What are others' experiences with online science courses at the early high school level?

Specific recommendations or cautions would be most welcome.

From what I have seen personally, most of these are decidedly.... not good.

My criticisms:

1. Science instruction at this level isn't memorization (aside from a few topical areas in biology, geology, and to a somewhat lesser extent chemistry and physics)-- but that IS how most online courses approach the material.

2. Interaction is (IMO) necessary to the development of the particular critical thinking skills in science, and the foundation of all that comes after these introductory courses. Skip that or skimp on it... and the result is "science lite." Think Popular Science. The problem with canned instructional modules is that they can't answer questions in real time, which is what (especially beginning) students truly NEED-- because having an expert shape your thinking process and learn to SELF-critique is really crucial (okay, not all high school teachers are good at this either).

3. Too few labs, too little actual connection to the principles of the course. "Virtual" labs don't cut it for anything but physics, IMO.


Online science classes CAN work. But there are some caveats... they require a living expert instructor to be available. That's the big one. Science is like literary analysis this way-- it just can't happen in a vacuum. Sure, doing some of the grind of learning formulae, techniques, etc. can, but learning to extend/apply generally cannot, because students who are LEARNING lack the expertise to know when they have a detail or two wrong. KWIM?

They also generally require a home-brewed lab, or at least significant improvement to the one on offer.


Name brands that I would (most certainly) AVOID-AVOID-AVOID:

1. Connections Learning
2. Pearson
3. KC (Distance) education
4. FLVS-- this is the Florida Virtual School
5. Virtual Sage


The ultimate issue with prepackaged courses in the sciences in particular is that the people WRITING the curriculum very definitely do NOT understand that material at the (post-baccalaureate) level that one must in order to evaluate the important stuff, and not write questions about minutiae.

Oh, dear. That's pretty much what I expected. While I was browsing they all set off my garbage detector...

Any experiences with Stanford University Online High School? This looks more "real" to me... a shade pricey (as in, more expensive than college courses here would be...)

http://ohs.stanford.edu/divisions/science.html

Thanks, HK.

We've had good and bad experiences with online science classes. I think that an important part of the equation is your individual student (and for those who don't know me, I'm a scientist who loves science with a science degree.. so that's my background fwiw). My ds is also very scientifically inclined - science is his thing. The class he had success in was very hands-off - he had an accessible and wonderful instructor but he didn't really need her either - he cruised through the class material independently and did very well in the class as well as the labs (which he did independently at home). The second online class he took, from the same institution, was a complete bust for him. I think he found the information not terribly exciting, and given that situation, not having the presence of other students and live discussion was a real issue for him.

DS is also an extroverted personality, so he likes to work with other students - and he's loved the labs he does at school because of the group dynamics. OTOH, he's bored to tears with the actual material presented in school, which is the reason he's wanted to take online courses. We gave up the last course and he just read a textbook instead and found that to be more "fun". I couldn't pinpoint exactly why he found the class so hopelessly boring because he does like the subject and he has enjoyed reading the textbook.

Ultimately what our ds has enjoyed the most have been summer science camps where he's in with a group of students. Last summer he had a camp at a university that was led by grad students and that's been his favorite so far.

Not sure that was much help - let us know what you decide to do!

polarbear

What about Laurel Springs? http://laurelsprings.com I have no idea how strong they are in science. But a friend's daughter had a good experience with them for online history classes. The only reason I suggest it as a possibility is that from what i understand there is a teacher who is available by email, and a lot of the work is graded by a person. I would worry about the labs.

DeeDee, maybe Val has some insights into that one-- I hope so. I know that they've made use of (er-- or tried to, anyway) many online options as well.

LaurelSprings raises many of the red flags that I've learned about with online providers over the years-- namely, there can't be BOTH "real live interactions with teacher and classmates!" and "work at your own pace-- endless flexibility!"

KWIM? Either the schedule works synchronously (like any other school class tends to) or it works in a vacuum and completely self-paced (independent EPGY, Khan, etc.) but it can't be BOTH at the same time.

I also have concerns when students are supposed to "submit material" and that is the limit of teacher involvement.

They also make a lot of noise about "mastery" learning-- but the terminology they use implies (to me) that they actually mean "we'll let students do it as many times as they need to in order to earn A's." K12 uses the same philosophy, and Connections does, too-- on the sly, though (without the overt "mastery" verbiage, I mean).

