Jump to content

Pearson

From Consumer Rights Wiki
Revision as of 05:58, 14 January 2026 by Gem (talk | contribs) (→Products)

❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub

This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Learn more ▼

❗Article Status Notice: Inappropriate Tone/Word Usage

This article needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Specifically it uses wording throughout that is non-compliant with the Editorial guidelines of this wiki.

Learn more ▼

Pearson
File:Pearson plc logo.svg
Basic information
Founded 1998
Legal Structure Subsidiary
Industry Education, Technology, Software, Artificial Intelligence, Information Technology
Also known as
Official website https://www.pearson.com/

Pearson (formerly Pearson Education) is the for-profit global education business arm of the Pearson plc conglomerate. Pearson provides textbooks, homework system platforms, educational content, assessment tools, exam proctoring and digital platforms to schools, universities and professional certifications worldwide.[1] [2]

Consumer-impact summary

No Ownership Rights, Limited Access to Purchased Materials:

Pearson is phasing out ownership of print textbooks and replacing them with digital textbooks and subscription services. CEO John Fallon stated in a BBC interview, the move is made in "hopes the move will make more students buy its e-textbooks which are updated continually" and that the next generation of consumers, "they expect to rent not own." Purchase of print textbooks has been replaced by a monthly subscription service (Pearson+) and rented e-books have limited access periods that prevent access for future referencing.[3]

  • DRM Prevents Resale and Sharing of Purchased Materials: Pearson restricts copying, pasting and printing pages from purchased ebooks and digital content. Unlike a physical book, a student cannot sell, give away, or lend their digital copy.
  • Limited Access to Purchased Materials: Pearson uses access codes for both "owned" and "rented" books and learning materials that limit access, after which the student loses access to material they bought or rented. This limited access prevents people from referencing study materials for future courses and careers. Consumers are essentially purchasing a license to use, not own their books and education.

Inclusive Access & Default Opt-In Raises Tuition Fees

Pearson's use of Inclusive Access prevents students and professionals from purchasing books and materials from other sources, buying older edition textbooks, or renting materials through other sources.[4] Known in the publishing industry as Inclusive Access or Equitable Access programs, students are automatically charged by colleges or bookstores for access to mostly online versions of course materials assigned for their classes. This practice has enabled the growth of a digital subscription business model, as the default opt-in automatically bakes Pearson materials costs directly into student tuition and fees. Pearson claims it is to make things convenient and cheaper for students. [4] There have been criticisms over extensive, round about opt-out processes and mandatory Pearson courseware systems used to grade homework and administer tests that prevent those who opt-out from participating in their classes.[4]

Lack of Transparency, Non-Disclosure Agreements

Pearson VUE's exam policy requires test candidates to read and accept the terms of the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) or any other terms and conditions presented to them prior to the start of the exam, contributing to lack of transparency. [5]

Market Control

Pearson is the largest company in higher education with influence over test administration, teacher licensing, educational software, eBooks, grading, guidelines. The company has a history of undisclosed lobbying and applying non-profit funds towards their for-profit business.[6] The state of Texas has made efforts to move away from Pearson's 30 year monopoly over exam testing. [7][8]

Incidents

This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the Pearson category.

Pearson Surveillance of Children's Social Media Accounts (2015 - )

Pearson has admitted ongoing surveillance of online activity and social media accounts, comments made about their tests and test contents, and checking accounts against a list of students taking their exams. This has created backlash from parents and states against child surveillance. Among the information collected is is the child's name, state of residence, and which school they attend. The consortium of states has asked Pearson to stop checking names against its own list of students, but Pearson claims it is for due diligence and test security. [9] 

Standards Breaches and System Failures (2025)

Pearson was fined more than 2 million pounds ($2.68 million) in 2025 due to standards breaches spanning between 2019 and 2023 that affected tens of thousands of students. Pearson failed to identiy and manage inconsistent grading standards, despite Britain's Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation, Ofqual, highlighting the risk in 2022 and 2023.[10] A £1,200,000 fine was also levied against Pearson several years prior for prolonged, serious systemic failures to comply with the reviews of exam marking, which must be conducted by an examiner who is not the original marker. Pearson was charged for operating under a "false assumption" of compliance. Problems continued even after Ofqual flagged similar problems at other exam boards AQA and OCR. Pearson's breaches significantly undermined and eroded public confidence in UK testing qualifications.[11]

Data Breach and S.E.C. Settlement (2018)

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced a $1 million settlement against Pearson for omissions and misleading investors about a 2018 data breach involving a data breach related to its AIMSweb1.0 web-based student performance tracking software that resulted the administrator login credentials of 13,000 schools, district and university customer accounts, along with millions of student usernames and passwords stolen. Pearson did not disclose this breach to investors until it was contacted by the media.[12]

Unregistered Lobbying through University of Texas Endowments (2013)

