Virtual Schooling and Our Ability to Handle the Changes it Necessitates

The advent of virtual schooling occurred in the 1990's with the exponential expansion of the internet, yet even today it continues to generate more questions than answers.  Some of the concerns regarding virtual schooling are merely logistical or technological; others are policy-oriented or even legal in nature, and their resolutions could set far-reaching and significant precedents for the field of education.

Schools must have policies in place to address the challenges posed by online schooling.  This is especially true today because of section 388.1621f of the 2013 School Aid Act.  This legislation stipulates that schools must be able to provide up to 2 online education courses per term for each student from grades 5 through 12, if the student or their parents request it.  The school may deny the request if the student has already earned credit for the course, the course does not generate credit, it is not consistent with graduation requirements, the student has not taken the prerequisite class(es), or if the course in question is of poor quality or academic rigor (MDE, 2013).  The student can appeal to the superintendent of the intermediate school district if he is denied.

Image Credit

The spirit of the legislation is to offer students an ability to receive their education "Any Time, Any Place, Any Way, Any Pace," as described by Michigan governor Rick Snyder.  Generally speaking, this is a boon to students because it increases flexibility.  Students today are busy with a variety of extracurricular activities such as sports, theater, clubs, and part-time work.  Offering online schooling opportunities opens their schedules to increase their scheduling flexibility.

This legislation is simple on its surface, but it opens up a number of challenges.

Students can also have access online to courses that are not offered at the school, for lack of a qualified instructor or class time.  Perhaps an advanced student wants to take an upper-level foreign language or mathematics course that is not offered at the school.  To meet this student's desire to be challenged, the school legally must provide an online course from a vendor that will meet credit and graduation requirements and is of high quality.  The school must pay for this course from the district's foundation allowance.  This can represent a financial strain on the school.  If there are more students than open seats in the course, they will have to be randomly chosen by lottery.  I honestly don't know how my school- Dakota High School of the Chippewa Valley School District- is handling this.  It really doesn't come up often in conversation, partly because such a wide diversity of courses are offered at DHS and CVS.  As a result, I don't know whether we are ready for requests for online schooling.  As for how these advanced or accelerated learners would fare in the online course... I cannot say until I see it.  In De la Varre's fascinating 2014 study on the reasons for dropout from online courses, they observed students in an advanced placement English class dropping out as a result of many factors.  Scheduling conflicts, too-great academic rigor, technological obstacles, perceived teacher distance, parent concerns, or a mix of factors contributed to dropout rates.  The dropout rate observed in this study- involving 720 students spread across 29 states- was 39 percent!  That astonishes me.  Now, I happen to know that the AP and honors courses we offer at Dakota are pretty stringent in their entrance qualifications.  The guidance office looks at previous grades, prerequisite classes, essays, and teacher recommendations.  I don't know whether the students in this study were required meet certain entrance criteria, but I think that might be helpful to "weed" out some (but not all) of the students who are at risk of dropping out.  As for at-risk students taking courses for recovery credit or other remediation, Lewis et al. (2014) identify a number of structures and supports that can mitigate this possibility, including positive adult-student relationships, adult support as they begin their first online courses, technology help, mixed methods, dedicated facilitators, and early intervention for struggling students.  This video offers both the sanguine, optimistic perspective that some students have for virtual schooling, and also presents a few of the negative aspects as perceived by an honors student who found it extremely frustrating.

Students who have medical constraints that keep them out of the classroom can also be served through online schooling.  Providing some kind of education for all students is of course constitutionally mandated, but virtual education can meet this need, possibly even better than a teacher liaison that travels between the hospital or home and the school.  Students with physical needs that keep them at home or in the hospital must legally and morally be offered learning opportunities in order to excel in their education, and I don't think you could find any reasonable teachers or administrators that would balk at this.  Dakota High School uses home-bound teachers to address such situations, but I think we should consider getting ahead of the curve and transitioning to virtual schooling for such students.  I have had to work with home-bound students and their travelling teachers for years, and the process is agonizingly inefficient, and the student really loses out on his education.  I think we really need to consider developing online learning opportunities for these students, to increase efficiency and improve the quality of education.  My general experience with medically home-bound students is that they take their work as seriously as they can and are highly motivated to pass the class.  They want to pass in the same time frame as their peers.  I had a student my second year teaching who suffered a concussion and subsequent chronic migraines, and she was hellbent on passing the class within the year, despite her serious handicap.  I think a medically-challenged student taking an online course can be just as successful as any other, especially if there is high teacher engagement, as described by Borup, Graham, & Drysdale (2014).  Practices such as designing learning activities, carefully facilitating, personally instructing, motivating, and monitoring learning were shown to be instrumental in student buy-in and engagement.  These practices would be crucial for helping a struggling sick student to pass the course.

