Triggers of Action: Carving the Noetic Keels Needed for Politics to Steer Society and People

Serendipity has always been one of my favorite words. I used to tell my children that a great vocabulary word has a sentence full of meaning in a single word. Several weeks ago I was out of town and catching up on emails when an investment newsletter just happened to use the following quote to make a point:

“A world of unseen dictatorship is conceivable, still using the forms of democratic government.”–Kenneth Boulding, University of Michigan

Yes, that is a troubling quote, but I recognized the name as being the professor I had cited in my book Credentialed to Destroy. He was behind the push that began in the 1970s to force ‘systems thinking’ into the classrooms. The quote was credited to a 1957 bestseller I had never heard of called The Hidden Persuaders by Vance Packard. Getting that book zoomed to the top of my To Do list even before I knew that the quote introduced a section of the book called “Persuading Us as Citizens.” It covered how the motivational research the PR and marketing firms were using to sell products and services had been introduced into politics in order to “influence the state of our mind and to channel our behavior as citizens.”

What was then at least understood by its dispensers as ‘depth psychology,’ and controversial enough to drive a bestselling tell-all explaining it, is precisely what is now known as Whole Child Education and Deep Learning. It must be used by teachers and principals, who may never have encountered anyone explaining the true background of these practices and techniques. Why? To be deemed Effective. This is why I created the term Inadvertent Change Agent in my book. It is also tied to what the new K-12 federal legislation, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), mandates as the means of establishing ‘success’.

“Forced ideological homogenization” and “equitable economic development” have long been regarded as necessary components of an attempt by systems thinkers to reorganize society and individuals and redefine what constitutes ‘self-reliance.’ I am really getting tired of all these non-asterisked redefinitions, aren’t you? There was a February 1976 annual meeting of Boulding’s General Systems Research Group followed the next day by a meeting at Harvard of virtually every group we have ever covered on this blog or in the book including representatives from the Club of Rome and the World Order Models Project. I located the minutes of the meetings in a book which was kind enough to tell us this:

“in order to carry out the program proposed by the model, one really has to carry out very deep structural and attitudinal changes. This is why we say that the main problem is a sociopolitical, not a material, resource kind of problem, in the sense that there are paths and strategies which can take us to the satisfaction of basic needs. But the main problem remains of a sociopolitical nature.”

Good thing, huh, that systems thinkers specialize in a remaking of education and the creation of think tanks and a public policy network that will cause politicians to believe that they need to mandate and plan all these areas in the name of Equitable Economic Development? In fact, that is what the 2014 federal legislation–WIOA–now has all states and localities on record as planning. Since all the legislation to force the needed sociopolitical changes is now in place in the US, let’s go back to see what motivational research already knew in the 50s. After all the Congressionally created and White House visiting League of Innovative Schools was created to obtain desired research into what ‘motivates’ students.

Boulding, in a 1973 paper he wrote for the Social Science Education Consortium, laid out his interest in viewing the “whole human being as a system” whose “concepts and perceptions are often strongly influenced by our motives.” Is it any wonder then that motives have been officially targeted for research and that ‘concepts and perceptions’ are officially required for annual assessment via ESSA? Vance Packard shorthanded Motivational Research and its goals and techniques as MR in his book The Hidden Persuaders so we will too as we access some of its insights as to why education is now taking the same techniques and forcing them deceitfully on classrooms and students everywhere.

Packard quoted the magazine Advertising Age as stating the wide use of MR in politics–“This is all to the good.” What was not good, however, was the “growing public discussion of the importance of advertising in politics.” If public awareness that politicians were seeking to influence them emotionally and at subconscious and unconscious levels was problematic in the 50s, by all means let me continue to try to force a discussion of these same MR methods into K-12 education now. After all, if ‘role playing’ is a ‘psychological technique’ used to ‘modify the behavior and attitudes’ when it is used on ‘key personnel’ in large industrial organizations, it still has that same function when it becomes a required classroom practice for students.

