Talk:List of virtual schools

Title (and scope of list)

Why is this titled "List of virtual schools", and yet only publicly funded schools are allowed here? Isn't that a subset of the set virtual schools? There are private virtual schools that require tuition but still fit the overarching qualifications demanded of a virtual school, otherwise known as an online school. If this list is not broadened to include all qualifying virtual, or online, schools, then a new list should be created for "online schools" that includes private schools also.Tmudder (talk) 14:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Because every vaguely educational web site -- including this one -- could qualify as a "privately funded virtual school."

Inasmuch as many publicly funded virtual schools already make use of serious commercial curriculum resources (such as K12.com and Calvert), broadening the definition to "any Internet resource that seems educational" would make this article both overly broad and utterly worthless. -- TheEditrix2 17:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

This was probably not the intention of this list, but I'd also think that if it were to include just private virtual high schools or even a mixture of both public and private, well... the previous editors who battled that comment are right. Besides that, I'd also think that Wikipedia helps a lot of people find information to things they might wonder about, and if a parent or child were looking for a free virtual high school and were to stumble upon a list that was just private virtual high schools or a mixture of both public and private, they might get discouraged and give up. Why? Because they'd have to pay for it, and Wikipedia probably isn't supplying them the information they needed. It might not be a main reason not to list all virtual high schools, but I think it's a pretty good reason and it's what I first thought of to refute that statement. Think about it.

And if you were to create a new list, it would be so long. I don't want to say anything, and I feel extremely bad doing so, but it just might get deleted or not even meet notability. Lady Galaxy 22:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Including private, non-profit schools that teach students, and especially those that are accredited, seems reasonable to me, if there is sufficient information about them. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

That seems reasonable. The criteria "Accredited not-for-profit schools" will prevent listings from self-proclaimed "schools" that are nothing more than dubious amateur websites established solely to generate Google Ad hits.

Or from slick commercial ventures (and spam operations) that have no accreditation and issue unrecognized matchbook-cover 'degrees' with diplomas that melt in the rain. TheEditrix2 09:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)