Peter Greene reports a shocking development (for operators of cyber-charters): Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf has said that he wants to reduce payments to cyber-charters, the online charter schools that are usually offered by for-profit corporations. Cyber-charters receive full state tuition for every student they enroll, and every dollar is subtracted from funding of local district schools that the student otherwise would have attended. Numerous studies have shown that the virtual schools have high attrition (as much as 50% a year), low test scores, and low graduation rates. But they are very profitable.
This is actually a shocking development for critics of virtual charters because their usual modus operandi is to sprinkle campaign contributions to key legislators and the governor, thus protecting their cash cow.
Greene writes:
Pennsylvania cyber charters are Very Sad, because the new governor of the state is threatening to end their long-standing party.
Years ago, a local departing superintendent offered a few words of advice. “If you want to get rich,” he said, “go start a cyber school.” He was not kidding. For the past decade-plus, running a Pennsylvania cyber charter has been as good as printing money. Despite their abysmal record of academic failure, Pennsylvania cybers rake in money hand over fist.
There’s no big secret to it– a cyber is paid the full per-capita home district cost of every student it enrolls. If it costs East Bucksawanna $10,500 per child to provide buildings and maintenance and infrastructure and resources and teachers and books and all the rest, then the Gotrox Cyber Acdemy gets that same $10,500, with which it provides the student with a computer (free!!) and access to a teacher or two (each of whom is carrying several hundreds of students).
It’s like running a dealership where every customer will pay the purchase price of their last brand new luxury automobile and in return, all you have to give them is some object with wheels.
This has been a point of contention in PA because every cent that goes into cyber coffers comes straight out of public school tax dollars. Every student that a cyber enrolls is a budget cut for public schools, and the cuts are vicious and deep and resulting in loss of programs, closing of schools, and furloughs of teachers. Taxpayers are complaining to public schools, “What the hell did you do with all that money I gave you,” and public schools reply, “That guy right over there [pointing at cyber charter] took it, and that guy right over there [pointing at legislator] says I have to let it happen.” People are getting pissed off. The baloney about how the money follows the child isn’t convincing, because people are now seeing that the child not only takes his own family’s money, but the tax dollars from all the neighbors on his street, too.
Cyber charters in PA have created whole new traditions. For instance, a cyber school may test a student to determine if the student has special needs. Why would they care? Perhaps because they get roughly $10K for regular students and $25K for students with special needs.
There’s also the tradition of enrollment day, on which guidance counselors and cyber schoolsters sit at their computers and toss students back and forth like hot potatoes on a reverse e-bay. Why? Well, there are two magic dates on the cyber calendar. After one certain date, the school gets to keep the money even if the kid leaves the cyber. After enrollment day, whoever still has the kid has to count that students test scores as their own.
Anyway. Governor Wolf has raised a fun question– how much does it actually cost to educate a cyber-student? Because shouldn’t it cost, you know, less? And if so, why should taxpayers pay more? No other public school (because, like all charters, cybers insist on calling themselves public schools) sets a budget that includes an extra couple of million just to feather the nest.
Just as a footnote, two operators of virtual charters are currently under indictment for the misappropriation of millions of dollars. Not like a principal or an assistant principal stealing petty cash. Big-time money. Millions.
The largest chain of virtual charters is K12, Inc. It was created by Michael Milken, noted non-educator, and his brother Lowell, also a non-educator. It is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
Just saw a tweet about this group – fairfundingpa.org
Once again, Peter nails it. As a Pennsylvania resident, I’m still in disbelief that we have a governor who actually gets it, too. But will the legislature back him up? Given that Wolf is a Democrat and the legislature is controlled by Republicans willing to hold his budget hostage to all kinds of nonsense, I fear politics will win the day. These are the same legislators lobbying Wolf to renege on the Commonwealth’s pension debt or else they won’t properly fund K-12 schools. It’s all a game in Harrisburg with other people’s money – mine, for instance. But thank goodness we have governors like Wolf willing to make positive change, truth tellers like Peter, and people like you, Diane, who help spread the word.
It is about time that a new governor that has done his homework takes charge of the crisis in education in Pennsylvania. He is trying to bring common sense back to government, and one sure way is to stop bleeding taxpayers’ money into failed experiments.
Charters are using non-compete clauses in Ohio:
“He resigned not because he was unhappy, but for a better position.
That’s when it got ugly at Summit Academy.
“They flipped out,” he said.
“I was just trying to better my family,” Kovitch said, thinking of his wife, his toddler son and the job offer in Richmond Heights, where he now makes $10,000 more and has greater job security.
He gave his two weeks notice, and a month later, an attorney for Summit Academy Management filed a lawsuit against Kovitch for breach of contract. He would be the first of 19 teachers to be sued, collectively in the past two years, for $28,900 — the amount the company alleges it cost to replace them.
The private company, headquartered in Akron, operates 26 publicly funded charter schools in Ohio, more than any other operator in Ohio’s heavily privatized charter school sector.”
