Th R liti f Vi t lThe Realities of Virtual Charter ...Attributes of Full-Time, Multi-district Online Programs • Organization type - Often organized as a charter school. •• Affiliation

Th R liti f Vi t lThe Realities of Virtual Charter SchoolsCharter Schools

S t Ri h C d ll A iSenator Rich Crandall, ArizonaDr. Allison Powell, iNACOLMary Gifford, Arizona Charter Authorizer Association

www inacol org

y ,

www.inacol.org

International Association for K-12 O li L i (iNACOL)12 Online Learning (iNACOL)

• iNACOL is the premier K-12 nonprofit in online learning• iNACOL is the premier K-12 nonprofit in online learning• 3500+ members in K-12 virtual schools and online learning

representing over 50 countries• Provides leadership, advocacy, research, training, and

networking with experts in K-12 online learning.• “Ensure every student has access to the best education• Ensure every student has access to the best education

available regardless of geography, income or background.” • Conference – Virtual School Symposium (VSS)• Next Generation Learning Challenges – Gates Foundation

www inacol orgwww.inacol.org

Attributes of State Virtual SchoolsMost state virtual schools share the following attributes:• Size - Most have a few thousand to about 16,000 course enrollments (one

student taking one semester-long course) in 2009-10.F nding F nded primaril b legislati e appropriation sometimes• Funding - Funded primarily by legislative appropriation, sometimes supplemented by charging course fees.

• Grade level - Grade levels are primarily high school, although half offer middle school courses and most offer high school courses to middle school studentsstudents.

• Full-time students - Most provide supplemental courses to students who are enrolled in another school full time. Though half offer a full-time option, most serve few or no full-time students.

• Organization type Run by or within the state education agency• Organization type - Run by or within the state education agency.• Accountability for student achievement - Most state virtual schools work

in partnership with local school districts, which grant the credit for the online course. The state virtual school provides the grade for the course. With the exception of courses that have a common exam that is the same for bothexception of courses that have a common exam that is the same for both online and face-to-face courses (e.g., Advanced Placement courses and, in some states, end-of-course exams), in most cases student achievement is not easily tracked beyond measures such as grades and course completions.

Full-Time, Multi-district Online Schools• Online schools that serve students full-time from across multiple

districts, and often an entire state• Make up a second major sector of online learningMake up a second major sector of online learning. • These schools are often, but not always, charter schools. • In full-time online schools, students enroll and earn credit and

diplomas issued by the online school.• The number of states that have full-time online schools is growing,

as is the number of these schools, and the number of students obtaining most or all of their education online.

• Although growth has not been equal across all states in generalAlthough growth has not been equal across all states, in general growth in full-time online schools across the country has been more steady than the uneven growth experienced by state virtual schools.

• As of fall 2010, 27 states and Washington DC have at least one full-time online school operating across multiple districts (Figure 6)time online school operating across multiple districts (Figure 6).

Attributes of Full-Time, Multi-district Online Programs

• Organization type - Often organized as a charter school.• Affiliation - Many schools are affiliated with a national organization such as Connections• Affiliation - Many schools are affiliated with a national organization, such as Connections

Academy, K12 Inc., Advanced Academics, or Insight Schools, which provides courses, software, teacher professional development, and other key management and logistical support.

• Geographic reach - Most of these schools attract students from across the entire state, in order to achieve scale; therefore most of these schools are in states that allow students toorder to achieve scale; therefore most of these schools are in states that allow students to enroll across district lines and have funding follow the student. The Electronic Course Program in Texas offers full-time online courses statewide to students in grades 3-10.

• All grade levels - are offered in online schools collectively, although individual schools may be limited to older or younger students.

• Funding is often provided via state public education funds that follow the student though• Funding - is often provided via state public education funds that follow the student, though some are funded through appropriations, fees, or grants.

• Enrollments - Most have few or no part-time students, and most have enrollment of a few hundred to several thousand students (FTE).

