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

  • illustration of a school building under construction

    One District, One Way: Bringing Consistency to K–12 Construction Projects

    From budgeting to closeout, here's how a single playbook can turn chaos into clarity in school construction programs.

  • KI Launches K–12 Classroom Furniture Giveaway

    Contract furniture company KI recently announced the launch of its fourth-annual Classroom Furniture Giveaway, which awards $50,000 each to four K–12 educators across the U.S., according to a news release. The goal is to address decreasing student engagement and increasing teacher burnout numbers by updating learning spaces to accommodate modern needs.

  • Brightly Software, XOi Partner for New HVAC Data Solution

    Siemens company Brightly Software recently announced a partnership with data intelligence company XOi to integrate real-time HVAC system data into Brightly’s Asset Essentials CMMS, according to a news release. The integration will allow facilities more insight into HVAC system performance, health, and risk across their operations.

  • Kimball International Launches New Furniture for K–12 Classrooms

    Commercial furnishings company Kimball International recently announced the launch of four new products designed for a variety of professional environments, including K–12 schools, according to a news release.

Digital Edition