pass the barf bag

External Locus of Control

I made myself sick today. I found out P - 20 isn't preschool-20 (college) as I thought. Oregon, Michigan, Kansas ( and likely every state) have websites about P - 20 which state it is prenatal - college. Yes, prenatal. To quote http://www.michiganschildren.org/Speaking-Up-For-Kids/what-is-p-20.html,

"p 20 is a cradle-to-career approach to education recognizing that education does not start and end at the classroom door". 

Yes....no sugarcoating here, they overtly mentioned a government sanctioning of cradle to grave control.
Here I thought all along, phew I have my kiddos until pre-school or kindergarten. I have them for their most influential formative years, go me! Take that, government! My dreams were shattered today. No longer are my children my own, but part of the state, parens patriae, the idea of the state as parent, since, apparently, these elitist experts know best. No more mommy knows best...this world is too "complicated" for us simple folks, an idea dating back to the Utopian goals of the Progressive Era and the notion of social efficiency.

Let me provide a disclaimer and interjection. I do not inherently see a problem with prenatal care and early childhood education. Our infant mortality rate and pregnancy complication rates are quite dismal for a first-world country. As a mother of two, I am all for prenatal care. As a teacher, I am all for early childhood education. During my first year of teaching, I found out that many kindergartners in my poverty stricken school neighborhood came to school utterly unprepared. Many had never used crayons or held a pencil. They had never even heard the ABCs and did not know their own name (often called mijo/a, baby, etc at home). I kid you not. These children are the most in need of intervention and the most targeted for such things. Therefore I wish to reiterate that I advocate prenatal care and early learning.

The Factory Model

But if history means a darned thing, this scares me... targeting the most at risk populations can mean they receive a stellar education that teaches them to think, ask questions, create, innovate, argue. Or it can teach them job skills like how to ring up a burger and fries and how to operate a vacuum, you know, skills that CC offers through the 70% weight of informative text in Language Arts courses.

The idea of scientifically managing the population to control them, as part of a Utopia, is hardly new. It originated in Prussia (see http://3rseduc.blogspot.com/search?q=prussia for background info on Prussia's influence on our education system) as noted at http://www.lewrockwell.com/2010/09/john-taylor-gatto/the-prussian-connection/ A concept called

"psychological parenthood" began to take shape, a radical notion without legal precedent that would be used down the road to support drastic forcible intervention into family life. It became one of the basic justifications offered during the period of mass immigration for a compulsion law intended to put children under the thrall of so-called scientific parenting in schools"

This idea that the families of the nation were ill-equipped to raise children; that scientific management thereof could save us, is prominent in the past and perhaps today.

in "Education for social efficiency: a study in the social relations of education" By Irving King (1915),

"It was devised as a means of insuring that the child should learn certain things which he would not be able to learn satisfactorily if he were left to pick up things for himself by imitation and simple contact with the life that was going on daily about him. As culture increased in complexity, more and more of the burden of education had to be shifted to formal agencies, specifically to the school"

From the same document,

"And this education must be largely wrought out through the school. The ideal of a social life adequate to modern conditions of living must take its place as an object of explicit and conscious training, just because it is too complex and difficult to attain in any other way"

For a nice outline of the Progressive Era and the influence on society and education, visit http://people.uncw.edu/ricej/education/The%20Progressive%20Era%202%20Social%20Efficiency.htm

As the Progressive Era rolled in, social efficiency reared its ugly head. I don't like using wikipedia as a reliable source, but instead of quoting ten separate sources to validate wiki, I will give you the wiki definition of social efficiency- I could not have said it better.

