This is another way to make big money on the privatization of public schools. Cyber schools get the same foundation grant as a public school. They do not have to provide brick and mortor, heat, water, busses, desks, sports, etc etc. The parents get canned lessons, books, and "access" to a teacher. It sounds like a great money maker for the owner!

Has anyone forgotten about THE most important part of "going to" school?? SOCIALIZATION. It's bad enough kids already spend an inordinate amount of time in front of television and computer screens, that they are losing THE most important skill in life - how to get along with others. I, for one, am terribly disheartened to think our State legislators think this is an appropriate direction to head for our children - the future 'citizens' of our country. I'm aware the legislators must be positively drooling at the thought of not having to fund 'buildings and books' any longer if this becomes reality. Shame on them. The only way this option would be even mildly acceptable is if there was a corresponding requirement for social interaction, similar to home schooling, but REQUIRED. My children are just beginning their school career... I'm afraid of what's to come if this is our State's idea of progress.

Cyber schools allow students to maximize their educational opportunities. The courses offered reach students who are: home-schooled (either temporarily because of long-term illness or as a regular alternative to attending public/private school), looking foradditional remedial or enrichment courses, geographically distanced from a K-12 building, or wishing to have more choice in the quality of the curriculum. These on-line schools provide close support for students who are enrolled and also offer a flexible schedule to meet individual needs. I believe these schools need to exist in addition to the more traditional types.

I can imagine that this might be helpful to kids who live in sparsely populated areas who do not have the diversity of course offerings possible in a more densely populated area. But when my daughter heard about this, her view was that she could just go to cyber school to avoid bullies. I think that's a problem that should be dealt with more directly -- not by hiding. As someone above noted, socialization is one role school plays.

This might also be helpful to people who are home schooling.

That said, I am sorry to question anyone's motives, but given past initiatives, I have to wonder whether the real motivation for the legislation isn't union-busting by another name. If public school teachers weren't known to often vote Democratic, I doubt that our Republican legislature would have pushed this through. There is no evidence in most of their other votes that they are concerned about the children of Michigan getting a quality education.

People all throw socialization out as an important purpose of public schooling. Yet children were socialized by exposure to actual society long before public schools existed. The 'society' in schools is hardly desirable. It is more a prison society than a model for normal healthy free people. You learn to sit down and stand up to an arbitrary clock and shut up and stifle yourself before authority no matter how mind numbing and stupid.

Wow! A school is more like a prison? What school are you referring to here? I don't see that going on at all. I see group problem solving, critical analysis, student-teacher interaction, skillls being passed to students based on core curriculum standards in every area, including art education, music education, life skills, and health. I also see clubs, after school activities, sports, and other options for student participation with the outcome being a well rounded citizen who doesn't make statements like the one above by someone who clearly lacks knowledge about what our schools are offering students.

Really? How much socialization do kids get in school? Sit quietly in their desks, no talking, etc. With *maybe* a half hour of recess each day (if they're lucky) and gym once a week? Interacting almost solely with the adult teachers and kids their own age almost solely?

After the situation I had w/ Rochester School District when the speech therapist told me my then 3 year old son would just have to "get over it" if he didn't like watching other kids eat snacks and treats he couldn't have (rather than working with me to find something that would accommodate all the kids in the speech therapy class).... well they can shove that kind of socialization and isolation.

I think cyber school is awesome and a bridge between outright homeschool and public/private school. Some families need more structure than homeschool necessarily allows (or they struggle with setting up the structure) and cyber school could be an amazing asset to them.

I've researched homeschool intensively the last 3 years and I've yet to meet a child who is "unsocialized". Whether its sports or scouts or volunteering or other interest clubs, I see highly involved kids.

I also don't understand why the homeschool vs. cyber school vs public/private school gets so heated. Not your kid, not your concern, not your beliefs, no biggie.

This is the first I've heard about this, so at this point I haven't formed an opinion on way or another. One thing that comes to mind is the kids that are so bullied at school that they are either so scared to go to school or they can't learn properly because of the bullying. My son personally hates going to school because he's so bored, but on the other hand I don't want to *home school* him. Maybe their could be a happy middle to this - I don't know. I know he would miss his friends at school, but I also think the the schools need to step up and find new innovative way to teach our kids, instead of fact memorazition and test taking.

" - with the outcome being a well rounded citizen who doesn't make statements like the one above"
You just have no clue how Orwellian that is do you? Success is a student who won't speak against the system. You slipped and spoke truth.

