Latest on Virtual Schools

Keeping Pace with K-12 Online Learning 2008 offers an introduction to online learning.

Full-time or supplemental?

One common way of disaggregating online programs is to distinguish between supplementary and full-time programs.

Programs are (generally) supplemental or full-time. Though the distinction is not always sharp, here are some of the qualities that generally characterize the two types of programs.

Supplemental programs:

• A student takes one or two courses online but are otherwise enrolled in a traditional school.
• No Child Left Behind and other assessment requirements are levied on the traditional school program.
• Are generally funded by a dedicated appropriation from the legislature.
• Their growth is measured by the number of course registrations. One-third are increasing registration by a rate of more than 50 percent a year.
• They’re generally at the high-school level.
• Most are run by a state education agency, not necessarily the department of education.
• Supplemental programs are more common than full-time ones: While 17 states offer “significant” full-time programs, 23 offer “significant” supplemental programs.
• Generally, “state-led online programs” are created by the state, are open to students anywhere in the state, and offer supplemental opportunities to students. The Illinois Virtual High School, the Kentucky Virtual High School, and the Michigan Virtual High School are examples.

Full-time programs:

• A student is enrolled exclusively in an online program.
• No Child Left Behind and other assessment requirements are levied on the full-time program.
• In most states are funded by a per-pupil formula for full-time enrollment equivalent (FTE).
• Their growth is measured by FTE enrollment, not course registration.
• Their growth comes not so much from more students enrolling in existing programs, but more programs being developed. On the other hand, the second-largest full-time program grew 25 percent in the year surveyed.
• Are generally not run by a state-level agency. The exception is the Florida Virtual School, which has over 700 full-tine students, but many more students taking supplemental classes.
• May be run by either a charter school or a local school district.
• Often supported by an organization such as Connections Academy, K12 Inc., Insight Schools, or iQ Academies, which provides content, teacher training and management.

Who takes online classes?

A variety of students, though it appears that honors students outnumber students who are “credit recovery,” or making up failed or missed classes.

Some numbers about growth of online learning

• Most small programs are run by districts (LEAs, technically); most big programs are run by a state agency.
• The Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School has 7,798 students. It is the largest full-time program. The second-largest program is the Ohio Virtual Academy, at 5,225 students. But most full-time programs have fewer than 1,000 students.
• Nearly one-third of all supplemental programs have seen course registration increase by 50 percent or more.
• Programs that felt constrained in their growth blamed funding more than any other cause. These were generally supplemental rather than full-time programs. The policy environment was the second-leading concern.

Policy Issues

The report mentions some policy issues that face online learning, including:

How should students and programs be assessed? One way is to take a snapshot test of online programs, but many people think that a “growth model” is the best way of assessing the student and the program.

Should teachers be required to take additional training? Do teachers learn how to teach in a virtual school setting? Some states are deciding that the answer is yes, and creating new requirements.

Can students take an online program anywhere, only only in their own district? Some states still place restrictions on students seeking online coursework. Should a student’s district of residence have a veto over whether he takes an online class offered by another district? Incredibly, in some states that is the rule. But if a student does “leave” the district for a program offered elsewhere, how much money goes with him? The state base amount? Local money?

How quickly can home-school and private school students be eligible for these programs? Some states say that only students who attended a public school in the previous year may attend a public virtual school. While we recognize the concern over funding, this requirement fails to recognize that the focus of public education should be about educating students. Making a student first spend a year in a public school would be, for many students, making them “mark time” until they can do what they really want–learn in a way that works for them.

What should be the basis of funding? : Based on geography? Should funding for online schooling be based on geography, or should the same amount be allocated to each student’s online learning regardless of where he lives?

What about elementary students? While most students who take part in online learning are high school students, some are elementary school. The appropriateness of online learning for lower-division students presents a host of questions that we’re going to omit for now.

Will online learning truly disrupt class? Business professor Clayton Christensen suggests in his book “Disrupting Class” that online learning will revolutionize education. The authors of Keeping Pace, by contrast, warn that any transformation is not automatic. They point out that the people who benefit from online learning (students) are not the people who fund schooling (that would be legislators) or purchase educational services (for now, that’s school districts). In other words, there are a lot of institutional obstacles to online learning being a significant force for change.

