Indoctrination in the SAT

David Coleman announces the SAT redesign.

Parents have been complaining about a question on the SAT their children took recently.

Two parents reported a question about a speech given by Bernie Sanders that was asked on the SAT. 

The first parent asked on social media: 

1) Why was there an Essay Question on my daughter’s SAT test asking her to explain why Bernie Sanders speech was effective?? 

Regardless of any political beliefs this is underhanded and just wrong.

2) The whole country takes mandatory SAT’s yesterday and my daughter was one of them….she told me that the last question was critiquing a speech that Bernie Sanders made on not privatizing the post offices. His arguments/opinions put out there without any opposing views. 

It’s a good time to remind you that David Coleman, one of the Chief Architects of the Common Core Standards, is now the President of the College Board. Since he was elevated to this position there has been much controversy surrounding the SAT/ACT and Advanced Placement Program. 

Coleman came under fire after the testing organization used the tragedy of the Parkland school shootings to promote the Advanced Placement Program

When Coleman spoke about redesigning the SAT he came under scrutiny when he quickly moved to align the SAT to the Common Core Standards.

The College Board moved to revise its AP U.S. History (APUSH) with an ideologically slanted framework. This moved resulted in calls to break the College Board’s testing monopoly. Politicizing U.S. History was not going to happen without controversy or a fight.

One of the ways to indoctrinate children with biased political views is, through standardized testing.  In New Hampshire, it is state law that the SAT must be used to test children in 11th grade.  This was signed into law after the Smarter Balanced Assessment created a whirlwind of controversy several years ago. As one wise parent pointed out this, when he looked at the question:

Notice how the question is couched. It’s sort of like asking, “Explain why Hillary Clinton isn’t President even though she deserved to win.” It’s an opinion framed as a fact. 

The problem isn’t that they included a speech from a political candidate. The problem is that they presented opinion as fact. It’s called a “mind virus.

When the College Board hired a political operative as their President, that brought with it the possibility of more politicization and indoctrination through the assessments and AP courses. It appears as if that’s where Coleman has taken this organization.

That might be why more and more colleges no longer consider the SAT in their admissions process.  According to fairtest.org “More than 1000 four-year colleges and universities do not use the SAT or ACT to admit substantial numbers of bachelor-degree applicants.”

This kind of political indoctrination does not help public education. Parents need to fight for quality education, not indoctrination.  Illiteracy is nothing to cheer about and the more this becomes acceptable, the more chances we have of dumbing down our public schools. 

Common Core Collaborators

Photo Credit: J. Sanna (CC-By-2.0)

Richard P. Phelps at the Nonpartisan Education Review provides an excellent resource. They offer five articles that provide a historical, financial and media analyses of the organization that spawned the Common Core State Standards, the two copyright holders, two of the paid proselytizers, and the delivery vehicle, where the reputed Common Core architect, David Coleman, now runs things where Phelps says he earns an annual salary of well over million dollars.

Here are the links to each article:

Do​ Advanced Placement Classes Help Students?

Photo Credit: J. Sanna (CC-By-2.0)

More students are taking Advanced Placement (AP), and more students are failing as a result as well, but some question whether taking AP helps students when they get to college. Are there better alternatives? 

The collective research on the subject is non-conclusive.

Amanda Zhou at Chalkbeat reports:

A new review of research provides a stark reminder that we simply don’t know the answer to that or a number of other important questions about AP courses, even as the program has become a more common part of the American high school experience.

Suneal Kolluri of the University of Southern California looked at over 50 studies of AP tests and classes that examine how they have expanded and whether they’ve equipped students with “college-level knowledge and skills.”

“AP is such an important element of high school for kids and teachers, and we don’t really understand how it’s impacting student experiences,” said Kolluri.

Unsurprisingly, students who score a 3 or higher on an AP exam do better in college. But, remarkably, there is virtually no research pinning down cause and effect — that is, whether taking AP courses actually helps students succeed. The association could be due to factors like a student’s high school quality or their own motivation.

Read the rest.

Since the research is inconclusive, one has to ask why schools are pushing AP over dual-enrolling in community college classes or taking a career tech class? 

My wife and I homeschooled all three of our children. All three of our kids, when they were juniors and seniors in high school, took classes at Des Moines Area Community College for high school AND college credit. My son went on to receive his EMT training, my oldest daughter finished an Associates Degree and graduated with honors from Hannibal LaGrange University in May.

