Gifted Issues Discussion homepage
Posted By: Bostonian Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/13/11 08:19 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204358004577030600066250144.html
My Teacher Is an App
By STEPHANIE BANCHERO and STEPHANIE SIMON
NOVEMBER 12, 2011

...

In a radical rethinking of what it means to go to school, states and districts nationwide are launching online public schools that let students from kindergarten to 12th grade take some�or all�of their classes from their bedrooms, living rooms and kitchens. Other states and districts are bringing students into brick-and-mortar schools for instruction that is largely computer-based and self-directed.

...

Nationwide, an estimated 250,000 students are enrolled in full-time virtual schools, up 40% in the last three years, according to Evergreen Education Group, a consulting firm that works with online schools. More than two million pupils take at least one class online, according to the International Association for K-12 Online Learning, a trade group.

...

Two companies, K12 and Connections Academy, dominate the market for running public cyberschools. Full-time enrollment in online schools using the K12 curriculum has doubled in the past four years, to 81,000, the company says. K12's revenue grew 35% to $522 million in its fiscal year ended June 30, when it reported net income of $13 million.

At some K12 schools, academic struggles have followed rapid growth. Colorado Virtual Academy, launched in 2001, notched strong test scores initially. But enrollment has soared to nearly 5,000�and scores have plummeted. The school falls below Colorado averages on nearly every standardized test at every grade level, with particularly big deficits in math and writing. Outside Colorado, too, many K12 schools have poor results on state standardized tests.

K12 officials say state scores can be misleading because students often enroll midyear and take the tests after just a few months online. They say that the longer kids stick with cyberlearning, the better they do: Only 39% of students pass state math exams when they've been enrolled in K12 schools for less than a year, compared to 48% for kids enrolled at least one full school year. The same trend holds true for reading.
Posted By: Wren Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/13/11 09:34 PM
It seems very logical to have online schools, within the brick and mortar structure. That way you have the socialization, music, art, gym and field trips.

There is a school called the Ischool, a new high school in NYC, that is trying this concept of online within brick and mortar.

I have thought about an online charter school for middle school but now we have decided to move and I am working on the grade skip for grade 4 when we go.

Posted By: La Texican Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/13/11 11:16 PM
OMG! How exciting?! � Beats them little Work at your own Pace books I got in private school with just a tutor to help out if you got stuck. �At the time that beat the public school crawl through topics two years too slow. �At the time the churches were clamoring for a voucher system so you had a choice in your kid's education. �This is So much better. �You get a real choice with planetary scale options, rather than a few little local lock-step schools. �I'm excited to be here.

Here, hoagies
Posted By: La Texican Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/13/11 11:17 PM
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/...e-education-is-ready-for-disruption-now/

Hoagies Facebook posted a positive article about this subject today.
Posted By: DeeDee Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 01:36 AM
Originally Posted by Wren
It seems very logical to have online schools, within the brick and mortar structure. That way you have the socialization, music, art, gym and field trips.

I have a rather different take on what it means to be "socialized" in an academic setting. For me, it should include work with peers, classroom debate/argument/discussion, engagement with the material of study that also includes engagement with others' opinions and experiences about that material.

The idea of "learning" online and then "socializing" apart from "learning" doesn't meet my ideal of education at all.

Most online learning treats education as though it were a matter of pouring content into a bucket (=brain), instead of a form of inquiry.

For all that it would give our kids a path to learn at their own pace(s), I'm still extremely skeptical of this for K-12 students.

DeeDee
Posted By: aculady Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 02:04 AM
I really liked the way that the Duke TIP program structured their online summer Criminal Justice course: assigned books, articles, and Web links to be read independently; a discussion forum where the teacher and students could post questions and discussion topics, with a requirement for each student to post a minimum number of topics or questions and a requirement to answer a minimum number of other people's posts each week; and several mandatory live chat sessions for more lively discussion of the issues covered during the week. Weekly writing assignments were uploaded directly to the teacher's dropbox and were returned with commentary. It was online, yes, but required a lot more class participation and gave a lot more feedback than many in-person courses I have seen. "Online" doesn't have to mean "without interaction".

