INTASC Standard #1
The teacher intern understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful to students.
NCTE Standard 3.1
I demonstrate my knowledge and skills in the English language in this paper. It was a group research paper where we had to write clearly, for a purpose, and in proper research paper format.
INTASC Standard #9
The teacher intern is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his or her choices and actions on others (students, parents, and other professionals in the learning community) and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
NCTE Standard 3.2.2
Our group used inquiry (research) to write this paper. We also were reflecting on issues present in education today.
Cohort 4 Research Paper
Kristin, Lisa F., Lisa D., Chris, & Jim
Education for Profit
Typical schools today are in competition with other entities that have formed and grown over the last half a century. These entities are businesses; they make money based on their marketing to the public, and they all declare their purpose to be furthering an individual’s education and therefore, improving life. Some organizations target young children and can be seen as another mere toy company; some target postgraduates and are considered universities. With the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act, there is national concern with improving the quality of education; and some people are now driven to other methods of instruction outside of their present institution. This paper will explore the many forms of education-based organizations: Kaplan, Sylvan, Knowledge Universe, Phoenix University, and ETS; and describe their impact on student achievement. These organizations are controversial but, for now, here to stay.
Kaplan is a for-profit education service designed to aide students in their everyday learning. This organization has been around for almost 70 years and originally began in the test preparation service. As Kaplan grew, it expanded its customer base to include those of all ages. Covering this age range has divided Kaplan into four main cohorts: Kids and school, Test Prep and Admissions, Higher Education, and Professional. The Kids and school sector works with students in grades K-10 and has study skills, summer programs, personal tutoring, and academic programs to enhance the learning of this age group. The Test Prep and Admissions area deals with what Kaplan was originally founded on, preparing students for benchmark testing. With the incorporation of NCLB and state standardized testing, Kaplan has woven test taking skills, specific to these tests, into their offerings. Higher Education by Kaplan offers programs for undergraduate, graduate, continuing education, and diploma/certificate programs. Kaplan University is the sounding board for which all the above resonates from. Lastly, the Professional area deals with career movers that have had a goal switch in their careers. Kaplan offers opportunities to educate and license those who wish to change jobs and take a different path resulting from a life/career goal change. Lifelong learning and achieving career goals are at the top of the list for performance outcomes at Kaplan.
Kaplan's ties with public education go through the Kids and school part of their corporation. The SCORE! program operates within Kaplan Education Centers and is designed around smaller class sizes resulting in more one on one attention. It also offers students a tailored education program done through computer software designed to assess where the student's specific strengths and weaknesses are. Students that wish to have even smaller class sizes (less than seven students per session) may partake in the Personal Academic Tutoring which offers the same as the Advantage Program mentioned above, but with a richer one on one experience.
Kaplan also offers educators and school systems help with improving test scores. The goal here is to aide districts and teachers with the NCLB requirements for public education. Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) is the targeted improvement area and this is done by offering enhanced lessons for specific topics and test taking skills to implement in the classroom. Kaplan also provides information and supplemental material on the most tested items on standardized tests as well as basic fundamental lessons for at-risk students. Test taking strategies are also offered to students and not just educators within the school system as well as study aides and study skill materials that make up the standardized test prep program. With Kaplan being founded on the test preparation service, the adjustment to providing services based on standardized test help is second nature to this organization. Specifically to high school, Kaplan offers the SAT, Pre-SAT, ACT, and AP test prep to aide in the college admissions process. "Higher mental functioning is mediated by tools and signs." (Wertsch, 114) Kaplan offers an array of resources to help students in their learning matters. First and foremost Kaplan has a highly navigable website (www.kaplan.com) that is clear and concise on their goals and what they offer to students of all ages and learning capabilities. The SCORE! program has 165 learning centers spread across 11 states (California, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia) for students. This provides ample opportunity for students to get help when they need it, if they are within the state for which these centers are located in.
