American Chronicle: Virtual Charter Schools

Virtual Public Schools: Why National Achievement Tests Scores Engender Their Support, Part III

Daniel Downs

April 3, 2007

Virtual charter schools offer the best of all worlds. They provide a public-secular curriculum and the benefits of both private and home-schooling. They allow motivated parents full participation in their children’s education, which in turn builds stronger family relations. Because virtual charter school programs are administered by certified teachers, they are a win-win situation for all public-secular concerns, but can it be proved? Do national or state achievement tests validate these claims?

An argument against the relevance of national and state achievement tests is the perception that they are not genuine indicators of overall student achievement. Advocates of this view believe achievement test scores and achievement levels are more the result of educators teaching to the test than real learning. However, a study conducted by the Manhattan Institute proves otherwise. Lead researcher, Jay Greene, states in the report entitled Testing High Stakes Tests: Can We Believe the Results of Accountability Tests? the following:

“Schools have no incentive to manipulate scores on these nationally respected tests, which are administered around the same time as the high stakes tests.” High stake tests are those conforming to criteria of No Children Left Behind. “If high stakes tests and low stakes tests produce similar results, we can have confidence that the stakes attached to high stakes tests are not distorting test outcomes, and that high stakes test results accurately reflect student achievement.

“The report finds that score levels on high stakes tests closely track score levels on other tests, suggesting that high stakes tests provide reliable information on student performance. When a state’s high stakes test scores go up, we should have confidence that this represents real improvements in student learning. If schools are ‘teaching to the test,’ they are doing so in a way that conveys useful general knowledge as measured by nationally respected low stakes tests.”

The problem with national and state achievement (or ‘high stake’) testing is the lack of complete consistency. Not all types of schools are represented in the Nation’s Report Card. For example, virtual charter schools were not differentiated from other charters schools. Even on state proficiency tests not all local schools are represented in state reports. Ohio is an example. About a third of local non-charter schools either did not take some state proficiency tests or only reported partial results. That makes an empirical evaluation of student achievement nationally or by state difficult. It also renders a solid comparison between schools equally difficult, but not impossible.

In the 2003 Charter Pilot Study, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) found little difference in test scores between charter school students and those in other public schools. White and black charter school students scored at nearly the same level. Hispanics, however, scored slightly higher. Lower test scores of charter students was attributed to inexperienced teachers and teachers with non-standard certification than any other factor. Test scores of public school students did increase in 2005, but the change was not statistically significant. (See chart 1 below for figures on average test scores for subjects and grade levels.)

Chart 1: National Proficiency Scores, 2005
Type of School	4th Reading	4th Math	4th Science	8th Reading	8th Math	8th Science
Charter	216	232	143	255	268	142
Public	217	237	149	260	278	147
Government	226	239	156	271	284	160
Average test scores by grade level, subject and type of school. Source: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005.

Average test scores on national and state proficiency tests can be deceiving. As mentioned above, the difference between charter and non-charter public school was very little. Differences become more apparent when comparing the percentage of students scoring at various proficiency levels. That is why some educators regard proficiency levels as a better indicator of school performance. It is also the best way to evaluate and compare the performance of different types of schools.

The 2005 Nation’s Report Card lists four possible levels of achievement:

1. Below Basic Proficiency,
2. Basic Proficiency,
3. At or Above Proficiency, and
4. Advanced.

What do those terms mean? Basic proficiency represents partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills fundamental for proficient work at the assessed grade level. Therefore, below basic means a lack of the necessary knowledge and skills to succeed academically. Proficiency represents complete mastery of grade level subject knowledge and skill. Advanced denotes superior performance. For comparison purposes, the basic level is the best measure of achievement because it is equivalent to the proficiency standard of most states

According to the NAEP, the nation’s charter schools had fewer students scoring at or above the basic achievement level than either public or government schools. On reading tests, sixty percent of 4th grade charter students achieved basic proficiency compared to 62% of public school students and 75% of students in government schools. The same trend continued across all subjects and grades. (See chart 2 below.)