I love that MIT and many other colleges are putting video of their best teachers online, and I would encourage students and schools who are using these materials to set up discussion sections with others who are also using them, either IRL or through e-mail lists or forums or chatrooms, to get the most out of the material.
Posted By: doclori Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 02:15 AM
Originally Posted by DeeDee
For all that it would give our kids a path to learn at their own pace(s), I'm still extremely skeptical of this for K-12 students.


Although we may end up going the online route at some point, I would tend to agree.

Also, when I hear that Jeb Bush is involved, I can't help but think that (at least in FL) the online option was pushed through to help out the owners of the online schools, no doubt cronies of his.

Wouldn't it be nice if all kids, gifted or not, could get each subject at their own level at a regular school.
Posted By: Camille Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 03:05 AM
Our choice to pursue online public school through k12 was taken from us about a year or two ago here in Missouri. We can still enroll in k12 but only as a private school, so it costs $5000 a year or $550 a course, which isn't much different from the cost of a decent parochial school in this area.
Posted By: DeeDee Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 03:14 AM
Originally Posted by aculady
"Online" doesn't have to mean "without interaction".

It can be done, certainly-- and I'm glad Duke is doing it. It's very resource-intensive, though, and that's not the way education is going these days.

DeeDee
Posted By: aculady Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 03:31 AM
FLVS courses have, or at least had a few years ago, live teachers who monitor student progress and are available by e-mail during large portions of the day and by phone during their specified office hours, and who have phone contact with the child on a regular basis, so they are already paying a teacher. It wouldn't really be more resource intensive to throw up a discussion board for each section and make it mandatory for students to participate (which I think would improve most of the courses greatly), but it would require a different kind of work for the teacher - it would require being less evaluative and more engaged, and require thinking about the curriculum in a different way - and I think that that may be the crucial point in why it doesn't happen more. Sadly, a lot of teachers really do think of education as filling bucket rather than lighting a fire.
Posted By: DeeDee Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 12:58 PM
Originally Posted by aculady
It wouldn't really be more resource intensive to throw up a discussion board for each section and make it mandatory for students to participate (which I think would improve most of the courses greatly), but it would require a different kind of work for the teacher - it would require being less evaluative and more engaged, and require thinking about the curriculum in a different way

Actually, I've done it-- throwing up a discussion board does nothing unless it's monitored by the teacher. Nobody will use it unless it's graded, and then if it's graded, the teacher is reading and commenting on, and keeping on track something the size of War and Peace (but more fragmented) weekly.

There are ways to do this well, but many more ways to do it poorly.

DeeDee
Posted By: aculady Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 01:45 PM
Originally Posted by DeeDee
There are ways to do this well, but many more ways to do it poorly.

Of this, I have no doubt!
Posted By: Wren Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 02:40 PM
Doesn't CTY have a method for this, since they do provide you with a teacher and they do programs for schools. They must have some knowledge bank on how to do it well.
Posted By: La Texican Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 03:03 PM
Couldn't you have it like the online comment boards where the students highlight the best and worst responses. The computer separates by votes. Everybody who makes it into the highlights gets an A, everybody else gets a B, comments voted not helpful gets a D.
Posted By: DeeDee Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/14/11 04:18 PM
La Tex: If you could trust k-12 students to be able to distinguish fruitful discussion from useless blather, you could do it that way. But even college student discussion degenerates pretty fast without guidance. It turns out that an expert teacher really does... teach.

DeeDee
Posted By: Ametrine Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/16/11 01:13 AM
I searched "Connections Academy" and found this thread.

There is an office nearby and I dropped in to get a packet of information.

They say that they "streamline and compress lessons when appropriate." However, their Gifted and Talented program starts in grade 3. They do say that, "when appropriate, younger students can benefit from advanced coursework and even have the opportunity to work at a higher grade level."

