Archives for category: For-Profit

A reader sent this today:

Interview of Chris Hedges today by Amy Goodman.  Opens with comments on Chicago teacher strike, as excerpted below:
 

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, you know, the tactic is clear. And, you know, the secretary of education, Duncan, is behind it. And that is essentially the stripping away of—you know, of qualified teachers. We’re watching it in New York. You know, the mayor of New York is very much a part of this effort. The assault on the New York City teachers’ union is as egregious as the assault against the Chicago Teachers Union.

And it really boils down to the fact that we spend $600-some billion a year, the federal government, on education, and the corporations want it. That’s what’s happening. And that comes through charter schools. It comes through standardized testing. And it comes through breaking teachers’ unions and essentially hiring temp workers, people who have very little skills. This is what Teach for America is about. They teach by rote, and they earn nothing. There’s no career.

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/9/11/chris_hedges_on_9_11_touring

 

Count on Stephanie Simon of Reuters to get the story that eluded every other reporter.

She is the one that got the inside story on Louisiana, TFA, and for-profit investors.

Now she has the scoop on Chicago.

The strike in Chicago is not about money.

It is a national story.

It’s about the survival of public education.

Read her story.

Jessie B. Ramey attended a meeting at the White House with a delegation of Pennsylvania educators.

Ramey wrote an open letter to Roberto Rodriguez, President Obama’s education advisor, asking the White House to stop berating educators and public education.

Based on the story in The Atlantic claiming that Michelle Rhee is “taking over the Democratic Party,” it becomes imperative for President Obama to distance himself from Rhee’s anti-teacher ideas.

Does President Obama support charter schools, like Rhee? Yes.

Does President Obama support for-profit schools, like Rhee? He hasn’t said.

Does President Obama worry about a dual school system in American cities, with charters for the haves and public schools for the have-nots? We need to know.

Does President Obama want entire school staffs to be fired because of low test scores? He said no at the Convention but he supported the firing of the staff at Central Falls High School in Rhode Island and his Race to the Top turnaround strategy supports mass firings. Does he approve or disapprove?

Does President Obama truly want to stop the odious practice of teaching to the test? Will he explain how teachers can avoid teaching to the test if their pay and their job depends on student test scores?

President Obama must let the nation’s teachers know that he is with them. He can do so by disassociating himself from Rhee’s anti-teacher agenda, as well as from policies pushed by his own Race to the Top.

And he could go to Chicago and tell Rahm Emanuel to settle with the teachers and do what is right for the children of Chicago.

The nation’s leading anti-testing organization has issued a call to its supporters to turn out and welcome Secretary Duncan if he visits their communities on his cross-country bus tour.

Tell him why his teach-to-the-test policies are failing. Tell him why high-stakes testing is bad for the quality of education. Tell him that children need time to play and dance and sing, not just take test prep. Tell him that it is wrong to ditch physical education and the arts and recess for more testing.

Greet him warmly. Of course, the tour starts in Silicon Valley, where the edu-entrepreneurs are heavily represented.

Here is the FairTest message.

Give Arne’s “Bus Tour” a Warm Welcome  

Once again, Education Secretary Arne Duncan is running a “back to school” bus tour, starting in California on Sept. 12 and winding east to DC (see http://www.ed.gov/blog/topic/bustour/ for full schedule).  

FairTest encourages assessment reformers to give Duncan the “welcome” his destructive policies deserve.  A handful of people is sufficient to make a big impact. You can leaflet the locations where Duncan and his surrogates stop, challenging their policies while educating the media and the audience. The National Resolution on High-Stakes Testing provides a succinct critique of federal testing policies (see http://www.fairtest.org/national-resolution-highstakes-testing)

The tour starts in the Redwood City/Silicon Valley, California area. Other stops include: Sacramento, California; Reno and Elko, Nevada; Salt Lake City, Utah; Rawlins, Rock Springs, and Cheyenne, Wyoming; Denver and Limon, Colorado; Topeka and Emporia, Kansas; Kansas City and Columbia, Missouri; St. Louis, Missouri ; Mt. Vernon, Illinois; Evansville, Indiana; Lexington, Kentucky; Charleston and McDowell County, West Virginia; Roanoke and Richmond, Virginia.