I believe in a hybrid approach, cyber school can help the kids move at their own pace and learn the subject, in-class makes them work socially and in groups on projects. A combination of both is the most effective. I have taken seminars to teach college classes 100% cyber and I believe the approach is not ready for prime time.

I have taught college level engineering classes with this hybrid approach and it works, I am totally against 100% cyber schooling. In my corporate training business we have used the hybrid approach with great success also. All of the students must be driven and self starters to really accomplish the work in the classes. Many kids in school do not have that trait yet, so we must be cautious as we implement.

Here is an interesting article on the "Flip" concept which is having great results in Clintondale High School, it uses both cyber in in-class. www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011110230455

Also, here is another unique approach used at Harvard. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBYrKPoVFwg

In both successful cases we are using technology, out of school time and in-person teaching. This should be considered in any program moving in this direction of cyber schooling.

I just wish that Michigan's long-term growth and development of its future citizens were at the top of the list of the legislators. They want to have it both ways. They like to use the well-researched and proven fact that TEACHERS and their relationship that they have with their students is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT DETERMINER of school success in order to say we must evaluate teachers (presumably to punish them if they don't deliver). The message they also deliver is: who really needs the student-teacher interaction if there is cyber school? In my 25 years + of teaching high school, I know and accept that half of my job is the actual teaching, and the other half is motivating the students. This involves both carrot and stick, depending on the child, and I have always taught an elective that is optional: therefore only highly motivated students supposedly take my classes. Even the best intended have to deal with their motivation waning at times. I agree with the gentleman above who says that we should proceed with caution so that we don't lose the students that would have been successful in a more traditional school set-up, but are lured away by the promise of an easier way. I hope parents and students alike will educate themselves about the amount of self-discipline and direction it will require. A possible way to proceed is to require students to be successful for one semester with one class first, and then gradually increase the number of classes they take.

There is likely a small group of students that might benefit from Cyber Schools. Homebound students for health reasons or those in an isolated geographic area may benefit. Those who are a danger to themselves and others should probably stay home with a parent and stay away from others too. Students who are afraid of school, or get bored or don't like school, need to turn that frown upside down and get out in the world anyway. School is a growing experience. Cyber school advocates are about the HUGE profit for Charter investors. Republicans are just helping investors or paving the way for their next job after their term runs out. Republican interest in education is about following the money.

Excuse me Tammy. Your telling me to tell a kid that has been verbally and physically abused on a daily basis to just TURN THAT FROWN UPSIDE DOWN??? I think you need to get into the real world. And the same with the bored kids. I've seen my share of teachers that just want to collect a paycheck. They throw a text book (middle school) at a kid, tell them to read chapters 2-4 and will be tested in the next couple of days. They choose to teach, then TEACH! This is a whole new generation of kids, they can't be held to the old traditional way of teaching.

I don't like to attack someone in a blog, but your comment on what these kids should do really hit me the wrong way.

While Michigan Virtual Charter Academy (MVCA) is relatively new to Michigan being in only it's second year here, thus the state has capped it's student capacity to just 750 students. However, this proven program/method has been used for more than a decade in many states (Business Week magazine ranks it has THE TOP HIGH SCHOOL in the state of Ohio - not top virtual school, THE TOP HIGH SCHOOL.) Over 200,000 students are enrolled in the program nationwide, with additional students from many other countries as well. Recent graduates from this program go on to attend top colleges.

It's more than a homeschool, having TEACHERS and learning aids available. It's better than homeschool, because the state continues to set the standards and goals that are required for graduation. TEACHERS continue to monitor progress on a weekly basis, providing additional assistance when testing shows that a student is falling behind. While a homeschool student is required to meet curriculum goals, a student at a Michigan virtual school is also required to complete all standardized testing required by the state and maintain the same number of class hours as a "brick and mortar" student.

Students from ALL areas excel at this method - special needs, accelerated learners, health concerns, high school drop outs, athletes, or students who fear going to school due to violence or bullying. It is an educational option that can be provided to all learners in all districts, throughout the state of Michigan. In essence, expanding Michigan's access to virtual schools is creating a variety of specialized schools in every district throughout the state, without the cost of having a brick and mortar facility. It also provides a method for students who might otherwise drop out of school access to a school that works around their home life environment - much less inexpensive in the long term than welfare and public assistance.

Our own reason and desire to have our daughter attend a virtual school is due to athletic competitions from non-school sponsored events. Travel and competition time often occurs on school days. While my daughter receives high marks (mostly A's and some B's - as we have mandated for her to continue her sport), we must:

1) lie to the district and say she's sick (because planned absences may or may not be excused by the school at their whim); and
2) due to the number of competition days, she runs the risk of "failing" just because she is not sitting in the building for a certain number of days. Failing, even though she maintains high marks.

