The Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration (CCOSA) has responded to questions regarding Transparency and Accountability of Oklahoma's Virtual Charter Schools. The document addresses the following areas of concern with virtual charter schools:
* Academic Performance Issues
* Student and Accreditation Issues
* Financial Issues
* Governance Issues
* Teacher Issues
The Oklahoma Association of School Administrators (OASA) and CCOSA have addressed these issues with presentation of facts, but doesn't go so far as to answering the most important question - Is it legal? Virtual Charter School officials would probably answer this question "I don't know, but it's fun, ain't it?".
The CCOSA document is 10 pages in length, so we'll start with only one category - Teacher Issues, and progress from there, until all 5 Issues have been analyzed. We'll update this column daily, and by the time all Issues are addressed - the reader will hopefully be able to decide for herself/himself if its all legal.
Teacher Issues: According to EPIC High School's 2017-18 Application for Accreditation - five (5) EPIC High School teachers are reported as having over 2,000 students each in the following subjects: U.S. History, 2,239 students; Chemistry I and Biology I, 2,039 students; Geometry and Algebra II, 2,098 students; English I, II, III, and IV, 2,746 students; and Algebra I, 2,948 students. All other EPIC High School teachers are reported under the description "Academic Achievement" with one or more assigned students. The unknown factor is the exact number of high school teachers EPIC employs. (Citations for these facts are listed with the CCOSA Report).
Most traditional public high schools strive to maintain a 20:1 teacher to student ratio, but core classes with as many as 30 students exist in Oklahoma. With 5 teachers having over 2,000 students and several ??? with only one or two students, the financial issue becomes: A traditional public school with approximately the same number of students as EPIC spends about $21 million on teacher salaries out of a $32 million instructional budget. EPIC spent approximately $10 million for teacher salaries out of a $31 million instructional budget. (The traditional school has approximately 525 teachers). The math ($21,000,000 divided by 525) indicates that each traditional teacher will receive about $40,000 in annual salary. If EPIC teachers receive an average of $63,000 per teacher, then $10,000,000 divided by $63,000 = 159 teachers. Several sources have reported EPIC has around 400 teachers, so which number is accurate... 159 or 400? If the number of EPIC teachers is around 400, then which additional EPIC employees are counted toward instructional teachers? And just who are these "super teachers" who have over 2000 students each? And if 100% of the $31 million is not being spent for student instruction, how is it being spent? An AP report out of Florida may provide an answer to this last question, but many other questions still have no answer.
Financial Issues: "According to the 2017 OCAS reports on the OSDE website, EPIC reports 3.28% administrative costs; however, the August 2017 Auditors report reflects that EPIC contracted 10% of gross revenues for operational and administrative services. This difference raises questions whether the OCAS data accurately reflect EPIC's administrative cost..." (CCOSA report, 2018). The mathematical calculation for the OCAS data indicates that EPIC spent .0328 x $38,701,823 = $1,269,420 for general administration. The auditor's report indicates, however, that EPIC spent .10 x $38,701,823 = $3,870,182 for administration. Added to the OCAS administrative spending, a grand total of $5,139,602 (13%) is spent for administration. This discrepancy in reported data may be described as "colorful accounting" at its best. The most obvious question that is asked about the conflicting data is: Why is there a discrepancy in reported administrative costs? One answer may be found in public school law (70 O.S. Sec. 18-124) which allows a maximum 5% administrative costs for schools with more than 1,500 students. EPIC has around 10,000 students. Five percent of $38,701,823 = $1,935,091, for the maximum EPIC may spend for administration. EPIC is compliant according to OCAS data, but is non-compliant according to audit data.
More Financial Issues: "According to 2016-2017 OSDE data... Epic had $38,701,823 in expenditures. Within those expenditures, OCAS Object codes 300-500 show $15,342,669 in what are called Purchased Services... In comparison to Epic, a traditional public school with approximately the same number of students, had $1,342,417 of Purchased Services during the same 2016-2017 time period." Question: Why did Epic spend ten times the money for Purchased Services than the typical traditional public school? Some school financial experts believe that some ($145,000), was spent for "legislator and elected official purchased services".
Governance Issues: "Oklahoma's traditional public schools are governed by local boards of education whose members are elected through processes defined by state law. Oklahoma law also includes processes intended to minimize the possibility that board members' decisions will be influenced by... personal or professional gain. The purpose of these laws is ostensibly to make local boards of education accountable to their local electors and to prevent board members from prioritizing their own interests over those of their district..."
According to the August 2017 Auditor's report, the governing body of EPIC is composed of four nominated members who are also directors of Community Strategies, Inc., a (profitable) non-profit entity. The founder was appointed as the executive officer (superintendent) of EPIC. Only EPIC's activities are included in the August 2017 Auditor's report; the activities of Community Strategies are not. The untold specifics of this business arrangement are significant because EPIC receives $ millions in public dollars annually. At a minimum, taxpayers should know how EPIC's appointed board members are selected and how potential personal and financial conflicts of interest among board members, the executive officer, and EPIC are prevented, as they would be for other board members under Oklahoma law." The question, "Whose in your Wallet?", may now have an answer...
Academic Performance Issues: "According to the National Education Policy Center (NEPC)... school performance measures for both virtual charter and blended schools indicate that they are not as successful as traditional public schools. Nevertheless, enrollment in these schools continues to grow. The May, 2018 NEPC Report reflects that, nationwide, virtual charter schools continue to underperform academically... Of those with available 2016-17 school performance ratings, 36.4% of full-time virtual charter schools... received acceptable performance ratings...
In regard to graduation rates and test scores, most Oklahoma traditional public schools also outperform virtual charter schools... and according to the 2017 graduation report from the OSDE, Epic finished in the bottom five schools... with a rate of 36%... Furthermore, graduation rates at Oklahoma virtual charter schools range from 35.7% (Epic) to 43.8% (not Epic) in comparison to Oklahoma traditional schools graduation rates averaging 84.7%.
Regarding test scores, Oklahoma's 2016-2017 State Test Score data for grade 10, the highest grade tested that year, reflect:
State % Proficient & Advanced Epic % Proficient & Advanced
Math 26 Math 10
Science 19 Science 11
ELA 36 ELA 23
US History 51 US History 33
*Several Epic officials have called this data "fake statistics", and Epic teachers report receiving "bonuses" for the above accomplishments. The bonuses received by Epic teachers, though, are reported to be provided for recruiting and retaining students.
Student and Accreditation Issues: "Public schools are responsible for treating students in an equitable manner in all aspects of their programs, services, and activities and for compliance with state accreditation requirements.
The May 2018 NEPC Report reflects the following:
* Relative to national public school enrollment, virtual charter schools had substantially fewer minority students and fewer low-income students.
* Non-profit Education Management Organizations enrolled a substantially higher proportion of low-income students than their for-profit counterparts.
* The average student-teacher ratio in the nation's traditional public schools was 16 students per teacher. Virtual schools reported having close to three times as many students per teacher (45) compared to the nation's average...
The student-teacher ratio of privately managed virtual schools could be partially responsible for the dismal academic profiles of those schools.
Following the release of the CCOSA research document, an Epic assistant superintendent replied that a response to the "white paper" was forthcoming. As of February 7, 2019, no response has been submitted...
***This CCOSA Report and citations thereof may be read in its entirety on the CCOSA website.
No comments:
Post a Comment