|
|
|
AEP Online |
Member of the Month SpotlightAn interview with Lois Eskin of Lois Eskin Associates. Q: Please describe your company A: We are a 17-year-old consulting firm for publishers,
organizations, and developers of instructional materials.
Our services include strategic planning, organizational,
process and procedures analysis, employee satisfaction
studies, product, market and competitive analysis,
and market planning. We also offer a number of seminars
to publishers and developers. Our research services
are extensive: we do proprietary studies of all types
and, as you know, we conduct syndicated studies of
the supplementary market. A: Some publishers have always strived to create research-based product; others have relied more on intuition and the input of a limited number of customers and sales/marketing employees. NCLB, for all of its pitfalls, has focused educators on the importance of research in determining which instructional models to use with children. This focus, in turn, is causing publishers to reexamine and rev up the role of research in their development processes. Q: What are the biggest implications of NCLB for principals and teachers? A: NCLB has implications for all aspects of the educational process. Most immediately, educators are frantically trying to decide what to do to help their students pass the high-stakes tests. Obviously, publishers that supply evidence to this effect have an edge over those that do not. But the bigger implications are much more serious. For example, what will happen to instruction in the arts? Extracurricular programs? Critical and creative thinking? The emotional stability of teachers and students under pressure to pass the tests? The relationship between parents and the schools? The legal implications for schools that don't measure up? Will the option to move students to other schools ultimately institutionalize public funding for private education? I could go on and on ... Q: What is the most common mistake you see publishers make when devising their research strategies? A: Some publishers do not have a research strategy. Instead, they are reactive, rather than proactive. Others tend to rely on research of just one type or from just one source. For example, AEP's recently sponsored research on supplementary publishing gathered industry statistics from its member publishers and consolidated it. This information can be very helpful in analyzing one's own operating processes, sales, and focus. On the other hand, our own Study of the Grade K-6 Supplementary Instructional Materials Market (K-6 Supplementary Study) gathers data from teachers and principals and is enormously helpful in tracking trends, product and marketing preferences, competitive information, and the like. Focus groups, telephone interviews, and internal reports serve yet other purposes. All are useful; none should be used exclusively. Q: Can you give an example of research that you
think has been particularly effective? A: The timely execution of a carefully thought-out and ongoing plan that includes both qualitative and quantitative research and is conducted by reputable researchers is the most effective approach. Subscribers tell us our K-6 Supplementary Study is highly effective. But I hope it isn't the only research they rely on. Q: Why did you decide to join AEP? A: In 1998, AEP invited me to present the results of an earlier edition of the K-6 Supplementary Study at AEP's annual meeting. I was so impressed with the quality of the meeting and the members that I joined immediately, recognizing that this organization was likely to become a powerful voice for supplementary publishers. And it has!!
Questions, ideas, or in need of more information? Please contact Stacey Pusey at 856-241-7772.
|
|
©
2008 The Association of Educational
Publishers
|
|
