Rogers Morton, the campaign manager for the presidential candidate, Gerald Ford, had lost 5 of the last 6 primaries when he uttered the phrase, as reported by Washington Post, "I'm not going to rearrange the furniture on the Titanic."
Morton uttered this phrase as he took over leading the campaign just a month prior. He knew, that in order for Ford to win, he could not continue to do what had been done. It wasn't working. It could not be tweaked. It could not be adapted. It had to be fundamentally changed.
Unfortunately for Ford, the changes made were too late and Jimmy Carter was elected President of the United States later that year.
My hope, as I utter the same "Titanic phrase" as it relates to the current virtual school model, is that it is not too late for virtual learning. It already is for the current model and that is fine. However, there is hope, I believe, for virtual learning -- a new model, "a new hope" as Star Wars might say.
Mr. Morton was correct though. We cannot merely rearrange the deck chairs, nor play music while the virtual school Titanic we are sailing on is sinking. The iceberg has already been struck so merely altering course will not do. The current model is already taking on water and there is an undeniable tilt to the ship.
What we must do is to rethink the virtual learning ship altogether. We need to throw away the old blueprints and rebuild with a new idea in mind.
After the Titanic struck the iceberg it took only 2 hours and 40 minutes for the mighty luxury liner to sink below the Atlantic surface. How long will it take the current virtual model to sink now that the iceberg has been struck?
That is why the time is now to reimagine virtual learning. The ocean still beckons for those willing to sail it.
#virtualschools #virtuallearning #elearning #blendedlearning #K12 #education #EpicCharterSchools #A3Education #GeorgiaCyberSchool #OhioVirtual #ConnectionsAcademy
Showing posts with label California Virtual Academies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label California Virtual Academies. Show all posts
Friday, September 13, 2019
Monday, July 11, 2016
The Art of Spin by K12
Is it $168.5 million or $2.5 million?
On Friday, July 8, 2016, the Attorney General of California issued a press release announcing a $168.5 million settlement with K12.
On the same day, K12 issued a press release announcing a $2.5 million settlement with the State of California Attorney General's office.
Two days ago (after seeing the news report, not the press releases) I penned a blog about the settlement and mentioned we will need to see how K12 spins it.
After reading their release, my head is still spinning. Now, I personally know the K12 PR head and the Government Affairs team -- they are good people, and I really feel for them. However, this is one of the best spin attempts I have seen, and I spend my time with words (marketing and sales training). I will only touch on a few points below.
K12 classified it as a $2.5-million settlement, and a $6.0 million donation to the Attorney General's office to cover the costs of the investigation. They also adamantly stated that the "settlement with the state includes no finding or admission of liability or wrongdoing by K12 or by the public, non-profit California Virtual Academies (CAVA) managed under contracts by K12."
California Attorney General Kamala Harris, in her own words, seems to see it differently from her press release, "K12 and its schools mislead parents and the State of California by claiming taxpayer dollars for questionable student attendance, misstating student success and parent satisfaction, and loading nonprofit charities with debt."
The next point comes from the first statement by K12 CEO Stuart Udell. (Nate Davis seems to have disappeared on this one). Anyway, back to Stuart's quote.
"The Attorney General's claim of $168.5 million in today's announcement is flat wrong. Despite our full cooperation throughout the process, the Office of the Attorney General grossly mischaracterized the value of the settlement just as it did to the issues it investigated. There is no "debt relief" to the CAVA schools. The balance budget credits essentially act as subsidies to protect CAVA schools, its students, and teachers against financial uncertainties. CAVA schools have not paid that money to K12 and K12 never expected to receive it given California's funding environment."
What I find most interesting here is the CEO's first comments attack the dollar amount and then the characterization of the debt relief, instead saying it should have been classified as subsidies.
K12 investors -- were you listening? (They are because the stock is up almost 2% today)
Let's forget that what the Attorney General said about misleading parents, misstating student success and parent satisfaction, and questionable student attendance. No, we want to make crystal clear it is not "debt relief."
The other point I want to draw attention to is Udell's last quote in the K12 release.
"Opponents of K12 and skeptics of public online education have spent years making wild, attention-grabbing charges against us and our business," said Udell. "The State of California used the full authority and investigative resources of the Office of the Attorney General to investigate these charges over eight months. In the end, we demonstrated industry leading levels of service and compliance with regulations and benefits to families. There is a reason families keep coming to our programs and its because we are committed to deliver valuable educational services within the laws and rules of every state."
I actually think he believes that statement too.
By the way, CAVA schools collectively had a graduation rate of 36% as compared to the state average of 78%. Facts are neither opponents or skeptics.
Now, I won't pick apart the use of the words "wild" and "attention-grabbing" in order to characterize any comments made by people pointing out flaws with K12 and their schools. I won't even point out the fact that the charter school association in California agreed with the Attorney General in this settlement (and last I checked they were not opponents or skeptics).
What I will point out though is the weakness behind this ending statement. Any communication expert knows you open big and end big. You open strong and end strong. You open memorable and end memorable.
And yet, this is the best they have -- ". . . we demonstrated industry leading levels of service and compliance with regulations and benefits to families. There is a reason families keep coming to our programs and its because we are committed to deliver valuable educational services within the laws and rules of every state."
Industry leading -- if the ship is sinking does it matter how beautiful the deck chairs look?
Parents keep coming to our programs -- Oh, and lest I forget to remind you where the focus seems to be. K12 held an investor conference call today to discuss the settlement.
Where is the parent conference call?
houston@figment-consulting.com
On Friday, July 8, 2016, the Attorney General of California issued a press release announcing a $168.5 million settlement with K12.
On the same day, K12 issued a press release announcing a $2.5 million settlement with the State of California Attorney General's office.
Two days ago (after seeing the news report, not the press releases) I penned a blog about the settlement and mentioned we will need to see how K12 spins it.
After reading their release, my head is still spinning. Now, I personally know the K12 PR head and the Government Affairs team -- they are good people, and I really feel for them. However, this is one of the best spin attempts I have seen, and I spend my time with words (marketing and sales training). I will only touch on a few points below.
K12 classified it as a $2.5-million settlement, and a $6.0 million donation to the Attorney General's office to cover the costs of the investigation. They also adamantly stated that the "settlement with the state includes no finding or admission of liability or wrongdoing by K12 or by the public, non-profit California Virtual Academies (CAVA) managed under contracts by K12."
California Attorney General Kamala Harris, in her own words, seems to see it differently from her press release, "K12 and its schools mislead parents and the State of California by claiming taxpayer dollars for questionable student attendance, misstating student success and parent satisfaction, and loading nonprofit charities with debt."
The next point comes from the first statement by K12 CEO Stuart Udell. (Nate Davis seems to have disappeared on this one). Anyway, back to Stuart's quote.
"The Attorney General's claim of $168.5 million in today's announcement is flat wrong. Despite our full cooperation throughout the process, the Office of the Attorney General grossly mischaracterized the value of the settlement just as it did to the issues it investigated. There is no "debt relief" to the CAVA schools. The balance budget credits essentially act as subsidies to protect CAVA schools, its students, and teachers against financial uncertainties. CAVA schools have not paid that money to K12 and K12 never expected to receive it given California's funding environment."
What I find most interesting here is the CEO's first comments attack the dollar amount and then the characterization of the debt relief, instead saying it should have been classified as subsidies.
K12 investors -- were you listening? (They are because the stock is up almost 2% today)
Let's forget that what the Attorney General said about misleading parents, misstating student success and parent satisfaction, and questionable student attendance. No, we want to make crystal clear it is not "debt relief."
The other point I want to draw attention to is Udell's last quote in the K12 release.
