Why Cyber Schools Aren't “Good” or “Bad”

1. Why Cyber Schools Aren't “Good” or “Bad” Chris Carnahan Facilitator for Secondary Education, Central PA Digital Learning Foundation Doctoral Candidate, Indiana University of Pennsylvania

2. Overview • Outline of Online Education • Why Students Choose Online • Achievement/Failure Causes • Attrition • PA Specifically • Money • Special Education • AYP • Evaluation

3. What is a Cyber Education? • Supplemental, District Based, Consortiums, & Cyber Charter (Cavanaugh, Barbour, & Clark 2009) • Programs Vary • state to state, district to district • 700,000 students & 18% Growth (Picciano & Seaman 2007) • Technology delivery is connecting fiber

4. Groups of Interest • Parents/Students • Seeking alternatives • Teachers • Focus on learning outcomes • School Entities (Districts) • Provide alternatives & Diverting Funds

5. Why Students Choose Cyber • Allows personalization • Doesn’t have constraints to serve masses • Customized Learning • Parents have direct control • Supplement • Additional Course Offerings • Credit Recovery/Advancement

6. Intrinsic Motivation • Structured • Connection to Certified Teachers • Control Over Exposure (Religion) • Engaging • Computer associated with Entertainment (Wijekumar, Meyer, Wagoneer, & Ferguson, 2006)

7. Extrinsic Motivation • Disenfranchisement with a school or district • Curricular • Social conflicts • Limited Teachers/Seats/Time • Supplement for purpose • Graduation, College Entrance, Scholarships

8. Reasons contd. • Sports • Social • Bullying • Arguments • Environment • Religion • Medical • Pregnancy • Family • Need to work • Run/Hide

9. Achievement & Failure • Parental Support • There is no teacher in the room • Need for digital connection • Substitute social interaction

10. Parental Involvement • Support & Monitor • Positive or Negative influence • Duties • Parent = On Task • Teacher = Content • Performance & Progress easily tracked

11. Decentralized Learning • High self-efficacy correlates to better achievement (DeTure, 2004) • Provide social interaction • Academic work • Social • Creates a community

12. Technology • Computer Failures • Proper training & support • Identifying at risk students

13. Issues with Attrition • Time Management • Student/Parent Misconceptions • Freedom vs. Structure • Grace periods/no credit enrollments (Roblyer, 2006)

14. Management • Self pacing (no hard deadlines) • Time management (Podoll & Randle, 2005) • Teacher is the Coach • Learners must pull information, not a push model

15. Misconceptions • Thought it was a game/entertainment • No Screening – Public Schools • Inclusion of learners w/ disabilities

16. Discrepancies • 28 days to stay or go (FLVS) • Still a “dropout” • Dropout Rates • 10% (Barbour & Mulcahy, 2008) • 70% (Roblyer, 2006) • Selection of High Achieving Students

17. Freedom vs. Structure • Balance independence/interaction • Failure from lack of teacher interaction (O’dwyer, 2007) • Desire collaboration • Lack support/Technologies • Requiring face to face contact increases retention • Decreases freedoms (Blomeyer, 2002

18. PA - What is a “Cyber School” • 12 Schools, 22,000 Students • Independent SD’s • Innovation/Non-traditional methods • FT Students K-12 (Pre K) • Different Modes of Delivery • Synchronous/Asynchronous

19. Staffing • Each has a Board of Directors & CEO • Only 75% of teachers must be certified • No findings on the impact • Part-time/Full-time

20. Funding • Why do traditional schools dislike cybers? • $ • $ • $

21. Brick/Mortar Funding **From Carr-Chellman & Marsh, 2009

22. Cyber School Funding **From Carr-Chellman & Marsh, 2009

23. Discrepancy in Funding **08/09 funding from http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/charter_school_funding/8661

24. Extra Curricular • Most cybers offer field trips/social activities • Home School Extra Curricular • Can Still Participate in Sports • Cyber reimburses school for cost

25. After Graduation from Cyber • Higher Education • Employment • Military – Does not recognize - 10% Rule • No data, using home school explanation

26. Special Education • 08-09 – Enrollment • Nearly 2700 Students • Cyber School Avg. 15.41% (State 15.2%) • Range 3.3% to 24.5%

27. Disabilities • Disabilities Reported ** • Autism, ED, Mental Retardation, Hearing Impairment, Specific Learning Disability, & Speech or Language Impairment **Means over 40 students in school

28. Special Education contd. • How are needs being met? • Support Services – IU’s • Modified Curriculum

29. CS AYP Status

30. Missing Research • Largely Anecdotal • US Dept of Ed – online K-12 analysis (2010) • Zero research on Special Education • Focus on Policy not academic outcomes (Cavanaugh, Barbour, & Clark, 2009) • Research is lagging behind practice • Limited research/rapid deployment (Beldarrian, 2006)

31. Research Questions • What Model of online education achieves the best learner outcomes? • Should a screening process be in place, knowing that there are specific characteristics that are associated with success?

32. Questions & Comments

33. What you really stayed for… Act 48 Code:GL073146

34. References • Barbour, M., & Mulcahy, D. (2008). How are they doing?: Examining student achievement in Virtual Schooling. Education in Rural Australia , 63-74. • Blomeyer, R. (2002). Online Learning for K-12 Students: What do we know now? North Central Regional Educational Laboratory , 1-20. • Cavanaugh, C., Barbour, M., & Clark, T. (2009). Research and Practice in K-12 Online Learning: A Review of Open Access Literature. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning . • DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive Style and Self-Efficacy: Predicting Student Success in Online Distance Education. The American Journal of Distance Education , 21-38. • Florida Virutal School. (2010). Retrieved 3 18, 2010, from http://www.flvs.net/Pages/default.aspx • Huerta, L., d'entremont, C., & Gonzalez, M. (2006). Cyber Charter Schools: Can Accountability Keep Pace with Innovation? Phi Delta Kappan , 23-30. • O'Dwyer, L., Carey, R., & Kleiman, G. (2007). A Study of the Effectiveness of the Louisiana Algebra I Online Course. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 289-306. • Podoll, S., & Randle, D. (2005). Building a Virtual High School....Click By Click. T H E Journal , 14-19. • Roblyer, M. (2006). Online High-School Programs that Work. Phi Delta Kappan , 55-63.