Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Similar to MUN 2015 - K-12 Online Learning in Canada: Situating Newfoundland and Labrador in the National Context(20)

Advertisement

More from Michael Barbour(20)

Advertisement

MUN 2015 - K-12 Online Learning in Canada: Situating Newfoundland and Labrador in the National Context

  1. K-­‐12  Online  Learning  in  Canada:   Situa5ng  Newfoundland  and  Labrador   in  the  Na5onal  Context   Michael  K.  Barbour   Sacred  Heart  University  
  2. State of the Nation: K–12 Online Learning in Canada ® Written by Michael K. Barbour, Wayne State University
  3. Canadian eLearning Network http://CANeLearn.net
  4. Canadian eLearning Network •  CANeLearn  is  a  pan-­‐Canadian  network  of  K12   online  and  blended  learning  schools  and   organiza=ons   •  Focus  is  on  sharing  resources,  PD,  research   •  Intent  is  to  leverage  collec=ve  to  promote   online  and  blended  learning  opportuni=es   •  hFp://CANeLearn.net  
  5. Mission    CANeLearn's  mission  is  to  provide   leadership  that  champions  student   success  in  online  and  blended   learning  and  provides  members  with   networking,  collabora=on,  and   research  opportuni=es.      
  6. http://canelearn.net/state-of-the-nation-k-12-online-learning-in-canada/
  7. Methodology  
  8. Na=onal  Overview  -­‐  Ac=vity  
  9. Na=onal  Overview  -­‐  Ac=vity   Province/Territory # of K-12 students # enroled in distance education Percent involvement NL 67,436 884 1.3% NS 122,643 ~2,720 2.2% PE 20,131 108 0.5% NB 101,079 2615 2.6% QC 1,307,026 ~70,5000 5.4% ON 2,015,411 78,095 3.9% MB 200,807 ~12,000 6.0% SK 172,205 ~10,000 1 5.8% AB 616,375 ~75,000 12.2% BC 635,057 77,912 12.3% YT 5,122 182 3.5% NT 8,204 228 2.8% NU 9,728 33 <0.1% Federal 106,500 ~1,800 0.1% Total 5,387,724 332,077 6.2% !
  10. Na=onal  Overview  -­‐  Ac=vity  
  11. Newfoundland  and  Labrador   •  Single  province-­‐wide  online  program  since   2001   – grew  out  of  district-­‐based  ini=a=ves  and  legacy   distance  educa=on  program     •  No  specific  policies  for  online  learning,  but   provincial  program  is  housed  within  MoE  
  12. Nova  Sco=a   •  Recent  crea=on  of  a  single  province-­‐wide   program   – grew  out  of  district-­‐based  online  ini=a=ves     •  11  provisions  included  in  the  agreement   between  the  Government  &  teachers  union   – defining  the  work  day,  professional  development   requirements,  program  oversight,  class  size,  &   management  of  the  distance  program   •  Provincial  program  is  housed  within  MOE    
  13. Prince  Edward  Island   •  Uses  online  learning  program  in  New   Brunswick   – phased  out  legacy  video  conferencing  program   several  years  ago     •  MOE  has  issued  two  direc=ves  since  2001   containing  guidelines  for  the  use  of  distance   educa=on  in  K-­‐12  environment  
  14. New  Brunswick   •  Single  province-­‐wide  program  since  1998   (English  &  French)   – used  frequently  by  face-­‐to-­‐face  teachers  too   •  Ministry  has  created  a  100+  page  handbook   that  districts  have  to  agree  to  in  order  to   par=cipate  in  online  learning   •  Provincial  program  is  housed  within  MOE  
  15. Quebec   •  Several  individual  online  and  correspondence   programs  that  partner  with  school  districts   – addi=onal  a  couple  of  programs  that  provide  for   connected  classrooms  or  blended  learning   •  MOE  devolved  distance  educa=on  to  the   districts  about  a  decade  ago   – currently  no  regula=on    
  16. Ontario   •  Primarily  district-­‐based  program  using     the  provincial  CMS  and  course  content   – coopera=on  between  boards  through  consor=ums   – Growing  number  of  private  schools   – Independent  Learning  Centre     •  Ministry  has  created  contracts  that  districts   have  to  agree  to  in  order  to  par=cipate  in   online  learning  based  on  the  Provincial  E-­‐ Learning  Strategy    
