This report is a fascinating and scary analysis of Pearson’s ambitious efforts to create a demand for their products around the world and to satisfy that demand while making profits.
It is called “Pearson and PALF. The Mutating Giant,” and it was written by Carolina Jünemann and Stephen Ball. It shines a much needed light on the international ambitions of the privatization movement and the commercializing of education as a consumer good. It is worth your time to read this important report. Arm yourself with knowledge and information.
It begins:
Education is big business. There are global, national and local businesses all seeking to profit from education and educational services. Increasingly, business, education policy and what it means to be educated are intimately intertwined.
Pearson is the world’s largest edu-business. Over the last 10 years Pearson has been involved in a process of re-invention, leading to its re-branding in 2014 as a ‘learning’ company with a vision, summed up in the strapline ‘always learning’, and with the aim of contributing to “the very highest standards in education around the world.”
This transition has at least two aspects to it. The first relates to Pearson’s repositioning of the brand as a social purpose company, one which portrays itself as having a positive, and measurable, impact on society, that of “help(ing) more people make measurable progress in their lives through learning”. The other relates to Pearson seeking to position itself as an increasingly powerful global policy actor in education – “to playing an active role in helping shape and inform the global debate around education and learning policy” (2012 annual report p. 39). But as Pearson is contributing to the global education policy debate, it is also reconfiguring the education policy problems that will then generate new markets for its products and services in the form of educational ‘solutions’.
In 2012, Michael Barber Pearson’s Chief Education Adviser, previously Head of the UK’s Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit (2001-2005) launched PALF (the Pearson Affordable Learning Fund) as a for-profit venture fund to support and encourage the development and expansion of affordable learning school chains in developing countries.
The creation of PALF is an integral part of the repositioning of Pearson as a global company rather than one focused strongly on European and the US markets. It fits into Pearson’s business strategy of venturing into new markets (geographical) and uncovering new market opportunities, in this case, a new market segment (socio-economic), moving the company away from its traditional position as mid-market and high-end operator in education. PALF has been created to develop an unconventional market niche – the need and ambition of the poor in developing countries to give their children a good education.
The main focus of investment in PALF’s first phase of activity was for-profit Low Fee Private School (LFPS) chains. PALF’s first investment was in Omega Schools, a chain of Low Fee Private Schools operating in Ghana. Another is Affordable Private Education Centres (APEC), a chain of low-cost secondary schools in the Philippines. A third investment within the LFPS chain sector in 2014 is eAdvance, a company that manages the first South African blended learning low fee school chain called Spark schools.
However, PALF’s initial focus on Low Fee Private School chains has been inhibited by the absence of appropriate investment opportunities – sustainable, innovative businesses that could provide the expected financial returns. This has resulted in a recent shift in PALF’s scope to include a more general mix of investments and a broader focus on commercial education ‘solutions’ that, as Pearson explains, “might involve new business models, investing in new technology, or testing innovative partnerships or distribution channels” (Pearson plc, 2014, p. 56).
As part of this change of focus, in March 2014 PALF made an equity investment in Zaya Learning Labs and another in Avanti Learning Centres, a provider of college entrance exam preparation for students of low-income families through a pedagogic approach based on peer-to-peer learning and self-study, both in India. This kind of investment, as those in Ed-tech more generally, also facilitate, and illustrate, the increased used of non-teacher based or blended learning pedagogies.
An important aspect of PALF’s outcomes driven ‘demonstration’ work is related to the role of technology as an enabler of scale through delivery cost savings, that is, by reducing the reliance on qualified teachers as the primary medium of instruction. There are complex and over-lapping profit opportunities in the technology – teaching equation. This has profound implications for the role of teachers. The commitments and functions of the teacher are increasingly narrowed to include only those deemed necessary for enhancing performance and outcomes, at the same time as teachers are residualised and ‘de-professionalised’.

From the article:
“I actually don’t have a problem with the idea of taking the schools that have low test scores, whatever the reason for those might be, and for creating a district where those schools get extra resources to help overcome whatever obstacles have been holding them back.”
Rubenstein should have a problem using ‘low test scores’ as any sort of ‘metric’ as those test scores are nothing more than MENTAL MATHTURBATION*, COMPLETELY INVALID as proven by Noel Wilson in his never refuted nor rebutted 1997 dissertation “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
And:
“I’d want to see the extra resources going toward wrap-around services and smaller class sizes and extra curricular activities and things like that.”
Oh, yeah, the obligatory “What should be done solution.” No doubt that we all would like that for all students who need them. The “educational problem” in the USA is a “societal problem” in that this country has far too many students who live in degraded home environments, the folks in which have little hope to ever overcome those conditions which are extended into the schools by the people in charge.
And:
“In the RSD, we learn, charters have 5 years to get from an ‘F’ to a ‘D’ and then five more years to get from a ‘D’ to an ‘C’. Even though I don’t know about the scientific validity of these letter grades, that does sound like a reasonable rate of expected progress.”
THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY TO THOSE LETTER GRADES.
That ‘discussion’ was an exercise in pure educational mental mathturbation* nothing more and it certainly couldn’t have been anything less.
*Thanks to SDP!
LikeLike
They already do dominate the educational market. Every PowerPoint any of my Professors use all have the phrase property of Pearson as the footer. In addition, as Medical students we are given homework in an online format which requires the purchasing of a Pearson Mastering account. Mind you this account and the format is riddled with errors which will affect the students final grade when doing homework and the customer service is terrible when one tries to address these issues directly with Pearson.
LikeLike
Pearson is emulating what has gone on in the major industries in this nation. Media, Banking, Airlines, Energy,etc. With our and the international oligarchical economic structure well developed, it will not find it hard.
LikeLike
Forgot to include my Cliff Notes version of Wilson’s work:
“Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
LikeLike
Diane:
Please remove my comments from this post as they are meant for the prior post on the three stooges of deform. Sorry I somehow misplaced them!
Thanks,
Duane!!!
LikeLike
No cause for fret, Duane.
Any post on Pearson could accurately be retitled “The Three Stooges of Reform”.
And PS: I didn’t invent mathturbation (the act or the term). So no thanks required.
LikeLike
“This transition has at least two aspects to it. The first relates to Pearson’s repositioning of the brand as a social purpose company, one which portrays itself as having a positive, and measurable, impact on society, that of “help(ing) more people make measurable progress in their lives through learning””
Measurable this measurable that! Pearson can measure all those things that are not measurable. Why. . . . they must be god to be able to do the impossible. Can I just start tithing to them now???
LikeLike
“The New Colonialism”
Colonies for Britain
Schools in Africa
East India and Pearson
Can really take you far
LikeLike
. . . “to playing an active role in helping shape and inform the global debate around education and learning policy”. . . so that it greatly enhances Pearson’s profits stolen off the backs of innocent children.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Visual Thinking and commented:
Thanks for sharing this thoguht provoking article….
My thought on this – 2 questions;
1. Can Pearson’s Plan serving as catalyst to accelerate positive change in the public education system?
2. Would the technology platform evolve to accomondate massive customization – educational contents that meet the context needs (cultural and/or individual)?
Robert
LikeLike
Children living in poverty traditionally don’t succeed in school. Parents must earn enough to pay for the basics. In our area rent for a 2 bedroom apt is $1600. Earning minimum wage doesn’t come close to paying this.
LikeLike
“It’s getting too difficult to sell cigarettes in the USA. We need to develop the overseas market”, and so it happened, (poor countries of course!)
LikeLike
Yahoo Finance identifies the state of Michigan as a “Notable Holder of Pearson Stock”- listed 7th, with 1,100,000 shares, at $19 per share (approx.) and,”Notable Mutual Fund Holder”- CREF, as in TIAA-CREF. Recently, the Financial Times reported, “TIAA-CREF
Big Backer of Big CEO Pay”.
In 2011, the WSJ reported the government of Libya was the 3rd largest Pearson shareholder and the Arab Banking Corp., was 4th largest. Mother Jones, in fall of 2014, confirmed government of Libya, at 3rd.
LikeLike
Bridge International Academies, recently in the news because of the criticism from more than 100 international organizations. Isn’t it backed by Gates/Zuckerberg/Pearson?
LikeLike
Pearson and Microsoft to lead the world?
As CEO of Microsoft, Bill Gates signed an agreement in 2004 with UNESCO for delivery of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to various regions of the world.
You can find the agreement by typing the key words Microsoft + UNESCO.
Then in 2014, Microsoft (Gates no longer CEO) announced its “pledge to the Global Partnership in Education to help member governments transform their education systems and build critical skills for millions of learners.” These gifts are tax write-offs for Microsoft. They include:
A program called K-12 Digital Access, a digital hub and competitions for schools with significant software discounts, technical expertise, content, measurement and evaluation, and teacher/school leader professional development to schools around the world.”
A Pan African initiative is called Project Badilko (means “change” in Swahili). This project is intended to reach half a million learners and 20,000 educators in 100 digital hubs. Search for current activity with the name of the project.
In addition, Microsoft hopes to “increase literacy by 100 million new readers in the next five years (staring in 2014) with e-book creation, consumption, and assessments, in any language, via the Matuto: Literacy for Life platform a project coordinated with UNESCO.
Add TV White Spaces broadband, where in Microsoft pledges to collaborate with developing country partners, donors, and the private sector to provide free or low-cost broadband to schools, “to enable effective infrastructure for Education Management Information Systems (EMIS)”—the management and allocation of educational resources and providing data on students and teachers, especially those enrolled in on-line courses. (A version of InBloom?)
Add the Partners in Learning program, a 15 year $750M investment in helping teachers and school leaders “effectively integrate technology in their classrooms.” “We will offer teacher and school leader professional development designed to help educators build lesson plans that enhance and grow students’ 21st Century skills.”
