In an extensive article in Politico, Stephanie Simon explores the vast influence of Pearson-a private sector corporation based in London- on the American education system.

For the full article click here.

There has been a great debate in our country over the past 20 years on the role of standardized testing in this country. It is perhaps the most divisive issue in education policy today. Many critique high-stakes standardized for wrenching control of the classroom from local campuses and teachers. Others claim that a standardized test is important to ensure quality instruction on all campuses. The truth probably lies somewhere between these two arguments. However, one thing is sure: the policy decisions are being made by a decreasing number of stakeholders. Chief among these are the executives of Pearson, who strategically aligned themselves to have vast influence on assessment and instruction, in addition to teacher training and accountability.

“The genius of Pearson is the interconnection among their markets…That gives Pearson its power.”

According to Simon:

“To prepare their students for Pearson exams, districts can buy Pearson textbooks, Pearson workbooks and Pearson test prep, such as a suite of software that includes 60,000 sample exam questions. They can connect kids to Pearson’s online tutoring service or hire Pearson consultants to coach their teachers. Pearson also sells software to evaluate teachers and recommend Pearson professional development classes to those who rate poorly — perhaps because their students aren’t faring well on Pearson tests.

‘The genius of Pearson is the interconnection among their markets,’ said (Michael) Apple, the education policy professor(at the University of Wisconsin-Madison). ‘That gives Pearson its power.’”

A great deal of Pearson’s power is the size of the company. Founded in 1844 as a construction firm, Pearson has grown to an international conglomerate with interests in education, news media, publishing, and entertainment. They own such well-known brands as Penguin Random House publishing, Madame Tussauds wax museum, and the quiz-show “Family Feud.” The company’s bread and butter comes from American schools, though. Pearson’s international profits for education alone exceeded $1 billion. 55% of that came from its North American education division. While much of that money goes into research and development, Pearson maintains a massive lobbying effort, both in Washington and in local state houses. Some estimates show that Pearson’s non-profit division spent $1 million in Texas alone lobbying law makers.

The size of the company combined with its lobbying interests have afforded it the power to earn No-Bid contracts, both at the district and state levels. The brands represented by Pearson (and many of its subsidiaries) have become so ubiquitous with assessment and instruction that many lawmakers do not give a second thought to using them as their sole-source provider. Many critique this monopoly as the reason standardized testing has been largely inefficient and ineffective. However this trend seems to be changing.

Again, Simon says:

“[A] big blow came this fall in the Lone Star State when Education Commissioner Michael Williams declined to renew Pearson’s $90 million-a-year contract to run the Texas standardized testing program.

The state auditor had ripped into the contract in a 2013 report that concluded it was far too vague to allow for effective oversight by the Texas Education Agency. The contract had so few details about the costs of each element that when the legislature eliminated 10 of the 15 tests required for high school graduation, state officials had to rely on Pearson to tell them how much they’d save.

Texas launched a competitive bidding process for new exams and is now reviewing the proposals.”

This will have a major impact on the future of assessment in our state. If other companies are allowed the opportunity to provide services to local ISDs and state assessments, the market will drive improvement. Perhaps Pearson will continue to be the best. But some competition is just what Texas needs to keep this massive company honest, and make sure they are doing what’s best for our students, and not what’s best for their bottom line.

For too long, “these tests” have borne the brunt of the criticism. This critique ignores the bigger picture and the value of testing in the school system. Assessment is a valuable tool for ensuring student success across geographic and socio-economic strata. It is also important as a formative tool for knowing what goals to set for classroom learning. However, when one company monopolizes control over an industry, innovation suffers.

Local campuses and districts need to be able to find resources that will work for their teachers and students. Much of those resources can be developed by the teachers and administrators themselves. And when districts need to outsource some of the work, there needs to be room for small upstarts to develop useful and innovative content. Of course, all of this needs money. The answer lies in where state legislatures allocate funds. As Texas moves forward into a new budgetary biennium, Texans need to encourage our lawmakers to move funding away from a major foreign corporate interest, and toward the wellbeing of Texas schools, Texas Teachers, and Texas children.