4 ms·

For Pearson, Common Core Is Private Profit

60 points by alexcasalboni 12y ago

jarin 12y ago
The headline should be rewritten: "Dominant Education Publishing Company Continues To Publish Education Materials"
- Retric 12y ago
  "Dominant Education Publishing Company" benefits from continuously changing standards. A history book might be good for ~5-10 years unless standards change. Then suddenly they get to print new books for every student.
  - jarin 12y ago
    They already do this every couple of years, if I recall correctly. It has nothing to do with Common Core. It's just plain old greed.
    - jes 12y ago
      How does Pearson induce their customers to buy their revised textbooks? If the newer books do not bring value, why do the customers purchase them?
      - jarin 12y ago
        I think this story by Richard Feynman might help illustrate it: http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm
  - bigtunacan 12y ago
    Pearson obviously profits from testing, however the standardization of testing as such is not benefiting Pearson. Quite the contrary; this has significantly hurt profits. Prior to government standardization and "No Child Left Behind" each state was self governing, but this did not mean they were unregulated. However, since they were not regulated at the federal level this resulted in each state negotiating independent smaller contracts and holding less bargaining power. Now with federal standards, many states pool together to contract companies such as Pearson to develop a single set of tests and materials to put the states in a better bargaining position. The scope and dollar value of this unified contract is more critical for the company (Pearson in this example) to capture so there is more pressure to reduce cost and insure the contract is won. At Pearson, this has resulted in lower profits, which in turn led to cost cutting measures (layoffs, etc...). http://www.4-traders.com/PEARSON-PLC-4000637/?type_recherche=rapide&mots=pearson http://www.4-traders.com/PEARSON-PLC-4000637/?type_recherche... A look back and we see Pearson's sales capping around 2012, with a significant (~.5 billion) drop from 2012 to 2013. Even today Pearson's sales lag from where they were 6 years ago.
bdavisx 12y ago
High-quality open-source text books covering the Common Core Material would be an incredible "force for good"...
- nissimk 12y ago
  I agree, but not just textbooks, also lesson plans and workbooks. The problem is that if Pearson makes the test and the test results are the most important metric for teachers and administrations, then they are compelled to use the materials from Pearson because they will be more effective at teaching to the test. I'm opposed to extensive standardized testing, but if it is mandated, then it should be written and administered by a government agency, not a private company.
- click170 12y ago
  My concern with that is that we could end up with a situation where the curriculum or textbook content is decided by the uneducated masses. Eg what happens if creationists figure out that all they have to do is gang up on contributing to the open source textbook to have their "theory" taught as equal in public schools despite the quality and quantity of their supporting evidence. IMO these things should be decided by certified smart people in a transparent manner where anyone can call their decision making into question. Who is a certified smart person is another issue. Maybe restrict it to top performing teachers and professors, or some other way or excluding those who would seek to sabotoge the process.
- secabeen 12y ago
  They exist already: http://www.ck12.org/blog/ http://www.ck12.org/blog/
jseliger 12y ago
This is not unique to Pearson. I do grant writing for nonprofit and public agencies, and I've worked on all sorts of education projects, including numerous projects for school districts, Head Start, Early Head Start, and Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK—it's an NYC program). For most of these projects, funders require applicants to identify the curriculum(s) that'll be used. The curriculums themselves are hundreds, sometimes thousands, of pages of stuff like this: 3. The Buildings Study; (a) Investigating the Topic; Day 5; Investigation 3: What are buildings made of? What makes them strong? Vocabulary: English: Characteristics. Spanish: Caracteristicas. Large Group: Opening Routine: "Sing a song and talk about who's here." Poem: "A Building My Size." Use Might Minutes 49, "A Tree My Size." (From The Creative Curriculum: For Preschool: Featuring the Buildings Study.) I'll stop now. These things are always faintly ridiculous, but they're mandated, so people produce them, and others use them. I have a shelf sitting next to me. A lot of funders will list validated curriuclums, so you have to chose from this, and only a relatively small number of companies are in the game. Those that are, from what I've heard on the grapevine, also spend a lot of money and time and energy taking people out to dinner and doing the sort of stuff you might've seen on Mad Men. It's a hard business but can also be a very profitable one. The teachers on the front lines know all this stuff is bogus. The basics of reading, writing, and math haven't changed substantially in decades. Everyone knows that great teachers aren't great teachers because they've mastered "Common Core" or "The Buildings Society." But most of these decisions get made deeply underground, and no one sees them. Common Core has for whatever reason become a politically popular thing to hate, but if you drill down to find each state's standards, they won't be any better. In some ways not much has changed since Richard Feynman wrote "Judging Books by Their Covers" (http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm) decades ago. The big publishers all know this stuff. Even the Al Jazeera article is only seeing a shadow from the main event. EDIT: For more on UPK in particular see http://blog.seliger.com/2015/01/11/trying-to-give-away-universal-pre-kindergarten-upk-or-early-head-start-ehs http://blog.seliger.com/2015/01/11/trying-to-give-away-unive.... Some outsiders are aware of how this stuff works, but it's not overtly corrupt and it's not sexy enough to be newsworthy most of the time.
- snowwrestler 12y ago
  Each state's standards are the Common Core. They are literally the same thing; the name "common core" simply refers to the effort to align the standards from state to state. Why? Because the basics of reading, writing, and math are the same in every state. State alignment of standards is common. You may have heard of the Uniform Commerical Code or the Uniform Building Code, which are other examples. Even the states whose governors are rejecting Common Core for political reasons are putting in place new state standards that are not substantially different from Common Core. But since national conservative organizations have latched onto the name Common Core for their fundraising, the name has become messy for conservative governors. But the concept of standards in education is still very popular. And standards are not the same thing as curricula. The standards define what students should learn; curricula define how students will learn that. The two are constantly conflated, which is not helpful to either.
rayiner 12y ago
Newsflash: every time the government buys a roll of toilet paper, a private company profits. That is not, by itself, a valid criticism. If there was evidence that the private companies are charging more than what it would cost states to do things themselves, that might be a criticism, but that's not what is being alleged here. And frankly, I'd rather have, e.g., Pearson certifying teachers in New York than have a government agency, which would inevitably fall into the pocket of teachers' unions, doing that.
- briholt 12y ago
  Who do they think sold all of the pre-Common-Core textbooks and assessments? Pearson, obviously.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

