Advocating for Cyber Charter Schools
The charter school movement in America is gaining momentum. Over one million students are now enrolled in more than 3,500 charter schools in 40 states and the District of Columbia. With some 70,000 students enrolled in 127 charter schools, Pennsylvania has been on the forefront of this movement – as have Pennsylvania’s cyber charter schools.
Between 2001 and 2009, enrollment in cyber charter schools in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has grown from less than 2,000 to more than 20,000. Students and parents value the flexible scheduling, expanded course offerings, and individualized instruction that the cyber school model offers. And student achievement in Pennsylvania cyber schools remains high, even though the schools receive less funding per student than traditional schools, and attract students who have struggled academically. In fact, Cyber schools enroll a disproportionately large number of students from districts with low graduation rates, below average
SAT scores, and low average reading and math scores as measured by the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) test.
Under attack
Yet despite the fact that more and more students and parents are freely choosing the cyber charter school option, and regardless of cyber schools’ success with educating students, there is an orchestrated and well-funded campaign underway to stymie their innovative and independent nature, and to dramatically reduce the amount of funding they receive. Several pieces of legislation have been introduced in recent years in the General Assembly, any of which, if adopted, would likely cause cyber charter schools to drastically reduce the level and quality of services to students – or to cease operations entirely.
“We can’t take for granted that cyber charter schools as they now exist will continue to be supported by the state legislature,” said PA Cyber CEO Dr. Nick Trombetta. “There are some powerful special interests who would like to see schools like ours go away, and for students and parents to not have this kind of choice in public education.”
Not surprisingly, the attack on public cyber charter schools (which has recently been extended to target brick-and-mortar charter schools as well), has been promoted in a collective effort by school boards, teacher unions, and some lawmakers who simply don’t like the competition to the traditional public school model. Opponents of cyber charter schools complain that the schools are unaccountable to taxpayers, and that they drain money away from traditional public schools.
“The Pennsylvania Department of Education authorizes the existence of and monitors the performance and progress of cyber charter schools,” says Scott Antoline, Director of Finance and Compliance at PA Cyber. “Cyber schools are required to comply with the same accountability and reporting measures as traditional public schools.”
Antoline says that in addition to basic requirements like child accounting, various types of state reporting, and annual financial audits, cyber charter schools must also go through a charter renewal process with the Pennsylvania Department of Education every five years.
In terms of funding, research done by the Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives found that cyber charter schools receive, on average, about 73 percent of what a traditional school district spends to educate a student. This is because the state funding formula for cyber charter schools allows home districts to subtract certain expenditures from its per-pupil educational costs – expenditures ranging from student transportation and facilities acquisition and construction costs, to adult education programs and debt payments. In the 2005-2006 school year, the average cyber school expenditure per pupil was $8,371, while the state average per-pupil expenditure was $11,485 – a difference of more than $3,000.
In terms of expenses, the BellSouth Foundation’s 20/20 Vision for Education report (2006) stated, “The operating costs of online schools are about the same as the operating costs of a regular brick-and-mortar school. . .many state policy leaders underestimate the true cost of providing a quality online education. . .the tendency might be to aim for the lowest-cost option, which might not yield the highest quality program.” The report was prepared by Augenblick, Palaich & Associates, the same company whose “costing-out analysis” (November 2007) for the Pennsylvania State Board of Education established a baseline that the department and administration have repeatedly used in their pursuit of a fairer and more equitable way to fund public education.
Far from draining funding away from the public school system, analysis from the Commonwealth Foundation also found that cyber charter schools are saving Pennsylvania taxpayers money. Spending on cyber schools represents less than 1 percent of all expenditures for public schools. In fact, school districts spend 11 times the total cost of cyber schools on construction projects and debt service alone.
Antoline says that it’s crucial that information such as this is shared with lawmakers and the general public.
“The more people know about the way cyber charter schools operate, the better position we will be in to protect and preserve our educational model, and serve our students.”
“We can’t take for granted that cyber charter schools as they now exist will continue to be supported by the state legislature. There are some powerful special interests who would like to see schools like ours go away, and for students and parents to not have this kind of choice in public education.” – Dr. Nick Trombetta, PA Cyber CEO
The best defense is a good offense
Supporters of cyber charter schools – including students, parents, teachers, administrators, and school board members – must remain vigilant in their advocacy for these schools of choice. Advocating effectively requires:
- Staying informed on the latest debates and policy initiatives concerning cyber charter schools. The Pennsylvania Coalition of Charter Schools provides up-to-date information on the various legislative proposals affecting all charter schools on its website, www.pachartercoalition.com.