If Duncan’s bus tour is visiting your region, please help make the public aware of the growing grassroots resistance to high-stakes testing.  Feel free to call on FairTest at any time for assistance in your important work.

Yesterday I responded to an article in The Atlantic claiming that Michelle Rhee was actually a “lefty” and was “taking over” the Democratic party.

I responded to the article.

Others have said that the writer, Molly Ball, was sending out an automated reply, but I got something slightly different.

What she says here is that she doesn’t understand why a Democrat would not support for-profit charter schools; or work closely with Governor Chris Christie to strip teachers of tenure and seniority; or work with Governor Rick Scott to promote privatization of public schools; or work with Governor Mitch Daniels to push vouchers through the legislature; or accept an award from the rightwing American Federation for Children in company with Governor Scott Walker.

What she says is that there is no difference between Democrats and Mitt Romney on education.

I hope that President Obama makes clear what the differences are.

Here is our exchange:

Hi Diane, thanks for the feedback. My intent with the story was not to mediate 
yet another round of the education-reform debate, but to illustrate the 
political inroads Rhee and her ideas have made, while noting, as you do, that 
they remain quite controversial. 

To answer your rhetorical questions, I don't see why a Democrat can't do any of 
those things. 

Best,
Molly
________________________________________
From: Diane Ravitch [gardend@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2012 6:05 PM
To: Ball, Molly
Subject: From Diane Ravitch re Rhee

Would a Democrat work to promote a for-profit chain?

Would a Democrat work with Republican governors Rick Scott, Chris Christie, and 
Mitch Daniels?

What part of Rhee's agenda differs from that of the most rightwing Republicans?

What Democrat would have accepted an honor from the far-right voucher-loving 
organization American Federation for Children, which simultaneously honored 
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker?

Nothing that Rhee advocates has ever succeeded.

Neither charters nor vouchers nor merit pay nor evaluating teachers by test 
scores has any evidence of improving education.

Diane Ravitch

A new reader has joined our discussion and is looking for answers to important questions. I assured this reader that we have explored these topics in some depth; that we know that the purpose of reform is to eliminate unions; to get rid of tenure; to cut the budget for schools; and to privatize the greatest extent possible, with profits where possible for smart investors in “reform.”

I invite the new reader to hang out with us and join our discussion.

Any advice for the new member of our discussion group?

Please forgive me if I am pulling this conversation back to farmed-out ground (I’m new); but is it fair to say that the gist of the corporate-backed educational “reform” movements today is generating cheaper teachers?This is how the equation boils down for me (a public school teacher). As I’ve been trained to show my work, my thinking is that the greatest “reform” that privatization and charter school movements bring is the elimination of union contracts. And that the primary consequence of eliminating unions in any field is lower labor costs.If the above argument holds water, is it acceptable to eliminate the obfuscating phrase “educational reform movement ” and replace it with the clearer “reducing educator salary” movement? Or, more simply, the “labor-busting” movement? Or the “cheapness” movement?In a similar vein, I am wondering if Dr. Ravitch and others have exposed the cant behind the argument that problems with tenure stem from unions. There don’t seem to be many general-public sources pointing out that no one from a public teacher’s union awards tenure to teachers. Every single public decision to grant tenure is made by an elected school board, advised by its appointed educational managers. If the nation’s schools are saddled with incompetent tenured teachers, the blame falls on leadership and management, does it not? From all the complaints being voiced about tenure that outsiders — many from the world of corporate management — it seems pretty clear to me that the nations educational managers apparently couldn’t recognize an incompetent teacher if they got hit with a hammer by one of them. What is eliminating tenure going to help this group of apparently bumbling crop of managers transform into brilliant predictors of pedagogy? At least tenure forces educational decision-makers to live with the consequences of their incompetence. Lifting the pressure of having to evaluate their teachers in three years and educational managers will be even less accountable for their bad decisions. In the world of corporate management, weakening the chains of accountability is an insane act — something that you would think the corporate nabobs nattering about our schools would understand. Unless they absolutely do understand what they are saying is absurd but don’t care, since the real goal isn’t improving our schools at all.