  17. Manitoba   •  Province  offers  three  forms   – MOE  manages  correspondence  &  instruc=onal   television  program   – districts  manage  their  own  web-­‐based  program   using  MOE  content   •  MOE  approves  programs  and  regulates  the   use  of  their  distance  content   v   virtual  collegiate  pilot  program  
  18. Saskatchewan   •  Primarily  district-­‐based  programs   – most  have  their  own  capacity  in  some  form   – sixteen  districts  provided  space  to  external   students  through  the  Saskatchewan  Distance   Learning  Course  Repository   •  Province  devolved  responsibility  to    districts   –  no  regula=on  
  19. Alberta   •  ~23  district-­‐based,  several  private,  &  province-­‐ wide  programs   •  MOE  has  no  specific  online  learning  policies   – reviewed  distributed  learning  around  2007-­‐09   – released  Inspiring  Ac7on  on  Educa7on  in  2011   – underwent  external  review  of  distance  educa=on   regula=on  &  ac=vity  around  2010-­‐12  
  20. Bri=sh  Columbia   •  76  programs   – 60  public  district-­‐based   – 16  independent     •  Most  extensive  distributed  learning   regula=ons   – funding  follows  student   – quality  audit  process  
  21. Yukon   •  Aurora  Virtual  School,  and  uses  programs   from  Bri=sh  Columbia  &  Alberta   –  Watson  Lake  Secondary  School  blended  learning  project       •  Primarily  regulated  by  Ministry  or  through   inter-­‐provincial  agreements    
  22. Northwest  Territories   •  Pilot  being  conducted  involving  five  small   community  high  schools  across  three  regional   boards  of  educa=on   – u=lizes  programs  from  Alberta   •  Primarily  regulated  by  Ministry  or  through   inter-­‐provincial  agreements  
  23. Nunavut   •  U=lizes  program  from  Alberta     •  Primarily  regulated  through  inter-­‐provincial   agreements   –  development  of  a  ministerial  direc=ve  regarding  access  to   and  delivery  of  distance  educa=on  has  been  underway   since  2012  
  24. Federal  Programs   •  Sporadic  programs   –  two  in  Ontario  (Keeway=nook  Internet  High  School  and   Gai  hon  nya  ni:  the  Amos  Key  Jr.  E~Learning  Ins=tute),   one  in  Manitoba  Wapaskwa  Virtual  Collegiate),  and  one   in  Alberta  (SCcyber  E-­‐learning  Community)   –  Credenda  Virtual  High  School  (Saskatchewan)  ceased   opera=ons  following  the  2012-­‐13  school  year  due  to  a   lack  of  funding   •  No  longer  enter  into  service  agreements  directly   with  e-­‐learning  programs  
  25. Trends  -­‐  Growth  
  26. Trends  -­‐  Growth   Newfoundland & Labrador 0   200   400   600   800   1000   1200   1400   1600   1800   2000   2000-­‐01   (8)   2001-­‐02   (16)   2002-­‐03   (19)   2003-­‐04   (22)   2004-­‐05   (26)   2005-­‐06   (31)   2006-­‐07   (32)   2007-­‐08   (36)   2008-­‐09   (36)   2009-­‐10   (40)   2010-­‐11   (38)   2011-­‐12   (38)   2012-­‐13   (39)   2013-­‐14   (34)   2014-­‐15   (36)  
  27. Trends  -­‐  Growth   0   10,000   20,000   30,000   40,000   50,000   60,000   70,000   80,000   90,000   100,000   2006-­‐07   2007-­‐08   2008-­‐09   2009-­‐10   2010-­‐11   2011-­‐12   2012-­‐13   2013-­‐14   British Columbia
  28. Trends  –  BeFer  Data   Province/Territory # of K-12 students # enroled in distance education Percent involvement NL 67,436 884 1.3% NS 122,643 ~2,720 2.2% PE 20,131 108 0.5% NB 101,079 2615 2.6% QC 1,307,026 ~70,5000 5.4% ON 2,015,411 78,095 3.9% MB 200,807 ~12,000 6.0% SK 172,205 ~10,000 1 5.8% AB 616,375 ~75,000 12.2% BC 635,057 77,912 12.3% YT 5,122 182 3.5% NT 8,204 228 2.8% NU 9,728 33 <0.1% Federal 106,500 ~1,800 0.1% Total 5,387,724 332,077 6.2% !
  29. Trends  –  BeFer  Data   1.  The  Saskatchewan  Ministry  of  Educa=on   provided  the  figure  of  2,611  students.   However,  based  on  previous  edi=ons  of  this   study,  the  Ministry  figure  onen  represents   between  30%-­‐35%  of  the  total.  