Within these centers, Kaplan has the software and technology to assess student understanding and find out where the student has weaknesses and strengths. Once the weaknesses are found, the software can then customize the education experience for each student and give them exactly what they need to succeed in the classroom. Of course all of this would be null and void if there were not expert instruction to go along with the software. Kaplan employs expert teachers to help guide students in their studies. The ability to have enough experts to lower class sizes is an additional value that helps improve test scores and student confidence. The expert teachers also can help restructure "and reconceptualize knowledge about a topic." (Norman, 40). Probably one of the most advanced resources Kaplan has is its online infrastructure for Kaplan University. Here students from across the globe can take classes and attain what they would like that would help them succeed at whatever career route they wish.
Kaplan is very clear about its goals and objectives for its students: academic progress. Kaplan emphasizes confidence building within its program. This is done through one on one instruction from quality teachers and positive feedback on test scores and assignments. It also recognizes that "knowledge does not and cannot have the purpose of producing representations of an independent reality, but instead has an adaptive function" (von Glasersfeld, 3). In other words Kaplan is helping students adapt to their learning opportunities and create a successful student. Also, key to academic progress is goal setting for the students. This goes a lot farther than just improving test scores, but to making a successful lifelong learner, one of the ultimate goals of Kaplan.
For the higher education goals, there is a strong emphasis on globalizing the student body. Kaplan practices what it preaches here with Kaplan University and its world wide capabilities and online classes and degree/certificate opportunities. It also is dedicated to bringing the job market to the student, therefore, course offerings and course objectives are aligned with today's job and career objectives. As for the Professional crowd, Kaplan offers many different career shift and career advancement test prep programs. Whether you decide to change career goals or want to climb the ladder in the current job field you are in, Kaplan most likely has the program capable of getting you to where you want to be.
Since Kaplan offers test prep and study help to all ages, it is difficult to see if there is one area for which it is strongest in. The Kaplan website does offer insight into the division of the four sectors with regard to the specific businesses that make up the corporation. The Higher Ed sector has the largest piece of the Kaplan pie and since Kaplan University falls under the Higher Ed sector, it makes sense that this would be the biggest piece with the revenue and offerings Kaplan U has. Although not number one, the original piece of Kaplan, Test prep, is tied with the Professional sector for second on the business list. The K-10 (SCORE!) piece falls last. The website does not give any reason for why all this is, but revenue probably plays a big role in the allocation of resources and materials. Test prep is a huge market with the amount of students that take college admissions tests and graduate/professional licensing tests. These are expensive tests followed with expensive prep programs. The Professional area involves steps up the ladder or career change, both occupied by adults drawing paychecks and can afford to pay a healthy sum of money to prepare themselves for a promotion or career oriented life change. The majority of K-10 students does not make money and rely on their parents to pay for their study help, which could result in lower revenue when compared to the other groups. With today's economy and push for education and constant learning, it looks as though Kaplan has a mainstay on the education market and will be here for many more years to come.
“Once considered a lifeline for underachievers and learning-disabled students, tutoring has become a $4 billion industry that increasingly caters to students in the academic mainstream. It's growing by 15 percent annually”, reports Boston-based Eduventures, an education market research firm.
The first Sylvan Learning Center was established in 1979. Baltimore-based, this organization is in the supplemental tutoring business with more than 1200 franchised and company-owned centers located in the United States alone. They deliver personalized tutoring programs, test preparation, supplemental, remedial and enrichment instruction; early reading, math and study skills programs for children in grades pre-K-12, as well as test-prep for college entrance and state exams.
Certified teachers go through the Sylvan’s specialized training program before providing personalized instruction. Sylvan’s teaching techniques are “patented”. Sylvan as a brand name has expanded: Sylvan, Sylvan Ventures, Sylvan Learning Systems, Sylvan Learning Centers, Sylvan Learning Center, Sylvan At Work, Sylvan At School, and Sylvan Prep. The newest addition is Sylvan Online. All of these and the Sylvan logo are registered trademarks of the parent company Educate, Inc (NASDAQ: EEEE).