60 points by alexcasalboni 12y ago

jarin 12y ago

The headline should be rewritten: "Dominant Education Publishing Company Continues To Publish Education Materials"

Retric 12y ago
"Dominant Education Publishing Company" benefits from continuously changing standards. A history book might be good for ~5-10 years unless standards change. Then suddenly they get to print new books for every student.
- jarin 12y ago
  They already do this every couple of years, if I recall correctly. It has nothing to do with Common Core. It's just plain old greed.
  - jes 12y ago
    How does Pearson induce their customers to buy their revised textbooks? If the newer books do not bring value, why do the customers purchase them?
    - jarin 12y ago
      I think this story by Richard Feynman might help illustrate it: http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm
- bigtunacan 12y ago
  Pearson obviously profits from testing, however the standardization of testing as such is not benefiting Pearson. Quite the contrary; this has significantly hurt profits. Prior to government standardization and "No Child Left Behind" each state was self governing, but this did not mean they were unregulated. However, since they were not regulated at the federal level this resulted in each state negotiating independent smaller contracts and holding less bargaining power. Now with federal standards, many states pool together to contract companies such as Pearson to develop a single set of tests and materials to put the states in a better bargaining position. The scope and dollar value of this unified contract is more critical for the company (Pearson in this example) to capture so there is more pressure to reduce cost and insure the contract is won. At Pearson, this has resulted in lower profits, which in turn led to cost cutting measures (layoffs, etc...). http://www.4-traders.com/PEARSON-PLC-4000637/?type_recherche=rapide&mots=pearson http://www.4-traders.com/PEARSON-PLC-4000637/?type_recherche... A look back and we see Pearson's sales capping around 2012, with a significant (~.5 billion) drop from 2012 to 2013. Even today Pearson's sales lag from where they were 6 years ago.

bdavisx 12y ago

High-quality open-source text books covering the Common Core Material would be an incredible "force for good"...

