Disclosure for those that sell or represent hs programs?

[newlifemom]

Totally agree with Tina that I never meant to offend you.

 

Now to say that people have to disclose who they work for, that really has a LOT of ramifications, which is why it's NOT a rule. Think about it, we have ladies with high degrees here who teach in colleges part time or more. Do they have to disclose that? Have you thought about the ELITISM that would result from that? So and so's opinion is more valuable because they have "I work for this company" in their sig. Or so and so's opinion is more valuable because they repped for such and such company. There's a certain amount of modesty and privacy to this frankly, not calling attention to yourself or trying to be more than anyone else. We have ladies here who are or have been La Leche League leaders. As a leader they have to give certain professional advice (not their personal opinions), represent the party line of LLL, and are covered by liability insurance. Can't they go to the general board and give advice on mothering and just be themselves, having their own opinions, not speaking for the company? They put on their company hats and they take them OFF.

 

There are multiple sides to this issue. I understand your concerns, but there are so few instances of this. It seems to me the current rules and resource structures (your ability to read all the threads of a person to see where they're coming from, your ability to contact them privately to clarify your concerns, etc.) are adequate. There is no way to make enough RULES to stop people from doing bad or unethical things. People will always find a way. If they make a certain kind of rule about marketing or sigs or blog links something, a new method will pop up. The peace of the boards solely resolves in good will and people chosing to do the right thing, best they can, at all points.

 

Well stated. :iagree:

[junepep]

I still can't find my dust pan. so.... instead of cleaning the kitchen floor, I'm doing this? oh the joy of having the 180 days done.

 

at convention,

I'd define "spokesperson" as someone who is giving the workshops at these conventions or is the lead person the convention organizers are in contact with from that company. how or what they are paid or not -- has nothing to do with it.

 

-crystal

 

 

In regards to your definition - since I have no help to offer on the dustpan issue: "Giving workshops" and being "the lead person convention organizers are in contact with" wouldn't address the concern that some have raised of clicking on a link and finding out that someone is getting paid for referring people. It also wouldn't address those who have been given curricula for free with the understanding that they will promote it online. You also don't define the duration or quantity of contact between the forum user and with a company - 1 month, 6, 12, ever?

 

As I said this is not something that it is easy to find an adequate solution to - there are too many potential loopholes.

 

The current tos is broad enough to allow posters who have consulted for these companies, but who have no vested interest in them, to recommend them and other programs that they feel strongly about.

 

Again, who would volunteer their time and energy to talk about a curricula (and teach it to their children) unless they believed in it?

[Kimber]

Well, I write curricula that I sell for me, but I have personally avoided putting it in my signature because I didn't want to advertise myself on the boards.

 

When I gave my books away for free, I let everyone know. I did that for about a year. But when I started to sell them only, I didn't bring them up; and I don't link them. If someone mentions it, I'd answer a question.

 

In fact, I try to stay away from posts that have anything to do with the content of books I sell.

 

But after reading the threads, I might put it in my signature just to be upfront.

 

Kimberly

Edited April 29, 2010 by Kimber

[cbollin]

since I have no help to offer on the dustpan issue:

 

my cat was sleeping on it. :lol:

 

oh by the way.. welcome along to the board.

 

-crystal

[Kate CA]

Ann, I think you're blowing this out of proportion. What the myriad of posters in this thread just showed was that you can get respondees who SOUND like vendors or sales people because they have done that in the past. But these people aren't doing that now. And to read that into threads around here is just unnecessary. There are clear rules for the board, and the authors that come around here DO label themselves. Amy of WT puts that in her name. SWB is SWB. Andrew Kern is Andrew Kern. I don't remember Lene's monicker, because she does't come around often, but it's plain too.

 

I think because you haven't repped you don't get the flip side. I think most people feel a bit self-conscious and don't want to go around parading and saying who they've repped for. Nuts, most of those companies wouldn't want their name slung around like that the rest of the year. It's usually more of a one-night-stand type of relationship, lol. You're reading way too much into posts.

 

If something is unclear to you, all you have to do is ask. If you politely say Wow, looks like you know a lot about this. They should have you rep for them! They'll probably tell you upfront if they have or not.

 

And I don't know why anyone is shocked by the blog links thing. Is that such a stretch? Isn't that the point of the compensation? Would you even follow it if you didn't find merit and persuasiveness in the person's method or writings? I don't do it, but it doesn't seem so outlandish to me.

 

There's no need to go on a witch hunt here. If we buy a spelling curriculum or a this or that and hate it, ultimately it's our own fault.

 

I 100% agree with this. Great post.

[Kate CA]

I certainly understand that we are multifaceted, never claimed the opposite. But if you are working for a company, that needs to be disclosed.

 

If people don't want it in their siggy-fine already.

 

If you disclose when you are posting about it-good. If not, you should specifically say you tutor for the company just as an FYI.

 

I don't understand why you feel you get to make this choice for the thousands of people on this board. If someone isn't making money by their posts and are only offering information and help, why does it matter that they might work with or might have repped for a company? Who better to ask than someone who really knows the curriculum in and out? Most people who rep for a company here do disclose this information.

