VOL. 27, No. 1
Virtual charter schools have emerged over the last decade as an increasingly popular alternative to traditional public schooling. Unlike their face-to-face counterparts, virtual charter schools educate students through blended or entirely online curricula. They present a host of new policy issues that should be scrutinized in order to ensure that students enrolled in virtual charter schools are receiving an adequate, if not excellent, education. This article explores the landscape in which virtual charter schools have emerged and describes their operation. Finally, the article discusses some of the challenges, opportunities, and key research recommendations associated with virtual charter schools.
Au cours de la dernière décennie, de plus en plus d’écoles à charte virtuelle ont vu le jour en tant qu’alternative populaire aux écoles publiques traditionnelles. Contrairement à leur équivalent face à face, les écoles à charte virtuelle font l’éducation des étudiants par le biais d’un programme de formation hybride ou entièrement en ligne. Elles font valoir une quantité de nouvelles questions stratégiques qui devraient être examinées soigneusement en vue de s’assurer que les étudiants inscrits dans les écoles à charte virtuelle reçoivent une éducation adéquate ou excellente. Cet article examine l’aménagement dans lequel les écoles à charte virtuelle ont vu le jour et décrit leur mode de fonctionnement. Finalement, l’article discute quelques-uns des défis, opportunités et recommandations clés de recherche associés aux écoles à charte virtuelle.
The last decade has seen steady growth in a new form of education— virtual charter schools. These schools are intended to replace traditional brick and mortarFN1 schools with a program in which students primarily receive instruction in the home through technology-mediated and online delivery. Charter school operators have seized this new form of schooling and have opened what are termed virtual charter schools, or cyber schools, as a way to propel education reform. Unlike their face-to-face counterparts, virtual charter schools educate students through blended or entirely online curricula.
Virtual charter schools were born out of the current movement towards privatization and school choice. Over the last 30 years, there has been a call to reform public school systems such as those in America that are perceived by many as inadequate for educating students for an increasingly global society and that are mired in bureaucratic inefficiencies. At the same time, as society has moved away from the democratic welfare state towards a more conservative, market driven economy (Murphy, 1996), reformers and parents alike have demanded increased choice as to how their children are educated. Finally, since the emergence of computer-mediated instruction there has been a rapid increase in technological innovation and access to high-speed Internet access making mobile learning not only feasible but common.
This article explores the landscape in which virtual charter schools have emerged and describes their operation. Finally, the article discusses some of the challenges, opportunities, and key research recommendations associated with virtual charter schools.
Privatization, School Choice and Alternatives to Public Schools
Over the last several decades, there has been a growing concern regarding the ability and legitimacy of governments to provide social goods to the general public (Minow, 2003; Murphy, 2012). As a result, a move towards privatization, which “encompasses the range of efforts by governments to move public functions into private hands and to use market style competition” to encourage growth, innovation, and efficiency has occurred (Minow, 2003, pps. 1, 230). Critics have offered reasons against privatizing government services arguing that educational markets are not typically populated by informed consumers, access to information is inequitable, and government loses its ability to regulate services (Minow, 2003). The arguments for and against privatization in general are echoed in the debate over school choice. Advocates of school choice argue that shifting from an institutional to a market-based framework, in which schools are held accountable by parents and regulated by government, will better meet the needs of parents and their children and will improve educational outcomes (Chubb & Moe, 1990).
Similarly, there has been growth in the number of students being taught in their homes (homeschooled) as well as an increasing acceptance of this form of schooling (Murphy, 2012). Homeschools are “an alternative form of education in which children are instructed at home rather than at a traditional public or private school … by parents, guardians, or other tutors” (Lips & Feinberg, 2008, p. 2). Since the 1970s, the number of students being homeschooled in the U.S. has grown from around 10,000-20,000 to over two million today with the most rapid growth occurring since the 1990s (Murphy, 2012). Canada has a smaller homeschooling population, but also saw growth over the last several decades to more than 80,000 students (Horsburgh, 2005).
