There was a message posted on one of the NACOL forums yesterday that had the title I have used above. The post read:
Many NACOL Members have asked me about Obama’s position on K-12 online education after I posted the link and story about McCain’s $750 million proposal supporting K-12 online education.
Until today, I had not seen a position from Obama’s campaign. In a recent memo made public on July 30, Obama’s campaign opposes public funding of K-12 online education.
Remember: NACOL does not support or endorse any candidate, and seeks to provide information as it becomes available to members on important policy issues . . . This is the first posting I have seen related, so I am posting for your information.
Here’s the posting on GuidetoOnlineSchools’ blog): http://www.guidetoonlineschools.com/blog/2…line-education/
Campaign Update: Obama Opposed to Public Online Education
Online Education
Posted on August 4th, 2008 by editorThe July 30 edition of Education Week reveals a troubling Obama campaign memo that maligns publicly-funded online learning solutions. The memo reflects an unsophisticated perspective on online education, referring to most online schools as “for-profit” organizations that would squander taxpayer money.
While many online institutions of higher education are for-profit, this has not dissuaded the federal government and the military from hiring online school alumni and placing them in senior positions (the current Secretary of Transportation and the Director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion program are both University of Phoenix alumni). Moreover, in the case of secondary education, many online providers are either non-profit or heavily funded by state governments.
The offending portion of the memo, which argues “many online schools are for-profit ventures and may siphon money away from public schools,” was part of internal communications regarding the campaign’s education policy. The conversation likely arose as a reaction to McCain’s proposal to pump up to $750M into building both public and charter virtual schools. This bizarre reaction is troubling, especially because educators tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic and will likely overlook this bizarre position.
See the July 30 Education Week story provides additional background at edweek.org . . .
If forum users try to follow that link to Ed Week, they’ll hit a wall unless they are subscribers.
I bought access to the piece you cited to “check facts.” To be accurate, this is a quote from the EdWeek piece:
QUOTE The Obama campaign contends that it might be difficult for states and districts to provide oversight of virtual schools.“Many online schools are for-profit ventures and may siphon money away from public schools,” the Obama campaign memo said. Note that the quote from that mythical “campaign memo” (cited by Susan and EdWeek) quotes Senator Obama as saying “Many” online schools are for-profit ventures…. NOT ALL.
Each of you is free to interpret that statement as you will. But without seeing the full text of that “campaign memo” cited, I’m not yet ready to conclude that Senator Obama is anti-online learning. He might be anti for-profit online learning providers, but that’s hardly the same thing.
[stuff deleted]
There is ample evidence that states including Colorado, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Ohio (for starters) have experienced difficulties bringing their for-profit, fully online cyber-charters (and F-T-F charter schools) up to the same standards for academic accountability that the public schools are held to under NCLB.
[stuff deleted]
States like Colorado and Ohio already did “due diligence” and called in independent, qualified professional evaluators and policy researchers to examine the quality of teaching and learning in their State’s cyber schools. Folks in “the industry” didn’t like what those reports said very much. They were so politically unpopular with GOP “power brokers” (and their supporters) that in one of those States the agency that was responsible for doing the research and publishing the critical findings was put out of business completely!
[stuff deleted]
Others who commented made similar requests to find a copy of the complete memo.
One individual did make a comment that sort of went against the grain, at least in terms of the sentiments being expressed in the thread.
What this article tells me is that WE have not done a good enough job communicating the benefits of successful online learning in public education. I work in Pennsylvania and many districts get hit by large bills for students attending cyber charter schools. K-8 students tend to do well, but a large percentage of high school students attending these schools either fail or do not progress to the next grade.
As a union officer, I see student-to-teacher ratios of 40+ to 1 in cyber charter schools compared to ratios of less than half that for traditional public schools. This estimate includes special education and services.
I believe the Obama position is valid. Online learning and union leaders must develop better communication. I am a big believer in the potential of online learning. My district puts students through a provisional status and keeps close communications with everyone of our students. We boosted a 94% success rate for K-12 online students for the 2007 school year because we worked closely with every student. We still have 6 high school students that left the district last year for cyber charter. 5 of those students either failed or did not complete enough coursework to progress to the next grade level. With $11,000+ of public funding leaving the district with each student, we owe it to our kids to make sure they are receiving the support and resources they need to succeed. Until better checks-and-balances are in place, I can not argue against Obama’s current position. When we improve communication, expectations will be raised. Those expectations will change perceptions and everyone will benefit. Complaining that any individual fails to see a vision of the future is our fault, because we haven’t made that vision clear.
To which at least one individual responded:
XXX response is valid, but only in Pennsylvania, where online learning grew faster than state regulataors were able to absorb its impact. This is not the case in every state and NACOL for several years documented the various states’ situations diligently.
It has been a fascinating thread because it has really shown for me the differences in the K-12 online learning movement – particularly being the supplemental virtual schools and the cyber charter schools.
What are your thoughts?
That it was most likely a partial memo taken out of context. I am sure he is probably not all that familiar with online education and has been given bad information on some of the for profit institutions. Regardless of how he feels, we aren’t going away anytime soon!
Comment by Jay Bennett — August 8, 2008 @ 5:22 pm |
I’m not willing to say that it was or wasn’t taken out of context – and it has been interesting to see those on the NCAOL forum and in the blogsphere deciding either or not the memo is in or out of context, usually based upon their support of Obama or one of his competitors (not that I’m making that claim about you Jay, just that it has been a trend that I’ve seen in this discussion).
Comment by mkbnl — August 8, 2008 @ 5:50 pm |
I am very concerned by his position. Cyber school has the potential to greatly enhance the learning of our children. After ten years in the public school system I pulled my 7th grader and 10 grader from the school building into a cyber school. I have found that they are monitored much closer. I have a much better idea of what my children are being taught and they have gone from being c – d students to A-B students. They are learning far more than they learned before and avoid having to sit through time wasting periods. As an American I want the choice to give my children the best education in the best environment I can.
Comment by Jennifer Schumaker — January 21, 2009 @ 7:00 pm |
Jennifer, I think that you have to look deeper to find the nuances on the position being presented. The first caveat that strikes me is the quote “The Obama campaign contends that it might be difficult for states and districts to provide oversight of virtual schools.” In some jurisdictions this is true – Wisconsin was one of those for a while this past year, where the legislation was clearly at odds with the model of delivery utilized by some of the cyber charter schools that were operating (which is why they needed to be shut down until the legislation was changed). A second quote from the entry, “Many online schools are for-profit ventures and may siphon money away from public schools.” While this does describe some K-12 online learning programs, it doesn’t describe all of them (I’d agree most of them). So the use of the summative term “many” may be an exaggeration to say the least. However, the position that public money for education shouldn’t be taken from public schools and given to for-profit companies is something that everyone SHOULD be able to agree with (I stress should because I do understand that the educational choice movement in the United States often uses a measuring stick about what should be done that only extends as far as their own children, and not what is best for the country as a whole – a different way of thinking than I’m accustomed to myself which is why I don’t live in the US anymore).
Comment by mkbnl — January 21, 2009 @ 11:59 pm |