Virtual Public Schools, Part II: Law, Free Market, and Win-Win Solution
Daniel Downs
March 24, 2007
In last week’s article, pros and cons of virtual public schooling were addressed. For those not up-to-date on educational programs and terminology, this week I begin with an explanation of what a virtual charter schools is. According to the US Chamber of Commerce report Leaders and Laggards, virtual charters schools are:
“Schools, in which instruction takes place over the Internet, also known as virtual or cyberschools, provide students, parents, and schools with choice and flexibility. Virtual schools are highly adaptive and offer states a potentially cost-effective way to reach a wide range of students, including those in rural areas, with advanced or specialized course work that might not otherwise be accessible to them.”
Students enrolled in a virtual public school will receive a loaned computer and an Internet connection, and textbooks and other supporting materials throughout the year. State-certified teachers will assign lessons and monitor student progress, communicating online [and] in person with both student and parent. In Indiana, students must have face-to-face contact with their on-line teacher periodically. Students are also required to travel to a central administrative office to take mandate state and national tests, according to the US Department of Education.
An important issue identified in Leaders and Laggards is the perceived need for stronger charter school law. The business community believes stronger charter laws will improve public schooling. In fact, they believe virtual charter schools will be an important part of creating a better future for American education capable of preparing all students for a productive life in a global 21st century.
What do they mean by strong charter school law? Using the same source used in Leaders and Laggards, I discovered strong charter laws really means creating a free public education market. Leaders and Laggards relied on criteria listed in a study by the Center for Education Reform (CER). The study entitled "In Charter Schools: Changing the Face of American Education" lists ten criteria necessary to create strong charter school law. Those criteria include permitting an unlimited number of charter schools to start and operate with complete legal, administrative, and financial independence from local school district control or regulatory oversight; permitting a variety or individual and groups both within or outside local district to start charter schools, and permitting 100 percent per-pupil funding to follow students when enrolled in charter schools.
Could a national school system based on free market be good for America?
The study Do Charter Schools Threaten Public Education? Emerging Evidence from Fifteen Years of a Quasi-Market for Schooling by James Forman, Jr. addresses that question. As noted last week, his study demonstrated that charter schools will likely engender more public supported funding. One of the primary reasons is a longer school year. Forman’s study also points out how both government and school services have already been privatized. Some examples of privatized school services include food service, transportation services, maintenance services, health services, counseling services, and special education services. Privatization of educational services is not as undemocratic as professional opponents claim. A typical reason for privatizing government services is efficiency. Business does a better job at a cost reducing price.
Past President Bill Clinton made a similar conclusion based on his study of governmental programs. The evaluation was headed by V.P. Al Gore. Their conclusion was the performance of many government programs was very poor and inefficient. Consequently, they launched a privatization effort that was republican in scale, and it seems President Bush has been carrying on those findings or at least similar efforts.
A more important reason to privatize all education--thus creating a free education market--is to adequately serve all students. Public education can not adequately serve all of its constituency because it can not adequately teach more than one curricula, one compatible to secularists (or the political left) and one compatible to religious or traditionalists (or the political right). Just as Warren Nord, professor of philosophy at the University of North Carolina explains in his book “Religion and American Education: Rethinking a National Dilemma,” public education is hostile toward Christians. With 40 to 60 percent of Americans claiming adherence to biblical or traditional values and beliefs, how can public schools satisfactorily educate students from those families? They cannot because secular ideology informing American education, being rooted in Unitarianism, is neither value neutral nor amoral.
When applied to virtual charter schools, however, these types of privatized public schools offer the best of all worlds. Virtual charter schooling provides a public-secular curriculum. It provides benefits of both private parochial and home-schooling. Virtual charter schooling allows motivated parents to assist with their children’s education. A collateral benefit is stronger family relations. Because the virtual charter school program is administered by certified teachers, virtual charter schools are a win-win situation for all public-secular concerns.
In Part III, an analysis of academic achievement of every type of America school including government schools will seek to determine whether virtual charter schools are worthy of public support. Look for it next week.
“Schools, in which instruction takes place over the Internet, also known as virtual or cyberschools, provide students, parents, and schools with choice and flexibility. Virtual schools are highly adaptive and offer states a potentially cost-effective way to reach a wide range of students, including those in rural areas, with advanced or specialized course work that might not otherwise be accessible to them.”
Students enrolled in a virtual public school will receive a loaned computer and an Internet connection, and textbooks and other supporting materials throughout the year. State-certified teachers will assign lessons and monitor student progress, communicating online [and] in person with both student and parent. In Indiana, students must have face-to-face contact with their on-line teacher periodically. Students are also required to travel to a central administrative office to take mandate state and national tests, according to the US Department of Education.
An important issue identified in Leaders and Laggards is the perceived need for stronger charter school law. The business community believes stronger charter laws will improve public schooling. In fact, they believe virtual charter schools will be an important part of creating a better future for American education capable of preparing all students for a productive life in a global 21st century.
What do they mean by strong charter school law? Using the same source used in Leaders and Laggards, I discovered strong charter laws really means creating a free public education market. Leaders and Laggards relied on criteria listed in a study by the Center for Education Reform (CER). The study entitled "In Charter Schools: Changing the Face of American Education" lists ten criteria necessary to create strong charter school law. Those criteria include permitting an unlimited number of charter schools to start and operate with complete legal, administrative, and financial independence from local school district control or regulatory oversight; permitting a variety or individual and groups both within or outside local district to start charter schools, and permitting 100 percent per-pupil funding to follow students when enrolled in charter schools.
Could a national school system based on free market be good for America?
The study Do Charter Schools Threaten Public Education? Emerging Evidence from Fifteen Years of a Quasi-Market for Schooling by James Forman, Jr. addresses that question. As noted last week, his study demonstrated that charter schools will likely engender more public supported funding. One of the primary reasons is a longer school year. Forman’s study also points out how both government and school services have already been privatized. Some examples of privatized school services include food service, transportation services, maintenance services, health services, counseling services, and special education services. Privatization of educational services is not as undemocratic as professional opponents claim. A typical reason for privatizing government services is efficiency. Business does a better job at a cost reducing price.
Past President Bill Clinton made a similar conclusion based on his study of governmental programs. The evaluation was headed by V.P. Al Gore. Their conclusion was the performance of many government programs was very poor and inefficient. Consequently, they launched a privatization effort that was republican in scale, and it seems President Bush has been carrying on those findings or at least similar efforts.
A more important reason to privatize all education--thus creating a free education market--is to adequately serve all students. Public education can not adequately serve all of its constituency because it can not adequately teach more than one curricula, one compatible to secularists (or the political left) and one compatible to religious or traditionalists (or the political right). Just as Warren Nord, professor of philosophy at the University of North Carolina explains in his book “Religion and American Education: Rethinking a National Dilemma,” public education is hostile toward Christians. With 40 to 60 percent of Americans claiming adherence to biblical or traditional values and beliefs, how can public schools satisfactorily educate students from those families? They cannot because secular ideology informing American education, being rooted in Unitarianism, is neither value neutral nor amoral.
When applied to virtual charter schools, however, these types of privatized public schools offer the best of all worlds. Virtual charter schooling provides a public-secular curriculum. It provides benefits of both private parochial and home-schooling. Virtual charter schooling allows motivated parents to assist with their children’s education. A collateral benefit is stronger family relations. Because the virtual charter school program is administered by certified teachers, virtual charter schools are a win-win situation for all public-secular concerns.
In Part III, an analysis of academic achievement of every type of America school including government schools will seek to determine whether virtual charter schools are worthy of public support. Look for it next week.
Print
Email
