STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

POLICY BRIEF: Online Charter Schools:
Policy Issues
August 2007
Policy Brief  Cyber Charter Schools  1
Introduction

Online charter schools are a relatively new trend in education. Such schools have the potential of better meeting the needs of many students than traditional bricks-and-mortar schools. However, the existing education infrastructure did not anticipate this new type of school and problems have arisen in other states. Policymakers may wish to consider whether any additional regulation is necessary to ensure that students learn and public funds are used efficiently.

In California, the online charter school HomeSmartKids had no buildings, no class-rooms, and no teachers, yet California paid nearly $1.4 million (about $4600 per student) in 2001 to reimburse homeschool families up to $1,500 per child for books, supplies and field trips that parents once paid themselves. In many cases, parents proctored the state assessments themselves (Asimov, 2001).

A 2006 audit in Colorado of its online schools found that online students performed poorly when compared with regular schools; found poor oversight by the Colorado Dept. of Education; use of questionable assessment procedures; use of uncertified teachers, use of parents as teachers, and large teacher-student ratios; use of public funds to support religion; incomplete criminal history checks; a lack of student documentation; and that some schools did not provide a comprehensive education.

In Kansas, a state report found that despite rigorous policies for overseeing the state’s cyber schools, actual oversight was weak (Robelen, 2007).

Plans to launch two new virtual charter schools in Indiana have been shelved due to

disagreements over education funding priorities (Robelen, 2007).

The Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School and affiliated entities are under scrutiny from the state’s Attorney General; a state grand jury is investigating allegations of double billing, excessive management fees, questionable payments to building contractors and misuse of tax dollars (Smith, 2006).

Background

Online charter schools, like other charter schools, are independent public schools created through a formal agreement (the charter) with a sponsoring entity (local or state board). Charter schools operate free from many regulations that govern traditional public schools, in exchange for accountability—if the school fails to perform at a level agreed to in the charter by the sponsoring entity, the contract may not be renewed, or even terminated under some circumstances.

Charter schoolsthat deliver instruction via the internet—called “online,” “virtual,” or “cyber” charters—are a fast growing segment of education. More than 170 online charter schools now serve some 92,000 students, according to the Center for Education Reform, which tracks and advocates for charter schools (Robelen, 2007).

Online charter schools are distinct from a local district’s online course offerings, in that online charter schools offer a comprehensive education and may operate statewide. Most district programs are intended to supplement the courses offered in bricks-and-mortar schools and are limited to resident students, although out-of-district students may take courses with the permission of their resident district or by paying tuition.

The model for online charter schools typically has five elements that set them apart from traditional schools:

  • Curricula is oftencreated and made available by for-profit firms;
  • Education is delivered through computers or through mail correspondence rather than aclassroom;
  • Teachers may have different roles, helping parents or others teach the student;
  • Students served are oftendrawn from the home schooled population; and
  • Online charter schools are often able to enroll students from multiple districts.

Combined, these characteristics challenge existing accountability and oversight frameworks.

In some cases, management of the school is also contracted out to Education Management Organizations (EMOs) and this segment of the market is growing.For-profit education companies regularly advertise at charter school conventions. Recently, Kaplanand Apollo Group have both acquired companies that run online high schools (Damast, 2007).

In 2000, a study of Michigan’s 172 charter schools found private management firms, rather than parent or community groups, were running 72% of the schools (Harrington-Lueker, 2002).

Of the four online charter schools currently operating in Oregon, two[1] have large populations of (formerly) home schooled students, but only one fits the classic EMO model—Oregon Connections Academy (ORCA). ORCA is also the only one of the schools not restricted in its ability to enroll students statewide.[2]

Benefits

There are many advantages to online learning.

  • Students may logon anytime of day that accommodates their schedule.
  • Students may work at their own pace, meeting the needs of both gifted students and students who need a slower pace.
  • The graphics and interactive nature of the software is often more compelling than textbooks and traditional teaching methods.
  • Teachers have more flexibility in when they work and may be able to better individualize lessons.
  • Distance learning can bring more diverse courses to small or rural districts or provide courses in topics where teacher shortages exist.
  • Parents who were home schooling their children have additional resources, enabling them to better prepare their children for college and the workforce.

In addition, a U.S. Department of Education spokesperson has underscored that failing schools must offer students school choice, and that, “In situations where it is a real challenge to offer school choice to a child—where all the schools in the district are full—the Undersecretary has said school districts need to be creative, and online charter schools or distance-learning [programs] are options they can offer” (Branigan, 2002).

Oregon’s State Online School

In 2005, SB 1071 was enacted, creating the “Oregon Virtual School District” (OVSD).Somewhat misnamed as it is neither a school nor a school district, it contracts with existing online content providers to create a central location where students can find and take online courses for credit at no cost to the student. The OVSD does not grant credit or diplomas. The goal is to provide easy access for students and, with an Oregon Department of Education (ODE) review process in place, assurance of quality courses. A comprehensive education program is not in place, and current OVSD courses are limited to high school courses that supplement local district choices.

