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

  • Different Starting Points, Same End Goal

    Higher education campuses can enhance student experience by implementing mobile credentials to streamline building access, on-campus payments, and access to other amenities. This enables students to connect to their campuses through the technology they use most: their mobile devices.

  • restroom sinks

    CSU Dominguez Hills Standardizes Plumbing to Improve Restroom Maintenance and Efficiency

    At California State University, Dominguez Hills, facilities leaders have taken steps to standardize restroom fixtures as part of a broader effort to improve maintenance efficiency and control long-term costs.

  • DLR Group Appoints New K–12 Education Practice Leader

    Integrated design firm DLR Group recently announced that it has named its new global K–12 Education leader, Senior Principal Carmen Wyckoff, AIA, LEED AP, according to a news release. Her teams have members in all 36 of the firm’s offices in the U.S., Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Europe, and Asia.

  • Beyond Four Walls

    Operable glass walls provide a dynamic solution for educational spaces. They align with today’s evolving teaching methods and adapt to the needs of modern learners. Beyond the functional versatility, movable glass walls offer clean, contemporary aesthetics, slim and unobtrusive profiles, and versatile configurations that cater to the evolving needs of students and educators alike.

Digital Edition