Christopher Hoehn-Saric is the Chairman and CEO of Educate, Inc. In his noteworthy entrepreneurial career he co-founded Sterling Capital, Ltd., an investment company that acquired the predecessor to Sylvan Learning Systems, Inc. Current subsidiaries of Educate, Inc. include:
1. Hooked on Phonics; this system has been used by some two million beginning readers and includes “Learn to Read," for children ages 3 - 7, and Master Reader," for children ages 7 - 14. Packages costs anywhere from $24.99 to $249.99; the system includes CD-ROMs, cassettes, flash cards, books, and parent guides.
2. The Catapult Learning division partners with schools and school districts to deliver supplemental education services, including those called for through the enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).
3. Progressus Therapy, Inc. brings professional speech-language, occupational, and physical therapists to the school for early intervention programs. It is owned by Catapult Learning.
Why do children need tutoring in the first place? “We all have our learning styles, strength and weakness … But in children with learning problems a particular combination of weaknesses and strength is disruptive to learning. This is true even though the weaknesses may be quite subtle. These children typically do not discover on their own how most effectively to use their strengths to compensate for their weaknesses. They usually need help in developing learning strategies that are the best ones for them”. (Novick & Arnold, 74)
Before beginning tutoring, a child undergoes an assessment: the Sylvan Skills Assessment, which is comprised of standardized tests, diagnostic tools and personal interviews. This provides the blueprint for the child’s individual program; material is selected from the standardized learning material available. Regular re-testing is also part of the program and Sylvan touts it as a confidence builder and to show the parent that the child is on track.
A local Sylvan Learning Center was started in 1991 as a franchise. According to the facility manager each teacher works with a maximum of three students at any given time. Tokens are given for effort in doing the work. The tokens can be spent on things from candy bars to CD players, thus teaching some real-life skills like banking and saving money for a bigger buy. The main focus is 4th through 8th graders. Children stay on average for 70-80 hours of tutoring. Suggested time is 100-140 hours. Ethnic background of the students is mixed. Math and reading are the mainstay courses. As the main benefits the manager cited: motivation, confidence, self-esteem. This center does not participate in Sylvan online courses; during e-learning there is no control other than parental control (over which Sylvan has no say), and teachers will not know who provided the coursework.
Even before the implementation of NCLB, Sylvan Education Solutions was becoming the nation's leading provider of supplemental education, but today the learning disabled and underachievers are no longer the mainstream of students. Standardized state tests and the headlines about failing schools have increased concerns from parents. The result can be a questionable definition of who needs help. As Sylvan’s vice president for education, Richard E Bavaria, said, ''A struggling kid might be a straight-A student who just got her first B."
There also is a push to tutor ever-younger pupils. Not content to wait until first grade more parents are flocking to supplemental education centers that have sprouted like Starbucks in communities around the country. Last fall Sylvan rolled out an early reading program aimed at 3-5 year-olds.
Tutoring does not come cheap. Students pay $40.00 to $55.00 an hour, while the teachers are being paid anywhere between $8.00 and $12.00 an hour. (Christopher Hoehn-Sarics’ earnings are reported to be $ 483.000). In general teachers tutor 3-5 students in an hour and most students come at least twice a week. According to one Sylvan operator: “If teacher’s wages seems too low, please keep in mind that teachers work only part time, have no preparation to do, no homework to grade, no other "teacher" duties ... If money is all that you are after Sylvan may not be for you. If you want to make a difference in a student's life, come in and fill out an application.”
The stampede toward learning centers troubles many educators and researchers. All agree that early language skills predict later reading success, and some are advising parents to talk to their children and read to them. “After a great deal of systematic study, we now know that there are three fundamental dimensions of parenting that differentiate… the home environments of children who are successful in school from those who are not: acceptance versus rejection, firmness versus leniency and autonomy versus control” (Steinberg, 106). Turning parental disengagement into involvement greatly increases student learning.
