DN Editorial: Cyber-charter blues
WITH OVER 150 charter schools - nearly half of them in Philadelphia - and an additional 13 "cyber schools," which operate online, Pennsylvania has a strong profile among states for embracing charters as a key part of education reform.
WITH OVER 150 charter schools - nearly half of them in Philadelphia - and an additional 13 "cyber schools," which operate online, Pennsylvania has a strong profile among states for embracing charters as a key part of education reform.
Unfortunately, we're lagging when it comes to coherent and consistent regulations governing the oversight of these schools, which are funded with public money but are free of many of the mandates of public school systems. "Bricks and mortar" charters are overseen by the school districts from which their students are drawn; cyber charters are overseen by the state Department of Education.
And while many bills that would govern charter oversight and funding have made their way through Harrisburg in the last few years, virtually none has been passed. It's high time.
Not only have we seen a string of scandals over the past few years centered on charters, but academic studies on their effectiveness continue to raise questions about student performance - especially in cyber charters.
Among the latest scandals: Last week, the Daily News reported that Frontier Virtual High school, a cyber charter, has laid off its teaching staff, has let bills go unpaid and seems not to be operating at all, despite having received $435,000 in public funds to educate 54 students. The Department of Education is expected to take action soon.
In both the House and the Senate, various bills have tried to address charter oversight and funding issues. One such bill would establish an independent authority to oversee all charters in the state. And Auditor General Jack Wagner has called for fixing the broken funding formula for charters, especially that cybers get as much as "brick and mortar" schools.
Those efforts have gone nowhere; some of them been have been held hostage by forces in Harrisburg that are pushing vouchers.
Charters are an important element in education reform, and widen the choices for parents. But few of them outperform traditional public schools in math and English scores . . . and some of them are a great deal worse.
We have no doubt that most charter operators believe in true education reform, and they, almost more than anyone, are damaged by those operators who use the charter law as a path to financial enrichment.
Many state lawmakers are great proponents of charter schools - in fact, many of them have created charter schools. But supporting the charter movement and taking charters seriously are two different things.
Taking them seriously means ensuring oversight and accountability while still allowing for innovation. Successful charters should lead that conversation.
Our state is known for the quantity of its charter schools; we need more attention on ensuring their quality.