A reader asks: did Deval Patrick sell out?

I feel ashamed for Deval.  I am one of his many, many progressive supporters, and we’re all baffled by how he got into this situation.  I worked harder for his election than I did even for Obama, and I never doubted his integrity or strength.  

Through all the vicious attacks on him during that first campaign, he stayed steady and clear.  Remember the white-woman-in-dark-parking-lot ad?  I left work every day and went straight to unlock the little campaign office in my own town, as more and more volunteers came forward and signed on.  It got very ugly; there were smear attacks on his family members.  Even in Massachusetts, after Romney and Celluci, he seemed like a long shot.  But Deval brought out the best in my community, and turned it blue again.

On the morning after the election, I came in to my classroom and told my diverse and hopeful students, “The American Dream is For You.”  They cheered.  A couple of them even cried.  Remember, this was before Obama ever ran for president.

Later, after I had chaired a citizens online task force on ethics and lobbying reform, I sat next to him at our summary report meeting so he could answer our recommendations (for the cameras) by saying he’d veto the state budget if the legislators didn’t send him his groundbreaking (we thought at the time) ethics and lobbying reform with it.

After the meeting, I confronted him with his failure to get the state version of the Dream Act implemented (he’d actually tried the executive order route, but had to withdraw it).  I told him about my students, and he really did tear up.  His determination and frustration were real.

State Speaker DiMasi had been indicted for kickbacks on state contracts for the insurance and education data warehouses.  He was convicted, but the investigation went no further.  Edubuisiness had a lock on the state DOE, until Deval stood up to the Boston Globe and appointed a progressive PTA leader (Ruth Kaplan) to the board.

Then, when he ran for re-election, Deval let K12 and other for-profit education companies run a fundraiser for him at the Children’s Museum.  K12 now has a thriving online charter business operating out of Greenfield, and Deval is supporting Mosaica Boston’s forced takover-turnarounds of Boston Public Schools.  A memo leaked from his Secretary of Education once argued they had to bow to an illegal charter school placement, against the will of the community, or the Globe would attack them.  

I swear I don’t understand how he could sell out public education for their measly political  support. Like Obama, he got his chance by being admitted to a luxurious prep academy, so maybe he just can’t untangle his own conflicts about private schools, and it clouds his understanding.  I know he isn’t a coward.  I know he has a fine mind, and I still believe his life is dedicated to the same mission as my own.  I just can’t believe his is a calculated betrayal of the public trust we placed in him, in the face of this dangerous hour for the future of democratic governance.

At the Democratic National Convention, Arne Duncan renounced many of his own policies.

He came out in opposition to teaching to the test, although his own Race to the Top demands it (he never mentioned Race to the Top.)

He denounced the millionaires and billionaires who are supporting the charter school movement and privatization of public education (he didn’t mention that either).

He didn’t mention that he wants education colleges to be graded by the test scores of the students of their graduates.

He didn’t mention merit pay, into which his Department of Education has pumped nearly $ billion.

He didn’t mention the proliferation of for-profit schools.

He didn’t mention that he campaigned with Newt Gingrich to rally support for Race to the Top.

He didn’t mention that he called Bobby Jindal’s choice for state commissioner a “visionary leader,” who now promotes vouchers and the disestablishment of public education.

We should be grateful, I suppose, for what he did not mention.

Mark Naison has written a passionate plea: It is time to start suing to stop the harm inflicted on children, teachers and schools.

The political parties have abandoned them and use well-honed PR rhetoric to paint abandonment as “reform.”

The media swallow the rhetoric.

The foundations have an open wallet for those who are destroying public education.

The Republicans want to intensify the  harm. Arne Duncan boasts of bipartisanship with a party that hates public education.

Naison says it is time to go to the courts to prevent further damage to America’s children and its education system.

Any public interest law firms listening? ACLU? Anyone?

 

      Alan Singer wrote an article about Pearson and its leaders in Huffington Post.

      I linked to it in a post yesterday about the high attrition rate of teachers.

In his original article, Singer pointed out that Susan Fuhrman is a director of Pearson. She is the president of Teachers College. Singer said she had $20 million in Pearson stock. As he notes here, he misread the British currency by a multiple of 10.