My youngest daughter, and our last child at home, just graduated from high school with a CNA certification (taking that class from Central Campus with Des Moines Public Schools). She is well on her way to completing the general ed college credit she needs to enroll in a respected nursing program in our state (students have to earn general education credit elsewhere before transferring to the program).

There are other ways to get a leg up on college credit and college preparedness. College Board should not have a monopoly. 

Student Data For Sale

Natasha Singer in The New York Times wrote about how student data collected by the College Board through surveys connected with the SAT and PSAT.

I wanted to highlight an excerpt:

Three thousand high school students from across the United States recently trekked to a university sports arena here to attend an event with an impressive-sounding name: the Congress of Future Science and Technology Leaders. Many of their parents had spent $985 on tuition.

Months earlier, the teenagers had received letters, signed by a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, congratulating them on being nominated for “a highly selective national program honoring academically superior high school students.”

The students all had good grades. But many of them were selected for the event because they had once filled out surveys that they believed would help them learn about colleges and college scholarships.

Through their schools, many students in the audience had taken a college-planning questionnaire, called MyCollegeOptions. Others had taken surveys that came with the SAT or the PSAT, tests administered by the College Board. In filling out those surveys, the teenagers ended up signing away personal details that were later sold and shared with the future scientists event.

Read the rest.

She mentioned the U.S. Department of Education in May released guidance on this particular practice (which ACT does as well). This guidance recommended that schools make it clearer that pre-test surveys are optional. You can it below:

 

Students Want College Board to Rescore June SAT Results

After David Coleman took the helm of The College Board it just seems like they’ve had one controversy after another whether it is the revamping of the SAT or problems with their AP U.S. History and World History Frameworks, they keep having problems.

Now students are protesting the scoring from June’s SAT results.

The News & Observer reports:

Many students who took the SAT exam in June were surprised Wednesday to get back results that they thought were inaccurate because the score was lower than they thought. The College Board, which administers the SAT, told students that because versions of the exam given on different dates are easier than others, they use a statistical process called “equating” to grade the answers on a curve.

“Equating makes sure that a score for a test taken on one date is equivalent to a score from another date,” the College Board tweeted Thursday morning. “So, for example, a single incorrect answer on one administration could equal two or three incorrect answers on a more difficult version. The equating process ensures fairness for all students.”

The College Board’s response didn’t satisfy families who are using the results as part of the college application process. Students and parents took their complaints to social media with the hashtag #rescoreJuneSAT picking up momentum on Twitter.

Read the rest.

They note this comes at a time where the SAT has already lost ground to their rival, ACT.

What The College Board Does With Data Collected From PSAT & SAT

College Board President David Coleman announces the SAT redesign.

In schools all over the country, middle and high school students will soon take PSAT and SAT assessments. I’m a parent and after my child’s class was asked to take the PSAT 8/9 (given to eighth and ninth graders) this past October, I discovered that the College Board, owner of these assessments, solicits personal information from each student without parental consent.

Several weeks after the test, the College Board returned the completed PSAT answer sheets and test booklets to students once the exam had been scored and recorded. I was surprised to learn that the PSAT 8/9 answer sheet begins by asking many very personal questions of each student; though nowhere on the form or booklet does it say these questions are optional.

The PSAT 8/9 instructions printed on the answer sheet said only this:

  • Use a Number 2 pencil only. Print the requested information in the boxes for each item.
  • Fill in the matching circle below what you write in each box. Erase errors completely.
  • In very fine print, at the top of Page 4 on the answer sheet, it states:                                                                                                              “QUESTIONS TO HELP THE COLLEGE BOARD HELP YOU — Your answers to the following questions will help the College Board ensure that tests and service are fair and useful to all students. Your responses may be used for research purposes and may be shared with your high school, school district and state.”

The answer sheet had spaces for the student’s name, grade level, sex, date of birth, student ID number or Social Security number, race/ethnic group, military relation, home address, email address, mobile phone,  grade point average, courses taken, and parents’ highest level of education.

If parents or students were to take it upon themselves to peruse the College Board website, they would find a page which urges students to participate in the College Board’s Student Search Service. See the table below for a list of the data that is potentially collected and shared, depending on the specific College Board assessment — SAT, PSAT or Advanced Placement.   Many of these questions are also asked of students right before they take the exam, as part of the Student Data Questionnaire.

As you can see, among students’ personal information collected and possibly sold includes citizenship — a particular concern given the increased risk that undocumented students may be identified and targeted by immigration officials. In New York City, apparently because of these concerns, public schools that are administering the SAT have now been alerted not to include the Student Questionnaire as part of the test.