 

I don't understand the fears expressed here. Are we not educated grown-ups capable of making curriculum choices on our own? I have been a part of these boards since the very beginning of the WTM boards and it is *so rare* that someone comes here and tries to sway someone to their curriculum choice so that they can profit from it. I mean RARE.

 

I work for one of the largest national homeschooling magazines and have seen more curriculum than most people ever will due to it. I don't mention it because I am not repping for any curriculum providers (or the magazine) and I am not making any money off of anyone if I recommend a curriculum.

 

If I link to a review the company has done it is because it is a worthwhile review and might help someone understand the curriculum from the perspective of the private homeschooling family that reviewed it. There is no compensation in any of the links I ever share to anyone. All the reviews are free and available to anyone online with a Google search. I rarely mention my association because it is irrelevant and could easily be seen as advertising - something we are all asked by those who own this site not to do.

 

I have always been a homeschooling mother first and foremost and I have the exact same struggles all of you have. If I come here for curriculum advice or help it is for my family. If I can help someone else along the way, wonderful. Some of the best curriculum advice and information about a product comes from someone who has used it and/or reps it because they KNOW it. To suggest that their association somehow makes them or their information suspect is really very disheartening.

[Ann@thebeach]

I don't understand why you feel you get to make this choice for the thousands of people on this board. If someone isn't making money by their posts and are only offering information and help, why does it matter that they might work with or might have repped for a company? Who better to ask than someone who really knows the curriculum in and out? Most people who rep for a company here do disclose this information.

 

I don't understand the fears expressed here. Are we not educated grown-ups capable of making curriculum choices on our own? I have been a part of these boards since the very beginning of the WTM boards and it is *so rare* that someone comes here and tries to sway someone to their curriculum choice so that they can profit from it. I mean RARE.

 

I work for one of the largest national homeschooling magazines and have seen more curriculum than most people ever will due to it. I don't mention it because I am not repping for any curriculum providers (or the magazine) and I am not making any money off of anyone if I recommend a curriculum.

 

If I link to a review the company has done it is because it is a worthwhile review and might help someone understand the curriculum from the perspective of the private homeschooling family that reviewed it. There is no compensation in any of the links I ever share to anyone. All the reviews are free and available to anyone online with a Google search. I rarely mention my association because it is irrelevant and could easily be seen as advertising - something we are all asked by those who own this site not to do.

 

I have always been a homeschooling mother first and foremost and I have the exact same struggles all of you have. If I come here for curriculum advice or help it is for my family. If I can help someone else along the way, wonderful. Some of the best curriculum advice and information about a product comes from someone who has used it and/or reps it because they KNOW it. To suggest that their association somehow makes them or their information suspect is really very disheartening.

 

Come on people! Get a grip. I brought up an innocent issue. Most obviously didn't think it was an issue. I said FINE it's not an issue, I accept that so move on.

 

And instead, people have to insert their interpretations and criticize any thoughts different than their own. Just WOW.

 

So I say again, DISCLOSURE IS OBVIOUSLY NOT AN ISSUE TO WTM MEMBERS.

[Colleen in NS]

I brought up an innocent issue.

 

I'm glad you did - it's something I would never have thought of, and I've been reading/posting here since around 2004 or so. I just assume that when people rave about a product, it's because they like it a lot - it's why I rave about various things. But it was interesting to me to read about other aspects, so thank you for bringing up your questions. I am surprised that some of the posts here seem condescending - your questions and concerns were thought-provoking to me, as were the explanatory posts. I liked asta's (?) point about us needing to learn to dig further when we read glowing reports. I do find that hard to do - I have to stop and think about how I'm going to fish out the cons of something someone is telling me about. Anyway, I appreciated you starting this thread.

[Lovedtodeath]

I think that if someone is representing a program, they most likely have used it and loved it. After that they would then become a representative. Therefore their ravings are truthful. KWIM?

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

I think that if someone is representing a program, they most likely have used it and loved it. After that they would then become a representative. Therefore their ravings are truthful. KWIM?

 

That's kinda what I decided to believe.

 

I've been noticing more of the product pushing here lately. One poster in particular! If I'm scrolling down through a thread and I see her avatar, I know she is going to be suggesting that product. 100% of the time.

 

I assume she really, really likes that product. Really.

[PeterPan]

So I say again, DISCLOSURE IS OBVIOUSLY NOT AN ISSUE TO WTM MEMBERS.

 

That's funny, I think just about everyone in this thread said just the opposite, that if they are here wearing their company hat, if they put their company hat on, they disclose it. And when they take their company hat off and want to be incognito, that's what they do. NOBODY here is hiding anything.

[Ann@thebeach]

That's funny, I think just about everyone in this thread said just the opposite, that if they are here wearing their company hat, if they put their company hat on, they disclose it. And when they take their company hat off and want to be incognito, that's what they do. NOBODY here is hiding anything.

