Guest Commentary: AEI's Special Report on 'How Government Supports Private-Sector Innovation, Except in Education'

The American Enterprise Institute's new "Private Enterprise in American Education" series is designed to pivot away from the tendency to reflexively demonize or celebrate for-profits and instead understand what it takes for for-profits to promote quality and cost effectiveness at scale. In this third installment of the series, John Bailey of Whiteboard Advisors demonstrates how for-profit educational providers are singularly excluded from federal governmental efforts to engage private-sector actors. Bailey notes that policymakers and government officials are comfortable with for-profits routinely playing a substantial role in addressing pressing social problems in areas like health care or green energy, but not in education.
"When it comes to other crucial challenges our country faces—creating a more reliable health care system, finding efficient sources of clean energy, or improving space exploration—policymakers do not ask whether they should engage for-profit companies, but how they should,” Bailey writes. “It’s time for education policymakers to follow suit.”
Click here to read his provocative study.
Click here to learn more about AEI's "Private Enterprise in American Education" series.

Michael B. Horn: Beyond Good and Evil

The role of for-profit companies in public education–education financed by the government–has attracted increased scrutiny over the past few years. Though for-profit entities such as textbook companies have had contracts with public school districts for decades, recent controversy over what government officials and others perceive as low graduation rates and questionable marketing practices within the for-profit higher-education space has drawn significant negative attention. As this controversy heats up, it is prompting a wider debate about the role of for-profit companies in education–a debate too often characterized by faulty assumptions and misunderstandings on both sides.
Many in public education assume the worst about for-profit corporations, arguing that they are money-grabbing entities that will shortchange the public good if it means increased profits. Critics see no place for for-profit providers in American education. Supporters view for-profits as a force for good that can harness the profit motive to attract top talent and scale quality in public education. The government often perpetuates these divides by drawing lines in the sand of what activities companies can and cannot do based on their corporate structures. Despite these views on for-profits, however, the reality is different. Policymakers, officials, providers, and other members of the debate would do well to keep three key points in mind:
--Firs, for-profit companies are not inherently good or evil
--Second, there are far fewer inherent and predetermined differences between for-profit companies and their nonprofit counterparts than many assume.
--Third, the biggest inherent differences between for-profits and nonprofits stem from their fundamental corporate structures, which determine what they do with their profits–and thus affect their ability to attract capital and scale–as well as what opportunities look attractive.
Click here to read more of my thoughts on for-profits and the role they should--and can--play in education. You will also find a link to my paper"Understanding the Role of For-Profits in Education Through the Theories of Disruptive Innovation," published by the American Enterprise Institute. There is also a link to AEI's "Private Enterprise in American Education Series."

Tom Vander Ark: Why States Should Contract with Multiple Online Learning Providers

The Internet has improved the public provision of services in a variety of ways and it is beginning to transform public education. The power of personal digital learning suggests that it doesn’t make sense to limit our children’s opportunity to learn to a local school or geographically defined school district.
In the 19th century, America developed an idiosyncratic system of public education based on local control. While federal and state governments have aggregated degrees of control, U.S. education is still largely a local issue—an unusual construct in the developed world. The growing potential of learning online requires us to rethink and revise how educational services are provisioned.
Digital Learning Now, the advocacy initiative chaired by former governors Jeb Bush and Bob Wise, released a video in which I try to make the case for multiple statewide providers of educational services. I know the video won’t be a YouTube favorite and that this won’t be my favorite column with my friends working in public school districts. Click here to read my complete post on this topic.
Click here to watch the video and please take time to comment so we can start a dialogue on this issue.
Extending educational options to the course level requires a new approach to school finance, one that is less dependent on local property taxes and is more need-based and performance-oriented (and a subject of future blogs). It will also require new strategies to ensure that every student receives a seamless web of support and, to the extent necessary, is plugged in to youth and family services in their community.
School districts will understandably oppose the idea of a multiple provider system but the opportunity to cost effectively improve services to students and families is worth pursuing.

Guest Commentary: Oklahoma School Board Should Continue to Eye Virtual Schooling Providers

The Oklahoman Editorial Board likes virtual schools and the direction it is taking education.
But most Oklahomans are slow to accept change. Any change. That's why the editorial board advises the state's ed board to take it slow when it comes to virtual school issues.
The newspaper's editorial says it views for-profit companies that provide curriculum, instructors, and school management with some wariness. It's not that their against the for-profits, it's just that for-profit companies being so hands-on in providing classroom experiences--even online classroom experiences.
"It's OK to wade in carefully," the editorial states. "Credible providers won't mind answering all the questions officials can muster."
Read the complete editorial here.