After searching the College Board website, I contacted the College Board and asked why students are being asked about their family’s race, religion or military background. What does the College Board do with this personal data? Who specifically do they share data with? You can see my questions and the confusing and evasive response from the College Board here.

It took the College Board over three months to answer. Additionally, my immediate follow up questions sent two months ago, which include asking whether they sell student data and whether it is required for students to provide their religion, are still unanswered.

In their January response, the College Board claimed that students were told which questions were optional and that students had given “express consent” to share this information. In actuality, after talking to students, parents, and administrators at the school, it was clear they were unaware that these questions were optional. Additionally, Colorado law saysstudents must be at least 18 years old to consent to the use, sharing, or retention of their personally identifiable information.

Neither the PSAT 8/9 answer sheet or test booklet informed students that most of these questions were optional, or distinguished them from the obligatory questions, demanding they fill out their name, school, etc. In fact, the “optional” questions are not identified in the PSAT 8/9 Supervisor Manual or the script which proctors are instructed to follow.

However, according to the College Board’s response to my query, only the first five questions on the answer sheet are obligatory, including student name, grade level, sex, date of birth, and student ID numberThe remainder of personal questions, including race, religion, military background, GPA, home address, phone, etc. are optional.

When sitting down to take this high-stakes test, how is a student able to know which questions are considered voluntary if this is not clearly marked or communicated? With the answer sheet instructions stating to fill in every box, students tend to follow suit, fearing that an incomplete answer sheet could render their scores invalid. Why does the College Board even have a space for a student’s social security number in place of student ID number, when most states forbid using social security numbers as primary identifiers? Why aren’t parents asked for consent before information about their child’s attitudes, religion and race are collected and apparently shared, accessed by outside organizations via purchased license according to the College Board website?

Under federal Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, sensitive questions such as religion or income require prior informed parental consent.

Remarkably, there is no federal law prohibiting the sale of personal student data. However, there is a self-policed software industry privacy pledge in which signers promise not to sell a student’s personal information. The College Board has signed this pledge.

In addition, like many other states that have recently enacted student data privacy laws, Colorado’s student data transparency and security law alsoprohibits vendors from selling personal student data except in the case of a merger or acquisition. Accordingly, the amended contract between the state of Colorado and the College Board for SAT and PSAT 10 (the PSAT for 10th graders) expressly says that the “contractor shall not knowingly….License or sell Covered Information, including PII  to any third party.” PII means personally identifiable information.

Consider the astonishing amount of data collected on students today. In particular, think of the data collected and analyzed when students take a college entrance assessment. Many states now require high school students to take the SAT in eleventh grade. Some states, districts, or individual schools require students to take the PSAT assessment in eighth, ninth or tenth grades in hopes of improving their scores later on the SAT.

However, what many parents and schools do not know is that their student’s personal data, including “geographic, attitudinal and behavioral information” can be profiled and accessed by organizations via a license they purchase from the College Board. Yet the College Board’s privacy policy to parents and students claims they do not sell student data. Rather, they sell a license to access a student’s personal data. What is the difference? Indeed, this distinction seems only semantical.

The College Board sells licenses to access the data through a tagging service called College Board Search. The Segment Analysis Service™ is one of three featured tools of the Search, along with the Enrollment Planning Service™, and the Student Search Service®. These are “enhanced tools for smart recruitment.” The College Board’s Authorized Usage Policies states, “Student Search Service in connection with a legally valid program that takes such characteristics into account in furtherance of attaining a diverse student body.”

The pricing for the College Board Search student data tagging service is$0.42 cents per student, and allows college admission professionals to identify prospective students based on factors such as zip code and race and to Leverage profiles of College Board test-takers for all states, geomarkets, and high schools.”

Segment Analysis Services is “for admission offices that need market and attitudinal information early in the recruitment process in order to better segment and target the admission pool,” and “Use Educational Neighborhood and High School Clusters as criteria when licensing names with Student Search Service, Access individual cluster factor scores. Tag an unlimited number of files…”

Which organizations buy personal student data licenses from the College Board? They are not listed anywhere on the website. A New York Civil Liberties Union fact sheet reveals that the Department of Defense is among the institutions which buys student data for recruiting purposes.

The College Board, ostensibly a non-profit, had $77 million in profits and $834 million in net assets in 2015,  according to Reuters. How much of that income  was garnered through the licensing of student data?