Social efficiency educators" such as theorists Ross, Bobbitt, Gilbreth, Taylor, and Thorndike were aiming to design a curriculum that would optimize the “social utility” of each individual in a society. By using education as an efficiency tool, these theorists believed that society could be controlled. Students would be scientifically evaluated (such as IQ tests), and educated towards their predicted role in society. This involved the introduction of vocational and junior high schools to address the curriculum designed around specific life activities that correlate with each student’s societal future. The socially efficient curriculum would consist of minute parts or tasks that together formed a bigger concept. This educational view was somewhat derived with the efficiency of factories which could simultaneously produce able factory workers. Critics believe this model has too much emphasis on testing and separating students based on the results of that testing.

Social efficiency keeps at it; A.H. Lauchner, a principal in 1951, said,

 "not every child has to read, figure, write and spell...that many of them cannot or will not master these chores." 

Meaning, why teach true academic curriculum to certain children to whom it would be a waste?

Okay so my point here is this, social efficiency used the "science" of test scores to drive curriculum to scientifically manage the populace, to determine which students were to be doctors and which were to be laborers. With the p-20 data tracking system, a student with behavioral issues, an IEP, low math test scores may be pigeonholed- on purpose- into becoming a manual laborer, even if their dreams and skills are in interpreting law or motivating students or what have you.

Sire, you say, this cannot happen. Or perhaps it is an old fuddy duddy idea that never came to fruition and never will. To re-quote one of my posts from this year,

From http://www.wiche.edu/info/publications/FrameworkForAMultistateHumanCapitalDevelopmentDataSystem.pdf

"The workforce sector wants information about prior training in
high school and postsecondary institutions as a foundation for
working with both education sectors to address identified skill gaps
in the workforce, as well as to identify equity gaps with respect
to demographic representativeness by job category. Knowing the
education sectors’ capacity to respond (i.e., by increasing the flow
of graduates with particular skill sets) will also help the state decide
whether to invest in education to address skill gaps or establish
incentives to induce more workers with needed skills to move
into the state. Moreover, linking with the education sectors would
provide labor market analysts with a wealth of data that would be
useful for examining equity in employment."

This document is a modern document, written sometime between 2009-2013, and it states that schools can increase the flow of graduates with certain skills. How might they do this? If society needs more engineers, or fast food workers, how will it "increase the flow" without either data manipulation (suddenly Johnny's test scores plummet and his education is individualized to send him into fast food) or using tracking to label students (everyone who struggled in science gets to work in fast f

Your Secret is Safe With me

Everyone keepos saying the data collected will remain anonymous, and will solely be used to improve prenatal care, career readiness programs, etc, But of course the data will be shared with any government organization or third party vendor or person in education (textbook companies, educational consultants) which will remain anonymous once out of the school level. Students will be numbered, data will be meta data, and it will be secure. (Just like our IRS records, social security info, etc which surely has never been compromised...ha ha).

"Anonymous" meta data is extrapolated from identifiable data, those "80% have graduated on time" had names and identities attached to them.  Collect some meta data such as addresses, parent's names, etc and enough datamanipulating can lead back to the student. Or, if anyone decides to be evil, a school official could leak identifiable student data, or how to access it (ie that student #642t50 is Jane Plain). But don't worry,,,your data is "safe".

Which leads back to social efficiency... whitehouse.gov had said,

Pearson will share data into the Learning Registry about many of their existing teaching resources including those that support CCSS so that they can be used n each students' personal learning path

Yep, right back to pigeonholing students in a certain direction as part of social efficiency, or as we call it now, human capital.  From http://www.csctulsa.org/content.php?p=195 we bring you,

The P-20 concept is a way of thinking and acting that promotes systematic aligning of multiple education, health, and social support resources to best advance human capital development from prenatal through postsecondary and employment, and on to sustained lifelong well-being...

See, my long-winded post does all come together right there. And it scares me. It is wrapped up in a pretty package- who doesn't want "sustained lifelong well-being"? But the question is, who decides what well-being means? Perception is everything and one man's well being could be another man's hell. Is the government's idea of my well being what I desire? Likely not, since obviously life- and my own well being- are "human capital" and must be micromanaged and decided for me.

think inside the box

LAUSD recently spent $1 billion -yes, billion- on technology for Common Core, mainly in the form of iPads. Let's ignore the money spent that we don't have/could be better spent. Let's ignore Common Core and the snafu that is, for now.

