OSSAA research indicates the only sure way to ensure competitive equity for all member schools is to separate schools for state play-off competition (Journal of Amateur Sport, National Review of Interscholastic Competitive Balance Solutions Related to the Public-Private Debate, Volume I, Issue I, 2015). Four other states have ditched their previous "multiplier" or "advancement" systems in favor of separating schools for play-off competition - because they claimed their systems did not work as hoped.The states which separate schools for play-off competition do so based on public and private schools, or separate schools based on advantage factors such as "financial assistance" and "restrictive enrollment".
Researched play-off competition in Oklahoma high school sports indicates that Rule 14 for competitive equity has also been a dismal failure for Oklahoma and the OSSAA. The competitive equity issue in Oklahoma was addressed by the OSSAA in 2011 with the passage of Rule 14. The Rule became effective for the 2012 sports seasons. In 2011, the year before Rule 14 was implemented, the football season ended with the following results for private schools:
Class 5A - Bishop Kelly, top eight (beaten in the 2011 state quarter-finals)
Class 4A - Bishop McGuinness, top four (beaten in the 2011 state semi-finals)
Class 3A - Cascia Hall, 2011 state runner-up
Class 2A - Lincoln Christian, top eight (beaten in the 2011 state quarter-finals)
Class A - No private schools
Class B - No private schools
Class C - No private schools
Approximately 6% of OSSAA member schools is private. In classes 2A through 5A, 32 schools made the top eight in 2011. Four schools were private, which indicates that 12.5% made the state play-offs. Six percent private membership but 12.5% in play-offs, indicates competitive equity was lacking for football during the 2011 season.
During the 2019 football season (seven years into the OSSAA's Rule 14 for competitive equity:
Class 5A - Bishop McGuinness ranked #1
Class 4A - No private schools
Class 3A - Heritage Hall ranked #1; Lincoln Christian ranked #2
Class 2A - Metro Christian ranked #1
Class A - Rejoice Christian ranked #2
Class B - Regent Prep ranked #2
Class C - Southwest Covenant ranked #1
The data analysis from the above play-offs for the 2011 and 2019 football seasons indicates that Rule 14 has been ineffective for promoting competitive equity in the OSSAA. Some member schools say that the implementation of Rule 14 in 2012 even made the problem worse. As a matter of fact, data from the volleyball state championships over the past three years indicate that Rule 14 has been a complete bust, and the OSSAA's solution to 'fix' the problem will only magnify the competitive equity issue.
So, what would a separation of public schools from private schools look like if the OSSAA decided to solve the competitive equity problem once and for all? The OSSAA executive director David Jackson stated "I think there are 24 private schools in the OSSAA", last week at the Westmoore regional meeting. In football, there are currently ten classifications for member schools (6AI, 6AII, 5A, 4A, 3A, 2A, A, B, C, and I), so the OSSAA is not reluctant to add classes. If Joe Van Tuyl's 2009 competitive equity plan were implemented and private schools were separated from public schools when the state playoffs started, it may look something like this:
Class IA - 8 private schools
Class IB - 11 private schools
Class IC (eight man) - 5 private schools
All private schools in the OSSAA would make the playoffs. The Class IC play-off scenario would pit the 4th and 5th seeded teams for the first round. The semi-final round would match the top seeded team with the winner of the 4th vs. 5th game, and the 2nd seeded team would play the 3rd seeded team. The class IB championship would play out the same way as the current 16 team bracket for playoffs - 8 vs. 11 and 9 vs. 10 the first week, and an 8 team bracket in weeks thereafter. The class IA championship bracket would play out as an 8 team bracket.
Everyone wins if the Van Tuyl plan is adopted by the members of the OSSAA: 1) The OSSAA wins because it generates more money for member schools. 2) Private schools win because all private schools make the play-offs, but continue to play public schools during the regular season. 3) Public schools win because more public schools make the play-offs. 4) Fans win because they get to see more "good games". For more information on this subject see:
mybackpagewithjimbeckhamblog.blogspot.com/2019/11/ossaa-regional-meeting-at-westmoore.html
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Monday, November 4, 2019
OSSAA regional meeting at Westmoore
We attended the Oct. 31 regional OSSAA meeting at Westmoore, where the OSSAA's new "competitive equity" plan was to be discussed. OSSAA Executive Director David Jackson explained the plan is to advance four volleyball and tennis teams from class 5A to class 6A - if all Rule 14 criteria are met for the four schools. Rule 14 previously prevented any schools from advancing to class 6A by criteria. Jackson then asked if anyone in the room has concerns or questions about the proposal. Two members spoke up about the concern that a new "super" classification for volleyball will be created when four private schools are added to class 6A volleyball. David Jackson responded that 'we already have that in class 5A volleyball'. He seemed to imply that since we already have one "super" class (5A) for volleyball, we are justified in having two. Jackson went on to say that no other competitive equity plans were considered, other than 'enrollment based' plans. Both coaches that spoke out about the new "super" classification plan, agreed that a plan which separates private schools from public schools for state playoff competition is the only workable solution.
As an example of a classification system that has gone awry is the case of the Victory Christian (VC) High School volleyball team. In 2017, enrollment classification would have placed the team in class 3A, but was inadvertently advanced to class 5A (should have been advanced to class 4A as per Rule 14) - where it won the 5A championship. The convoluted nature of the Rule 14 advancement requirements was the reason for the OSSAA 'mistake'. As a matter of fact, we are not even sure of the above stated fact due to the 'super convoluted' nature of the rule. After winning the 5A championship in 2017, VC won the class 4A championship in 2018 - where it belonged according to the OSSAA 'enrollment based' system. Since VC won the 4A title in 2018, the OSSAA advanced it to class 5A for the 2019 season, where it won the 5A championship the last week of October. No one, including OSSAA officials, can truly say what class VC should compete, but after it won the 5A state title two weeks ago - the team broke out into a chant "We want 6A! We want 6A!". The OSSAA executive director assured the class 6A coaches at the Westmoore meeting that a team may only be advanced one class upward, and since VC had already 'advanced' to class 5A - it would not be going to class 6A next year (where it would also dominate).
