When I spoke at NCTM, I talked about the common thread that unites mathematicians and historians: We believe that evidence matters. No matter how much we speculate, or theorize, or predict, what matters most is: Show me your work, where is the evidence.
There is no “reform” these days that has less evidence to support it than the expansion of cyber-charters. This is the (usually for-profit) business that enrolls students, provides them a computer and textbooks, then teaches them online while they sit at home in front of a computer. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post have published exposes of the for-profit cyber-charter corporations.
I don’t doubt that there are some students who benefit by being able to take their courses at home. Some special-education students, some incarcerated youth, some others. But as a replacement for regular schools, the cyber-charters have a very poor record. Various academic studies, including those by the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado have documented the poor results of the cybercharters. One of the best is the CREDO study of Pennsylvania cybercharters.
If we look at the studies and investigations, these findings stand out: students in cyber-charters get lower test scores, have lower graduation rates, and are likely to drop out and return to their local public school, leaving their state funding behind with the cyber-charter.
The bottom line on these “innovations” is that they produce worse education but generate large profits for their investors and owners.
The Michigan state legislature just voted to increase the number of cyber-charters in the state and the number of students these schools could enroll. No doubt, the for-profit corporations hired lobbyists to make their pitch.
If evidence matters, this would not be happening. If legislators and policymakers actually cared about education and our nation’s future, they would not be expanding a sector that has such a poor record.
Legislators and policymakers who ignore evidence should look in the mirror when they seek a reason for the state of education today.
Diane
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Dr. Ravitch,
I have been, and continue to be, an ardent supporter of many of your views toward our national education system. Your latest book, “Life and Death of the Great American School System” certainly made outstanding points concerning the realities of recent educational reform efforts.
As the new principal of Iowa Connections Academy (IACA), I have already been introduced to many Iowa families that are so excited for an alternative educational option that differs from their traditional school setting. Many of these families have students that may benefit from an online educational program because of special needs, incarceration, medical issues, a need for accelerated coursework, individualized curricular programming, threat of dropping-out, public school governance issues, and/or concerns of bullying in their brick-and-mortar schools.
Each family has a unique need for choosing to enroll in IACA. As such, IACA will work hard to provide each student with an outstanding educational program that meets their individualized needs. Our school will be held to the same standards of accountability as other Iowa school districts. I would even argue, given the recent focus of state legislative efforts and heavily biased print media articles in opposition to online schooling, even more “eyes” and attention will be focused on our progress.
I just sincerely hope that our prognosticators will not go so far as to cheer for our failure, merely based on their philosophical opinions of online learning.
Iowa families deserve the best educational opportunities possible. For some, IACA may be that opportunity.
Respectfully,
James Brauer (@jamesbrauer)
Principal, Iowa Connections Academy
Dr. Ravitch,
I have been, and continue to be, an ardent supporter of many of your views toward our national education system. Your latest book, “Life and Death of the Great American School System” certainly made outstanding points concerning the realities of recent educational reform efforts.
As the new principal of Iowa Connections Academy (IACA), I have already been introduced to many Iowa families that are so excited for an alternative educational option that differs from their traditional school setting. Many of these families have students that may benefit from an online educational program because of special needs, incarceration, medical issues, a need for accelerated coursework, individualized curricular programming, threat of dropping-out, public school governance issues, and/or concerns of bullying in their brick-and-mortar schools.
Each family has a unique need for choosing to enroll in IACA. As such, IACA will work hard to provide each student with an outstanding educational program that meets their individualized needs. Our school will be held to the same standards of accountability as other Iowa school districts. I would even argue, given the recent focus of state legislative efforts and heavily biased print media articles in opposition to online schooling, even more “eyes” and attention will be focused on our progress.
I just sincerely hope that our prognosticators will not go so far as to cheer for our failure, merely based on their philosophical opinions of online learning.
Iowa families deserve the best educational opportunities possible. For some, IACA may be that opportunity.
Respectfully,
James Brauer (@jamesbrauer)
Principal, Iowa Connections Academy
With all respect to James Brauer, groups like mine who have been working to stop Michigan’s uncapping of “cyber” charter schools don’t need to wish for failure. Unfortunately, we see that in spades in the experience of other states with online charter schools. Most disturbing were the experiences in Colorado, where schools not only performed poorly but also gamed the system to maximize enrollment (and thus revenue) and to hide the numbers of students who drop the program. Teacher to student ratios were also fudged, since enforcement is very difficult. The experiences of Florida and Pennsylvania have been similar. Profit is a powerful motive, and it does not serve the public well in the field of public education.
