Friday, June 23, 2017

Virtual Learning: Surprising, Concerning, and Confusing

"The education process in its new form becomes a supervised process, rather than a fully controlled process since virtual learning changed the education process pattern represented by the triangle (student, teacher and content) by increasing the importance of both “student” and “content” factors and transforming the main task of the “teacher” from “Teaching” to "Tutoring”," (Aldikanji & Ajami, 2016).


     I feel that the quote above is a good summary of virtual learning. Although virtual learning in the K-12 environment is still in its infancy, there is no denying the impact it has had on education. It has helped to transform the learning process for those involved. I would like discuss some of the aspects I consider to be either surprising or concerning, and would like to address a few questions I still have. I focused this review based on Virtual Schools offering full-time enrollment in programs. This information may not include blended/distributed learning environments.

Surprise


Accessibility


     "According to the National center for Educational Statistics (2012), approximately 11% of all undergraduate students have some kind of disability requiring support services and/or accommodation," (Simonson, Smaldino, Zvacek, 2015, p. 291). This was a surprising number for me. Combine that with the requirement that courses must be accessible by all students, and it becomes very difficult to administer distance education.

State Cooperation


     I have always thought about the differences in K-12 institutions between states, but I had not thought about the post-secondary. I was surprised to find that state authorization is required for colleges to enroll students in online programs. (Simonson, Smaldino, & Zvacek, 2015, p. 295) With so many ads for Phoenix and Grand Canyon, I had assumed it was open to anyone in the country.

Class Size


     Although Simonson, Smaldino, & Zvacek cited that even experienced teachers should only have between 20-25 students in a course. I found in my research that the average virtual program has a 34:1 student to teacher ratio. This is both a surprise and a concern, but I found it more shocking than anything if the teacher is willing. This number climbs to 44:1 when looking specifically at the for-profit institutions. (Barbour et al., 2017)

Concern


For-Profit Institutions


     Online instruction has led to a host of new education providers across the United States. Some of these were founded as non-profit and some hosted by public education, but the lion's share of students are enrolled in full programs are using for-profit institutions at both the K-12 and Higher Ed. This does not necessarily include the students enrolled in a blended-learning program. These programs have less accountability and typically have a higher drop-out rate. (Barbour et al., 2017)



Graduation Rate


     The graduation rate for students enrolled in virtual programs is far below the national average for traditional programs. This could be for a number of reasons, but I feel it is predominately due to lack of student readiness to take distance courses. Simonson, Smaldino, & Zvacek recommend "that incoming students have the appropriate level of readiness, including commitment, self-discipline, and time management skills to be successful in an online environment," (2015, p. 300).

Question


     I learned a lot about virtual learning throughout my readings, but I probably have more questions now than I did to begin with. I guess the biggest question would be related to government oversite. Should virtual schools continue to be managed at the state level even though they stretch across state lines, or should the federal government set more rigid guidelines that have to be met by any program that operates in multiple states?

References


Aldikanji, E., and Ajami, K. (2016). Studying Academic Indicators Within Virtual Learning Environment Using Educational Data Mining. International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process, 6(6). Retrieved from:  https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1612/1612.01090.pdf

Barbour, M., Davidson, C., Gulosino, C., Huerta, L., Moron, G., Molnar, A.,… Shank, C. (2017) Virtual Schools in the U.S. 2017. Retrieved from: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2017

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., & Zvacek, S. (2015). Teaching and Learning at a Distance (6th ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.





2 comments:

  1. I feel like distance education has already started making an impact in the tradition classroom through the recent focus on student-centered learning and the development of teacher/ student observation tools such as ELEOT. Even though virtual learning is still relatively young, it will be interesting to see where it will go from here. You make some excellent points regarding class size, accessibility and state cooperation. I like your question about the potential of the federal government imposing legislation on virtual schools. I also wonder what extrinsic factor would have to come into play to motivate the Federal Department of Education to try and mandate legislation on virtual schooling across state lines. The U.S. Department of Education website indicates that, "the Federal contribution to elementary and secondary education is about 8 percent." It seems like they wouldn't want to waste their resources working to create and impose legislation on distance education with that small of a percentage of combined budgets at stake-- then again, I am often surprised at legislation!

    I also like you point regarding the graduation rate. When I was looking at the policies for state virtual schools, I noticed that several had GPA requirements for students interested in participating. I thought that this was an excellent idea; however, I would also like to learn more about the SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indicator referenced by Simonson, Smaldino, and Zvacek (2015). I like that this indicator measures, "individual attributes, life factors, learning styles, technical competency, typing competency, and reading rate and recall" (pg. 300). This indicator gives students who might be excellent candidates for online learning, but who might fall short in terms of GPA a chance to participate.

    References
    The Federal Role in Education (2017). U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from: https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html

    Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., & Zvacek, S. (2015). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (6th ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In reference to the ratio of students to teachers in online schools, this was not a surprise to me. Students must understand as they move into the virtual world, more of the responsibility of the learning becomes theirs, therefore, students should not need as much of the teacher's time as a traditional student would.
    I am concerned as well with the accountability measure of these virtual schools that are for profit. I also wonder what is the motive behind an organization (outside of a k-12 ) starting online virtual schools. According to Simonson, Smaldino, & Zvacek (2015), "the process of planning and organizing for a distance education course is multifaceted and must occur well in advance of the scheduled instruction". I am very interested in reviewing the research on for profit versus nonprofit virtual school graduation rates. I will check it out.

    Reference
    Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., & Zvacek, S. (2015). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (6th ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

    ReplyDelete