Why is the College Board allowed to share personal student data through the Student Search Service, in which companies are charged via a “license agreement” if this is specifically prohibited by Colorado law?

Is the College Board selling personal student data in other states, through their “license” agreements, despite having signed the student privacy pledge?

 Interestingly, since I’ve started asking questions to the College Board and the state, the College Board recently sent home Student Data Consent Forms for the PSAT 10 and SAT to some Colorado families the week of March 6, 2017. This is a good first step and should have been done prior to students taking the PSAT 8/9 assessment last fall.

However, there is no parent signature required on these new consent forms. Why is the College Board still asking for consent from a minor student and not the parent?

Here is an excerpt of the new SAT consent form sent home to Colorado students:

The SAT Student Data Questionnaire asks students about their personal attitudes and interests.

The Colorado contract with the College Board for SAT and PSAT10 states the following about this Student Descriptive Questionnaire:

Curiously,  the SAT Consent Form links to instructions for the College Board’s Student Data Questionnaire which say, “The data you provide will be added to your College Board student record, even if you choose to not participate in Student Search Service.” What personal information is being “added” to a student’s record and what is the purpose? Can that information still be licensed and shared?

As reported by independent consultant Nancy Griesemer in 2015, ACT also has a lengthy pre-test survey that collects personal data from students which, combined with other data, is being used by colleges and universities to assess the student’s “Overall GPA Chances of Success” in various majors and courses, measured in terms of likely to receive “B” or “C” or in these areas. You can see what these scores look like on this updated sample ACT report. (Notice this ACT report also includes the student’s citizenship status.)

As discussed in The Washington Post last year, there’s still a lot students and parents need to know about how data is collected, shared, and accessed via licenses sold. And as Politico reported in 2014:

Many kids also put their personal profiles on the market — whether they realize it or not — when they take college entrance exams. Students taking the SAT, ACT, Advanced Placement exams and other standardized tests are asked to check off a box if they want to receive information from colleges or scholarship organizations. Depending on the exam, at least 65 percent — and as many as 85 percent — of test takers check that box, according to the College Board and ACT. That consent allows the College Board and ACT, both nonprofits, to market students’ personal profiles…

That struck me as almost predatory, playing on students’ hopes and fears by having them surrender their personal data. So, I wrote to the College Board and asked this: “What happens if students do NOT give their data to Student Search? Will this limit their ability to get into colleges? Will they still be considered for scholarships?

The answer from the College Board is important for every student, parent and school administrator to hear: “If a student does not opt in to Student Search Service it will not impact their chances at being accepted into colleges or scholarship programs in any way.”   This should be printed on instructions, every test booklet, and website.

My experiences as a Colorado parent show that this frustrating lack of transparency still exists today. And it’s getting worse as  data and algorithms are being increasingly used to make decisions about students’ lives, without their knowledge. These algorithms can analyze and recombine data to make predictions about their futures. As an article in “Fast Company” reveals, students’ data footprints are affecting their lives in ways they can’t even imagine:

…Even major life decisions like college admissions and hiring are being affected. You might think that a college is considering you on your merits, and while that’s mostly true, it’s not entirely. Pressured to improve their rankings, colleges are very interested in increasing their graduation rates and the percentage of admitted students who enroll. They have nowhave developed statistical programs to pick students who will do well on these measures. These programs may take into account obvious factors like grades, but also surprising factors like their sex, race, and behavior on social media accounts. If your demographic factors or social media presence happen to doom you, you may find it harder to get into school—and not know why.

Despite much opposition, a 2011  regulatory change to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, FERPA,  weakened this federal law that once protected student information from being shared without consent.  FERPA needs to be fixed and parents need to be given back their rights to consent to student data sharing. State laws as well as the Student Privacy Pledge need to be scrupulously enforced so that personal student data is not sold for profit. Bottom line, parents and students after they reach 18 should own and control their own data. They should have a say as to whether and how personal information about their child is shared outside of the school walls.

Beware, SAT Season is Here

Many school districts in the state of Washington administer the SAT to all of their 10th or 11th grade students.  School districts in other states may do the same.  Check your school and district calendars for SAT administration dates if it is administered at your local high schools.

Unwittingly, the majority of students provide personal information to the College Board that they don’t need to provide. It is supposed to be voluntary but students may not realize that or they don’t give any thought to what may be done with the information they provide. It is possible they are duped into providing this information.