In comparison, charter schools have become the most established and accepted of the available market-based educational reforms, claiming support from 70% of the American public (Bushaw & Lopez, 2011). A charter school is a publicly funded school that operates autonomously outside the control of conventional school districts and holds an agreement, or “charter” that a public body grants. Since the first charter schools opened in the United States in 1991, they have grown to serve over 1.7 million students in 5,400 schools in 40 states and Washington, D.C. (Center for Education Reform, 2011). In Canada, charter schools first opened in 1994, and now serve over 7,500 students in 15 schools in the province of Alberta (Government of Alberta, 2011). Reasons that may explain some of the growth seen by charter schools include increased innovation, choice, competition, and improved educational outcomes (Harris & Witte, 2011).
Virtual charter schools represent the marriage of the charter school and homeschool movements and are embedded in the larger landscape of privatization. These schools demonstrate an even more radical move towards privatization because parents yield more control over their child’s education. Virtual charter schools are programs intended to supplant the entire educational program offered in brick and mortar schools (Glass & Welner, 2011; Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia & Jones, 2010).
Beyond their predominantly online nature, virtual charter schools are distinguished from homeschools and brick and mortar schools in essential ways. Murphy (2012) provided the following framework to describe homeschool education and that can be used to compare homeschooling with other types of schooling. Children are homeschooled when: (1) the funding for the student’s education comes from the family and not the government, (2) the education is provided by the parents and not state-funded (or privately financed) employees, and (3) the regulation of the enterprise is internal to the family, not the responsibility of the government (or another entity such as a religious organization).
The homeschool conditions outlined by Murphy (2012) are almost completely violated in the virtual charter school context. First, funding for the student’s virtual charter school education comes from state or other jurisdictional funding. Next, the service (i.e., teaching) is not provided solely or even mostly by parents, as the curricula is provided by the school. However, while the online curricula provided by the school may dictate what children are to learn, parents still have substantially more influence over how the children will learn than parents whose children attend brick and mortar schools. Finally, virtual charter schools are considered public schools, and while less regulated than brick and mortar public schools or charter schools, they are still subject to government accountability requirements. Despite these discrepancies, virtual charter schools share two characteristics with their homeschool counterparts: the rejection of traditional public or private schooling and the centering of the child’s education within the home (Murphy, 2012).
Marsh, Carr-Chellman and Sockman (2009) reported three reasons why parents choose virtual charter schools. First, virtual charter schools provide individualized instruction for their children. Second, there is no financial risk involved because virtual charter schools provide free instructional materials to students. For parents who previously homeschooled their children, virtual charter schools subsidize the costs that these parents were previously bearing. Third, parents indicated they wanted to be part of an educational reform movement. A qualitative study conducted by Horsburgh (2005) identified reasons why parents who previously homeschooled their children in Canada later opted in to public online school programs. Based on Horsburgh’s study, similar reasons as those described by Marsh et al. (2009) were highlighted for why virtual charter schools might be a preferred educational opportunity for students in some Canadian contexts.
The following sections draw from the literature in both the United States and Canada and describe growth, challenges, opportunities, and other key considerations associated with virtual charter schools.
Growth of Virtual Charter Schools
There has been indisputable growth in the American virtual charter school sector with other countries following behind. However, measuring this growth has been complicated by the ambiguous definitions of virtual charter schools used by different researchers, the media, and government agencies. There are many challenges when reporting enrollments in virtual charter schools including determining daily enrollments, average attendance rates, and benchmark achievements.
Despite these challenges, a basic picture of the growth of virtual charter schools is possible. Clark (2001) reported that by the end of 2000 there were three virtual charter schools in operation and that by the end of 2001 that number had jumped to 14. In the same year, there were 50 charter or public schools with online programs (Barbour & Reeves, 2009), although the nature of these programs is unclear. By 2003, there were 57 virtual charter schools across 13 states serving about 16,000 students, or 2% of the charter school population (Knight, 2005). By 2008 there were approximately 180 virtual charter schools in 25 states (Center for Educational Reform, 2009), and by 2009 there were 372 virtual charter schools: 219 of which were completely home-based with the remainder using a blended model (National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, 2012). The most recent figures indicate that 40 U.S. states have authorized virtual charter schools in some capacity (Glass, 2009) and that across the U.S. nearly 250,000 students are enrolled in these schools full-time. To date there are no virtual charter schools in Canada (Government of Alberta, 2011).
