Archives for the month of: July, 2012
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Another Charter School Scandal: Ho-Hum

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
3

I guess we will have to get used to this sort of thing.

Some charter schools in Florida padded the enrollment–er, made a miscalculation–of the number of students in their program.

Here is the story:

An audit of Coronado High School found there was no documentation to show 465 students participated in an on-the-job course. The school could provide documentation of 13 students in the course. The audit at North Nicholas High revealed 102 of 372 students were incorrectly reported.

Nice to see they were audited.

The governor had three charter school executives on his transition team.

He named one of them to the State Board of Education.

Does anyone care?

Remember when we used to worry about conflicts of interest?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Florida, For-Profit, Privatization

Creationists in Louisiana Win State Funding

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
49

The voucher legislation in Louisiana will send millions of dollars to Christian academies that repudiate evolution and teach creationism. Their students will never learn about evolution other than to hear it ridiculed.

At least 20 of the religious schools that receive voucher students teach creationism, and as this researcher shows, that may be only the tip of the iceberg.

This is a descent into ignorance.

But in the eyes of a group of state superintendents called Chiefs for Change (the state superintendents of Florida, Oklahoma, New Jersey, New Mexico, Maine, Louisiana, Rhode Island, and Tennessee), this is called bold and visionary “reform.”

We are in deep trouble if we continue in this direction.

The Louisiana reforms should be recognized for what they are: An embarrassment to our nation.

Louisiana has made itself an international joke.

But for the children, it’s not funny.

Categories Chiefs for Change, Curriculum, Education Reform, Jindal, Bobby, Louisiana, Vouchers

Prosecutor Pledges to Pursue Charter School Scams

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
1

After a federal grand jury returned a 62-count indictment against a charter school founder and her associates, claiming that $6.5 million in public funds was misused, the U.S. Attorney declared that he would pursue any charter school operators who abused the public trust. The attorney for the defendant said she was innocent and would offer a strong defense against the charges.

“This indictment in this case alleges that June Brown and her four co-conspirators used the charter school system to engage in rampant fraud and obstruction,” Memeger said during an afternoon news conference. “My office will continue to vigorously investigate and pursue those charter school operators who defraud the taxpayers and deprive our children of funds for their education.”

He was joined at the announcement by FBI Special l Agent in Charge George C. Venizelos and Steven Anderson, the special agent in charge of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Inspector General for the Mid-Atlantic region. Agents from both federal agencies were involved in the years-long investigation with Assistant U.S. Attorney Anthony Kyriakakis that led to the indictments.

“The bottom line is running a charter school does not give you a license to steal,” Venizelos said.

Every penny that was lost due to fraud was taken from the public schools of Philadelphia.

The School Reform Commission of Philadelphia hopes to expand the charter sector, adding dozens more deregulated and lightly supervised schools.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Philadelphia, Privatization

Chicago Teachers Union Wins This One

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
15

As you may recall, Mayor Rahm Emanuel in Chicago has demanded that teachers teach a longer school day without additional compensation.

For that and other reasons (including rising class size), the Chicago Teachers Union took a strong stand in opposition. It took a strike vote, and 98% of those voting gave their approval, which was unexpected and unprecedented. The CTU held a rally, and 10,000 members turned out.

Mayor Emanuel accepted a deal that met the CTU’s demands. Its members will not have to work longer hours without pay. The school day will be extended, as he wants, and the teachers who provide the extra time will be selected from the pool of veteran teachers who were laid off.

This was a stunning victory for the CTU. It shows what happens when a union is resolute and united, and its demands are just.

Here is the CTU press release, which is the only information available at this time:

