Dear Representative Stairs: 

Regretfully, due to the overwhelming crowd, I was unable to be more than a passive spectator at your charter cyber hearing on January 19.  Please accept these notes as representative of what my comments would have been.  You and the committee have my deepest respect for tackling such a convoluted and emotional issue. The hearing reminded me of past days when I was involved in closing elementary schools. 

I write this and would have spoken yesterday not as a representative of blendedschools.  Rather my comments would have come as a school superintendent who, I pray, is doing his best to represent all of the children in my district and the state.

There is no doubt that virtual learning is now and will be an integral part of the education landscape. There is no doubt that as our children, the new technology natives, pass through our school systems the demand for virtual opportunity will exponentially increase.  There is no doubt that the funding provided inadvertently by the state to charter cyber schools prompted the development of a virtual education industry in Pennsylvania.  There is no doubt that the dollars being sent to charter cyber schools do not reflect the actual cost of providing a virtual education.  There is no doubt that cyber charter, for profit and not for profit virtual companies are providing credible education services for children across the state and beyond.        

As I pondered yesterday’s debate it became clear that this is not about quality virtual education or access to that service for children.  As time dragged on it became evident that this was a fight by adults over money, lots of money, and the state’s obligation to continue funding what has become a market place issue.  In a sense this is a debate over de-regulation.  With this said I have four recommended solutions to the problem.

The first is to do nothing.  This choice most certainly perpetuates the system of alleged abuse and empire development that was indirectly discussed yesterday.  It also avoids the murky issue of charter school legislation and its funding stream, which looms as a complicating factor.

A second solution may address the charter issue and district need. My recommendation is to create a market system for those districts wishing to do so.  For example in Greencastle-Antrim we could negotiate a fee of $1,000 per course with Western Pa. Cyber or $4,000 for a full time child.  A parent has the option to use the district provider and essentially receive a free virtual education for their child.  Or, the parent can send their child to another provider with Greencastle paying the same $4,000.  If the charge for the alternate provider happens to be $5,000 then the parent agrees to pay the difference.  For this flexibility the district agrees to direct pay the provider and the state, beyond monitoring, is effectively out of the picture. If a district does not have the savvy to negotiate a market contract it pays the fee currently set by law for charter schools.  In the end you have a market system that provides district freedom yet protects the sacred status of the charter law.

A third option is for the state to buy one of the existing virtual schools and provide the service statewide.  There is little doubt that this could be accomplished for far less that the current dollars being invested.  At first people rebel at this idea until discussion turns to equity, adequacy and work force development.  This concept could blend with the current initiative to expand broadband service throughout the state.  From this point it is a short step to a anytime / anyplace virtual education system that provides service from birth to death for interested citizens.  We are and have been working on this achievable concept in Greencastle-Antrim for some time.

A viable fourth solution is to re-create or re-design the formula for cyber funding.  It is my understanding that PARSS has made just such a proposal.  A methodology could be to use certify actuarial numbers determined by state audit to set a reasonable market cost for virtual education.  Subsequently, payments would be accordingly adjusted.

After listening yesterday it is evident that our current method of supporting virtual education has served its purpose and is no longer necessary to insure services for children.  The existing system certainly stimulated growth and change but now it is actually hurting some children, retarding development and assisting a few in deference to the many.  Once again this debate, I believe, has moved past children and their benefit, to arguments between adults over money.           

Please know that I personally appreciate your and the committee’s work on all education issues.  If I can ever be of service to you or the committee please do not hesitate to ask.

Respectfully,

P Duff Rearick

Superintendent

Greencastle-Antrim