"Even have the opportunity to work at a higher grade level"? That sounds a bit condescending to me. Like we should somehow be incredibly grateful for that.

Am I just being touchy?

My son is 4.9 years old and, best as I can tell, he's reading at a fifth grade level and is at around a second/third grade level in math. (He's not been formally tested.) So I'm skeptical about it being superior to a brick-and-mortar school in this area. Seems to me that their curriculum isn't all that different.

Am I wrong?

I'm a bit discouraged by their description of Kindergarten, to say the least!

I came on Davidson to find out if anyone here has gone into Connections Academy and what their experience with their G&T program has been. (For very young learners, specifically.)

Posted By: La Texican Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/16/11 01:59 AM
Well, that's a point. But that might be good too. Learning isn't about being right, it's about making progress. The teacher would get a real good idea of where the kids heads were at. But you're right. A good teacher could already do that. I think a major point was that by transferring to a digital classroom the good teachers could have access to more students and we would have less reason to maintain the quantity of teachers, rather giving more people access to the quality teachers.

Edit:
I'm not saying that this is the answer to education. I'm summerizing this one answer the best way I understand it.
Posted By: mecreature Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/18/11 03:53 PM
that is perfect.

Originally Posted by DeeDee
La Tex: If you could trust k-12 students to be able to distinguish fruitful discussion from useless blather, you could do it that way. But even college student discussion degenerates pretty fast without guidance. It turns out that an expert teacher really does... teach.

DeeDee


This expert teacher usually can adapt to many situations very quickly and get back on track pretty much on cue.

I would not trade the personal relationship my son had with his 2nd grade teacher (last year) for anything. Looking back its easy.
Posted By: ultramarina Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/21/11 01:34 PM
I'm pleased to have this option available in my state. I don't think it's a panacea, but it's my failsafe. Right now it doesn't look like we need it. DD is a very self-directed learner and I think she would do fabulously with it; however, I would need to be driving her hither and yon all day to meet her social needs.
Posted By: 2cool4school Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/21/11 02:54 PM
I know several families through our inclusive homeschool group who use K12 or Connections. Many use it as a "spine" but still supplement with private or co-op classes, book clubs, etc. The majority are engaged in private music lessons, sports, book clubs, etc.

Soapbox alert smile We have multiple opportunities to socialize every day. We have considerably more field trips than the students in public school. Sorry, but when someone starts talking about "socialization" it raises my hackles.

I will say this: Online school or homeschool--done correctly--requires an enormous amount of time and effort on a parent's part. They should call it car-schooling because you spend half your day in the car escorting your child to his various classes, clubs, and lessons. A website or boxed curriculum is not sufficient. Face time, a real science lab, making a mess that //I// don't have to clean up...it's all important.

I researched Connections Academy in August -- even went to an information night and considered enrolling DS11. In the end, it just didn't look rigorous enough for me. I get concerned when I look at the English curriculum and see that they only cover 1 novel in a semester, and the boy has already read them.

We are going to experiment with online learning later this winter with an AOPS math course. I'm looking forward to seeing how he likes it. I suspect it will be a big hit. He's already so wired in that he's practically a cyborg. He loves to chat, email, forum surf, listen to music, watch youtube, research homework help ------- all at the same time :P
Posted By: ultramarina Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/21/11 03:50 PM
Not sure if you are referring to my post, 2cool, but I certainly think HSed students can be very well-socialized. No doubt about it--BUT it would take a lot of work on my part, and I'm a homebody. I have NO interest in "carschooling," as you put it...
Posted By: 2cool4school Re: Public Online Schools (WSJ article) - 11/21/11 10:22 PM
Actually, Wren had mentioned the big "S" word back there. When one HSs, one can get weirdly defensive about it. Probably b/c we're used to hearing comments like these:

http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/would-you-want-to-be-home-schooled/?apage=1#comments

I agree that it takes too much work. I'm exhausted. It's difficult b/c I'm a total introvert, too. Definitely prefer the library to a party wink
© Gifted Issues Discussion Forum