The shiny new auditorium is filled to capacity. The audience is conspicuously silent. On the stage a glass and chrome podium awaits the speaker. In the background a state-of-the art, rear projection, theatre screen proclaims, "Welcome to The School of the Future."
A thin figure dressed in Khakis and blue oxford cloth shirt, sleeves rolled to the elbow, walks to the podium, taps and adjust his wireless microphone and say's, "May I have your attention."
The audience erupts in a cacophony of clapping, press shutters snapping, flashing of cameras and the mutterings of the attendees. The reflection of the camera flashes off his round glasses dance around the room as if a million fireflies have invaded.
The lone figure raises his arms to quiet the audience and after what seems to be an eternity there is silence. He says, "Students, parents, teachers, and guests welcome to the future." The roar of applaud is deafening and slowly returns to breathless silence. He continues, "I am your Principal and my name is Bill Gates!"
Far fetched you say. Consider this.
"Philadelphia on Thursday September 7, 2006 opened a public high school where students work on wireless laptops, teachers eschew traditional subjects for real-world topics and parents can track their child's work on the Internet."
"The school, which cost the school district $63 million to build, is free and has no entrance exams. The 170 students in the inaugural ninth-grade class were selected by lottery from 1,500 applicants."
"Microsoft, motivated by a combination of altruism and self-interest, was closely involved in planning the school and providing its technology, said Mary Cullinane, group manager for the company's Partners in Learning program and the school's "technology architect." (Reuters)
Why would Bill Gates the richest man in the world take on a problem that has plagued the U.S for more than three decades? Why would he not go sit on a beach and enjoy his money instead of involving his company in a problem that is filled with political agendas, factional fighting, teachers Unions and angry parents.
Bill Gates has long been critical of the educational system. In a speech to his executives he said, " If the U.S. public education system was working at peak efficiency it could not supply the people to sustain a knowledge economy."
To many people's chagrin, he could not be more correct. This problem has been documented as far back as 1983 in "A Nation at Risk " and has been supported by commission after commission ever since. What is remarkable, is that every administration, regardless of party, has agreed? Despite this, Educational Testing Service reports that SAT scores hit a 31 year low. The U.S., for the first time in its history is no longer number one in the creation of new patents and discoveries.
Read more... Connected Learning
As a corporate executive Bill Gates understands that the people he needs to sustain Microsoft's dominance are not being produced in our schools.
There is perhaps a second reason. Colorado, where I live, is 39th in the nation for per pupil allocation of funds for education. This is reported to be $7,200 dollars per year. The U.S. department of Education reports that approximately 45 million students are enrolled in public education. Do the math. If we take Colorado's expenditure per child and multiply it by the number of students in the U.S. we get $324,000,000,000, that's 324 billion dollars spent by the states, per year alone, and not counting Federal and private expenditures.
Is it possible that the numbers are sufficient to entice the world's most successful capitalist to be interested in education?
Microsoft already owns the lion's share of our workplace technologies. Their software is in our homes, telephones, refrigerators and personal computers. Do we want them to control how we educate our children? Unless we make a firm commitment to insure that our schools remain under public control.
The Principal of the school of the future will be Bill Gates.
Information from Encyclopædia Britannica about Bill Gates
Information from Encyclopædia Britannica about Microsoft Corporation
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 10
I had hoped you would comment on the Gates school, and I see you believe that the gesture has no potential problems associated with the semi-privatization of "public" education. Yet, in looking over past articles, I see your admiration for Thomas Jefferson--how would his ideals for public education consider this move by the the "self-motivated" and "altruistic" billionnaire?
Isn't there something problematic here? Is your enthusiasm in any way tempered by a concern that our fundamentally American belief in the "public" of "public education" means that we should be wary of corporate interests who do not have our childrens' best interests at heart?
Maybe it's me, but the Bill Gates foray into the "technological architecture" of a "public school" throws up red flags all over the place. When taxpayers realize they no longer have to pay full price for the education of America's children--rather, they should petition Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, or perhaps the richest man in China (the highest bidder), how will "public" education survive? (And what happened to the kids who didn't win the lottery? Will they walk up the street to peeling paint and substitute teachers?)
I'm not as gung-ho as you are, Reid. When billionnaires can manipulate an entire school district and thereby have such control over the education of our children, to the exclusion others all in the name of corporate "self-interest," I am concerned. I don't believe that the Gates Machines are a panacea for the ills of American public education. I don't believe that computers or the Internet will address the myriad problems of the underclass. And I certainly reserve a measure of distrust for any rich guy who says the "architecture" comes with no strings attached. He didn't become the richest man in the world by giving things away.
Will he eventually dictate what the school will teach? And if he does, will the district have the guts to tell him, "You don't have the credentials or the experience to tell these us what to do?"
Again, I have my doubts.
But, like I said: Maybe it's just me.
I thought the last paragraph posed this fear rehetorically.
Reid c
Reid:
You should craft another article, which has your "terror" in the lead paragraph. I didn't see it in the rhetorical conclusion of your article above. Given your familiarity with corporate structures, I'm certain your perspective will be both insightful and appropriately cautionary.
Does anyone have a good answer as to why this is?
There was a time in this country when to be educated was valued over, above and aside from its impact on earning power. Today, we eschew learning anything that does not lead immediatly to a higher paycheck. I suspect that if one were to have dinner with Bill Gates, that he could converse articulatly and informitively on a wide range of subjects that have nothing to do with computer software.
Thank you for posting this and I got your point loud and clear and agree with it, it's terrifying. Public schools should stay public, that is, without Bill Gates controlling them as a new business venture.