Supplemental tutoring is no longer private business. According to J. Mark Jackson, Eduventures' senior analyst for the K-12 market, NCLB could potentially put $220 million in federal funds into private and for-profit tutoring and other extra educational services for students in low-performing schools in this year alone. The total could top $1 billion and Sylvan is tapping into this through Catapult Learning: they opened new schools and community-based centers; and by 2002- 2003 delivered NCLB supplemental education services to more than 70,000 students in 900 urban schools across 150 districts in 24 states.
The business of education is booming. Private ownership of schools from kindergarten to 12th grade may never be the norm, but the market for supplemental educational materials, such as software, Internet tools, and educational toys, is growing. Knowledge Universe, masterminded by ex-felon Michael Milken, has recognized the growing interest of education facilities in technology and has made investments in multiple areas that affect education as it aims to be the first super brand in the emerging industry of for-profit education.
Knowledge Universe (KU), which oversees approximately 50 companies, maintains a presence in virtually all aspects of play, education, and work. KU’s goal is to court learners from “the cradle to the grave.” Young children will play with KU toys and enjoy KU-produced programs on television. Some children will progress to KU preschools and schools that use KU brand curricular and instructional material. Graduates can obtain an MBA through Cardean University, which is an online company owned and operated by U.Next (owner of Knowledge University—a subsidiary of Knowledge Universe.) Teachers can attend conferences or find lesson plans through services offered by KU. Parents and grandparents can use KU online by using ParentsEdge and GrandparentsEdge (part of Knowledge Kids Network), which provide child-rearing and child-interaction information.
From parents and pre-schoolers to post-secondary education and professional training, Milken (through KU) has targeted them all in order to make a profit. He has also laid the framework to link them through e-learning space. In the past a KU brochure stated that the mission of KU is to help build capital from birth to post-retirement: to provide lifelong learning opportunities for individuals and businesses and to help businesses to better utilize the power of their human capital (Bracey, 2004). All this may explain why KU has acquired such a variety of IT training companies, a chain of child-care centers, a knowledge-management consulting business and an educational toy maker.
It is early childhood development and K-12 that Milken has made several large profits or advancements. KU has started, acquired, or invested in several pre-school through middle-school companies that provide online curricula, testing, test preparation, tutoring, and school management. Because of the interest of Lowell Milken (brother of Michael and co-founder of Knowledge Universe) in early childhood education, the company found and bought Children’s Discovery Centers (a chain of 170 preschool and day-care centers), took the company private, and began to build the curriculum by introducing technology. KU changed the name of CDC to Knowledge Beginnings and began to work with corporate clients to meet the education and the day-care needs of their employees and children.
Milken has also profited through early childhood development by integrating LeapFrog Enterprises into the KU network of K-12 companies. LeapFrog, the developer of interactive learning toys, was originally built around a product invented by a lawyer whose child was having difficulties learning to read. After becoming part of the KU network, the company’s profits began to skyrocket, in part to due the fact that KU enabled LeapFrog to run television commercials and to spread its message by paying for calls on influential educational experts (not to mention all the children who saw the product on TV and wanted one for themselves).
With the aide of KU, Leapfrog has become the third largest toy company in the world. The company has a product line that includes multiple products that claim to aide in learning by using software and technology. LeapFrog SchoolHouse is the school products division of LeapFrog that KU says was developed in response to requests from educators to customize LeapFrog’s educational platforms for the classroom. LeapFrog SchoolHouse claims that its programs offer a comprehensive curriculum, are based on empirical research, provide more learning modes and a greater range of feedback, as well as include assessment capabilities.
LeapFrog SchoolHouse also has pioneered a program called “Leap into Literacy,” was “designed with the classroom teacher in mind.” With claims to be a hands-on multi-sensory curriculum, providing direct instruction in early comprehension skills for reading and ELL, it has been adopted by the California State Board of Education for Phonological Awareness. Other LeapFrog SchoolHouse products being marketed to KU schools, as well as other educational institutions include: The LeapPad, The LeapMat, direct.mail, and The LeapDesk. The LeapDesk also aides in reading and provides immediate feedback on the tasks children complete. Through an adaptive teaching mode, The LeapDesk is supposed to create a lesson for the student based on his/her skill levels. With an included assessment feature, The LeapDesk allows up to eight different tests to be administered to up to 40 students as well as for written reports. The company advertises that the program can be used to support and reinforce any language instruction taking place in K-2 classrooms and leads to effective teaching of 18 standards.