After wasting/spending a billion, LA took back the iPads, sorry kids. Why?

the kids "hacked" the tablets to enable music streaming and social media, o.m.g. folks, how awful of them. The head IT dude (or dudette, gotta be p.c.) just changed the settings to block social media and music so all the "hackers" did (hardly hackers, a grandma or kindergartner is I guess a hacker) was change the settings in the control panel.

My first point here is, these same "evil hackers" are hiding their cell phones in their pocket, their textbook, under their desk and texting, twittering, facebooking discretely. Each child in a hoodie, or with head leaning into their arms, or hair brushed by an ear, is rocking out to their iPod. It is how this generation does things. Secondly, they are accessing these things because
a) they can multitask....remember back in our day, taking lecture notes while writing a note to your best friend and doodling on the margins?
b) your common core, scripted lesson sucks an they have lost all interest
c) you could do the work for them and they are so apathetic, they wouldn't turn it in...they will never do their work. Live with it.

So I say, let them "hack". It makes no difference.

Another point is thus....technology is so "21st century" but schools seem stuck in the 20th century and heck even 19th, 18th..... while I love "real" books, pen and paper, technology is, as we know it, the "future". So let's embrace it. But technology and "21st century skills" are NOT virtual textbooks and tests. Sorry. You could accomplish the same damned thing with pen, paper,"real" books. Schools refuse to embrace real cutting edge technology because the first mention of cell phones, social media, live streaming music or media and they shut down. Kids cannot do those things, it is against learning,they say.it isn't "right". So they continue using technology as if it were what we have already had,,,open your e-books to page 35 and take the multiple choice test at the end. Yet we spend a billion dollars to do what we already have in place.

How about we embrace all these banned things? You can save paper by having students instagram a pic of a worksheet to share with their workgroup via text messaging. You can use the virtual blackboard to host discussions. Skype experts. Network with up and coming poets, watch video clips. Store and access data on the cloud. Follow a politician's twitter account and blog about it. Skype the leading expert in physics for a q&a session. Really use technology for what it is, a newly fangled device to bring the world to your fingertips.

And please do not punish the "hackers" as they are the last bastions of free thought and innovation we have in a lock step one size fits all automaton education system. It is the rebels that make a difference and make history.

The Answer my Friends

I often get told something like, "stop telling us what is wrong with education, tell us how to fix it!" I wish I had an answer for how to fix education.

This blog exists as an open dialogue and informational source as to what is wrong with education- uncovering the ills of education that hide in plain sight; we are educated to not seek the answers, find out the "why", whereto look, or how to decipher something written cleverly to disguise the truth. I'd love to have a blog with the almighty answers of "how" and "what" in regards to "fixing" education.

So why don't I propose a solution? Well, it is a complex answer...

One, whenever I seem to encounter some new innovation, school of thought, curriculum, etc that seems to fit my dreams for education, it turns out "evil" and used for control, dumbing down, fitting some agenda that seems against freedom, enlightenment, betterment, intellectualism.

Two, I still struggle with what education should be, as in the whole picture, the mission statement. If it is to foster intellect and curiosity, can it also prepare people for jobs without pigeonholing people into certain careers, controlling their destiny? If I use data and best practices for improvement, can it be just that without labeling and marginalizing students? Really, all I can conclude for my aims of education is to educate. To give children a thirst for knowledge, skills to think and question on their own, and innovation, curiosity, creativity. But the "how" is the mystery.

Perhaps, when I crticize education and complain it is too prescriptive, focusing on quantitative over qualitative, one size fits all... I could use the same parameters to criticize the solution, whatever it is. I don't think there is one exact solution. More a variety of solutions, individualized, on a spectrum of sorts.

