Our parents' voices continue to be heard. Below are two more letters to the editor that take on the critics of our public virtual schools. If you submit a letter to the editor, or otherwise share your views with your legislators, please let us know by sending an email to us at info@idchartercoalition.org.  

Thanks, again, to everyone who's willing to fight for our choice in public education!Click on the headline below to read the letter on the newspaper's web site.

Virtual schools are the best option for some

In failing to recognize the benefits of virtual public charter school options throughout Idaho and the complex, yet closely monitored way they are funded, the Times-News has, again, gotten it wrong.

As parents, the distorted facts in the "Virtual moneymakers" story on the state's virtual public school options is upsetting. Our daughters are enrolled in the Idaho Virtual Academy and, between them, have been for more than five years. We rely on this education option because we're not interested in placing our children in the hands of administrators and teachers whose hands are tied in so many areas, which include class size, discipline problems, unnecessary budget expenditures–and the slow pace of learning progression.

We have found the ability to speed up in certain areas of learning and slow down in others quite rewarding and necessary depending on each child. Our children have the opportunity to take a full science class each–year–from first grade on. In–our ever-evolving–world, the more science and math–a student can take the better.

We also chose Idaho Virtual Academy because it–can and–does spend 85 percent of its budget directly on each child's learning curriculum and teacher.

Traditional public schools contract out for textbooks and learning materials and IDVA should be able to enlist outside resources without criticism. Our daughters are thriving with the K12 curriculum used by IDVA and are–true examples of its commitment to quality and innovative learning.

Both of our girls–have different learning needs, which made us open to this unique form of education. Please don't attack our virtual schools just because they are different. Clearly, there is a need and demand for this type of learning as demonstrated by the thousands of kids enrolled in virtual schools across the state.

JOSH FULLMER
TRACHELLE FULLER

Jerome

June story on virtual schools was misleading

I am unhappy about the June 29 article titled "Virtual moneymakers."

I believe the general thrust of this article was inaccurate and misleading. I am a parent who has had children in the (Idaho Virtual Academy) for more than five years now, which is nearly the entire time it has existed.

Several factors should be considered when assessing the state of Idaho's young virtual academies. The first is that, since they are so new, in order to be cost-effective they must contract for many of the services they use. This is not unusual, even for brick-and-mortar school systems. Also, in order to fulfill the need for which they were created, they must purchase first-class curriculums which do pose a significant cost. Finally, though the raw numbers quoted in the article are impressive, when comparing per-student costs and academic outcomes, IDVA is far more efficient than its much older counterpart.

Much of the scrutiny being given to virtual learning is coming at the behest of those within existing school systems. Today's teachers are talking about "21st century learners," a concept that includes more interactivity, creativity and collaboration within the framework of schooling than ever before. It's all about preparing kids for the future, not protecting the beloved system of the past.

Next time: the whole story, please!

TAMMY LOWTHER

Twin Falls