• Accountability for student achievement - Because these are full-time schools, they are accountable in the same ways as all other public schools and/or charter schools in theaccountable in the same ways as all other public schools and/or charter schools in the states in which they operate. They report results of state assessments and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

Differences in Funding Responsibilities• Supplemental

D t t dit

• Full-Time– Must adhere to all state and

federal accountability req– Do not grant credit– Implement IEP

(sometimes)

federal accountability req. (State Assess., NCLB, etc.) Space Needs Across State)

– Special Needs(sometimes)– Primarily HS only

(some middle

Special Needs Accommodations (all)

– Student Support Services (Enrollment, Counseling, E t i l )(some middle

school)– Part-time Faculty

Extra-curriculars)– Serve all grade levels– Data compilation (Tracking

students academic records)Part time Faculty students academic records)– Full-time Staff (benefits)– Student Technology

Trends in K 12 Education:Trends in K-12 Education: Next Generation Models of

Online and BlendedLearning

Hybrid/•Online course and/or•Online content

•Buffet: F2F & Online Courses

BlendedPrograms

BlendedCourses

•Online instruction•LMS/Technology

•Emporium: F2F place with blended/hybrid approaches toapproaches to learning

Blended Learning: The Convergence of O li d F t FOnline and Face-to-Face

• There is no single type of blended education;There is no single type of blended education; student-centered learning

• Policies: competency-based, multiple pathwaysp y , p p y• New methods: content, assessment,

collaborative development, PD, p , ,instruction/pedagogy

• New Platforms: Web-based platform; LMS• New Solutions: Continuity of Learning H1N1

Increasing Academic Options• Personalizes education to address specific learning styles and

student educational needs• Multiple assessment typesMultiple assessment types• Content differentiation

• Provides educational options to students unavailable at local schoolschool

• Provides an experienced, highly effective teacher in every classroomP id l t d ti l t iti• Provides equal access to educational opportunities

• Allows for scheduling flexibility (Students have access 24-7 from any Internet-connected computer.)

• Meets the specialized needs of students (homebound, special education, student athletes, etc.)

Providing Opportunities to All StudentsTraditional

Credit Recovery

Accelerated Students

Public/Private

Medically Fragile

Need to work and/or support family

Aspiring athletes and performers

ELLSpecial Education

Rural Students

Areas Virtual Learning Can Address

• Equity and AccessSt t id t t id th i• Statewide access = statewide authorizers

• LEA Responsibilities • Long Term Suspensionsg p• IEPs• Homebound Students• Drop Outs/GED• Drop Outs/GED• Students from other states (revenue source)• State Testing and Assessments• Hybrid learning• Collaboration (Partnerships/Content/Portals)

U.S. Online Learning Facts• 46 states have significant state policies (KP 2009)• 31 states have state virtual schools (KP 2010)• 8 states have an online learning initiative (KP 2010)8 states have an online learning initiative (KP 2010)• 27 states and Washington DC allow 220 full-time virtual charter schools with

over 225,000 students (CER)• 2 states require an online course for high school graduation• 50% of employers use e-learning for training• 1 in 4 undergraduate and graduate student enrolls in an online course in

higher education• 82% of school districts had one or more students in a fully-online or blended• 82% of school districts had one or more students in a fully-online or blended

course• More universities are offering K-12 courses online

– MIT open courseware for K-12 students– Stanford, Northwestern programs for gifted

• K-12 Online Learning enrollments growing 30% annually nationwide with 50,000 in 2000 over 2 million enrollments in 2008-2009

State Online Learning State Online Learning &&Trends & ExamplesTrends & Examples

• Convergence between full-time and part-time (K-12, 6-12) g p ( )offering both part-time and full-time options

• Statewide authorizers for virtual schools: important role

• Michigan and Alabama: online learning HS graduation requirement

• Montana: new state virtual school

– Managed by the University of Montana’s College of Education

International Trends in Online Learning• Mexico

– K-12 Digital Content, Laptop for Every Teacher, Pre-service methods using engaging digital content, new strategies

T k• Turkey– 0-15 million enrollments in 3 years

• Canada– All 13 Provinces and Territories offer K-12 online learning

• South Korea – National Virtual School

H K• Hong Kong– Blended learning for Continuity of Learning

• AustraliaF d l f d d ti l ll t f 1 1 ti– Federal funded national rollout of 1:1 computing across years 9-12 by end of 2011

India• Size

– 1 billion+, 70 % rural population– Need 200,000 more schools

29 Lang ages (none of hich are English)– 29 Languages (none of which are English)• Internet Accessibility

– 2007-08 - 42 million users (3 7%)2007 08 42 million users (3.7%)• Online Learning