In a more fraught scenario, a student may wish to take an online course because she or her parents do not like the school's instructor.  Again, Section 21f requires that the school must legally provide online courses for this student, but at the further expense of offering funding when the school has already hired the teacher for precisely this purpose.  The school must take funding from the foundation allowance, which for the 2017-18 school year runs at $7,631 per pupil for the huge majority of Michigan schools (Senate Fiscal Agency, 2017).  Other than allocating funds from the foundation allowance, the 2013 School Aid Act seems silent on this issue.  Should the school be required to offer this class, effectively doing double-duty for a choosy student?  It seems that legally, they must.  Again, I don't think Dakota has to deal with this specific scenario because not only do we have high-quality teachers, but there are also several in each subject (freshman science alone has 5 full-time biology teachers).  This means that a parent's request to switch teachers- although not necessarily satisfied- can be met without resorting to online schooling.

A further question is what should be done when a formerly online student transfers to a traditional brick-and-mortar school.  Suppose the teachers and administration determine that his online education up to this point has been poor.  He lacks a number of basic skills in writing, literacy, mathematics, and foundational science concepts.

Further worsening the situation is that schools and teachers are increasingly held professionally accountable for their students' success in state standardized tests, such as the SAT, NWAEP, M-STEP, and others, and student success on these tests are wrapped into some teachers' evaluations.  (This is a whole hornet's nest that I will side-step here.)  What do we as educators do?  The student will have to take the tests, whether we like it or not, and whether the student is competent or not.  Unfortunately, I don't see a way "out" of this for schools or teachers.  The student will probably require immediate remediation to help him catch up with his peers.  At Dakota, we treat such students in a similar way to students coming from high-needs or under-performing schools.  We try to give them as much face-to-face support as we can so they can sharpen the skills they need to be successful.  But this might require more effort and time, and possibly co-taught programs, all of which run on staff, time, and money.  Personally, I think the student would make the transition if he has the right attitude and motivation, and his instructors exhibit the kind of teacher engagement described by Borup, Graham, & Drysdale.

And on that subject, what do we do for teachers who are asked to facilitate these online classes?  In my view the teacher has a right to request at least one hour of release time per day in order to facilitate the class, or be paid for an additional prep.  The 2013 School Aid Act is entirely silent on the question of how teachers are to be compensated for facilitating online course work.  If a teacher is asked to run an online class without some kind of compensation, I think he should approach his union representative to see what can be done, and they may be able to have some pull.  But from the administration's perspective, if they do not legally have to pay the instructor for this service, why should they?  They may already be financially strained by having to render the online course in the first place, and now they are being asked to pay the instructor more?  This really calls to mind the refrain sung by teachers and school administrators everywhere, "If you expect us to do this, we need more money."  Beyond that, it is hard for me to see a solution that will satisfy all stakeholders.  I don't know if Dakota has any plan in place for compensating teachers who are asked to facilitate online courses.

I fully look forward to having the opportunity of trying my hand at facilitating an online course someday.  I am beginning to think that it is important for administrators and teachers to try getting ahead of the curve in order to anticipate some of the challenges posed by the School Aid Act of 2013 and the national rise in virtual learning.  This modality of educating Generation Edge can be successful with the proper support of parents and teachers, and if students who take these courses do so with a growth mindset and proper soft skills described here.

References

Borup, J., Graham, C.R., & Drysdale, J.S.  (2014).  The nature of teacher engagement at an online high school.  British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 793-806.

De la Varre, C., Irvin M.J., Jordan, A.W., Hannum, W.H., & Farmer, T.W.  (2014).  Reasons for student dropout in an online course in a rural K-12 setting.  Distance Education, 35(3), 324-344.

Lewis, S., Whiteside, A.L., & Dikkers, A.G.  (2014).  Autonomy and responsibility: Online learning as a solution for at-risk high school students.  International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 29(2).  Accessed August 16, 2017 from http://ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/883/1543

Michigan Department of Education.  (2013).  FAQ for section 21f of the State School Aid Act.  Accessed August 16, 2017 from http://mymassp.com/files/Section%2021f%20FAQ%208-29-13.pdf

Senate Fiscal Agency.  (2017).  Per-pupil foundation allowance ten-year history for schools.  Accessed August 16, 2017 from http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Departments/DataCharts/DCk12_FoundationHistory.pdf