Why cyber charters advertise
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Monday, May 13, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
In her letter “Cyber school waste” (May 5 and TribLIVE.com), Pamela Newhouse asked me interesting questions about cyber charter schools. I would like to respond.
First, most cyber charter schools must market their programs. Unlike traditional school districts that usually serve a captive population within their attendance areas, most such schools' charters mandate that they serve students across the state. The only way to accomplish this is to advertise, so parents understand what they offer. Marketing is an integral part of Achievement House's budget, just as a traditional school budget may include a new stadium with artificial turf. The important point is that each public school must spend taxpayer money wisely.
Second, traditional schools advertise, too! Perhaps Ms. Newhouse does not realize that several Pittsburgh-area school districts are advertising on TV, billboards and/or online, despite local media regularly providing free publicity by covering district sports, activities and events. More schools likely will add marketing to their annual budgets. Is marketing good for one public school and bad for another?
As a taxpayer, school-choice advocate and parent whose children are graduates of cyber and traditional schools, I embrace competition so parents can chose the best school for their children. It is up to each school — cyber charter, charter or traditional — to focus on students and create a budget that enables it to meet their needs. Schools must be able to justify expenditures as they create education programs that enable children to reach their potential and prepare for the workplace or college.
The writer is senior director of communications for Achievement House Cyber Charter School-Pittsburgh Resource Center in Oakmont.
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.
- Medicaid’s future
- Slots & property taxes
- Harmar needs better enforcement
- Putin’s actions I
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Obama & Reaganomics I
- We pay to keep poor warm
- Orwellian redefinitions
- Not reviled abroad
- Saved her life
- Ukraine & history