 

"DISCLOSURE IN THEIR SIGNATURES is not an issue" is what I meant since that was my original issue. :rolleyes:

[Kate CA]

Come on people! Get a grip. I brought up an innocent issue. Most obviously didn't think it was an issue. I said FINE it's not an issue, I accept that so move on.

 

And instead, people have to insert their interpretations and criticize any thoughts different than their own. Just WOW.

 

So I say again, DISCLOSURE IS OBVIOUSLY NOT AN ISSUE TO WTM MEMBERS.

 

I wasn't angry when I posted what I posted. I just think differently. If you post something here as an issue and assert that posters *need* to do something, does it really surprise you that you have others saying, "I disagree and here's why"? I am not sure why you feel all-caps is necessary as I didn't "yell" at you. :confused:

 

As someone already said below me, I think it is pretty clear when a poster is *only* responding to certain posts and only repping a certain product. I am going to assume anyone smart enough to homeschool their children is smart enough to do their curriculum research based on more than one person's reply. I think the moms here are a pretty smart bunch.

 

Have a nice evening.

[Donna A.]

The other thing we have to remember is that someone may only or mostly post about just one curriculum because it's the only one they know *really well*. I used to post about nearly every curriculum I've ever tried or researched, and I stopped doing that because the fact is, there's only a couple that I've used ENOUGH to really talk about at length.

 

But I've also suggested to others that that curriculum *might* not be the right choice for them.

 

Talking about how something works because someone knows it really well isn't the same as "pushing" it. If questions are being asked about a particular curriculum, then someone who DOES know it really well SHOULD answer the questions.... whether they've ever worked in a convention booth or not.

 

I really dislike it, though, when someone who only used a curriculum for a very short time tries to explain how it works when they don't really *know* it (and then they end up stating inaccuracies about it). I've been guilty of that, too, and I quit. So should I continue to respond to questions about every curriculum I've ever tried just to avoid the appearance of "pushing" one particular curriculum? I don't think so.

 

Editing to say that I'd be careful about assuming the motives of the posters here. If someone is doing something unethically or with a hidden agenda, they'll eventually be called on it by the PTB. ;o)

Edited April 30, 2010 by Donna A.

[Lovedtodeath]

Yes Donna. ITA

[Guest Cindie2dds]

 

I have to admit neither of these bother me nearly as much as people who post vehement advice or opinions of curriculum they haven't used or have only been using a short time. I think those warrant disclosure. :)

 

Wow, what a wise statement. I have been a victim of clever, colorful marketing. More importantly, until you get into the guts of any program, you don't really know how it will play out in the long run.

[Kate CA]

The other thing we have to remember is that someone may only or mostly post about just one curriculum because it's the only one they know *really well*. I used to post about nearly every curriculum I've ever tried or researched, and I stopped doing that because the fact is, there's only a couple that I've used ENOUGH to really talk about at length.

 

But I've also suggested to others that that curriculum *might* not be the right choice for them.

 

Talking about how something works because someone knows it really well isn't the same as "pushing" it. If questions are being asked about a particular curriculum, then someone who DOES know it really well SHOULD answer the questions.... whether they've ever worked in a convention booth or not.

 

I really dislike it, though, when someone who only used a curriculum for a very short time tries to explain how it works when they don't really *know* it (and then they end up stating inaccuracies about it). I've been guilty of that, too, and I quit. So should I continue to respond to questions about every curriculum I've ever tried just to avoid the appearance of "pushing" one particular curriculum? I don't think so.

 

Editing to say that I'd be careful about assuming the motives of the posters here. If someone is doing something unethically or with a hidden agenda, they'll eventually be called on it by the PTB. ;o)

 

Yes, :iagree: too! :D

[PeterPan]

What is PTB??? I can't think of an explanation that fits, lol, so enlighten me. :)

[Delighted3]

Powers that be ????

[PeterPan]

Ohhh... Gotta remember that! LOL

[Donna A.]

Yep, PTB = Powers That Be. :)

[asta]

Not all caps are yelling. Not all bolding is yelling or "strongly worded". Not all italics are "you really don't seem to be getting it".

 

Impish just likes bold letters. It's her personality.

 

Some people bold, other people cap, other people italicize, other people surround their words with asterisks. While some people regimentally adhere to the "bold is always for emphasis, caps are always for yelling, italics are always for - hard to explain, a kind of shruggy almost condescension -" not everyone follows the internet's self imposed "rules".

 

It's teh internets, folks. It's wonderful, it's dangerous, it's currently (mostly) unregulated. Drink a cup of your preferred drink and relax. This is only a message board.

 

 

asta

[jewellsmommy]

This discussion has made me nervous. lol. I have been sitting here thinking... "well I post that I love (insert name of curriculum that shall now remain nameless) whenever the subject of said nameless curriculum arises. I hope no one thinks that I am advertising or something."

 

I am being light hearted here of course. But, seriously, I totally see what both 'sides' are saying. I think that most people here will be true to their conscience. It is always good to be reminded, though, to carefully weigh out all opinions and options when choosing curricula. I personally think that choosing materials is the hardest part of homeschooling! Or, maybe it is just me.

