I'm sorry but this makes no sense at all. Who decided that the public schools, supported by the taxpayers, should pay this bill? If you don't like the schools either move to a district where you do like the schools or pay for it out of your own pocket. I am really growing weary of the new "math" in this country - the math that says the minorities get to decide for the majority. And yes, the IB program is part of this inequality.

Lou, because of the way charter funding is set up, USC School District has to dish out tuition and lose state funding when a child chooses to go to a charter school or cyber charter school. O'Toole said he's for giving students options about their education, but he says the funding system is broken. Charter schooling is something not related to IB at all.

A couple observations....

First understand why these options are needed. What do the charter schools offer that the public schools do not? It is not just that parents don’t want their kids in the public schools. I know parents with kids that have emotional problems that prevent them from learning in a typical school environment. Cyber schools are viable option for them.

Second, the complaint is about a per student cost that is less than $10,000. That is 2-4 thousand less than the USCSD's advertised cost per student. Why can't the USCSD provide education at that per student cost? If a charter/cyber school can provide and equal or better education for a lower per student cost, the USCSD has to look in the mirror. Think value for the dollar, not just budget impact.

If you don't like the charter school system, you should contact your state representatives, Sen. Matt Smith and Rep. John Maher, to let them know.

Not everyone has the choice to move, particularly when the high tax structure deters others from moving into USC. The school district "loses" funding for a child they are not educating - how is that inequitable? Perhaps Dr. O'Toole and staff should consider the 200% increase in families votiing with their feet. Could it be that the "Best District in the State" is run by mere mortals who could improve their business?

"The charter school tuition rates are established by the Pennsylvania Department of Education each year, and are based on each school district's finances, according to the USC administrators."
Does this mean that each school district pays a different amount per student for the same program?

I can't understand why most parents would want to send their kids to charter schools. EVERY SINGLE ONE was deemed "FAILING," (https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/25-8), and there is no accountability for anything that is going on in these schools. I have had students return to my classroom after essentially taking a year off (their words, not mine), and they are generally behind. With regard to online learning, It takes a highly motivated student and parent to make sure that the children actually log on and then do the work. Online learning can be wonderful for the right student, but I have had students tell me that they had a hard time waking up to go to school, so they ended up enrolling online (at an astronomical cost to the district) thinking it would be easier, and then they ultimately realized they weren't able to accomplish the required work online either, or worse, their parents did the work for them! The teachers are usually accredited, but many have never actually taught in a brick and mortar classroom (other than student teaching) and thus have little experience dealing with real, live students. Obviously, schools can and must do better to serve the needs of the students, but here's some food for thought: Schools are bending over backwards more than ever to serve the individual needs of students and are still being criticized. Nobody cared about "differentiated instruction" when I was in school, yet we tend to praise the schools of those days.

I am sure I am in the minority, but I am happy charter schools are an option. Some children and adults for that matter, do not thrive in a conventional school setting. I did not know that the school sent tuition to the charter schools. I think this is fantastic, parents who do not have the means for private school have the option of sending their child another route maximizing potential. I feel for the USC board because I am sure there is no real way to anticipate how many students will be going another route so budgeting nightmare! Maybe USC should offer a cyber school option and this will keep the money in the district.

Traditional schools present a lot of limitations that simply don't suit a lot of families, particularly with the way technology is changing work patterns for parents. That a more flexible cyber school option is available to them is a great thing, and it makes sense that at least some of the taxes that they pay to a public school they do not attend are transferred to the public school they do attend.

It's understandable that the loss of revenue is frustrating to the USC school board, and the solution lies not in trying to force these students/parents to squeeze into an education model that does not fit their lives. Rather, it is to explore and understand their needs, and then for the USC school district to be on the cutting edge of education (as ever) by taking the bold step of creating an school system with enough in-built flexibility to keep these students (and their tax dollars) at USC -- both now and as work patterns continue to change in the future.

I would be interested in seeing what ages these children are removed from the district to be placed in cyber school. It is my understanding that several families did this with their kids to remove them from Fort Couch. Is that true? If so, maybe we should look at what the issues are at that school.

The IB argument again? My child does not play a single sport, yet I continue to pay for stadium maintenance, equipment, bus transportation/fuel costs for travel to away games, and coach salaries. Team sports also benefit a minority of students. We moved here from another state and magnet school system that had no sports beyond intramurals paid for by the parents whose children participated -- and enrollment was highly competitive. USC is different. IB was among the chief reasons we chose to settle in USC over Mt. Lebanon or the North Hills. I'm not complaining about sports -- just pointing out that we all pay for programs that our children don't use.

Wait a minute, aren't Cyber Schools the main reason Streams switched to all IB? http://upperstclair.patch.com/articles/usc-administrators-recommend-making-streams-all-ib
Did anyone honestly believe these two issues were related?!

Some children attend cyber schools as their only way to escape being bullied. Bullying still happens in the best of school districts.

To summarize a couple points made in the comments….

The USC School Board should examine the reasons parents are choosing charter/cyber schooling over the current educational offering in USC and ask themselves, where is the USCSD program lacking and what, if anything should we do about it?

Pressure should be put on the state government to revamp the charter/cyber school program to build a competitive alternative education market that allows local school districts to negotiate pricing directly with the charter/cyber schools.

Bullying is obviously not the only reason a student would switch to a charter school - it can happen there too. Why then would a student need to/want to leave our award-winning curriculum? Not every student meets the USC mold, so it is therefore nice to have alternatives.
I have a child in USC and one that travels 2 hours/day to attend a charter school, which just happens to be a better fit for her.
I have always felt that you pay to play! My USC student is an athlete - I pay athletic fees. Someone has a child in IB - pay to play. It is what it is. I have no problem paying the charter school directly - lower my taxes accordingly, since my other child is not in the school district.
There are obviously bigger issues with our award winning curriculum is families are looking for alternatives.

PK3, what do you mean when you say IB is going to take over the district? You're afraid the traditional classroom program is no longer going to be offered?

In this thread, "PK3" refers to State Representative John Maher as "a joke". I would not use that terminology, but I would note that he only comes out of the woodwork at election time to request petition signatures and money. One would not know that he exists at other times. He does not keep in contact with constituents by any means nor ever explain his positions in editorial commentary. This is in stark contrast to activist, involved leaders like Philadelphia State Senator Daylin Leach. (I do not adhere to the views of Senator Leach on fiscal matters nor in his desire to maintain a highly-compensated, bloated General Assembly; I am with him on most social issues (the push for legalization of marijuana, treating gay men and women like human beings with the respect and rights they deserve, and enacting reasonable restrictions on the right of individuals to acquire an arsenal of weapons)). My experience with Representative Maher over the eleven years in which I have been his constituent is that he is not accustomed to criticism and does not accept it.

Glenn Robinson's suggestion that new Board members be voted in is a good one for the many that are dissatisfied with how things are going in the District. The problem, according to a member of the Republican Committee of Upper Saint Clair, is that good people do not run, thus we get what we have gotten for years, the Petersen/Bolas high-tax, high-expenditure model, which maintains a stranglehold over the Board and the community. The days of fiscal responsibility under the leadership of Dr. Mark Trombetta, Dr. Bill Sulkowski, Dr. Daniel Iracki, Attorney Carol Coliane, and others, is over, and one cannot expect any of them to take up the mantle of Board leadership again after all of the years that they selflessly devoted to the community. The responsibility of being a Board member is enormous and requires a great commitment of time. It is not suited to most 40-hour-per-week (or more) middle class workers who are not able to accept a second career as an unpaid Board member. It is something which fits for those who do not work outside the home, or for one that is an independent businessperson. The common thread for most members of the Board is that they are wealthy, enabling them to volunteer. This certainly causes a lack of identification with the middle class members of the community who must adhere to a budget. Those members of the community are forgotten, and in the minds of some, not welcome here.

Brian,

Mrs. Stern made the comment when the USCSD raised taxes (not the most recent increase) and I am paraphrasing. The tax increase amounts to a pair of sneakers which most people can afford. Amy B asked for my vote 8 years ago on Election Day I responded why should I vote for you and she went on to cite numerous items that makes USC schools successful. She didn't mention parents or the tax payers . Their actions demonstrate the need for power and personal wins. Most desire national,state and local awards for school directors also , IB awards too.

When people start complaining about the cost of cyber schools it sounds as if they are more concerned about money that the success of students. I took my kids out of public school because they were being held back. Now they are able to work at their own pace and we still have full time access to qualified teachers who keep us (parents and students) accountable, teach on line courses and grade assignments. The public school system does not work for every child and tax paying parents should be given an option to find something that works for their child rather than be forced into a monopoly that has very little incentive to change the way they do things. As for advertizing, our principle at PAVCS just explained to us last week that the state requires that there is proof of equal access to the school - so they HAVE to advertize, by law.

What about the cafeteria at the high school being called a "nutrition" center? I don't understand that at all? Probably because of the IB program or the charter schools.