CPS STEPS BACK FROM LONGEST SCHOOL DAY; A VICTORY FOR STUDENTS AND TEACHERS
INTERIM AGREEMENT MINIMIZES LONGER TEACHER WORK DAY,  STAFFS LONGER STUDENT DAY THROUGH NEW HIRES,                                 GUARANTEES NEW JOBS TO DISPLACED TEACHERS
CHICAGO – The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) bargaining committee today accepted an interim agreement that many thought impossible:  The Chicago Public Schools (CPS) has finally backed off the unworkable seven-hour 40 minute teacher work day and instead will make only modest increases in the length of teacher work days.  CPS thus reverses its publicly-announced policy that the CTU has consistently criticized as bad for both students and teachers.  CPS will staff the longer student day by hiring nearly 500 new teaching positions, and it has finally agreed to recall rights for teachers.  Tenured teachers displaced in 2010, 2011 and 2012 will constitute the pool from which principals must hire the new teachers.
“This is movement in the right direction, but this does not settle the outstanding and mandatory issues in the contract,” said Lewis. “It is too bad this solution—which was actually presented months ago—was rejected out of hand.  It has taken a march of nearly 10,000 educators, a strike authorization vote and a fact-finder’s report to get CPS to move on this issue. This is yet another example of the CTU’s determination and dedication to fighting for solutions that will strengthen our schools.”
Length of the School and Work Day is a permissive subject of bargaining under the Educational Labor Relations Act, and CPS previously announced that it was increasing the length of both elementary and high school work days to seven hours and 40 minutes without bargaining with the Union.  But CTU unity and determination has cause CPS to rethink its position, and the new agreement scales these times back significantly, while restoring work opportunities to displaced teachers.
The new schedules will be implemented with the start of the Track E school year, so that no disruption will occur to students or teachers as a result of ongoing contract negotiations.  It is expected that the new hiring will include many recently-neglected areas of instruction, including art, language, library science and physical education, thus achieving a CTU goal of a better school day, not just a longer school day.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Under the agreement, teacher work days will be 420 minutes (7 hours), which will include a 45-minute duty-free lunch during the day, which is the same length of day for schools that currently have an open campus.  Instructional minutes will be capped at 296 per day, which is no more than was allowed under the expired contract.  Average daily preparation time will be increased from 62 minutes to 64 minutes.  Student days will also be 420 minutes.
Since the student day will be longer CPS has also agreed to hire about 750 new teachers to cover the extra periods, including 477.5 new positions that will be filled under the Interim Agreement.  CPS has finally agreed that any tenured teacher displaced in 2010 or after can apply for an open position, and as long as at least 3 qualified applicants apply for a position the principal must hire a displaced teacher and cannot hire off the street.  Similar to the current process under Appendix H, the principal may elect not to retain the teacher after the semester is completed, but if so, the principal must hire the replacement out of the same pool of displaced teachers.  Any teacher retained beyond the semester becomes a permanent appointment.
A summary of the old school day (open campus), CPS announced Full School Day, and the settled day are shown below:
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Components of Teacher Day
Current Default
(open campus)
Announced
Full School Day
Interim
Agreement
Instructional Minutes
296
315
296
Morning Preparation
30
25
0
Midday Preparation
32
60
64
Duty-Free Lunch
45
45
45
Supervision
17
15
15
Total On Site
Work Time
420
460
420
 
HIGH SCHOOLS
Under the Interim Agreement, high school teacher work days will be increased 14 minutes, from 421 minutes to 435, but instructional minutes will be increased by no more than 7 minutes, from 244 to a maximum of 251.  Average daily preparation time will be increased up to 10 minutes, to a maximum of 102 minutes, depending on class length.  Critically, CPS has also agreed that no teacher will be required to teach a sixth class, as many teachers would have been compelled to do under the original CPS plan, unless that teacher receives additional compensation as required under the expired contract.  Student days will be 435 minutes on average per week.
A summary of the old school day, CPS announced Full School Day, and the settled day are shown below:
HIGH SCHOOLS
Components of Teacher Day
Current Schedule
 
Announced
Full School Day
(regular day)
Interim
Agreement
Instructional Minutes
244
Up to 276
248 to 251
 
Morning Preparation
0
10
0
Midday Preparation
92
92
92 to 102
Duty-Free Lunch
46
46
46 to 51
Passing Periods
38
36
up to 36
Total On Site
Work Time
421
460
435
 
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS CONTINUE
Though this Interim Agreement is significant, it does not settle many important issues that remain the subject of ongoing negotiations and discussions.  
For example, the Agreement does not settle the length of the school year, and it does not settle teacher compensation.  The Chicago Teachers Union and the Board of Education remain far apart on compensation issues, and this agreement does not change the timeline for CTU to exercise its full rights in contract negotiations.
“This Interim Agreement would not have been possible had we not shown our discipline and determination to be treated with respect,” said Lewis. “We are making real progress but we must keep up the pressure for a fair contract.”
###
 
The Chicago Teachers Union represents 30,000 teachers and educational support personnel working in the Chicago Public Schools, and by extension, the more than 400,000 students and families they serve.  The CTU is an affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers and the Illinois Federation of Teachers and is the third largest teachers local in the United States and the largest local union in Illinois.  For more information please visit CTU’s website at www.ctunet.com
 
Categories Chicago, Emanuel, Rahm, Teachers and Teaching, Unions

No Accountability for Voucher Schools in Louisiana

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
10

John White spelled out the rules for nonpublic schools receiving vouchers, and few if any will be held accountable for student performance.

