Questions
for Saxon/Harcourt Achieve
by
Linda
Schrock Taylor
by Linda Schrock Taylor
I
receive an incredible amount of mail from readers interested in
the changes being made to the traditional Saxon math books. I hear
from people who use the books. I hear from people who are considering
use of the books. I hear from current Saxon employees. I hear from
former Saxon employees. I hear from booksellers of Saxon products.
I hear from mathematicians who evaluate and write math curriculum.
I hear from college professors who are frustrated with the mathematically
illiterate new-new-math high school graduates who end up,
by default, in what once were college level math courses,
now remedial math classes.
Most
of the people write to ask me questions, which I gladly answer to
the best of my ability. Many, however, write to tell of experiences
they have had with New-Saxon. Many write to tell of things they
believe they have been told by: Saxon reps; booksellers; neighbors;
family members; or by someone who told someone who told someone
else. I suspect that, as with much hearsay, there is, or at
least was, some basic truth at the level of the initial utterance.
My goal is to separate a truth from any embellishment; from any
agenda. I believe that the best way to do this is to ask the Saxon/Harcourt
Achieve people and hope that they will be honorable and honest with
their responses.
I
could write directly to the Harcourt Achieve, but I choose not to
do that for the following reason: The president/CEO of Harcourt
Achieve, Tim McEwan, wrote me a personal email following one of
my articles. I appreciated him doing that, but before I could respond
to his mail, I received an email from a woman who claimed to have
nothing at all to do with Saxon or with Harcourt. It would have
been just another email from an unknown reader except for the fact
that...she attached a copy of McEwan's personal email to
me!! I concluded that he had not been writing to me at all.
He had instead written a piece of propaganda with blind copies to…well,
it would be anyone's guess as to how many people received copies
of an email that on the surface was addressed only to me.
So,
I will pose my questions and discuss my concerns here, openly, with
no blind copies sent to anyone at all.
1)
I have received complaints that Harcourt Achieve refuses to sell
hardback editions to homeschooling families, thus limiting homeschooled
children to the soft cover, rewritten, moving-towards-new-math editions.
If this is true, I am truly appalled by such discriminatory practices.
I request an explanation of why such an anti-scholarly decision
would be made by a company selling products advertised as ones to
educate children.
Look
at the Saxon price
list for schools. It runs five pages and included in that price
list are the hardback editions that homeschoolers are not allowed
to buy.
Look
at the Saxon price
list for homeschoolers. It consists of two pages and the only
options given are the newly rewritten books, which include stem
and leaf plots and reorganization of topics. I am not the only one
suspicious that this may be the beginning of a process: a series
of rewritten books, with a predetermined target group, with sales
limited until Saxon can have most homeschoolers trapped in the fuzzy
world of new-new-math.
2)
I have communicated with sellers of homeschooling materials who
explain that Harcourt refuses to sell them any hardback books, hinting
of some contract Harcourt signed with schools. If this is true,
the contract supposedly prevents H.A. from selling the previous
hardback editions to homeschoolers. If such a contract exists, it
was a ridiculous decision with grave implications. Homeschoolers'
money is as green as the money stolen from their paychecks to purchase
HB books for public schools.
However,
a decision to restrict sales would make sense if the following rumor
is in actuality a truth: that Saxon's goal may be to dumb down the
homeschooling children with these new materials. In light of the
suggestion of a contract to restrict sales, this additional tip/rumor
causes me to wonder whether state schooling could be pressuring
Saxon to harm homeschooling in hopes of compromising the academic
progress that homeschooled students are making; of putting an end
to homeschooled students excelling as publicly schooled students
fail.
3)
One correspondent mentioned that Saxon believes that the new soft
cover books are "more suited to homeschoolers." Why would that be?
Why would it be appropriate to force homeschooled children into
the world of Fuzzy Math, while public schools are allowed to buy
effective, traditional math books?
4)
Is Saxon/Harcourt not training its representatives well? Did HA
not even take the time to learn about a major producer of scholastic
materials before making the decision to purchase the entire company?
What kind of business sense does that make?? I don't even switch
brands on important products before reading the labels, yet one
reader writes that a HA rep wrote, in response to questions about
the Saxon products, "…I have very little information for you and
may not for a while since the Saxon products are very new to us
at Harcourt and we are still learning about the homeschool markets…"
Is Harcourt saying that the traditional Saxon books were rewritten
to be "more suited to homeschoolers" even as they admit that they
"are still learning about the homeschool market"? I have in my possession
a copy of this email from the Saxon representative who admitted
Harcourt's ignorance about homeschooling. Why would any competently
run organization buy another company then immediately change a successful
product, then admit a lack of understanding of the market upon which
they are forcing the new products?
5)
Why do some of the most educated and competent mathematicians refer
to "Harcourt Achieve" as the "slow learner" division of Harcourt?
When I requested an explanation, I was provided with opinion backed
by intelligent support and phrases like "…the least content heavy…"
Is HA forcing homeschooled children into slow learner, content-weak
products, and for what short-term objectives; for what long-term
goals?
Additionally,
I've heard that Harcourt Achieve even describes itself as the branch
of Harcourt that "deals with students who are not 'the best' or
even average." I have also heard that when confronted about their
target audience, the HA people reluctantly admitted that their focus
was "intended [for] the students who were mostly behind, as a sort
of 'reclamation project'."
Frankly,
if homeschooled children are "a reclamation project" it is because
we homeschooling parents have to de-program the children from the
warping of attitudes, perceptions and loyalties that passes for
education in state schooling. When our homeschooled children
are academically delayed, it because little-to-no true scholastic
and foundational instruction was ever given in the public schools
prior to decisions by wise parents to bring their children home
where they can receive a real and complete education.
Our
public schools are the entity that should be considered
for a reclamation project. I take that back. Better yet, let us
close them all. Let us sell these prisons-for-children to the highest
bidders with every buyer forced to sign a contract, binding on
self and any future owners, that the buildings will never again
be used to house children in any capacity.
Let
us encourage those who would homeschool to homeschool; those who
would send their children to private or religious schools to do
so; those wishing neighborhood, local schools to gather and create
the kinds of small schools to which individuals, in unique neighborhoods
and communities, seek to send their children. Schooling is a family
decision, not a federally mandated one. How did we ever allow it
all to go so wrong?
If
Saxon/Harcourt Achieve responds, I will write a follow-up article
to report how they answered each of these questions suggested by
letters from readers.
January
10, 2005
Linda
Schrock Taylor [send
her mail] is a free-lance
writer and the owner of "The Learning Clinic," where real reading,
and real math, are taught effectively and efficiently.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Linda
Schrock Taylor Archives
|