I recommend that you get on the email list of the Keystone State Education Coalition if you want to know what is happening in Pennsylvania. Lawrence Feinberg posts informative articles about the schools of that state. You can contact him at lawrenceafeinberg@gmail.com.
One ongoing scandal in Pennsylvania is the story of cyber charters. Pennsylvania has 14 cyber charter schools, and 13 of them are on the state’s list of the lowest performing schools in the state. Cyber charters have low graduation rates, high attrition, and low scores. While Pennsylvania has many underfunded districts, the state is very generous with its failing cyber charters. From the years 2013-2016–four years–the state paid $1.6 Billion to these “schools.” In 2016 alone, the state handed out $454.7 million to cyber charters. All of that money is extracted from the budgets of public schools because the money follows the student, from good public schools to low-performing cyber charters. Most cyber charters are operated for profit. And they are very profitable! But not for their students.
Understand that the cyber charters receive full tuition for every student they enroll, even though they have none of the expenses of brick-and-mortar schools. No maintenance of grounds, no heating or cooling, no nurses, no library, no gym, no lunch room, no meals, etc. Yet they collect the same tuition as real schools. Their owners are rolling in dough. The creator of the first cyber charter, The Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School, is now in prison, after having been convicted of tax evasion on $8 million that he diverted from the school. Think of it. Ten thousand students were enrolled, bringing in tuition of $10,000-11,000 (more if they were special education) each. That is a minimum of $100 million to run a online program that offers nothing but computers, textbooks, and online lessons. What a profitable business! Trombetta was not convicted of theft or embezzlement, but of tax evasion. Curious.
There is one hopeful piece of legislation under consideration. Senate Bill 34 and House Bill 526 would end public school district payments to cyber charters if the school district offered online schooling for free. The State College District supports these bills because it is currently paying $14,000 for each student in its district who enrolls in a cyber charter and $29,000 per year for each student with special needs. The irony is that the cyber charter does nothing additional for students with special needs and is not required to spend the additional money it receives on them.
School districts across the state are facing higher taxes and underfunded schools, while the failing cyber charters are flooded with cash. Will the Republican-dominated legislature take action to save public schools or will they devote their time to adding new money to the state’s charters and its voucher program?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Jeb Bush, ed reform leader and national expert on all things education, did more to promote these schools than any one individual:
“One of the ways digital education unites us is in the ubiquity of its tools; computers, tablets, and even cellular phones make up the future of 21st century communication. We can learn on and with these devices just as much as we use them recreationally. Thanks to technology, parents are empowered to choose not only the best school, but also the best course for their child.
Educational pioneers like Sal Khan of the Khan Academy are harnessing the power of “blended learning” – a classroom structure that harnesses the power of technology to empower teachers and allows students to learn at their own pace. In doing so, they’re maximizing students’ potential to succeed by opening their eyes to a more diverse, customized array of learning techniques than ever before.
Students in these programs can learn anywhere, at any time, with a customized course load that emphasizes what the student and his or her parents want their son or daughter to learn. Combined with the capacity for instantaneous feedback, this approach emboldens kids who have a demanding schedule, battle learning disabilities, learn at a different pace than others, or, in the case of Kaleigh, suffer from a medical condition that makes attending a traditional school impossible.
This type of customization liberates students from a wasteful, one-size-fits-all system borne from a bygone era and an archaic way of thinking – it’s why we see it celebrated over and over again at National School Choice Week events.”
Pure marketing and product promotion. The number one cheerleader of these schools is also our national education director. That many of the products and programs he promotes are complete disasters does not matter at all. He’s still an expert. It’s impossible to discredit him. No matter how many failures he oversees we still get his cheap gimmicks and fads shoved into public schools, even though they’re absolute junk.
“borne from a bygone era and an archaic way of thinking – ”
Every time you read these marketing slogans from ed reformers remember that they went to private schools with actual teachers and small classes and human interaction.
And they all have successful and lucrative careers in ed reform. So this “archaic way of thinking” worked pretty well for them and will be JUST FINE for their children, but not yours. Yours get cheap, gimmicky ed tech junk- the junk they all enthusiastically sell to low and middle income public schools.
Stop buying it.
Reading this timeworn marketing ploy is particularly distressing in light of the recent revelation of Pearson’s plan to “takeover” education by 2020 with more such nonsense. I don’t know about you but the social aspects of schooling were huge in the way I learned. Whatever happened to human interaction? What makes social isolation so cool? I guess it would cut down on the messiness of social interchange if kids never come within 50 feet of each other!
Those social aspects of education are also emotional. Psychologists are seeing more depression, anxiety and sleep disorders in young people than ever before. It may be due to the harmful impact of social media, or it may be due to “blue light” sensitivity. In any case sitting in front of a screen for long periods of time may be harmful to developing eyes and brains. With so much unknown about this exposure. it is reckless to assume such exposure is safe. https://www.mentalhealthamerica.net/blog/how-blue-light-affects-mental-health
Khan Academy is a teacher on a video. If they’re arguing that video tutors are helpful because they are “cheap tutors” they should say that, instead of spouting all this nonsense about “disruption”.
Kids get this. They know exactly what this is, which is why they’re completely unimpressed with it.
I think they don’t state it plainly because that’s an admission that small class sizes benefit students. A tutor is just a very small class size. There’s nothing magical about it.
Summit Learning claim they benefit students because of “mentoring” and “small group collaboration”.
No one has to buy anything to do that and I’m not an education expert but I think “mentoring” and “tutoring” are ancient ideas, not new ideas.
This Summit CEO claiming she invented these concepts is just crazy.
Amen, retired teacher. There are a lot of screwed up kids and the parents have no clue.
When former political hacks and business people became presidents of universities and superintendents of school districts, everything started going DOWNHILL. I experienced this first-hand.
likely because computer technology has been created, built and expanded by many who are very near the far end of the social isolationist scale, it is how they see the world and thus it is how technology expects everyone to live
What is Pearsons plan? You are aware they got out of the NA K-12 education business, sold it to a private equity group. However, they did keep Connection Academies, the virtual charter schools, But I’m sure how well that business does. With John Fallon at the helm of Pearson, i woundn’t ferm them too much. In fact, it’s amazing they are still in business IMO.
I should have said virtual schooling; they are still quite involved and growing the online platform. I believe their target date was 2025, not 2020. I will keep looking for where I read the article. It was the first time I had read such a blatant plan, so I was less than a careful researcher, which I am not anyway, but still ready to watch for future articles on the plans for virtual schooling. I guess it got my attention because of the poor quality of such programs up to now.
Read : Pearson’s Plans for 2025: Make Sure You Are Seated When You Read This
Diane posted this on May 19. I didn’t get it there, but this post links to the full report by Pearson.
We shouldn’t expect the chancellor of higher ed. in Penn. to take a stand. He was formerly with the Gates Foundation.
Thanks for the Keystone State Ed Coalition shout out Diane!