Most of the students taking public money with them are in kindergarten, first and second grades, where they are not tested.

And there will be no consequences for the voucher schools if their students fail:

White’s plan requires voucher students in grades 3-11 to take standardized tests like public school students, including the LEAP exam taken by fourth- and eighth-graders take. [But not all the students in the school.]

However, unlike public school students voucher recipients will not be required to pass LEAP to move to the next grade.

Private schools will not get letter grades, which their public school counterparts do.

The Reuters story about the voucher system spells it out: Even if students fail the state tests,there will be no accountability for the private schools.

Now we begin to understand what the voucher program is about.

It is not about helping the children. They can continue to fail and the state doesn’t care.

It is not about improving public education, as the money will come out of the public schools’ budget.

It is not about accountability, as the voucher schools won’t’ be held accountable.

So what is it really about? Is it about defunding public education? Is it about “choice” for the sake of choice, without regard to the consequences?

What’s the point?

 

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, Jindal, Bobby, Louisiana, Vouchers

Stephen Krashen: How Much Testing?

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
11

Stephen Krashen, professor of linguistics at the University of Southern California (emeritus), wrote this post to explain how the adoption of the Common Core will change testing in the nation’s schools:

HOW MUCH TESTING?

At first glance, the assessments now being developed to accompany the common core standards do not appear to be much more than we already have, at least in terms of subject-matter covered and grade level.  According to the organizations working on developing standards and tests (PARCC and SBEC), as is the case with NCLB there will be summative end-of-the-year tests in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school and these additions: Writing is added as a component of language arts, and voluntary interim testing will be offered through the academic year.

There is reason to suspect there will be a lot more.  As Jim Crawford has stated, “With standards come tests; with more standards, more tests” (letter submitted to the New York Times, July 17, 2012).  PARCC accepts this, urging the development of an accountability system that covers P-20 (pre-school through college), and “that supports the full implementation of the common standards” (PARCC: On the Road to Implementation: Achieving the Promise of the Common Core Standards, 2010, Achieve, Inc. p. 4).

More Subjects

There are clear signs that the tests will not be limited to language arts and math. US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, in his 2010 presentation “Beyond the Bubble Tests” states that “the study of science, history, foreign languages, civics and the arts” should be considered part of the “vital core” and deserve to be assessed. The Department of Education’s current proposal to reauthorize the ESEA, he announced, would  “allow states to include subjects other than math and English language arts in their accountability system … the reauthorization blueprint includes millions for the research, development, and improvement of additional high-quality assessments–which could include science and foreign language tests.“

The secretary pointed out that science is an area that should be tested, but development of science assessments has to wait until science standards are developed.  These standards are being constructed now (http://www.nextgenscience.org).

Similar statements are made in the Blueprint for Reform (US Department of Education, 2010).

Test us too!

The professional educational organizations in a variety of subjects (I must emphasize, the professional organizations, not necessarily the teachers) have endorsed the idea of standards and tests in areas other than language arts and math.

Twenty-one educational organizations have asked for “standards, assessments, accountability systems, and public reporting of achievement” for science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, geography, health and physical education.” (http://www.ascd.org/public-policy/well-rounded-education.aspx.)  It was clear that they were not only asking for standards but for tests as well: Their request specifically mentions “standards, assessments, and accountability systems.”

More Grade Levels

PARCC is constructing optional interim tests to be made available for grades K-2, but explicitly notes that the goal is K-12, with benchmarks starting at grade 3: “The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) is a consortium of states working together to develop a common set of K-12 assessments in English and math anchored in what it takes to be ready for college and careers. These new K-12 assessments will build a pathway to college and career readiness by the end of high school, mark students’ progress toward this goal from 3rd grade up, and provide teachers with timely information to inform instruction and provide student support. “  (http://www.parcconline.org/about-parcc) (Note that as stated above, PARCC eventually expects assessments for P-20.)

