Peter Greene writes here about the possibility that legislators might attempt to limit the damage done by the cyber charter industry, which is protected by armor of cash and campaign contributions.
Numerous studies, including one by the charter-friendly CREDO of Stanford, have found that students in cyber charters don’t learn much. Some studies have shown that cyber charters don’t learn anything.
But the industry is immensely profitable, because the cyber charters get paid full state tuition and provide almost nothing, unlike a brick and mortar school that must provide heat, electricity, a custodian, a library, transportation, etc. Cyber charters make all those things unnecessary, but at the same time that provide as meager an education as is possible.
Greene writes:
Rep. Curt Sonney is a GOP top dog in the Pennsylvania Education Committee, and he’s never been known as a close friend of public schools. But he represents Erie, a district that has been absolutely gutted by school choice, so maybe that’s why he has spent the last couple of years nipping at the heels of Pennsylvania’s thriving cyber charter industry.
Harrisburg just had hearings on his latest proposal, a bill that he first announced last October and which has something for virtually everyone to hate.
Pennsylvania cyber schools are an absolute mess, barely covered by laws that never anticipated such a thing and protected by a massive pile of money thrown both at lobbying and campaign contributions.
The cybers do offer a service that is useful for some students (I personally know of one such case). But they also provide a quick exit for parents who don’t want to deal with truancy issues or other disciplinary problems. Their results are generally very poor (none have ever been ranked proficient on the Big Standardized Test), and state oversight is so lousy that many were allowed to continue operating for years without ever having renewed their charters.
But what really has drawn the wrath of even people who don’t pay much attention to education policy is that they are expensive as hell. Because the charter laws didn’t really anticipate this cyber-development, cyber-charters are paid at the same rate as a brick-and-mortar charter. So an individual student may bring in $10-$20K, but costs the cyber charter the price of one computer, one printer, and 1/250th of an on-line teacher. The profit margin is huge, but so is the cost to local districts, with poorer districts in the state being hit the worst.
A year ago, there was a bill floating around Harrisburg to change the game– if a local district opened a cyber-school, then any families that wanted to send their kid to an out-of-district cyberwould have to foot the bill themselves.
The bill (HB 1897) is a bit involved, and we’ll go digging in a moment, but the two headline items are this: all cyber-charters will be shut down, and all school districts will offer cyber education. Now, to look for some of those devilish details.
Betsy DeVos is a huge fan of cyber charters and has even invested in them.
Be that as it may, they are a financial success and an education failure.


Pennsylvania should revamp its charter laws to reflect the current reality. Most of the remaining laws are outdated holdovers from the Corbett administration. Pennsylvania is on shaky financial ground due to the laws that put profiteering ahead of the needs of public education. Voters should vote out any representatives that refuse to be good stewards of the public’s money.
LikeLike
Pennsylvania gets a mention in a Jan. 23 article in The Guardian. The article alleges a former student of Villanova University (Penn.) and graduate of a, “prestigious N.J. Catholic prep school,” is leader of a Neo-Nazi group linked to current court cases. The Guardian identifies his wife as Russian born. It’s an intriguing story with many twists and turns.
LikeLike
THIS IS A BILL THAT WOULD REQUIRE SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO DEVELOP THEIR OWN CYBER SCHOOLS AND TO OFFER THE OPTION OF 2 OTHER CYBER SCHOOLS. Sickening.
This is from the PA School Board Association:
LikeLike
A friend’s grandson is taking an online AP English class. She asked him if he was keeping up with the work. He said he submits papers. Weeks later when they are returned, each earns him 100 pts.
My friend read the papers and said, she sees no improvement and the first paper was not quality work.
I can’t imagine what incentive the grader would have to return comments or to care about the young man’s progress. It’s not like the grader is in a community where she sees the outcome of her work or has colleagues and parents who can give her feedback.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understand the desire for convenience, but what a price to pay. Thanks, Linda.
LikeLike
The equivalent of style without substance.
LikeLike
shades of the idiotic week-long (and more) testing which kids must now take for “state” assessment where the results are calculated elsewhere and not returned to the kids
LikeLike