The scholarship in my book, MANIPULATION OF THE MIND: Our Children and Our Policy at Peril explains how the breakdown of the American way of life was planned from the coercive measures by the prestigious tax-exempt foundations and the organized efforts of The Milner Group. Those measures influenced the K-12 teaching system, which is neither values-based nor develops higher order thinking. With a crippled education system, is there a common connection between policies getting implemented and our K-12 teaching methods? Policies in general not in the interest of our children.
Yes, there is a connection. In America, complex decentralized organizations make policies usually not in the interest of the common people. The K-12 teaching methods and not K-12 education, do not develop among Americans a habit of their involvement in keeping a check on their interest in those policies. My book has supportive research.
Scholars have numerous theories on explaining school shootings. My scholarship does not directly relate to school shooting, but in this post, I take my findings and associate it with a probable cause of shooting. My thesis around K-12 teaching methods is as follows:
The K-12 teaching methods and the lack of higher order critical thinking curriculum is the primary cause policies evade the people’s scrutiny and directly explains impact to our society. I share this viewpoint from the solid foundations developed in my scholarship.
The K-12 teaching methods through multiple-choice, is a student’s conditioning tool and is used as a primary means of society’s control mechanism, which does not develop higher order critical thinking as means to decision making. Within a controlled K-12 curriculum, the reliance on multiple-choice exams and SAT drills throughout their early education encourage students to make choices rather than decisions based on some evaluation constructs. In their adult life, the American people continue to be victims of the same conditioning as they confront policies handed over to them.
In a K-12 multiple-choice-based curriculum, Americans develop a behavior from (skipping difficult problems, a first gut feeling choice selection making choices and not decisions.) They learn connectionism in their K-12 curriculum that is based mostly on multiple-choice and true/false patterns, which represents the whole truth. Unfortunately, these connections are the choices student make are someone else’s, as is the “truth” on which it is based. Children learn facts associated with a truth that is presented to them as an unquestionable reality. Therefore, a provoking thought, the connections in video games etc., can get compounded with the other findings in the Secret Service and the Department of Education “Safe School Initiative” report. This report is the outcome of school shootings. Additionally, another assessment becomes apparent from a connection made in the report. Some states have passed laws, which my scholarship shows, policies are accepted and promoted without the people’s scrutiny from their intellectual thought.
Safe School Initiative Report: The report found “targeted school-based attacks cannot be measured in statistics alone.” Theories were identified. In the Secret Service and the Department of Education report, threat assessment was defined as the “process of identifying and managing threat.” Proactive intelligence was the outcome from the statistics gathered in the study.
The study concluded on attack prevention and not how the attacker got to the “pre-incident thinking.” From the study’s flawed approach, the report offered a questionable outcome—invasion of privacy by enacting laws. Several states have cheered the legislation to share student data with law enforcement. The law is expected to “create environment for students to feel comfortable telling an adult what they heard about someone,” is more telling of giving up freedom than it is a fix.
Methodology: It was based on the “attacker pre-incident thinking.” A very problematic methodology for a pandemic purpose—more laws. If a methodology is based on pre-incident thinking, the conclusions are likely not derived, but are rather targeted to get to a preconceived outcome—to create further laws. Certainly, it is not a recipe for making America great again.
For this methodology, thirty-seven (37) incidents were analyzed. The characteristics of attackers were: Split parents 76%; a few with foster parents; students grades were “A” and “B” 41%; isolated to highly popular relationships (1/3 were loaners) and without behavior problems 63%.
In my view, a shortcoming of the study or methodology is that the combined study’s outcome was prevention and not how did the students get to the point to killing fellow students? How does law enforcement (secret service) prevents – By force? – By wire taps? – By passing laws, is a solution to a perplexing phenomenon found on the fringes of the societal behavior spectrum. It is a U.S. specific catastrophe.
Findings: Students involved in the school shootings were bullied 3/4 of the times; students that were subjected to mental health evaluation 34%; students with mental issues fewer than 1/5; interest in violence through movies 59%; No violent or criminal behavior 31%; few students had harmed or killed an animal 12%; history of arrests 1/4; and the students with a history of coping with significant losses 98%.
Conclusion: Threats are assessed from what a student is sharing with others.
Commentary: Imagine a car that seems fine but makes grinding noises when it accelerates. People hear the noise and speculate about a failing transmission without looking under the hood or checking if transmission fluids were periodically maintained. Similarly, threats are assessed based on what a student shares with others, is like a poorly maintained car is judged by the sound the car is making, is bit too late.