Because virtual charter schools are becoming an increasingly important part of the education landscape it is imperative that more accurate information be collected on the number of schools disaggregated by program and operator type, the nature of the educational experiences provided, and the effects of these organizations on the students who participate in them.
Virtual Charter Schools and the Private Sector
An important facet of virtual charter schools is their relationship with for-profit companies. The private sector has made a heavy imprint on the growth and development of schooling in general and on virtual charter schools more specifically. In 2011, 35% of brick and mortar charter schools, representing 42% of students enrolled in charter schools in the United States, were operated by for-profit companies (Miron, Urschel, Yat Aguilar & Dailey, 2011). In contrast, 75% of American students enrolled in full-time online schools attend schools managed by for-profit companies (Glass & Welner, 2011).
Two companies dominate this sector in the US: K12, Inc. and Connections Academy (Miron et. al, 2011). The growth of virtual charter schools established by for-profit providers reflects the growing popularity of these schools. In 2008, K12 Incorporated (K12, Inc.) operated 24 charter schools and enrolled over 37,500 students (Molnar, Miron, & Urschel, 2009). By 2009 enrollment in K12, Inc. schools had increased to 56,000 students (Watson, Gemin, Ryan & Wicks, 2009), and by 2011 that number had reached 81,000 (Banchero & Simon, 2011). The Pennsylvania Virtual Charter School which partners with K12 Inc. and is purportedly the first virtual charter school in the U.S., enrolled 600 students in 2003 and by 2007 reported an average daily attendance of over 3,800 students (Marsh, et al. 2009). The role of for-profit companies is less significant in Canada, where virtual schools are almost always overseen by each province’s Ministry of Education and where curricula is most frequently developed by individual teachers or district employees (Barbour, 2010).
Changing Roles
Perhaps the greatest difference between brick and mortar and virtual charter schools is the reversal in the role of teacher and parent. In traditional school settings, teachers are expected to provide instruction, assess progress, intervene when there is a deficiency, and monitor performance. Parents are expected to support the work of the teacher by reinforcing expectations and ensuring the completion of homework. In the virtual charter school setting, many of the responsibilities previously held by teachers are now delegated to a parent or to the student through technology-mediated instruction. In most instances, the teacher is no longer responsible for presenting information, but rather for answering questions and providing feedback to students (Hassel & Hassel, 2011). Teachers, like parents in traditional school settings, may become responsible for motivating or advocating for a student (Tucker, 2007).
In virtual school environments teachers and parents may assume more active roles in facilitating learning. The role of the parent may look dramatically different in a virtual charter school depending on the age of the student and the nature of the online curriculum. Not surprising, parents of students enrolled in virtual programs in Alberta reported spending significantly more time working with their children than they had when they had been enrolled in a brick and mortar school (Smith, 2000). Parents of adolescent and young adult students may be expected simply to supervise their learning activities (Barbour & Reeves, 2009; Meyn-Rogeness, 2010) whereas parents of younger children may provide the bulk of the instruction (Hernandez, 2005). According to documentation provided by K12, Inc. (2011), parents of students in grades K-8 are expected to work more closely with them on daily lessons while parents of students in high school are expected to provide more of a supportive role. As the assessment of educational outcomes becomes more prevalent, it is likely that documentation mandates will require that teachers and parents of virtual charter school students demonstrate the ability to support the educational process.
Potential Opportunities Provided by Virtual Charter Schools
It is frequently reported in the literature that virtual charter schools expand educational access to students. This can be physical access in the case of students who are homebound because of an extended illness, who frequently travel or miss school due to athletic training or artistic pursuits, or who for some other reason are unable to regularly attend brick and mortar schools (Tucker, 2007). Rural students who have limited educational choices also stand to benefit from virtual charter school opportunities (Cavanaugh, 2001; Watson, Murin, Vashaw, Gemin & Rapp, 2012). Virtual charter schools may also reduce the geographical barriers that limit the teacher labor force. Combined with legislation that relaxes certification requirements, teachers in virtual charter schools could potentially come from all over the world and reach more than one class at a time (Hassel & Hassel, 2011).
