Hacker News Reader

Comment by dnewcome | Hacker News Reader

I think that Bill can do a world of good by sharing his thoughts via a blog like this. Assuming he is candid and fosters real communication, that is. Sections like 'What I'm thinking about/what I'm learning' is exactly the right attitude.

View on HN

The problem is that Bill Gates only reads books that reinforce his existing beliefs. That's why he's so pro-KIPP, because he doesn't have any interest in authors like John Taylor Gatto. (Or at least this is what I heard from someone who had lunch with him recently.)

That's hardly unique to Bill Gates. People rarely re-examine what they presume to be correct, and when people call that a "problem" I tend to think that it just means "he's wrong and pig-headed." Which he may likely be, but let's at least speak plainly.

I also take it as an indication that the person saying "he's wrong and pig-headed" is also so entrenched in their viewpoint that they are not likely to examine evidence to the contrary either.

Well in my case I've read a couple books about KIPP looking for evidence that I was wrong, but I didn't find any. The problem is that while KIPP is probably the fastest way to improve kids performance on Things That Can Be Measured, there's a lot of research showing how this approach is really bad for kids. And the pro-KIPP literature doesn't take any of this into account. My problem with Gates specifically is that not only does he not know what these problems are, but even when told about them he has no interest in learning about them despite the fact that they are extremely serious.

"The problem is that while KIPP is probably the fastest way to improve kids performance on Things That Can Be Measured, there's a lot of research showing how this approach is really bad for kids."

I don't understand this point here. If you cannot measure something, how can you determine what is an improvement and what is not?

I think what he means is: you can't measure a specific metric but you can see from the end result that some other technique ended up with a better overall result.

So are the really bad things you mention things like obliterating intellectual curiosity, fostering dependence on authority, crushing children's self-esteem and so on?

Because it seems like there are some people for whom those results define cruelty and failure and others for whom those kinds of critiques ring hollow and self-serving.

This looks like a debate of preconceptions, the most intractable of arguments.

"This looks like a debate of preconceptions, the most intractable of arguments."

The issue is that this debate isn't even taking place, and people don't know about the research on what happens to kids' intrinsic motivation and such under these programs. Now if the parents knew this and thought it was an acceptable tradeoff then that would legitimately be an intractable debate, but for Obama and Gates to force this onto inner city minorities without informed consent seems extremely wrong.

Could you point me to some further reading about the criticisms of KIPP? I've noticed obvious incompatibilities between their philosophy and the research catalogued by Alfie Kohn, but he obviously doesn't bring up KIPP by name.

As far as I know, there are no real criticisms of this program specifically yet. Most of what I have read from about KIPP comes from Paul Tough, both his series of NYTimes Magazine articles and also his book Whatever It Takes. He's clearly a supporter of KIPP, but in his book he also briefly acknowledges that the ideas underlying the program are not supported by science, unlike many recent initiatives to improve parenting ability. (IIRC the school he writes about in the book is not run by KIPP, but it uses their methodology.)

Just out of curiosity but how do you know this?

EDIT: I am not being sarcastic or anything.

Basically my friend tried telling him about how John Taylor Gatto's new book suggested that there were some unstated assumptions behind KIPP that were worth examining, but Gates wasn't at all interested in even talking about this, let alone reading the book.

Wow, and from just that you were able to determine that he only reads books that reinforces his existing beliefs? Holy assumptions, Batman!

That, and the fact that his articles and speeches on education reflect a shallow thought process that lacks a real nuanced understanding of the problems and tradeoffs.

Yeah, I'm sure he could learn a thing or two from you.

Guys, can I suggest that your points can be made more forcefully by stating a position, and not simply attacking each other?

And before replying to this, read this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006657

I've been guilty, and occasionally still am guilty, of exactly what PG is observing. You can disagree without attacking each other, and you can make your points without snide asides.

Please.

That wasn't a snipe. My issue with Gates literally is not his ultimate position, but rather the fact his arguments for his position are shallow and lacking nuance.

There is a lot of research out there suggesting that while this program may be a fast way to teach troubled kids to read, there's also a lot of research suggesting that it'll completely destroy their intrinsic motivation to learn and, frankly, to do much of anything in the future. Now maybe there is some special reason why the research doesn't apply in this case, or maybe Gates believes it does apply but the tradeoff is worth it. But most likely I don't think Gates even knows that this research exists, and more generally about this wider branch of theory that suggests that this whole approach is going to be really harmful to these kids.

That's what bothers me, the fact that he's pushing this program really hard without an honest discussion about its merits and drawbacks.

Stating that someone who doesn't even want to discuss something they disagree with is closed minded seems more a matter of reason than assumption.

It could also be the case that he disagreed with it and simply did not feel like talking about it at the time he was trying to enjoy his lunch.

This second-hand anecdote is light on details so I think we cannot draw too deep of conclusions about Gates' character from it.

KIPP?

Also, I'ma huge fan of the Underground History of American Education (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/)

I'm not familiar with it but there is an article on his site about it: http://www.thegatesnotes.com/Learning/article.aspx?ID=29

That site reminds me of reading a Lyndon LaRouche pamphlet once in college...

would be interesting. too bad the comments are turned off.

I dunno, I think that a comment section for an author as famous as this would just be a fire-hose blast of noise.

Yeah, it would only work if he had paid moderators.

Why don't they implement a point voting system like HN? It's usually quite a good filter.

That's more a function of the community here. No guarantees that billg would have an equally good community. How many "windoze suxx" comments do you think would get voted up on every article?

I was wondering why there wasn't more functionality too. I guess he follows the release early and often philosophy.

I saw that one of the people that Gates follows said this:

http://twitter.com/inafried/status/8000814417

Reply on news.ycombinator.com