VITUAL CHARTER SCHOOLS: Solution or Siren Song?

Summary: Backus is a professor and Jones is a former student from the University of Oklahoma College of Law. Interestingly, both are former educators. In this article they look at the legal code and effectiveness of virtual charter schools in Oklahoma.

There are two classifications of virtual instruction in Oklahoma: supplemental online instruction (including credit recovery, specialized or Advanced Placement courses, personalized learning, etc.) and full-time virtual schooling. Supplemental online learning has twice the number of students as full-time virtual schooling. Oklahoma currently has 5 fully online schools, and in the 2012-13 school year there were 10,585 students who took online courses. Backus and Jones discuss supplemental and full-time online learning separately due to several key differences.

First they discuss supplemental online courses. Supplemental online courses are well-supported in Oklahoma. All public schools are required to offer educationally appropriate supplemental courses to all of their students. Students can take up to 5 hours of supplemental online instruction at no cost to the student’s family, and frequently the courses are offered during the school day. The 17 providers that have been approved by the state board offer a selection of over 600 courses. Students adhere to the same attendance, end-of-year assessment, and course completion policies as the student’s physical school. Districts retain a great deal of control over their students by determining what is “educationally appropriate” for each student. The school districts are required to provide special education services to students who are enrolled in supplementary online courses.

The growth of virtual schools has largely been fueled by the growth of full-time virtual charter schools. Virtual charters have been the fastest growing alternative to public education in recent years. In Oklahoma, charters are granted for no more than five years, and they can be revoked for several reasons, including if the school fails to meet student performance requirements or standards of fiscal management. In Oklahoma, the Virtual Charter School Board is the only sponsor of statewide virtual schools, but local districts are still able to sponsor a virtual school within the limits of their district. An application for a virtual school charter must include a student admissions policy, a plan for fiscal management, measurement of student achievement, and adherence to applicable federal, state, and tribal laws and regulations. The schools receive funding from the State Board of Education. The Virtual Charter School Board can collect up to 5% of the funding for administrative purposes. Oklahoma also has procedures in place to ensure that virtual charters do not receive funding until they provide financial records from the previous year.

As of the publishing of this article, vitual charter schools have been authorized in 34 states. Many legislators view them as a way to improve education while decreasing costs, but the authors cite a number of concerns regarding their effectiveness, inclusiveness, funding, and profit. There is very little evidence that fully virtual schools are effective for K-12 students. One possible reason for this is that 44% of full-time charter schools are operated by for-profit companies, especially K-12 Inc. and Connections Academy. Management decisions are made to benefit their stockholders and investors rather than the students they serve. Virtual schools must also spend a significant amount of money on advertising in order to recruit students. Finally, for-profit virtual charter schools spend a large amount of money on lobbying efforts in order to expand their companies into new states and markets. In response to these issues, Backus and Jones end with several recommendations for Oklahoman lawmakers:

1. Attendance regulations must be improved. Virtual schools should take daily attendance based on log-ins and provide that information to the State Department of Education. Students should be required to document residency in the state of Oklahoma in order to have accurate funding and enrollment data.
2. At least 95% of virtual schoolers should be tested in accordance with federal law.
3. The growth of virtual schools should be slowed until there is an understanding of why they often suffer and how they can improve.
4. Virtual educators should be highly qualified, have special training in virtual instructional methodology, and be given manageable class sizes.
5. Virtual schools should have local school boards that serve the interests of the students.
6. The true cost of educating a student virtually must be determined and the funding formula should be adjusted to match.

Appraisal: Unless the reader is specifically interested in Oklahoma, I would recommend the NEPC report for its more in-depth and nationally comprehensive discussion of virtual charter schools. Much of Backus and Jones’ article mirrors the NEPC report in both its concerns with virtual charter schools and its policy proposals.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in reviews are not the official views of ICHER or of its members. For more information about ICHER’s Reviews, please see the «About these Reviews» Section.