She has the potential of being penalized because she is competitive and wishes to persue her sport, which she plans to persue at higher levels to compete on a national and international basis.

When we asked our own daughter why she wanted to attend a virtual school, her response, "I think I'll do better. So much time is wasted in the classroom, this way I can focus on learning." Think about it. Students participating in virtual school are required to attend the same number of hours, however their time is dedicated and focused on their learning, at their pace. It is proven throughout the country that this program allows students of a variety of backgrounds and educational needs to excel.

I encourage you to take some time to review the organization that has set the program and curriculum of the Michigan Virtual Charter Academy that is already set up in Michigan (www.k12.com), and learn facts about this program how it could positively serve many people from all walks of life. Take a look at the top colleges virtual school graduates go on to (including Ivy league). This is a proven program. This bill would expand access to a specialized education to students across the state. It is monitored, the students are required to take the standardized testing like other public school students.

Individual school districts can even set this up as one of the school of choice options - maintaining the students (and the $$) within their district.

Granted, this program is not for every student. I myself have 1 child who would excel, and 1 child who will do better at a brick and mortar school. But, we should have the option.

It's time that Michigan provides access to quality virtual education throughout the state. This is not a substandard program, this is a proven program that will meet the needs of the 21st century students who don't fall into the traditional mold.

Susan: You've made some strong points. I that we should have the option to decide, based on our child's learing capabilities what is the best situation for him/her. I don't know which one my child would benefit from, but this has certainly given me something to think about.

This really hits to the heart of the issue, which is whether we should parents to have a hand in guiding their child's education, or if we should instead simply turn that responsibility over to the state.

For some, the public schools are a good, effective program. But we cannot deny that they are not effective for everyone. The “one size fits all approach” is a huge problem if your child does not fit into that size.

Unfortunately, the current monopoly held by public education is a "take it or leave it" approach.

What cyber schools MAY offer is a solution that will work for some. But cyber schools are not for everyone, for the reasons outlined above. Charters are another option, not only for the educational aspect, but also sometimes for the safety factor, or the “culture”. Maintaining traditional public schools should also be an option, because we really do have good schools that are a great solution for many children.

Consider a hybrid solution, where as a parent you can have a hand in choosing what is best for your child!

Maybe a mix of cyber classes and traditional classroom experience.

In the end, we need to accept that all children learn differently, and no one school or teaching approach is going to be effective for ALL children.

The Senate has taken a worthwhile first step towards helping our children.

I'm a big advocate of "whatever is best for the student" and letting parents decide that. Cyber Schools could work great for many students and be awful for others. What is important is that parents have the choice. Effecting change at the public schools is very difficult and painfully slow. As the saying goes "Change or Die". Change will either happen within the public schools or from without. One way will lead to them thriving, the other to them dying. I hope they change.

BTW, I believe another proposal should be sent to Lansing. Any regulations imposed on charter schools should be imposed on traditional public schools. If poorly performing charter schools should be shuttered, the same should be true about traditional schools. If charter schools can't have entrance tests, traditional schools can't either. (Bye-bye International Academy math entrance exam.) If charter schools have to pay property tax, public schools should as well. This will help sort out which proposed laws are about academics and which are actually about stifling competition and choice.

Having options is almost always a great thing. Government cheese may slice and melt well, but sometimes a bit of variety is needed.

As earlier stated, I belive in the hybrid solution and there are great applications that show real results. Education should prepare the student for the real world which includes knowledge, wisdom and how to socially engage with others in work and personal life.

100% cyber does not address all of these needs and I believe all of them to be important. I also see the value in the parents choosing the path that is correct for their kids. After all, it is their money collected by taxes and they should have a choice. With that choice comes personal responsibility, so they are making decisions they need to ensure has value for their child, it is not for everyone.

This is not an union issue, nor a teachers issue, it is a new way of teaching and a way for parents to choose the best path for their child. So all methods (public, private, charter) should offer this flexibility and options. The first one that offers it with real value will win the students.

Put the power in the parents hands, with that comes responsibility.

As far as Oakland Schools Superintendent Vickie L. Markavitch voice opposition... well, what do you expect? There is always opposition to "choice" from those like to view our children as a revenue source.

Here are comments from one of the Rochester School Board candidates that are quite open about restricting choice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieUqr5FowSE&feature=related

I think it's Clinton Valley schools where they do a hybrid approach. The lectures (done by the teachers) are viewed at home on-line and the next day students go into class prepared to work on their assignment in class with the teacher present answering questions as they arise. The kids can review the lecture as many times as they need to and the teachers are there to answer questions as the kids need assistance.