[lovemykids]

YES! This is one of the examples I was thinking of. I person asked about a curriculum that didn't have reviews anywhere. Suddenly a glowing review was posted on this thread by a person with only 3 posts. The other 2 posts were in other places on the board for the same curriculum-no other posts. But the OP seem to think this was good enough and commented she was going to try it. It scared me to think she'd buy something based on a questionable review.

 

I know the post you are speaking of, but thankfully, that doesn’t happen very often. The obvious vendor representative in that case, also answered one of my threads regarding the same program; I didn’t bother to reply. But I still may purchase that program, I’m curious, and just because no one here has used it, doesn’t mean it’s not good.

 

That's kinda what I decided to believe.

 

I've been noticing more of the product pushing here lately. One poster in particular! If I'm scrolling down through a thread and I see her avatar, I know she is going to be suggesting that product. 100% of the time.

 

I assume she really, really likes that product. Really.

:iagree:

Gee, I Wish I could get some compensation....other than my personal happiness with materials

:iagree::D

I have to admit neither of these bother me nearly as much as people who post vehement advice or opinions of curriculum they haven't used or have only been using a short time. I think those warrant disclosure. :)

 

Oh, I could be held guilty of this, as could many of us here I suppose. I can be found raving about a program after only using it a short time, or because of the way I utilize certain curricula- I may think it’s wonderful after only using some of it and pairing it with another program. Since curricula is a tool, we all aren’t going to use it the same way, nor or we going to get the same results when we apply identical methods. It still counts; if you ask me, when one has only used “some†of a program. And if you are an experienced homeschooler there is something to be said for holding curricula in your hands and giving it a review, no doubt. Although, it should be stated that the person has only looked it over, and from what I can tell, most do this.

I mean if I used XYZ program for two months, then dropped it, maybe later picked it up again for another month or so, and the recently started using it, yet again, for a period of two months or so- wouldn’t you say I was qualified to rave about it if I wanted to? We like to share our experiences. Getting others excited about something we love helps us to retain that excitement, and to continue homeschooling with a positive attitude.

When researching, everyone should ask questions like- how long have you used this particular item, what else do you use alongside it, etc. ;)

Someone who makes a decision from one post has obviously made up their mind long before the thread. I mean that certain person could get numerous negative posts regarding a certain curricula one week, and then multiple positive posts another week. It really doesn’t mean that this particular program is or is not the one for that poster, if that makes any sense at all. In the end, they have to decide what they are going to purchase, and then it’s up to many more factors as to whether it will be a success or not.

I guess my point is; it’s not that big of a deal, we all have heads on our shoulders or we wouldn’t be here. Adding a bunch of silly rules will not accomplish much of anything that we can’t figure out ourselves.

 

moving on...:tongue_smilie:

[8filltheheart]

Originally Posted by Dulcimeramy View Post

That's kinda what I decided to believe.

 

I've been noticing more of the product pushing here lately. One poster in particular! If I'm scrolling down through a thread and I see her avatar, I know she is going to be suggesting that product. 100% of the time.

 

I assume she really, really likes that product. Really.

 

Of course, then there are obnoxious posters like me :D that see a thread title and KNOW that certain posters are going to give absolutely glowing reviews of certain products and immediately dismiss any negative comments or questions about them, so we jump into the discussion to try to balance out the one-sided love affair for unsuspecting readers. (or does that plural "we" need to be deleted and be changed to an "I"???) :lol:

 

I think it all balances out in the end. However, I am glad Ann started this thread b/c naively, I hadn't really considered the marketing techniques and have always just assumed pure enthusiasm. I did find the marketing link to AAS very enlightening. ;)

Edited April 30, 2010 by 8FillTheHeart

[Lovedtodeath]

But you see, I was offered an affiliate link thing with AAS and I turned it down...

 

which illustrates my earlier point that someone who markets a product signs up to do so after they have absolutely loved it and plan to rave about it anyway.

[Guest Cindie2dds]

Of course, then there are obnoxious posters like me :D that see a thread title and KNOW that certain posters are going to give absolutely glowing reviews of certain products and immediately dismiss any negative comments or questions about them, so we jump into the discussion to try to balance out the one-sided love affair for unsuspecting readers. (or does that plural "we" need to be deleted and be changed to an "I"???) :lol:

 

I think it all balances out in the end. However, I am glad Ann started this thread b/c naively, I hadn't really considered the marketing techniques and have always just assumed pure enthusiasm. I did find the marketing link to AAS very enlightening. ;)

 

Wow, I guess you could put me in that naive category also. I assumed pure enthusiasm also, not marketing. Although I'm completely clueless about posters or curricula you all are talking about. Would someone care to enlighten me via pm? :D

 

ETA: Another clueless question ~ AAS?

[Heather in WI]

Whew! Just read through the whole thread.

