FEBRUARY 15, 2012

Attacking Cyber School Funding

The House Education Committee held an informational hearing today with administrators from several of Pennsylvania's cyber schools. The school officials mainly addressed myths about cyber school funding and performance, in light of a new bill introduced by Rep. Michael Fleck in December, HB 1973. One testifier described the bill as "a wolf in sheep's clothing, purporting to reform charter operations with the true intent of killing cyber charter schools."

Why such strong language? Cyber schools are public, taxpayer-funded online schools that began a decade ago. They offer parents an alternative to their local brick-and-mortar public school, without the cost of a private education. And they are proving immensely popular, with nearly 28,000 students enrolled today. When a student leaves her school district for a cyber school, public funding—76 percent of the per-student cost, on average—follows the child. Faced with a loss of funding—though it is a minuscule 1 percent of public education spending—school districts are crying foul, and demanding that lawmakers "fix" how cyber schools are funded.

The main funding element of HB 1973 is a restriction: It would mandate that cyber schools keep their "fund balances" —essentially the school's reserves—at 8-12 percent of their budgeted expenditures. Lawrence Jones, President of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Public Charter Schools, explained why this is a problem:

Half of the 400 school districts refuse to pay for their students enrolled in cyber charter schools, forcing cybers into the four-month long redirection process and often into procurement of loans to cover operating costs...Cyber charters need to retain a fund balance so that taxpayer dollars that currently go to lending institutions and attorneys can instead be used to educate children. Imagine what it would be like to run the government if half of Pennsylvania's taxpayers simply refused to pay their taxes and there were absolutely no recourse to force them to do so.

So, yes: Cyber school officials agree that funding for their schools needs fixing and should be more equitable. But there is no one-size-fits-all "actual instruction expense" for every cyber school. Furthermore, questions such as "How much does it really cost to educate a child?" could equally be asked of a traditional public school.

In reality, having a competitive education marketplace in the form of charter, cyber, private and public schools is what keeps costs down and learning effective. Burdening cyber schools with needless regulation serves only to smother the innovation our public education system so desperately needs. In the end, public education funding should serve children, not a system.

posted by PRIYA ABRAHAM | 04:49 PM | 0 comment

FEBRUARY 1, 2012

Happy Digital Learning Day

Today is national Digital Learning Day, during which groups across the country will commemorate how technology is changing education for the better. So what exactly IS digital learning?

Digital learning occurs when students use online programs—guided by teachers—to learn math, science, English and every other subject they would study in a regular classroom.  Most importantly, it allows students to control the pace and location of their study, meaning they can learn as slowly or as quickly as they need. We tracked the trend in Commonwealth Foundation's latest report on digital learning, The Learning Revolution.

In Pennsylvania, digital learning has exploded in popularity, with nearly 28,000 children now enrolled in cyber schools (from zero when they began about 10 years ago). Children learn at home but are in constant contact with their teachers, and also participate in "real-life" sports and arts programs.  The flexibility especially helps students who are sick, have demanding sports or performing arts schedules, are gifted, or who are struggling academically. Take 14-year-old Caela, from Lake Ariel, Pa., for whom cyber school has been a lifesaver:

Between kindergarten and sixth grade she was hospitalized 16 times from bronchitis, pneumonia, allergies and asthma. In fifth grade, she missed 83 days of school; in sixth, 67. In 2010, Caela enrolled in Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School and completed a full year's worth of English and science courses in just five months.

Best of all, her mother says, Caela is off all her medications and has not been sick since starting cyber school. Thanks to digital learning, students like Caela don't have to give up good schooling, and having online tools that help teachers adapt means we can tailor education to every student's needs.

posted by PRIYA ABRAHAM | 00:11 PM | 0 comment

NOVEMBER 18, 2011

Our Villainous Plan to Let Parents Choose the Best School for Their Children

If you weren't aware, Commonwealth Foundation is a sinister cog in a powerful underground organization of folks who support online learning.  An article from The Nation bemoans conservative and libertarian villains behind the horrific effort to, uh, give families school choice. They point to the traditional bogey-men of the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Koch brothers, and the State Policy Network for organizing a conspiracy to promote more digital learning. 

A sample paragraph from "How Online Learning Companies Bought America's Schools":

SPN has faced accusations before that it is little more than a coin-operated front for corporations. For instance, SPN and its affiliates receive money from polluters, including infamous petrochemical giant Koch Industries, allegedly in exchange for aggressive promotion of climate denial theories. But SPN's conference had less to do with policy than with tactics. Kyle Olson, a Republican operative infamous in Michigan and other states for his confrontational attacks on unionized teachers, gave a presentation on labor reform in K-12 education.

The article contains lots of innuendo and conspiracy theories—like the fact that some education reformers have met with (gasp!) Republicans.  As for explaining why hundreds of thousands of parents are choosing online learing for their children, well...it's down to evil, greed, conspiracy, corporations, conferences, or something like that.

Now I must return to stroking my desultory white cat with a jeweled hand.

posted by PRIYA ABRAHAM | 03:19 PM | 0 comment

OCTOBER 19, 2011

School Choice Saves Kids, Taxpayers $4 Billion

Critics of expanding school choice in Pennsylvania often claim it will "cost too much" or drain precious resources. But in fact, school choice already saves Pennsylvania taxpayers more than $4 billion every year—more than $1,300 for every family of four.

In 2009-10, Pennsylvania school districts spent $14,300 per student. In comparison, public charter schools spent about $2,400 less per student, on average (and cyber schools more than $3,300 less), as documented in our recent policy points on charter school funding.

Private and nonpublic schools—which benefit from more than $200 million in state aid for student textbooks, transportation, and special needs students—enroll close to 300,000 students. About 40,000 of these students receive scholarships through the Educational Improvement Tax Credit, with the average scholarship amount being around $1,000. Even counting the the tax credit for private donations to scholarship organizations as a "cost" to taxpayers, private school choice saves more than $12,000 per child leaving a school district.

Homeschool students receive no taxpayer subsidy, saving taxpayers $14,300 for each of 22,000 homeschoolers. Even the proposed voucher program—less than half the amount, per student, of district spending—would represent significant savings for taxpayers.

If the 380,000 students attending schools of choice returned to district schools, at current spending levels, taxpayer costs for education would rise by $4.3 billion.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 02:46 PM | 0 comment

DECEMBER 23, 2010

More Bad News for Minority Students in Philadelphia Public Schools

How are African-American males faring in Philadelphia public schools?  According to a report recently released by the Council of Great City Schools, not very well.  The report, "A Call for Change: The Social and Educational Factors Contributing to the Outcomes of Black Males in Urban Schools", which highlights the plight of African-American males in the nation's largest urban school systems, found that fully 50 percent of 4^th and 8^th grade African-American males scored below the basic levels in reading and math on the 2009 National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) test.

NAEP test results were used in this report because it is consistently considered the national standard of being able to compare student achievement across state lines, and often provides a much different picture of student performance than dumbed-down state standardized tests.

How specifically did African-American Students in Philadelphia public schools perform?

The report found that 68 percent of 4^th grade students scored below the basic level of achievement on the NAEP reading exam.  Only six percent scored at or above the proficiency level.  Likewise, 46 percent scored below the basic level of achievement on the 4^th grade mathematics exam and only 10 percent scored at or above the proficiency level.

In addition, the report found that 58 percent of 8^th grade students scored below the basic level of achievement on the NAEP reading exam and only six percent scored at or above proficiency.  Likewise, 60 percent scored below the basic level of achievement on the 8^th grade mathematics exam and only eight percent scored at or above proficiency level.

These results are discouraging for parents who want their children to achieve academic success once they enter high school, let alone prepare them for college and life.

This is just one more example of why families in Pennsylvania are clamoring for more educational options for their children.  Charter schools and cyber charter schools are helping to provide more flexibility with in the public school system at a reduced cost to taxpayers.  Programs like the innovative Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) program are giving tens of thousands of students a chance to succeed in a private school of their choice thanks to the involvement of the business community.

Now is the time to take the next steps and allow educational dollars to follow students to whatever school they and their parents decide best fits their educational needs.

posted by ANDREW LEFEVRE | 05:19 PM | 0 comment

DECEMBER 15, 2010

PA School Districts Creating Online Options in Response to Cyber Schools

As reported in the Valley News Dispatch, Pennsylvania school districts continue to add online options in response to students leaving for public cyber schools.

Two things to note:

• Districts do respond to competition, when they "lose money"/lose students to schools of choice.
• Districts are spending a lot less per-pupil—less than half in this case—to educate students online than in their buildings, a major savings to taxpayers.

Indeed, the options for families are increasing, including the development of hybrid, or blended schools, which combine the online components of a cyber school with a facility for students to attend—such as the recent Agora Learning Center launched in Philadelphia.

Relatedly, a new report from Jeb Bush's Foundation for Excellence in Education outlines the best practices in the states for high-quality digital learning.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 02:37 PM | 0 comment

DECEMBER 14, 2010

Choosing Schools

Recently, Bruno Manno in Education Week explains that approximately 29 million students are enrolled in the school of their choice (free registration required). This means that over 50 percent of K-12 students attend public charter or cyber schools, private schools, home school, attend public schools outside their district, or parents admit to choosing a house based on school district. Manno's school choice breakdown is below:

• Charter schools are among the fastest growing, with more than 1.7 million students currently enrolled, and an estimated 420,000 students are on waiting lists. Charters serve primarily nonwhite students—over 60 percent—and 48 percent are from low-income families, according to federal data.
• Private schools educate about 6.1 million students—11 percent of total K-12 students. Twelve states and the District of Columbia have vouchers or tax-credit programs that provide scholarships to mainly low-income students to attend private school.
• As of 2007, 1.5 million children were being home schooled, nearly double the number of students in 1999.
• While traditional public schools enroll around 49 million students, approximately 12.7 million of these student's parents admit choosing their home based on the school district. Additionally, many states allow students to attend schools outside their assigned boundaries, accounting for about 7.4 million students attending alternative public schools.