Michigan has an unusual school funding system, in which all school operating funds are allocated to districts (including charters) on a per-pupil basis. The bill (SB 619), which just passed the House and will presumably go to the Governor in a few days, allocates the same per pupil funding to cyber charters as to any other physical school. Since most virtual charter operators, including the two pilot schools in Michigan (run by K12, Inc. and Connections Education) are private, for-profit firms, we cannot reach into those organizations easily to see how funds are being spent and what profit margins are like. (However, as a publicly-traded company, K12 does have to disclose its finances. The firm has been profitable enough to have been a fad growth stock and to earn its CEO $5 million in compensation last year.)
There is also the question of the intended “market”: while some children would clearly benefit from these kinds of programs (and many local school districts offer online and “blended” options), the largest group pressing for unrestricted online charter schools were homeschooling families. These families have made a legitimate choice to opt out of institutional schools, but now the cyber charters will offer them a free curriculum while the school operators pocket the same per pupil funding other schools get. Conveniently, the bill also removed the requirement that students of cyber charters have been enrolled in public schools before joining the program. (The bill also deleted requirements that the schools focus on urban and at-risk student populations.)
Finally, the unseemly haste is illuminating. Michigan’s cyber charters were set up as a pilot program, part of our unsuccessful efforts to secure “Race to the Top” funding. The state department of education is due to issue a progress report at the end of this year, reflecting on the performance and finances of the two pilot programs in their first two years of operation. Calls to hold this legislation until after the report fell on deaf ears in the legislative majority. It’s hard to explain this haste if educational quality is truly the primary issue.
And in fact it is not. I use my home state as an example, but I believe this dynamic is common across the country. The pressure to take restrictions off charter schools, to enact voucher programs, grow virtual charters, create “parent trigger” rules, and so on, cannot be justified by a focus on quality. In fact, careful research indicates that charter schools are roughly similar to local public districts in student performance, and the cyber charters have a poor record. At the same time, overall funding for education has been cut dramatically and will remain truly flat (fall behind inflation) for some time to come.
What is clear, especially in Michigan, is that the game is rigged: no one is trying to improve struggling local districts, or relieve the budget pressures on other, successful districts. The focus is on making it as easy and desirable as possible for students to move to privately-managed but publicly-funded schools. I used to think that arguments like this smacked of paranoia; our experience over the last year in lobbying against one blow to community-governed public schools after another has convinced me otherwise.
While I wish Principal Brauer and his students well, I believe that the measures being pushed so hard around the country will do irreparable damage to public education rather than improve it.
Steven Norton
Executive Director
Michigan Parents for Schools
Steven,
Please consider joining Parents Across America, which follows the efforts to undermine public schools across the nation and provides useful information to parents.
Diane
[…] that many of its ideas are now being enacted. Just last week, the Michigan House of Representatives expanded the number of cyber charters that may operate in the state, even though the academic results for such online schools are […]
[…] it is getting, and the fact that many of its ideas are now being enacted. Just last week, the Michigan House of Representatives expanded the number of cyber charters that may operate in the state, even though the academic results for such online schools are […]
[…] it is getting, and the fact that many of its ideas are now being enacted. Just last week, the Michigan House of Representatives expanded the number of cyber charters that may operate in the state, even though the academic results for such online schools are […]
[…] it is getting, and the fact that many of its ideas are now being enacted. Just last week, the Michigan House of Representatives expanded the number of cyber charters that may operate in the state, even though the academic results for such online schools are […]
[…] it is getting, and the fact that many of its ideas are now being enacted. Just last week, the Michigan House of Representatives expanded the number of cyber chartersthat may operate in the state, even though the academic results for such online schools are […]
[…] it is getting, and the fact that many of its ideas are now being enacted. Just last week, the Michigan House of Representatives expanded the number of cyber charters that may operate in the state, even though the academic results for such online schools are […]
Reblogged this on Transparent Christina.
Public Education’s ‘Shock Doctrine Summer’ Rolls Out, Part 2…
With the glow of high school graduations still lingering in many American families, and analysts predicting that an”economic recovery” is on the way, this is a time when you’d expect to start hearing more positive news about the state of US public e…
I live in an area where IPads are replacing teachers in the public schools. Thus, many parents feel that an on-line charter school is not different than a robotic computerized teacher.
For the sake of learners in your area, I certainly hope the definition of teaching and learning is much more than simply giving a learner a tech tool. But, I suspect there is much more engagement and facilitation by teachers than parents understand.
I’d love to talk more about our specific model anytime. brauerjames@gmail.com
So now online charter schools will be another place for government to waste millions of dollars a years. Just do away with all state run,”child endangerment centers” and let the free market figure it out including safety of those enrolled. Is it in the best interest of the parents to not educate their children? Wait! Don’t answer that. They aren’t your children so it is none of your business.