paper presentation 2013

AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CYBER CHARTER SCHOOL SCIENCE PROGRAMS FOR HIGH

SCHOOL STUDENTS IN PENNSYLVANIA

DENNIS C. WILSON

Introduction

• Pennsylvania is a pioneer in cyber charter schools

• Oldest school opened in 1998

• Second only to Ohio in number of students enrolled (~35,000).

Background on Cyber Charter Schools

• Act 22 of 1997 – PA’s Charter School Law

• Act 88 of 2002 – Put Cyber Charter Schools under PA DOE.

• 16 Cyber Charters have been issued

• 14 still in operation.

Literature Review

• Very few studies have been done the effectiveness of online learning.

• First adopters were large research universities.

• Virginia Tech Cyberschool – 1994.

No Child Left Behind

• Triggered an explosion of charter schools.

• 2009 – More than 5,000 charter schools nationwide.

• Little evidence that they perform better than traditional schools.

U. S. Department of Education Meta-Study: 2010

• Searched literature between 1998-2006.

• Found 99 studies comparing face-to-face learning with online or blended learning.

• Only 9 involved K-12 students.

• Rest were secondary education.

Of the Nine K-12 Studies

• Some studies showed a positive result for online learning.

• Others found no difference.

• Examined: Interactivity, individualization, reflection, online simulation.

• Little conclusive evidence.

Matthew Vick - 2012

• University of Wisconsin-Whitewater.

• Surveyed science curricula at a cyber charter school.

• Compared them to Bloom’s Taxonomy.

• Looked at whether they used virtual or at home lab projects.

Limitations to Vick’s Study

• Looked at only one school.

• Did not assess outcomes.

National Education Policy Center

• 2013 Report

• Sharply criticized cyber charter schools

• Found students at PA cyber charter schools performed significantly lower in reading and math than brick-and-mortar charter schools.


• Typical charter school student: African-American and economically disadvantaged.

• Typical cyber charter school student: White and not economically disadvantaged.


• Underrepresented at cyber charter schools:– Minorities– Economically disadvantaged– Disabled/special needs– English language learners

Method

• PSSA 11th Grade Science Proficiency Examination

• Academic years from 08-09 through 11-12

• Compared to statewide results

12 Cyber Charter Schools in operation

• Two excluded – Had less than 20 students take the exam

• One only operating for 1 year prior.

• Leaving 10 for comparison.

Overall 2011-2012 Academic Year

Categories Not Examined• Insufficient Numbers at Cyber Charter Schools:

⁻ Asian Students

⁻ Multi-ethnic Students

⁻ Native American Students

⁻ English Language Learners (ELL)

All Students

11th Grade PSSA Science Proficiency Exam: Number of schools with a percentage above or below statewide result

African-American Students• In any given year, only 3-5 schools had 10 or

more African-American students taking the exam.

• 2008: African-Americans were 5% of 11th grade cyber charter school students.

• 2012: Rose to 11%

• First time matched statewide percentage.

African-American Students


Hispanic Students• 2008-2010 less than 20 Hispanic students took

the 11th grade exam.

• All were attending PA Cyber.

• 2011: Jumped 42 students at 3 three schools.

• 2012: 108 at 4 schools.

Hispanic Students


Caucasian Students

• Largest group

• Overwhelming majority

• Did Poorly overall.

Caucasian Students


Female Students


Male Students


Economically Disadvantaged Students


Individualized Education Program Students


Cyber Charter School Profiles• Ten Schools

• Five Years of Data

• Looking for improvement or Decline

• Proficient = Advanced + Proficient

• Also looked at graduation rates and AYP

21st Century Cyber Charter School

• Five Year Average Proficient or Advanced Percentage: 48.1%

• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 66%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Warning• Years of Operation: 12

21st Century Cyber Charter School

Commonwealth Connections


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6% • Graduation Rate: 83%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Second Year Correction Action II• Years of Operation: 10

Commonwealth Connections

PA Cyber


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 61%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Warning• Years of Operation: 11

PA Cyber

Agora CS


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 49%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Third Year Correction Action II• Years of Operation: 8

Agora CS

Achievement House


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 33%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Second Year Correction Action II• Years of Operation: 9

Achievement House

STREAM Academy/PA Learners Online


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 80%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Fifth Year Correction Action II• Years of Operation: 11 (Defunct)

STREAM Academy/PA Learners Online

PA Leadership CCS



PA Leadership CS

PA Distance Learning


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 51%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Third Year Correction Action II• Years of Operation: 9