What that often amounts to in practice is teachers who will "reset" assessments so that students can do them again. Not more instruction in a direct sense. It also doesn't mean moving at your own pace, which is probably what most of us here would like.

Their AP Physics B course is the exact same one that my DD took through Connections. Seriously-- it looks to use precisely the same materials and in the same sequence and pacing. (Very similar rubric-driven grading and assessment schema, as well.)

I strongly suspect that the "labs" included are just about as lame as what my DD's class offered. We supplemented. A lot.

No way do I think that course would be worth shelling out nearly $2K for. No way. You could do it a LOT better yourself by purchasing a copy of the Giancoli text, a copy (used) of Hewitt's lovely conceptual physics text, a solutions guide for Giancoli, maybe toss in an AP exam prep book, get a lab pack-- for about 400 bucks total. It will amount to pretty much the same darned thing in the end, since your involvement as a parent will be similar either way.

I say that in light of the fact that my child also had about an hour a week of (truly) good quality direct instruction, which it is not clear that the LS version of things actually has.

Most online courses are going to operate more or less like correspondence courses. That might be okay for some subjects, but it's hard for me to see how it works well for some others.

Oh-- and surprise-surprise, none of their science offerings meet UC's standards for a-g, either. Now, that's a red flag for me in a different way... I mean, it doesn't matter if you aren't applying to UC, I suppose. But it's a warning that the post-secondary academy doesn't consider the course to be sufficiently rigorous to serve as "college preparation" in the subject-- at least not as it stands.

That's true to my experience as well.

And all of these courses are presented with such hype that it's hard to imagine any of them living up to any of their claims.


Thanks for the recommendations. We may end up doing something like this... depends on how negotiations turn out.


Yes. I teach a college course online, and to do it well is simply a boatload of work. And even then, it's serving certain needs, but definitely not all the needs these students present. It's a stopgap.

And while I trust myself to deliver quality instruction, I don't really trust anyone else automatically on that score-- it's simply too much work to do it well for me to imagine that everyone who hawks courses is going to do it well.

And for science... I want real labs.

Thanks.

Hybrid courses at a local community college might be a way to get what you're after-- that's what we've opted for for chemistry. Physics was do-able at home since DH's PhD is in a very closely related discipline, and mine is "related."

But I don't really feel that HS chemistry can be taught well with only home-managed labs. I've written lab manuals for college courses, of course-- but the problem becomes having a way to set aside a dedicated space for labs, ventilation, disposal, etc.

Add to that the biology harpy teaching chemistry and we said thanks but no thanks.

DD wants to take it, though, before she enters college in the fall. So we might have her take the B&M class at the local CC-- if she can get a seat, I mean-- or try the hybrid class (which does about 70% online, and meets in person weekly too).

Okay what do you think about flvs science class for middle school for a non science kid who learns really fast 6th and 7th grade science? And my older son sat through 6th and 7th grade science in a FL middle school honors/gifted class and it wasn't all that great live and in person.

Just in general terms, I've been underwhelmed by the level and depth of FLVS offerings in all subjects, not just science. I've seen five or six of those in secondary, and none of them stood out as what I'd call "good" examples.

The AP Stats class that my DD is currently enrolled in is a Spokane product-- it seems considerably better put together than most online courses for secondary.

Not sure what you mean by B&M "wasn't all that live and in person," there-- do you mean that the teacher was bad and therefore the class was as well? Or that there wasn't anyone really teaching the class?


Ah-- (I see your edit now). Yeah-- it's not that virtual is ALWAYS worse than the alternative. Just that I've yet to see a virtual class (especially in science) where I've thought that it was better than a good B&M version of the same scope and sequence. If that makes sense.

Teacher quality makes a huge difference in total suckage versus something pretty great. Just like in any other subject, I suppose, and math, math, math-- ohmigosh, the house of horrors we could all build in that subject, eh?

So I am thinking if both b&m and virtual are suckage then my son might prefer the virtual suckage than the live suckage.

My dh and I are debating what we are going to do for middle school (we still have this year and 5th grade to get through) and home school is what we are considering. I don't hate science, but eh I am not sciency unless it is biology and something I am really interested in...I would rather out source science than teach it.