nissimk 12y ago
I agree, but not just textbooks, also lesson plans and workbooks. The problem is that if Pearson makes the test and the test results are the most important metric for teachers and administrations, then they are compelled to use the materials from Pearson because they will be more effective at teaching to the test. I'm opposed to extensive standardized testing, but if it is mandated, then it should be written and administered by a government agency, not a private company.
click170 12y ago
My concern with that is that we could end up with a situation where the curriculum or textbook content is decided by the uneducated masses. Eg what happens if creationists figure out that all they have to do is gang up on contributing to the open source textbook to have their "theory" taught as equal in public schools despite the quality and quantity of their supporting evidence. IMO these things should be decided by certified smart people in a transparent manner where anyone can call their decision making into question. Who is a certified smart person is another issue. Maybe restrict it to top performing teachers and professors, or some other way or excluding those who would seek to sabotoge the process.
secabeen 12y ago
They exist already: http://www.ck12.org/blog/ http://www.ck12.org/blog/

jseliger 12y ago

This is not unique to Pearson. I do grant writing for nonprofit and public agencies, and I've worked on all sorts of education projects, including numerous projects for school districts, Head Start, Early Head Start, and Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK—it's an NYC program). For most of these projects, funders require applicants to identify the curriculum(s) that'll be used. The curriculums themselves are hundreds, sometimes thousands, of pages of stuff like this: 3. The Buildings Study; (a) Investigating the Topic; Day 5; Investigation 3: What are buildings made of? What makes them strong? Vocabulary: English: Characteristics. Spanish: Caracteristicas. Large Group: Opening Routine: "Sing a song and talk about who's here." Poem: "A Building My Size." Use Might Minutes 49, "A Tree My Size." (From The Creative Curriculum: For Preschool: Featuring the Buildings Study.) I'll stop now. These things are always faintly ridiculous, but they're mandated, so people produce them, and others use them. I have a shelf sitting next to me. A lot of funders will list validated curriuclums, so you have to chose from this, and only a relatively small number of companies are in the game. Those that are, from what I've heard on the grapevine, also spend a lot of money and time and energy taking people out to dinner and doing the sort of stuff you might've seen on Mad Men. It's a hard business but can also be a very profitable one. The teachers on the front lines know all this stuff is bogus. The basics of reading, writing, and math haven't changed substantially in decades. Everyone knows that great teachers aren't great teachers because they've mastered "Common Core" or "The Buildings Society." But most of these decisions get made deeply underground, and no one sees them. Common Core has for whatever reason become a politically popular thing to hate, but if you drill down to find each state's standards, they won't be any better. In some ways not much has changed since Richard Feynman wrote "Judging Books by Their Covers" (http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm) decades ago. The big publishers all know this stuff. Even the Al Jazeera article is only seeing a shadow from the main event. EDIT: For more on UPK in particular see http://blog.seliger.com/2015/01/11/trying-to-give-away-universal-pre-kindergarten-upk-or-early-head-start-ehs http://blog.seliger.com/2015/01/11/trying-to-give-away-unive.... Some outsiders are aware of how this stuff works, but it's not overtly corrupt and it's not sexy enough to be newsworthy most of the time.

snowwrestler 12y ago
Each state's standards are the Common Core. They are literally the same thing; the name "common core" simply refers to the effort to align the standards from state to state. Why? Because the basics of reading, writing, and math are the same in every state. State alignment of standards is common. You may have heard of the Uniform Commerical Code or the Uniform Building Code, which are other examples. Even the states whose governors are rejecting Common Core for political reasons are putting in place new state standards that are not substantially different from Common Core. But since national conservative organizations have latched onto the name Common Core for their fundraising, the name has become messy for conservative governors. But the concept of standards in education is still very popular. And standards are not the same thing as curricula. The standards define what students should learn; curricula define how students will learn that. The two are constantly conflated, which is not helpful to either.

rayiner 12y ago

Newsflash: every time the government buys a roll of toilet paper, a private company profits. That is not, by itself, a valid criticism. If there was evidence that the private companies are charging more than what it would cost states to do things themselves, that might be a criticism, but that's not what is being alleged here. And frankly, I'd rather have, e.g., Pearson certifying teachers in New York than have a government agency, which would inevitably fall into the pocket of teachers' unions, doing that.

briholt 12y ago
Who do they think sold all of the pre-Common-Core textbooks and assessments? Pearson, obviously.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]