Teacher to student ratios and cyber school

I am a parent of five children who has put his children through the K-12 process. My children were home educated in places like Indiana, Phoenixville and Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania. When they started college I looked with them at their choices, and one of the first things we looked at was teacher to student ratio. In all cases the schools with the lower teacher to student ratio were worth more money, and had better reputations.

The Philadelphia School District is currently cutting teachers because this ratio is too low. While I understand the tax payers prospective on this, it seems like we are moving in the wrong direction. In the School District of Philadelphia a 6th through 12th grader should not experience more than a 33 to 1 student to teacher ratio in a class. In some cases this ratio is lower so they are laying off teachers.This same ratio is  higher in cyber school. SB 1085 is currently cutting the revenue of cyber schools by 5%. This cut is ironic because the student to teacher ratio in cyber school is growing. The question is; should it be shrinking?  It is not unusual at some cyber schools for teachers to have over 200 students. SB 1085 will provide a motivation to raise that ratio further instead of shrink it to more effective levels. On a cyber level of education or in traditional education, the lower the student to teacher ratio is, the more effective the education. Every parent knows this, but perhaps some people think that cyber schooling is different.

Cyber School is not different. In our learning platform we have an instant messenger that allows us to respond to our students quickly when they have questions. Just now I answered  five students who needed my help with an assignment or project they were working on. Massive Open Online Courses (M.O.O.C.S) are different. In some cases they have tens of thousands of students in a single class. They serve the opposite objective of public education. They are attempting to leave all students behind, and recommend the cream of the crop to perspective employers who are willing to pay handsomely for this information. Students at a younger age than those participating in MOOCS are not as independent in their learning styles. If we make MOOCS the online learning template for public education it would be a drastic mistake. In my opinion, public education is about raising the bottom and mentoring the top. When my students fail at something I am always there to encourage them to try another door to an opportunity or learning. Students can get very depressed when they are compared to the best and the brightest in the world. The global economy has opened up greater opportunities, but it also has also created stress points along the way. When there is a coach or mentor standing in the doorway we can help our students when they feel they have made a mistake. I always tell my students there is always another door that they can go through. In a MOOC this does not happen. It is all about promoting the top and then grabbing them for a specific need. Public education should consider employment needs from the students' instead of the employers' perspective.

Philadelphia school teachers are being cut because they do not have the students to fill the schools. Should cyber schools be cut because they have too many students for their teachers to manage? I would suggest that our legislators consider teacher to student ratio when considering funding cuts. If they will consider this, then the current SB 1085 does not make sense. Minimizing our attention to students by raising student ratios will give us a short term cash bump for a long term unemployment outlook. It is like what Joachim Posada calls "Eating the marshmallow," instead of waiting for the good and healthy food. In a world economy where our students are competing for jobs that do not exist yet, it is important to maximize attention to our students, and their ultimate economic outcomes which will pay for our future retirement.

We need more students to go on our DC and China trips. Click here to find out more information, and scroll down to the trips near the bottom of the page.

PALCS Cyber Charter School Short Film

Have you ever wondered why students choose a cyber education?
Please watch this brief film by 8th grader Sean Brown.

Professional Learning Network (PLN) for Cyber School?

I am discouraged today as I write this BLOG post. The wrongs of some of the more charismatic leaders in the cyber charter school movement have caused some legislators to question the value of cyber Education.These incidents all have one thing in common. A charismatic leader chose to take advantage of their position in way that brought public scrutiny. This public scrutiny is reaching a harmful point now that legislation pending could cut our school funding by as much as 20%. This post is about the teachers, parents and students who sacrificed, risked money and stability to achieve innovative teaching practices in The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

  

I am a cyber teacher and administrator at Pennsylvania Leadership Charter School. I started at the school in 2004. I had worked in the Philadelphia School District briefly, and was one of the first teachers hired at this school. I am grateful for the opportunity that Philadelphia and PA Leadership gave me to start my third career in education.  In my experience I have found all teachers to be mission minded. I am one of thousands of people who are working behind the scenes to provide a valuable alternative to students in cyber education.  Our 2500 students chose our school because of our unique blend of teacher inspired lessons, and independent learning. Many of these people would receive relatively low rankings on the charisma scale. However, they form a professional learning network that can change education. 

Technology is the great equalizer in education. Many students are receiving the equivalent of a preparatory school education when they choose alternative education models. Our University Scholars Program within PA Leadership Charter School prepared my son well for Drexel University. He is not struggling to keep up with his classmates, and is ahead of most of them. Many of our students benefit from the flexible assessment grading where they are able to work at their own pace. When we consider cutting education costs, we should also consider that we are discarding the capitol investment of technology before we have realized its benefits.  This is a bad business practice. 

Like most educators, cyber teachers have embraced the mission of education. In cyber education the parent and learner are in the driver seat. They have chosen an alternative form of education. The teachers, parents and students in cyber education are willing to take a risk for students to have better educational outcomes. They are the true unsung heroes of education.  When these unlikely heroes are cut from the system because of funding cuts, are we really stripping the sustainable forces of stability from the school?