– Universal Access for K-12 Education in 10 yrsy– Shortage of good teachers– Leverage teachers using technology to bring to scale

Ed P di iti i l i ( li t t)– Educomp Program digitizing learning resources (online content) in K-12 Education

• View as export opportunity

China

• China: 1.3 billion peopleChina: 1.3 billion people

• Digitized K‐12 curriculum

• Training Master Teachers to teach online

• With online learning: increase educational opportunities to 100 million

dnew students

European Union

• EU:EU:

– EU E-Learning Action Plan

– IB Diploma Programme Online (125 countries)

• UK: E-Learning Exports - 29 billion pounds annually; deal with China– Education as an export

New Zealand

– Professional Development – ICT PDp

– Teacher Laptop ProgramTeacher Laptop Program

– National Broadband InitiativeNational Broadband Initiative

– Virtual Learning NetworkVirtual Learning Network

Singaporeg

• Singapore: 100% of Secondary schools useSingapore: 100% of Secondary schools use online learning

• All teachers trained to teach online

• Blended Learning EnvironmentsBlended Learning Environments

• E-Learning Weeks

Contingency Plans: H1N1

Does Every Student Have Access?

• Online learning bridges gaps and createsOnline learning bridges gaps and creates opportunities for a world-class education

Learning Beyond Textbooks– Learning Beyond Textbooks– Personalization and individualized attention

from effective teachersfrom effective teachers• Both full-time online learning programs

and part time (supplemental courses)and part-time (supplemental courses)

Every Student’s Right to Online Learning Opportunity

• Online learning is emerging as an essential part of g g g pthe K-12 education landscape. To meet their educational goals and secure their future as active and productive citizens K-12 students must haveand productive citizens, K 12 students must have access to quality online learning opportunities in a variety of forms that meet their needs.

• We endeavor to ensure that all students have the opportunity to choose an online learningthe opportunity to choose an online learning course or program that meets their needs as part of their K-12 education.

Advance every student’s right to online learning opportunity

• Responsive state policies so that a student’s choice of li t it i f ilit t d th th bl k donline opportunity is facilitated rather than blocked.

• Fair and sustainable funding so that online learning opportunities expand with student demand. S ibl d ibl i ht th t h t d t i• Sensible and responsible oversight so that each student is guaranteed quality in the online opportunities available.

• Modern frameworks for curriculum and instruction so that each student may be assured of credit for successful onlineeach student may be assured of credit for successful online work.

• Thoughtful teacher licensure requirements so a student may always benefit from the best online instructors.

• Valid research so that a student’s online opportunities reflect effective best practices.

Policies

• Funding follows the studentFunding follows the student– Approved Minnesota districts or charter

programs can serve any student withprograms can serve any student with individual courses 1/6 FTE

• Open enrollment & no enrollment capsOpen enrollment & no enrollment caps– districts can allow students to take individual

courses at their own school from a virtualcourses at their own school from a virtual school

Licensure Requirements

• Teachers holding a teaching license (inTeachers holding a teaching license (in any state) with subject matter expertise should be permitted full reciprocity toshould be permitted full reciprocity to teach online

North Dakota has full reciprocity– North Dakota has full reciprocity

Fair and Sustainable Fundingg• Independent, national studies suggest virtual

h l f di h ld b b t thschools funding should be about the same as those of a regular brick and mortar school. Costs for full-time virtual schools ranged fromCosts for full time virtual schools ranged from $7,200 - $8,300 per pupil (Augenblick, Palaich and Associates)– savings compared to $10,000 per pupil national

average for K-12 educationA f di f i t l h t h l i• Average funding for virtual charter schools in U.S. is $6,500 per pupil (2010)

Examples of Funding Models for Virtual Schools

• Full-time Virtual Charter Schools– Funding follows student in full-time virtual charter schools

• State Virtual Schools (supplemental) have different funding modelsFunding follows student 1/6 FTE

• Florida Virtual “Performance-based funding model” and funding follows student• Minnesota funding follows student course enrollment

A l l i l ti ll t t li it t b f liAnnual legislative allotment limits access to number of online courses available

• Kentucky, Virtual High School, Virtual Virginia, Georgia • Texas Virtual School Network – provider and user districts

