Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

VSS 2012 - North American and International Online and Blended Learning: What can Programs Learn from Each Other?


Published on

Clark, T., Barbour, M. K., Bacsich, P., Ebert, J., Powell, A., & Ferdig, R. (2012, October). North American and international online and blended learning: What can programs learn from each other? A panel presentation at the annual Virtual School Symposium, New Orleans, LA.

This panel session takes an international look at key policy and practice issues that need to be addressed in K-12 online and blended education. What can North American educators learn from international programs, which are mainly blended? Conversely, international K-12 educators want to know, what can we learn from North American programs, which are mainly online? The moderators asked chapter authors from around the world to help them respond to these questions through a forthcoming book.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

VSS 2012 - North American and International Online and Blended Learning: What can Programs Learn from Each Other?

  1. 1. North American & International Online & Blended Learning What Can Programs Learn from Each Other? Virtual School Symposium 201210/22/2012 1
  2. 2. Agenda • Introductions • Join Us Online • Overview • Panelist Presentations • Interactive Panel Dialogue • Interactive Q & A10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 2
  3. 3. Introductions • Moderators • Tom Clark, TA Consulting • Michael Barbour, Wayne State University (via Skype) • Panelists • Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting • Jhone Ebert, Clark County School District • Recuperating (here in spirit) • Rick Ferdig, Wayne State University10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 3
  4. 4. Visit our Panel’s Online Page Respond to VSS email re “Virtual School Symposium 2012 Community” If already active, sign in at: • Click on Schedule –>Monday Oct 22-> 10:00 AM -> “and 7 more” -> “What can North American and International…” • Start a conversation, or add to one10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 4
  5. 5. Overview • What are some similarities and differences in online and blended learning programs in North America and other areas of the world?10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 5
  6. 6. 2011 iNACOL Study • 54 nations responded to 2011 survey by iNACOL /Atlas Economic Research Foundation • 65% of responding nations said that online learning (OLL) or blended learning (BL) opportunities were available to at least some students10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 6
  7. 7. 2011 iNACOL Study • Challenges identified include sporadic interest in OLL, and a general lack of tech access, funding and governmental vision & leadership • Wide variety of levels of activity/access • Mozambique: 1% have Internet access; 12% have electricity; 50% illiterate. Little OLL/BL. • China: 200+ online public schools enroll 600,000 + students10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 7
  8. 8. International Trends/Issues (vs N. Am.) • Trend 1: Blended & online choices most avail. to students in urban areas of developed countries • Intl: Less than half indicated availability to students in rural or suburban settings or small schools. • N Am: Online choices are available in all areas - rural, urban, suburban; blended ops in a variety of school districts • Trend 2: Growth in digital learning stems from shared authority between local schools & national govts • Intl: Schools in many countries have a high level of autonomy in developing & promoting OLL/BL. Less than 25% had national quality standards for online • N. Am: School authority primarily by state/province, with districts deciding about participation; growth varies widely across states/provinces.10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 8
  9. 9. International Trends/Issues (vs N. Am.) • Trend 3: Specialized teacher training is not required, but is encouraged and available • Intl: When countries fund OLL/BL, few require specific license/credential (11%) or training (25%). 72% reporting OLL/BL reported PD was available for teachers • N. Am: Six U. S. states (12%) offered voluntary credential in 2011; WI, NC require PD. PD generally is available. • Trend 4: Blended learning is occurring with much greater frequency than online learning • Intl: Most use of eLearning tools supports in-class activities. Little learning exclusively online. Mostly BL. • N.Am: Program growth is mainly in district-led programs, which are often OLL/BL. • Trend 5: Online learning mainly for special or extenuating circumstances (not so much in N. Am)10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 9
  10. 10. International Trends/Issues (vs N. Am.) • Issue 1: No clearly defined international understanding of online learning • Intl: OLL is thought to mean any integration of ICTs. Growth reported as OLL was mainly in BL. Challenge - Lack of knowledge of OLL as a method. • N. Am: Online learning (OLL) is understood as education via Internet where teacher is remote from student. • Issue 2: The lack of equitable access to the Internet, technology tools, and resources for online learning • Intl: Many countries report a widening digital divide. Lack of electricity, tech infrastructure, and illiteracy prevent access. • N. Am: Digital divide is less. Budget cuts/regulatory issues restrict access, access issues vary by state/province.10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 10