Meanwhile, the US Department of Education has announced a Race to the Top grant competition, the “Early Learning Challenge,” to “design and implement an integrated system of high-quality early learning programs and services” for “infants, toddlers, and preschoolers.” (http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-earlylearningchallenge/index.html).

This means more standards, and of course more testing: “This competition rewards States that will implement high-quality early learning and development standards and comprehensive systems of assessments aligned with these standards. The implementation of these standards and assessments will ensure that early childhood educators have the information they need to understand and support young children’s growth and development across a broad range of domains so that significantly more young children enter kindergarten ready to succeed.”  (From: Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge Application for Initial Funding, CFDA Number: 84.412 , section C).

The Early Learning Challenge was termed “Race to the top for tots” by the New Brunswick Patch. I commented on this initiative here: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2011/07/stephen_krashen_race_to_the_to.html

It also needs to be pointed out that others are eager to test small children: ACT has developed a test to determine if children are ready for kindergarten. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/02/career-test-for-kindergar_0_n_1644215.html.   Diane Ravitch asked if this is “a sign of educational madness.” https://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/04/a-sign-of-educational-madness/.

Pre-tests?

The US Department of Education has announced its support of “value-added testing”, that is, the use of increases in standardized test scores as a measure.

Secretary Duncan supports the use of value-added measures to evaluate teachers, but maintains that they should not be the only factor in evaluating teachers. He also endorsed value-added measures as a means of rating the Schools of Education teachers     attended:

“Let’s do what the State of Louisiana is doing — tracking student scores to teachers and teachers back to their colleges of education so we know who is doing a good job of preparing educators –.” (http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/secretary-arne-duncans-remarks-statehouse-convention-center-little-rock-arkansas)

Scathing criticism of the use of value-added measures in this way has not changed the Department of Education’s position  (See Note below).

Diane Ravitch (personal communication) has pointed out that value-added measures could very well necessitate the use of pre-tests in the fall.  Measuring growth from spring to spring does not take into account the effects of summer – it has been repeatedly documented that children of poverty fall behind during the summer. The loss in reading is due to the lack of access to books (Heyns, B. 1975.  Summer Learning and the Effect of School. New York: Academic Press.  Kim, J. 2003. “Summer reading and the ethnic achievement gap,” Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 9, no. 2:169-188; Entwisle, D. E., Alexander, K. L. and Olson, Linda Steffel. 1997. Children, Schools and Inequality. Westview Press.)

Of course, pretesting in all subjects would vastly increase the amount of testing done.

 

SUMMARY

Current plans are to add a writing test, and to add interim testing to what is already required under NCLB.

There is every reason to suspect that we will soon have standardized testing in many different subjects, not just language arts and math.

There is every reason to suspect that standardized tests will be given to very young children, before grade 3, and there may be assessments to cover all of “P-20.”

There is every reason to suspect that there will be pre-tests in the fall.

Even if the new tests will not require more time in administration and preparation than the tests we have now, we may soon have more testing than ever seen on planet Earth.

Note:  Teachers’ value-added ratings based on previous years are weak predictors of test scores at the end of a year with new students. A teacher who succeeds in boosting scores with one group will not necessarily succeed with others (Sass, T. 2008. The stability of value-added measures of teacher quality and implications for teacher compensation policy.  Washington DC: CALDER. (National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational Research.)  Kane, T. and Staiger, D. 2009. Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation. NBER Working Paper No. 14607 http://www.nber.org/papers/w14607).

Also, different tests result in different value-added scores for the same teacher (Papay, J. 2010. “Different tests, different answers: The stability of teacher value-added estimates across outcome measures.” American Educational Research Journal 47,2.).

In addition, there are ways of pumping up test scores without student learning, including teaching test-taking strategies and making sure weak students don’t take the test.  See also: https://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/16/why-vam-is-junk-science/

Categories Common Core, Education Reform, Testing

Parent Trigger Fires Again

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
1

Yesterday a judge in California ruled in a case involving the state’s so-called “parent trigger” law that parents who signed a petition to convert their school to a charter would not be permitted to rescind their signatures. They could choose to sign, but they could not change their mind afterwards.