- Knowing and understanding the rights charter school students and parents have under Pennsylvania law. Both Act 22, the law which created charter schools in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Act 88, which more clearly defined and regulated cyber charter schools, are available at The Pennsylvania Department of Education’s website, www.pde.state.pa.us.
- Keeping elected leaders informed of the good work charter schools are doing, their importance to creating a truly world-class system of public education, and the facts regarding what cyber charter schools cost and how they benefit all taxpayers. Letters, emails, phone calls, and one-on-one visits from constituents have a profound impact on elected officials. Cyber school parents and students alike (as well as cyber school faculty and administrators) have a duty to raise their voices on behalf of this vital educational model.
- When possible, attending rallies, legislative hearings, and community forums in which issues pertaining to public education are discussed and debated. In particular, legislative hearings on the funding of cyber charter schools require the input and participation of ordinary citizens who know and understand firsthand the value these schools provide.
“Every day I hear stories from parents about what a positive difference our school has made in the lives of their children,” Dr. Trombetta said. “The decision makers in Harrisburg need to hear those same stories from those same parents. Coming from them, it has great impact.”
Strengthening Pennsylvania’s charter school law – and working together
In addition to maintaining fair and equitable funding for students who attend cyber charter schools, other steps can be taken to further strengthen and support these innovative schools of choice in Pennsylvania.
For example, extending the charter renewal term for all charter schools to ten years will promote stability, allowing teachers and administrators to focus on student achievement, instead of on bureaucratic requirements.
Instead of looking for ways to weaken Pennsylvania’s charter and cyber charter schools, legislators, educational leaders, and all concerned taxpayers should be working to build upon the advances these schools have already garnered. In little more than a decade of existence, charter schools – and cyber charter schools in particular – have broadened the educational horizons for tens of thousands of students. Those with a sincere interest in promoting excellence within public education should embrace the innovations being created by these schools of choice and find ways to incorporate the best practices they have developed. Imagine the student-centered system of public education that could be created if all public schools – traditional, charter, and cyber charter – decided to set aside political considerations and work together to raise standards, promote achievement, and provide each and every student with an instructional plan tailored to meet his or her individual needs and requirements. •
Funding change would create 2nd class status for special needs students
The Pennsylvania Senate Education Committee held a hearing at Lincoln Charter School in York, Pa., on March 12 to hear testimony on issues affecting charter and cyber charter schools, focusing on a proposal by Gov. Rendell for changes in how these schools are funded.
Among those testifying on behalf of charter and cyber charter schools was Lawrence F. Jones Jr., president of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Charter Schools and CEO of Richard Allen Preparatory Charter School in Philadelphia.
While acknowledging the need for fiscal responsibility in light of a projected state budget deficit, Jones said that “the fix must be widespread and should not be placed on the backs of charter school students and families.”
The administration’s plan to base a statewide cyber tuition rate on the experience of one cyber school, he said, is “comparing schools with a few hundred kids to one with 8,000 kids . . . comparing apples to oranges.”
Jones said “the costs to develop, sustain, and continually upgrade vibrant cyber education programs are different from those of traditional schools, not necessarily less than.”
Charter schools are already funded at a lower level than school districts, and should not be penalized for operating efficiently, he said.
“With all due respect, if the administration focused a fiscal lens on school districts and required them to reorganize based upon current and future enrollment trends, greater fiscal savings and responsibility may be realized,” said Jones.
Especially troubling, he said, is the administration’s plan to create a two-tier funding level for charter school students with disabilities.
“Should this proposal come to fruition, Pennsylvania will have created a second class for special education students based upon whether or not their parents exercised their rights to school choice,” Jones told the committee.
The full text of Jones’ testimony is posted at the coalition website, www.pachartercoalition.com •
Statistically Speaking
No one test result or statistic provides a complete picture of a schoolÕs effectiveness. Here, however, are some PA Cyber numbers which show some of the schoolÕs achievements and challenges.
- 1,568 PA Cyber average SAT Score, compared to 1478, Pennsylvania state average, and 1,511, national average.
- 84 percent PA Cyber graduation rate (80 percent required).
- 98 percent of eligible PA Cyber students took the PSSA test last three years (95 percent required).
- 68 percent of our graduates enroll in a 2- or 4-year college or university.
- 1,535 (41 percent) of the 3,721 PA Cyber students who took the PSSA test in 2007-08 had been with the school less than a year.
- Of those 1,535 new students, 418 came from school districts under Corrective Action I or II status. In 2008-09, more than 50 percent of new students came from Corrective Action districts.
- 3,140 new students enrolled this year with PA Cyber (2008-09). 1,606 (51 percent) of these new students tested below grade level (Scantron testing).
- 2,741 (87 percent) of new students improved per Scantron testing between the fall and winter testing windows.