Students may be asked to provide their social security number, religious affiliation, citizenship, family income, ethnicity, and other information that is not required in order to take the test.

The College Board eventually sells the student data they collect.

For more information read the Washington Post’s What your child needs to know before taking the SAT and ACT. This is also on the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy website.

I wonder if school administrators and school board members really know what information students are being asked to provide. If they really knew and cared, I would hope they would do something to stop this practice of data collection and protect student privacy. I wonder if taxpayers would support the administration of these tests in our schools if they knew the extent of the data being collected and that the College Board sells it.

The Parent Coalition for Student Privacy has a SAT Pre-Test checklist.

  1. On Thursday or Friday, talk to your children about the importance of providing only the personal information necessary to take the test, and show them the SAT’s Student Search Service ™ screenshot below so they know what it might look like and which box to select (No, thanks.);
  2. Encourage them to go to bed early Friday night, get plenty of rest, and set the alarm (AM, not PM!);
  3. Serve a nutritious breakfast Saturday morning to your children and remind them to bring a photo ID, the “admission ticket,” NO. 2 pencils and an acceptable calculator from the College Board’s Test Day checklist;
  4. Remind them NOT to volunteer any personal information other than what is required like name, address, school, date of birth, etc., and that there is no reason to offer up their Social Security number, religious affiliation, family income, or other extraneous information. They should also CHECK the “No, thanks” box if there is one in the Student Search Service ™ section.
  5. Reassure them to relax and just do their best on the exam itself.

The Parent Coalition for Student Privacy also has Five Principles to Protect Student Privacy that you may want to become familiar with.

This article is being re-posted here with permission from The Underground Parent.

We Don’t Want Betsy DeVos Banning Curriculum

I just received this email from a reader and I wanted to use it as a teachable moment.

It read in part…

“Can Mrs. Devos work quickly to do something with the AP History for high school seniors?  There has been so much indoctrination going on that it seems we need to get rid of this curriculum as quickly as we can and I might also say replace David Coleman on the College Board.”

I share the reader’s disdain for the changes made in the AP U.S. History and World History frameworks. I also haven’t been impressed with David Coleman’s time at leading the College Board. It’s not really a topic that we address here at Truth in American Education, but I’ve addressed it at Caffeinated Thoughts. I share the reader’s frustration.

My first question would be what, exactly, do we want Secretary DeVos to do?

Based on how she followed-up the question with “it seems we need to get rid of this curriculum” does this mean some would like Secretary DeVos to do something to that end?

Fortunately federal law prohibits her from taking such action.

This question goes along with the statement that we want the feds to repeal Common Core. No, I want them to defund it. I want them to assure states that they can repeal it without penalty. I would like to see Secretary DeVos and President Trump use their bully pulpit to speak out against Common Core (and Next Generation Science Standards for that matter), but I don’t want them to tell a state they have to repeal them.

This would be federal overreach in the opposite direction and it is just as unconstitutional.

If the federal government has the power to ban curriculum or standards we don’t like like then they can do the same with curriculum and standards we do like.

So can Betsy DeVos work quickly to do something with AP History for high school seniors?

No, not really. There are two primary things we can do: 1. We can boycott AP courses and anything to do with College Board and 2. encourage our states to adopt alternatives to Advanced Placement. Also look additional things colleges will accept so your student can receive either credit or to be able to opt-out of some general education requirements when they get to school.

The Destructive Capacity of David Coleman

David Coleman announces the SAT redesign.

David Coleman announces the SAT redesign.

Since Common Core architect David Coleman took over as president of the College Board, the scandals or at least embarrassments have come fast and furious (see here and here). The latest is a Reuters investigation, reported by EdWeek, that discovered the College Board’s vaunted redesign of the SAT math section erects even more hurdles to students who traditionally score lower anyway (low-income and minority students). This is because the new math section focuses more on reading than actually working math problems, so a student who is good at math but less so at reading will score lower on math than he would have under the traditional SAT design.

The problem is the new SAT’s alignment with the Common Core national standards. The Common Core math standards are based on the idea that knowing math is insufficient; a student must be able to read a tome and apply math skills to the supposed “real-life” problem it presents. (The engineers who brought the Apollo 13 astronauts home on a crippled spacecraft somehow managed to apply their antiquated math education to a real-world problem, but pay no attention to that.) While the text-heavy approach may work for strong readers, turning a math test into a reading test creates unnecessary problems for students who traditionally don’t score as well on the SAT anyway.

