6 ms·

Non-American here. Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? They have totally perverse incentives to make

Non-American here. Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? They have totally perverse incentives to make tests more frequent and difficult, so they can sell more training materials for the same. Also, stuff like this (http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20120207a.html http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20...) seems to give Pearson the ability to arm-twist states into using their standardized tests ("otherwise we'll move somewhere else").

coldpie 12y ago
> why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? Welcome to money in American politics, and one of many reasons behind the outrage at the result of Citizens United v FEC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
- saryant 12y ago
  What does the Citizens United decision have to do with any of this? Standardized tests have been written by private companies for decades, it didn't just happen recently.
  - coldpie 12y ago
    Privately run standardized testing generates a lot of money. Money influences politicians. Getting money out of politics would help prevent that influence. Citizens United went in the other direction.
nissimk 12y ago
It's actually worse than that. The teachers and administration are very concerned about the test scores. Now they are compelled to buy the lesson plans and other materials from the same private corporation that creates the test. Every piece of paper my kids bring home says Pearson on it. Privatization of public education is a serious problem. We will also be opting out like @themartorana. In case you want similar content about opting out with regards to NY state, look here: http://www.nysape.org/refusing-the-test-resources.html http://www.nysape.org/refusing-the-test-resources.html
phkahler 12y ago
>> Non-American here. Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? That is the key question. And it is a rhetorical question. It would be better to point to the fact that "this is not supposed to be the job of a private company." Phrasing it as a question implies that there may be a legitimate answer, and offers the people pulling this crap an opportunity to try to justify it with an answer. I've been to school board meetings where concerned parents ask rhetorical questions. IMHO the approach needs to shift to pointing out the boards responsibilities and the fact that they are not meeting them. Outsourcing is both failure to do your job, and also violating the childrens privacy as mandated by law. "Opting" in or out is just a diversion - it implies again that what they're doing ok because it's optional.
gcb0 12y ago
wife teaches at top 10 us university. they adopted Pearson books after Pearson allowed newer white book edition to be authored by one professor of the department (not the one that are reference in the file field, no. the one that barely has a degree in the dpt subject but is the TA and undergrad teaching supervisor) now they moved several undergrad and extra classes that were taught by phd TAs to 60% online on Pearson black board system. which is a piece of crap site made in java. their selling point to the university was that they could save money they pay to TAs. as if TAs are even paid... there is nothing in their pitch (which became public after a small strike) mention better learning.
dreamweapon 12y ago
Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? In a nutshell: because a profound ideological shift has occurred in the last 40 years, which dictates that nearly all aspects of public life should ultimately be privatized -- real effectiveness, hidden costs (and nefarious side effects) be damned. cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

coldpie 12y ago

> why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? Welcome to money in American politics, and one of many reasons behind the outrage at the result of Citizens United v FEC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

saryant 12y ago
What does the Citizens United decision have to do with any of this? Standardized tests have been written by private companies for decades, it didn't just happen recently.
- coldpie 12y ago
  Privately run standardized testing generates a lot of money. Money influences politicians. Getting money out of politics would help prevent that influence. Citizens United went in the other direction.

nissimk 12y ago

It's actually worse than that. The teachers and administration are very concerned about the test scores. Now they are compelled to buy the lesson plans and other materials from the same private corporation that creates the test. Every piece of paper my kids bring home says Pearson on it. Privatization of public education is a serious problem. We will also be opting out like @themartorana. In case you want similar content about opting out with regards to NY state, look here: http://www.nysape.org/refusing-the-test-resources.html http://www.nysape.org/refusing-the-test-resources.html

phkahler 12y ago

>> Non-American here. Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? That is the key question. And it is a rhetorical question. It would be better to point to the fact that "this is not supposed to be the job of a private company." Phrasing it as a question implies that there may be a legitimate answer, and offers the people pulling this crap an opportunity to try to justify it with an answer. I've been to school board meetings where concerned parents ask rhetorical questions. IMHO the approach needs to shift to pointing out the boards responsibilities and the fact that they are not meeting them. Outsourcing is both failure to do your job, and also violating the childrens privacy as mandated by law. "Opting" in or out is just a diversion - it implies again that what they're doing ok because it's optional.

gcb0 12y ago

wife teaches at top 10 us university. they adopted Pearson books after Pearson allowed newer white book edition to be authored by one professor of the department (not the one that are reference in the file field, no. the one that barely has a degree in the dpt subject but is the TA and undergrad teaching supervisor) now they moved several undergrad and extra classes that were taught by phd TAs to 60% online on Pearson black board system. which is a piece of crap site made in java. their selling point to the university was that they could save money they pay to TAs. as if TAs are even paid... there is nothing in their pitch (which became public after a small strike) mention better learning.

dreamweapon 12y ago

Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but why is a private company even been allowed to test kids? In a nutshell: because a profound ideological shift has occurred in the last 40 years, which dictates that nearly all aspects of public life should ultimately be privatized -- real effectiveness, hidden costs (and nefarious side effects) be damned. cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism