Smith: Still waiting for change on Pennsylvania cyber charters

In 2016, the auditor general declared Pennsylvania as having the “worst charter school laws in the United States.” It is my opinion, and the opinion of other public school advocates, that state laws remain so lax that charter schools, particularly cyber charters, have become profit-making operations that pour taxpayer money into marketing efforts while being overpaid for its services. To further the outrage, most of these cyber charters have not been audited since 2016.

The PA Charter Performance Center reports that 61,000 Pennsylvania students attend cyber charters — two times as many as in any other state — followed by Ohio with about half as many. Why are we the cyber charter capital of the nation?

Perhaps students are choosing this option because they believe cybers are academically superior to traditional brick and mortars. However, in the five years when the state issued school performance profile scores, none earned passing grades. Perhaps another misconception is that students who prefer a cyber choice believe traditional schools don’t offer one. In fact, nearly every district in the commonwealth offers an in-house cyber option with solid academic results. How about misconceptions of cost efficiency? Wrong again. Districts offer similar services for as little as one quarter the cost.

One explanation is advertising, something disallowed for traditional public schools. Cyber charter schools are using some of its staggering profits on costly marketing campaigns to boost its rosters. Shown through a recent Right-to-Know request, Commonwealth Charter Academy, a cyber charter school that some Bellefonte area students attend, spent $3.2 million of our tax dollars in a three month period on internet, radio and television advertisements to recruit students. This included ads on Hulu, Pandora, Pinterest, YouTube and social media outlets. CCA paid for museum sponsorships and embroidered Eddie Bauer vests. Every advertising dollar was a tax dollar meant for the education of students.

Many advocates for change have proposed several solutions, including modeling tuition rates after other states. Eleven set tuition less than brick and mortars. Some have a flat tuition rate. Some receive payments directly from the state. Some require students to complete courses before tuition is paid rather than just enroll, as Pennsylvania does. Some operate theirs jointly through local intermediate units. Several states prohibit them. Bottom line is they all do it more responsibly.

To date, 420 of 505 districts have pleaded for change through board resolutions, yet legislators continue to make no changes to the 25-year-old laws, despite serious issues that have developed. Districts across the state are met with inaction, excuses and silence. Only when the public makes noise will there be a change.

I echo Senator Jake Corman, who spoke after the governor’s budget address. He said: “It has always been the responsibility as legislators to use the taxpayers’ dollars wisely. This is our money that we spend that comes from the taxpayers and we have to be accountable, which we will, and we have always tried to lead that charge.”

We are still waiting.

This story was originally published March 24, 2022 at 6:00 AM.