Dealing with e-schools: Kids in first year in online schools learn little, never catch up

Drilling down into the data.  The results for e-schools is not pretty.  The kids fall behind and never catch up.


Meanwhile the taxpayers pay millions and some corporations and sponsors make a lot of money.  $6000 per kid.


"Test scores plummet the year a student transitions to an e-school," that study found. "E-school students' scores see incremental increases in the subsequent years. However, it is important to note, that despite subsequent increases their scores remain below the scores they received prior to entering an e-school."


 Ohio Education Resource Center


An ugly graph.


http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/09/dealing_with_e-schools_kids_in.html

200 Charter School Failures and Counting

A thorough article on the waste of taxpayers dollars in this community school experiment.

It points out the lack of appropriate supervision by sponsors.  They have a conflict as there fees depend on the existence of the school, not the results.

It points out the lack of qualified disinterested school boards.  Ohio lets the managment company pick the boards and then presents a contract with the terms the managment company writes in that contract. 

“I wonder why people sit on Boards? Is it a cheap self esteem boost?”

“ I often think the many Boards I have seen are lead around by the nose anyway.”

http://www.connectionsacademy.com/news/ray_lambert_school_leader.aspx

"In Ohio, for-profit companies run most charter schools, according to a 2014 Beacon Journal analysis. Some of the largest are out of state. Contracts allow many of the operators to hire employees and negotiate vendor and landlord contracts without seeking approval of the school board. In many cases, contracts are with parties related to the for-profit operator."

http://www.ohio.com/news/break-news/blame-and-ignorance-follow-200th-charter-school-flop-in-ohio-1.625609#.VgAYW9DsFP0.mailto

No question the education education system needs help.  This points some of the many flaws.

David Hansen Resigns

From the Washington Post.  There is also a lot of coverage from the Cleveland and Columbus press.  I do not see much from the Cincinnati press.

The "mask" is off.  Money talks.  He got caught scrubbing data.

Results matter.  Good and bad.  No excuses.

"In the latest mark against Ohio’s troubled charter school sector, David Hansen, the Ohio Education Department official responsible for school choice and charter schools, just resigned after admitting that he gave help to charter schools to make them look better in state evaluations.

Hansen, who resigned Saturday, recently acknowledged that he omitted from evaluations “F” grades received by online and dropout recovery schools. The evaluations were not for the schools themselves but for their sponsoring (or authorizing) organizations. His actions, according to the Associated Press, “boosted the ratings of two sponsors” so that it was possible that they could be eligible for more help from the state.

Hansen was required to include all school scores in the evaluations, which have since been retracted by the department. According to the Plain Dealer, the “F” grades the schools received were given “for failing to teach kids enough material over the school year.”

Hansen’s wife is Beth Hansen, chief of staff to Kasich. Kasich is expected to jump into the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, and Beth Hansen is planning to work for the campaign.

The AP quoted David Hansen, the executive director of Ohio’s Office of Quality School Choice and the Office of Community Schools, as saying that he omitted the failing grades because he thought they would “mask” other successes by the schools.

Analysis on outsourcing, Ohio included

Another article about outsourcing.  Follow the money.  Is this the best we can do for Ohio?

http://www.sourcewatch.org/images/c/c9/Outsourcing_Report_Oct_2014.pdf


Some analysis on school boards. 

From a prior post:  Traditional school districts, in most cases, employ qualified professionals to manage finances, develop curriculum and ensure that applicable laws are followed. Charter schools are, by philosophy, less traditionally structured.

Ohio could do a lot to head off charter-school problems by reforming the process by which they are created.

A key weakness has been the lack of any way to hold accountable those charter-school sponsors who don’t act as watchdogs over the schools they sponsor. Weak Ohio law allows blatant conflicts of interest — for example, nothing bars sponsors, the supposed watchdogs, from selling services to the schools they are supposed to be holding accountable"

“All control and direction for the school comes on high from corporate, and such constructs as school governing boards and local governance amount to distractions. Clearly, local control is an oxymoron to the Dennis Bakkes of the charter school industry.

The memo also makes it clear that no autonomy is expected of the boards which are chosen mostly by the company’s regional managers. While the best of our nation’s schools usually feature a collaborative model where teams of teachers work with school administrators, privatization of public schools that are operated by national chains seems to come only with a top-down approach, and any semblance of a governing board to provide guidance and oversight for the school’s operations is not to be tolerated in Bakke’s world.

In Ohio, the Revised Code treats a charter school as a school district, with its own treasurer, chief administrative officer, and governing board. But state law also allows great latitude regarding the operation and governance of the school, and current law requires that each school have a minimum of five board members, with no other qualifications stated in the law.”

Raymond Lambert School Leader of the Year by the Ohio Alliance for Public Charter Schools (OAPCS) once had this to say about boards.

“I wonder why people sit on Boards? Is it a cheap self esteem boost?”

“ I often think the many Boards I have seen are lead around by the nose anyway.”

"Ohio’s charter schools, which are publicly funded, are

supposed to be subject to periodic state audits and held to

performance standards by the sponsoring organizations

that contract with operators.

 

But governing boards may not be as independent as they

ought to be, as a 2014 investigation by the Akron Beacon

Journal found. White Hat shares legal representation with

 

the boards of many of the charter schools it has contracts

with.

149 And a number of board members have admitted

that they were recruited by White Hat, a clear conflict of

interest.

In a revealing statement, Maggie Ford, chief academic

officer at White Hat, told the

Beacon Journal, “Sometimes

we have one or two people that would like to start a school,

and they don’t have enough for an entire board. So they

want to, they talk to, other board members or ask us to

help recruit board, um, recommend board members.”

 

In effect, the boards at many “nonprofit” charter schools

were hand-picked by White Hat, which contracted with

those same boards to operate the schools."

Combine a couple of hand-picked board members and combine that with a couple of well-meaning but unqualified parent board members and you have a serious but profitable governance situation. Again, where is the independence?

Keep in mind that a billion dollars has been transferred out of the public schools to charter schools in Ohio.
I  note that the folks who set up Connections Academy board are former White Hat employees.  I suspect that many of the same management people take what they learn to set up a new charter that primarily benefits their interests.  I would submit that the boards are handpicked rubber stamps with little actual power.

 

A little more publicity

I was pleasantly surprised to see a letter to the editor in a recent Cincinnati Enquirer about the need for the Ohio legislature to get their hands around the lack of accountability of charter schools in Ohio.

The Columbus Dispatch also published a similar letter to the editor.

This is not to say that this publicity can compete with the marketing power of radio and television blitz of the charter schools (which never mention their resport card) but it is a start.

Some charter schools are well run and successful.  Others are just a conduit of incompetence to profit the sponsors, owners and administrators.