Charter teachers in this state are paid less than public school teachers, so they probably need a non-compete clause or they can’t compete for teachers 🙂
As usual, the Ohio Department of Education says they have no authority over private companies so can’t even investigate this.
http://www.ohio.com/news/local/charter-school-company-summit-academy-management-sues-teachers-who-quit-1.598685#.VXdcMbQarfw.twitter
Last year, my intrepid 11-year-old daughter and I “fake-enrolled” her to PA Cyber Charter to hear their spiel, and it was impressive. Everything was free! free! free! My daughter would get her own laptop, free! She would get her own printer, free! The only thing we would have to provide was Internet access.
When Zoe asked how gym works in cyber school, she was told that a “ten-minute walk with Mom around the block” would count. When Zoe asked how she would make friends, they said that she would meet other kids during the PSSA state testing (which doesn’t take place until April, and is not exactly an ideal setting for friendship-building). The salesperson carefully avoided our questions about the student/teacher ratio and the cyber charter’s attrition rate.
When I asked who was paying for this “free” education, there was no mention of my local school district footing the bill. But the salesperson did stress that if Zoe wanted to play sports or audition for the school play, our local school district was obligated to let her try out and participate. In other words, not only would our local school district be forced to cut PA Cyber Charter a big check for Zoe’s tuition, it would also have to let her participate in all of the extra-curriculars that PA Cyber couldn’t provide. Talk about the best of both worlds for this invidious scam.
The necessity for state testing is actually one of the expenses cybercharters point to justify the cost. They have to rent facilities, hire people to oversee testing, etc. No one ever asks if it makes any sense to create two entire systems of publicly-funded schools.
“As a common-sense matter, bricks-and-mortar charter schools are more expensive to run because they have buildings, people to take care of the buildings and a lot more teachers,” said Dejarnatt.”
That’s true but there’s more than that. Local public schools have fixed costs. They have to be prepared, for example, to accept the students who move in and out of cybercharters. Cybercharters create a considerable amount of churn and local public schools pick up the entire burden of that. Obviously it’s disruptive and more expensive to be designated the “safety net” system for the charter sector by default or what really amounts to negligence by lawmakers. They have to be considered, and they never are.
Public schools can’t respond to these experiments quickly by cutting staff or facilities, because they have a duty to the children in the school and the next kid who comes in the door.
Speaking of Milken, from the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education website:
$140,000 in Prizes Awarded to Early-Stage Education Entrepreneurs
University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education & The Milken Family Foundation Announce 2015 Education Business Plan Competition Winners
Philadelphia, PA, May 13, 2015—The University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education (Penn GSE) and the Milken Family Foundation announced the winners of the sixth annual Milken-Penn GSE Education Business Plan Competition (EBPC) today. Winning ideas included platforms to connect parents with teachers, apps to provide personalized lesson plans for students with special needs, and programs to keep low-income students on track to finish college.
As the largest competition of its kind, the EBPC features multiple cash and in-kind prizes totaling $140,000. This year’s competition included a new path devoted to Idea-stage ventures as well as a competition pathway devoted to more mature, but still early stage, start-up Ventures. Prizes were awarded in both categories. All Idea and Venture Path finalists will receive access to a suite of tools through Microsoft BizSpark. Finalists may also be invited to join the Fall 2015 cohort of The Education Design Studio Inc. (EDSi), a hybrid incubator and seed fund built specifically for education ventures that was launched in collaboration with Penn GSE in 2013.Today’s winners include:
Venture Path
Grand Prize: $40,000
Kinvolved
The Venture Path Grand Prize winner will also receive $60,000 in Azure credits.
Additional Venture Prizes: $20,000 each
AdapTac Games, of Darien, CT, creates behavioral health educational tools for kids as a safe and enjoyable option for skills training. The company’s first app is a research-based game to help children with ADHD. Recognized for addressing the special education marketplace.
Byndr, of Conshohocken, PA, is a mobile learning management system for higher education aimed at universities in emerging markets. Based on social media platforms, Byndr is currently being used by three universities in India. Recognized for addressing the Higher Education marketplace.
Code Monkey, of Tel Aviv, Israel, teaches students aged 9-16 to code using an engaging online game that teaches a real-world programming language. Code Monkey is currently used in half of the schools in Israel. Recognized for addressing college readiness.
Mosa Mack Science, of Brooklyn, NY, a platform for teaching science to middle school students. Lessons start with Mosa Mack, an interactive cartoon in which the title character models scientific thinking to solve mysteries. Mosa Mack is being used in 2,500 classrooms. Recognized for addressing gender and cultural diversity in STEM learning.
You couldn’t make this stuff up! Penn is allowing the “entrepreneurial spirit” of a convicted felon to use their good name to reward students that develop apps or programs designed to help troubled students. It is a lot cheaper than tons of therapy and treatment. Who needs psychologists and therapists when you have the Milken phone app? I suggest that anyone that goes into “business” with Milken get a good lawyer to read the fine print. What could go wrong?
A most heartfelt thanks to Peter Greene and the commenters on this thread.
Just when you think that the “unfettered greed will answer every need” crowd couldn’t RaceToTheBottom any quicker—
They find new ways to lower the bar.
