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 Kraus-Anderson

    Minnesota District Completes $49.7M Addition, Renovation Project

    St. Paul Public Schools in St. Paul, Minn., recently announced the completion of a $49.7-million addition and remodeling project at two district schools, according to a news release.

  • Girl Sitting at Library Desk, Using Laptop

    How Campus Design Shapes the Finals Week Experience

    Academic performance is not just about preparation. It is closely tied to how students manage stress, maintain their energy, and shift between work and recovery modes. Much of that is influenced, directly or indirectly, by design.

  • Big Horn Academy

    Big Horn Academy

    Established in 1999, the Education Design Showcase is a vehicle for showing off innovative — yet practical — solutions in planning, design, architecture, and construction. Big Horn Academy has been recognized with an EDS 2026 Project of Distinction award in the category of New Construction.

  • California K–12 District Finishes Renovations on Multi-Sport Stadium

    The Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) in Alameda, Calif., recently announced the completion of a renovation project on the Encinal Jr. & Sr. High School stadium, according to a news release. The district partnered with Quattrocchi Kwok Architects (QKA) and Bothman Construction on the facility, and funding came from Bond Measure B.