This was a law passed in 2010 by the legislature to allow parents at a low-performing school to seize control of their school, fire the staff, and hire a charter operator to run the school.

In fact, the law was a stealth tactic by charter advocates to gain a larger market share by duping parents.

This is an excellent summary of what happened, written by San Francisco parent advocate and journalist Caroline Grannan.

An organization called Parent Revolution, funded by the Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation and the Walton Foundation, has led the “parent trigger” efforts.

It has sent paid organizers into two communities in California to gather signatures. Both ended in legal limbo as supporters and opponents challenged the validity of the signatures.

In the second of the two districts, the targeted school was Desert Trails in Adelanto, where Parent Revolution circulated two petitions. One called for improvements in the two schools, the other called for the conversion to a charter. When only the petition to convert to a charter was presented to the local school board, the battle was on.

As the wrangling intensified, a number of parents asked to have their names taken off the petition. They had changed their mind. They did not want their school converted to a charter.

The judge ruled yesterday that they were not permitted to take their name off the petition.

This was exciting for charter advocates, even winning them a celebratory editorial in Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal.

The Wall Street Journal exulted:

The ruling effectively hands Desert Trails to the parents, ordering the district out of their way as the judge says they can “immediately begin the process of soliciting and selecting charter school proposals.” This represents a potentially revolutionary power shift. For all the PTA meetings and solemn assurances from superintendents and union leaders that parent input into public schools is sacred, the ability of parents to force change has typically been nil.

The editorial sounds as though the Journal joined Occupy Wall Street and would be equally happy if disgruntled tenants seized control of public housing or other public facilities. Somehow, I doubt it.

There are complicating factors to the ruling. One is the inevitable appeal: If parents sign a petition, why should they not be free to take their name off? Is their choice only for one time, never for the future?

And the ruling ignores the clear language of the law, which does allow parents to remove their names from a petition: The language in the “Final Statement of Reasons” on the Parent Empowerment Act states, “Nothing in these regulations precludes a parent/guardian from withdrawing his/her signature from a petition at any time,” according to the Victorville Daily Press, the local daily newspaper.

And the other, as pointed out in a recent Los Angeles Times editorial, is that charter operators have lost their appetite for taking control of low-performing schools. They much prefer to start new schools, where they can select the students. This increases their odds of producing high test scores.

Florida parents will be watching this controversy closely, as Jeb Bush and Michelle Rhee and ALEC will be back next year, after losing on the “parent trigger” this past spring. The united opposition of Florida parents stopped the move to create another way to convert public schools to private management.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform

Tell the Truth about American Education (Math)

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2012 //
16

So-called reformers say again and again that the U.S. education system is a failure and that academic performance is declining.

What they never tell you is that the test scores of American students are at their highest point in history, as recorded on the only longitudinal measure of performance, the federal test called the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Maybe the reformers don’t know that. You can educate them with facts.

In an earlier post, I reported the reading scores. The gains in reading have been slow, steady, and significant.

In mathematics, the gains have been large.

There are two different versions of NAEP.

One is called the long-term trend trend, and it reports the scores on tests that have been given from 1973 to 2008.

The long-term trend tests hardly ever change, so they provide a consistent yardstick over decades.

The other is called “main NAEP,” and it has been reported periodically since 1990 or 1992 (depending on the subject).

Unlike the long-term trend NAEP, main NAEP gets revised and updated, yet still has a consistent trend for academic performance over the past 20 years.

Main NAEP is now given every other year; the long-term trend NAEP is given every four years.

Here are the long-term trend data for mathematics. Remember, same test given every four years from 1973 to 2008:

White students: Age 9, up 25 points; age 13, 16 points; age 17, up 4 points.

Black students: Age 9, up 34 points; age 13, up 34 points; age 17, up 17 points.

Hispanic students: Age 9, up 32 points; age 13, up 29 points; age 17, up 16 points.

On the main NAEP, from 1990 to 2011, here are the data:

White students: fourth grade, up 49 points; eighth grade: up 23 points.

Black students: fourth grade, up 36 points; eighth grade, up 25 points.

Hispanic students: fourth grade, up 29 points; eighth grade, up 24 points.

Asian students: fourth grade, up 29 points; up 28 points.

