When I first read SB 1085, I was encouraged that the bill attempted to reform Cyber Charter Schools in a way that would reform all schools. Education reform is valuable and is needed in our nation as well as in Pennsylvania. In a recent
BLOG post, Ali Carr-Chellman, a Penn State Professor and former critic of Cyber Charter Schools, suggests that Cyber Charter Schools are not a bad thing, "I'm very much in favor of
local and district-level innovations. This is really pushing them to do
some innovation. That's not a bad outcome." She is, however, against the diverting of monies into corporate non-profits with unethical vendor arrangements. She calls this a "Gold Rush" for these schools. She also thinks that we are currently in a state of detente, allowing
local cyber charter schools to develop.
I believe that SB 1085 is meant to correct problems, however, the legislators have added a 5% cut in funding to Cyber Charter Schools. This cut is meant to correct the pension double dip. HB 618 was meant to do this last year. It was not passed because many legislators want school choice, and realize that there is a price for innovation in school reform. This price is never less money at the development stage. Traditional schools who
choose to use snow days this year to teach Online would never have attempted that 5 years ago. This year SB 1085 has been revised to include a 5% cut in Cyber Charter Schools to pay for the pension double dip. Here is some of the reasoning from Dr. James Hanak, CEO of Pennsylvania Leadership Charter School, about why HB 618 and the revised SB 1085 are a bad idea.
- All charter schools begin with only 70 cents on the dollar from the home
sending school district. Despite this, charter schools are held to
higher standards than their traditional counterparts, and Cyber Charter
schools are graded with more stringent requirements than their equal
brick and mortar counterpart.
- The bill (618) will hold cyber charter schools more “accountable.”
This argument was a diversion designed to draw attention away from the
real purpose of the bill – to cut Cyber Charter funding. Most of the so
called “accountability” factors contained in the bill have already been
put in place in law, and all Cyber Charter Schools are already carefully complying with
these accountability requirements.
- The only thing this bill does is further cripple Cyber Charter Schools by 5%.
It cuts cyber schools’ funding dramatically but only saves local school
districts .02% of their budget (two tenths of one percent). It saves
the State nothing.
What will happen if Cyber Charter funding is cut by 5%?
- Those schools that are growing (most of them) will...
- simply hold off
raises for their teachers / staff.
- increase class sizes, or purchase
less education software or the like.
- create
an environment encouraging
staff to look for more stable job opportunities
- Those schools that are not growing will...
- make layoffs
- create
an environment encouraging
staff to look for more stable job opportunities
Teachers are not entrepreneurs. They generally do not like risk. When Cyber Charter Schools are perceived as experimental, then many teachers will search for safer employment in the brick and mortar world. If fewer teachers choose to work for Cyber Charter Schools, then there will be less innovation. Is a.02% gain in revenue the reason HB 618 or the revised version of SB 1085 have traction? I do not think that this is driving the argument. The enemies of Cyber Charter Schools are. Innovation is needed in education. The enemies of Cyber Charter Schools include the teacher's union, and the school board association. Their gain is their windfall from SB 1085. This could easily result in the tax payer paying more money for less innovation in traditional schools.
Please join us in Harrisburg this year for the PA Families Cyber Day on the Hill on May 6th 2014. The permission slip and BLOG where you can make payment can be found
here.
