Thursday, June 29, 2017

Modify PA HB 97 & Senate Bill 766 (An Open Letter to the Pennsylvania Senate)

Modify HB 97 & Senate Bill 766


The current Senate Bill 766 sponsored by Senator Argall and HB 97 by Representative Reese need some adjustments. Here is the core of the Senate bill. A task force will be appointed to determine minimum standards of academic achievement for students of cyber charter schools. Students who are determined as having failing grades will be removed from the cyber charter school system. Here is an excerpt from the bill.

(4) annually conduct an assessment of the student's achievement to determine whether the level of achievement satisfies the minimum achievement requirements established by the task force under section 1704-A to continue enrollment in the cyber charter school. (2) A student who fails, after being assessed in accordance with section 1743-A(e)(4), to satisfy the minimum achievement requirements established by the task force under section 1704-A shall withdraw from the cyber charter school at the end of the semester in which the assessment occurs and may not re-enroll in the cyber charter school or enroll in another cyber charter school unless the student satisfies the minimum achievement requirements at least one school year thereafter.

Here are some adjustments that I would recommend.

Stanford Study: 


The Stanford study has stimulated the desire to hold cyber charter schools accountable due to inadequate student achievement. While I applaud the concern for failing students in the cyber charter setting, the cyber charter school movement will not benefit from a one-size-fits-all policy. Some cyber schools are doing a better job of remediating student achievement and should be differentiated by the task force.

The Need for Differentiation:


The cyber charter schools are using different platforms and pedagogy to deliver instruction. In addition to differences in instructional platforms, there are also synchronous, asynchronous and blended learning models that are being beta tested. These innovations all have an implementation timeline for effectiveness. Many of these implementations are new. Cyber education changes as technology advances to deliver the best possible individual learning experience. A one-size-fits-all funding formula will punish innovation and reward the status quo. The loser in this formula is technological innovation which continues to change and increase in the proving grounds of cyber education.


Proving Ground or Dumping Ground


Cyber charter schools have become the dumping grounds for students seeking a second chance for success. There are legitimate reasons that many students choose a cyber educational setting. I call them the four B's. 
  1. Bullying is a common reason students leave brick and mortar schools because they gain an individual setting apart from bullies. 
  2. Bad or divergent behavior also provides a valid reason to minimize student interaction. Antisocial behaviors on the spectrum of autism can ostracize students causing them to withdraw. Cyber school provides students with a way to ease into a social setting with instant messages, multi-media classrooms, and field trips. 
  3. Bad grades is the third reason for students leaving the traditional setting. Brick and mortar schools lose students because parents choose to send their children somewhere else. Many of these students suffer with poor grades and are looking for a different fresh start. Cyber schools provide a different alternative that provides individual instruction which allows for the possibility of success.
  4. Breaking Boundaries is a different reason students choose cyber education. They embrace technological change to allow the time to reach other goals within their lives. They are leaders. They are also single mothers, gifted students, musicians, athletes, politically active, and young entrepreneurs.
Cyber charter schools are likely to have poorer graduation rates for the first three reasons, and traditional schools graduation rates should go up. Using student drop out averages across all schools to access effectiveness punishes cyber charter schools for accepting these students. 

Accountability:


The Task Force should take the average failing scores of students in the top cyber charter school when developing standards to determine "minimum achievement". This should be written into the bill to direct the task force to determine a benchmark. This will promote innovation without punishing systemic achievement.

Relationships:


The student teacher relationship is a foundation marker for student achievement. Students will never care how much you know until they know how much you care. The most at risk students are the students most deserving of a mentor relationship with their teacher. As a teacher of cyber charter students for fourteen years I have had the distinct privilege of making life long relationships with many of my students. As they have graduated and become Linkedin, Facebook and Instagram connections I have watched them succeed and flounder. The students who I have had the strongest relationship with seem to have found their way better in the world of work and family. 

Conclusion:


One size does not fit all in education or in cyber charter education. In my educational experiences over the past 14 years I have seen the need for greater differentiation in education. Technology provides a path to this. I do however understand the need for accountability. I welcome it when it comes with measures that reward innovation while punishing the lack of student achievement.