But while the word “educational” may be splashed throughout the advertising, no broad studies have been used to assess whether these toys actually teach anything. So far, research on such toys has consisted only of small experiments with small sample sizes. For many child development experts, the toys’ effectiveness is not as important as what they feel my be happening to a child’s imaginative playtime as a result of spending long lengths of time in structured lessons created be these “electronic learning aides.” Others express concern about the possibility of children who spend long hours playing with these interactive toys suffering delays in both social and intellectual development through their lack of interaction with another person.
After the federal No Child Left Behind Act there has been a huge growth in the tutoring industry as parents and schools search for ways to make sure their children are at or above grade-level; therefore, in addition to marketing their interactive educational toys as teaching/educational aides to be used in schools, LeapFrog Enterprises Inc (a part of the Knowledge Universe network) has coupled with Educate Inc to open learning centers inside retail stores such as Wal-Mart. Kids can attend tutoring sessions while their parents shop. This program was created in an attempt to tap a wide audience that cannot afford the costs of more comprehensive tutoring assistance at Sylvan Learning Center.
Not only has Knowledge Universe (i.e. Michael Milken) influenced early childhood development, but KU also has key holdings in several other educational related companies. Picking up on NEA’s studies that show most teachers lack computer skills, KU started a new company called Teacher Universe. KU also has major holdings in K-12 which is a Web-based elementary and secondary school being developed in McLean, Virginia by former U. S. Secretary of Education William Bennett. U.Next is an online learning company that offers pre MBA and MBA programs through a consortium of schools and is also primarily owned by KU.
With Knowledge Universe’s goal to influence learning from “cradle to the grave,” Milken (through KU) has targeted children, grandparents, universities, and professionals. His influence can be seen in most stages of educational development. And most importantly, it is probably he who has profited the most.
More on the “grave” end of learning there is Phoenix University, which has been featured in nearly every recent commentary on for-profit higher education. It is the first, and often the only, example given of the sector, and its activities and operations are studied and talked about more than any other for-profit institution. Compared to this single university, little attention is paid to the rest.
Despite all the attention to the institution over the last few years, profit-making institutions have always been part of the spectrum of postsecondary education in the United States, and scholars have been studying them off and on for more than a century. In the 1800s, for-profit schools were the dominant form of business education, enrolling a substantial number of students in nearly every major city in the United States. By 1890, the U.S. Bureau of Education counted 250 “private business colleges” enrolling more than 81,000 students. Considering that traditional colleges and universities served 157,000 students that same year, the for-profit sector was a major educational presence in the 19th century. These for-profit schools remain the foundation of the sector today, with well over 100 institutions that can trace their origins back a century or more (Kinser, 2005).
Phoenix, on the other hand, was founded in 1976 and thus is still in its adolescence. Like an adolescent, it has an anti-establishment streak and enjoys its “us-vs.-them” relationship with traditional higher education (Miller, 2004). Founder John Sperling’s story of the university’s origin is truly one of nonconformity and confrontation.
Phoenix is national in scope. As the non-conformist, relative newcomer to the for-profit world, Phoenix’s originality lies in how it conducts its business as a university. It represents the development of large, regionally accredited degree-granting institutions in a non-profit sector that is dominated both historically and currently, by small, lower-level institutions authorized by states and national career and technical accrediting agencies (Recker, 2005).
Its enrollment is four times that of the next for-profit competitor. More than 230,000 students attend the University of Phoenix, compared to an enrollment of 55,000 at DeVry University. Phoenix dominates its market, enrolling 20% of all students in the degree-granting, for-profit sector and awards 40% of the sector’s four-year and graduate degrees. It maintains more than 170 locations across the United States.
