The New York Times called it a “setback for the nearly $8 billion prekindergarten through 12th-grade education technology software market.”
InBloom CEO Iwan Streichenberger calls it “a real missed opportunity for teachers and school districts seeking to improve student learning.”
I’m sorry, but making my classroom part of “the nearly $8 billion… technology software market” does little to convince me that Iwan Streichenberger can do anything substantial toward “improving student learning” in my classroom.
I wonder just how dead inBloom actually is.
One of the sponsors of inBloom is a company called BloomBoard, a company started by Jason Lange and Eric Dunn in 2o1o. The two entities complemented one another: inBloom was to collect student data; BloomBoard is to collect teacher data for “professional development” and teacher evaluation– and embedded in teacher evaluation is student data.
BloomBoard needs student data. InBloom was to provide student data.
In true corporate reformer fashion, Jason Lange is a “CEO” who is now making a go at profiting from public education dollars after establishing his professional background in mergers and acquisitions and private equity.
Co-CEO Eric Dunn hails from the highly controversial Edison Learning, the reborn version of Edison Schools. (If managing schools leads to financial failure, just rename and change the game to education software focused on “achievement management solutions.”)
“Mergers and acquisitions” and “achievement management” are not terms on my resume. Then again, my entire professional career has been inside of the classroom. Imagine that.
According to this August 2013 BloomBoard Frequently Asked Questions file, inBloom and BloomBoard are not related:
7. inBloom, which collects student data to personalize learning pathways, recently inBloom, BloomBoard, and the Undeniable, Corporate Reform “Need” for Student Data | deutsch29: