Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

bppe.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 364 posts

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#291

Post by austenallred »

jcims wrote: post #254
austenallred wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. We have to take what we're currently doing and try to retrofit it to what regulators are expecting. I don’t think (for us) this process have improved the school at all.

Retrofit in reporting or delivery? That’s precisely the effect I’m interested in. Even if it doesn’t impact what you deliver to students there is still a chilling effect and possible blockers to developing novel approaches. The juice may still be worth the squeeze for larger/funded ventures. Your efforts to translate what you do to what regulators want to see is probably worth it. However, smaller outfits might be in…

Reporting.

For example, we use mastery-based progression, where students don't move on to the next unit until they've demonstrated mastery in the unit they're currently in, even if it takes longer. It's super expensive to do, but incredibly, incredibly effective.

When a student repeats a week we call that a "flex."

Regulators ask us how long a course is and what exactly the curriculum is for every week. As you can imagine, building in mastery-based progression into the program wasn't on anyone's mind when they created all the regulations.

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#292

Post by barry-cotter »

duxup wrote: post #71
baggy_trough wrote: post #4

Nuts that the state has the right to block this kind of thing. What foolishness is that?

Private schools that don't operate in the student's best interests pretty quickly can be a larger economic problem for everyone. These schools can be expensive and having a bunch of folks who want to do the work to move up getting ripped off is not in society's best interest.

You could have omitted the “private” and it would still be just as true.

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#293

Post by austenallred »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #289
Alupis wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it means a physical location for the business, ie. a brick and mortar store location - such as those "A+ Tutoring" or similar tutoring businesses common in major shopping centers.

If you're a sole proprietor who comes to students' homes, you're going to pass every legal test of "physical presence in California". Note that Lambda School's lawyer interpreted the law the same way you'd like to -- Lambda School doesn't have a physical presence in California because it doesn't operate any classrooms. But the state felt differently. And the state is pretty unambiguously correct on this point -- Lamb…

Pretty sure that information is wrong, because I was born in 1989...

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#294

Post by tibbon »

austenallred wrote: post #288
tibbon wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow, I could talk for hours about this. From what I've heard at a lot of schools, the teachers would like to "fail" people or have higher standards for entry - but management and sales (I mean, admissions) push back hard. A student leaving is money lost. A student just not doing well afterward is something that they can write off as some glitch. They'd rather have the latter. Or they want the instructors to do sup…

That's the nice thing about the aligned incentives of Lambda School.

I'd like to know more about that. It sounds like a great idea!

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#295

Post by sfthrower89 »

rhacker wrote: post #96

What is the purpose of having a law requiring approval for post-secondary education? Isn't this a trade school? Why in the world does a trade school need this kind of regulation. It just seems like most of our laws are passed in secret you don't know you violated anything until you get hit.

[flagged]

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#296

Post by sfthrower89 »

joelhaasnoot wrote: post #127
anonymous5133 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as i know TU wasn't a scam. It was simply a real estate focused program.

It was settled for $25 million, so we'll never really know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_University#Allegations_o...

[flagged]

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#297

Post by thaumasiotes »

austenallred wrote: post #293
thaumasiotes wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a sole proprietor who comes to students' homes, you're going to pass every legal test of "physical presence in California". Note that Lambda School's lawyer interpreted the law the same way you'd like to -- Lambda School doesn't have a physical presence in California because it doesn't operate any classrooms. But the state felt differently. And the state is pretty unambiguously correct on this point -- Lamb…

Pretty sure that information is wrong, because I was born in 1989...

Hmmm.

> Lambda, Inc. of California, doing business as Lambda School, operates as a school. The School offers course such as computer science, software engineering, machine learning, web developing, and java script learning programs. Lambda School serves clients in the State of California.

> SUB-INDUSTRY

> Educational Services

> WEBSITE

> www.lambdaschool.com

So far so good.

The address does appear to be wrong, judging by the entry for "LAMBDA INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS LAMBDA SCHOOL" at https://businesssearch.sos.ca.gov/

But,

> Entity Address:

> 5820 STONERIDGE MALL RD STE 212 PLEASANTON CA 94588

sure seems to suggest that you've got a physical presence in California.

I was under the impression that extant businesses have some value purely for their history of being extant businesses, and are sometimes bought and sold for that reason, so it didn't seem impossible that Lambda School was technically the reimagining of some now-dead shell corporation founded in 1983.

Bloomberg's phone number for Lambda School appears to be right, or at least appears to be a phone number once controlled by an Austen Allred in his capacity as executive officer of a company in Utah. Now I'm pretty curious where the Bloomberg information comes from.

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#299

Post by macinjosh »

QuadmasterXLII wrote: post #144
merpnderp wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

25 lbs of paperwork to register an online school? Sounds less about protecting students and more towards protecting incumbents and cronies.

When the government makes you waste a a day filling out paperwork to prove that your dog food doesn’t contain human remains, don’t blame the regulators. Blame the guy before you who made a buck by vertically integrating his cannery and his morgue.

Right, because there is no other option than to have the government get in everyone's business. Why should the government impose on my business because some asshole did something he shouldn't have? It's oppressive and we should fight it.

Re: Lambda School fined $75k by CA for operating without state approval [pdf]

#300

Post by jcims »

austenallred wrote: post #291
jcims wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retrofit in reporting or delivery? That’s precisely the effect I’m interested in. Even if it doesn’t impact what you deliver to students there is still a chilling effect and possible blockers to developing novel approaches. The juice may still be worth the squeeze for larger/funded ventures. Your efforts to translate what you do to what regulators want to see is probably worth it. However, smaller outfits might be in…

Reporting. For example, we use mastery-based progression, where students don't move on to the next unit until they've demonstrated mastery in the unit they're currently in, even if it takes longer. It's super expensive to do, but incredibly, incredibly effective. When a student repeats a week we call that a "flex." Regulators ask us how long a course is and what exactly the curriculum is for every week. As you can im…

Interesting, glad you are able to still operate how you like.

My wife is an instructional coach in a public district in Ohio that went from traditional curriculum to a personalized, mastery-based approach. The mastery model has taken a few years to get traction but seems to be catching its stride. One of the challenges is the loss of nuance in a binary grading system, another is the tendency to fall into retry loops with assessments and wasting lots of educator/student time.

The personalized learning is just starting and this past year their data in standardized testing took a hit across the board. My guess is that the teachers are just overwhelmed and its going to take a bit of time and possibly some technology to really dig deep into personalized learning.

The regs you are describing seem far too prescriptive. If you can define measurable goals it seems like they should back off one step in the regulation and try to find a way to just pin you to your promises.

Not sure if you’re in Ohio yet but it might be worth a look.

Post reply on HN