Where does Kansas fit in?

How does Kansas compare with other states?

• There are 35 programs in the state, run either by a school district or an educational service center.
• It does not have a state-led supplemental program; 34 states do.
• It does offer full-time programs; 21 states do.
• It is one of 17 states to offer both supplemental and full-time programs.
• Two states (Kansas is not one of them) currently or will require that a student take at least one online class to graduate.
• Florida is the only state to require that all districts create or provide an online learning program.
• In Kansas, Colorado, Idaho and Wisconsin, program audits led to suggestions that a moratorium be placed on online learning. Instead, the legislatures in each state placed additional regulations on the programs, but not a moratorium.
• By contrast, two states (Connecticut and Delaware) scaled back their plans, citing budget concerns.
• Unlike Wisconsin, it does not place a cap on the number of students who can take an online class or participate in an online program offered by another district. Unlike the Texas Legislature, the Kansas Legislature has not opposed students crossing district lines.
• Kansas gives an equal funding to students regardless of geography. (This is a good thing.)

Recommendations of the report

• Make sure that families are free to choose online learning.
• Schools of education should teach future teachers how to teach online courses.
• States should recognize teaching credentials of other states. This will help teachers cross state lines.
• Create a national standard for content. [Not sure we can buy into that.]
• Revise financial standard to make sure that the qualities of the online environment are taken into account, rather than depend on “seat time” and other old-school measures.
• Establish basic tools for measuring program quality. For example, do students complete courses?

Here are some other takeaways from the report, though not formal conclusions:

Per-pupil funding models are more stable than legislative appropriations.

Kansas Resources

Finally, KSDE has a portal to information on virtual schools.

Home Schoolers are a Diverse Lot

While doing some research for another subject, we came across this interesting point about home schooling. It provides further evidence for journalistic impressions.
In the journal “Education and Urban Society,” Ed Collom of the University of Maine studies the motives of parents who homeschool.

Parents are motivated by four different concerns, he says, including academics and pedagogy and religion. He further says that religion is declining, relatively speaking, as a motivation.

He concludes that “homeschoolers are a heterogeneous population with varying and overlapping motivations.”

More evidence that families need school choice. One type of school doesn’t work for everyone.

(See this abstract from Sage Publications)

An Interview with the Director of “Flunked”

Bob Weeks, editor of Wichita Liberty, has an interview with the director of “Flunked,” which was recently shown in Wichita. It’s a good review of the qualities that make charter schools work.

Among the points:

• Charter schools do not “skim the cream;” instead, they accept students by lottery.
• High expectations are key.
• “We need to empower parents. And the one way you can really empower parents is to give them some choices. Charter schools do that. Charter schools are not the silver bullet. Let me say that right up front. There are some charter schools that don’t work. But here’s the important thing and the really good news: When charter schools fail, they go away! It’s great! When the regular traditional school fails, it just stays there.”

Innovation in Charter School Management

The U.S. Department of Education offers up a story about an innovative company that manages charter schools (PDF). Public charter schools, by virtue of being different from traditional public schools, are more likely to pursue new ways of doing things.

Charter School Facilities Grants

The U.S. Department of Education gives states money that they can in turn distribute to charter schools or their capital needs. Only a few of the schools get this money, but it can go to good use. The Education Innovator, a publication of the department, gave a profile of some schools in Minnesota that used such funds. You can read the story on the Department of Education web site (PDF).

Pay for Better Performance?

Should teachers get paid based on their students’ performance? When you consider how important a good teacher is to a student’s academic success, there’s something to be said for it. Of course there are various methodological problems involved, particularly in estimating just how much a student has gained over the course of a year.

That doesn’t mean the effort isn’t worth trying. The Teacher Incentive Fund of the U.S. Department of Education is one means of encouraging such efforts. The Education Innovator, a newsletter (PDF) of the department, discusses how some schools are using variations on the pay-for-performance model.

A Charter School Story

While not every charter school is superior to every traditional school, a charter school is more free, both legally and in its internal culture, to find innovative ways to excel. The U.S. Department of Education tells the story [PDF]  of one charter school in Georgia. Originally a traditional public school, the International Studies Elementary Charter School became an award-winning charter school in the No Child Left Behind Blue Ribbon Schools program.