  30. Trends  –  BeFer  Data   •  26%  response  rate  in  2011   •  14%  response  rate  in  2012   •  21%  response  rate  in  2013    
  31. Trends  –  Blended  Learning   •  more  than  a  third  of  the  enrollments  in  the  New   Brunswick  provincial  learning  management  system  are   from  classroom  teachers  and  students  using  the  content   in  a  blended  fashion   •  while  the  Learn  program  in  Quebec  serves  approximately   5,300  students  engaged  in  its  distance  educa=on   program,  it  has  more  than  150,000  enrollments  from   classroom  teachers  and  students  using  asynchronous   course  content   •  Bri=sh  Columbia’s  Navigate  Program  in  the  Courtenay/ Comox  school  district  received  iNACOL’s  2014  Innova=ve   Prac=ce  of  the  year  award  
  32. Trends  –  Suppor=ve  Unions   •  NLTA  partnered  with  the  CDLI  to  create  a  Virtual  Teachers   Centre  to  use  the  infrastructure  and  exper=se  of  the  K-­‐12   online  learning  program  to  deliver  online  professional   development   •  several  teacher  unions  have  invested  in  research  into  how   teaching  at  a  distance  differs  from  teaching  in  the  classroom,   and  what  impact  that  has  on  the  workload  and  quality  of  life   of  their  members  who  teach  at  a  distance  (e.g.,  ATA  &  BCTF)   •  NSTU  has  11  provisions  related  to  distance  educa=on  in  its   contract  that  focus  on  teacher  cer=fica=on,  workload  issues,   defini=on  of  a  school  day  for  DE,  school-­‐based  supervision   and  administra=on  of  DE  students,  DE  class  size,  professional   development,  and  governance  of  DE  programs  
  33. Trends  –  More  Research   •  beyond  a  small  number  of  descrip=ve  and/or   overview  pieces,  there  is  very  liFle  research   •  BCTF  -­‐  an  effort  to  understand  what  K-­‐12   distance,  online  and  blended  learning  mean  for  its   members  and  the  nature  of  their  work  life   •  MUN  -­‐  two  federally  funded  ini=a=ves:   1.  the  Centre  for  TeleLearning  and  Rural  Educa=on     2.  the  Killick  Centre  for  E-­‐Learning  Research  
  34. Because  Research  Is  Important!!!  
  35. Supplemental  Student  Performance   Literature Finding Bigbie & McCarroll (2000) …over half of students who completed FLVS courses scored an A in their course & only 7% received a failing grade. Cavanaugh (2001) …effect size slightly in favor of K-12 distance education. Cavanaught et al. (2004) …negative effect size for K-12 distance education. Cavanaugh et al. (2005) FLVS students performed better on a non-mandatory assessment tool than students from the traditional classroom. McLeod et al. (2005) FLVS students performed better on an algebraic assessment than their classroom counterparts. Means et al. (2009) …small effect size favoring online cohorts over face-to- face cohorts based on limited K-12 studies. Chingos & Schwerdt (2014) FLVS students perform about the same or somewhat better on state tests once their pre-high-school characteristics are taken into account.
  36. Bigbie & McCarroll (2000)   between 25% and 50% of students had dropped out of their FLVS courses over the previous two-year period   Cavanaugh et al. (2005)   speculated that the virtual school students who did take the assessment may have been more academically motivated and naturally higher achieving students   McLeod et al. (2005)   results of the student performance were due to the high dropout rate in virtual school courses   Means et al. (2009) Given the small number of studies that addressed K-12 learners in the meta-analysis, attempts to test for statistical differences between the mean effect for K-12 learners and those for other types of learners should be viewed as merely suggestive
  37. Literature Finding Kozma et al. (1998) “…vast majority of VHS students in their courses were planning to attend a four-year college.” Espinoza et al. (1999) “VHS courses are predominantly designated as ‘honors,’ and students enrolled are mostly college bound.” Roblyer & Elbaum (2000) “…only students with a high need to control and structure their own learning may choose distance formats freely.” Clark et al. (2002) “IVHS students were highly motivated, high achieving, self-directed and/or who liked to work independently.” Mills (2003) “…typical online student was an A or B student.” Watkins (2005) “…45% of the students who participated in e- learning opportunities in Michigan were either advanced placement or academically advanced students.”
  38. Literature Finding CO (2006) “Online student scores in math, reading, and writing have been lower than scores for students statewide over the last three years.” OH (2009) …online charter school students experienced significantly lower achievement gains compared to brick-and-mortar charter schools in the state. OH (2009) Online charter schools “rank higher when looking at their ‘value- added’ progress over one year rather than simply measuring their one-time testing performance.” WI (2010) “Virtual charter school pupils’ median scores on the mathematics section of the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination were almost always lower than statewide medians during the 2005-06 and 2006-07 school years.” CO (2011) “Half of the online students wind up leaving within a year. When they do, they’re often further behind academically then when they started.” MN (2011) “Compared with all students statewide, full-time online students had significantly lower proficiency rates on the math MCA-II but similar proficiency rates in reading.”
