WOW!

This column may sound strange coming from a person whose livelihood depends in part on the sale of advertising space. I don’t question advertisings effectiveness. Advertising informs, communicates and affects sales. What I do question is the allocation of public funds — taxpayer dollars — to increase attendance in virtual for-profit schools.

In recent weeks, I’ve watched a number of ads on television touting the value of attending a particular virtual, for-profit school. Knowing the price of prime-time television advertising, I’ve wondered how they could afford those ads. Then I read an article in USA TODAY that gave me a little more insight… “An analysis by USA TODAY finds that online charter schools have spent millions in taxpayer dollars on advertising over the past five years, a trend that shows few signs of abating. The primary and high schools — operated online by for-profit companies but with local taxpayer support — are buying TV, radio, newspaper and Internet ads to attract students, even as brick-and-mortar public schools in the districts they serve face budget crunches.”

All I can say is WOW! The use of private monies by for-profit companies is one thing. The use of public monies that are earmarked for “education” is another. What happened to the discussions we were having about allocating more funds for “in classroom” expenses like teachers, programs and materials? All I can do is hope that a new analysis would find that the source of funds for advertising have changed from public to private dollars, and that the public dollars these institutions receive are actually going toward educating students.

Having a choice is a good thing. Healthy competition can help raise the bar and make all schools better. Knowing what choices you have is important. But herein lays the problem. I am a huge proponent of “fairness,” and somehow it does not seem fair when for-profit companies that benefit from the use of taxpayer education dollars spend the precious few education dollars available for students to benefit their own company.

Think about it. What would happen if all schools — public and private — would divert funds from educating students or taking care of the infrastructure they already have in place, and use the funds to buy primetime ads on television. The number of students is finite. More kids would not attend school, they would only change the school they were attending. I, for one, am not convinced that is where our money needs to be spent!

This article originally appeared in the issue of .

Featured

  • Photo courtesy of Spiezle Architectural Group, Inc.

    West Melbourne School for Science Completes Expansion Project

    The West Melbourne School for Science, which serves students grades PreK–6 in West Melbourne, Fla., recently completed a 12,450-square-foot elementary school expansion, according to a news release.

  • Lawrence Group Announces Expansion of Student Housing Studio

    Integrated planning and design firm Lawrence Group recently announced that it has hired Nick Naeger, AIA, as the new Associate Principal / Senior Project Manager at its headquarters in St. Louis, Mo., according to a news release.

  • University of Utah Launches Utah 360 App

    The University of Utah in Salt Lake City, Utah, recently announced that it has partnered with digital engagement hub Pathify to launch a new app for the university community, according to a news release.

  • ClassVR Wins Tech & Learning Best of Show at ISTELive 25

    Avantis Education recently announced that its flagship product, ClassVR, won the Tech & Learning Best of Show Award at ISTELive 25 in San Antonio, Texas, according to a news release. The program is designed to celebrate products that are “transforming education in schools around the world and that show the greatest promise for the industry,” and this is the fourth consecutive year that Avantis has claimed the award.