If an insurance exec admitted role playing was used widely because “we needed a motivational device…[that] at the same time teaches at the emotional level,” that remains true when the methods are transferred from adults to the far more malleable minds of students. When Packard quoted the book The Engineering of Consent on how the MR methods are of “considerable value…to those who wish to modify society” and that “People must be controlled by manipulating their [instincts and emotions] rather than by changing their reasonings,” we get to remember that quote when the Davos crowd suddenly this month calls for  https://www.weforum.org/reports/new-vision-for-education-fostering-social-and-emotional-learning-through-technology .

That’s even more true once we realize that MR users in the 50s knew already that “if you are engineering consent, then I think the social sciences would like to warn you that you should begin with a basic analysis of three levels upon which consent moves in a society like ours.” Try not to get ill when we recognize that education now is all about manipulating level two and public policy think tanks and many pundits from every spectrum and announced party affiliation are all about targeting level three. The man being quoted above and below is a social anthropologist Lyman Bryson describing 1953 seminars on the social sciences held at Teachers College, Columbia for PR firms. My bolding.

“The first level, he said, is human nature. He added that little really could be done here to ‘manipulate’ people. The second level was cultural change, which is where you must operate, he said, if you want to influence people’s ideas. The third level is the region of choice. Here is where an impulse is running in a particular direction, and some sort of choice will be made regardless, ‘as when a choice between similar products [think tank or media deceit functions here] is made.’ At this level, he said, ‘it is relatively easy to manipulate people.’ On the other hand, if you are trying to change their ideas, ‘you work on the second level,’ where different ‘psychological pressures, techniques, and devices from those successful on the third level’ must be used.”

Think of that quote and the ubiquity of the School Choice mantra that the think tanks push as their solution to education and the needs of public policy. Suddenly the imperviousness of the phrase to facts that show there is actually no choice becomes clearer. Likewise, Packard quoted a Dr Samuel Stouffer, director of Harvard’s Laboratory of Social Relations telling his listeners that “it was a good working rule that people’s attitudes are more easily reached through their emotions than through their intellects.” Back to role playing and a Whole Child emphasis and that Science of Virtues, then, huh?

It should bother us a great deal that Dr Stouffer considered that to be ‘learning theory’ research. Looking for ‘triggers of action’ in the form of words or visuals, learning theory even in the 50s knew that “behaviors can be changed by changing ‘the motivational forces working upon them.'” Think about that when you reread Chapter 7 of my book about how the Common Core and Competency-based education really target values, attitudes, and beliefs. If people are systems as Boulding and others hoped, then those are the areas that must be changed in order for personal behavioral goals to change as well. Once again the redefinitions kick in as the socially reengineered student, and then adult, gets described as ‘autonomous.’ It’s called Hidden Persuaders for a reason as the MR techniques “can create wants in people that they still didn’t realize existed.”

Trained through learning tasks and classroom experiences to act. Requiring ‘performance standards’ precisely to force daily practice with engineered mental models and manipulated emotions. Meanwhile no one planned to disclose the engineered existence of an internalized noetic keel consciously carved during years of preschool-high school ‘student-centered’ education. Carved precisely so that politicians and agency planners can steer society as they wish and reward cronies as they want. Packard ended his book with this worry:

“The most serious offense many of the depth manipulators commit, it seems to me, is that they try to invade the privacy of our minds. It is this right to privacy in our minds–privacy to be either rational or irrational–that I believe we must strive to protect.”

Federal law now requires, and states and schools, public and private, everywhere are happy to go along with, a now mandated invasion of the privacy of our minds. That’s the purpose of education research and the mandated databases. Longitudinal is another word for what used to be called more clearly ‘time series data’. The point is not what is personally identifiable, but the changes over time to allow this desired steering process. Packard was lucky. He was able to get the word out to enough people that MR became notorious. So it went underground and got new names and is now mandated for all of our children. To ultimately control enough of us for this steering to guide all institutions, but installed through deceitful false narratives and K-12 education.

