Accountability is a word that means different things to different people in the education space and it is often the reason for disagreement and even fractures among people who often see themselves on the same side of the debate. For some supporters of parent choice—well, charters at least—accountability is about math and reading scores, plain and simple. For others, it is about what parents want for their children and is often defined, at least in part, as “parents voting with their feet.” But many folks, myself included, land somewhere between these two poles and I worry that conversations about choice that value the complexity of accountability and show an understanding and respect for what drives parents to make different choices are getting increasingly hard to find. But when I do come upon a robust, respectful, and public conversation, it helps me to work through my own thinking and also better understand where others are coming from.
At the moment, much of the debate and yes, even upset, is around virtual charter schools, a sector that has long been broad-brushed—or scapegoated—as “the problem” in the charter sector. I do not pretend to know enough to make any declarative statements about virtual charter schools—I am in a learning and listening phase so I’m grateful for threads like this. Twitter makes it a bit confusing and hard to capture every part of the conversation but here’s my best effort.
Lots of folks in ed reform take it as a given that virtual schooling is worthless, a scam, or both. Important pushback from the redoubtable @TillieElvrum. https://t.co/iVVozXJcA7
— Robert Pondiscio (@rpondiscio) February 26, 2019
Come on Robert. Nobody says they are worthless, or all a scam. But many are terribly ineffective, based on lots of measures. It’s appropriate for charter authorizers & policy makers to address those concerns.
— Michael Petrilli (@MichaelPetrilli) February 27, 2019
As ever, context has to be weighed. Different students, different needs, different definitions of effective.
— Robert Pondiscio (@rpondiscio) February 27, 2019
Yes. But some online schools, including Ohio’s ECOT, were/are terrible regardless of the context or measures. It was a big scam. And if you want good online schools you have to root out the bad.
— Michael Petrilli (@MichaelPetrilli) February 27, 2019
But here we go again. What set @TillieElvrum's teeth on edge was a report painting a sharply negative picture of her son's school as an example of the kind of bad "we have to root out." Yet she and others tell a very different story. That should give us pause. It does for me.
— Robert Pondiscio (@rpondiscio) February 27, 2019
What I know…parents have no confidence in the system when their due process is threatened, denied a seat at the table, when they see state employees accept payments from vendors they contract with. Employees implementing policies in direct opposition to parent recommendations.
— Tillie Elvrum (@TillieElvrum) February 27, 2019
So, if a school is, say, the lowest growth school in the state on test scores, has among the highest attrition rates, and intends to double in scale, what would you suggest is the appropriate response from policymakers? Just say, "Well, some parents want it…"? Serious Q.
— Kevin Huffman (@k_huff1) February 27, 2019
This is a serious policy issue. Do we just say, if a parent wants it, the state will pay for it, regardless of the quality? because who are we to judge? I think that is bad policy.
— Kevin Huffman (@k_huff1) February 27, 2019
Great. Any policymaker worth his/her salt asks that. Answers range from "My kid was bullied" to "I don't like my school" to "my family decided to hike the Smokies" to "we are home schooling" to "we are home schooling and it's free but we don't really use it or show up." Now what?
— Kevin Huffman (@k_huff1) February 27, 2019
With respect you’re putting the burden of proof on parents to justify a choice that you find inappropriate. Doesn’t that strike you as the opposite of how this should work?
— Robert Pondiscio (@rpondiscio) February 27, 2019
My sense is that online schools serve a different set of students and that the standard metrics might not capture it. I simply lack the confidence to assume I can judge *any* school by its data alone. If we've learned nothing else in the past 20 years it should be humility.
— Robert Pondiscio (@rpondiscio) February 27, 2019
I think we sit in two different places on the choice continuum. You – correct me if I am wrong – think that we should be fine for state $$ to flow to any school, no matter how poor the academic results, if parents want it. I think there is a state role in accountability for $$.
— Kevin Huffman (@k_huff1) February 27, 2019
My difference is philosophical: we seem determined to limit entry into the field, hold singular views of accountability, yet somehow still wring our hands about a lack of innovation. Odd.
— Robert Pondiscio (@rpondiscio) February 27, 2019
This system is not designed for innovation – the people in the system arent innovators & even so-called reformers dont have an innovation mindset. Everyone is too afraid of risk – now the medical profession …those folks are innovators. But they deal w life & death – oh wait…
— Colleen Dippel (@ColleenDippel) February 27, 2019
Agreed! And we can’t truly transform education without every stakeholder having input. When parents are regulated to cheerleaders for policy instead of being a part of the conversation from the start we aren’t going anywhere.
— Tillie Elvrum (@TillieElvrum) February 27, 2019
Right. Let’s remember who has the greatest stake in a child’s success. Teachers, schools can hand them off, but parents live with the results for the rest of their lives.
— Jim (@jim_again) February 27, 2019
Thanks to everyone putting themselves out there, despite disagreement and even personal pain and sacrifice, to do right by parents and kids.