 

 

I'm glad you did - it's something I would never have thought of, and I've been reading/posting here since around 2004 or so. I just assume that when people rave about a product, it's because they like it a lot - it's why I rave about various things. But it was interesting to me to read about other aspects, so thank you for bringing up your questions. I am surprised that some of the posts here seem condescending - your questions and concerns were thought-provoking to me, as were the explanatory posts.

 

I think if you are or have been affiliated with a company, you should disclose it. Maybe not necessarily in your signature, but when you recommend or discuss it. Financial compensation is not the only reason -- some people have a vested emotional interest in having others jump on their bandwagon which I think can be just as strong.

[Donna A.]

Well, I guess I'm wondering why we have to be so suspicious in the first place. Why can't someone just love and rave about a curriculum without having a hidden agenda? :001_huh:

 

And as others have pointed out, if someone IS representing a particular company/curriculum/method, either with compensation or without, either through convention booths or a link on their blog or a line in their siggy or by stating it within the post, it seems obvious that the only reason the person IS representing that curriculum is because they loved it in the first place and THEN agreed to represent or help the company after the fact. In that case, it seems to me the person who's raving/representing would be doing so anyway. I just don't see the big deal.

 

As I said before, it's when someone does a detailed comparison or explanation of a curriculum without having even USED it that bugs me. :glare: Especially if they're related to the owner/author. Unless they state up front that they only looked at it and didn't use it... but even that can be misleading sometimes, depending on how it's worded.

[Donna A.]

I think if you are or have been affiliated with a company, you should disclose it. Maybe not necessarily in your signature, but when you recommend or discuss it. Financial compensation is not the only reason -- some people have a vested emotional interest in having others jump on their bandwagon which I think can be just as strong.

 

That's a good point.

[lovemykids]

Well, I guess I'm wondering why we have to be so suspicious in the first place. Why can't someone just love and rave about a curriculum without having a hidden agenda? :001_huh:

 

And as others have pointed out, if someone IS representing a particular company/curriculum/method, either with compensation or without, either through convention booths or a link on their blog or a line in their siggy or by stating it within the post, it seems obvious that the only reason the person IS representing that curriculum is because they loved it in the first place and THEN agreed to represent or help the company after the fact. In that case, it seems to me the person who's raving/representing would be doing so anyway. I just don't see the big deal.

 

As I said before, it's when someone does a detailed comparison or explanation of a curriculum without having even USED it that bugs me. :glare: Especially if they're related to the owner/author. Unless they state up front that they only looked at it and didn't use it... but even that can be misleading sometimes, depending on how it's worded.

:iagree:

[usetoschool]

I appreciate the detailed and insider and detailed knowledge of people that are affiliated with or have represented a curriculum. I think it wouldn't hurt to let people know how you know so much but the only time I think there should be full "legal" disclosure is when the person or someone in their circle would benefit financially from convincing you to purchase something. If you have worked a booth you are not making any money by convincing me on these boards to buy something. I just think you must really like and believe in the product if you have taken time (at a kind of low compensation rate from what I have read) to work for the company explaining their product.

 

I do agree that it is the buyers responsibility to research thoroughly. Some people are gullible or get excited I guess and make hasty decisions but that is really their problem. I don't think I like the idea of being protected from myself.

 

And I think most people who spend much (too much :glare:) time reading these boards know who the owners and developers of commercial curriculum are. I actually appreciate their chiming in regarding questions about their curriculum. I guess I don't read as much as I thought because I have never noticed the phony salespeople types posting here.

[lovemykids]

I appreciate the detailed and insider and detailed knowledge of people that are affiliated with or have represented a curriculum. I think it wouldn't hurt to let people know how you know so much but the only time I think there should be full "legal" disclosure is when the person or someone in their circle would benefit financially from convincing you to purchase something. If you have worked a booth you are not making any money by convincing me on these boards to buy something. I just think you must really like and believe in the product if you have taken time (at a kind of low compensation rate from what I have read) to work for the company explaining their product.

 

I do agree that it is the buyers responsibility to research thoroughly. Some people are gullible or get excited I guess and make hasty decisions but that is really their problem. I don't think I like the idea of being protected from myself.

 

And I think most people who spend much (too much :glare:) time reading these boards know who the owners and developers of commercial curriculum are. I actually appreciate their chiming in regarding questions about their curriculum. I guess I don't read as much as I thought because I have never noticed the phony salespeople types posting here.

 

I have seen very little of this.

 

ASS = All About Spelling (Cindie's question)

[cbollin]

:lol::lol:

 

I think Elvis said it best ''we can't go on together, with Suspicious minds.."

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtsmuVA0m7c&feature=related

 

(I'm going to be youtube elvis all day now) and I get to call it local history! maybe I'll get in the car and drive past Graceland. field trip!

 

:lol:

 

-crystal

[Tutor]

I am an author with CAP of an as yet unpublished curriculum. However, if I answer any questions that even remotely relate to the topic I have written on, I disclose that I have a book in the publication process on the subject. Often I choose not to answer on the board but PM the person instead... just to err on the side of caution and not inadvertently violate any board rules or look like I am selling something. Do I want people to buy my books when they come out? Sure. However, I know that they will not work for everyone and families have their own preferences, so I don't want to look like a curriculum pusher. :)

 

ETA: I have used other CAP products and recommend them (or not) based on my own personal experience with them. But in those instances, as well, I will let people know that I am under contract with CAP for an unrelated product. As Elizabeth has pointed out, one of the things I like about the boards is some level of anonymity and being able to ask questions about curriculum or homeschooling life without my work entering into the discussion (even remotely) where it is irrelevant.

