Skip to content
Subscribe

The Gates Effect: Common Core Has Powerful Ally Keeping Unpopular Program Alive

The Gates Effect: Common Core Has Powerful Ally Keeping Unpopular Program Alive
Published:

The amounts are huge. A search in the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation website for grant awards with the keyword “Common Core” returns 257 results accumulating more than $300 million.

Substituting the Common Core euphemism “college and career readiness” uncovers another $130 million for another 52 grantees.

Even more Common Core money has been sent under vague explanations such as “for general operating support” to organizations whose only relationship with the Gates Foundation is to promote Common Core.

The Common Core Initiative comprises:

  • A set of content standards from kindergarten through grade 12 that most US states have adopted;
  • Tests developed by the Partnership for Readiness for College and Career (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortia (SBAC), which fewer states have adopted;
  • “Progressive education” curricular materials and instructional methods;
  • Many promotional strategic partnerships among organizations; and
  • Seemingly ubiquitous marketing.

The controversial Common Core Initiative has reworked what and how US elementary and secondary schools teach in every classroom, in every school, every day.

It is so unpopular and unwieldy it would probably have expired a few years ago if not for Gates Foundation support. But, what if it doesn’t work or, as some critics argue, it makes things worse?

The Gates Foundation has shown a willingness to throw in the towel after earlier, failed efforts to transform US education, for example, with new forms of teacher evaluation and smaller high schools.

Nine years on, however, Gates shows no reluctance to continue pushing on Common Core, despite massive unanticipated resistance from grassroots parents groups and the few political groups that have not accepted money to promote it.

At this point, one wonders what could induce Gates to cease and desist. The Foundation will not run out of money in our lifetimes. With a robust stock market, and generous transfers from Warren Buffet, the coffers continue to swell.

The PR and marketing machine promoting Common Core continues unabated, with no countervailing force anywhere near the Gates Foundation in size or impact.

Gates withdrew from earlier K-12 education projects when faced with obvious mismanagement or clear empirical evidence.

But, the Common Core Initiative differs fundamentally – it is amorphous – not localized, observable, and measurable like previous Gates projects.

It seems possible that Common Core’s impact is so nebulous, that it will never be obvious enough to Gates to give up. In that case, critics would argue, the Common Core Initiative will slowly and gradually degrade US education achievement over the course of a generation.

As large a worry as the possible harm to American education, is the possible harm to American governance.

No one elected Bill and Melinda Gates or the leaders of the many other foundations funding the Common Core Initiative. The foundations are accountable to no one (with the nominal exception of the Internal Revenue Service, which may or may not check to determine if grant goals match organizations’ typically vague, generic mission statements).

Perhaps most alarming, the Gates Foundation is also interjecting its preferences directly into politics. In the first years, Common Core funding was devoted to building infrastructure—paying to develop the standards and tests, for example.

For better or worse, those now exist. So, more and more Common Core funding now pays directly for lobbying and promotion.

Some grants for Common Core promotion go straight to state education agencies, local school districts, and parent-teacher organizations. Others go to public relations and law firms to influence legislatures and judges.

Journalism in general may be suffering, but coverage of education issues has grown, in part thanks to you know who.

Gates generously funds all of the mainstream education press: Education Week, the Hechinger Report, the Education Writers Association, Chalkbeat, and EdSurge, as well as National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System.

While Gates may be listed as just one or two (there’s also a Gates Family Foundation) of the donors in a list, some of the other donors listed may simply be pass-throughs for Gates money, or they may be collaborating with Gates in a strategic partnership aimed at increasing the impact of their donations through collective action.

Occasionally, one hears some protest about the Gates Foundation’s large intrusion into education policy. The Los Angeles Times Editorial Board, for example, expressed their opinion that the “Gates Foundation failures show philanthropists shouldn’t be setting America's public school agenda.”

But, alas, they are.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.
Preparing the article

The Gates Effect: Common Core Has Powerful Ally Keeping Unpopular Program Alive

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us