Prior to the OVSD, students would have to visit each district’s web page individually looking for courses, and while most of the programs offered were accredited, no uniform standards were in place. All OVSD courses meet state standards.

Currently, the existing online charter schools are not part of the OVSD, but they could be.

Because of its supplemental nature, the OVSD tends to not raise the same policy issues as district online charter schools, though some have voiced concern that the OVSD inappropriately competes with online charterschools (Willamette Week, 2006).

Students

Online charter schools tend to attract certain students more than others. Among these:

  • Students unhappy with limited district offerings or who live in remote areas
  • Students seeking to recover credit for graduation
  • Home schooled students
  • Health-impaired students
  • Students with careers
  • Talented and gifted students
  • Incarcerated students
  • Students who do not “fit” the traditional student profile (gifted, special needs, gay, older, employed, pregnant)

Are all students good candidates for online charter schools? Some have questioned whether online charterschools can adequately address the needs of special education students, students with limited English proficiency, those with visual impairments, and motivational problems (Zollers & Ramanathan, 1998).

Some also question whether very young students can effectively learn virtually, without a teacher on site.

There is some evidence that online charter schools managed by smaller EMOs serve significantly lower percentages oflow-income and minority students than other charter schools(Lacireno-Paquet, 2004).

In Oregon, a 2007 ODE review of the Oregon Connections Academy (ORCA) enrollment application found questions that could be used to screen out impoverished students (“Total gross monthly income generated by household: $___”); immigrants (“What language is most frequently spoken at home?”“Have you moved within the last three years for the purpose of finding seasonal or temporary employment directly related to producing or processing crops, livestock, dairy farm employment, planting or harvesting trees, or catching shellfish or fish in natural water?”); problem students (“I hereby swear or affirm that my child was/was not previously suspended or expelled from any public or private school for an act or offense involving weapons,alcohol, or drugs, for the willful infliction of injury to another person, or for any act of violence committed on school property.”) and special education students (IEP and 504 plans requested).

When contacted, ORCA officials stated it was not their intention to use these questions to screen students, and changed its materials to eliminate thesequestions during theapplication stage.

Because this language may have been used for the prior two years, there is no way to know if it discouraged enrollment or discouraged enrollment from certain categories of students. It also points out the issues that may arise when school districts adopt materials that were originally created for private use.

2006-07 SPECIAL EDUCATION/MINORITY ENROLLMENT IN OREGON ONLINE SCHOOLS
% minority/
27.6 %state / %special ed
12.7%state
Clackamas Web Acad. / 20% / n<6
LincolnCity Career Tech / 13.5 / 26.9%
ORCA / 7.6% / 3%
REALMS / 13.6% / 18%
Resource Link CS / 21.4% / 19%
W. Lane Learning Ctr. / 14.9% / N<6

New Students

Another funding issue other states have encountered is the enrolling of students who were previously taught at home or in another private setting.

A Pennsylvania study found that EMO-operated online charter schools had a higher percentage of formerly home- and private-schooled students enrolled than other charter schools. The schools with high proportions of students coming from private or parochial schools were, in most cases, also the schools that had low proportions of minority students and low incomestudents (Miron, Nelson, Risley, & Sullins, 2002).

Colorado specifically bans online schools from enrolling students that were home schooled the prior year.

Oregon has approximately 18,000 home schooled students and 41,000 private school students.[3] The state’s charter law only forbids private schools from transforming themselves into charter schools wholesale, without dissolving and a opening a new enrollment process (ORS 338.035(6)(a).

Policy Issues

  • What policies best support student-centered learning?
  • Can online schools provide instruction to all students?
  • Does enrolling previously home- and private-schooled studentscreate any problems?
  • How will special education services be delivered to students in a virtual environment?
  • How do virtual schools meet the federal requirements under Title 1A (disadvantaged), Title 1C (migrant), and Title III (English Language Learners)?
  • Can the very young student profit from virtual teaching?

Teachers

Many teachers prefer the online teaching environment, citing flexible hours, ability to hold a second job, the one-on-one nature of teaching, the greater diversity of students, and the ability to individualize courses.

A majority of the staff of the state’s online charter schools are licensed. Oregon’s charter school law requires that at least 50% of a charter school’s teaching and administrative staff hold a valid credential. Non-licensed teachers must register with the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission and be subjected to a criminal background test and submit a letter of request from the charter school. Oregon Administrative Rule (584-036-0017) requires that all distance learning teachers be licensed.

However, the practices of some online charter schools have raised issues.

