George Polk Award – The Profit Motive Behind Virtual Schools In Maine

I discovered from Diane Ravitch’s blog that Colin Woodward, author of the Special Report: The profit motive behind virtual schools in Maine has been awarded the George Polk Award. I had to look this up myself, but the George Polk Awards are given to honour excellence in print and broadcast journalism.  I posted the article and accompanying infographic here:

• News – Special Report: The profit motive behind virtual schools in Maine
• Infographic: Following The Money And Influence For Digital Education

The infographic is worth repeating here…

Click to enlarge

Does This Apply To Cyber Charter Schools Too?

Last week I saw an article entitled Marketing and For-Profit Schools: Conflict of Interest? come across my electronic desk (through Twitter I think).

According to some accounts, for-profit colleges spend as much money on marketing as they do on instruction—sometimes more. Proponents of restrictions generally hope that the money saved on recruitment and marketing could be reinvested in school infrastructure, curriculum, programs, and instructors.

I don’t know if the figures hold true for for-profit corporations that operate in the K-12 environment, but I do know that cyber charter companies spend significant amounts of money on advertizing (while most supplemental statewides and district-based programs spend almost no money on advertizing).

Given that the educational management organizations (EMOs) that operate charter schools, both brick-and-mortar and cyber charter schools, often rely upon aggressive advertizing to increase enrollment numbers (which increases funding – i.e., profits – through an increase in Full-time equivalents [FTEs]).  At the same time, traditional public schools spent nothing or almost nothing on advertizing.  Is this a conflict of interest?

This Is What Happens When There Is Deregulation And No Oversight In For-Profit K-12 Online Learning!

This is what happens when legislators open up the K-12 market to allow for-profit online learning companies to operate with little to no oversight.

• Oregon charter school founders accused in $20 million racketeering lawsuit
• State Attorney General Racketeering Complaint
• AllPrep charter school network leaves hundreds in lurch
• Ed Choices/All Prep Investigation update

This is the situation that many of the neo-liberal think tanks, advocacy groups, and professional associations have been arguing for in many states.  They’ll say that they are against these kinds of actions – and I’m sure they don’t condone the theft of public funds.  But the bottom line is the massive deregulation they call for and arguing that any real measures of oversight are needless impediments to the growth of online learning, in the end will lead to more and more situations like this one!

News from the NEPC: Key Considerations in Funding ‘Choice’ Schools

From yesterday’s inbox…

Is this email not displaying correctly?  View it in your browser.

New Brief Points to Key Considerations in Funding ‘Choice’ Schools Contact William J. Mathis, (802) 383-0058, wmathis@sover.net URL for this press release: http://tinyurl.com/aa4fvcb BOULDER, CO (December 13, 2012) – The newest in a series of two- and three-page briefs summarizing current relevant findings in education policy research describes important issues and questions that policymakers should consider in determining public funding of alternatives to conventional public schools. Dr. William Mathis, author of Public Funding of School Choice, explains, “When lawmakers do decide to allocate public funding to choice schools, as they have increasingly done over the past couple of decades, they must then engage in a new level of scrutiny regarding the structure, level and conditions of these subsidies.” Mathis notes that the specific costs as well as the specific needs of students will vary from school to school, meaning that funding requirements can correspondingly vary widely. Similarly, wide variations among states in funding levels, funding sources, regulatory scrutiny and the details of choice mechanisms complicate the decisions policymakers face. Mathis also explains that recipients of public funding should be open to rigorous scrutiny that emphasizes equity, transparency, and the assurance that the funding is reaching the intended students. Dr. William Mathis is managing director of the National Education Policy Center, housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education. Public Funding of School Choice is part of Research-Based Options for Education Policymaking, a multipart brief that takes up a number of important policy issues and identifies policies supported by research. Each section focuses on a different issue, and its recommendations to policymakers are based on the latest scholarship. The brief is made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. Find William Mathis’s brief on the NEPC website at: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/options The mission of the National Education Policy Center is to produce and disseminate high-quality, peer-reviewed research to inform education policy discussions. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence.  For more information on the NEPC, please visit http://nepc.colorado.edu/. This brief is also found on the GLC website at http://www.greatlakescenter.org/

follow on Twitter |   friend on Facebook

Washington Post: Michigan Coalition Opposes Race To Top Finalist In Letter To Obama, Duncan

I wanted to re-post this today, given that I am one of the many signatories, and that the collection of lame duck bills includes provisions to drastically expand online learning in the state with not checks or balances and no measures to ensure quality.  It essentially throws open the doors to a system of K-12 online learning that, to date, has produced very poor results in Michigan (e.g., one news item noted that the Michigan Virtual Academy reported results lower than that of the Detroit Public School District).

For those not familiar with what is happening in Michigan, I would recommend reading Michigan again: ‘This bill … disenfranchises voters, ends their local control, and unconstitutionally hands taxpayer-owned property over to for-profit companies.’

---

Michigan coalition opposes Race to Top finalist in letter to Obama, Duncan

A large coalition of Michigan parents, PTA leaders, K-12 teachers, professors and others — including the superintendent of Detroit Public Schools — sent a letter (see text below)  to President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan protesting the selection of a new education entity as a finalist in the latest edition of Race to the Top, the administration’s signature education initiative.

The U.S. Education Department this week announced 61 finalists in the latest Race to the Top edition, this one designed to award a total of nearly $400 million in federal funds to school districts that agree to implement specific school reforms. The list of finalists was somewhat unusual, given that it was intended for districts but a few individual public charter schools won, as well as charter school networks. In Michigan, the only finalist named was the “Education Achievement Authority,” a newly created entity that will operate  the lowest performing 5 percent of schools in Michigan. The state government had applied to three previous rounds of Race to the Top, not winning any of them.

Here’s the letter that explains why so many people in Michigan oppose the naming of the EAA as a Race to the Top finalist:

Dear President Obama and Secretary Duncan:

We are encouraged that education continues to occupy such an important space in the national agenda, and we thank you for your efforts in promoting dialogue around this critical issue.  We are writing to share our deep concerns with the possible awarding of Race to the Top funds to the “Education Achievement Authority” or EAA in the state of Michigan.

The EAA, a “state reform” district modeled after the problematic New Orleans Recovery School District (RSD), was established through an August 2011 interlocal agreement between then-Emergency Manager of Detroit Public Schools Roy Roberts and Eastern Michigan University under the former Public Act 4 of 2011 (“The Emergency Manager Law”), an act that was repealed by the Michigan electorate in the November 6 election. Shortly thereafter, the Detroit Board of Education voted to disband the EAA and to sever ties with Eastern Michigan University.  Despite the voice of the electorate, our Michigan state legislature is pressing forward with bills during the lame duck session that would codify the EAA into state law.

To continue reading…