Edited April 30, 2010 by Tutor
grammar and eta section

[8filltheheart]

This discussion has made me nervous. lol. I have been sitting here thinking... "well I post that I love (insert name of curriculum that shall now remain nameless) whenever the subject of said nameless curriculum arises. I hope no one thinks that I am advertising or something."

 

I am being light hearted here of course. But, seriously, I totally see what both 'sides' are saying. I think that most people here will be true to their conscience. It is always good to be reminded, though, to carefully weigh out all opinions and options when choosing curricula. I personally think that choosing materials is the hardest part of homeschooling! Or, maybe it is just me.

 

I hope no one took what I posted too seriously b/c I certainly meant it jokingly (except my being obnoxious, that is. ;))

 

I do post contrary views to board favorites if I have had a different experience. Too often board favorites tend to skew realistic views of curricula. There is no "perfect" product. There are pros and cons to all of them. What really amazes me is when criticism of a product is taken personally and the responses to the criticism is to try to silence the critical remarks. Math wars are a perfect example. :tongue_smilie:

 

Personally, I am thrilled if I ask a question about a product and I hear opposing views. It helps me evaluate exactly what I want from my purchase and whether or not it fits my needs/goals. If I only hear one side......I know I missing the bigger picture.

[MerryAtHope]

Honestly, I've not given this much thought. I'd be happy to ammend my signature line if people think that's more appropriate.

 

In my siggy currently I have a link to my blog review about All About Spelling where I say that I am an affiliate. I was recommending AAS before I even knew they had an affiliate program though, because it totally changed spelling, reading, writing, and school attitudes for my children. After many failed spelling programs, I was glad to find it--and if it can help someone else, I'm glad to point them in that direction. If it doesn't help them, I'm not offended--I've used too many things that didn't work for us, and that's an awful place to be with a kid who's struggling. I'd much rather see a mom find what works for her kids than make 5 or 10 bucks. And in the case of AAS, if it doesn't work or someone doesn't like it, the person returns it for a refund, which also means the affiliate commission is returned. So there's not a benefit to an affiliate to try to mislead someone or exaggerate the pros of the program.

 

In the interest of full disclosure, I also work in customer care at AAS, answering emails. I didn't seek a job from them. I was simply a homeschool mom, online, raving about how AAS had helped us and helping others to use the program. I was just doing what I've done for years with lots of other curriculum like HWT, Horizons, Sonlight, MOH, Bravewriter (and I don't work for any of them! although Bravewriter once asked me to, but I decided it was too much time)--talking about why I liked it & how it helped us, how we use it etc..., The author heard about me, started reading my responses, and asked if I would like a pt job.

 

When I come here, I don't think about every word I say representing AAS, so it would be weird to put my pt job or affiliate status in my signature, but I can if people think the blog link isn't enough of a disclosure. But when I say I love MOH or Bravewriter or workboxes or SL etc..., that's not "AAS" endorsing it--it's me saying that's worked for us. I come as a homeschool mom, sharing what's helped me, asking questions about other curriculum and reading lots of various threads to try to figure out what to do next year and as I look forward to high school in another year for my oldest.

 

Merry :-)

[Lovedtodeath]

That is good Crystal. :D

 

8filltheheart.. yep. I can think of a person who pushes and defends each of these: MFW, PR, WP, WRTR, AAS.

 

Merry: Once again, you loved and raved about AAS before becoming an affiliate. :)

[Avila]

I guess I look at it a little differently than the OP. I don't see people widely being dishonest about this here.

 

First, there is not much money involved here even for the people receiving compensation -- AND for most affiliates to receive the compensation, they HAVE to share the link and you have to click on it when you are purchasing the product, so the company knows who to credit. Meaning they have to disclose their affiliation or they get no money anyhow. If they rave and you buy without using their link, they get nothing from that. So for them, why would they NOT disclose that?

 

The other thing I see is that these moms used the program and genuinely loved the program and that is why they chose to become associated with it. Why is their opinion as a homeschool mom who uses it any less valuable than someone else's just because they might make a dollar if you buy it? Maybe I am not cynical enough, but most of the ladies I see on here were using and raving about these products before they became involved with the companies, and what they say hasn't change since they became involved, KWIM?

 

It is always caveat emptor. Personally, I look at how long someone has been here and whether they ever post anything that isn't about just that product before listening to them. But most of the people I know who get excited and post a lot about certain products are not being compensated for it. They just really like it. Whether that means anything to me or influences me is up to me and not them, you know? And from what I have seen, the people who are the biggest posters are not the ones being paid for it usually.