  39. Literature Finding AZ (2011) “[N]early nine of every 10 students enrolled in at least one statewide online course, all had graduation rates and AIMS math passing rates below the state average” OH (2011) “[N]early 97 percent of Ohio's traditional school districts have a higher score than the average score of the seven statewide” online charter schools. Those schools in Ohio also underperformed brick-and-mortar schools in graduation rates. PA (2011) 100% of these online charter schools performed significantly worse than feeder schools in both reading and math. AR (2012) …online students performed at levels comparable to their face-to-face counterparts in six out of eight measures, and on the remaining two measures online students outperformed their face-to-face counterparts at a 0.10 statistically significant level. National (2012) “…students at K12 Inc., the nation’s largest virtual school company, are falling further behind in reading and math scores than students in brick- and-mortar schools.” KS (2015) “Virtual school students perform similarly to traditional school students in reading before and after controlling for student demographics. After controlling for demographic differences, virtual school students’ performance in math was similar to that of traditional school students.”
  40. Full-­‐Time  Online  Students   • Understanding  that  K¹²-­‐managed  schools  are   serving  large  numbers  of  students  who  enter   behind  grade  level  in  math  and  reading     K12  Inc.  Public  Affairs.  (2012).  Response  to  NEPC  report  on  K12  Inc..  Herndon,  VA:  K12,   Inc..  Retrieved  from  hFp://www.k12.com/response-­‐to-­‐nepc#.VPfKu2TF_Kk  
  41. •  K12  Inc.  virtual  schools  enroll  approximately  the  same   percentages  of  black  students  but  substan5ally  more  white   students  and  fewer  Hispanic  students  rela=ve  to  public  schools   in  the  states  in  which  the  company  operates   •  39.9%  of  K12  students  qualify  for  free  or  reduced  lunch,   compared  with  47.2%  for  the  same-­‐state  comparison  group.   •  K12  virtual  schools  enroll  a  slightly  smaller  propor5on  of   students  with  disabili5es  than  schools  in  their  states  and  in  the   na=on  as  a  whole  (9.4%  for  K12  schools,  11.5%  for  same-­‐state   comparisons,  and  13.1%  in  the  na=on).   •  “Students  classified  as  English  language  learners  are   significantly  under-­‐represented  in  K12  schools;  on  average  the   K12  schools  enroll  0.3%  ELL  students  compared  with  13.8%  in   the  same-­‐state  comparison  group  and  9.6%  in  the  na=on.”   Miron,  G.  &  Urschel,  J.  (2012).  Understanding  and  improving  full-­‐7me  virtual  schools.  Denver,  CO:  Na=onal   Educa=on  Policy  Center.   Reality  of  Full-­‐Time  Online  Students  
  42. Newfoundland  and  Labrador  
  43. Student  Performance  and  Students   But  are  we  really  comparing   apples  to  apples?  
  44. Mulcahy,  Dibbon,  &  Norberg  (2008)     •  study  of  rural  schooling  in  three  schools  on  the   south  coast  of  the  Labrador   •  found  two  had  a  higher  percentage  of  students   enrolled  in  basic-­‐level  courses   •  speculated  because  the  only  way  students  could  do   academic  course  at  their  school  was  online,  some   students  specifically  chose  the  basic  stream  to  avoid   taking  an  online  course   Students  who  enroll  in  the  basic  stream  are  not   eligible  for  post-­‐secondary  admiFance!  
  45. Academic  Tracks   •  English  language  arts   •  mathema=cs   • academic  stream  -­‐  gradua=on,   college,  university,  etc.   • basic  stream  -­‐  gradua=on,   trade  school   • CDLI  only  offered  academic   streamed  courses  
  46. Enrollment  -­‐  English  Language  Arts  
  47. Enrollment  -­‐  Mathema=cs  
  48. But  What  Does  This  Data  Really  Say?  
  49. The  Challenge   Whether  online   learning  can     be  suitable  for     all  K-­‐12  students?       (Mulcahy,  2002)    
  50. The  Challenge   How  do  we   create  an   environment   where  all  K-­‐12   students  can     be  successful   when  they  learn   online?  
  51. Your   Ques=ons   and   Comments  
  52.  Director  of  Doctoral  Studies   Sacred  Heart  University,  USA   mkbarbour@gmail.com   hFp://www.michaelbarbour.com    
Advertisement