Chart 2: National Proficiency Levels, 2005
Type of School	4th Reading	4th Math	4th Science	8th Reading	8th Math	8th Science
Charter	60	74	57	65	56	50
Public	62	79	66	71	68	57
Government	75	85	77	84	77	75
Percentage of students at or above proficiency by grade level, subject and type of school. Source: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005.

What does the report card of government school students prove? It proves two things: One, it proves how well government is at spending America’s money, and two it proves how good it is at educating America’s youth. Could the difference between government school achievement and public school be the result of better discipline? If so, then here is another piece of evidence that liberal-secular ideas are harmful to American education.

Until now there has been no discussion about virtual school student achievement. That is because no national test data is available. Virtual schools are still relatively new, and only during the past few years have they begun to spread across the nation. What is available is provided either by individual state department of education or by virtual schools themselves.

In order to make this article as short as possible, the remainder of this article will evaluate and compare the single best national virtual school system using the most reliable and comprehensive achievement testing program. According to the well researched opinion of Jay Greene of the Manhattan Institute, the State of Florida fits the bill.

According to Jeff Kwitowski, Director of Public Relations at K12 Virtual Schools, many virtual schools are not actually full-time schools, and not all full-time virtual schools are alike. K12 is both the largest and in most cases the highest achieving virtual school system in the nation and Kwitowski has the statistics and charts to back that claim up. As you will see, it is certainly the case in Florida.

Florida Virtual Academy (FLVA) did exceed the state average in every subject and every grade on Florida’s 2006 Comprehensive Achievement Tests (FCAT). According to the Florida Department of Education, 83% of FLVA student scored at or above proficiency on reading tests compared to 80% of Connection Academy (FLCA) (K12’s nearest competitor) students and 66% of those in public schools. In math, 68% of FLVA students achieved proficiency, while only 53% of FLCA students and 67% of students attending public schools. There was no 4th grade science test, but there was for 5th grade. Fifty-nine percent of FLVA student scored at or above the proficiency level compared to 53% of FLCA students and 35% of those in public schools. The percentage of 8th grade FLVA students at or above proficiency on the reading was 69% compared to 52% of students attending FLCA and 46% of public school students. On math, 82% of FLVA student achieved proficiency or above while 53% of FLCA and 60% of public schools students. (See chart 3 for a comparison of all grade level tested.)

Chart 3: Florida FCAT Results, 2006
Type of School	4th Reading	4th Math	5th Science	8th Reading	8th Math	8th Science
FLVA	83	68	59	69	82	39
FLCA	80	53	53	52	53	28
Public	66	67	35	46	60	32
Source: Florida Department of Education, FCAT 2006. Percentage of students at or above proficiency by grade level, subject and type of school.

The proof is in the numbers. Students attending virtual schools do have greater success in mastering the important subjects and skills of reading, math and even science than any other public schools.

In Florida, demographics reflect many private and home schools: 74% white and 26% minority. Are we to conclude that only upper middle class families are able to take advantage of the virtual charter school opportunity? Not necessarily. Virtual schools are public schools. Unlike with home schooling and private schools, parents are not required to pay additional fees for their children’s schooling. Consequently, more American families with one stay at home parent can enroll in a virtual charter school. These types of schools are also ideal for parents whose career requires extensively travel or for youth whose exceptional talents create opportunities to participate in a career bound activity like the Olympics. Families living on farms or in rural areas might also benefit from a quality virtual school program.

As Kwitowski said, “some virtual schools focus on very at-risk kids” or “take kids who are so far behind; it [is] difficult for them to ‘prove’ academic success from only yearly test scores.” Even though their test scores may be slightly lower than other public schools, most, like charter schools, are doing an excellent job. In California, Colorado, and Florida, charter schools consistently out-perform other public schools. Poor performance levels charter schools in state like Ohio, Michigan, and Texas are the results of the politically mandate to serve at-risk and urban minorities. The fact their students score a little below other public schools demonstrates phenomenal achievement overall. Therefore, we can expect the same phenomenal accomplishment from virtual charter schools students when under proper supervision.

To give all Americans the best possible education, virtual charter schools, whether they are government, public, or managed by companies like K12, must be supported. Therefore, I want to encourage you to contact your local, state and federal representatives. Ask them to continue funding and support for our military virtual schools, which has yet to be decided by Congress, and also our local and state virtual schools.