I've heard quite a bit about Aurora Lipper and her Supercharged Science, but I don't have any true experience with it.

Polar, what institution ran the ones that your DS liked?


I think there are definitely well and poorly designed/taught courses-- the difficulty being that you don't know what you're in for until you've paid...


I hadn't realized how bad things had gotten until DS came home very excited because *he had actually learned a new thing in science*. In January.


Would you mind PMing me the name of the camp? Nothing is off the table at this point, though I do need to solve the school situation.

Thanks,
DeeDee

I just wanted to throw out two other options. They don't meet HowlerKarma's requirements fully, but as best I've seen, the science is sound, the information is well presented and the cost isn't so outlandish that you'll feel compelled to stick with it no matter what.

Ck12.org- Both middle and high school level science. I've spent more time looking at the middle school. No live science labs, no live teacher, but essentially a well written textbook, with a teacher guide (on request) and interactives, questions and videos imbedded.

UCScout.org- Free if you're in California and looking at self-paced, also comes with the option of hiring a local teacher to proctor or to pay for the UC Scout teacher to proctor it. UC a-g approved and fairly well designed. We are using it for math and my son really likes it. I find that it doesn't have enough practice problems, so we alternate between Khan and Scout.

It is difficult to recommend online science courses at the early high school level without more information.

Is the school situation which you need to solve that in January DS excitedly reported that he had learned something new in science? Are you looking for a replacement for classroom curriculum? Or something for after-schooling to prepare for an out-of-level test?

If looking for a replacement for classroom curriculum, have there been ongoing complaints from DS regarding boredom in science class throughout the school year? Has teacher input at conferences, feedback on tests/assessments, labs or projects, been consistent with a student needing replacement curriculum in the classroom? Are there results from out-of-level tests which would tend to support advocacy efforts in this area?

If concerned that DS recently reported learning something new, is your son especially passionate about a particular unit of science? Are there science topics which he may have studied independently in great depth and breadth over the years, therefore was surprised to learn something new in his area of expertise? While studying science in his classroom do the science topics/units change frequently? Does the syllabus show that he may soon be studying a different topic/unit?

Regarding any online course, are there 2e accommodations which may need to be taken into account in your selection process? Is reading comprehension and science vocabulary at a high school level or above? What grade level is DS currently in? If currently in early high school, what science course is he currently taking... Biology, Honors Biology, Chemistry, AP Chem, Earth Science, Marine Biology, Environmental, AP Environmental, etc?

Sorry that this is not a pat answer, but science is a very broad area and there are many different needs which individual students may have when their families are seeking an online curriculum for them.

Lastly, as you mentioned teaching an online course at the college level, and the fact that quality may vary depending upon the instructor, might your colleagues in online ed be a resource for you in choosing an online science course (and recommending an instructor) at the early high school level?

That makes sense.

That is good to know. All I knew is that there history classes did count for A-G. Didn't really look very far into the science classes except to know they existed.

It can be very hard to judge these places without any personal knowledge. Last year I was looking at Japanese online classes and had difficulty finding any that seemed "good enough" and gave up. Decided that community college classes were the better way to go, and that it would be best to wait for a bit more maturity out of DS before trying the community college class.

I have heard bad things about Connections Learning and Pearson from people who have used their courses. However, I have not heard of issues with KC education or FLVS and have not heard of Virtual Sage period. Do you (or your DD)have first hand experience taking courses from KC or FLVS? It seemed hard to tell without actual first-hand experience through the particular course even though your point in general regarding lack of adequate lab opportunities is a given. These online courses also seem somewhat teacher dependent.

This is just on my distant radar and likely only for more exotic offerings rather than the meat and potato courses like bio, chem and physics.

Yes, my experience is firsthand via DD for all of the above. The one exception is that I have NOT seen a lot of assessments under FLVS, so I can't say if those are in great alignment or well-written generally speaking. What I have seen has been not awful, but not awesome, either.

Understand that many students don't have major issues with any of them-- but that gifted students (IME/IMO) almost certainly WILL. MOST students in HS science classes are memorizers, not "understanders." Therefore, they aren't really engaging the way sciencey kids do, and almost certainly not the way HG+ ones do.