Or...is there really no answer? Meaning, does every answer have an ":evil" side? Is there no way to educate without thought control, human capital management, eugenics, and the sort? Really, what if there is no "right" way to educate?

I keep hoping somehow there is an answer, a pure, just, good, liberty-minded answer (or answers) out there; I just do not know how to find it. I hope by exposing that which is "evil" in education, I can uncover what is good.

Who Needs to Know? part II

A continnum of my post http://3rseduc.blogspot.com/2013/06/who-needs-to-know.html............

There is rumor of"opt-out" to CCSS and the LDS data collection, and I have heard many anecdotes of parents whose information is collected without permission. A well known example would be the iris scanning incident (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2336020/Parents-angered-schools-conduct-Minority-Report-like-iris-scans-students-young-asking-permission.html). However, supposedly law is in place to prevent such things,

"The Fair Information 
Practice of Transparency calls for “providing 
notice to the individual regarding the collection, 
use, dissemination, and maintenance of personally 
identifiable information” (NIST 2010 Special 
Publication 800-122, p. D-2, 3)."

This links to FERPA which was changed in 2011 (after publication of this document) which is referenced here http://dianeravitch.net/2013/04/08/why-is-the-us-department-of-education-weakening-ferpa/ and http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/pdf/sealea_overview.pdf to cite a few sources.

But don't fear, folks....

"A school or district is also required to provide an 
annual Directory notice, if directory information 
is disclosed without consent. The school or district 
may choose to combine their annual FERPA 
notification with their annual Directory notice. 
Directory information includes information 
contained in a student’s education record that 
would not generally be considered harmful or an 
invasion of privacy if disclosed. The Directory 
notice must describe the specific types of 
information the school or district has designated 
as directory information, and the parent’s right to 
opt out of disclosure of directory information. In 
the case of postsecondary institutions, these rights 
accrue to the student."

Of course, I have worked in schools and perhaps I'm out of the loop and was out of the loop as data and assessment coordinator but I've never seen this directory or heard mention of it. I hope exists but my guess is it is published in the district office and sits in a binder; no one is ever notified of it, the fact that it is law is apparently enough notification.

Collecting data is, again, supposedly a very public motion with an opt-out program but it isn't quite that cut and dry. All the info you submit when enrolling a child (ie a photo id of parents, utility bills, birth certificate) are all "mandatory" for enrollment and often end up in the data systems. I mean, I guess that is common sense but parents often do not think of it as such, and they are not alerted to the collection and use of the data past enrollment purposes.

"The Pupil Protection Rights Act requires parental 
notification if a study to be conducted in a school 
includes any information or questions about the 
student or the student’s family related to the eight 
identified sensitive topics: political affiliations or 
beliefs; religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs; 
mental and psychological problems; sex behavior 
or attitudes; illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating If the study is funded by the U.S. Department of 
Education, schools and contractors must obtain 
written parental consent before minor students 
can be required to participate in the study. If the 
school received funds from the U.S. Department of 
Education, school districts are required to provide 
an annual schedule of the specific or approximate 
dates of all other surveys with a notification of 
the parents’ right to request and review a copy of 
the survey before it is administered and to decide 
that their child will not participate, reagrdless 
of the survey’s source of funding. Under this 
Act, parents must also be notified each year of 
their right to decide whether or not their child 
will participate in activities that make student’s 
personal information available for marketing or 
other profit-making activities."

Again, I have yet to see these "notifications" and keep hearing from parents of breech of this law/procedure.

Things often get lost in "legalese" and below you can see that permission to use a student's data is permissible   without notification when sharing with school officials and other designated entities with legitimate educational interests. What might that mean? I have yet to get an answer and suspect it could mean volunteers, government organizations (i.e. dept of health), testing companies, think tanks, researchers, textbook companies, and corporations.