In contrast, more than 300 non-profits operate as single-campus institutions, and most of the rest have fewer than five locations. The multi-state distribution of the University of Phoenix is also unusual. Of the other institutions with more than one campus, 90% operate in three or fewer states. With campuses in 37 states, the University of Phoenix is one of the few for-profit institutions with a truly national presence (Kinser, 2005).
How the University of Phoenix grows is as significant as its growth. There has been essentially no change in average campus enrollment at the University of Phoenix since 1999, remaining at around 700 students at each location. Instead, historically, Phoenix has expanded by establishing new campuses. Bur now, even growth attributed to new locations is modest compared to the increase in Phoenix’s distance-education division. Adding 52 new locations between 1999 and 2003 resulted in 39,000 new students. During this same time period, distance education grew by 70,000 students (Miller, 2004).
Phoenix University is, simply put, rich. Phoenix is owned by the Apollo Group and provides roughly 90% of the company’s revenue. Apollo has a market value of $9 billion, giving the company quite a bit of money to invest in its primary university business. Only the Washington Post Company, parent of Kaplan Higher Education, comes close, with a market value of $7 billion.
The University of Phoenix is also unconventional. The academically nontraditional nature of the for-profit sector is easy to see. Few for-profits offer tenure, research is rarely combined with teaching, and classes tend to be directed toward independent learners and conveniently scheduled year round (Recker, 2004). Fewer than two percent of its 20,000 faculty members are considered full time employees. Among the rest of the degree-granting for-profits, the full-time proportion averages 45%. In short, the use of part-time faculty in for-profit higher education is principally a Phoenix contribution to the sector (Recker, 2004).
The centralized curriculum is another University trademark. Courses are designed by a committee of subject-matter experts and standardized across the system in short semester blocks of five to six weeks. Most regionally accredited for-profit schools allow the faculty to be directly involved in designing the courses they teach, and most courses are offered in traditional semesters or quarters (Kinser, 2005).
The diversity of for-profit higher education is evident once Phoenix is placed in proper perspective. More than 1,600 institutions and 2,700 campus locations span every state in the nation. Although nearly 40% of all the campuses in U.S. Department of Education’s database are for-profit, only about seven percent of all students in postsecondary education are enrolled in the sector (Kinser, 2005). These students attend primarily small schools enrolling fewer than 500 students with programs in business, allied-health, and computer-related fields. They tend to be accredited on a national level rather than having the regional accreditation held by nearly every public and private not-for-profit institution.
Generalizations about for-profit higher education should be made with caution. There are, for example, about three times as many non-degree granting, for-profit schools as degree granting ones. But the degree-granting institutions are much larger, with an average enrollment of about 1,000 students, compared to just 200 students in a typical non-degree granting institution (Miller, 2004). Even so, enrollment is less a factor of degree-granting status than it is of ownership. Because of quarterly demands for growth, institutions owned by publicly traded corporations tend to be bigger on average than their independently owned peers, regardless of degree status. These Wall-Street fueled institutions are also more likely to hold regional accreditation, with about 25% accredited regionally, compared to less than five percent of independently owned institutions. Finally, although most for-profits offer just a few subjects, there are about 40 different programs, from agriculture to visual arts, represented in the for-profit sector. Undergraduate degrees and master’s degrees are awarded in almost all of these programs (Miller, 2004).
The University of Phoenix is a unique institution, and its presence has certainly influenced the postsecondary education system. It has played a major role in the recognition and accreditation of institutions with campuses in many states, and its accelerated, career-oriented programs represent a real innovation in teaching working adults. From a policy perspective, its prominence gives a substantial push toward legitimizing for-profit higher education (Kinser, 2005).
The Educational Testing Service (ETS) is another company in the business of education today. Their overall vision, like many education related companies, is to advance academic achievement. ETS creates tests and support services for test takers, as well as supplies teachers with useful instructional products. They create paper-based, internet-based, and computer-based tests and address people with learning difficulties by allowing (after proper evaluation) extra time for ADD learners, Braille tests, and sign language assistance for the hearing impaired. Harvard University President James Conant believed an organization committed to research and testing would promote better education in the United States. His idea was realized in 1947 when the American Council on Education, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and the College Entrance Examination Board came together to build ETS- led by Henry Chauncey.