Since statistics alone cannot measure attacks. Hence, the alternative approach are theories. I bring forth a theory. Since the K-12 teaching methods that are not based on Trivium and Quadrivium (removing fact from fiction) curriculum cannot rescue our children’s intellectual thinking and shaping their success. Women choose successful partners. Lack of attention by females or neglect is one of theories in this problem.
Regardless of how innocent the air of this reports is, the preconceived target or outcome is to enact laws.
The report’s conclusion—threat assessment from what students is sharing with others is indicative of the fact that the Secret Service have weighed-in heavily on the conclusion of the report than the Department of Education’s capacity to add an alternate approach. Therefore, one could only expect a sub-par conclusion deficient on a greater panacea thought. The Department of Education bringing value to education is questionable—my scholarship is the testimony to my claim.
The study focused on prevention, which is fine, but has overlooked the first layer of defense. How do these young minds get there (to a point to commit heinous crimes from vengeful fantasies.) Is it really a fact that the common finding: seventy-five percent (75%) were bullied, 34% had mental health issues and 59% had interest in violence through movies caused them to trip? Keeping in mind, almost half of them are above average students and only a few (12%) harmed or killed an animal. Why did they commit inconceivable crimes of violence and revenge?
The biggest neglect and shortcoming of the study is, the conclusion has no remedy for a significant data find–student with history of coping with significant losses. The fact is, the United States system (The Milner Group as I have adopted as a name for establishment) is not interested in the welfare of her people–allocating funds for social services is not a capitalist idea.
Neglecting people’s welfare is not a new deficiency in our society. The shootings in Virginia Tech (VT) was concerning. A prized institution now has a record of mass shooting. in my days, college students would pull into a campus parking lot with a rifle holstered in a gun-rack. I never heard of school or campus shootings then. Once I had the occasion of attending orientation at VT. The campus police had a booth there too. I asked the officer, why have the shootings have gone up from my days in school? The officer’s reply, the states have been cutting findings for the mental disorder programs.
Connecting the dots; first, in my field when a computer system malfunctions in a bizarre manner, the basics require upgrading the BIOS and the drivers, and in that order. I equate this process to placing K-12 education system first before we can begin troubleshooting. In troubleshooting steps, I would not dare to venture in telling parents how to educate their child, but my definition of sound education is values-based and to nurture higher order thinking for the higher order. Now, values-based is a taboo term in education, though values are placed in the forefront in an election campaign.
To understand the taboo, a values-based education (K-12 Education) can alternatively be phrased as instilling value through scholastics with higher order critical thinking, theocracy (the forbidden word in education) or attention given to nurture students.
Per John Gatto, Public schooling is a “jail.” K-12 is a python constricting humans. I can further say ‘good’ scholastics can have the elements of necessary attention given to students. Jordan Peterson approach has resemblance to my values-based thought.
According to Jordan Peterson, “the fundamental human value is attention.” (Attention to students through “values-based” schooling.) Peterson further says, “If children do not get good attention they will go after bad attention.” Peterson points, if a student is given a choice to choose between being hated or ignored; he would chose hate because it tells a student “he exists.” We exists through many things. One is scholastics. To Peterson, school shootings is clearly a mental issue. –Jordan Peterson on The Rubin Report.
To Peterson, “attention” is the fundamental currency. He summed up the sentiments of a neglected student, “I rather be dead and infamous than alive and anonymous.” –Id.
There are other theories. Dr. Warren Farrell points to, within the K-12 schooling daughters are not doing it, but sons are. Per Farrell, success of boys has a role in these shootings. Squarely, many of these observations are tied to K-12 education and not K-12 teaching methods. There are other reasons that fall outside of the K-12 education’s scope. Dr. Farrell said that these were dad deprived boys and the feminine ethos, an “all-encompassing” trait that nurtures and not harms.
Second, policies are made by complex decentralized organizations with affiliation to The Milner Group (TMG) as the norm are usually not in the interest of the common people, and with these policies and the five controls, TMG manages society. (There is a chapter in my scholarship on TMG.)
We know, the law enforcement had met these students before the school shootings had taken place. And what does the study conclude? Too meet them some more–those that have committed inconceivable crimes. To pass more laws and gun control laws.
The report cheered the fact that several states have legislation to share student data with law enforcement to create an environment for students to feel comfortable telling an adult what they heard about someone.
In conclusion, The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province in Pakistan has a gun culture—a loaded AK-47 fully automatic, there is practically no safety net of mental healthcare, there is bulling of students, likely none have a police record. There are no school shootings.
I find the Secret Service report lacking in addressing the root cause. Improving the K-12 education system—a solution favored by 78% in a Chicago Council poll—is a promising approach to prioritize. Strengthening education could directly influence the connection, cited by 59% in this case, between exposure to violent video games and attraction to violence.