PA Distance Learning

SusQ-Cyber Charter


• Statewide Five Year Average: 39.6%• Graduation Rate: 32%• Statewide Graduation Rate: 83%• AYP Status: Fourth Year Correction Action II• Years of Operation: 15

SusQ-Cyber Charter

PA Virtual CS



Graduation Rates

School Management Years of Operation Graduation Rate

Five Year 11th Grade Science

Proficiency Average

21st Century Cyber Charter School IU/Districts 12 66% 48.1%

PA Cyber Non-profit/District 11 61% 36.1%

PA Virtual Non-profit/District* 12 66% 34.5%

PA Leadership Cyber Charter School Non-profit 9 88% 34.1%

PA Distance Learning Non-profit 9 51% 32.9%

Commonwealth Connections Private, for-profit 10 83% 27.3%

SusQ-Cyber Charter School IU/School Districts 15 32% 22.8%

Agora CS Private, for-profit 8 49% 20.0%

Achievement House Non-profit 9 33% 18.8%

STREAM Academy (Defunct) IU/Districts 11 80% 15.6%

PA Virtual vs. Agora

• Both use the same curricula (K12, Inc.) • Agora is also managed by K12• PA Virtual is not• PA Virtual’s Five Year Average Proficient or

Advanced Percentage: 34.5%• Agora’s Five Year Average Proficient or

Advanced Percentage: 20.0%

Laboratory Projects at Cyber Charter Schools

• At home projects using kits.

• Virtual lab projects (froguts.com).

• Some use combination of both.

• Commonwealth Connections: Mobile lab unit in converted bus.

Laboratory Projects at Cyber Charter Schools

School

Five Year 11th

Grade Science

Proficiency

Average Biology Chemistry

Physics/Physical

Science

21st Century Cyber Charter School 48.1% Combination Combination Combination

PA Cyber 36.1% Combination Combination Virtual

PA Virtual 34.5% At home At home At home

PA Leadership Cyber Charter School 34.1% Virtual Virtual Virtual

PA Distance Learning 32.9% Virtual Virtual Virtual

Commonwealth Connections 27.3% Combination Combination Combination

SusQ-Cyber Charter School 22.8% Combination Virtual Virtual

Agora CS 20.0% Combination Virtual Combination

Achievement House 18.8% Virtual At home Virtual

STREAM Academy (Defunct)* 15.6% N/A N/A N/A

*No information was available for the kind of lab projects students at the now defunct STREAM Academy performed.

The Bottom Four: STREAM Academy

• The STREAM Academy was closed due to financial difficulties and a lack of sufficient enrollment .

• Little information was available about the curriculum.

The Bottom Four: Achievement House

• Worst performer among schools still in operation.

• Depends on parents to act as learning coach.

• Offers little training beyond orientation.

• Depends on parents offering peer support.

The Bottom Four: Agora

• Run by K12.

• July 2012: CEO indicted for fraud

• $6.5 million in taxpayer’s money

• Only recently started a learning coach program.

The Bottom Four: SusQ-Cyber

• No formalized learning coach program.

• Did not offer a physics course.

The Top Four: 21st Century

• Only one to consistently beat the statewide 11th grad science PSSA percentage.

• Teacher designed curricula.

• Learning coach is a trained teacher.

The Top Four: PA Cyber

• Varied curriculum

• Multiple learning methods (synchronous and asynchronous)

• Offers science seminars.

• Trained learning coaches for students falling behind.

The Top Four: PA Virtual

• Parents are the learning coach

• Strong support through “Diamond Model”

• Partners with science museums

• Uses K12 curriculum

The Top Four: PA Leadership

• Parents are the learning coach

• Provides technical training and support

• Teaching-designed course content

Common Factors in Top Four• A varied curriculum that combines both at

home and virtual lab projects.

• Curricula that are designed by the teacher instead of relying on “canned” curricula.

• Training and support for a learning coach, whether that coach is a teacher or a parent or guardian.

Conclusions• In general, PA’s Cyber Charter Schools are

lagging brick-and-mortar schools in science.

• Minority and ED students underrepresented in this exam.

• Little evidence that cyber schools are an adequate substitute for traditional schools.

• Stronger financial oversight is needed.

Areas for Further Study• Effects of Student Motivation.

• Whether for-profit EMOs are effective.

• Effective training for teachers and learning coaches.

• Virtual labs vs. Hands on labs.

• Comparing PA’s cyber charter schools to those in other states.

Questions?

paper presentation 2013

Education

cyber charter schools

pa cyber charter schools

mortar charter schools

explosion of charter

charter schools nationwide

number of schools

number of students

africanamerican students