ETS makes and manages millions of tests in 180 countries and the US. Tests ETS is responsible for include: GRE, SAT, Praxis, TOEFL, MAPP, ITC Literacy Assessment, AP, Major Field Tests, TSE, and TOEIC. These tests all influence student achievement in one way or another. Every High School student who is college bound will take the SAT and be judged on their score. If those students want their image enhanced they can take AP classes junior or senior year; and AP classes end with the AP exam, which can result in college credits if aced. Every college student who has the desire to further their education at the graduate level will usually have to take the GRE or the Praxis 1 or 2.
Simply put, unless students drop out of High School, they will be affected by ETS testing. High-stakes testing is becoming more prominent in education today; and though some disagree with it- it’s the most efficient mode of assessment that exists. Andrew Mollison explains his viewpoint: “The influx of under prepared students into colleges has created today's strange paradox: colleges are offering more high school-level remedial courses for no credit at a time when high schools are offering more college-level courses that earn college credits” (Education Next, 2006).
ETS has printed study guides, helpful hints, and practice questions online for those who want to prepare for a test. The anxiety-reducing tips and the practice questions are free online, but to get a more in-depth view of a test, a student will need to purchase a study guide from the website. These can cost up to $40. The study guides do have a significant amount of information for the test taker; but still don’t provide everything needed. In the Praxis 2- English Language, Literature, and Composition, Content Knowledge study guide there is an alarming paragraph: “Some specific factual knowledge is required, but for some questions, no previous experience with the supplied passages is required (although it’s assumed that you’ve read widely and perceptively in poetry, drama, fiction, and nonfiction from American, British, and World literature)” (Study Guide, 16). That’s a massive range of work the test taker is supposed to be familiar with.
Even more expensive are the tests themselves. Currently, the GRE costs $130 to take. Most of the Praxis 2 subject matter tests (used for teacher licensure) have a registration fee of $75. The Praxis 2 is notorious for producing repeat test-takers. It is now a requirement to pass subject area tests in order to become a licensed teacher (influence of NCLB). The difficult and specific test questions, along with a lack of sufficient study materials allows ETS to make more money from these repeat test-takers. Add these fees to the already high cost of college tuition and it’s easy to see why most college students are broke until they finish school completely and start a career.
Today, ETS classifies itself as a “private, nonprofit organization devoted to educational measurement and research, primarily through testing” (www.ets.org). The organization technically is nonprofit; but it still can be considered an organization that makes money. It’s a service and testing organization that people pay for to advance their education, much the same way as Sylvan Learning Centers charges for tutoring. The website even states: “Our nonprofit status is a reflection of our purpose: ETS was established to serve education, and therefore performs a public service. However, ETS is also a private, self-supporting organization. That means we must make enough revenue each year to cover our expenses, plus enough extra to support the work we want to do in the years ahead.” That last phrase means they do keep money and may (or may not- it’s impossible to measure) use it in the future. ETS still attempts to gain public support by presenting itself almost like a charity- a “public service.” The question is whether these life-altering tests are causing leaps in student achievement or just debilitating stress.
ETS does offer other products and services to aide students in learning, no matter their age. For teachers, the ETS website offers several instructional tools, like the “e-rater.” The e-rater is a writing analysis tool in which students can submit an essay and get a holistic score based on an automated evaluation scoring engine. Students can get feedback about weak areas in their writing based on e-rater features like grammar, style, diction, organization, etc… The e-rater is a useful tool, but “it is not meant to replace a teacher whose judgment is essential to helping students improve their writing ability” (www.ets.org).
One program ETS offers troubled school systems is “Program Improvement.” It’s a three-year program to help low-performing schools meet their AYP goals. Through web-based software, advising and supporting district staff with education consultants, and other strategies schools write up and implement a new plan to align curriculum and assessment. In 2003, 87% of schools using ETS's program improvement services met or exceeded their performance targets” (www.ets.org).
