|
0 members (),
104
guests, and
41
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,428
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,428 |
I have such a crush on Gene Wilder.
Sorry. Carry on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
[1frugalmom's painful description] Wait. Is Pearson claiming that this stuff is the Common Core???? {patiently} Pearson is one of the main architects (er-- or is the term really "archetypes" I do get those confused these days).... of Common Core.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
[1frugalmom's painful description] Wait. Is Pearson claiming that this stuff is the Common Core???? {patiently} Pearson is one of the main architects (er-- or is the term really "archetypes" I do get those confused these days).... of Common Core. Oh dear. If they were claiming this at her school, it's no wonder she was saying it was crap. This kind of thing is precisely what I fear most about the Common Core: smart, knowledgeable people worked very hard to create a set of standards...and people who are interested in the wrong sorts of things are going to make a dog's dinner out of them. Oh, this sucks. And the worst part is that the Common Core will get the blame.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
Okay, so maybe the term is Arch-enemy.  In all seriousness, that is precisely what I've feared re: Common Core since Pearson seemingly won the behind-the-scenes battle to corner the assessment market associated with The New Initiative. They have their hands in an awful lot of pies now. Of course, pie sales are WAY, way up, so who really cares if they are all cowpies or mudpies, really? They look great for the photo-ops.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
This reminds me about what Richard Feynman wrote about choosing textbooks for California public schools: it was all about the marketing. For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, read this essay: Judging Books by their Covers. In summary, nothing has changed in 50 years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 312
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 312 |
[1frugalmom's painful description] Wait. Is Pearson claiming that this stuff is the Common Core???? Oh yea, all our students get to see of CCSS is through the eyes of the gawd-awful Pearson curriculum the school district powers that be chose (after careful, stringent examination I'm sure). I think getting laptops for every student in grades 3-12 is great. I think CCSS, if done even remotely well, can be great (for the most part). But telling us what the program can do then finding out that was a lie, or maybe there was never a plan to allow the program to work that way in the first place, is down right cruel for us that really had our hopes up. DD9 was in tears just yesterday because she is back to hating school. We haven't heard that since our horrible 1st grade year. I know we have strayed a bit off topic (sorry about that) and I know we have had other posts about Pearson's enVision math, but my biggest complaints with our current curriculum stem from this one specific program. See for yourselves - http://www.mypearsontraining.com/products/envisionmath/2012/tutorials.asp?page=faqsruazkaz - be forewarned that once your school does figure out what to do with their new technology it does not include a crappy curriculum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
Well, it's a technology-based curriculum, so I think it meshes well with this thread. As for Pearson: Find Tools4Math within Pearson SuccessNet in the enVisionMATH Premium Digital System. I suspect the quality of a curriculum is inversely proportional to the number of out-of-place cAPital lEtterS and rand0m NumB3rs in its title. How long did a marketing guru (see below) labor over this tradmarketable masterpiece? And how much did they pay him? And how much did it cost to pay for all those committee meetings so that everyone could discuss the relative merits enVision, ENvision, and EnvisioN so as to maximize Pearson's market impact at this critical juncture? Or maybe they were really just enVi$ioning their bonuses. But perhaps I am too cynical. Introduction to the Eleven Tools Hmm. This sounds like some kind of new internet religion they're trying to sell me, complete with - Ten-Frames
- Fraction Circles
- Model lessons, as noted above
- Transformations
and, of course - Money
Again, perhaps I am being overly cynical. Perhaps I should work harder at finding a path to enLightenM3nt via the Eleven Tools (tm). Maybe the path is polygonal. Maybe I should follow all it points and click my way to bli$$ Bliss. Maybe one of their marketing gurus will guide me if he has time between meetings. I think I need a huG (tm).
Last edited by Val; 02/10/14 11:08 AM. Reason: (tm)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
Well, you might need a hUG, but I feel rather strongly that what I most need is comMenceMent. Only four more months... only four more months... In all seriousness, though, all that most students are ever going to actually see of CCSS's lofty and well-considered curricular goals is Pearson's funhouse mirror image of the same. Well, because that's what they'll be TESTED upon, see. Because Pearson owns SmaRt3r BaLanC3d, now, too: PARCC, Pearson, and SmarterBalanced (and is it just me, or does "Smarter Balanced" sound SUSPICIOUSLY like a wholesome breakfast cereal??) A somewhat snarky (but accurate) appraisal of this development. Pearson's own appraisal, which terms this an "exciting" development. (I'll bet. Exciting primarily for investors, but hey...)