Let me end with the remaining purpose that I believe has motivated who has been  deemed acceptable for the Presidency and other political offices by either party since at least 1988. I think it is why ESSA and WIOA were “Bipartisan and Bicameral” as necessary components of the mostly invisible steering process. It’s 2016 and the oligarchs think it has taken far too long for what was planned in earnest from the 1950s on. Removing all obstacles, down to the level of the mental models of our minds, that might block the planned:

“most important social engineering role of them all–the gradual reorganization of human society, piece by piece and structure by structure.”

Person by person, starting with the children and euphemised as being about Learning, Student Growth, and Success for All.

 

 

39 thoughts on “Triggers of Action: Carving the Noetic Keels Needed for Politics to Steer Society and People

  1. Thank you, Robin. You are so on target with this piece. Vance Packer was such a genius and he warned us well. I remember all the hubbub about subliminal advertising that came out at that time, methods still used today even though they were actually outlawed. Then there was the hidden messages in music, also still used today. We are manipulated at every turn. Keeping on a straight line in your thinking is very, very difficult. Just imagine how difficult it is for children and young people who have not had a solid foundation to which they can tie their mooring lines. No wonder people are crawling out of the woodwork to keep people who are not controlled by the MR process from acquiring positions of leadership.

  2. Ahhh …this is so clear Robin.Thank You. The steering is so palpable to me now.
    25 years ago I stopped buying fashion magazines. I did not stop liking clothes or pretty pictures but I came to see how perfectly miserable I felt about myself after just 15 minutes of reading one of these magazines.
    I became a happier person once I ditched them.
    Fast forward to roughly 3 years ago when for some reason I cannot explain I stopped watching tv. I was never a big tv junky but I went cold turkey .
    I noticed that within a few months my thinking was clearer and I began to question all sorts of narratives I had simply accepted at face value before. The spell had been broken.
    On top of depth psychology and MR techniques being used in the classroom upon kids I have noticed of late how there are tell-a-visions reinforcing the classroom frameworks and lenses are all over, all kinds of schools these days. They run “educational programming” or CNN or even the weather channel etc…. all brainwashing, all the time. For Growth. For Learning. For the WHOLE child.

    • Oh, no! Mom was correct again? Tell-a-vision will rot your brain! I like that way of naming the subliminal box. I agree with you on the magazines. I feel that way about smart phones. All these people missing activities staring at the glowing box in their hands missing real life.

          • Remember I have books Bloom wrote where he lays out ML in a way that clearly dovetails with cybernetics.

            The state Atlas affiliate that hosted the Foundation for Excellence in Ed breakfast where I confirmed much of this last week two weeks ago hyped a new tech charter school opening up near Emory that would be using the Mastery Learning techniques developed my MIT professor Benjamin Bloom. I e-mailed the Pres of GPPF that Bloom was at U-Chicago, not MIT. I do not think it was a simple error though. I think Bloom was characterized as an MIT prof by someone wanting to bulletproof ML via an appeal the authority fallacy.

            Like most of these people there are books in print not on their cv that one can only become aware of via footnotes in still other books. I do not have to speculate on what is going on, but it has taken me years to get to this point of understanding with the requisite proof in their own words.

        • Wow. I read a lot of ESSA ‘permits’ and ESSA ‘allows’ and The Law ‘provides’ and ‘recommends’ for states. Hard to make that synonymous with local control. Well, in the actual sense of local control , as opposed to the Big Brother Directed Sense of the meaning local control. Must keep current.

          Could not help but notice as well the language that states must ‘design’ their educational systems. Lots of Designing being written about. No surprise of course. But it does make me think that all the Design Thinking hornswoggle in ed which is about as substantive as a feather and which at most is a form of structured design dialogue practice in the classroom has also been a way of conditioning educators to become familiar and comfortable with the word so that when they are told to DESIGN larger systems they will think of it as benign if they consider it at all.

          So many levels of language manipulation to frame the individuals weltanschauung.

          • I have not put it up because I want to protect it, but that Boulding 1973 paper explains that people are ‘goal-seeking systems’ and education is about enabling people to accomplish their goals and altering those goals. That’s why all can succeed. It is a radically different conception of what it means to be human that is simply not going to fare well in the sunlight. I found the paper because the 1976 minutes book mentioned a Boulding systems thinking curriculum being used in 5th grade social studies classrooms. I found the research paper on ERIC once I had the name.