ETS is now going global. ETS Global BV, a subsidiary of ETS, is bringing assessment expertise to businesses and educational institutions around the world. It offers products aiding English language learning, development of assessments, and technical training. ETS’s ability to look toward the future has also inspired Innovations, the ETS corporate magazine. Not all US school systems problems are fixed yet; and so the expansion of ETS to other countries seems questionable. There is still much to be done in American schools, but as an organization, ETS feels it necessary to expand to other markets.
Like ETS adjusting its gaze towards other countries, students and parents today turn to other places outside the classroom to get help. With the immense popularity of these organizations, one can see how the general public would view American schools as failing. Their popularity, though, may not exist for sound reasons. Their overall message is positive- lifelong learning- but the underlying goal is to make money and promote products. The question is which you think is the predominant goal.
KU and LeapFrog, which produce interactive learning toys, have genius advertising with commercials and the “children get tutored while the parents shop” idea; but they could soon be blamed for young children’s lack of social skills. Sylvan and Kaplan have test-prep services and tutoring which help many students every year- but they are expensive. A lot of the hysteria about succeeding in school is driven by high-stakes testing; and while these for-profit organizations’ goals include lifelong learning, the goal for parents may be simply for their child to pass a test. Whatever they’re used for, these organizations have a solid foundation and are here to stay.
Works Cited
Bracey, Gerald. "Knowledge Universe and Virtual Schools: Educational Breakthrough or Digital Raid on the Public Treasury?” Arizona State University: Education Policy Research Unit Report. Apr. 2004.
Educational Testing Service. Study Guide: English Language, Literature, and Composition: Content Knowledge.2006 ed.
Educational Testing Service. 2006. 3 Dec. 2006 <http://www.ets.org>.
Galagan, Patricia. “Bullet Train.” Training and Development. (July 1999):22.
Guernsey, Lisa. “Toy Story: looking for lessons; do multimedia playthings teach, or do they just pacify nervous parents?” The New York Times, 3 Jan. 2002: D1.
Heller, N.B. “LeapFrog SchoolHouse tackles early literacy with transparent technology.” Heller Report on Educational Technology Markets(April 2000): 5.
Hopkins, Jamie Smith.” Baltimore-based education firm plans to open learning centers in big-box stores.” Baltimore Sun. 22 Dec. 2004.
Kinser, Kevin. “What Doesn’t Phoenix Teach Us about For-Profit Higher Education”
Change 38 no. 4 24-August 2005.
Miller, Valerie. “Phoenix University: Setting the Standard for the Future.” Arizona Republic News, January 7, 2004.
Mollison, Andrew. “Surviving a Midlife Crisis: Advanced Placement turns Fifty.” Education Next 1 Jan. 2006. 3 Dec. 2006 <http://www.keepmedia.com/pubs/EducationNext/2006/01/01/1328774>.
Notes Toward a Theory Of Complex Learning. Norman, Donald A. "Cognitive
Psychology and Instruction." New York: Plenum Press.
Novick, B.Z. & Arnold, M.M. (1991). Why is my child having trouble at school? New York: Random House, Inc.
Recker, John. “Changing the Dynamic of non-profit Higher Education Forever”
The Boston Herald, August 22, 2004, A3.
Steinberg, Jacques.” Skeptic now sees the virtue in teaching children online; ex-education chief founds k-12 e-school.” The New York Times.28 Dec. 2000: A1.
Steinberg, L. (1996) Beyond the Classroom: why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon & Schuster
Sylvan Solutions. 2006. 1 Dec. 2006. <http://www.sylvansolutions.com>.
Aspects of Constructivism. von Glasersfeld, Ernst. "Constructivism: Theory,
Perspectives, and Practice." Teachers College, Columbia University:
Teachers College Press.
The voice of rationality in a sociocultural approach to mind. Wertsch, James, V.
"Vygotsky and Education." Cambridge University Press.