There is at least one other member here that I know would agree with me on all of the above points. I think that he ultimately withdrew his PG child partially on the basis of determining that the underlying problems were structurally-based in curriculum design, and support for the same.

Those courses are written by contract-- low bidding, basically-- and often in virtual sweatshops, which is precisely the problem with Virtual Sage. I know because I tracked down message board posts from tech writers on contract who warned about them on jobs boards-- that they paid poorly and not on time, that their timelines were INSANE for product delivery... and that no, it didn't really require subject expertise, since they provided the electronic version of the course texts... (no worries, right?) or that in courses without texts, not to worry because the course syllabus was quite detailed and gave a lot of guidance on the types of content to include. Oh, and that the assessments weren't part of the 'package' either way-- those were contracted separately.

All of that information explained a VERY great deal about the problems with the curriculum.

One of the questions from a Virtual Sage course was so bad that I remember it even all these years later--

in this question, students were expected to "understand" that seismicity and vulcanism are unrelated phenomena.

Well, my daughter, being a fairly science-y kid, and living ON the ring of fire, 'understood' no such thing. And argued vociferously on this point, in fact. All she did was alienate the teacher, who labeled her a trouble-maker.


Anyway. That kind of thing is stunningly common in online courses-- the problem isn't any ONE thing, it's everything. Bad curriculum writing (at best, mediocre, IMO), AWOL teaching, and assessment writing by people who clearly should have had more rigorous gen-ed coursework in college. Fix any ONE of them, and it becomes more tolerable. Fix them all, and the experience can be quite a good one. My DD's AP Phsyics class was about a 1.5 out of three proposition... teacher was great, and the assessments and curriculum bit were about two stars out of four each.

It just usually isn't that good-- for the reasons that DeeDee noted. It takes a LOT of time to teach well, and short-cuts and canned curriculum to "automate" the process don't really work as an adequate stand-in most of the time.


I mean, yes-- I'd choose this over actively AWFUL B&M science, probably. Sure. Well, some of the online stuff is pretty awful, too, honestly...

Let's just stipulate that we're not signing up for anything awful... live or automated... :-P

Thanks.

Good choice.

What about Super Charged Science with Aurora Lipper?

Your child works through whichever of the topics they choose at their own pace and the online live classes are optional as and when the topic grabs your interest.

You can always e-mail for help and suggestions on anything you are working on.

I have just received a mini-package that I ordered from them (3 x dvd's) with Magnetism (23 lessons) electricity (26 lessons) and energy 1 (33 lessons). So far we are impressed!

And if these work well for us this year, we will be getting the full program from next year on.

That is one reason that I am really glad that my children are okay in public school and that high intelligence seem to be less of an issue in general the higher you go up in schooling. On the other hand, it does seem that lab work in general at the high school level has been reduced compared to when I was a high school student.

My son has taken 2 science classes from Stanford OHS, one was a physics course in 7th grade the second was a follow up survey in 8th grade. Each week in his 8th grade course they did an experiment which was focused on the topic they were discussing (i.e. physics of light) and very well organized, and they keep a lab book of all their experiments. I did not like his 7th grade teacher because while he was likely a brilliant man he did things like have them watch youtube videos and have discussions for 3 weeks, and then at midterms assign an experiment that literally took 16-20 hours of hard core data to do, while also studying for midterms. Poorly organized. Both classes, however, were not light weight at all. My daughter does science course work (Astronomy and earth science) through Northwestern University's online program, she is younger, but enjoys it, this summer will be doing a 2 week genetics camp on campus. Also, starting in 9th grade at Stanford, there is a 2 week summer session to supplement all labs, so you go on campus and do the lab work in August. NEither programs are cheap, but, you get what you pay for. And, both have needs-based scholarship programs.

Oh my gosh - these sound incredible!!

How did they organize the labs, in terms of materials and setup? Is it all do-at-home? In reality or "virtual"?

His Stanford courses through the OHS are LIVE classes that meet twice a week for 1 hr 15 minutes each class. The class is very interactive with a central screen for lecture, a window for whomever is on the live video feed (instructor, students) a text chat box, and emoticons by the class list to raise hands, vote, etc. The weekly experiments do require adult supervision, and some outside materials. They have weekly quizzes after their second class over the weekly material and the instructor (who have PhDs in the subjects area) are very open to questions, Skype conferencing, etc. For the high school level, like chemistry biology, they have on campus labs for 2 or 3 weeks in the summer.