      He made the correction, and I reprint it here.

      There remains the question of conflict of interest when the president of the nation’s most prestigious graduate school of education (and the president of the National Academy of Education) is also a member of the board of directors of a profit-seeking seller of standardized testing, online instruction, online charter schools, and course materials for the Common Core. Pearson is deeply entwined in the current destructive reform movement. It is hard to see how the leader of major education institutions can be a spokesman for the best interests of both Pearson and American education.

                 Important Corrections to the Latest Pearson Article

 

London Stock Exchange prices are quoted in pounds and pence. Unless indicated, the price of shares is shown in pence. I00 pence equal 1 pound. I wrote “The sales brought Ethridge alone 20,474,712 GBX or approximately 32,350,000 in U.S. dollars.” However, GBX is in pence, so the U.S. dollar value of the transaction was only be $323,500.

http://www.stockexchangesecrets.com/london-stock-exchange-prices.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sterling

 

In official Pearson PLC reports available online, Susan Fuhrman, President of Teachers College-Columbia University is listed as a non-executive director of Pearson. As of February 29, 2012, she held 12,927 shares of Pearson stock valued at $240,000. As a non-executive director she also receives an annual fee of 65,000 or almost $100,000. Fuhrman has been a non-executive director since 2004 and has received fees and stock I estimate worth more than a million dollars, certainly a substantial sum, but not the $20 million I initially reported.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/pearson-plc/20-f-annual-and-transition-report-foreign-private-issuer/2012/03/27/section2.aspx

 

I thank “Nick50000” for bringing this to my attention.

 

Corrected Version — Pearson “Education” — Who are these people?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/pearson-education-new-york-testing-_b_1850169.html

 

According to a recent article on Reuters, an international news service based in Great Britain, “investors of all stripes are beginning to sense big profit potential in public education. The K-12 market is tantalizingly huge: The U.S. spends more than $500 billion a year to educate kids from ages five through 18. The entire education sector, including college and mid-career training, represents nearly 9 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, more than the energy or technology sectors.”

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/02/usa-education-investment-idUSL2E8J15FR20120802

 

Pearson, a British multi-national conglomerate, is one of the largest private businesses maneuvering for U.S. education dollars. The company had net earnings of 956 million pounds or approximately 1.5 billion dollars in 2011.

http://www.answers.com/topic/pearson-plc

 

Starting in May 2014, Pearson Education will take over teacher certification in New York State as a way of fulfilling the state’s promised “reforms” in its application for federal Race to the Top money. The evaluation system known as the Teacher Performance assessment or TPA was developed at Stanford University with support from Pearson, but it will be solely administered and prospective teachers will be entirely evaluated by Pearson and its agents. Pearson is adverting for current or retired licensed teachers or administrators willing to evaluate applicants for teacher certification. It is prepared to pay $75 per assessment.

http://www.regents.nysed.gov/meetings/2012Meetings/March2012/312hed5.pdf

http://www.nystce.nesinc.com/NY_annProgramUpdate.asp

http://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-and-pearson-collaborate-deliver-teacher-performance-assessment

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/education/new-procedure-for-teaching-license-draws-protest.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.scoretpa.pearson.com/

 

The Pearson footprint appears to be everywhere and taints academic research as well as government policy. For example, the Education Development Center (EDC), based inWalthamMassachusetts, is a “global nonprofit organization that designs, delivers and evaluates innovative programs to address some of the world’s most urgent challenges in education, health, and economic opportunity.” EDC works with  “public-sector and private partners” to “harness the power of people and systems to improve education, health promotion and care, workforce preparation, communications technologies, and civic engagement.” In education, it is involved in curriculum and materials development, research and evaluation, publication and distribution, online learning, professional development, and public policy development. According to its website, its funders include Cisco Systems, IBM, Intel, the Gates Foundation, and of course, Pearson Education, all companies or groups that stand to benefit from its policy recommendations.

http://www.edc.org/about

http://www.edc.org/about/contracting

http://www.edc.org/about/funders

 

EDC sponsored a study on the effectiveness of new teacher evaluation systems, “An examination of performance- based teacher evaluation systems in five states,” that Pearson is promoting but there are two VERY BIG FLAWS in the study. First, of the five states included in the study, Delaware, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Texas, four, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Texas, are notorious anti-union states where teachers have virtually no job security or union protection, and Delaware used the imposition of new teacher assessments to make it more difficult for teachers to acquire tenure. In Texas, North Carolina, and Georgia collective bargaining by teachers is illegal. Tennessee, Texas and North Carolina used the new assessments to make it easier to fire teachers and Georgia used the assessments to determine teacher pay. The second flaw is that the study draws no connection between the evaluation system and improved student learning.

ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2012129.pdf

publications.sreb.org/2011/11S11_Focus_Tenure.pdf

 

According to the Financial Times of London, a Pearson owned property, in what I consider a conflict-of-interests, Susan Fuhrman, the President of Teachers College at Columbia Universityhas been a “Non-Executive Independent Director of Pearson PLC” since 2004 and a major stockholder in the company with over 13,000 shares worth according to my estimate over two hundred thousand dollars. Fuhrman also is “president of the National Academy of Education, and was previously dean of the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania and on the board of trustees of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.”

http://markets.ft.com/Research/Markets/Tearsheets/Directors-and-dealings?s=PSON:LSE

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

 

In official Pearson PLC reports available online, Susan Fuhrman, President of Teachers College-Columbia University is listed as a non-executive director of Pearson. As of February 29, 2012, she held 12,927 shares of Pearson stock valued at $240,000. As a non-executive director she also receives an annual fee of 65,000 or almost $100,000. Fuhrman has been a non-executive director since 2004 and has received fees and stock I estimate worth more than a million dollars, certainly a substantial sum, but not the $20 million I initially reported.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/pearson-plc/20-f-annual-and-transition-report-foreign-private-issuer/2012/03/27/section2.aspx

www.pearson.com/investor/ar2010/files/pdf/Pearson_AR10.pdf

 

There has been some resistance to Pearson’s influence over American education.

In May 2012, students and teachers in the University of Massachusetts Amherst campus School of Education launched a national campaign challenging the forced implementation of Teacher Performance Assessment (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/education/new-procedure-for-teaching-license-draws-protest.html?pagewanted=all). They argued that the field supervisors and cooperating teachers who guided their teaching practice and observed and evaluated them for six months in middle and high school classrooms were better equipped to judge their teaching skills and potential than people who had never seen nor spoken with them. They have refused to participate in a pilot program organized by Pearson and to submit the two 10-minute videos of themselves teaching and a take-home test. They are supported by United Opt Out National, a website that organized a campaign and petition drive to boycott Pearson evaluations of students, student teachers, and teachers (http://unitedoptout.com/boycott-pearson-now/). In June 2012, New York parents protested against Pearson designed reading tests that included stand reading passages and meaningless choices.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/07/new-york-standardized-tests-protest-pearson-field-tests_n_1579187.html

 

The question that must addressed is whether the British publishing giant Pearson and its Pearson Education subsidy should determine who is qualified to teach and what should be taught in New York State and the United States? I don’t think so! Not only did no one elect them, but when people learn who they are, they might not want them anywhere near a school – or a government official.

 

From what I can make out from its website, the three key players at Pearson and Pearson Education are Glen Moreno, chairman of the Pearson Board of Directors, Dame Marjorie Morris Scardino, overall chief executive for Pearson, and William Ethridge, chief executive for North American Education. Although the largest stockholders are a British investment firm called Legal & General Group PLC which controls 32 million shares or 4% of the company and the Libyan Investment Authority with 24 million shares or 3% of the company. According to the Financial Times of London, the Libyan Investment Authority was founded by Libyan dictator Muammer Gaddafi’s son Seif al-Islam, his heir apparent until the regime’s collapse, in January 2007.

http://www.pearsoned.com/

http://www.pearson.com

http://www.pearson.com/about-us/board-of-directors/Boardmembers/Glen-MorenoChairman-47/

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1b5e11b6-d4cb-11e0-a7ac-00144feab49a.html#axzz24qXoOwON

 