"The annual FERPA notice provides information 
about permissible uses of PII in education records. 
That is, FERPA allows educational agencies 
and institutions to non-consensually release 
education records to school officials and other 
designated entities with legitimate educational 
interests 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(b(1)(A)"

To confirm or ease my fears, here is some more "legalese",

"a 
third-party contractor, consultant, 
volunteer, or other party to whom an 
agency or institution has outsourced 
institutional services for which the 
agency or institution would otherwise 
use employees—as long as that third 
party’s use and maintenance of education 
records is under the direct control of the 
agency or institution and is subject to 
the regulation requirements governing 
the use and redisclosure of PII from 
education records......
.....The disclosure is to organizations conducting 
studies for, or on behalf of, educational 
agencies or institutions for specified 
purposes related to predictive tests, student 
aid programs, or the improvement of 
instruction......
.............The disclosure is in connection with a health 
or safety emergency .............."

So yes corporations, government officials, volunteers etc can see the data. And what defines a health or safety emergency? A natural disaster, yes....but could there be a "psychological risk screening", "immunization study" or other "emergency" where data is collected? Again, the answer is unclear.

Can you view your child's records to ensure compliance?t  Yes....kind of. You probably will not know who else views their data but you can know what they view.... kind of. I have heard fro parents that is isn't just a walk in and see them scenario, that schools stall and send you from one person to another; some schools reportedly have even tried to charge a fee for the records. Regardless, here is the law.

"FERPA (20 U.S.C. § 1232g (a) and the related 
regulations (34 CFR § 99) establish the right of 
a parent to inspect and review his or her child’s 
(or in the case of an eligible student his or her 
own) education record for accuracy."


I hope these two posts, links, excerpts, and commentary have helped parents and educators at least know what is happening with data (even if some of this information is three years old, thus outdated).

Who Needs to Know?

As one may surmise, one of my biggest apprehensions regarding CCSS (Common Core Standards) is the LDS (Longitudinal Data Sysyem) collections proposed.

I found a document http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011602.pdf that had some interesting information that I will copy and paste here. Enjoy!

The Fair Information Practice of Data 
Minimization and Retention calls for “only 
collecting personally identifiable information that 
is directly relevant and necessary to accomplish 
the specified purpose(s). [And for] only retaining 
personally identifiable information for as long as 
is necessary to fulfill the specified purpose(s).”

This sounds innocent but who decides what is relevant and necessary, and for how long? With P-20 in position, the information could be viable and important for more than 20 years of a person's life. The types of data could include psychological profiles, behavioral records, health records and religious affiliation, to name a few. http://truthinamericaneducation.com/privacy-issues-state-longitudinal-data-systems/privacy-invasiondata-mining/what-400-data-points/ links to https://ceds.ed.gov/elements.aspx?v=3&ex= and http://nces.ed.gov/forum/datamodel/eiebrowser/techview.aspx?instance=studentPostsecondary  which outline these proposed records to be collected on students. Each to their own, but who wants this information collected on their children, especially when the length of time and who views the data remains vague?

Perhaps I am paranoid but thus next excerpt shows my worst fears;

"Linkage with information from an external 
source could occur as a result of a direct linkage 
by someone with access to two confidential 
data systems who is able to directly link the two 
databases (e.g., the student record linked to local 
public health records on sexually transmitted 
diseases or local crime records) or as a result of a 
less direct linkage of information from a student’s 
education record with information available in 
public records (e.g., the education record for a 
15-year-old Asian female includes participation 
in services for unmarried pregnant students, and 
public birth records could be used to identify 
the father of the student’s child. Alternatively, an 
education record might show that a 13-year-old 
female student was the victim of a violent assault 
during the school day on a specific date (without 
the specifics of the assault). Meanwhile, a report 
in a local newspaper, while protecting the direct 
identifiers of the victim, reveals some of the details 
of an assault on a female student in that school on 
the same date)."

