Our visit with the distinguished Michael Dembrow is over. I sent a letter to the ORCA parents group giving my take on the meeting. I am going to share it with you. Keep in mind, I am sharing this with the parents so we can hone our answers and deepen the meat of the conversations all of us have been having with our legislators.
When I refer to the 50/50 thing, that is referring to the post-ORCA, ruling that came down requiring that online charter schools have 50% of their online students from that school district. That would succinctly prevent small school districts from hosting online schools. If you ask me, it also disenfranchises them and prevents them fiscally from doing better. Also, when I refer to b and m schools, I am referring to regular schools. It is virtual school speak for "bricks and mortar schools". Anyway, here is my summary:
What I learned from Michael Dembrow:
1) We hear the proponents of 767 refer to "for profit" a lot. I get what they are saying now. The Scio school district, a very small school district, receives enrollment dollars for ORCA students. Enrollment dollars they wouldn't normally receive. That is what they are referring to, "the Scio SD is profiting from this online school." Got it. After ORCA started suddenly bunches of other small school districts applied for online charter schools giving the impression that they wanted those enrollment dollars, that they wouldn't have normally received before, and it gives the impression of "profiting" from state tax dollars (OUR tax dollars).
It also pits school districts in competition with each other for enrollment dollars. Okay, I get it. It's stupid, but I get it. (No I didn't say that.) Why? Because the spirit of charter schools is to establish competetion and competancy in schools. Competition creates excellence. If Scio's online charter school is competing with several other online charter schools from other districts, then you betcha all of them will make sure their students are performing to standards of excellence. That is the whole spirit of charter schools. I did say that. I also said, if Scio is taking on these kids as being responsible for their education, then why should my district (as it does now) receive enrollment tax dollars? They aren't doing anything for my kid!
But I have a real practical response to that.....what did they expect to happen when they approved the charter in the first place?? This is a consequence that they should have easily foreseen at ORCA's inception, not five years later to punish ORCA. Not ORCA's problem if you ask me.
And that is why the 50/50 thing came into play.
2) He also said that ORCA has a 30% "dropout" rate annually, meaning students stop and then go back to their b and m schools. I told him I disagree that number is so high based strictly upon our poll, but I could be wrong. He said this was "disruptive". I was flabbergasted at that, but held my breath. That is "disruptive"? I can see what he is saying though, so we need a response to that. Students that do come and go between virtual schools then back into the districts, I can see his point. Let's find a good answer to that.
I also pointed out that b and m schools also have a drop out rate of 12% and that results in students not being prepared to face a workplace or a job market. I think that is disruptive.
3) He also said he understood that is costs ORCA $7,000 to educate a kid annually and I disagreed with that. He said he knew that nationwide in other ORCA schools, that number has been considerably less, which is why there is a bill to cut funding for ORCA per student allotment. Well, I told him I heard $4,000. Both my husband and I pointed out vehemently, it's still cheaper either way than a b and m school and doing a better job. That is worthy of notice.
He also kept saying "Oregon's tax dollars". At one point, my great hubbie interrupted him and said "MY tax dollars. I pay those as well, and have a say in how they are used."
4) On a practical level, he does not like online schooling as a school model. Which is why it will take him changing his heart, not his mind on this issue. I asked him so even if he disagrees with this as a model, he does need to remember that Oregon recognizes online accredited teaching degrees, and hires those teachers. He agreed that I had a point.
I also pointed out that ORCA or any other online school has said online education is not for everyone and everyone agrees to that. It isn't for everyone. It is for a small demographic, just like charter schools are. They are targeted to a certain demographic, and offer great choices to parents. That is the point of charter schools!
5) He does think there is a need for a statewide online program. He asked, "Would you be for that?" I said "Yes, but the problem is this. I know the wheels of bureaucracy. That will take 8-10 years to fully implement. (I pointed to my son) I need a good education for him right now." I also said in my perfect world, a statewide system would be implemented, ORCA could continue to exist until it is ready to go, then the two combine. Is that such a bad idea? He laughed at me so apparently it is. I thought it was a good idea.
6) He also had some serious scrutinies of online success. I pointed out to him, if we are going to put virtual schooling, specifically ORCA, through such scrutiny (both fiscally and academically), he needs to be prepared to put the same kind of scrutiny on regular b and m schools, and "I think we both agree, b and m schools wouldn't pass muster." He agreed! OH MY WORD! He shook his head yes to that. He also agreed that b and m schools do pay too much to educate kids and that it is administration pay heavy.
7) He did argue that there is "no union for school administrators" and leaned back and chuckled at that. I asked then, if that is so funny, who is that listed right on the top of the bill. "Oh that is just a lobbyist group". Okay, let's split that hair a bit further, which is worse a lobbyist group that truly is in it for the money, and getting paid to lobby or a union that at least pretends to have it's employees interests at heart. I dunno, but he caught our drift on that.
So there are my finer points of our meeting yesterday. Those are what the opposition is thinking and feeling. I hope I was able to convey it meaningfully. I also hope it helps us to get into the mind of the opposition a bit and have even better discussions for our side.
No comments:
Post a Comment