The man who convinced Engels to become a Communist was the same Moses Hess who had convinced Marx before. Hess writes after he met Engels in Cologne, “He parted from me as an over-zealous Communist. This is how I produce ravages.“ To produce ravages — was this Hess’s supreme purpose in life? It is Lucifer’s, too.” – (from a short essay on Marx at Berit Jose’s website:

        • I will let the comment stand, but this is taking us off topic and gets confusing to the casual reader. At this point it is not Marx the man I care about, but his ideas. If his ideas such as DiaMat are coming in as a disguised Marxist Humanism hidden behind rhetoric about freedom, liberty, and human capability or evidence-based policymaking, we have to know them well enough to still spot them.

          Speculating as to whether he was involved with the occult is a distraction from the nature of this post and this blog. After I wrote this post I tracked down a Pavel Luksha presentation from fall 2017 where he openly acknowledged that the global ed focus is “with the organization of our individual and Collective minds. The frontier of evolution of the humanity is thus the self-guided evolution of consciousness.”

          Of course I would dispute whether it is knowing self-guidance given all the deceit. Students engage in the mandated learning experiences and prescribed activities and use the supplied conceptual frameworks and have their inner neural maps manipulated. That’s too invasive and totalitarian an aspiration for governments and think tanks to be off speculating about Uncle Karl when it is not pertinent to unveiling the deceit or figuring out the intended target. We already have both of those. It’s why I write despite the stress of mastering this information and developing metaphors to illustrate these aims.

          We all get these are destructive ambitions. It’s why it is so essential to cut through the false narratives.

          • Yes, diamat; Hegel and Marx both partook in “Faustian” events. Hegel is foundational and his dialectic is “alchemy”. “The Collective unconscience”; that’s Jung, more “alchemy”. It appears Jordan Peterson is one academic who is aware of the “Alchemical” underpinnings who couches his comments with “scientific” jargon. He wrote about this subject genre in depth in his book, “Maps of Meaning”. Just run what ever I say through a Jordan Peterson filter. We are saying the same thing. My communication of it is simply less sophisticated and more blunt, impatiently blurting out the nakedness of the Emperor; yanking the curtain down exposing the man behind it. I think Dr. Peterson does an excellent job cutting through less obvious parts that interact nicely with your focus. The target of the Globalists is “all commoners”.

          • As I have mentioned I have a three knock rule on what I look into. I had long since figured out Esalen was a common link among many of the relevant transformationalists. An off-line discussion involving executive ‘coaching’ and leadership training pulled up that so many of the prime pushers also had a link to what I recognize as Integral Consciousness work and ties to Esalen, frequently no longer on the current CV.

            A little more poking this morning pulled up this. Love the part about being able to get an apartment in Moscow in the 70s when only the politically connected could. We commoners are apparently supposed to take our citizen modelling without complaint or even noticing. Ooops.

    • involves a Center for Neuroscience and Education in Montreal but fits in perfectly with what this post warns is being targeted.

      I am adding this language from one of my am feeds because it fits so well with this post. This is the vision of philanthropy.

      The Equity Journey: Investing in the Whole Learner

      A central challenge of our time is creating the intellectual, emotional, and social supports that empower students for the difficult task of continually unlearning the old ways, while simultaneously learning new ones. If education succeeds, students will soon be the inventors of a bright future.”

      -Christopher Dede, Harvard Graduate School of Education

      Over the years, we have taken a journey together as grantmakers in exploring equity in education. Our journey thus far confirmed that learners, birth to career, must be prepared for new challenges in a new world. We also learned that, as education grantmakers, we can prepare ourselves to support learners in myriad ways in order to advance our investments in our nation’s future. Together we take the next step: to explore how to strengthen the whole learner.

      At the 2018 Grantmakers for Education annual conference, we will investigate what it takes to foster the whole learner by exploring interventions and support structures to enhance environments within and outside of school, as well as by examining how and why to incorporate social and emotional competencies into the learning domain.

      We need nothing less than a coordinated approach to creating healthy, safe and supportive environments that promote positive and versatile outcomes for the whole learner. ”

      Continually unlearning the old ways is something to think about as the new school year starts for so many.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.