The new and improved version of Rule 14 will affect volleyball by advancing the top four finishers in class 5A, to class 6A.. if all criteria are met for advancement. The new rule prohibits a team from advancing to 6A if it has already advanced to 5A previously. This would prevent VC from advancing to class 6A, since it had already advanced to 5A from 4A. So class 6A volleyball teams may be worried about something that won't happen. It appears Tulsa Bishop Kelly may be the only class 5A volleyball team to qualify for advancement to class 6A. If that is so, the smallest class 6A team, Yukon, would regress to class 5A, taking the place of Kelly. A class 4A team, Lincoln Christian, would likely be the only 4A team to advance to 5A. If this scenario happened, the smallest class 4A team would drop down to class 3A. The advancement of Lincoln Christian to class 5A would likely knock Bethany out of an earned play-off spot in 2019, resulting in the only class with all eight playoff teams being 'private'. Of course, this scenario is only conjecture, as Rule 14 becomes more convoluted with each revision.
The OSSAA will undoubtedly vote to send this revision out to a vote of the membership, unlike what it's done in the past for other competitive equity plans. It may pass a vote of the membership because OSSAA officials have told the membership that 'it's the best we can do'. Many OSSAA member schools know better, however, so we'll see how it goes.
As an example of a classification system that has gone awry is the case of the Victory Christian (VC) High School volleyball team. In 2017, enrollment classification would have placed the team in class 3A, but was inadvertently advanced to class 5A (should have been advanced to class 4A as per Rule 14) - where it won the 5A championship. The convoluted nature of the Rule 14 advancement requirements was the reason for the OSSAA 'mistake'. As a matter of fact, we are not even sure of the above stated fact due to the 'super convoluted' nature of the rule. After winning the 5A championship in 2017, VC won the class 4A championship in 2018 - where it belonged according to the OSSAA 'enrollment based' system. Since VC won the 4A title in 2018, the OSSAA advanced it to class 5A for the 2019 season, where it won the 5A championship the last week of October. No one, including OSSAA officials, can truly say what class VC should compete, but after it won the 5A state title two weeks ago - the team broke out into a chant "We want 6A! We want 6A!". The OSSAA executive director assured the class 6A coaches at the Westmoore meeting that a team may only be advanced one class upward, and since VC had already 'advanced' to class 5A - it would not be going to class 6A next year (where it would also dominate).
The new and improved version of Rule 14 will affect volleyball by advancing the top four finishers in class 5A, to class 6A.. if all criteria are met for advancement. The new rule prohibits a team from advancing to 6A if it has already advanced to 5A previously. This would prevent VC from advancing to class 6A, since it had already advanced to 5A from 4A. So class 6A volleyball teams may be worried about something that won't happen. It appears Tulsa Bishop Kelly may be the only class 5A volleyball team to qualify for advancement to class 6A. If that is so, the smallest class 6A team, Yukon, would regress to class 5A, taking the place of Kelly. A class 4A team, Lincoln Christian, would likely be the only 4A team to advance to 5A. If this scenario happened, the smallest class 4A team would drop down to class 3A. The advancement of Lincoln Christian to class 5A would likely knock Bethany out of an earned play-off spot in 2019, resulting in the only class with all eight playoff teams being 'private'. Of course, this scenario is only conjecture, as Rule 14 becomes more convoluted with each revision.
The OSSAA will undoubtedly vote to send this revision out to a vote of the membership, unlike what it's done in the past for other competitive equity plans. It may pass a vote of the membership because OSSAA officials have told the membership that 'it's the best we can do'. Many OSSAA member schools know better, however, so we'll see how it goes.
Thursday, October 17, 2019
Complicity by Silence: The Epic Racket
Most people believe that to remain silent on any illegal or unethical practice, especially when incontrovertible evidence indicates illegal or unethical behavior, is to be complicit. The practice of remaining silent when one knows that possible illegal and certainly unethical behavior is going on - is complicity by silence.
When people know the difference between right and wrong, ethical and unethical, and even legal and illegal - but sit idly by or say nothing when they see unethical or illegal actions - inaction or silence can mean complicity. Many public school teachers, officials, and supporters have not sat idly by or remained silent while Epic Virtual and Blended school owners have become millionaires at Oklahoma tax payer expense. These teachers and education supporters have openly voiced their opposition to the Epic racketeering going on in our state, and have stood up to the unethical and illegal activities. They (teachers and public school supporters) can do very little about the problem, but still call it out for what it is.
While teachers and other public school employees usually aren't listened to when they object to illegal or unethical behavior by Epic Virtual or Blended Public School owners, there are a few entities such as law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys who are listened to. When the questioned behavior is unethical, but not illegal, it often falls upon our state lawmakers and other elected public officials (Senators and Representatives) to voice concern and ask the hard questions.
Senator Ron Sharp (R) of Shawnee is one such lawmaker who is not afraid to stand up for the public interest and demand answers from Epic. He continues to demand answers from Epic, and even from his fellow lawmakers - many of whom have chosen to remain silent, concerning the alleged misappropriation of tax payer funds. According to Senator Sharp, about $11.2 million in tax payer dollars has flown out the door - going to the owners of Epic, instead of to Oklahoma students. Since Oklahoma senators and representatives are in charge of overseeing how tax dollars are spent and not squandered, it stands to reason that lawmakers would be upset at how this waste of money has been allowed to go on. Senator Sharp has faced the wrath of Epic, however, as it has hired private investigators to "dig up dirt", threatened his job by encouraging Senate leadership to "fire" him, and threatened lawsuits for "slandering" Epic owners. Senator Sharp is alone in asking the tough questions and demanding answers in behalf of Oklahoma tax payers, because many other lawmakers are evidently complicit with Epic in their silence.
This "complicity by silence" is not a fact, however, until those lawmakers have been given the opportunity to voice their opinion. Senator Ron Sharp does not represent my home district, so it may only be fair to give my senator and representative a chance to speak their opinions and protect Oklahoma tax dollars which should be going to Oklahoma students. Senator Paul Scott (R) of Duncan and Representative Cindy Roe (R) of Lindsay are my local lawmakers. Since Epic opened a school in Blanchard several weeks ago, I think it only fair to give both lawmakers a chance to comment. I plan on asking these tough questions of both Roe and Scott at a legislative meeting for educators on November 21 in Wayne, Oklahoma. It will be interesting to hear their answers to some very political questions. I'll publish the responses in this post after November 21.
When people know the difference between right and wrong, ethical and unethical, and even legal and illegal - but sit idly by or say nothing when they see unethical or illegal actions - inaction or silence can mean complicity. Many public school teachers, officials, and supporters have not sat idly by or remained silent while Epic Virtual and Blended school owners have become millionaires at Oklahoma tax payer expense. These teachers and education supporters have openly voiced their opposition to the Epic racketeering going on in our state, and have stood up to the unethical and illegal activities. They (teachers and public school supporters) can do very little about the problem, but still call it out for what it is.
While teachers and other public school employees usually aren't listened to when they object to illegal or unethical behavior by Epic Virtual or Blended Public School owners, there are a few entities such as law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys who are listened to. When the questioned behavior is unethical, but not illegal, it often falls upon our state lawmakers and other elected public officials (Senators and Representatives) to voice concern and ask the hard questions.
Senator Ron Sharp (R) of Shawnee is one such lawmaker who is not afraid to stand up for the public interest and demand answers from Epic. He continues to demand answers from Epic, and even from his fellow lawmakers - many of whom have chosen to remain silent, concerning the alleged misappropriation of tax payer funds. According to Senator Sharp, about $11.2 million in tax payer dollars has flown out the door - going to the owners of Epic, instead of to Oklahoma students. Since Oklahoma senators and representatives are in charge of overseeing how tax dollars are spent and not squandered, it stands to reason that lawmakers would be upset at how this waste of money has been allowed to go on. Senator Sharp has faced the wrath of Epic, however, as it has hired private investigators to "dig up dirt", threatened his job by encouraging Senate leadership to "fire" him, and threatened lawsuits for "slandering" Epic owners. Senator Sharp is alone in asking the tough questions and demanding answers in behalf of Oklahoma tax payers, because many other lawmakers are evidently complicit with Epic in their silence.
This "complicity by silence" is not a fact, however, until those lawmakers have been given the opportunity to voice their opinion. Senator Ron Sharp does not represent my home district, so it may only be fair to give my senator and representative a chance to speak their opinions and protect Oklahoma tax dollars which should be going to Oklahoma students. Senator Paul Scott (R) of Duncan and Representative Cindy Roe (R) of Lindsay are my local lawmakers. Since Epic opened a school in Blanchard several weeks ago, I think it only fair to give both lawmakers a chance to comment. I plan on asking these tough questions of both Roe and Scott at a legislative meeting for educators on November 21 in Wayne, Oklahoma. It will be interesting to hear their answers to some very political questions. I'll publish the responses in this post after November 21.
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
OSSAA Competitive Equity Plan
The OSSAA's plan to revise Rule 14 to promote competitive equity in the OSSAA falls woefully short of accomplishing its goal. An 'OSSAA appointed' committee was charged with studying the competitive equity issue about eight months ago. They were further charged with coming up with a plan which will promote competitive equity for all member schools.
Before we take a look at the OSSAA's recommendations for "tweaking" Rule 14 to level the playing field for all schools, let's look at the Oklahoma high school football rankings this year as a way of determining the effectiveness of Rule 14 for promoting competitive equity. Only about 6% (20 of 337) of the total member schools which participate in football are 'private', which leaves 94% 'public'. There are six classifications in which both public and private schools participate: 5A, 3A, 2A, A, B, and C. No private schools participate in classes 6A and 4A football. The high school football class rankings according to the Daily Oklahoman after seven weeks into the season include:
Class 5A - Bishop McGuinness #1
Class 3A - Heritage Hall #1, Lincoln Christian #2
Class 2A - Metro Christian #1
Class A - Rejoice Christian #2
Class B - Regent Prep #2
Class C - Southwest Covenant #1
Only time will tell as to how many private school state champions will be crowned in December, but there is a good chance that a private school state champion will be crowned in all classes in which they participate. The fact that private schools make up only about 6% of the total participants indicates that Rule 14 has been a total bust for promoting competitive equity in the OSSAA.
Further evidence that Rule 14 (implemented in 2012) has not been effective for leveling the playing field in football, is collected when we examine the final rankings for high school football in 2011 (one year prior to implemention of Rule 14 for competitive equity):
Class 5A - Bishop Kelly - top 8 (beaten in the 2011 state quarter-finals)
Class 4A - Bishop McGuinness - top 4 (beaten in the state semi-finals)
Class 3A - Cascia Hall #2
Class 2A - Lincoln Christian - top 8 (beaten in the state quarter-finals)
Class A - No private schools
Class B - No private schools
Class C - No private schools
As noted in state news a few weeks ago - the OSSAA has not been very good at gathering 'athlete concussion' data and analyzing that data in solving this student health crisis. The OSSAA has publicly stated that it's waiting for Texas UIL to study the problem before addressing it. It comes as no great shock that the OSSAA would 'drag its feet' in addressing the public/private competitive equity issue, if it has done the same thing for much more serious problems.
The OSSAA committee assigned to study the competitive equity issue and form a solution to the problem, listed one research article - "National Review of Interscholastic Competitive Balance Solutions Related to the Public-Private Debate" Volume 1, Issue 1, 2015 of the JOURNAL OF AMATEUR SPORT. The research document noted several methods by which state athletic associations have attempted to level the playing field for both public and private schools, including enrollment "multipliers" and "advancement" rules similar to Oklahoma. The research indicated, however, that most, if not all these enrollment based rules have failed to promote competitive equity. The document goes on to relate that "separate playoffs" for public and private schools is the "... only competitive balance solution to eliminate the public vs. private issue by isolating private schools to separate playoffs" (page 41). One must bear in mind that the OSSAA touted this research when devising its own competitive equity solution.
So, just what is the OSSAA's new competitive equity plan for leveling the playing field for all members? We've not seen it in print just yet, but a report by the competitive equity committee entails that it involves bumping the top four finishers in class 5A volleyball and tennis, to class 6A. To many OSSAA member schools, this plan looks like some sort of convoluted joke.
There are five private school volleyball teams in class 5A and twenty-seven public school teams. All five finished in the top eight, which means that two teams will move up to class 6A. (Three of the five were already playing up a class, so may not advance to class 6A.) The two lowest ADM class 6A volleyball teams will then 'bump down' to 5A, to replace the two 5A teams which advanced to 6A.
In related news, the NCAA has announced that it will create another division for college sports. In addition to Division I, II, and III for athletic competition levels based on scholarships and ability to recruit - there will now be Division IV, for those colleges which have a lot of 'out-of-state' players. It has been suggested that those schools such as the University of Oklahoma, which have a lot of 'move-ins', have an unfair advantage over those schools which do not (like Texas and USC). According to the NCAA, a large number of 'move-in' athletes does not promote competitive equity. Of course, this is fake news, and asinine for the NCAA to ever consider.
It was suggested to the OSSAA membership by an OSSAA official, however, that 'move-ins' create a tilted playing field in competition between member schools. In other words, competitive equity cannot be achieved without considering the number of 'move-in' players a team has. The official even provided my school as an example. I believe the official knows this is a ridiculous factor to consider when promoting competitive equity, but simply used it as a distraction from the real factors (providing student financial assistance and restricted enrollment). The same OSSAA official claimed we have published misleading, inaccurate, or emotionally charged information in the data above.
Update - October 31, 2019: We attended the OSSAA regional meeting at Westmoore high school. The OSSAA's plan for tweaking Rule 14 (Competitive Equity) involves advancing the top four finishers in 5A volleyball and tennis to class 6A, just as we expected. The class 6A traditional public schools in attendance were unhappy with the OSSAA suggestion. They believe that this new Rule 14 will lead to a "super-class" of volleyball and tennis teams in the OSSAA. The OSSAA's response was that there is already a super-class in class 5A, indicating that we'll now have two super-classes for volleyball. The OSSAA indicated it will probably send the new competitive equity plan out to vote of the membership, but there are many class 6A schools which will vote 'No', and countless other schools which will vote 'No', because the new Rule 14 tweaker does nothing to address the real problem - competitive equity in the OSSAA. In fact, the OSSAA's analysis of the data indicates that the competitive equity problem has been solved for all other sports. The competitive equity problem for member schools has not been solved for any sports!
Update - November 13, 2019: For the 2019 football playoffs, fifteen of the twenty private schools made the playoffs, or 75%. Only about 52% of the public schools are playoff bound.
Before we take a look at the OSSAA's recommendations for "tweaking" Rule 14 to level the playing field for all schools, let's look at the Oklahoma high school football rankings this year as a way of determining the effectiveness of Rule 14 for promoting competitive equity. Only about 6% (20 of 337) of the total member schools which participate in football are 'private', which leaves 94% 'public'. There are six classifications in which both public and private schools participate: 5A, 3A, 2A, A, B, and C. No private schools participate in classes 6A and 4A football. The high school football class rankings according to the Daily Oklahoman after seven weeks into the season include:
Class 5A - Bishop McGuinness #1
Class 3A - Heritage Hall #1, Lincoln Christian #2
Class 2A - Metro Christian #1
Class A - Rejoice Christian #2
Class B - Regent Prep #2
Class C - Southwest Covenant #1
Only time will tell as to how many private school state champions will be crowned in December, but there is a good chance that a private school state champion will be crowned in all classes in which they participate. The fact that private schools make up only about 6% of the total participants indicates that Rule 14 has been a total bust for promoting competitive equity in the OSSAA.
Further evidence that Rule 14 (implemented in 2012) has not been effective for leveling the playing field in football, is collected when we examine the final rankings for high school football in 2011 (one year prior to implemention of Rule 14 for competitive equity):
Class 5A - Bishop Kelly - top 8 (beaten in the 2011 state quarter-finals)
Class 4A - Bishop McGuinness - top 4 (beaten in the state semi-finals)
Class 3A - Cascia Hall #2
Class 2A - Lincoln Christian - top 8 (beaten in the state quarter-finals)
Class A - No private schools
Class B - No private schools
Class C - No private schools
As noted in state news a few weeks ago - the OSSAA has not been very good at gathering 'athlete concussion' data and analyzing that data in solving this student health crisis. The OSSAA has publicly stated that it's waiting for Texas UIL to study the problem before addressing it. It comes as no great shock that the OSSAA would 'drag its feet' in addressing the public/private competitive equity issue, if it has done the same thing for much more serious problems.
The OSSAA committee assigned to study the competitive equity issue and form a solution to the problem, listed one research article - "National Review of Interscholastic Competitive Balance Solutions Related to the Public-Private Debate" Volume 1, Issue 1, 2015 of the JOURNAL OF AMATEUR SPORT. The research document noted several methods by which state athletic associations have attempted to level the playing field for both public and private schools, including enrollment "multipliers" and "advancement" rules similar to Oklahoma. The research indicated, however, that most, if not all these enrollment based rules have failed to promote competitive equity. The document goes on to relate that "separate playoffs" for public and private schools is the "... only competitive balance solution to eliminate the public vs. private issue by isolating private schools to separate playoffs" (page 41). One must bear in mind that the OSSAA touted this research when devising its own competitive equity solution.
So, just what is the OSSAA's new competitive equity plan for leveling the playing field for all members? We've not seen it in print just yet, but a report by the competitive equity committee entails that it involves bumping the top four finishers in class 5A volleyball and tennis, to class 6A. To many OSSAA member schools, this plan looks like some sort of convoluted joke.
There are five private school volleyball teams in class 5A and twenty-seven public school teams. All five finished in the top eight, which means that two teams will move up to class 6A. (Three of the five were already playing up a class, so may not advance to class 6A.) The two lowest ADM class 6A volleyball teams will then 'bump down' to 5A, to replace the two 5A teams which advanced to 6A.
In related news, the NCAA has announced that it will create another division for college sports. In addition to Division I, II, and III for athletic competition levels based on scholarships and ability to recruit - there will now be Division IV, for those colleges which have a lot of 'out-of-state' players. It has been suggested that those schools such as the University of Oklahoma, which have a lot of 'move-ins', have an unfair advantage over those schools which do not (like Texas and USC). According to the NCAA, a large number of 'move-in' athletes does not promote competitive equity. Of course, this is fake news, and asinine for the NCAA to ever consider.
It was suggested to the OSSAA membership by an OSSAA official, however, that 'move-ins' create a tilted playing field in competition between member schools. In other words, competitive equity cannot be achieved without considering the number of 'move-in' players a team has. The official even provided my school as an example. I believe the official knows this is a ridiculous factor to consider when promoting competitive equity, but simply used it as a distraction from the real factors (providing student financial assistance and restricted enrollment). The same OSSAA official claimed we have published misleading, inaccurate, or emotionally charged information in the data above.
Update - October 31, 2019: We attended the OSSAA regional meeting at Westmoore high school. The OSSAA's plan for tweaking Rule 14 (Competitive Equity) involves advancing the top four finishers in 5A volleyball and tennis to class 6A, just as we expected. The class 6A traditional public schools in attendance were unhappy with the OSSAA suggestion. They believe that this new Rule 14 will lead to a "super-class" of volleyball and tennis teams in the OSSAA. The OSSAA's response was that there is already a super-class in class 5A, indicating that we'll now have two super-classes for volleyball. The OSSAA indicated it will probably send the new competitive equity plan out to vote of the membership, but there are many class 6A schools which will vote 'No', and countless other schools which will vote 'No', because the new Rule 14 tweaker does nothing to address the real problem - competitive equity in the OSSAA. In fact, the OSSAA's analysis of the data indicates that the competitive equity problem has been solved for all other sports. The competitive equity problem for member schools has not been solved for any sports!
Update - November 13, 2019: For the 2019 football playoffs, fifteen of the twenty private schools made the playoffs, or 75%. Only about 52% of the public schools are playoff bound.
Monday, October 14, 2019
Life Perspectives - George and Alpha
I often espouse my opinions and lament about public school issues in this column, but sometimes relate personal views and perspectives of events which have affected us all at one time or another. Every now and then something happens to each of us which causes a realignment of what is really important in life. It seems that those life-changing events happen at a faster rate when we get older. Twenty-five years ago, my twelve year old nephew, Austin Beckham, tragically died from an accidental gunshot. I still haven't fully recovered. The child's father (my brother) hasn't either, but he was the strongest I've ever seen in dealing with this tragedy.
I suppose some people have such an inner strength and faith, that they actually become stronger when faced with adversity. Such is the case of my brother... and Glenn Floyd, who lost two young daughters in a house fire in the 1970's. I asked both my brother and Glenn how they recovered from such a personal tragedy, and their answers were the same - Faith in God and work. People also must have another reason to continue on, and its usually for others. In other words, when something tragically happens to a loved one, most people actually become stronger and more faithful for their loved ones still around them. It is when this reason for living disappears, that many couples leave us at the same time.
George Ingram, my brother-in-law, was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer about three months ago. A pancreatic cancer diagnosis is most often a death sentence in the majority of cases, but George fought valiantly with the help of his wife Alpha. Unfortunately, George succumbed to the disease at the end of September. The battle was gut-wrenching for George as well as Alpha, and it took its toll on her. George was 63 at the time of his passing, and Alpha was 58 (still young by my standards).
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019, a neighbor found Alpha unresponsive in her home. She was transported to the hospital and placed in intensive care. My wife Sherrie (Alpha's sister) went to the hospital to support Alpha. Sherrie stayed with her for several days. The next week, on Tuesday evening, as Sherrie was taking a break to eat, Alpha called her from the hospital and said she was dying. Sherrie rushed back to the hospital to see Alpha and try to comfort her. That night, Alpha "coded" and became comatose. The doctors and nurses did everything they could over the next several hours to save her, but at around 10 AM on October 9 - they decided that they could only make her comfortable during her last few hours. Sherrie asked them to stop extraordinary life-support at around 12:50 PM. Alpha left us at 1 PM on October 9, and is now with her husband George - where she always wanted to be.
I suppose some people have such an inner strength and faith, that they actually become stronger when faced with adversity. Such is the case of my brother... and Glenn Floyd, who lost two young daughters in a house fire in the 1970's. I asked both my brother and Glenn how they recovered from such a personal tragedy, and their answers were the same - Faith in God and work. People also must have another reason to continue on, and its usually for others. In other words, when something tragically happens to a loved one, most people actually become stronger and more faithful for their loved ones still around them. It is when this reason for living disappears, that many couples leave us at the same time.
George Ingram, my brother-in-law, was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer about three months ago. A pancreatic cancer diagnosis is most often a death sentence in the majority of cases, but George fought valiantly with the help of his wife Alpha. Unfortunately, George succumbed to the disease at the end of September. The battle was gut-wrenching for George as well as Alpha, and it took its toll on her. George was 63 at the time of his passing, and Alpha was 58 (still young by my standards).
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019, a neighbor found Alpha unresponsive in her home. She was transported to the hospital and placed in intensive care. My wife Sherrie (Alpha's sister) went to the hospital to support Alpha. Sherrie stayed with her for several days. The next week, on Tuesday evening, as Sherrie was taking a break to eat, Alpha called her from the hospital and said she was dying. Sherrie rushed back to the hospital to see Alpha and try to comfort her. That night, Alpha "coded" and became comatose. The doctors and nurses did everything they could over the next several hours to save her, but at around 10 AM on October 9 - they decided that they could only make her comfortable during her last few hours. Sherrie asked them to stop extraordinary life-support at around 12:50 PM. Alpha left us at 1 PM on October 9, and is now with her husband George - where she always wanted to be.
Monday, September 16, 2019
Epic Conflicts of Interest
As noted in the news, Epic Virtual and Blended Charter Schools continue to be investigated by the FBI, OSBI, and State Auditor and Inspector, for embezzlement of state funds, racketeering, and related crimes. The investigations may be hampered by potential "conflicts of interest", however, as acquired information has been slow in coming, as those who could be implicated have a lot of money to lose.
Those which may have a lot to lose if Epic owners are eventually held accountable for Epic transgressions could be:
1) Brad Clark, the current legal counsel for the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE). Clark was the attorney for Ben Harris and David Chaney, aka Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, in a lawsuit against the University of Central Oklahoma for withdrawing its contract to be the sponsor of Epic in 2010. At that time he was employed by the Bill Hickman Law Firm which represented Butch and Sundance in 2010. Brad Clark's wife, Tiffany, is currently Epic's Contract Compliance Clerk. Clark contributed $700 to Joy Hofmeister's re-election campaign in 2018. Does Clark have a conflict of interest and a lot to lose if Epic players are indicted? Remember, Brad Clark was the OSDE employee who handed over Oklahoma teachers' personal information to Epic only a few months ago.
In a July 12, 2019, Tulsa World article Brad Clark is quoted as saying that, by law, blended learning charter schools (such as Epic's Blended Learning Center) "are subject to the same attendance requirements as traditional charter schools". On August 13, 2019, in a correspondence to a State Senator, Clark contradicted his earlier statement by saying "It appears that Epic-Rose State (BLC) has adopted an attendance policy that parallels that which has been adopted by Epic One on One Virtual as required pursuant to 70 OS 3-145.8." However, the Contract for Epic Blended Charter-Rose State College 2017-2022 requires compliance to 70 OS 3-136.
70 OS 3-136 (11) requires compliance to 70 OS 1-109: 180 Instructional Days or 1080 hours.
70 OS 1-109 requires compliance to 70 OS 1-111: 6 Hour school day.
In a September 20, 2019, Tulsa World article Epic Charter Schools sends state senator 'cease and desist demand' letter, "An attorney for Epic Charter Schools issued a 'cease and desist demand' letter to a state senator who has been raising questions about the legality of the school's student attendance practices..." An excerpt from the letter reads - "You are hereby put on notice to cease and desist all defamation of Epic, Its staff and false accusations related to the school." Epic attorney Bill Hickman wrote the letter. Brad Clark, the OSDE legal counsel, was employed by Bill Hickman before being employed by the OSDE. Could this be the conflict of interest involved when Clark readily handed over teacher personal information to Shelly Hickman, assistant superintendent at Epic and the wife of Bill Hickman, a few months ago?
When public schools require legal guidance to answer questions or provide a course of legal action, they usually employ a law firm or attorney. Since most schools retain legal expertise to address legal issues, and since public schools are run by elected school boards - boards retain the soul authority to direct legal action. Epic Public Schools has two School Boards to direct such legal action - Epic One on One Virtual Charter School Board and Epic Blended Charter School Board. The (Bill) Hickman Law Group may be on legal retainer with either or both of Epic's Boards to address legal issues as indicated in the 'cease and desist demand letter', but nowhere can it be found in either Board's minutes that the Hickman Law Group was directed to address the Epic legal issue outlined in the letter. If the Hickman Law Group is acting without the authorization to act, and spending taxpayer dollars without Board authorization, does this constitute fraudulent correspondence? If the Hickman Law Group has used the US Postal Service to deliver such unauthorized legal correspondence or action against a State Senator - does the correspondence or threatened legal action constitute federal mail fraud? Many school law experts believe the answer to both questions is yes.
Another question which may only be answered by the Attorney General's office or a district attorney is: The Hickman Law Group, retained by Epic Public Schools, has evidently acted without appropriate board approval. Does this act constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act, 25 O.S. Sections 301-314? Since the Hickman Law Group may be retained by private entities (Ben Harris and David Chaney), it may not constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act. Once again, though, The Hickman Law Group claims to be retained by Epic Public Schools, not Harris or Chaney, so should be directed by the Epic School Board(s). It also appears that no authority has been provided to the superintendent of Epic to direct such legal activity.