From reviewing internal emails, Reuters discovered that College Board officials “knew of the potential problem with the word-heavy math questions because outside academics raised the issue as they reviewed items while they were being developed.” And in a confidential 2014 test run, only about half the students even finished the math section.

Maybe Coleman and Co. intended to correct the problem, but apparently they never got around to it. Or maybe they’re so invested in the Common Core ideology of “deeper conceptual understanding” that they simply don’t care.

So assume the situation of an immigrant student (call him Carlos) whose family speaks Spanish at home. Assume he’s a math whiz but still struggles with English, because he’s been in the country only five or six years. With the old SAT he might have performed poorly on the verbal portion but scored an 800 on the math. With the new test, he’ll perform poorly on both. Well done, Mr. Coleman.

Not only will Carlos suffer from this ideological redesign, but his school may as well. This is because the new fed-ed bill, the Every Student Succeeds Act, allows states to replace their high-school achievement tests with the SAT. The ramifications of the redesign are thus troubling both for Carlos and for honest accountability for schools.

Dr. Sandra Stotsky raised a related concern years ago about Common Core math, in that case with respect to children in the early grades. Since Common Core applies the word-heavy approach across K-12, young children are also expected to read paragraphs rather than simply grasp math calculations. This means, Dr. Stotsky warned, that many little boys might struggle with math even if they have a gift for numbers – because little boys are generally less verbal than little girls. Johnny might be proud that he can work math problems more quickly than anyone in the class, but don’t worry, Common Core will beat that sense of accomplishment out of him.

Common Core theorists call this “productive struggle.” Normal people might call it academic malpractice. By all means, let’s extend it to teenagers as well.

The Common Core realignment of the SAT math section will hurt low-income students in other ways. In a Pioneer Institute report, mathematician James Milgram and testing expert Richard Phelps explained that aligning the SAT with Common Core essentially converts it from a test predicting college success to one that simply measures high-school achievement. These experts pointed out that an achievement test is less effective at identifying students with significant STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) potential who attend schools with inferior science and math programs. And the Common Core math standards – which stop with an incomplete Algebra II course – will ensure that many schools, especially those serving low-income students, will have such inferior programs.

Michael Cohen, a prominent developer of and cheerleader for Common Core, testified several years ago that we won’t know the full effects of Common Core “until an entire cohort of students, from kindergarten through high school graduation, has been effectively exposed to Common Core teaching.” Having already lowered national test scores, increased the achievement gap, driven excellent teachers out of the profession, and now wrecked the SAT, it looks like Common Core is ahead of schedule. Mr. Cohen underestimated the destructive capacity of Mr. Coleman.

Blame the Textbooks for Poor Common Core Implementation!

Photo credit: World Economic Forum (CC-By-SA 2.0)

Gates funds the standards, funds reviews of the standards, and now funds reviews of the textbooks.
Photo credit: World Economic Forum (CC-By-SA 2.0)

EdReports.org reviewed five high Common Core-aligned math textbooks in their first round of reviews and found only one textbook was “aligned.”

  • College Board – nope.
  • Houghton Mifflin Harcourt – nope.
  • Pearson – nope.
  • Carnegie Learning – partial credit for “focus and rigor,” but nope.
  • The CPM Learning Program was the only textbook deemed “Common Core-aligned”

Pearson wasn’t happy with the review because obviously this isn’t good for the bottom line.

They wrote:

Our analysis of the EdReports evaluations of Pearson Integrated High School Mathematics Common Core ©2014 shows that the EdReports evaluations continue to be plagued by inaccuracies, misunderstandings of program instructional models, misinterpretations of the both the intent and the expectation of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and the Publisher’s Criteria, and a lack of understanding of effective curriculum development and pedagogy. Pearson Education and its authors consider the EdReports evaluation an incomplete, invalid, and unreliable reporting of the quality of the program and of its alignment to the expectations of the CCSS-M.

This group recently said all of the K-8 math textbooks reviewed were not “Common Core-aligned.”

Look here is all you need to know about EdReports.org. They received just shy of $1.5 million in 2015 from the Gates Foundation (by way of the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, Inc.) for operating support “to enable them to build their core priorities of publishing reviews of instructional materials, and to grow their operations and capacity to include teacher feedback of such materials.”

See if all the textbooks are bad then they can blame the poor implementation of Common Core on the textbooks, not the standards themselves.  They have already started that narrative. See teachers just need better resources, not new standards… Nothing to see here folks, just ignore the clear conflict of interest.