Education Week - August 21, 2019 - 11

include providers for curriculum,
computer equipment, and other
managed school services."

Digital Lockout
In the meantime, K12 Inc. is
making life difficult for the cyber
academy, the school contends.
The company has shut down student computers, the cyber charter
said in a press release. The academy says K12 Inc. has also replaced
login screens with a "caustic note"
asking parents to return the computers, and "threatened" to come
to students' homes to get them,
the statement said. It has locked
the cyber charter's employees out
of their emails. It has shut students
out of state-funded dual enrollment courses accessed online,
keeping some students from accessing assignments they needed
to complete, the school says.
Georgia Cyber Academy officials
believe that K12 Inc. is trying to retaliate for the curriculum change,
calling the company's actions,
"purposeful, retaliatory, and wholly
indefensible" in the press release.
Kraft, the company spokesman,

to do so that identifies the records
being sought," the company said in
a statement. "Thus far, all K12 has
received is a generalized request
that is not in compliance" with
Georgia's open records laws. "K12
will comply with the law."
And K12 told the Atlanta Journal
Constitution that the agency was
operating on misinformation from
the school and that it hoped to
"correct the record" in a meeting.

Parents Take to Facebook
On social media, some families
are complaining that their students
are unable to complete their school
work.
"My high schooler is finishing up
a summer school dual-enrollment
course and this is finals week!
His laptop was locked down with
ZERO notice," wrote one woman
who identified herself as a parent.
Others worried the company is
tarnishing the school's reputation.
"Shame on you K12, this was VERY
UNPROFESSIONAL to post this
here on FB right before our students
start school," wrote another, referring to a Facebook post written by

... we're doing the things we need to do
to make sure our students
are being served."
MIKE KOOI
Executive director, George Cyber Academy

said K12 Inc. warned the charter
school in advance that withdrawing from its platform would disrupt
students' learning experience.
That move "triggered a standard
course cancellation process," the
company said in a statement. "This
included a computer freezing/reclamation process for the computers
that K12 loaned to GCA students
and are configured to work with
K12's curriculum."
The state's charter authorizer,
the State Charter Schools Commission of Georgia, has backed up
the Georgia Cyber Academy. The
commission gave K12 until Aug. 2
to release students' and financial
records back to the school. When
the company did not appear to
comply, the commission sent a
follow-up letter on Aug. 7, telling
the company that it could be found
in violation of state law if it did not
return GCA's "lawful property."
The company said that the
cyber academy isn't being specific
enough in its records ask.
"K12 has consistently told GCA
and the State Commission that
K12 intends to provide GCA with
access to GCA's student records
and school financial records once
it receives a specific written request

Chavous that accused the school
of "questionable" practices. "What
is your motivation behind this? To
scare us, make us parent[s] question
our educational choice?"
But another poster, who also
identified herself as a parent, said
she was "bummed" that the cyber
academy was no longer part of K12
because her son had enjoyed the
K12 curriculum.
Kooi said the school is working to
make sure students have access to
the materials they need.
"We are managing under the circumstances," he said. "We're getting computers on to people, and
we're doing the things we need to
do to make sure our students are
being served."
Coverage of how parents work with
educators, community leaders, and
policymakers to make informed
decisions about their children's
education is supported by a grant
from the Walton Family Foundation.
Education Week retains sole editorial
control over the content of this coverage.
Sign up for the "EdWeek Tech Leader"
e-newsletter, which tracks news and
trends on this issue.
www.edweek.org/go/newsletters

Inside a Procurement
Dispute in North Carolina
State's choice of reading test stirs bigger questions
By Stephen Sawchuk
North Carolina officials' switch in
reading-test vendors just weeks before the new school year got underway is spotlighting the often murky
process of contracts and procurements for K-12 services.
Deep disagreements linger over
whether the $8.3 million, three-year
contract was properly awarded to the
Dallas-based company Istation. Some
educators, including a former state
education department employee, are
seething that top officials ignored an
internal panel recommendation to
award the contract to New York Citybased Amplify, not to Istation.
But State Superintendent Mark
Johnson contends that members of
that committee failed to follow the
right procedures and violated their
confidentiality agreements-thus requiring the state to redo the competition, where Istation eked out the win.
Beyond the accusations of favoritism, the debates shine a light on the
potential pitfalls in large state K-12
procurement processes-as well as
how key purchases, like testing systems, can affect every classroom's
approach to teaching.

New Laws, New Products
In the mid-2010s, North Carolina
passed several laws relating to reading, including requiring diagnostic
reading exams for students in kindergarten through 3rd grade, and
requiring school boards to screen
students for dyslexia and other learning disabilities. The results are used
to target some students for summer
school, and eventually can lead to
some students being retained at the
end of 3rd grade.
Amplify had held the contract to
supply the diagnostic assessment,
teacher training, curriculum, and
online supports for teachers for a
number of years. That contract went
up for rebidding in 2018.
According to documents obtained
through public-records requests, the
internal committee judged Amplify
the best, if the most expensive, of the
four bids that came in. Shortly thereafter, the documents show, state officials suddenly canceled the RFP, entered into negotiations with the two
top vendors directly, and ultimately
selected Istation, which had come in
second in the earlier committee ranking.
The decision was made by a second, smaller committee at the education department, without any
outside teachers or educators to act
as advisers. They decided that Istation's approach was more adaptive
and "personalized" to students than
Amplify's-though they also deemed
it weaker on its ability to screen students for dyslexia.

For Amy Jablonski, who oversaw the
first evaluation committee and left the
department in December 2018, the decision set a bad precedent for teachers,
disregarded their input into the procurement process, and could discourage them from sitting on other panels.
"The experts made the decision,
recommended the decision, and then
a different decision was made," she
said.

The Fallout
Amplify immediately protested the
award, noting apparent differences in
the two committees' review criteria.
But in a detailed response, Johnson
denied the protest.
Among the documents he cited is

The experts made
the decision,
recommended the
decision, and then
a different decision
was made."
AMY JABLONSKI
Former state education department
employee

a text message purportedly from one
of Jablonski's committee members
seeming to disclose information from
internal discussions, in violation of
a nondisclosure agreement. At least
one committee member also had past
ties to Amplify, he said. But the text
exchange also appears to show that
committee members felt pressured by
Johnson to select Istation.
Amplify has since requested an administrative hearing with the state
Department of Information Technol-

ogy, which is reviewing the matter.
The situation has fueled debates
over a number of classroom teaching
issues, notably about best practices for
screening for students with dyslexia,
and about how much contact young
children should have with technology.
Istation uses an all-computer-based
assessment approach, in which students match letters to sounds and are
recorded reading a passage. (Teachers can also administer exams one on
one.) With the Amplify product, each
student is individually assessed reading a passage by his or her teacher.
Dyslexia advocates in the state are
concerned about whether it's possible
for a computer-based exam to measure all the components of early reading and oral fluency.
North Carolina has already delayed
by six months the date on which results from the exams start to filter
into school ratings in response to
superintendents' concerns. Mainly,
district leaders said, they just want to
be sure that they understand how to
use the tool as school begins.
"I think that teachers are open
minded to change if they can understand how it can benefit their
students. They're still trying to take
that in," said Rhonda Schuhler, the
superintendent of the 8,300-student
Franklin County district.
"One of their concerns is that it's a
student interfacing with technology
and we're committed to making sure
that regardless of what the tool looks
like, the teacher is a vital part of that,
and they're there with the student
and there's that interaction that takes
place," she said. "It's just an important part of reading development."
Whatever happens next, there's
likely to be political fallout.
Unlike other states that appoint
their state chiefs, North Carolina
elects its state superintendents. And
Jablonski has announced plans to
challenge Johnson for state superintendent in 2020.
Staff Writer Michele Molnar contributed
to this report.

Out of the
Trenches.
Into the Future.
Author Gary Marx
explores the
21 Trends
impacting
education
and our future.

To order this book: www.edweek.org/go/21Trends
EDUCATION WEEK | August 21, 2019 | www.edweek.org | 11

http://www.edweek.org/go/21Trends http://www.edweek.org/go/newsletters http://www.edweek.org

Education Week - August 21, 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - August 21, 2019