Glen Moreno is wealthy, powerful, influential, and highly suspect. According to Wikipedia, Moreno was born in California in 1943 and has a law degree from Harvard University. He worked for 18 years at Citigroup in Europe and Asia, running the investment banking and trading divisions. Moreno was a director of Fidelity International Ltd. And became chairman of Pearson, the publisher of the British newspaper Financial Times in October 2005.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glen_Moreno

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-27/lloyds-says-deputy-chairman-moreno-to-step-down.html

 

Moreno was chairman of UK Financial Investments, the group set up by the British government to protect public funds used to bail-out banks after the 2008 global economic collapse. He was forced to resign in 2009 when it was revealed that he was a trustee of Liechtenstein Global Trust (LGT), a private bank accused of aiding tax evasion.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/feb/12/moreno-uk-financial-investments

 

Moreno was also deputy chairman of Lloyds Banking Group, Great Britain’s largest mortgage lender, but stepped down there in May 2012.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-27/lloyds-says-deputy-chairman-moreno-to-step-down.html

 

Among the Pearson troika, Moreno is the lowest paid, although he apparently has other resources. According to Forbes, his total compensation in 2011 was a little over $600,000. He does however own a home in London and a cattle farm in Virginia and according to the Times of London, managed to contribute half a million pounds to the British Conservative Party in 2009, and purchase 200,000 shares of Lloyd stock in 2010.

http://www.forbes.com/profile/glen-moreno/

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/sitesearch.do?querystring=glen+moreno&p=tto&pf=all&bl=on

 

Dame Marjorie was also originally an American but became a British citizen. She has been CEO of Pearson since 1997. Before becoming CEO of Pearson she was a lawyer in Georgia and a newspaper publisher. In 2007, Forbes magazine placed her seventeenth on its list of the 100 most powerful women in the world. She was named a “Dame of the British Empire” in 2010. According to Forbes, her total compensation in 2011 was $2,455,000. But that represents a tiny fraction of her compensation that includes stock options. Scardino holds 1.5 million shares of Pearson stock.

http://www.forbes.com/profile/marjorie-scardino-1/

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

 

William Ethridge became chief executive of Pearson’s North American Education division in 2008. He has what Pearson considers educational experience because he previously worked for Prentice Hall and Addison Wesley. At Pearson he has been head of its Higher Education, International and Professional Publishing division and chairman of CourseSmart, a Pearson sponsored consortium of electronic textbook publishers. According to Forbes, his total compensation in 2011 was $1,390,000. He holds a half million shares of Pearson stock.

http://people.forbes.com/profile/will-ethridge/62414

http://www.pearson.com/about-us/board-of-directors/Boardmembers/Will-EthridgeChief-executive,-North-American-Education-235/

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

 

According to ILSE or London South East, which reports British stock market transactions, on July 30 and 31 2012, Dame Marjorie and William Ethridge were heavily involved in Pearson stock transfers and sales on the London exchanges earning them millions of dollars. If I read the ILSE report correctly, the percentage of their holdings that Ethridge and Scardino sold seemed to be a bit less than 4% of their total holdings. The sales brought Ethridge alone 20,474,712 GBX or approximately $323,500 in U.S. dollars.

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?SharePrice=PSON

 

 

This was at a time when financial observers including the influential Nomura Group were questioning whether Pearson stock was overvalued. ILSE reported that “Pearson had warned in April that its adjusted operating profit would be down in the first half of 2012 . . . Sales at Penguin dropped 4%, with profits falling 48% to £22 million, which management said was caused by lower sales in its more profitable U.S. market. Uncertainty over potential national and local government spending cuts in the US continues to cast a shadow over the group’s Education business.”

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?SharePrice=PSON

 

In other words, Pearson’s chief operating officers, who are also heavily invested in the company, are busy trading stocks and racking up dollars and pounds while the corporation’s financial situation is shaky. And their solution is to sell, sell, sell their products in the United States.

 

Are these the people we want designing tests, lessons, and curriculum for our students and deciding who is qualified to become teachers?

Alan Singer, Director, Secondary Education Social Studies
Department of Teaching, Literacy and Leadership
128 Hagedorn Hall / 119 Hofstra University / Hempstead, NY 11549