The Washington Post is writing about it; the NBC Nightly News broadcast of November 27 featured it. According to some people the latest, best new thing in education is the virtual school. The concept is simple to explain but difficult to envision. In theory students from grades K-12 will take all of their classes at a computer in a location of their choosing. One of the largest of the companies offering these classes is K12 .com located in Herndon, Virginia but operating in states throughout the country. According to K12:
“Every child learns in his or her own way. Yet many classrooms try to make one size fit all. K12 creates a classroom of one: a remarkably effective education option that is individualized to meet each child’s needs.”
It would appear that K12 is to education what the food truck is to the restaurant business—reduced overhead, lower prices and added convenience. There are no classrooms to build or furnish, no cadre of support groups to hire, no grounds to maintain, no athletic teams or clubs to underwrite. The price is reasonable because the taxpayer is footing the bill for most of these ventures. This is bare-bones education that consists of a student, a computer and a teacher working in front of a camera or on videotape.
Lunch versus learning
Eating at a food truck may provide a reasonably priced meal at a nearby location but it does not necessarily surpass dining at a nice restaurant. Anyone who has stood on a sidewalk devouring a delicious $17 lobster roll understands the cost-benefit of this decision. That sandwich, however, is only one of several meals to be eaten in a single day; if one has made an epicurean mistake it can be rectified within hours. Unfortunately the decision to entrust the education of a child to a virtual school is a choice that will affect a lifetime.
According to an article in the Washington Post K12 has plenty of detractors.
“Kindergarten kids learning in front of a monitor — that’s just wrong,” said Maryelen Calderwood, an elected school committee member in Greenfield, Mass., who unsuccessfully tried to stop K12 from contracting with her community to create New England’s first virtual public school last year. “It’s absolutely astounding how people can accept this so easily.”
From a teacher’s perspective the flaws in this concept are obvious. A solitary student sitting in front of a monitor does not have the benefit of the interaction of other classmates. While some argue that the demands of on-line learning require a high-level of commitment and self-discipline, they ignore the fact that for many adolescents these are skills that must be taught over a period of time. The lack of social interactions may rob individuals of one of the most important components of a 21st century job—working as a team. But beyond the problems in the delivery of a well-rounded education there is another equally troubling development surrounding the virtual school.
Turning education into big business
According to Ronald J. Packard executive director and founder of K12 , “We understand the politics of education pretty well.”
Based on the Post article, that comment could be a bit of an understatement.
“K12 has hired lobbyists from Boise to Boston and backed political candidates who support school choice in general and virtual education in particular. From 2004 to 2010, K12 gave about $500,000 in direct contributions to state politicians across the country, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.
“K12’s push into New England illustrates its skill. In 2009, the company began exploring the potential for opening a virtual school in Massachusetts in partnership with the rural Greenfield school district.
“But Massachusetts education officials halted the plan, saying Greenfield had no legal authority to create a statewide school. So Greenfield and K12 turned to legislators, with the company spending about $200,000 on Beacon Hill lobbyists.
“State Rep. Martha “Marty” Walz wrote legislation that allowed Greenfield to open the Massachusetts Virtual Academy in 2010. She acknowledged that the language was imperfect and didn’t address issues of funding or oversight but said she couldn’t wait to craft a comprehensive plan.
“You do what you need to do sometimes to get the ball rolling,” said Walz, who accepted at least $2,600 in campaign contributions from K12, its executives or its lobbyists since 2008, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.
“That scenario is repeating nationwide as K12 and its allies seek to expand virtual education.”
In the state of Virginia, many of the students enrolled in K12 are costing the taxpayers twice what they would if they were in a traditional school. But all efforts to halt this practice by legislators have been thwarted by the state’s Governor who has received $55,000 in political contributions from K12.
It should not be surprising these approaches sound like what big business is doing on a regular basis in politics. K12 is big business. Last year Packard, a former executive at Goldman Sachs with little background in education, earned $2.6 million and the company saw its revenues increase by 38%.
Assessing the results
While it is too early to make definitive evaluations of the success of virtual schools there are some troubling numbers. In Colorado the graduation rate for virtual schools was 12% compared to 72% for the state. In Ohio those numbers were 30% and 78% respectively. While the comparisons are premature they are an obvious concern.
Our children deserve better
Approaching education in a manner similar to health care, tax codes and immigration by employing lobbyists, hefty campaign contributions and a focus on the bottom line is unlikely to produce the best outcomes for our students. While many aspects of the virtual school would be highly beneficial to all students, its tactics and goals are questionable at best. Technology needs to be a major component of our schools, but our students need to be in a classroom and the politicians need to listen to educators not financial consultants.
I am not an advocate of on-line learning as a replacement for the classroom (though I can see it as a supplement in some cases), but I have a question about one of the points in your article. “In the state of Virginia, many of the students enrolled in K12 are costing the taxpayers twice what they would if they were in a traditional school.” How is this possible? What costs are being compared–on-line enrollment fees vs tax money spent on one child’s schooling? And, if that’s right, on-line fees are really so high? OW!!