            It would not be on ERIC unless it was being used, but teachers and principals are just told to push Competency, not what Competency really assumes.

            People are among the systems they intend to now design. These theories actually show the intention to turn schools into psychological Auschwitzes using Inadvertent Change Agents chasing the next promotion.

            Hard to watch Paul Ryan on last night’s news misquoting Trump (by leaving out his stated premises) and not recognize that the man wants to steer us and get us to shut up. The only things Reps have going for them at any level is that they did not lie to parents’ faces about Benghazi in front of coffins.

          • Robin, this Boulding systems curriculum for social studies class beginning in 1976 intrigues me. Is it stated in what schools the teaching was piloted? I’m thinking back to my SS class and the projects we did to learn about how the colonial economy worked in Williamsburg.

          • It shows Boulding as being at U of Colorado along with another co-author Lawrence Senesh and Alred Kuhn of U of Cincinnati. It talks about how the “science of system analysis is still young and unstandardized.” That’s what the New Standards Project imposed in the 90s and Common Core imposed on all states and districts. The non-participating states in CCSSI were all involved with NSP. NCEE even had an office in Ft Worth, Texas. The needed standardization towards behavioral specifications remain in place under ESSA and being state-led doesn’t change the nature.

            The curriculum gives the family as an example of a “system with its own goals to achieve. Each member is therefore sensitive to its environment. He interprets information received from his environment and makes decisions to further his own goals.” When I talk about false narratives on the Common Core it is because they do not explain ESSA accurately or disrupt the states ability to force ideological homogenization and mind molding. Politicians and the public sector are now requiring the same MR techniques as what Vance Packard wrote about. When you teach a mayor, state legislator, or city council member that a city is a system, they immediately want to create the goals for it. It turns public policy and systems thinking into tools for invisible 21st century tyranny. Remember the WIOA statute requires systems thinking for all students in order to be deemed ‘Workforce Ready.’ That is not an accident. I am not imagining how this fits.

            Here’s another quote from Kochen’s essay in the 1976 book. My hands were practically shaken with the current implications as I read it. “The third kind of information base has traditionally been in our heads, and it reflects what we know and learn about how decisions are made, how models are shaped, and how the images that guide our actions are really formed and used. It contains more attitudinal and social data, representing peoples’ beliefs, ideas, and symbols.” Now go back to everything I described in Chapters 2 or 3 on the reading and then the math wars and what is really aimed at and then the Chapter on Competency and finally 7’s coverage of the actual implementation that the INL states have confirmed is still the aim as personalized learning. All of those seek to disrupt, analyze, and manipulate precisely what Kochen said is sought.

            He goes on to state that the supplied competencies “should help its users make decisions in simple cases, in small steps, where it serves their short-term self-interest…it should at the same time help them to perceive the world more imaginatively and more resourcefully; it should help people come up with richer problem representations with a longer term time horizon and a broader interest scope. It should help them select the key variables and concepts and assumptions with more specificity and depth than they have today.” That is precisely what is now called Deep Learning and getting at this is what makes the instruction personalized. Checking for the presence and ability to motivate and guide behavior is precisely what the HOTS annual mandate in ESSA is all about.

            The false narratives on ESSA make it clear to me it is not just the radical Left wanting to use these techniques for invisible social planning and transformation. The Atlas Network members want to use it too and ultimately this is the model School Choice actual imposes on everyone. I think it is why that Lum,ina convening of 75 metro areas in Dallas in January 2015 had documents assuming all schools would be private or charter. It’s how this model spreads. This is what Boulding’s curriculum teaches about cities and every planner at that Lumina conference and working for most cities now believes this:

            “families interact with other families to form supersystems on various levels. Each supersystem may or may not have its own goals, depending on whether these are consciously built into its structure. [Think of the ubiquity of the word Design now] A city, for example, is not itself a goal-oriented supersystem, although it does create organizations which have goals, such as the city council and public school system. A neighborhood is another supersystem which can organize to pursue goals, as by forming a welcoming committee or a volunteer fire department.”