Advocates emphasize the increased opportunity for choice as an important reason for opening virtual charter schools. Virtual charter schools may expand choice beyond what is offered by brick and mortar counterparts by enrolling students from around the globe. Furthermore, stakeholders may adopt virtual charter schools to reduce transportation, maintenance, and food service costs. Finally, districts may be inclined to offer a virtual school option in order to meet mandates such as the “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) initiative based in the United States. According to NCLB, schools that fail to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) over several years are required to offer their students alternative educational choices, one of which could be a virtual program (Barbour & Reeves, 2009; Clark & Berge, 2005).
Enrollment and Operationalization
Huerta and her colleagues (2006) suggested that non-classroom based schools should be held accountable for “enrollment, instructional hours, quality of instruction (whether delivered by parents, computer software, or distance learning), quality of student work, assessments, and level of contact hours between teachers and students” (p. 132). Capturing enrollment, delivery, and quality data, however, is inconsistent and challenging.
In brick and mortar schools student enrollments are typically calculated using one of two methods: by calculating average daily attendance rates or by conducting a head count of students on a particular day. Based on these enrollment numbers, schools receive a particular level of support from the district and, depending on the individual characteristics of the students such as income-status or language proficiency, schools may receive additional funding from the state and federal government.
Because virtual school students are not typically gathered in a single location, states or districts may need to devise different methods of documenting enrollment than those used in brick and mortar schools (Hassel & Hassel, 2011). Considering reports of high student turnover and dropout rates in virtual schools (Layton & Brown, 2011; Glass & Welner, 2011), this measure would ideally span enrollment over the course of time instead of relying on daily calculations. Virtual schools in British Columbia, for example, count student enrollment three times a year to ensure accuracy (iNACOL, 2008).
The number of instructional hours is another component used in calculating the amount of funding received by a particular district. Per pupil expenditure is allocated assuming that students will be enrolled for a school year in the same grade and in the same school. Many states mandate the number of days or hours that constitute a school year with the majority of states setting this number at 180 days or around 1,000 hours (Tomlinson, 2004).
Virtual charter schools have some flexibility in the number of seat hours they offer to students; however it is not clear how relevant seat hours are for students in a virtual environment. Students attending virtual charter schools could potentially complete and master a particular grade’s standards in more or less time than is allotted in a brick and mortar setting.
Monitoring the Quality of Instruction
The quality of instruction should be monitored regardless of whether instruction is delivered virtually, by a parent, or by a teacher (Huerta, d’ Entremont, & González, 2006). Assessing teacher quality has become a part of the movement for education reform and policies and structures to monitor and assess teacher quality have been created and are being implemented in countries around the world.
Currently, certification requirements for teachers in most virtual schools in both the U.S. and Canada are the same as those for teachers in brick and mortar charter settings (Watson et al., 2009; Barbour, 2010). However, as discussed previously, the role of teacher in a virtual charter school is fundamentally different than the role of brick and mortar school-teachers, and thus the requirements and accountability systems for teachers need to be re-conceptualized. In a policy paper, Hassel and Hassel (2011) argued that “the elements of excellent teaching that are most difficult for technology to replace will increasingly differentiate student outcomes” (p. 1). These elements include the ability to motivate and mentor students, build critical thinking skills, help students overcome obstacles, and develop productive academic skills and habits.
As the number of virtual schools expands, some states, including Wisconsin, Kansas and Alabama, are beginning to enact stricter accountability for online-teacher quality (Wisconsin State Statute 118.19(13); Watson et al. 2009). At this point, no Canadian province requires pre-professional training for virtual teachers; as such, training may be haphazard and only offered at the school or district level (Hawkey & Kuehn, 2007; Muirhead, 2013).
As credentialing and qualifications for teaching in online and virtual environments, stricter requirements will likely emerge. Virtual charter school teachers may need to master a new set of skills and teacher certification requirements will need to reflect these changes. In addition to being competent in their content area, teachers also need to be sufficiently computer literate to manage instruction over the web (Jones, 1998). Undoubtedly, teachers will need training in how to deliver instruction that is mediated through the Internet, how to supplement a computer-based curriculum, and how to help students manage their time. In many instances, teachers in virtual settings will have more access to data on how students perform on individual lessons (Hassel & Hassel, 2011) and will need to be trained to analyze and utilize data to individualize instruction.
Access Considerations
While there is a growing body of literature on virtual charter schools, current research suggests that students served by virtual charter schools are systematically different than students in brick and mortar schools. A study of non-classroom based schools found that 38% of students could be considered at-risk, 19% had had discipline problems in their brick and mortar school, and 14% could be considered gifted (Guarino, Zimmer, Krop & Chau, 2005). Similarly, Canadian virtual charter school teachers noted that the number of students with special needs was growing (Hawkey & Kuehn, 2007). A study of the Colorado Virtual Academy found that there was a significant population of special needs students who enrolled (Baker, Bouras, Hartwig & McNair, 2005). In California, 37% of the students in non-classroom based charter schools were members of minorities, compared to 60% in brick and mortar charter schools and 65% in traditional public schools (Guarino, et al., 2005). Across Canada, rural and high school students were most likely to be enrolled in a virtual programs (Canadian Council on Learning, 2009).
An important enrollment consideration that educational sectors must ensure is that there is equitable access to virtual charter schools for students who may be on the wrong side of the “digital divide”. While access to the Internet is quite pervasive throughout the United States and Canada, differences in access still exist between people at different income levels, of different races, and living in urban or rural areas (Canadian Council on Learning, 2009). Low income and minority students are more likely to have access to older technology within their brick and mortar school than their more affluent White peers (Hernandez, 2005). If a similar pattern emerges within virtual charter schools, low income and minority students could be disadvantaged.
One way that individual virtual charter schools have confronted problems related to the digital divide has been to provide students with computers, vouchers to pay for Internet access, and supplies (Tucker, 2007)". In Pennsylvania, for example, all virtual schools must provide students with all instructional materials and technology required to complete the curriculum, as well as a plan that delineates how students and parents will receive technical support (Knight, 2005). Florida and Ohio have similar policies (Watson et al., 2009).
Apart from access to resources, low income and minority students may be disadvantaged if their parents are less educated or cannot be home because of work obligations. In full-time virtual charter schools, especially those enrolling younger children, parents are often expected to take an active role in guiding students through lessons, ensuring that students complete assignments, and maintaining student motivation. Cavalluzzo (2005) suggested that virtual charter schools that are concerned about providing equitable access to all students should establish physical spaces where students could be monitored by adults and access the requisite technologies. This type of support structure has proven useful for online schools serving First-Nations students living in remote areas of Canada (Barbour & Stewart, 2008), for example.
Assessment Challenges
There are several situations that schools and districts must guard against when designing assessment policies for virtual charter schools. First, online assessments might tend to evaluate lower order thinking skills (i.e., identification and comprehension) rather than higher-order skills (i.e., analysis, evaluation, and problem solving). Second, there is a possibility that the student enrolled in a particular course is not the same student that completes an assessment, or similarly, that a student may not complete the assessment independently (Muirhead, 2013). Finally, students may have the opportunity to take online assessments multiple times, therefore positively biasing their outcomes when compared to brick and mortar school students and obfuscating how much they are actually learning (Barbour & Reeves, 2009).
Virtual charter schools, like all charter schools, are held to the same state accountability standards as all public schools (Tucker, 2007). Virtual charter schools should develop systems so that students are monitored while exams are occurring to ensure academic integrity. In their policy report, Glass and Welner (2011) cited evidence of high school students enrolled in an online credit recovery program cheating in order to pass their final exam and it is likely that at least some students in virtual charter schools participate in similar behaviors. Some virtual charter schools have partnered with testing agencies, such as Kaplan Learning Services, or with community colleges to proctor final exams and state assessments (Glass & Welner, 2011; Carnevale, 2001).