Parents as teachers

Many of the pre-packaged curricula offered by for-profit companies depend on parents to deliver the education, particularly for elementary students. ORCA does not require that students have an adult at home to assist them in their education, though the web page does not make that clear as of this writing.[4]

When the Coquille School District tried to start its own charter school, COR-IDEA,[5] the Marion County Circuit Court found thatparents were serving as teachers on a day-to-day basis, in violation of the law that requires at least 50% of the staff to be licensed.

Teacher Qualifications

Can any teacher teach online? According to the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCEL), it is likely that less than one percent of teachers are trained as online teachers.According to Education Week, only 11 states require at least some of their online teachers to receive training in online instruction (Greenway, 2006).

The North American Council for Online Learning is in the process of developing online teacher quality and course content criteria. Bruce Friend of NACOL has stated that, “You can’t just plunk down a classroom teacher into the online world and expect them to be successful” (Davis, 2007).

If a company provides both the curriculum and the teachers, are these teachers comparable to Oregon teachers and are they undergoing criminal background checks or jumping over other qualifying hurdles?

Class Size

Some online charter schools have much larger student-teacher ratios than found in traditional schools. ORCA has about a 50:1 ratio.

Policy Issues

  • Should online teachers be required to be certified for online teaching?
  • At what point do parents become teachers and violate state law?
  • Should there be any limit to class size or guarantees of regular teacher contact with the student?
  • Should all teaching staff be subjected to Oregon teaching requirements and criminal background checks?

Governance & Fluid Boundaries

To some degree, the charter school movement was intended to alter traditional governance structures andto shift control away from school districts towards parents. However, when Oregon’s charter school law was enacted in 1999, bricks-and-mortar schools were envisioned, not online schools.With online charter schools, traditional governance is impactedeven more significantly:

  • Students may enroll throughout the state;
  • Curricula choices of online schools have statewide impact;
  • The State Board of Education, with its broad waiver authority, can significantly altereducation delivery on a statewide basis, without legislation, with a single waiver.

Statewide Attendance

Under the current place-bound system, if a student wants to attend school in a different district from where he or she lives, both districts have to approve the transfer. This enables the sending district to control student “leakage” and better enables the district to budget and plan and also recognized the district’s responsibility to the student.

Charter schools, on the other hand, are open to students from other districts without the districts’ permission, but geography and transportation issues limited the number and the impact. With online charters, this limitation is removed.

When Oregon’s charter school law was first enacted, it allowed no more than 20% of students to be from out-of-district to be enrolled.

Lifting this provision paved the way for large-scale online schools. Scio School District began such a school in 2005, increasing its enrollment from 696 in 2004-05 to 1314 in 2005-06. ORCA expects to enroll to2500[6] students in 2008-09.

In response to concerns about online charter schools, the 2005 Legislature enacted a requirement that at least half the student body of such schools be from the district where the school is located. Attempts to repeal that requirement failed in 2007.

Legal experts disagreed as to whether the 2005 law affected Oregon Connections Academy. It is the opinion of the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) that when the ORCA contract expires in 2010, the law will apply to it.

Curriculum

If enrollment in an online charter school is significant, the curriculum used could become defacto state curriculum, shifting the traditional curriculum creation responsibility away from local districts. In the case of for-profit companies operating nationally, the curricula could become defacto national curriculum to some degree. This is likely not an issue if the curriculum aligns with state standards.

Another question is whether districts using a packaged curriculum are going through the textbook adoption process as required by law when texts are used that are not on the state adoption list (ORS chapter 337).

State Board of Education

Another important governance provision of Oregon charter school law is the one that allows the State Board of Education to waive all but a short list of laws for charter schools.

The majority of prior waiver approvals by the state board have had a small impact on the education system as a whole.

Prior waivers
  • Waived enrollment requirements to give charter applicant children preference, or siblings of admitted students, or former alternative education students preference.
  • Waived 20% cap on out-of-district students (provision has since sunset).
  • Waived 50% licensed staff requirement by counting transitional licenses as licensed.

However, the waiver requests that may come from onlinecharter schools—because they draw students from around the state—are likely to have a more significant effect on education delivery in Oregon that may ripple through the system for years.

It is likely that the board will soon be asked to waive the requirement that 50% of students reside in the sponsoring district. Representatives from such national online curriculum providers as K12, Inc. and Insight Schools, Inc. would like to do business in Oregon andnot be limited by district boundaries.

These organizations approached the 2007 Legislature with the request that the 50% requirement be removed. A House subcommittee was formed and the results were amendments to HB2037 (Appendix C) that set forth a number of requirements to be in place before the state board could consider waiving the requirement. That bill died without being enacted. Had it been enacted, the bill would have directed the State Board to consider waiving the requirement under certainconditions. These includerequiring that a plan for academic progress be in place, that students be provided all materials and internet access at no cost, that there be bi-weekly teacher contact, and in-person teacher contact at least six times during a school year, and that there be optional educational events where all students might attend.