The collection of data has purpose which to me seems to conflict, Case in point;

"INSTRUCTION—Teacher and counselors 
need information about an individual 
student’s previous educational experiences 
and any special needs the student might have 
to deliver appropriate instruction and services 
and to plan educational programs; parent 
contact information is needed to keep parents 
informed of student progress. 
» OPERATIONS—Schools and districts need 
data for individual students to ensure the 
efficiency of day-to-day functions such as 
attendance records, meeting individual 
students’ special needs, handling individual 
students’ health problems, and operating food 
service and transportation programs.
» MANAGEMENT—Schools, districts, and 
state education agencies use data about 
students for planning and scheduling 
educational programs and for the distribution 
of resources. ACCOUNTABILITY—Schools, districts, 
and state education agencies use data 
about students and about individual 
students’ progress to provide information 
about students’ accomplishments and 
the effectiveness of schools and specific 
educational programs. 
» RESEARCH AND EVALUATION—Schools, 
local, state, and federal education agencies 
use data about students and about individual 
students’ progress to conduct analysis 
of program effectiveness, the success 
of student subgroups, and changes in 
achievement over time to identify effective 
instructional strategies and to promote school 
improvement. "

I understand the purposes outlined here and agree with them, having had managed two schools' data a few years ago. But what does the information about an assault on campus that was reported in the news?  How would maternal last name, religious affiliation, and website URL be used in the classroom, or at the state and federal level to improve instruction?

 Again, I remind you of P20, that these records will follow you through life:

"To facilitate the 
usefulness of this information, the legislation 
also calls for an alignment between P–12 and 
postsecondary data systems, which requires 
linkages between student and teacher records, 
between preschool and elementary education, and 
between secondary and postsecondary education 
and the workforce."

It seems who will access student information remains unspecified, and the most private data such as biometrics and social security numbers are of course of highest concern. This document states that such records wqill only be accessed by and for a need to know basis but there lacks a definition of "need to know".

"After the risk level is established, consideration 
should be given to providing more protection 
and more restrictions on access for the data 
elements that are identified as highly sensitive. 
For example, these data elements might be stored 
apart from the rest of the student record in a 
more secure electronic environment, with access 
limited to “need to know” circumstances for only 
a subset of those with access to the system."

One possible relief is the proposal to give students unique identifier numbers (California already has such a thing) separate from their Social Security number; the article adds a second layer of security that at least did not exist in California during the 2010-2011 school year; a unique linking code to access social security numbers which few have access to, so that Social Security numbers will be more secure.

Who might be managing your child's data or accessing the linking codes? Well,

"PII carries a potential for misuse. As a result, it is
advisable to require security screenings for staff
members whose job responsibilities require them
to have access to PII in student education records.
The screening might include a background
investigation using written, electronic, telephone,
or personal contact to determine the suitability,
eligibility, and qualifications of a staff member for
employment."

This sounds great, yet humans are, well, human. Every year across the nation, teachers with supposed clean records and qualifications attend yearly training of confidentiality and test procedures, signing legally binding affidavits and yet every year there are teachers and administrators across the nation breaching confidentiality of these tests. Therefore, how can a similar procedure protect your child's data with 100% assuredness?

Stay tuned for part II of my analysis of this document.

The gray area

A quick little rant...

It seems that those I align myself with politically and educationally tend to go one way and those opposite, well, opposite. Of course I'm generalizing here, never a good tactic for debate or even backing up a claim but I digress....

What I'm trying to say is, it seems each "side" argues (yep here comes the generalizations) for one very polarized opinion.

Side A says: Eek education is all about indoctrination into social justice and communism (or socialism), environmentalism, removal of patriotism or anything to do with the constitution or Founding Fathers, replacing it with a one world order, pro-UN global society that hates Christianity.

Or something like that.

Side B says everything opposite (no need to list it, you are a smart reader and can figure it out)

And then there is little old me, usually siding with A and ranting about the wrongs of side B, but yet I say

Wait! There is a gray area!