Don’t let anyone tell you that American education is failing and declining. It’s not true. 

Share this.

Source: “The Nation’s Report Card Mathematics 2011: National Assessment of Educational Progress,” U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

“The Nation’s Report Card: NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress, Reading 1971-2008; Mathematics 1973-2008,” U.S. Department of Education

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, NAEP

Why Won’t They Let Teachers Teach?

By dianeravitch
July 24, 2012 //
7

I asked a question about the value of online learning, and this teacher responded somewhat off-topic. But what he says raises an interesting question. Are public officials and their cascade of programs making it impossible for teachers to teach? Are they destroying the last vestiges of professional autonomy? Do they talk “respect” but act top-down? Why won’t they let teachers teach? What do they expect to accomplish by their constant interference?

This teacher wrote:

Well, as part of Reading First, all the K-3 classroom/reading/special education teachers and assistants in my school had to complete all the online modules in the New York State Reading Academy.  Why, it worked so well that the following year New York State made us complete all the online modules of Voyager: Reading for Understanding.  Of course, after studying a topic online we had opportunities to try things out with our students and then meet to reflect and discuss everything in study groups.  Since then, we’ve made AYP every year and always managed to stay off the SINI list, so I guess you could say it was successful, but that was under NCLB where at least everything was clearly defined.  Now, with APPR, CCSS, RTTT and waivers, everything seems to be about as clear as mud and we’re all sort of stumbling along trying to figure out just what it is that the powers that be actually do want.  Consensus opinion is that there really isn’t much of a plan, that they’re winging it and making it up as they go along, and that seems to be validated by the constant updates and questionable quality of the materials and guidance offered by NYSED through the EngageNY website.  When I was in the private sector, we called this “discovery based learning,” which meant just keep trying until you finally figure out what the boss wants.  How well you can learn from any course, online or otherwise, would have to start with the quality of the course design.

Categories Education Reform, Teachers and Teaching

Please Explain—UPDATE

By dianeravitch
July 24, 2012 //
18

No, I am not a Luddite. No one can use technology as intensively as I do and be fairly accused of being anti-technology.

I am just naturally skeptical of the claims made for all miracle cures, whether it is snake oil, video game-playing, or the Land of Oz.

I promise you, when I see a guy with a crown who is buck naked, I’ll be the first to say so even if he is an emperor.

So I want to know: Can you really learn to be a carpenter at an online college? Can you learn HVAC online? Can you become a master electrician online?

My rant was brought on by an article in the Wall street Jpurnal. Someone said you can’t read it without a subscription. The quote follows this post.

Maybe it’s possible. I am not passing judgment. I’d like to know.

I’m not saying it can’t be done.

But I just finished a basement renovation, and I am afraid that the guys I hired learned their trades online.

Just wondering.

·

The Regulatory Power to Destroy

The Department of Education and the unjustified ruin of a for-profit col

Dark Knight Rises” hits theaters this week, and no surprise some liberals are comparing the villain Bane to . . . care to take a guess? In this comic conception of the world, corporations always play the Bane to government’s Batman. Regulators may have expansive powers, but they’re rarely so heroic. In fact, they’re often the real bane.

Take the case of for-profit Decker College, which a federal bankruptcy judge has concluded was driven into bankruptcy seven years ago by its accreditor’s falsehoods that followed unusual regulatory intervention. A fact-finding report by Judge Thomas Fulton of the Western District of Kentucky last week vindicates the college, but it comes too late to save the company and many of its creditors, who include students and workers.

***

Decker spiraled into insolvency in the fall of 2005 after the Council on Occupational Education unfairly withdrew accreditation of its online programs in carpentry, electrical science and HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning). That made Decker ineligible for federal student aid, its largest revenue source.

CEO William Weld, the former Massachusetts Governor, had no choice but to close up shop and hand control to bankruptcy trustee Robert Keats to settle $57 million in claims. Some 500 employees lost their jobs, and stories about Decker undermined Mr. Weld’s attempt to run for Governor in New York in 2006.

Mr. Keats has sought to recoup some federal student aid by challenging the Council’s statements to the Department of Education that it had never accredited Decker’s online programs. As a parenthetical, it may seem odd to teach construction over the Internet, but about 100 proprietary schools now do….

Categories On-Line Education, Technology, Computers
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »