>What you say here is not the truth. Your talk of "The >Gap" including your above is if not explicit then >implicit racist talk about race.
Reducing The Gap is the Prime Directive of the Education Mafia. It is not I who says so, the Education Mafia say so. The Prime Directive is the central organizing principle for all education policy in the U.S. That is why it is the PRIME directive, if you catch my drift. Therefore, to speak of education policy in 21st century America without reference to The Prime Directive is to speak gibberish.
You seem to think The Prime Directive is inherently racist. Perhaps you are right. But you are wasting your time complaining to me about it. If you do not like The Prime Directive, perhaps because of its racist flavor, you will have to take that up with the Education Mafia. Good luck with that.
In this thread, Richard Hake is flirting dangerously with speaking gibberish. Hake seems to have a hard on for the education methods of one Louis P. Benezet, and Hake blames direct instructors for frustrating the widespread adoption of Benezet pedagogy. Although I am certainly willing to be persuaded by the facts, my very strong hunch is that direct instructors have approximately zero influence on American education policy.
Furthermore, Hake never analyzes the political question of Benezet pedagogy, i.e., the dissemination and adoption of this pedagogy in the schools, in terms of The Prime Directive. The kindest comment I can make about this lacuna is to quote a famous criticism made by one general officer against another general officer. In describing how the other guy makes his plans, the first general says of the second: "he takes everything into account except the disposition of the enemy."
Formulating military plans without considering the enemy sounds like a preposterous thing to do. It sounds unbelievable, until you see it being done over and over and over. Just as Hake is doing here.