            Notice that the people being Delphied under its various names are the leaders of these ‘goal-achieving’ subsystems.

            This view of education also redefines know to mean what a person needs in order “to reach its goals effectively.” Again that’s success. It is why all students can succeed or achieve.

          • “Design” as in design like Garanamals kids clothes, remember those? Or like a prix fix dinner menu, pick one ffrom app list of 3 choices, pick salad or soup, pick one entree from chicken, fish or duck, and molten lava cake or creme brulee..
            Look i designed my own choice!!!

  3. Robin-

    Andrew Bolt has additional information on the school program working on gender fluidity in Australia: http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/turmbull_vs_his_party_on_marxist_anti_bullying_scheme/

    The whole thing is flying under an anti-bullying banner. Now that the hidden aspects are out, their Liberal party (similar to US conservatives) is apparently going up in arms about it.

    The post does cover some of your points here regarding psychological pressure and manipulation.

  4. Take a look at this article. Near the bottom of the page by Peter Stonefield, You to Me to We.
    http://aap-psychosynthesis.org/articles-in-pdf-format/
    He also participates in this group. I believe we have discussed them. https://bayareasol.wordpress.com/past-meetings/

    When I was looking at this I read a segment on “knowledge bullies”. Those people not willing to coach others to bring others careers up to speed with the manager or associate who has all the brain power.
    Reminded me of your redistribution of intelligence phrase.

    • I wrote about Roberto Assagioli and psychosynthesis here. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/developing-adequate-personalities-and-psychosynthesis-an-odd-way-to-define-college-career-ready/ It’s fascinating how we can now see why the research trail led where it does.

      Below I laid out my concerns about the PII misdirection that always seems to track to an Atlas member think tank or its major financial supporters. Look at this from Harvard in the same year the Big Data paper came out. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/~ddl/articlesCopy/FischerGroundwork.MBE2009.3.1.pdf

      I can read that and tell how pertinent it is to ESSA, which makes sense since Marty west was Lamar Alexander’s advisor. It also fits with the World Bank’s development model and the White House Behavioral Sciences Team both embracing the Mind, Behavior and Society theme. Just imagine what the NSF BRAIN Initiative will be able to develop with all those research dollars or the Science of Virtues or that NIH research on the effect of concept-based curriculum on neural pathways.

      The reasons for all the subterfuge and misdirection are becoming painfully clearer by the day.

    • LL. I have direct experience with how the “Knowledge Bully” is defined in the classroom. 6 years ago when my oldest daughter was in the 7th grade she was bored silly with her then schools ridiculous math curriculum. She finished the entire workbook for the year by Thanksgiving.

      We asked to have her move up in math to the next grade level because she was capable. The school refused. They insisted she should participate in class and help the students who did not get what she understood well. But she was not allowed to learn more.

      We protested and eventually they signed her up to do an online math program out of Stanford . Yep. If ONLY I had know then. Daughter reported at the time that she would do the tasks online and then when she was done the lesson would shut down. She could do no more. At the end of the week someone from standford would chat online with her to answer any questions she had. She said many of the problems were non sensical and generally it was a waste of time.

      Ugly stuff.

    • I did read it and thought it was interesting but irrelevant to what ESSA is really about. It appears to be a Red Herring. I don’t know if Jane recognizes this is not the point but it clearly fits with the active deceit that seems to play into the Atlas networks true agenda around social and economic planning and the MH model. I was flabbergasted this week when Daniel Greenfield, who is also a fellow at the Bradley Foundation supported Horowitz Center that is this tied to Encounter Books, came out in support of a Science of Virtues and communitarian ethos. http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2016/03/youmerica.html

      That Pearson paper I put up yesterday makes the continued hyping over PII dangerous given the intention to target what is described as the Learner Model. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/~ddl/articlesCopy/Fischer_Geert_pp313-336_2009.pdf does a great job of laying out what is meant by “Individual-Based Models of Change and Development.” I know Jane (she is based out of Atlanta) and have explained to her in person numerous times why PII is irrelevant to what is really going on. Since she is a bright woman, I can only surmise her employer does not want an accurate understanding of this cybernetic/DST intent that is actually embodied throughout ESSA.

