OPINION & EDITORIAL
Online education vital for Wisconsin
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Mike Hahn:
- Recent polls reveal... absolutely nothing (December 4, 2007)
- 'Right to bear arms' stands up to scrutiny (November 27, 2007)
- Democrats play dangerous game (November 20, 2007)
- The pitfalls of holistic admissions (November 13, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Both sides now: Religion takes center place in Milwaukee voucher debate (January 27, 2006)
- School Choice hurts public schools (November 7, 2001)
- A choice to expand opportunity (November 24, 2003)
- Single-sex schooling comes back in style (September 1, 2005)
- Vouchers don't solve MPS woes, but incentives can (October 31, 2007)
by Mike Hahn
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
In the state of Wisconsin, parents are allowed a great many options on how to educate their children from kindergarten through 12th grade. We have public schools. In Milwaukee — thanks to the voucher program — we have private schools. In many districts, parents can also choose charter schools or virtual schools, or even to home-school their children themselves.
Last week the 2nd District Wisconsin Court of Appeals effectively eliminated one of those choices for parents in the state.
At issue in the case is the Wisconsin Virtual Academy — an online "virtual school" run by the Northern Ozaukee School District. Much in the same way that online courses are done here at the University of Wisconsin, in a virtual school, certified public school teachers provide instruction in regular subjects over the Internet to students who work from their homes. The students still complete their assignments on time and must meet the same standards as if they were in a traditional "brick and mortar" classroom, but the lectures and classroom hours can be completed on a more flexible schedule.
Most parents whose children are enrolled in virtual schools believe it is an excellent tool forchildren who may be behind their peers or for the children who excel beyond their standard age group. The test scores of the students in the WIVA are at or above the state averages and suggest that this new type of school is working well for these students.
So if the virtual school was working so well, why would anyone sue to have it shut down?
According to the court's ruling, and the original complaint filed by the state teachers union — WEAC — at least one of the problems is the amount of parental involvement. WEAC alleged, and the court of appeals agreed, that state law requires primary instruction in a public school must be done by a certified teacher. Fair enough, but in the case of WIVA the students were getting instruction from certified teachers, the assignments were coming from certified teachers and the grades were being given by certified teachers. What then, is the problem?
Well, it seems that because the parents are so involved with the learning process — the classroom is at home after all — the children are in effect receiving their primary instruction from the parents. This raises several questions: What about a parent who is heavily involved in his or her child's education at a traditional school? What about the parent who helps his or her children with homework they are struggling with? At what point does the parent become so much like a teacher that the state has to shut the school down?
Unfortunately, there is no definition of what constitutes parents acting like teachers. The court does not even approach the subject in any serious way, other than stating WIVA is in violation of state law. Because this never happened, the court could not provide any way for the school to comply with the law. Rather than shutting down WIVA, the court should have provided ways for the school to remedy the problems it has so that it can continue serving as many families as possible.
It may very well be that the applicable state laws, such as the definition of primary instruction and where a school is located, need to be clarified. No matter what the final outcome of this case is — I am fairly certain that the state Supreme Court will be taking this case head-on — the state Legislature must make the rules and regulations governing charter schools and virtual schools more clear.
Ultimately, this case is extremely important for the future of public education in Wisconsin. If we continue to allow so many options for parents and their children, how do we define those schools, and how do we ensure that they are educating the children effectively?
Personally, I believe that greater choice and greater parental involvement are good things. But what those choices are and how they are administered must be clearly defined so that we do not end up with 700 students who are without a school.
We can all agree that every kid deserves a great school. When we start the debate over how to resolve the issues of this case, let's keep that in mind.
Mike Hahn (mhahn@badgerherald.com) is senior majoring in history and political science.
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 8:09am):
Mike, online schools would save tax payers TONS O' CASH (no school buildings, less teachers to pay, less administration, no more sports or music programs), but who would provide daycare for little Suzie while mom and dad toil away at their thankless jobs?
Mike, you're assuming that schools are places to learn, but they're just an institution for Uncle Sam to raise your children so that YOU can participate in the capitalist machinery. Uncle Sam needs your dainty wife to get to work too.
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 8:28am):
Parents need to let their kids go. School is obviously not all about learning, it's about socialization.
Get your kids to a real school so they can be real kids. We don't need anymore "virtual" worlds, kids play enough videogames as it is.
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 12:07pm):
Right, 8:28, because kids aren't allowed to go outside anymore and socialize.
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 2:56pm):
I just wish home schooling was around when I was a kid. I can learn at home instead of going to a place where there is a lot of violence, gangs, drugs, and teachers who are not as competent as teachers were when my parents went to school.
This is what it has come down to. Why fight it? If I have kids, they'll learn at home where it's safe.
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 3:31pm):
Did I say that kids aren't allowed outside? No. What do kids do when they go outside? They play. Who do they play with? Other kids. If kids don't go to school and/or live in neighborhoods that safely allows them to be outside running around, who are they going to meet and who are they going to play outside with?
Oh yea and why are kids so fat these days? Why has the child obesity rate more than tripled for children ages 6-11?
Stephen (December 11, 2007 @ 10:15pm):
Flexibility is irrelevant when you factor in that that virtual schools just flatout aren't a good idea.
I don't care what stats you spit out about test scores etc., strictly learning via a computer screen is just a bad idea.
In virtual schools, kids will not meet other kids. While their test scores may be up to par, kids enrolling in virtual 'schools' would come up very short in the social skills department.
Furthermore, any personal interactions or connections with teachers are lost.
Having real, face-to-face conversations about topics does not happen. Kids won't learn how to act in the real world.
So while kids in virtual schools are still held to the same "standards," what some would argue as an even more important aspect of their education disappears. If you're okay with that, then fine; but I certainly am not.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