I just can’t forget all that claptrap about “you can’t solve a problem by throwing money at it” and “charters do more with less” and “public education is too expensive” and other clichéd distractors/decoys/misleads [borrowing from psychometric lingo for the “not best answer” on a standardized test].
The rheephorm rheetoric is rheeal slick.
The rheephorm reality is real sick.
Remember this posting the next time you read or hear about some eudpreneur or edubully or edufraud piteously complaining about a few bad apples spoiling the rheephorm barrel.
Yes, they are sincere. Sincere about keeping the $tudent $ucce$$ flowing. Flowing into their hands.
The rest? Just Marxist blather:
“The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”
Groucho couldn’t be any prouder…
😎
Wolf for President.
Or if Bernie gets in, Wolf can be Arne’s successor at DOE. He is cleaning up Corbett’s mess, and he could do the same with the mess Obama and Duncan are leaving behind.
I’m so happy for Pennsylvania that they have elected a governor who isn’t a paid shill for the reformistas.
Here is “liberal” Massachusetts the scenario is different. Governor Charlie Baker is what all reformistas dream of in the corner office. He has appointed James Peyser of the Pioneer Institute to be his education adviser. Peyser has never met a privatizing scheme he hasn’t loved – and he was once written off as a kook, but the center has moved so far to the right that now he’s mainstream.
There’s a conflict between Peyser and Mitchell Chester, Comissioner of Education and chairman of PARCC, like the Bud Light commercials of whether our high-stakes testing should be MCAS (Peyser) or PARCC. Peyser opposes Common Core as not enough rigor, so no to PARCC.
Out in the real world, however, there is a Day of Action today at the State House in support of a bill calling for a 3 year moratorium on the shiny new PARCC and an end to the high-stakes nature of this testing. A coalition of of AFT-MA, MTA, Citizens for Public Schools and Greater Boston Labor Council are supporting the legislation.
See: http://www.citizensforpublicschools.org/get-ready-for-a-week-of-action-for-less-testing-more-learning/
But the cities where most of the state’s poorest children live and learn can’t catch a break. Lawrence Public Schools are under state receivership, which may extend for 3 more years. Holyoke Public Schools have just been taken over by the state as well, despite overwhelming opposition from those who pay taxes in Holyoke. The bloodhounds are circling the Chelsea public Schools, which were already privatized once, for 20 years, under the aegis of Boston University. For Boston, there seem to be regulations written only aimed at its schools. Last year, the legislature declined to raise the charter school cap, but different rules apply in Boston.
“Boston could see new charter school seats for the first time since reaching a state-imposed charter limit in 2013.
In a weekly update, state Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester projects that up to 668 charter school seats could be approved in Boston.
Boston currently hosts 34 of the state’s 80 charter schools. Any new, approved charter schools could open by the fall of 2016, according to state education officials.
When it comes to the number of students allowed in charter schools in a given area, as well as charter funding caps, it all comes down to the district’s public school budget.
Under current law, the state may direct up to 9 percent of the money the district spends on students to fund seats at local charter schools. In low-performing school districts like Boston, the state can direct up to 18 percent of that spending to fund charter schools before it is capped.
The increase in charter seats in Boston is a reflection of Boston Public Schools’ more than $1 billion budget for the 2016 school year — the district’s largest budget ever.
With more money in the district, the cap on charter spending — and therefore seats — rises. Yet, a larger budget in Boston doesn’t necessarily mean extra funds.
While the 2016 school budget is the largest in Boston’s history, the district still faces numerous spending shortfalls. To compensate, the district plans widespread cutbacks including closing two schools, cutting back food services and reducing services at the district’s counseling center.
It’s the potential transfer of funds to charter schools from districts facing shortages that worries Massachusetts Teachers Association President Barbara Madeloni.
‘Districts like Boston, like Holyoke, they’re losing so much money every year to charter schools and that’s public money being put into private hands,’ Madeloni said. ‘It weakens the foundation of the schools. Above that we’re not fully compensating districts when that happens.’ ”
So here’s the rule – we don’t play fair with districts serving the most kids with the highest needs.
Compounding all of the above, Boston’s new superintendent is Tommy Chang, late of the Los Angeles iPad fiasco, whose previous experience is running a Green Dot Charter. He recently named a Chief of Staff, Makeeba McCreary, whose current position is “strategy and engagement consultant for Families for Excellent Schools in Massachusetts”, and his Director of Communications has this to say: “Boston Public Schools believes that all children deserve to attend a high-quality school near their home, whether that be a public or charter school,” said Richard Weir, a spokesperson for Boston Public Schools. The privatizers are now making policy from within the public schools.
Here’s the link from the quoted article:
http://learninglab.wbur.org/2015/06/04/new-charter-schools-could-come-to-boston/
Boston Public Schools demographics:
78% low income
87% non-white
19.5 % SWD
46% English is not the language of the home
29% limited English proficient or English language
learners
Click to access BPS%20at%20a%20Glance%2015-0610.pdf
Michael Milken, one of the founders of K-12, is not only a non-educator, but is a convicted felon who served time in prison for fraud.
Ah, yes, just the kind of person we want involved in teaching children…