      One more point that I have always found troubling. That Big Data report she, Joy Pullmann, and Emmett McGroarity did for Pioneer ends up advocating for the precise same solution that MIT prof Sandy Pentland wants for his Davos-connected vision for a planned, Equitable world. This is the Pentland post. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/redesigning-education-globally-to-humanize-personalities-and-make0each0one-of-us-more-susceptible-to-peer-pressure/

      It was almost like Pioneer wanted a paper that would provide a False narrative that enabled what MIT and Harvard are both involved in. MIT with the Belmont Challenge and the GEFF 2035 and Harvard with Mind, Brain & Society work that is also pushing DST. Both again are involved with Fadel, UNESCO, the OECD, World Bank, state of Massachusetts and that Center for Curriculum Redesign. That deliberate misdirection and attempt to control the narrative around the Common Core and ESSA and what the data is really for also fits with that Missouri story where GEFF 2035 is mentioned but its actual purpose is not accurately described. Once again it becomes about PII instead when the Learner Model does not care about PII.

      It’s like when Donna Gardner out in Texas prattles on in writing about Type #1 instruction vs Type #2, continuing the Deceit that what is going on in Texas has anything to do with how to teach math or reading. There is clearly a coordinated common false narrative that doesn’t want ESSA, Competency, the role of data, the true nature of assessment and what it is for, or School Choice accurately perceived.

        • I remembered I had written about Boulding’s 1962 book and the crucial role of the internalized Image in motivating and guiding behavior. Boulding even said it doesn’t matter if it is false, the point is its ability, once instilled, to participate unwittingly in desired social change. What I had forgotten was that post was the first of what I named the Changing Mindsets Trilogy. As I have reread all three posts this morning, it is clear to me, whatever the intentions of Jane Robbins and Mary Byrne in writing that ESSA paper, it, that Pioneer Big Data report, and the false narratives around standardized testing and pretending personalized learning is about PII play right into what was laid out by the Commission on the Year 2000 as what would be needed for the desired Service State.

          http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/circumscribing-knowledgepart-2-of-imposing-mindsets-to-fit-a-new-political-philosophy/ This all fits to me with where the Atlas Network is also going. We have so many at all levels of government and from both parties who are hyping public policy and think tanks now as a means to use education to create predictably obedient citizens. It also fits with the Science of Virtues and redefinition of Liberty. I swear I think all the hyping about ‘limited government’ simply means crony providers of the stipulated services of the Service State instead of the public sector. No wonder we now have the Reason Foundation, Cato Institute, and now the Manhattan Institute touting Finland. It is the Service State vision.

          I am not OK with this vision political power imposed at the state or local level by majority rule makes it acceptable to treat us as the Governed. I also do not think it is a slip-up in that ESSA paper you linked to. That post’s description that the planned social order would need (1) a new conception of knowledge, (2) adjusting the nature of desired outcomes, and (3) changing the nature of participant assessment seems to me to be precisely what ESSA actually did as does personalized learning. Misleading about all three of those shifts appears to me to be what is the crux about what is false in these false narratives. I don’t think that is accidental even though these report authors may not themselves know why they are being paid to frame the narrative a certain way. remember that odd Pioneer report on federalism?

          The deceit is all going on a common direction because someone somewhere is directing useful false narratives backward mapping from a 2016 update of what was called the Service State in 1965. I also now know achieving it is linked to CASBS in Palo Alto and it is a new name for the Marxist Humanist Human Development Society because said that in a 1957 book of his I read last year. I was reading it in the lobby of the hotel while I gave my daughter the room in private to get ready and I remembered almost falling out of my chair. If Bell knew it in 1957, then he and the Commission knew it and the role of Boulding’s systems work when they created those plans for ‘directed social change’ in 1965. Bell wrote memorably about how translations of Marx;s work meant that the planners had access to his real vision and that Lenin had not.

          Fascinating for the historian in me to read that. No wonder there is such a hurry by the 1973 and 1976 efforts described in this post. No wonder outcomes-based education under its myriad of names never goes away and simply gets renamed and, perhaps, broken into interlocking pieces that can gear up on command.