A New Charter School for KCK

The Maurice R. Holman Academy of Excellence opened its doors recently. It’s the first charter school in Kansas City, Kansas.

Correct that. It’s the first charter school OF the KCK district.

Odd, yes. In most states, charter schools are independent public schools that have been authorized by the state board of education, a four-year college or a state board of education for charter schools. In other words, they stand as separate organizations, serving students with the same legal independence that traditional school districts have.

But in Kansas, charter schools aren’t independent. They’re legal and financial creatures of the school district that agrees to permit them to exist. In other words, they’re a gussied-up version of an alternative school.

Not exactly the model of what makes some charter schools work so well elsewhere.

As for the new school,

“According to a press release from the district, the mission of the school is “to provide self-paced, performance-based learning with an emphasis on core knowledge, civic responsibility and entrepreneurship.”

Source: Charter school up and running, Kansas City Kansan.

Flunked

The Wichita Eagle takes note of Flunked the Movie, recently shown in Wichita. The Flint Hills Center for Public Policy was one of the sponsors. Contrary to what you might think from the title, the movie isn’t entirely about schools that fail and why they fail. It also shows some schools–unconventional schools–that are working and succeeding.

It has this interesting piece of information:

“But school board president Lynn Rogers said if people vote against the bond issue hoping to expand school choice, “it’d probably take a constitutional amendment” to accomplish it.

Kansas law has rules limiting the formation of charter schools and doesn’t provide money for school vouchers or tax credits.”

Kansas law on charter schools is very restrictive, as we have pointed out. Unlike charter schools in some other states, Kansas charter schools have no financial or legal independence from school districts. That dependence–something that not every school district would want–works counter to the independence that is inherent in the concept of charter schools. Kansans should develop a strong charter school sector, and one step towards that end is changing the law so that entities other than school districts–perhaps universities, perhaps an independent state board of education for charter schools–are authorized to grant and oversee charter schools. That step would require a change in law–but not a constitutional amendment.

As for whether a voucher or tax credit arrangement would require a change in the constitution, opinions differ. See, for example, this testimony (PDF) given before the Kansas Legislature.

Flunked the Movie Coming to Wichita

TWO THUMBS UP FOR “FLUNKED”
A must see for those who care about education

(WICHITA, Kansas) – You won’t see violence or suspense in the movie Flunked, but it is truly a scary show, as it foretells serious trouble ahead for American students.

The average American student is no longer able to compete academically. In Kansas, nearly six out of ten eighth grade students have substandard math skills, nearly half are not good readers, and four students out of ten fail to graduate from high school, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

These fundamental skills are critical in today’s workplace and economy, and recent studies indicate American students are falling far behind students in other countries.

As dire as it seems, this story has a hero, in fact many heroes. These heroes are teachers and principals who are achieving great success with their creative approaches to education. The movie Flunked profiles these heroes, and highlights the common threads of successful education: strong leadership, high standards, excellent teachers, and solid curricula.

Flunked has been widely hailed as a groundbreaking film, racking up awards such as Best Educational Documentary at the Bayou City Inspirational Film Festival, Honorable Mention in the Accolade Competition, and has been accepted into the San Fernando Valley International Film Festival.

The movie will premiere in Wichita on Wednesday, October 8 at 6 p.m. at the Orpheum Theatre, 200 North Broadway. Producer Steve Maggi will be on hand for questions. The one-time-only showing is sponsored by the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy, Americans for Prosperity-Kansas, and Citizens for Better Education. These groups hope the movie will provide inspiration, ideas, and dialogue about improving the education of our children.

This event is open to the public at no cost, although school supply donations are encouraged.

The doors will open at 5 p.m. for a reception and refreshments. The show will run from 6:00 to 6:45 p.m., followed by a question and answer session. Make reservations by calling the Flint Hills Center at 634-0218, or at www.flinthills.org.

Flint Hills Center for Public Policy • 250 N. Water, Suite 216 • Wichita, KS 67202-1215 • (316) 634-0218

As a non-profit, nonpartisan think tank, the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy is an independent voice for sound public policy solutions that will enhance the well-being of all Kansans. Visit www.flinthills.org for more information.