What's Up With Gates?
Several of you have pointed out this hilarious/ridiculous story about the Gates Foundation and its funding of a study at Clemson on what is being called the "Galvanic Bracelet Grant." Turns out there are two grants; one for Clemson for almost $500k and one to the National Center on Time and Learning for about $620k. This is supposed to be measure student interest and teacher effectiveness.
Turns out the person who usually writes grant descriptions for the website got it wrong on the Clemson one.
From The Answer Sheet at The Washington Post:
The original description of the Clemson grant said:
Here's the other grant:
The description of the $621,265 grant given at the same time to the National Center on Time and Learning was accurate:
This is all part of Gates' MET (Measures of Effective Teaching) program.
This is the best use of $1.1M. Oh, I forget, to Gates that parking change.
How did this come about?
Well, I can see that for autistic students. But there would be all sorts of reasons this would not work in a regular classroom. You could get a reaction from a student for many reasons including a classmate whispering to him, a text message a student reads or any number of things.
Remember Clockwork Orange?
I long for the day when I might have an audience with Gates. I would be torn between the Cher response in Moonstruck (she slaps her boyfriend when he says he loves her and says, "Snap out of it!") or getting on my knees and begging him to listen.
It just may be too late for any of that.
Turns out the person who usually writes grant descriptions for the website got it wrong on the Clemson one.
From The Answer Sheet at The Washington Post:
The original description of the Clemson grant said:
Purpose: to work with members of the Measuring Effective Teachers (MET) team to measure engagement physiologically with Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) bracelets which will determine the feasibility and utility of using such devices regularly in schools with students and teachers.The new description of the grant’s purpose will say:
Purpose: to conduct a pilot study to measure student engagement physiologically with Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) bracelets, which will determine the feasibility and utility of using such devices more broadly to help students and teachers.Well, I feel better now.
Here's the other grant:
The description of the $621,265 grant given at the same time to the National Center on Time and Learning was accurate:
Purpose: to measure engagement physiologically with Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Galvanic Skin Response to determine correlations between each measure and develop a scale that differentiates different degrees or levels of engagement.Now apparently the Gates Foundation isn't "envisioning" that such a device would be part of a teacher evaluation but they don't make those decisions do they. I can certainly imagine a governor or superintendent making that call, though.
This is all part of Gates' MET (Measures of Effective Teaching) program.
This is the best use of $1.1M. Oh, I forget, to Gates that parking change.
How did this come about?
“The genesis of the project came in similar research done with autistic students, which found that they often were engaged in learning, even when it did not seem that they were from outward appearances.
“The pilot study will be small — some 100 students — and is still in the early stages of design. The foundation is funding, rather conducting this research, as part of its overall portfolio of grants designed to support promising research.”
Well, I can see that for autistic students. But there would be all sorts of reasons this would not work in a regular classroom. You could get a reaction from a student for many reasons including a classmate whispering to him, a text message a student reads or any number of things.
Remember Clockwork Orange?
I long for the day when I might have an audience with Gates. I would be torn between the Cher response in Moonstruck (she slaps her boyfriend when he says he loves her and says, "Snap out of it!") or getting on my knees and begging him to listen.
It just may be too late for any of that.
Comments
Seems like its worth digging deeper. Research on student engagement, using non-invasive measurements like MRI & GSR isn't necessarily a bad thing. It might give you a biological measure that contradicts with (or is subthreshold) to some forms of measured behavior. One would do it to find more effective methods of teaching, not to actually measure teaching in a particular instance.
Part of the goal would be to come up with standardized curricula or techniques for teaching something (like the trig functions, or multiplication tables, or reading). One might object to the standardization, but I'd not expect that the aim would be to measure teachers ability by the GSR response of particular groups of students (well, I hope not, it would be crazy).
But, I still don't understand who is doing the research.
So, now they're drifting into woo land. I looked at the WaPo article, and the clarification sounds like my presumption (i.e. use the GSR/MRI data to design effective teaching curricula) was not right, and that they're actually hoping that GSR is going to give them a large scale "objective" method of measuring education (the crazy version).
Or they've been talking to some GSR snake oil salesman in marketing departments (or more ickily, seduced some otherwise sane psychologists with money). Ugh.
(zb)
Will the GSR be able to differentiate between the teens response to the cute kid sitting next to them vs. response to learning.
Absolutely hysterical!!
-Methinks the Emperor Has No Clothes
At what point do these things become an invasion of privacy? GSR is a component of lie detector tests IIRC. It's not hard to imagine that they could incorporate HR (heart rate) and BP (blood pressure) into these things. What if a teacher/principal is investigating something and asking questions of a student. Would they have access to the data? Would they be required to ask the student to remove the monitors?
Yeah, a little paranoid - not that there isn't valid use for this kind of monitoring device, but when others have access to the data, I get a little wary.
-StepJ
Maybe then managers would be more engaged in doing what they're paid to do by the community - figure out solutions which benefit the community, instead of beggaring community members!
HandcuffsAreBracelets
The most important thing to understand the "technocratic" mind is its compulsive need for control. And where it cannot possibly have control, it will settle for the illusion of control. They'd call it data based, and so that legitimizes their delusion.
This sounds like a logical opportunity for the polygraph industry. Polygraphs have no scientific validity and are used mainly as a tool of intimidation. Polygraph operators are good at finding out what results the bosses want, so they can get those results. I'm sure this would work fine in the schools too.
Here is a skeptical article about GSR devices.
- spacehound
FedMomof2
FedMomof2
Thanks for the morning chuckle—I needed it. But what a sorry state we are in (literally and figuratively).
Solvay Girl
http://mynorthwest.com/11/692043/Bracelets-could-help-teachers-better-understand-students
Public School Parent
Really?! Really? Clockwork Orange, Brave New World, worse...The abandonment of heart, of feeling, of human-ness in the pursuit of data.
I'm not astonished by this, but saddened.
Actually, that would less invasive then constant monitoring of our galvanic skin response. This is basically being attached to a lie detector all day.
Its "old school" for a teacher to use her/his eyes? No $$ into corporation pockets. I'm good with scientific research, but not with an agenda to sell ridiculous products to schools.
I like FedMomof2 idea - Moodrings! Those are cheap too.