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 312
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 312 |
In all seriousness, though, all that most students are ever going to actually see of CCSS's lofty and well-considered curricular goals is Pearson's funhouse mirror image of the same. Well, because that's what they'll be TESTED upon, see. Because Pearson owns SmaRt3r BaLanC3d, now, too: PARCC, Pearson, and SmarterBalanced (and is it just me, or does "Smarter Balanced" sound SUSPICIOUSLY like a wholesome breakfast cereal??) A somewhat snarky (but accurate) appraisal of this development. Pearson's own appraisal, which terms this an "exciting" development. (I'll bet. Exciting primarily for investors, but hey...) ARRRRRGHHHHH!!!!! NOOOOOOOOO!!!! Off to find that post on how to opt out of state assessments.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
More about Pearson... Pearson Foundation working for Pearson-for-Profit re: Common Core-- settled with NY for 7.7 Mil.More Pearson-Pearson-Pearson behind CCSS rollout: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/education/28gates.html?_r=0http://education-curriculum-reform-...son-publishing-investigated-for-payoffs/ That one, while MOSTLY unsubstantiated, is particularly icky if true. I have no reason to think that it is NOT true in light of what else I know to be true about Pearson and their business practices, which make Microsoft look like major philanthropists, quite frankly. You know-- the same Microsoft slapped around by the EU for slimy practices? This one is even quite up-to-date: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/pearson-plan-for-education_b_4628520.htmlThe embedded links mostly check out on that piece, by the way. It's not that it's a left or right-wing set of concerns-- actually both sides (and not a few moderates who are simply alarmed by the apparent quality issues which are becoming obvious) are expressing increasing skepticism about Pearson's involvement. http://www.edexcellence.net/comment...e-watch/2013/pearson-crosses-a-line.htmlLast week, the New York Post and Daily News reported that the Pearson-developed New York State ELA sixth- and eighth-grade assessments included passages that were also in a Pearson-created, “Common Core–aligned” ELA curriculum. This meant that students in schools that purchased and used instructional materials from Pearson had an enormous advantage over those who didn’t. As for Pearson, it’s no stranger to these kinds of conflict-of-interest accusations. In the U.K., Pearson both administers a state “A-Level” qualifying exam—the results of which are used to inform, among other things, university admissions—and sells textbooks aimed at helping students prepare for those assessments. Last November, U.K. officials launched an investigation into “possible conflicts of interest within its role as both a publisher of textbooks and an issuer of academic qualifications.”
It's a textbook (pardon the pun) anti-trust scenario: By developing both the test and curriculum materials, Pearson will basically control the market, regardless of the quality of their materials. After all, if you were a New York principal and learned that Pearson included passages from their curriculum on the state test—the results of which are used to inform everything from student to teacher to school accountability—whose curriculum would you buy? (The comments from educators are particularly prescient, given that this was all taking place in 2011... and SO much of that has come to pass...) Officials from the Gates and the Pearson foundations say the project will create 24 courses: 11 in math, for grades K-10; and 13 in English/language arts, for grades K-12. Four of those courses will be available for free online through the Gates Foundation. The full 24-course system, with accompanying tools including assessments and professional development for teachers, will be available for purchase, likely through Pearson, the international media company that operates the New York City-based Pearson Foundation.
Each course will serve as a 150-day curriculum and will harness technological advances such as social networking, animation, and gaming to better engage and motivate students, Judy B. Codding, the managing director of the Pearson Foundation, said in an April 27 conference call with reporters.
The linkage between the two foundations and the for-profit education company represents a “leading edge” in education philanthropy, said Chris Tebben, the executive director of Grantmakers for Education, a Portland, Ore.-based group of funders. Now-- how, one might (rightly) ask, does this relate to technology in classrooms? Ask yourself what school administrations are loading onto mobile devices being provided to students. Go ahead. Ask. It's PEARSON. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/la-students-outfox-apple-_b_4003489.html The real story there, as Singer notes in that write-up, is that Apple-Pearson are the exclusive providers of proprietary-- LICENSED-- content.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