One example of legislation pending to cut teachers is House Bill 618. This bill will cut pension funding for cyber schools. If this happens, then we will likely cut the funding of new employees pensions. This will likely create a dual system of pensions and another class of teachers. Most teachers will not like this. This kind of unrest can lead to the creation of teachers unions in cyber schools. If you have read any of my past posts you will know that this is not something I am in favor of. Unions will bring stability, but they will also slow innovation. In my opinion we need to increase innovation, and not slow it down. Our students are feeling the pressure of competing in a global market place, and it our duty to equip them with the best technology possible to help them. Cyber education is just one example of using technology in a way where we can give our students a competitive advantage.

Parent and student choice is at the center of the cyber school model. When we empower parents and students to choose, only then can we give feet to educational change. Parent and student choice should be the center of education reform. The professional learning network Of parents, teachers and students are in the best position to see the outcomes of the educational process. The world is changing rapidly around us. We need to move our students with the change. Maximizing parent and student choice is very much like the following story. A parent and their student is waiting patiently for their train to come on the station platform. The train arrives and the student notices that he has the wrong ticket. It is a local train instead of a express train. Fortunately, he still has time to rush over to the ticket window and exchange his ticket. If we were to put this story into today's educational system the student would miss his train. He would would have to call his guidance counselor, to change that ticket. He would miss the express career train, and perhaps an opportunity for a better educational choice, that could lead to better job. Cyber school teachers work with software learning programs that represent the cutting edge of education. They can connect students with more resources to keep up with the changing world. We are training our students for jobs that do not exist yet. We must empower students to make the choices that come at the speed of technology, or they may end up in the wrong job. Cyber School puts students back on track.

Pa House Bill 618

From: Jim Hanak, CEO, PA Leadership Charter School

Dear Parents and Supporters of Cyber Charter Schools,On Wednesday September 25, 2013, House Bill 618 passed the PA House of Representatives 133-62.  This bill cuts funding for the 15 PA Cyber Charter Schools by over 10% the first year and up to 20% on the out years.  It was sold as a “double dip” that cyber charter schools are receiving from the school districts.  This “double dip” is actually less than a ½ dip that, if “corrected” by HB 618 it would actually reverse the double dip in favor of the home school district. It was also presented as a “compromise” bill that contained items that cyber charter schools want.The biggest problem with this bill is that it does not begin to address the other inequities in the cyber charter school funding formula that already punishes cyber charter schools.  

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.Some will point out that this 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 the bill have already been put in place in law and all cybers are already carefully complying with these accountability requirements.Our opponents will argue that this bill is a compromise and contains features that cyber charter school supports want.  

While this is true, the bill was written without any consultation with the cyber charter community and contains features (like a 10 year charter) that, while are nice, do not compare to the financial cuts that cybers must endure.  The opponents of charter schools estimate that it will cost cyber charter schools as much as $40 million!...the first year.This bill was supported by the Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials and the PA State Education Association (PSEA – teacher’s union), two very powerful status quo educational lobby groups. All PA Cyber Charter Schools were united in opposition to the bill.  Thousands of e-mails, letters, phone calls and visits to State Legislators did not stop this bill.  It was supported by the Republican Majority Leader but opposed by the Republican Speaker of the House.  

To pass the bill, the Majority Leader had to provide promises to Democrats – something he was unwilling to do to pass the same bill last Spring.   The only thing this bill does is further cripple Cyber Charter Schools.  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.  It saves taxpayers nothing.  It simply transfers millions of dollars from students in cyber schools to students in their home school district. What will cyber charter schools do to adjust?  Those schools that are growing (most of them) will simply hold off raises for their teachers / staff or increase class sizes or purchase less education software or the like.  Those schools that are not growing will have to make layoffs, creating an environment like that of Philadelphia School District encouraging staff to look for more stable job opportunities. What will local school districts do with the additional two tenths of one percent income.  

I don’t know.  What I do know is that it is not the additional income that is driving the Teachers Union (PSEA) to promote this bill.  Rather it is the crippling effect on cyber charter schools. So, where does 618 go from here?  It must pass the Senate and be signed by the Governor in order to become law.  Now is the time to let your Senator know how you feel about this bill. Most state legislators have no strong feelings as to who should educate our children.  They will very likely cast their vote based on how strongly their voters feel about this issue.  We thank all of our PALCS families for letting their voice be heard on this issue.  

Dr. James HanakCEO, PA Leadership Charter SchoolView in: Mobile | Desktop©2012 Google

What is leadership?

Three very popular leaders from the past 150 years answer student's questions about leadership.

Putting things in perspective

I agree that we need education reform. I disagree that the funding formula should be balanced at the expense of cyber students.  In regards to the former auditor general’s findings, my point was that we should be investing in innovation. Are you suggesting that we make school districts funded through state funding measures? Unless we get rid of local school boards this will not happen. If cyber tuition rates are flawed, then Pennsylvania funding rates are flawed and cutting cyber education funding will not solve the problem.  Our school has also eliminated several teaching positions this year because of the funding cuts that all school districts are facing.