"Opponents of K12 and skeptics of public online education have spent years making wild, attention-grabbing charges against us and our business," said Udell. "The State of California used the full authority and investigative resources of the Office of the Attorney General to investigate these charges over eight months. In the end, we demonstrated industry leading levels of service and compliance with regulations and benefits to families. There is a reason families keep coming to our programs and its because we are committed to deliver valuable educational services within the laws and rules of every state."
I actually think he believes that statement too.
By the way, CAVA schools collectively had a graduation rate of 36% as compared to the state average of 78%. Facts are neither opponents or skeptics.
Now, I won't pick apart the use of the words "wild" and "attention-grabbing" in order to characterize any comments made by people pointing out flaws with K12 and their schools. I won't even point out the fact that the charter school association in California agreed with the Attorney General in this settlement (and last I checked they were not opponents or skeptics).
What I will point out though is the weakness behind this ending statement. Any communication expert knows you open big and end big. You open strong and end strong. You open memorable and end memorable.
And yet, this is the best they have -- ". . . we demonstrated industry leading levels of service and compliance with regulations and benefits to families. There is a reason families keep coming to our programs and its because we are committed to deliver valuable educational services within the laws and rules of every state."
Industry leading -- if the ship is sinking does it matter how beautiful the deck chairs look?
Parents keep coming to our programs -- Oh, and lest I forget to remind you where the focus seems to be. K12 held an investor conference call today to discuss the settlement.
Where is the parent conference call?
houston@figment-consulting.com
Saturday, July 9, 2016
California settles with K12 over CAVA
False advertising. Misleading parents. Inadequate instruction.
That was the case laid out against K12 by the California attorney general's office. Today, the LA Times shared that the state had reached a settlement agreement with K12.
As part of the agreement, K12 admitted to no wrongdoing but did agree to "abide by state law" moving forward -- that is an interesting paradox in my mind, but it is what it is.
In addition, K12 paid $8.5 million to settle existing claims, and agreed to not be reimbursed by the CAVA schools by offering a "debt relief" of $160 million. Again, that is a steep amount to pay overall for doing nothing wrong.
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-state-settles-with-cava-online-charter--20160708-snap-story.html
Let's see how this one will be spun by K12.
Not sure the normal response offered by K12 will work with this one.
It's sad.
houston@figment-consulting.com
That was the case laid out against K12 by the California attorney general's office. Today, the LA Times shared that the state had reached a settlement agreement with K12.
As part of the agreement, K12 admitted to no wrongdoing but did agree to "abide by state law" moving forward -- that is an interesting paradox in my mind, but it is what it is.
In addition, K12 paid $8.5 million to settle existing claims, and agreed to not be reimbursed by the CAVA schools by offering a "debt relief" of $160 million. Again, that is a steep amount to pay overall for doing nothing wrong.
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-state-settles-with-cava-online-charter--20160708-snap-story.html
Let's see how this one will be spun by K12.
Not sure the normal response offered by K12 will work with this one.
It's sad.
houston@figment-consulting.com
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
California Virtual Academies issues
A friend forwarded this report to me on the California Virtual Academies (CAVA), managed by K12, Inc. It is a report from the group, In the Public Interest, and it is a scathing look into the way CAVA and K12 are intertwined.
But, is it accurate? According to K12, the report was conducted as leverage for the California Teachers Association (CTA) and their push to unionize the CAVA teachers.
I do appreciate the finding by In the Public Interest that the concept of virtual schooling is a great option for some students. Again, my concern is the concept and the implementation are becoming synonymous, so it is refreshing to see the two be separated in a report such as this.
Virtual schooling is a great option for the right student -- the one willing to put in the work, daily.
houston@figment-consulting.com
But, is it accurate? According to K12, the report was conducted as leverage for the California Teachers Association (CTA) and their push to unionize the CAVA teachers.
I do appreciate the finding by In the Public Interest that the concept of virtual schooling is a great option for some students. Again, my concern is the concept and the implementation are becoming synonymous, so it is refreshing to see the two be separated in a report such as this.
Virtual schooling is a great option for the right student -- the one willing to put in the work, daily.
houston@figment-consulting.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)