Education shouldn't be limited by the peer group that happens to be in your child's class(es). Teaching to the lowest denominator restricts kids who are able to learn more quickly. It is also a detriment to students who need the extra help because the teacher has to move on to accommodate the "middle", so the lesson gets taught.

If the current model of education was working well, then there wouldn't be so much demand for more choices. Fighting against the choices that parents want only shows them that public schools are inflexible and unable to adapt to the needs of their 21st century students and their parents.

The K12 system this currently is in use by virtual schools here in Michigan uses the hybrid method. Students can participate live (allowing student interaction), or view at a later time.

Unfortunately Charters and Cyberschools do not have the same transparency of funding that public schools are required to have. Unless you get a FOIA and likely a lawyer, we won't see that the investors are making millions, especially on Cyber schools that absolutely do not require the same dollars as a live public school. The way to change public schools is to attend school board meetings and talk to school boards. Work with the perfectly great resources that we have. Right now millions of dollars are being spent by special interest groups to persuade the populace to believe that teachers aren't doing their jobs, when the poor scores follow poverty every time. Fixing poverty doesn't make anyone rich though. Putting the money in an investor's pocket has already proven to not work. Millions of tax dollars were wasted as the Cyber schools have been run into the ground by investors. Investors invest to make money. Investors can get rich quickly too and get out before the fall, leaving a mess in their wake.

Public schools are the people's schools. Change them at school board meetings, if you must. I urge you not to give them away to investors who are in it for the $$$.

Tammy, as the founder of Rochester SAGE - Supporting Advanced & Gifted Education - http://RochesterSAGE.wordpress.com - I have attended nearly all school board meetings this past year, spoke before them numerous times, talked to most of the board members individually, talked to teachers, principals, learning consultants, and district administrators. The best I've received has been vague promises that the board and administration will increase focus on meeting the needs of high learners. There has been NO change. A member of my group placed her child in a charter school and has raved about how much the school has done to meet the needs of her child with an academically aligned education. This charter school doesn't come near Rochester Community Schools on tests and given the population it serves probably never will, but for her child it was the best option available.

With one decision, this parent is getting for her child an education that will likely never be offered to her in Rochester's mostly excellent schools. Why shouldn't she be allowed to get this for her child? Why shouldn't people who want to homeschool their children, gifted or not, have an online curriculum to help with it?

When the principals, school board, and administration take concrete action after listening to parents, perhaps charters will become less necessary.

I have to admit, up until this point I've only been responding to the comments. I did read the article and I am truly shocked at how uninformed the Oakland School Superintendent is on the subject of virtual schools. These systems have a 10-year PROVEN track record throughout the United States, public, private, charter and international academies. THERE IS research that has been done that proves a wide variety of students excel with this method. THERE IS a proven history with this program. THERE ARE already Michigan students enrolled. She needs to stop her Chicken Little impression and become a bit educated on the topic herself. The public not being educated? Fine. But someone who is entrusted with the educational needs of students? Really? I would have expected better. She needs to wake up and realize she's in the 21st century.

Mike,

You're missing the socialist point. A threat to the good of the majority must be challenged and squashed. Who cares about the benefit to the minority? Sounds like the school system is great at creating A Brave New World of Alphas and Epsilons. We got to keep those Epsilons down for the betterment of Alphas and Betas, after all. Make sure the Epsilons know their place, and we should start the caste system early at age five (or earlier if mandated preschool gains sway), just to make sure they don't question their place in the world.

A blogger talks about cyber school after working for the cyber school for 5 years:

http://blog.k12.com/2011/12/06/getting-schooled-about-online-schooling?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=socialmedia

Why is it that a private company doing education for the money is bad - but a money grubbing public system with their hand constantly out is good?
Have you ever driven past the public school palace over by the Oakland county campus? No private education company would ever build themselves such a shrine to avarice.

I really don't have a firm opinion on this subject, but clearly it's gaining traction nationwide. With technology advances and long standing, successful online college courses/degrees, it seemed inevitable that this would turn up in high schools.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/education/stanfords-online-high-school-raises-the-bar.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=stanford%20high%20school&st=cse

http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/04/03/ohios-for-profit-charter-schools-make-great-businesses-crappy-educators/

I dont care what other pepole choose for their childs school. I'm just glad that as a 10 yr old I can help my parents make the best decision of the school i would want to go to.