Cyber program at Seneca Valley created out of necessity
More than 10 years of battles to keep local students from transferring to cyber charter schools has led Seneca Valley School District to fight back.
Nearly 200 Seneca Valley students have enrolled in cyber charter schools in each of the past five years, which has cost the school district more than $7.3 million in tuition to these schools.
The district's seven-year-old cyber program has prompted some students to return to the district, which offers part-time, full-time or hybrid workloads for students.
“Each year the costs for (Seneca Valley) were increasing and increasing, so we made the decision to start our own cyber program to try to stop the bleeding,” said Matthew McKinley, assistant superintendent of secondary instruction.
“We were able to do that, and now we're gaining students back.”
Cyber charter schools are publicly funded, privately-run online schools.
Districts use tax dollars to pay a per-student fee to charter schools.
For each student that attends a charter school, Seneca Valley pays $8,000.
If that student is in an individualized education program, that cost can jump to between $12,000 and $18,000.
Students who returned to Seneca Valley during the last school year reduced the cost for the school district by about $40,000.
Seneca Valley's cyber program has also attracted other school districts leaders who want to learn how to start cyber programs.
“We're interested in showing them how we did it, partnering with them and showing them how to run their own program,” Superintendent Tracy Vitale said.
The district received about $450,000 for cyber-related services to other districts in the 2011-12 school year, according to its budget.
Those services include enrolling students from other districts into the Seneca Valley cyber program, training teachers from other districts and advising.
As many as 30 school districts could partner with Seneca Valley during the 2013-14 school year, officials said.
However, Seneca Valley officials would not estimate how much revenue they would receive, nor would they say how much money the district received in tuition and fees from partnering districts during the 2012-13 school year.
“When we're charging them money, that's going towards operating the program and bridging the program, so we're not in it for the business of making money, we're in it for helping other schools start their own cyber program,” Vitale said.
Bringing students back isn't the district's only prerogative.
The school board adopted a resolution in April that called for the state legislature to reform Pennsylvania's cyber charter school funding formula.
In the resolution, the board called the funding system flawed. Each district in Pennsylvania pays a different amount of money per student that attends a charter school.
Former state Auditor General Jack Wagner has criticized the system, saying that it is not based on actual educational cost by the schools.
Seneca Valley officials said that excess funding is unnecessary.
The board adopted a similar resolution opposing the payment of public funds to charter schools in April 2012.
That resolution claimed that “Pennsylvania students in charter and cyber charter schools achieve less academically” than those educated by the district.
“Our graduation rate is 97 percent, and in cyber charters it ranges from 49 percent to 83 percent depending on which cyber charter it is,” Vitale said.
Shawn Annarelli is a freelance writer for Trib Total Media.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.