In addition, Microsoft’s YouthSpark program, started in 2012 is touted as “reaching 300 million youth worldwide with education, workforce development, and entrepreneurship skills building” in more than 100 countries. As part of this pledge Microsoft is offering “a special package for Microsoft’s IT Academy program, an online training platform which offers everything from core digital literacy curricula to advanced Microsoft business and IT certifications.
Microsoft’s $300 million contribution is for the following “Global Partnership” countries: Albania, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Georgia, Ghana, Haiti, Honduras, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Moldova, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Rwanda, Senegal, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
This pledge permits Microsoft to write off donations while building customer familiarity and comfort with Microsoft’s products.
Details at
://www.globalpartnership.org/docs/replenishment/2014/Pledge-Microsoft-EN.pdf
LikeLike
Yet, Microsoft still needs off shore accounts to avoid taxes?
LikeLike
Dear Diane,
I am in need of support, I am the only teacher in the STATE of Florida to have made it to an Administrative Hearing based on the new system of evaluation. I have been fighting my case for 5 years and have been left to defend myself. I am going to a hearing October 25, 2017 in Tallahassee.
My evidence was not submitted and the witnesses against me were not counter questioned. I had a DOAJ hearing 6 months ago and the judge “recommended” I have my certification revoked based on an evaluation score. No direct evidence was presented by the state, only wide sweeping generalizations from the rubric.
I was observed and graded over 28 times in two years and they are using only one 20 minute informal to ruin my 25 year career committed to the advancement of ELL, at-risk, and learning disabled students.
When I first started to stand up I called an employment attorney who called me back and said, “who did you piss off?”
Needless to say there is no direct evidence of a specific behavior(s) to quantify, yet the rubric explanations, without any supporting evidence is what they are basing determination on.
I need some guidance before I sit In front of the ethics committee. I have freely chosen this path because I was tenured at the outset, and no other teacher could argue the case.
All others signed agreements to maintain their certification but I did not. Many chose to keep their certification and go to teach in Charter Schools. Strange how the public believes a charter is a great idea, but the teachers are the teachers, the same pool of people for all jobs. The notion there is a better teacher would likewise mean I could have had a better student.
The public has been entirely mislead, because the majority of charter teachers are people who could not get positions in public schools, or at this point, have lost their public position. Most people would choose a higher paying public school position with much better benefits, leaving the charters with what’s left over.
The list of procedural statutes violated at both the state and federal level is extensive.
If this recommendation is completed freedom in academia will be a thing of the past. It will open up the lines for rampant discrimination without need for any factual evidence, just a check mark in a box on the rubric with no actual details or facts to support the negative rating statements.
Please send me a note with a number to have a conversation before I make this historical trip.
I had no illusions that when I reached this point I might possibly be standing alone. Not a single peer has had the courage to stand with me, but privately cheers me on.
At first they made me doubt myself, but then in my prayers I would ask, please send me the child I have failed so I can see the truth and make amends.
God keeps sending me my successes though.
LikeLike
Noel,
I sent you a long message via the email you posted. Not all such emails are genuine.
Do you belong to a union? Have you asked for their help? Did you check with FEA?
Professor Audrey Amrein Beardsley is willing to talk to you. Email her: Audrey.beardsley@asu.edu
LikeLike
Thank you Diane. Audrey has made contact with me and has been very supportive. I appreciate you taking action on my behalf, and yes, I am genuine, I chose to work with the most difficult student population; spent years being the one teacher who could get the most disinterested child to cooperate and freely begin working.
I loved my job, I loved my students. I actually taught in a very well funded district once and it was amazing, the students loved my class, and were always interested in the topic of the day. It was easier because the were not battling so many issues and were already interested in becoming educated.
Although I loved it very much, there was a part of me that felt they didn’t need as much assistance and I wanted to make a difference with those less fortunate. I loved my school, it was the most diverse population possible, the hurdles being poverty, many IEP’s, lack of attendance and a lot of ELL students.
I never saw my students as not making progress, and all of my students accounted for their final grade. If a student didn’t pass, they would always say, “It’s not your fault, I didn’t do the work.”
I recently ran into one of the students I had the first year they graded me unsatisfactory. He was working in the local store and he said, “Hey did you teach at…”
I said yes and after confirming each others names he said, “I’m so sorry for how angry I got.”
I told him, “That’s ok, it’s to be expected, it was middle school, and you didn’t speak English, it was your first year here and it must have been terribly frustrating.”
He smiled and said he and another girl in our class had went looking for me a couple weeks ago, but I wasn’t at the school.
I asked him who his teacher for the following year was and he said, “I didn’t go to that school the next year.”
He went to NY, told me he got up early every morning, stayed late at school on a double schedule and graduated EARLY.
I was so proud. He spoke no English when I had him, he became self-directed after he left me and finished school ahead of time. He now speaks perfect English, and he had come to see me.
What a success!
LikeLike