 

ETA: Just for full disclosure, I don't get paid for anything I recommend. But I do probably show up on the same threads all the time because it is what I use and what I know best. I think we all have our niches. If I had the opportunity to work at a booth for a discount on stuff I like, I would take it and not feel responsible to disclose it here though!

Edited April 30, 2010 by Asenik

[cbollin]

. But I do probably show up on the same threads all the time because it is what I use and what I know best. I think we all have our niches. !

 

yep. That describes me.

 

 

-crystal, who didn't get to drive to graceland because it looks like it's going to rain any minute.... pout.

[siloam]

Ann,

 

I will sometimes disclose when I post to a thread about MOH that I am listed on MOH as a person to contact for info. But I don't disclose it all the time because I am not and have never been paid for it, or compensated with hsing material or anything else. I just want her to have more free time to write the next volume!

 

Most of the people who do represent a business as well, will disclose it on threads about that topic, so over time you do get to know who everyone is.

 

Heather

 

[KathyBC]

I do post contrary views to board favorites if I have had a different experience. Too often board favorites tend to skew realistic views of curricula. There is no "perfect" product. There are pros and cons to all of them. What really amazes me is when criticism of a product is taken personally and the responses to the criticism is to try to silence the critical remarks. Math wars are a perfect example. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

And what about posters who consistently put down a particular program, but seem to be fairly tight-lipped about the fact that they offer a similar service?

[Rosie_0801]

I have to admit neither of these bother me nearly as much as people who post vehement advice or opinions of curriculum they haven't used or have only been using a short time. I think those warrant disclosure. :)

 

Having been accused of this myself, I can only say that I cannot take responsibility for anyone else's credit card usage. "Hey, look at X, it might do the trick for you" should not be read as "I know everything about everything and everyone and this thing is absolutely the right thing for you, so buy it right now because you should TRUST ME." If anyone reads suggestions in that way and is that "trigger happy" with their credit card, they need to get rid of their credit card. All "Hey, look at X because it might do the trick for you" really means is , "no one has suggested this thing to you yet and it might be what you are looking for, so have a look and see what you think."

 

If we get too carried away, there won't be anyone qualified to suggest anything! The author would look suspicious, people who've only heard about it will be afraid to mention it in case someone things they are strongly recommending rather than merely suggesting an idea the OP hadn't thought of yet, people who have used the product will be afraid to say anything in case others think they haven't used it long enough to be qualified in saying something, and anyone who has graduated a child using X product will feel unqualified to recommend it because they can't compare it to newer products!

 

I don't suppose I can see any reasons to get one's knickers in a knot. Those of you in the US can go along to a curriculum fair and look at it for real. The rest of us are obliged to read every review we can find online then cross our fingers and hit the purchase button.

 

Rosie

[Lovedtodeath]

 

Having been accused of this myself, I can only say that I cannot take responsibility for anyone else's credit card usage. "Hey, look at X, it might do the trick for you" should not be read as "I know everything about everything and everyone and this thing is absolutely the right thing for you, so buy it right now because you should TRUST ME." If anyone reads suggestions in that way and is that "trigger happy" with their credit card, they need to get rid of their credit card. All "Hey, look at X because it might do the trick for you" really means is , "no one has suggested this thing to you yet and it might be what you are looking for, so have a look and see what you think."

:iagree:

[angela in ohio]

"no one has suggested this thing to you yet and it might be what you are looking for, so have a look and see what you think."

 

I think you can still recommend something, but I think it is kind to include, "I don't actually use this, but..." or something similar. I'm not really referring to people who say the quote above, but more to people who get into lengthy recommendations for (or against) something without disclosing that they have never used it (or haven't been able to use anything, as their oldest is a toddler :D.)

[blessed2fosteradopt]

Having been accused of this myself, I can only say that I cannot take responsibility for anyone else's credit card usage. "Hey, look at X, it might do the trick for you" should not be read as "I know everything about everything and everyone and this thing is absolutely the right thing for you, so buy it right now because you should TRUST ME." If anyone reads suggestions in that way and is that "trigger happy" with their credit card, they need to get rid of their credit card. All "Hey, look at X because it might do the trick for you" really means is , "no one has suggested this thing to you yet and it might be what you are looking for, so have a look and see what you think."

 

If we get too carried away, there won't be anyone qualified to suggest anything! The author would look suspicious, people who've only heard about it will be afraid to mention it in case someone things they are strongly recommending rather than merely suggesting an idea the OP hadn't thought of yet, people who have used the product will be afraid to say anything in case others think they haven't used it long enough to be qualified in saying something, and anyone who has graduated a child using X product will feel unqualified to recommend it because they can't compare it to newer products!

 

I don't suppose I can see any reasons to get one's knickers in a knot. Those of you in the US can go along to a curriculum fair and look at it for real. The rest of us are obliged to read every review we can find online then cross our fingers and hit the purchase button.

 

Rosie

 

:iagree:As usual, the true voice of reason! Rosie, have you considered writing a blog? :001_smile:

[Donna A.]

without disclosing that they have never used it (or haven't been able to use anything, as their oldest is a toddler :D.)