$400,000 endowments were made by Pearson and their charity to The University of Texas College of Education Pearson Center for Applied Psychometric Research, which provides evaluation services for policymakers.[13] State policymakers have went on to award Pearson over $1 billion in contracts since 2010, suggesting a conflict of interest, including a 5-year deal worth $462 million in testing contract.[13] Although Texas made it illegal for testing company lobbyists to serve on advisory boards and make campaign contributions, Pearson was allowed to operate without oversight. The Texas stance against lobbying was initially aimed at Sandy Kress, the architect of No Child Left Behind policy and a Pearson lobbyist who served on several state advisory boards.[13]Public opinion, advocates and lawmakers argued Pearson had too much influence over the state's education policy without scrutiny. In 2021, Texas scaled down the 30-year Pearson monopoly by signing on ETS and Cambium Assessment, a Washington D.C.-based testing company a $262 million contract, reduced Pearson's contract to $126 million. [7][8]

Self-Dealing Fraud (2013)

Pearson, the education-publishing company was charged with a $7.7 million settlement for self-dealing fraud. [14] Investigations found that Pearson contributed funds to its charity, Pearson Foundation, who then sent $540,000 of the funds to the Chief State School Officers and the copyright holder of the Common Core State Standards. Along with the Gates Foundation, the Common Core course was sold back to the for-profit Pearson company for $15.5 million.[14] “The fact is that Pearson is a for-profit corporation, and they are prohibited by law from using charitable funds to promote and develop for-profit products,” said Attorney General Eric Scheniderman. [15] [7]

New York Statewide Exams Failure (2012)

Main article: link to the main CR Wiki article

Pearson obtained a $32 million contract to administer New York academic tests plus a $1 million contract to maintain testing services with the New York State Education Department and in 2012, a statewide systemic failure involving numerous test errors, printing errors, security breaches and lack of transparency affecting test administration and test scores of hundreds of thousands of students. Thousands of students were denied from graduating due to the Pearson failure on test scoring. The students were assigned further summer school attendance. The Department spokesperson's response was the victimized students would "benefit from the extra instruction in summer school."[16][17]

Products

  • MyLab®
  • MyMathTest® and Mastering®
  • Pearson Plus +  eTextbooks 
  • Revel® multi-media eTextbooks and interactive learning 
  • Connections Academy full time online virtual Schools
  • K-12 Online Schools[18]
  • K-12 Assessments for School Districts
  • Pearson Clinical Assessments for Professionals, including BASC™-3, aimsweb®Plus and Q-global®[19]

See also

Link to relevant theme articles or companies with similar incidents.

Add your text below this box. Once this section is complete, delete this box by clicking on it and pressing backspace.


References

  1. ↑ "Pearson". Retrieved 11 Jan 2026.
  2. ↑ "Pearson Exam Proctoring". Retrieved 11 Jan 2026.
  3. ↑ "Education publisher Pearson to phase out print textbooks". BBC. 2019-07-16.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Duplantis, Hilary (2024-08-24). "Inclusive Access in Higher Education: Unlocking Student Success". Pearson Inclusive Access.
  5. ↑ "Exam Policy". Pearson Vue. Retrieved 2026-01-12.
  6. ↑ Hu, Winnie (2011-12-21). "Testing Firm Faces Inquiry on Free Trips for Officials". New York Times.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Gross, Allie (2015-05-20). "Pearson loses Texas testing account to ETS after 15-year relationship". ABC 13 Eyewitness News.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 "Texas hires two companies to run STAAR, moving toward statewide online testing". ABC 13 Eyewitness News. 2021-01-05.
  9. ↑ Singer, Natasha (2015-03-17). "Pearson Under Fire for Monitoring Students' Twitter Posts". The New York Times.
  10. ↑ "Ofqual fines Pearson £2 million for rule breaches affecting thousands of students". GOV.UK. 2025-12-15.
  11. ↑ "Notice of monetary penalty: Pearson, Reviews of Marking". GOV.UK. 2022-12-13.
  12. ↑ Page, Carly (2021-08-16). "Pearson to pay $1M fine for misleading investors about 2018 data breach". Tech Crunch.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 Stanford, Jason (2013-12-19). "It's Time to Investigate Pearson in Texas, Too". HuffPost.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Gose, Ben (2014-11-18). "After a Scandal, Pearson Dissolves Foundation".
  15. ↑ Hernández, Javier (2013-12-12). "Educational Publisher's Charity, Accused of Seeking Profits, Will Pay Millions". The New York Times.
  16. ↑ Gonen, Yoav (2012-06-26). "7,000 city students wrongly blocked from attending graduation". New York Post.
  17. ↑ Otterman, Sharon (2011-08-12). "In $32 Million Contract, State Lays Out Some Rules for Its Standardized Tests".
  18. ↑ "Pearson K-12 Online Schools". Pearson.
  19. ↑ "Pearson Asessments". Pearson Assessments.

https://www.wiredacademic.com/2011/10/pearson-draws-criticism-from-new-york-to-texas-justified-or-unjustified/

https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/get-the-facts/corporate-myth-fact-030116.pdf

https://www.reddit.com/r/Teachers/comments/1glwk0/pearson_seems_to_control_everything_in_education/

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/05/pearson-shareholders-reject-pay-revolt-john-fallon

Retrieved from "https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Pearson&oldid=33443"