Okay fair enough, a couple responses.
1) Pearsons text's do support the TEKS, they have to be approved by
TEA (unless they are supplementary materials/texts). Likely what
your issue is is that the TEKS arent covered the way you would like
them to be, but while errors happen, Pearson texts do meet the
minimal requirements of the TEKS.
2) Pearson is a machine, whose job is to make money. You only do
that with new business and repeat business. Texas is only one
revenue stream, and if you make to perfect and reliable a product
you strangulate your other revenue streams. Automakers cant make
a car that lasts a lifetime and stay in business and maintain jobs, and
salaries, and lobbyists, and consultants and ESCs, etc. People got to
get paid, and the way the paychecks and the profits happen is if you
create products and services and manufacture the need for those
products and services.
3) In the past Texas and California, used to drive the sale of
textbooks. Publishers wrote for those states and everyone else got
modified versions, now we have common core and the demand from
the other states drives editorial content now. As a result there is a
higher probability of error.
If On 8/27/14, 1administrator wrote:
> PsyGuy- I have a question. I am not trying to start an argument,
> but on C-scope, Curriculum, and such but why can't Pearson or
> textbook publisher write a textbook that covers the TEKS
> required. We are purchasing textbooks, hardcopy or online
anyway.
> Just a random thought that crossed my mind. With the number of
> purchases, the publishers should be able to produce the needed
> books.(I only mentioned Pearson because they already own TEA!)
> Let me hear what you think!
>
> On 8/26/14, PsyGuy wrote:
>> Typical tea party rhetoric. If its not about god, guns, taxes
> or
>> profits, its anti-american and anti-family.
>>
>> On 8/17/14, Hope wrote:
>>> On 8/17/14, c-scope is being raised from the dead... wrote:
>>>> I heard that the Texas Resource System is c-scope revised.
>>>> Is this true?
>>>
>>> Yes, but supposedly without the controversial lessons that
>>> were anti-American, anti-family, etc. The region service
>>> centers are making a killing off this. They're not about to
>>> let it die. It's their cash cow. Forget about it being full
>>> of numerous errors. Teachers aren't supposed to be smart
>>> enough to see that, or stupid enough to point it out to
>>> anyone in authority.
Posts on this thread, including this one