America is a great nation, one many people only dream of, but yes we as a nation are not perfect. No one person or place is. We have faults. But we have things worthy of praise. Our values, our founding documents, our collective individualism and desire to help others and better ourselves and nation is something extraordinary. Few realize this, but talk to anyone from say, Cuba, Romania, Cambodia who came to our shores for what we offer and you will hear some great stories. So we can't just side with A and say we are the best most perfectly,  awesome country,  America f*** yeah, but we also can't say America is all that is evil and wrong with the world.

We cannot decimate the planet from an environmental perspective, but we should really bring in logic to the equation. No matter how many reusable bags I use, China will still be responsible for 30% of the smog in my  skies. Worshipping sustainability in the sense we become a third world stone age world is not the answer, but why not try and clean up the littered highways?

We are a predominately Christian nation, but there are other religions out there and we are not a Christian nation per se. Christians should pray for God to guide and protect our nation, but if a Muslim girl wants to wear a hijab or a school wants to teach that Hinduism is a religion of India and looks to books such as the Bhagavad Gita for guidance, so be it. We as Americans are not all one kind of people and that makes us great.

Face it. We are a global society. While we should have patriotism and love of our nation, we need to realize there is a world out there that interacts with us daily. We should be familiar with other cultures, religions, customs, languages. Chances are, you will have a neighbor from Italy and another from South Africa, a co-worker from Singapore, a boss from Brazil... you get the idea. We can love our country and know about other peoples.

We need to recongize these gray areas and focus in on them instead of polarizing everything. Only then can we get somewhere.

P20, LDS, CCSS Data WILL control your child's future

P20 will mold your child into a specific career, not of your child's choosing but of the State's, Government's, or workforce/corporation's desire and need. With the collection of over 400 data points with LDS (Longitudinal Data Systems) being developed under CCSS, comes the sharing of that data with governmental agencies, colleges, and workplaces.

So what, you might say. Well thorough the scientific management of people, known as "human capital", little Billy and Susie will no longer be Billy or Susie but numbers in a system, funneled into specific tasks in society based on assessment results, behavioral data, or merely just a need for more widget makers. Just like in the social efficiency movement, our children are seen as future workers, machines of labor, no longer unique individuals with dreams and desires but robots called human capital, scientifically designed to serve the corporate machine.

From http://www.wiche.edu/info/publications/FrameworkForAMultistateHumanCapitalDevelopmentDataSystem.pdf , a well renowned document full of information worth reading, comes this:

"The workforce sector wants information about prior training in 
high school and postsecondary institutions as a foundation for 
working with both education sectors to address identified skill gaps 
in the workforce, as well as to identify equity gaps with respect 
to demographic representativeness by job category. Knowing the 
education sectors’ capacity to respond (i.e., by increasing the flow 
of graduates with particular skill sets) will also help the state decide 
whether to invest in education to address skill gaps or establish 
incentives to induce more workers with needed skills to move 
into the state. Moreover, linking with the education sectors would 
provide labor market analysts with a wealth of data that would be 
useful for examining equity in employment."

Did you read that? By increasing the flow of graduates with a particular skill set? Think....how can they do this? Let's scale this idea down quite a lot, to ten students, numbered 1-10.
1-3 want to be doctors,
4, a firefighter,
5-7, teachers,
8-10 truck drivers.
However, the workforce sector has an overabundance of teachers and truck drivers but needs more soldiers and HR managers. So, by collecting data and seeing which child might possess a personality for the military, or by, God forbid, changing a child's educartional path completely, suddenly you have...
1-2 doctors.
3 became a soldier
4, firefighter
5, teacher
6 became an HR manager
7, solider
8, truck driver
9, solider
10, HR manager

Suddenly, business, through data has manipulated the future, manipulated our children through education to shape a desired future, by increasing the flow of graduates with a specific set of skills.


Is this what we want for our children?