Charters and cyber-charters should be treated as "cost plus" contractors with the PDE. They should operate under negotiated indirect cost rate agreements that are audited every year or every other year to make sure only allocable and allowable costs are used to burden direct cost estimates. If they meet all their mission objectives, allow them to charge 8% over their burdened direct costs. This is how it works for me as a federal contractor and we're doing just fine. You wouldn't let a contractor pave Hwy. 462 and then send PennDOT a bill with someone else's rates on it; cyber charters' reimbursements should reflect their own cost structure.
I have no quarrel with school choice for parents. But other states are able to provide school alternatives without the same level of waste. And parents making the choice should know that the evidence clearly indicates public schools outperform cybercharter schools in Pennsylvania for the overwhelming majority of students, no matter what measure of quality education you use.
Sure! There is mountains of data and many studies you can look at. Let me just give one example: a comparison of the latest data available from the state's School Performance website (paschoolperformance.org) for Emmaus High School and Commonwealth Charter Academy, which is one of the biggest cyber charters in East Penn and the state. For students taught at Emmaus, 68% are proficient in algebra, while only 5% of students taught at Commonwealth are proficient. Academic growth scores in English, math, and science at Emmaus are 64, 100, and 100 respectively, while the growth scores for Commonwealth are 55, 50, and 74 in these same categories. At Emmaus, 94% of students achieve the state's career standards benchmark in Grade 11 while at Commonwealth only 84% do so. At East Penn, 89% of students take a rigorous set of courses, while at Commonwealth only 16% do.
Charters and cyber-charters should be treated as "cost plus" contractors with the PDE. They should operate under negotiated indirect cost rate agreements that are audited every year or every other year to make sure only allocable and allowable costs are used to burden direct cost estimates. If they meet all their mission objectives, allow them to charge 8% over their burdened direct costs. This is how it works for me as a federal contractor and we're doing just fine. You wouldn't let a contractor pave Hwy. 462 and then send PennDOT a bill with someone else's rates on it; cyber charters' reimbursements should reflect their own cost structure.
I have no quarrel with school choice for parents. But other states are able to provide school alternatives without the same level of waste. And parents making the choice should know that the evidence clearly indicates public schools outperform cybercharter schools in Pennsylvania for the overwhelming majority of students, no matter what measure of quality education you use.
Sure! There is mountains of data and many studies you can look at. Let me just give one example: a comparison of the latest data available from the state's School Performance website (paschoolperformance.org) for Emmaus High School and Commonwealth Charter Academy, which is one of the biggest cyber charters in East Penn and the state. For students taught at Emmaus, 68% are proficient in algebra, while only 5% of students taught at Commonwealth are proficient. Academic growth scores in English, math, and science at Emmaus are 64, 100, and 100 respectively, while the growth scores for Commonwealth are 55, 50, and 74 in these same categories. At Emmaus, 94% of students achieve the state's career standards benchmark in Grade 11 while at Commonwealth only 84% do so. At East Penn, 89% of students take a rigorous set of courses, while at Commonwealth only 16% do.
Thank you for posting this. Performance data in PA are transparent, and cyber-charters are, in the aggregate, underperforming.