Financial Considerations
One of the most contentious points discussed in the literature on virtual charter schools is how much these schools cost and how they should be funded. At first glance, because they do not need to provide facilities or transportation it might seem obvious that virtual charter schools will cost less to operate than brick and mortar schools. However, such cost reductions may be offset by other costs particular to virtual schools, such as “computer and internet provision…technology support, and per pupil licenses for any commercial products” (Hassel & Terrell, 2004, p. 7).
Estimates of the price per pupil enrolled in a virtual school vary widely. One study estimated a per pupil expenditure of $3,000 and estimates provided by K12 reach $5,000 (Hassel & Terrell, 2004). Generally, research has suggested that virtual charter schools do require less funding than traditional public schools (Glass 2009; Watson et al., 2009). Moreover, the cost of developing and maintaining online curricula is extremely variable: $4,500 dollars for a course developed within a district by teachers with no online course development experience to $1,000,000 for some individual courses developed by the Florida Virtual School that include “inquiry-based assignments that account for different learning styles, the use of the web, and other supporting materials” (Young, 2003 as cited in Cavalluzzo, 2005).
The method by which students are funded varies by state. In many American states and most Canadian provinces there is no specific policy for how students in virtual charter schools will be funded: these states fund students in brick and mortar schools and virtual schools equivalently (Barbour & Reeves, 2009; Glass & Welner, 2011; INACOL, 2012; Watson et al., 2009). It is typical for funding to follow students to the school in which they enroll although some states have enacted policies to ensure that some of the funding remains with the sending district (Watson et al., 2009; Tucker, 2007).
In Canada, provincial funding for distance learners has actually increased in some instances when students who were previously home- schooled opted into an online learning program. In British Columbia for example, jurisdictions receive $250 per home-schooled student, but over $5000 per student enrolled in an online learning program (Horsburgh, 2005). This funding strategy provides a strong incentive for provincial jurisdictions to create online learning programs and recruit home-schooled students.
Regardless of whether virtual charter schools cost more or less to operate than brick and mortar public schools, accountability for how public resources are utilized is an important consideration. This is particularly relevant because of the high proportion of virtual charter schools that are managed by for-profit organizations. Private companies are not regulated in the same way as public schools, making operations less transparent and opening up greater opportunities for financial corruption.
Areas for Future Research
To provide insight to all of the relevant stakeholders there is a considerable need for research related to virtual charter schools. Glass & Welner (2011) warn, “those making policy should be clear on this key point: there exists no evidence from research that full-time virtual schooling at the K-12 level is an adequate replacement for traditional face-to-face teaching and learning (p. 5). In light of the emergence of virtual charter schools, the following areas of research are suggested:
Conclusion
Just like in brick and mortar classrooms, virtual charter school curricula should be rigorous, relevant to the learner, and the schools must demonstrate high quality educational outcomes and achievement if they are to be successful. Policy makers should ensure that curricula adequately cover the content that will be assessed if adopting curricula created by a for-profit entity. Moreover, as technology-mediated instruction, blended, and fully online learning environments continue to thrive and, in some instances, displace more traditional face-to-face classrooms, it is imperative that educational administrators and key stakeholders are well-informed regarding virtual charter schools as they make policy decisions. Those individuals associated with virtual charter schools should be at the table as these discussions are occurring.
This article described how the forces of privatization driving charter school reform and home schooling have converged to create virtual charter schools. While virtual charter schools share many of the characteristics of brick and mortar classrooms and home schools, they are unique in a number of ways and should be considered separately by policy makers. It is unlikely that virtual charter schools will become anything but more popular and widely accepted, therefore, it is crucial that researchers and educators continue to question the future impact these schools will have on the lives and learning trajectories of children, adolescents, and young adults.
Daniela Torre is currently a doctoral student in the department of Leadership, Policy, and Organizations at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee. E-mail: daniela.torre@vanderbilt.edu