When it comes to school choice, the discussion is no longer should it exist. It's already here. Parents are voting for school choice with their feet—actively deciding what school their child will attend. Rather, the question now is how policymakers will embrace the movement and promote school choice for all students.

posted by KATRINA CURRIE | 10:45 AM | 0 comment

OCTOBER 6, 2010

Auditor General Hits the Wrong Target

Here is a note I sent to Pennsylvania Auditor General Jack Wagner regarding his call for a moratorium on new charter schools until the funding mechanism is "fixed":

Auditor General Wagner,

I have read your report on charter schools, and found it hypocritical that you fail to point out the same issues exist with district schools:

• "Funding inequities"—any difference in per-pupil revenue for charter schools is due to differences in spending by school districts. After all, the funding formula for charters is simply the per-pupil spending by districts, excluding "fixed costs" and federal funds. In fact, funding disparities are greater between school districts, for both traditional and special needs students.
• "Some school districts were partially subsidizing other districts"—Except for cyber charter schools, charters are established within a school district, so there is very little cross-subsidization. Moreover, residents of one district subsidizing students of another is pretty common-that's what State Funding, and Federal Funding, are all about.
• Your report uses the term "tuition" for district payments to charter schools. This is very misleading, and helps confuse the issue—many voters do not understand that charter schools are public schools, and cannot charge tuition.
• State law does not require school districts to reconcile revenue with "actual costs." School districts spend and keep whatever is given to them.
• "Fund balances"—As Jan Murphy's reporting should have every Pennsylvanian aware of, school districts are sitting on $2.75 billion in fund balances. This amount has jumped dramatically in recent years. Your report's implication that only charter schools retain fund balances, and school districts are restricted in this regard is flat out erroneous. The limit on districts' reserves only applies in certain cases when seeking to issue additional debt, and is rarely enforced.

Here are some questions for you:

• Do you support fixing "funding inequities" so that charter schools receive the same funding per-pupil as district schools, rather than far less as under current law?
• Would your proposed funding formula of "actual costs of educating students"—with weights for special needs students —apply to regular school districts, so that funding follows the student, and is not allocated according to district?
• Should school districts be required to return their "overpayments" to taxpayers?
• Should limits on "excess fund balances" be applied to school districts (as you wrongly imply is already law)?
• Should PDE strengthen accounting, reporting, and spending transparency for school districts as well, so that we can determine "whether taxpayer dollars are being spent for their intended purpose"?
• Should district schools be treated identically to charter schools - receiving funding only when parents choose them, and having to reapply for a charter that can be revoked for repeated failure—or given preferential treatment.

Here is a link to our news release: http://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/research/detail/charter-schools-give-children-a-choice-and-a-chance; I look forward to any response you may have.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 00:00 PM | 3 comments

SEPTEMBER 30, 2010

Are More Educational Options in PA's Future?

Both gubernatorial candidates have voiced support for government-funded grants to allow parents to choose an alternative school for their children. Sen. Jeffrey Piccola, Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, is set to capitalize on this opportunity by sponsoring a day-long hearing on October 13th to prepare for new school choice legislation come January.

Senator Piccola is optimistic that enough has changed to erode some of the opposition and fear about surrounding education vouchers. Of course, the teachers unions, school boards and administrators, and other public school advocates still see vouchers as undermining funding for public education.

Steelton-Highspire District Superintendent Audrey Utley claims:

If the goal is to expand the educational options available to students presently in struggling school districts, the increased availability of public charter schools and cyber charter schools has already achieved that goal.

It's true educational options have increased, but not enough. Many families are stuck on long waiting lists for Pennsylvania's EITC program. In Philadelphia, over half of parents say they do not have enough good choices when it comes to picking a school. And charter schools continue to gain popularity with enrollment 170% higher than it was in the 2000-2001 school year.

Despite these facts, the Philadelphia School Reform Commission is enforcing an illegal enrollment cap placed on the William D. Palmer Leadership Learning Partners Charter School, even though the school recently expanded to include grades 9-12. Senator Piccola filed an amicus brief in the case explaining the legislature never intended to limit the growth of charter schools and enrollment caps are clearly prohibited by state law.

Using enrollment caps public schools are purposefully disregarding the wishes of parents and what's best for the student. However, with the support of the new governor disgruntled parents may not be waiting for long.

posted by ELIZABETH STELLE | 04:59 PM | 0 comment