蜜桃影视

Since the coronavirus outbreak hit the U.S. in mid-March, virtual classrooms have replaced in-person classes. Teachers have had to pivot quickly to online learning and are doing their best to keep their students from falling behind. School districts had not prepared distance learning plans for an extended closure, and now the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has that remote learning may have to continue through the fall. 

Virtual K-12 schools 鈥� most of them for-profit companies 鈥� have seized on an opportunity, on public school districts across the country to market their products and services for distance learning. Last year, enrollment in these virtual schools amid complaints about poor outcomes. But now they are quickly ramping up their branding to capitalize on the COVID-19 crisis.

Some are offering free teacher training or a free month of their online curriculum, with the hope that some districts will stay with their paid virtual program in a blended learning model once they reopen. There are many good-faith operators out there offering their services, but also a slew of bad actors that have reputations for abysmal student outcomes, poor graduation rates and exorbitant costs. School districts, which spent on education technology in 2019, need to research these companies before accepting any of their 鈥渘o-risk鈥� offers.

A growing number of have found that when students move to online formats, it has a negative impact on student achievement. According to the a nonprofit housed at the University of Colorado Boulder, most students enrolled in full-time K-12 virtual schools do not perform as well as their classmates attending brick-and-mortar schools. Of the 320 virtual schools with available school performance ratings, just 67, or 48.5 percent, were rated acceptable by their state education agencies, according to data collected by the center for the 2017-18 school year (71 were rated unacceptable; 182 had no rating reported). The graduation rate was 48.5 percent at virtual schools managed by for-profit companies, far below the national average of 84 percent. Less than half of students graduating and less than half of for-profit schools rated 鈥渁cceptable鈥� is not good enough for America鈥檚 children.

Another , conducted by the Center for Research on Educational Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University, concluded that students in virtual programs 鈥渓earned the equivalent of 72 fewer days in reading and 180 days in math compared with the traditional public school students to whom they were matched.鈥�

The Hechinger Report recently conducted an analysis of dozens of and found that they were 鈥減romoting their products鈥� effectiveness on their websites, in email pitches and in vendor brochures with little or shoddy evidence to support their claims.鈥� Hechinger cited Matific, IXL and Edgenuity, as well as , one of the largest for-profit education chains in the country.聽

We鈥檝e seen this playbook before 鈥� in the higher education sector, where for-profit college chains with subpar online programs disproportionately recruit vulnerable populations, including low-income persons and veterans. To get their hands on federal funds, including GI Bill benefits, many of these colleges brand themselves as military-friendly and spend more money on deceptive advertising and aggressive recruitment tactics than on students and instruction. For-profit colleges鈥� salespeople, under pressure in boiler room atmospheres, overpromise and underdeliver. After enrolling, students end up with worthless degrees, credits that don鈥檛 transfer and loan debt they didn鈥檛 sign up for.

Years of state and finally shed light on some of these bad actors, shuttering dozens of campuses and bankrupting large for-profit chains like the Corinthian College and ITT Technical Institute. Their collapse wasn鈥檛 the result of a simple business failure so much as an indictment of a business model devoted almost entirely to gaming the taxpayer-funded financial aid system. We鈥檝e been fighting this battle for years, and now we鈥檙e concerned about how that business model is being applied to K-12 virtual schools.

Nonprofit K-12 providers make better choices and have proven reputations when it comes to online learning. provides free resources and classes for students, teachers and parents. For years, Match Charter School in Boston has been posting its pre-K-12 curriculum on the platform . An enhanced version, Fishtank Plus, is normally a subscription service, but it is currently being offered for free during the COVID-19 crisis, with updated materials and tips for teachers to adapt the curriculum to an online platform.

Keeping kids鈥� learning on track is difficult enough during this time. School districts that are approached by for-profit companies would do well to take the advice they give their students: Do your homework. 

Carrie Wofford is president of . Matthew Boulay is the founder of the and author of .鈥�

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 蜜桃影视鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.