If the pension funding measures are changed now it is likely to result in inferior funding measures for future cyber school employees. If this is the case there is likely to be divisiveness among the teachers.  This is likely to result in more unions in cyber schools. Unions in cyber schools will not promote change. It will promote stability which will hinder short term innovation efforts.  Innovation is not always efficient, but it is critical in light of global competition in education. 

Some cyber schools are operated by for profit companies. Laws could be passed that would limit upper management’s salaries, and advertising could be restricted or even forbidden. I would not oppose such targeted changes. 

I disagree with Susan Spicka's article because everyone has vested interests. She has a vested interest in getting elected to be a state representative, and I have a vested interest in keeping my job as a cyber teacher. I have written another BLOG post to address education reform in light of vested interests. 

I think you must look at the churn rate of cyber schools in light of the high school dropout rate. Students choose Cyber School because they are failing in traditional schools. In the current state of traditional education we are in free fall of 7000 students dropping out every school day. 

As far as the personal attacks go I would be open to anyone checking the individual achievements of the students my wife’s teaches. Last year I paid for my son to go to China with me. My wife came because she is the best English teacher our school has, and the Chinese wanted an English teacher. She works harder than any teacher I know at PALCS. I asked for people to take the China trip three years ago and I had no takers. I have not been to Panama in three years. I only went to Quebec this year because a teacher left the school. I do not see these trips as a vacation. They are a lot of hard work. Teachers go on these trips because they take the initiative to put the trips together.  I do not ask for payment for the time that I am working when I would normally be off the clock. The biggest part of the hard work is recruiting the students to fund raise in the first place. Our school does not subsidize these trips.  

I am currently attempting to negotiate oral English classes online for Chinese students. If anyone wants to help me I am all for it. Blog.palcs.org/ila We have our first teacher heading to China in 2013. He is going there voluntarily. I recruited him at no expense to our school.

Virtual Schools are schools of the future.

Virtual schools are schools of the future. They provide the ultimate level playing field for students living in poverty or affluence. The phenomenal growth of internet learning is happening across the education spectrum. This has been played out in the growth of massive open online courses (MOOC). In 2012 one internet platform provider had 300,000 students. Also, 6.7 million or a third of all college students now learn online according to the Babson Survey Research Group. The 200,000 students already enrolled in K-12 virtual schools are only about 3% of this number. At this rate of growth, virtual learning has surpassed the number of K-12 students in public schools in the US. In light of these developments, perhaps, there are too few initiatives in internet learning. 

I work at an independent Cyber Charter School in Pennsylvania. We live in a changing world that is requiring our students to change with it. Cyber Schools are schools of choice. Parents who have a negative experience at a cyber school can choose another form of education. This is not the case with traditional schools. They have a default population who are assigned to a school on the basis of where the family resides.

Students and teachers at Cyber Schools collaborate online. At our school, (www.palcs.org) we use an open source Moodle platform to teach asynchronously. Students are assigned a learning module where teachers have placed a motivational hook, review, a lesson, and an assessment. Students can contact teachers at our buildings by instant messenger, built into the platform, or phone which allows for quick collaboration to catch a student processing their learning. We also teach synchronously and use Adobe multi-media classrooms. In addition, we have six centers where students can meet and collaborate in a blended learning environment. Virtual schools rent hundreds of rental facilities across the Commonwealth to implement standardized tests. In addition, students can travel to locations on leadership, language immersion, and family trips. They can stay current on their school work and travel the world at the same time with the aid of a laptop and an Internet connection.

We have 1100 high school students who are members of a student government organization at our school. They create and implement student funded projects and trips like... a Chinese exchange program, Panama, Quebec, Washington, New York City, and Harrisburg trips, proms on both sides of the state, talent shows, a protected social media discussion board, a Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) event, a yearbook, numerous fundraisers, and community service projects. There is a certain irony in these activities because our school receives 25% less funding than other public schools because we are not paid to provide extracurricular activities.

Pennsylvania Representative Dan Truitt has introduced two new bills to protect Cyber Schools. House Bill 970 and 971 will allow Cyber School funding to be reformed by having schools report their expenses versus their revenues on an annual balance sheet. Unfortunately, cyber schools currently seem to be an easy target for funding cuts. When Dan attempts to defend cyber schools, he has heard one consistent rebuttal, “Cyber schools deserve a cut because they have no buildings.”  When you ask someone if they have ever visited a cyber school they normally respond, “no.” Many people will never believe that we have buildings until they visit. We welcome them to come to 1332 Enterprise Drive, West Chester, PA 19380 or any of our other five centers. I am sure that the other cyber schools will be happy to invite you as well. The truth is Cyber Schools have many of the same expenses that traditional schools do at the K-12 level. However, charter schools only receive 75% of the tuition allocated for a student at his or her local public school. 

In an age where no child should be left behind pulling Cyber School funding has already created an uneven playing field. Recently Monica Allison, the President of the Pennsylvania Families for Public Cyber Schools sent me this question, “Is my child a second-class student?” I present the following question to you as you consider the online education debate, “Do we want to relegate any child to the status of second-class student?”