Friday, July 04, 2008

Side Note

Just for reference, Steve Hargadon does get paid some money (not enough) to help maintain the K-12 Open Tech website, of which Pearson is a sponsor. I don't think this was a factor in their asking him to record at edubloggercon, and I don't think is a subtantial conflict of interest, but it would give him some incentive not to tell them to go pound sand. That and the fact that he's a really nice guy.

Anyhow, the upshot of all this would seem to be that Steve should have more help organizing things next year, which he'd probably appreciate anyhow.


Miguel Guhlin (@mGuhlin) said...

What are your sources for this post? How do you know? Why should we believe you aside from the fact you're a really nice guy?



Tom Hoffman said...

Well, I know because Steve told me last year at NECC. For actual evidence you could do some in depth sleuthing like looking at Steve's blogger profile which begins:

"I am the director of the K12 Open Technologies Initiative at the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN)..."

And if you look at theK12 Open Tech site you'll see that Pearson is one of four sponsors.

It is hardly a secret.

Steve Hargadon said...


You're right. Pearson is a CoSN sponsor, and while not a primary sponsor of the K-12 Open Technologies initiative--of which I am the director--they are a sponsor.

No one from Pearson sits on the advisory panel for the initiative, and I've never had any contact or involvement with Pearson regarding CoSN.

I don't really think we need to try to dig any deeper about my discussions with Pearson about EduBloggerCon--I take full responsibility for misunderstanding why they wanted to be there, and for telling them that I thought it was OK. I didn't do so in order to curry favor with them, or for any financial rewards. I thought they were impressed with what we were doing and wanted to document it; as well, I also knew they were interested in talking to some of the edubloggers who were going to be there. I never expected the intrusive mics and cameras in the sessions.

I'm still hanging on to the hope that something good will come out of this.

Tom Hoffman said...


I don't think this is a big deal really, although I'm sure I would have thrown a shit fit had I been there.

This post is just more aimed at people who were wondering if you had some connection to Pearson. You do! And it is easy to see. It would be nice if, when people are being suspicious, they could at least show the slightest competence in pursuing their own suspicions.

Miguel Guhlin (@mGuhlin) said...

I're hoping for that kinda wisdom in others, just as other wish you did!!


Don't post this comment (unless you want to). I think Steve and Elaine (Pearson) have addressed this sufficiently in Wes Fryer's post.

And, I touched on relevant parts here:

Having fun at your expense, Tom....