 

Oh yeah, I've seen that a few times, too. :glare: Someone whose *oldest* child is in the Pre-K to 3rd grade range talks about a curriculum as if they know ALL about how it works across the board. I don't have a problem with someone saying "I called the publisher and asked this question, and here's what they said." But when they talk as if they have experience with the curriculum at that level and don't disclose their (young) children's ages... that's annoying.

 

There's another curriculum in particular for which I've seen many, many reviews (even on this board) claiming it doesn't do enough of this or have enough of that, when they didn't even use it beyond the early elementary years. Umm, how could they possibly know what the curriculum does or doesn't do for an 8th grader when they aren't there? Or maybe they use the curriculum *loosely*, but don't follow the author's recs (or read and use the TM) but then turn around and say "this doesn't work". I've seen that happen MANY times with MANY different curricula.

 

But none of those review problems are the result of someone having worked in a curriculum provider's booth at some point in time, or having a link to a publisher's website on their blog. :tongue_smilie:

[Lovedtodeath]

 

Or maybe they use the curriculum *loosely*, but don't follow the author's recs (or read and use the TM) but then turn around and say "this doesn't work". I've seen that happen MANY times with MANY different curricula.

I don't know why but this reminds me of my problem with TMs. I have ADD and I can't seem to follow some of them. Winterpromise and AAS have been difficult for me to even get off of the ground. I am hoping HOD proves easier. I like having one day at a time. We will see.

[Shelly in the Country]

Having been accused of this myself, I can only say that I cannot take responsibility for anyone else's credit card usage. "Hey, look at X, it might do the trick for you" should not be read as "I know everything about everything and everyone and this thing is absolutely the right thing for you, so buy it right now because you should TRUST ME." If anyone reads suggestions in that way and is that "trigger happy" with their credit card, they need to get rid of their credit card. All "Hey, look at X because it might do the trick for you" really means is , "no one has suggested this thing to you yet and it might be what you are looking for, so have a look and see what you think."

 

If we get too carried away, there won't be anyone qualified to suggest anything! The author would look suspicious, people who've only heard about it will be afraid to mention it in case someone things they are strongly recommending rather than merely suggesting an idea the OP hadn't thought of yet, people who have used the product will be afraid to say anything in case others think they haven't used it long enough to be qualified in saying something, and anyone who has graduated a child using X product will feel unqualified to recommend it because they can't compare it to newer products!

 

I don't suppose I can see any reasons to get one's knickers in a knot. Those of you in the US can go along to a curriculum fair and look at it for real. The rest of us are obliged to read every review we can find online then cross our fingers and hit the purchase button.

 

Rosie

 

:iagree:

[Donna A.]

I don't know why but this reminds me of my problem with TMs. I have ADD and I can't seem to follow some of them. Winterpromise and AAS have been difficult for me to even get off of the ground. I am hoping HOD proves easier. I like having one day at a time. We will see.

 

But see, that's a quirk you already know about yourself. That isn't necessarily what I'm talking about. Some people just do better doing their own thing, or like you said, a daily plan instead of weekly (or vice versa). But unless you're telling other people that WP or AAS *the curriculum* doesn't work, when you know the real reason is that doesn't work for YOU because you struggle with that type of TM, then you aren't leading people astray.

 

Two specific examples I've seen a lot over the years are BJU and Alpha Omega Lifepacs. Both of those curriculums are intended to be used with the TMs. The meat of the lessons are in the TMs. But I see people using just the student materials a lot and then telling others "you don't need the TM". Some try it without the TM just to save money; others really don't need the TM because they're strong in that particular subject. But to tell newbies (or newbies to the curriculum) that they don't need the TM is unfair because the curriculum is written TO use the TM in order to get the full and complete lessons. Lifepacs are NOT meant for the student to use independently with mom being hands-off, yet I see a lot of moms trying to do that very thing. Same with BJU. And then they say the problem is with the *curriculum*.

 

Another example: "CLE LA doesn't teach writing." Umm, yes it does, if you use the TMs. They also have a Writing Handbook that they recommend which is very inexpensive, and if you can afford to buy the LA, then you can afford to buy this little handbook. Also, CLE and AO Lifepacs both incorporate writing and other LA skills throughout the curriculum (in other subjects besides just the LA), but a mom uses *just* the LA, often without the TM, and then says "it doesn't teach writing". That's giving an unfair and incorrect assessment of the curriculum when they aren't even using it the way it's intended to be used.

 

Now if you were to say, "I don't like these big, bulky TMs" or "I don't like how the manual is laid out at this level", that's different. That's not the same as saying "this curriculum doesn't teach XYZ" when you didn't even bother to follow the author's instructions or use the TM at ALL. The latter is attacking the entire curriculum. The former is stating more accurately why the curriculum -- or that particular subject/level of the curriculum -- didn't work for you personally. And sometimes the layout or focus of a curriculum changes as it gets into upper levels, so it's just as unfair to imply that an entire curriculum doesn't do ABC when one has only used a small portion of it. See the difference?