2) Joy Hofmeister, State Superintendent of Schools. Fact #1 - Since 2014, Joy Hofmeister received almost $50,000 from Ben Harris, David Chaney and their spouses, and Epic lobbyists, in campaign funds to favor Epic in all education decisions. Fact #2 - According to a Tulsa World article on July 25, 2019, Swink school district facing forced consolidation says Epic leader offered a rescue: 'I'm in pretty good with Joy'. A Swink school board member is quoted "I got a call from Ben Harris (of Epic) about two weeks ago. He had heard that we were in trouble, and he was offering the possibility to annex into Panola, the little district they already control. I told him, I'm a one man board. Everyone else has resigned, and I can't make any decisions. The (state) Department of Education is going to destroy us. He (Ben) said, 'If you're interested in this, I'm in pretty good with Joy (Hofmeister). I can get this done."
We have questions for Joy Hofmeister or Brad Clark (OSDE legal counsel): The Statewide Virtual Charter (school) Board has recently approved 22 additional learning and testing sites for Epic, which includes Blanchard and Durant. Are these Epic Public School buildings exempt from property taxation? Does Epic Public Schools pay its rent using Oklahoma tax dollars?
Update October 9, 2019 - Prior to the election of Joy Hofmeister as State School Superintendent in 2014, Janet Barresi (prior State Superintendent) directly told Ben Harris and David Chaney (Epic co-owners) that they could not open new Epic Learning Centers (such as currently opening in Blanchard and Durant) using tax payer dollars. Our question is: Has Joy Hofmeister told them the same thing?, or was Ben Harris accurate when he said "I'm in pretty good with Joy"? An Oklahoma State Department of Education insider told us that it's all related to campaign donations - campaign donations to legislators who may have passed favorable legislation for allowing Epic to open the public schools. What the insider didn't say was "it's all related to campaign donations to Oklahoma Legislators and the State Superintendent". We're left to wonder if it is?.. or isn't?
Update October 22, 2019 - In an interview with 'News 9 Investigates' on Thursday, October 17, Joy Hofmeister is quoted as saying "To see those (tax) dollars being used, not to recruit new teachers with advertising dollars, but aggressively recruiting students to build a business, that is the piece that I think is difficult to square -- that's what I have a problem with." Evidently, Ben Harris is not so "in pretty good with Joy" as he thought he was on July 25. The $50,000 in campaign donations that Ben and company provided Joy is looking like a big waste of money. It won't be long before Ben pens a letter to the Daily Oklahoman decrying how Joy Hofmeister is misleading state tax payers. David Chaney, Epic co-owner, did the same thing to Mary Fallin in 2012, when she opposed Epic racketeering at that time.
Those which may have a lot to lose if Epic owners are eventually held accountable for Epic transgressions could be:
1) Brad Clark, the current legal counsel for the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE). Clark was the attorney for Ben Harris and David Chaney, aka Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, in a lawsuit against the University of Central Oklahoma for withdrawing its contract to be the sponsor of Epic in 2010. At that time he was employed by the Bill Hickman Law Firm which represented Butch and Sundance in 2010. Brad Clark's wife, Tiffany, is currently Epic's Contract Compliance Clerk. Clark contributed $700 to Joy Hofmeister's re-election campaign in 2018. Does Clark have a conflict of interest and a lot to lose if Epic players are indicted? Remember, Brad Clark was the OSDE employee who handed over Oklahoma teachers' personal information to Epic only a few months ago.
In a July 12, 2019, Tulsa World article Brad Clark is quoted as saying that, by law, blended learning charter schools (such as Epic's Blended Learning Center) "are subject to the same attendance requirements as traditional charter schools". On August 13, 2019, in a correspondence to a State Senator, Clark contradicted his earlier statement by saying "It appears that Epic-Rose State (BLC) has adopted an attendance policy that parallels that which has been adopted by Epic One on One Virtual as required pursuant to 70 OS 3-145.8." However, the Contract for Epic Blended Charter-Rose State College 2017-2022 requires compliance to 70 OS 3-136.
70 OS 3-136 (11) requires compliance to 70 OS 1-109: 180 Instructional Days or 1080 hours.
70 OS 1-109 requires compliance to 70 OS 1-111: 6 Hour school day.
In a September 20, 2019, Tulsa World article Epic Charter Schools sends state senator 'cease and desist demand' letter, "An attorney for Epic Charter Schools issued a 'cease and desist demand' letter to a state senator who has been raising questions about the legality of the school's student attendance practices..." An excerpt from the letter reads - "You are hereby put on notice to cease and desist all defamation of Epic, Its staff and false accusations related to the school." Epic attorney Bill Hickman wrote the letter. Brad Clark, the OSDE legal counsel, was employed by Bill Hickman before being employed by the OSDE. Could this be the conflict of interest involved when Clark readily handed over teacher personal information to Shelly Hickman, assistant superintendent at Epic and the wife of Bill Hickman, a few months ago?
When public schools require legal guidance to answer questions or provide a course of legal action, they usually employ a law firm or attorney. Since most schools retain legal expertise to address legal issues, and since public schools are run by elected school boards - boards retain the soul authority to direct legal action. Epic Public Schools has two School Boards to direct such legal action - Epic One on One Virtual Charter School Board and Epic Blended Charter School Board. The (Bill) Hickman Law Group may be on legal retainer with either or both of Epic's Boards to address legal issues as indicated in the 'cease and desist demand letter', but nowhere can it be found in either Board's minutes that the Hickman Law Group was directed to address the Epic legal issue outlined in the letter. If the Hickman Law Group is acting without the authorization to act, and spending taxpayer dollars without Board authorization, does this constitute fraudulent correspondence? If the Hickman Law Group has used the US Postal Service to deliver such unauthorized legal correspondence or action against a State Senator - does the correspondence or threatened legal action constitute federal mail fraud? Many school law experts believe the answer to both questions is yes.
