In her statement, she disputes many of SRA/McGraw-Hill's assertations, gives a clearer picture of timelines/who said what, admits that she should've known who the contract was with, and thanks McGraw-Hill for posting that contract... since she now believes they owe her $5,000.
There's MUCH of interest in her statment. This is probably my favorite part:
I had agreed to do two of my well-known speeches. “The Heroes in My Life” and “Tales and Talk”. My corporation produces videos of both of these speeches. Within the content of both of these programs I make reference to the NCLB and it’s destructive and counterproductive force in American education today.
I find this pretty darn amusing, assuming it's true. McGraw-Hill contracted an author for talks that she is known for, that reference NCLB negatively... then they cancel the appearance for that very reason. Yet, McGraw-Hill has stated, here on the blog and elsewhere, that Ms. Polacco was going to give a "public policy speech." Nice spin... but apparently ONLY spin.
Also from Ms. Polacco...
Another ridiculous assertion by SRA/McGraw Hill is: “Patricia Polacco was to be paid for her appearances, therefore making her an employee of SRA/McGraw Hill, which means that she is obliged to represent the views of our company”…
I have NOT yet seen that statement by SRA/McGraw Hill. I'd love to find it, however. If any of you can point me to it (including, of course, anyone representing SRA/McGraw Hill either from their New Jersey base or their Ohio contingent), please do so.
The point of this blog wasn't to be involved in stories like this, but SRA/McGraw-Hill came here and has left unanswered questions. They made this bed, so I'm just keeping it warm til they come back and sleep in it.