Federal Funds (Tennessee E4TN)Federal Funds (Tennessee E4TN)Local School Districts support own program (Fairfax County, VA)Special Funding Sources (Federal/State/AT&T – Louisiana Virtual)Private Foundation Grants

I di Vi t l A d i fit (501 3)• Indiana Virtual Academy is a non-profit (501c3)• Tuition

– Illinois Virtual High School (within regional service agency)

Responsible Oversightg

• Creating an Independent State Charter Authorizer g pis key– Provide a menu of choices– Ensure quality and accountability for full-timeEnsure quality and accountability for full time

programs with multiple providers and programs– Authorizers experts in understand online learning– State districts and universities can charter– State, districts and universities can charter– State charter authorizers

• Colorado • Idaho• Idaho• South Carolina• Arizona

Frameworks for Curriculum and Instruction

Instructional Materials allow textbookInstructional Materials – allow textbook funds to be used for 21st century digital learning content computers online courseslearning content, computers, online courses

Online Learning ResearchOnline Learning Researchgg• #1 Online Learning Expands Options

• “The first impetus to the growth of K-12 distance education was an interest in expanding educational options and providing equal p g p p g qopportunities for all learners.” (NCREL 2005)

• #2 Online Learning Is Rapidly Growing• “Recent Surveys show that K-12 online learning is a rapidly growing

phenomenon ”phenomenon. – Growing 30% annually

• #3 Improves Teaching• Teachers who teach online reported positive improvements in face-to-p p p

face, too.• “Of those who reported teaching face-to-face while teaching online or

subsequently, three in four reported a positive impact on their face-to-face teaching”face teaching

• #4 Is Effective: “Better”• U.S. Department of Education Report of Online Learning Better than

Face-to-Face (USED 2009)

Project Tomorrow Survey (2009)Project Tomorrow Survey (2009)

• Benefits of taking a class online?• Benefits of taking a class online?– According to students:

• 51% said it allows them to work at their own pace51% said it allows them to work at their own pace• 49% to earn college credit• 44% said it allows them to take a class not offered

on campus • 35% said it was to get extra help• 19% said they took online courses to get more19% said they took online courses to get more

attention from teachers

Disrupting ClassDisrupting Class

Christensen suggests that by 2019 about half of gg yall high school courses will be online.

Online Funding Modelsg

• Course completion or proficiencyW k b t f l t l d– Works best for supplemental, secondary courses

– Not necessarily a good fit for full-time or K-8 programs– Consider other performance measures like state tests, end of

course exams or grade level promotioncourse exams or grade level promotion• Singular count dates

– Consider credit recovery or second semester course needs; fall count dates create a disincentive for online programs to offer

dit d tcredit recovery or second semester courses• Average daily membership or average daily attendance

– Instructional time logged 24/7St d t d t t t t d t– Student data management systems must accommodate “anytime” attendance

State Policy Issues• Academic accountability: How will student performance in• Academic accountability: How will student performance in

online courses be measured?• Funding: Does public school funding follow the student at the

l l? A bli h l i d t 100 t fcourse level? Are public schools required to use 100 percent of funds dedicated to online courses to student instruction/courses?

• Data management: Do state systems contemplate 24/7 attendance, non-traditional instructional calendars and fractional enrollment?

• Enrollment: Do open enrollment policies make it possible forEnrollment: Do open enrollment policies make it possible for students to participate in online courses anywhere in the state?

• Special populations: Do policies make online opportunities available to special populations?available to special populations?

• Transparency: How do parents, policymakers, regulators and taxpayers have visibility into overall online program performance?

Authorizing Online Charter Schools

• Do virtual charter schools warrant only t k t i ti h t i itweaks to existing chartering regimes—or a wholesale reinvention of the authorizing function?function?

• Do authorizers have sufficient expertise to approve and oversee online charterapprove and oversee online charter schools?

• How do stakeholders learn about online• How do stakeholders learn about online charters and authorizer practices?

States Need to Reform Policies

• Schools are funded on seat-time, not t li i d t b i d tmastery; policies need to be revised to

enable pupil funding for competencies demonstrated; performancedemonstrated; performance.

• States need to allow teaching licenses to have reciprocity; permission to teachhave reciprocity; permission to teach online across state lines.

• Quality standards should be held to a high• Quality standards should be held to a high level/level playing field for all courses.