Another question which may only be answered by the Attorney General's office or a district attorney is: The Hickman Law Group, retained by Epic Public Schools, has evidently acted without appropriate board approval. Does this act constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act, 25 O.S. Sections 301-314? Since the Hickman Law Group may be retained by private entities (Ben Harris and David Chaney), it may not constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act. Once again, though, The Hickman Law Group claims to be retained by Epic Public Schools, not Harris or Chaney, so should be directed by the Epic School Board(s). It also appears that no authority has been provided to the superintendent of Epic to direct such legal activity.
2) Joy Hofmeister, State Superintendent of Schools. Fact #1 - Since 2014, Joy Hofmeister received almost $50,000 from Ben Harris, David Chaney and their spouses, and Epic lobbyists, in campaign funds to favor Epic in all education decisions. Fact #2 - According to a Tulsa World article on July 25, 2019, Swink school district facing forced consolidation says Epic leader offered a rescue: 'I'm in pretty good with Joy'. A Swink school board member is quoted "I got a call from Ben Harris (of Epic) about two weeks ago. He had heard that we were in trouble, and he was offering the possibility to annex into Panola, the little district they already control. I told him, I'm a one man board. Everyone else has resigned, and I can't make any decisions. The (state) Department of Education is going to destroy us. He (Ben) said, 'If you're interested in this, I'm in pretty good with Joy (Hofmeister). I can get this done."
We have questions for Joy Hofmeister or Brad Clark (OSDE legal counsel): The Statewide Virtual Charter (school) Board has recently approved 22 additional learning and testing sites for Epic, which includes Blanchard and Durant. Are these Epic Public School buildings exempt from property taxation? Does Epic Public Schools pay its rent using Oklahoma tax dollars?
Update October 9, 2019 - Prior to the election of Joy Hofmeister as State School Superintendent in 2014, Janet Barresi (prior State Superintendent) directly told Ben Harris and David Chaney (Epic co-owners) that they could not open new Epic Learning Centers (such as currently opening in Blanchard and Durant) using tax payer dollars. Our question is: Has Joy Hofmeister told them the same thing?, or was Ben Harris accurate when he said "I'm in pretty good with Joy"? An Oklahoma State Department of Education insider told us that it's all related to campaign donations - campaign donations to legislators who may have passed favorable legislation for allowing Epic to open the public schools. What the insider didn't say was "it's all related to campaign donations to Oklahoma Legislators and the State Superintendent". We're left to wonder if it is?.. or isn't?
Update October 22, 2019 - In an interview with 'News 9 Investigates' on Thursday, October 17, Joy Hofmeister is quoted as saying "To see those (tax) dollars being used, not to recruit new teachers with advertising dollars, but aggressively recruiting students to build a business, that is the piece that I think is difficult to square -- that's what I have a problem with." Evidently, Ben Harris is not so "in pretty good with Joy" as he thought he was on July 25. The $50,000 in campaign donations that Ben and company provided Joy is looking like a big waste of money. It won't be long before Ben pens a letter to the Daily Oklahoman decrying how Joy Hofmeister is misleading state tax payers. David Chaney, Epic co-owner, did the same thing to Mary Fallin in 2012, when she opposed Epic racketeering at that time.
Tuesday, September 3, 2019
More Epic Unanswered Questions
By now most people know the OSBI, FBI, Oklahoma County District Attorney's office, and maybe the Securities Commission has several questions for Epic Virtual Charter Schools. Questions concerning racketeering, embezzlement of state funds, falsification of records, ghost students, etc., are all questions that Epic will eventually answer. We have several education related questions that have been previously posed, however, and are still awaiting answers.
1) Article 10, Section 15 of the Oklahoma Constitution states "... the credit of the State shall not be given, pledged, or loaned to any individual... nor shall the State.. make donation by gift...". In addition State Law 70-16-121 states "... all textbooks (and computers) shall be owned by such (school) districts...". How does Epic explain gifting more than 6,000 laptop computers and more than $3,000,000 to individuals?
2) Epic has reported class sizes of 25 to 30 students per teacher. Five (5) Epic high school teachers are reported as having over 2,000 students each. Epic, please explain?
3) State Law prohibits a school of Epic proportions to exceed 5% in administrative costs. The August 2017 auditor's report, however, reflected that Epic accrued 13.28% in administrative costs. How did Epic avoid a penalty for exceeding the limit for administrative costs?
While certainly not as important as the questions the OSBI and FBI has for Epic, our questions concerning education also remain unanswered.
1) Article 10, Section 15 of the Oklahoma Constitution states "... the credit of the State shall not be given, pledged, or loaned to any individual... nor shall the State.. make donation by gift...". In addition State Law 70-16-121 states "... all textbooks (and computers) shall be owned by such (school) districts...". How does Epic explain gifting more than 6,000 laptop computers and more than $3,000,000 to individuals?
2) Epic has reported class sizes of 25 to 30 students per teacher. Five (5) Epic high school teachers are reported as having over 2,000 students each. Epic, please explain?
3) State Law prohibits a school of Epic proportions to exceed 5% in administrative costs. The August 2017 auditor's report, however, reflected that Epic accrued 13.28% in administrative costs. How did Epic avoid a penalty for exceeding the limit for administrative costs?
While certainly not as important as the questions the OSBI and FBI has for Epic, our questions concerning education also remain unanswered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)