Classes are year long, from August through May, with midterms and finals each semester.

That sounds (to me) like a really worthwhile experience. Based on what we know of how synchronous distance instruction and learning virtually can actually work, I mean.

My DD would love that.

I think HK and others make important points about science pedagogy for kids interested in science. For the reasons they suggest, any self-paced online course with DIY labs probably cannot be adequate for a really motivated science kid who wants to learn at a high level.

I'm writing just as a Laurel Springs Academy (that's the GT branch)("LSA") parent to suggest gently that we have found that LSA is a bit better than other online options, at least in the humanities areas that my HG child loves. LSA is definitely a self-paced model (except at the AP level, which has real-time weekly lectures/discussions). Teacher interaction is something you ask for, and the teachers have time to offer it (unlike other places, where they are on the clock a bit more). Still, a distant teacher is a distant teacher, and so IMHO, LSA is best for (a) autodidacts who want a curriculum as a baseline for outside learning and (b) kids with an in-house teacher (with higher education in the field). I am a fan of LSA *given our situation*. But I would NOT rely on online courses by LSA (or any other provider) without significant home support from a highly-educated parent or tutor. To their credit, the LSA staff are upfront about this, even if the catalog seems puffy.

So LSA for us is what I consider "semi-homeschool." They provide a good curriculum, but we teach it and provide real-time questioning and consideration. HK is quite right (good catch!) that the science offerings are not UC-approved; the other subjects generally are.

I have found that, as with any school (real or virtual), the parent needs to be an educated and involved consumer. But what I love (and what I have not seen in any other online or bricks-and-mortar school) is that involvement results in tailoring rather than bureaucratic stonewalling (as in our prior public school). My child and I have full power to choose among course options and, in consultation with teachers who "get" gifted kids, to redesign curricula to enrich or deepen. We rejected the standard Geometry text (induction) in favor of Jacobs' Geometry (full-on, no-excuses deduction), and it has been a pleasure. The school was fine with it and helped us redesign the course.

I hope I'm managing to give a nuanced account here. For humanities-oriented kids with expert (humanities and math) parents at home, LSA is great, as long as you understand what it is.

By contrast, I have had first-hand experience with K-12, Apex, and Aventa. The K-12 quality was mixed but not bad; the major limitation is that it was very "grade-level" with no honors options (at that level, anyway). Apex was very rote and multiple-choice-based, and Aventa was affirmatively poor in quality. (I am judging history and English grades 5 and 6 at K-12 and HS-level language and math offerings through Apex and Aventa.)

But I would NOT rely on online courses by LSA (or any other provider) without significant home support from a highly-educated parent or tutor. To their credit, the LSA staff are upfront about this, even if the catalog seems puffy.

REALLY great point-- and good information about LSA.

It's a good sign that they were willing to work with you to flex the geometry course to meet your needs, too. That won't happen with most virtual charter schools, which are decidedly "married to" a particular curriculum, whether it's good, bad or ugly.

Great information, thanks.

I'm interested to hear that Laurel Springs science isn't UC approved. I don't know much about them, but talked with them at one point while looking over options. I teach at the university level with a science PhD and get frustrated at the way certain things are taught that don't really reflect how science is done (it's like science education departments and scientists don't talk with each other enough).

I asked LS if I could modify the class at all if I wanted to add my own labs (because I have a university lab) or if I wanted to tweak the content. I was told definitely not because they have to keep UC approval.

I can understand if they think it would be stressful on the teacher and that the teacher needs to run the class, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to be able to discuss teaching approaches before choosing the class.

So I'll just teach my kids myself (and bring other kids in to enjoy experiments in the lab, etc.). I know we're fortunate to have these resources, but it frustrates me to see the options for kids to learn science.

From what I have been able to determine, NO virtual high school has UC a-g approved science coursework.

Of course, having seen some of those offerings, I can say with confidence; good for them.

Without a fairly involved (and well-educated parent) at the helm day to day, no way does the online science content meet "university prep" standards. In my opinion.

Maybe my standards are just too high-- but I feel the same way about it that the UC regents do, apparently.