Our Opinion: Virtual schools won't solve real education puzzle

A problem with expanding virtual schools is we have not yet created virtual motivation.

Virtual schools are a topic of legislative discussion as lawmakers craft a student transfer law, designed to provide education alternatives to students from districts that lose accreditation.

Virtual schools are not new to Missouri; they have existed since 2007. They serve, primarily, students with long-term illnesses or autism, victims of bullying and children of transitory or military families.

Expanding virtual schools raises issues of both motivation and accountability.

Education requires a motivation to learn, which can come from a variety of sources. Some students simply love to learn; some are blessed with motivated parents, including home-schoolers; and some share institutional learning at public and private schools.

At a virtual school, who or what can be counted on to motivate a student to learn online?

And, how do we measure what has been learned?

Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed a student transfer law approved last year, mainly because it offered private schools as an alternative to a public education. Regarding this year's discussion of a virtual school provision, he said: "We're not ruling out options. I'd want to see the language of it, because you want to make sure your maintain high quality."

Maintaining high quality education is a challenge for Missouri schools. For example, news stories have documented inadequate school funding, as well as the need for higher education institutions to require remedial courses for incoming freshmen. (See Perspective, "Make college free-market, not "free'," elsewhere on this page).

Ideas vary on how to meet the challenge. A more student-oriented approach is to create more choices; a more institutional approach is to improve public education.

Where does the virtual school component fit? A recent Associated Press story reported: "State funding for Missouri's virtual instruction program, or MoVIP, has decreased significantly since its inception in 2007, when it received about $5.2 million. Last fiscal year, the program received about $378,085, effectively limiting free tuition only to students with medical needs."

Virtual schools may be an option, but they are hardly a solution to either the school transfer issue or the larger public education puzzle.