          • The PII matters to parents but they still do not understand that the data itself is not the focus. They seem not to understand the overall picture of internal change. It does not help that trusted names obscure the overall purposes. Same goes for the assessments.

          • The 1976 book mentioned in this post had a footnote to a Russian book from 1971 that was immediately translated into English, much like the later Turchenko blueprint I go into in Credentialed to Destroy. It is called The Scientific Management of Society and the links to the pushes by these public policy think tanks and the whole ‘data-driven decisionmaking’ could not be more clear as I read it.

            It makes the crucial role of the ‘subjective factor’ crystal clear, which may be why all of the Bushes in their political roles have made education such a focus. Creating the internalized keel of desired values, attitudes, beliefs, guiding and motivating concepts, and practiced behaviors is necessary for cybernetic control of society and the economy. It is also the function of the Foundation for Excellence in Education. Excellence is another word for that desired keel and someone must have known that when Jeb Bush created that Atlas Network member in 2008, two years after the NGA called for the remake of high school and launched the CCSSI initiative with Jeb playing a crucial role.

            I had to stop reading yesterday as the current examples of what I was reading became overwhelming. I started again this morning and just took a break to locate a Stafford Beer article cited. This came up in the search–clearly relevant to to the Science of Virtues push from the previous post. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED065266.pdf Someone has gone to a lot of trouble to get this online now.

            So the PII Deceit may not be appreciated fully by the actual deceivers, but misrepresenting the nature of the knowledge shift, assessments, and what personalized learning actually means obscures the actual creation and tracking of this internalized keel. The same keel that is necessary for the Atlas Network members to accomplish the actual socio-political and economic steering that they exist to encourage.

            I really do not think this is coincidental, do you?

            I also suspect this is why the head of the Georgia Atlas affiliate wanted to credit Benjamin Bloom as being an MIT professor so that the pedigree of his touted Mastery Learning by a newly created charter school in the Emory area would seem to be beyond scrutiny. MIT is a major hub of cybernetics and Mastery Learning is intended to implement the cybernetic internalization controlling external behavior under a euphemism. Anyway, who would notice?

            The data is the focus but it need not be personally identifiable to provide the needed info of what must be altered. The parents are being misled that the interest is in static data, when it is merely benchmaking what needs to be changed. Then it shows what has been changed and what it took to change it (curriculum used as the computer knows if it is online experiences) and then cross-referencing against the personal characteristics of the student. Names, addresses, religion, are irrelevant. Parents ed and income are not irrelevant because they factor into characteristics and the civil rights call for Equity.

      • they came out of nowhere as leaders in the charge against common core… Slick vids, organized talks, press… Got concerned parents to follow and trust them. They represented parents! Now they are marching their followers to prison saying oh its such a sunny place. Seriously cat out of bag y’all!!

    • OH LL this is frightening. And obnoxious. Why do I keep having premonitions where I see each one of us having to demonstrate with fidelity 15 minutes of mandatory mindfulness when the siren screams across radio and tell A vision air waves?

      Im still struggling with this bit of pablum. Makes me want to go extra conflict-y and contrarian.

      “Kathlyn (Katie) Hendricks, Ph.D., BC-DMT, is an evolutionary catalyst and contextual disruptor who creates transformational collaboration around the world. She considers her life and relationship a living laboratory and invites others into co-creation free of drama and conflict.”

      • I think that’s the one I choked on first. I hate to break the news to her. . . But all our lives are living laboratories, we just don’t think we are a fascination to others, or God’s gift to the world. Every one of those speaker blurbs was more nauseating than the previous one. I am mindful of being gagged with a shovel, maybe even a front end loader.

  5. Has anyone taken the time to search the the UN Agenda 2030? It’s all there in black and white. You can read for yourselves exactly what they are planning for us. It’s all out in the open. In addition to the many analysis on different websites ( The New American has a good one) one can simply peruse the UN website for their full confession.
    My question is, why aren’t more people upset about this?!!

Leave a Reply to L.L. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.