  11. 11. International Trends/Issues (vs N. Am.) • Issue 3: A lack of government funding or policies to promote online learning vs. traditional schools • Intl: Funding limited. Most initiatives focus on tech integration, not OLL. Sporadic interest in OLL. • N. Am: More funding, but varies by state/province. Decreased federal funding. Policies vary widely. • Issue 4: The need to focus on teacher training and teacher roles • Intl: lack of focus on teacher training; limited training on new teacher roles in OLL/BL. • N.Am: Some focus on OLL/BL teacher training and new roles in many states/provinces.10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 11
  12. 12. Panelist Presentations • Presentations about OLL/BL practice and policy in their part of the world • Special Questions of Interest: • What are some program practices and policies that appear relevant across states, provinces and nations? • What can North American and International educators learn from each other?10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 12
  13. 13. Paul Bacsich, VISCED project EUROPE – IS DIFFERENT!10/22/2012 13
  14. 14. Europe • Funded under EU LLP KA3 ICT • Circa US$0.5m funding • January 2011 to December 2012 • Sero is project manager & scientific lead • Leverages on Re.ViCa (on virtual unis) • Leads to POERUP (on OER)10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 14
  15. 15. Europe – the numbers • Europe in our sense includes not only the EU but the countries in geographic Europe including all Russia and Turkey, and Caucasus • Around 70 virtual schools identified • Likely to be over 100 • However, most countries have only one or two • Main exceptions are UK, Spain, Finland and Sweden10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 15
  16. 16. Europe: Key differences 1-4 1. Most activity is blended – ministries thought (or hoped) that there were no virtual schools (any more) 2. Virtual schools are mainly small (few hundred) 3. Much larger focus on expatriates and disadvantaged/ill (homeschooling is often illegal) 4. Virtual schools are less regulated10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 16
  17. 17. Europe: Key differences 5-9 5. Systems are more “classroom” in focus – not nec. “synchronous” 6. Often can draw on minimal linguistic resources ( < 3m often) 7. Virtual schools are more entrepreneurial, even state ones 8. Virtual schools for adult credit recovery is a big driver, in some countries (UK, Spain, some Nordic) 9. More(?) interpenetration of virtual schools and virtual colleges (UK…)10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 17
  18. 18. Europe: Policy constraints • Some European countries are federal (UK, Germany, Spain) • Some (UK) even have zero pan-country ministry role (cf Canada) • “Rights of the Child” issue inhibits homeschooling – thus(?) virtual schooling • Focus on nation-building/socialisation • Most ministries not interested: “we thought they had gone”10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 18
  19. 19. Finesse: at EU level Virtual schools are key to various EU initiatives: • STEM and other shortage subjects • Travelling and other excluded communities • Broadband uptake and open education But issues with: • No EU right to acceptable level and choice of education EU-wide (islands…) • No Bologna for schools credit transfer10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 19
  20. 20. Supporting the 21st Century LearnerJhone EbertChief Technology OfficerClark County School District
  21. 21. Clark County School DistrictThe District employs 37,115 employees 2012-2013 General fundincluding full-time, part-time, substitute, and operating budgettemporary employees $2.062 billion2012-2013 enrollment Student Population 1.50% 0.50%311,429 students Hispanic/Latino 6.00% Caucasian 6.60% CCSD is the357 schools Black/African American 5th• 217 Elementary schools Largest 12.00% 44.00%• 59 Middle schools Asian School• 49 High schools Multiracial District in• 24 Alternative schools the Nation. 29.40%• 8 Special schools Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander Native American
  22. 22. Challenges Too few islands of excellence Achievement gaps are too great Reserved expectations of excellenceStrategies Embrace transparency Welcome criticism Partner with critical friends
  23. 23. Focus for Action Harness breakthrough innovation and redefine how schooling is accomplished. Fully tap the potential of a new model of schooling. Align resources to our highest priorities and execute with precision. Continue to do what works and stop doing what does not.
  24. 24. CCSD Technology105,000 computers supported with an All schools and sites areaverage child to one computer ration of 4.9. interconnected via a 2.5 Gb/s internet service.Over 150 million email messagesare delivered each year; spam filterscaught 300 million spam messages last Over 19,000 data switchesyear. Approximately 120,0006,000 business process jobs data portsare processed monthly.There are over 33,000 telephones Over 12,400 Wi-Fion the CCSD telephone network, with access points areover 69,000,000 calls processed installed in CCSD schools.per year.
  25. 25. Nevada LegislationFlexible Credit Legislation Credit by Exam NRS 389.171 Distance/Alternative Ed: Alternative Scheduling NAC 387.193 & NAC 387.195 Credit for Community Service NRS 388.165Other Flexible Legislation Academic Plan Requirements NRS 388.165 & NRS 388.205
  26. 26. Nevada Virtual Schools Nevada Dept. of Ed.approves all online programs20 approved programs 13 District Online Programs 7 Online Charter Schools
  27. 27. CCSD Virtual HS 2004 first graduation Full catalog of courses 172 Full-time currently 12,000+ enrollments in 2011-12 State-wide 350 non-CCSD students in 2011-12
  28. 28. Blended & Online Learning in CCSD 100,00 students blended/online by 2015 Shiftingthe K-12 learning environment from the present arrangement to one that is instead almost entirely composed of blended or full-time virtual learning
  29. 29. Teacher Certification ProgramTier Approach  Tier I – Foundation Philosophy and Pedagogy  Tier II – Emphasis Tools and practicesSpring 2012  5 courses  State-wide  700 + credits issuedFall 2012  9 courses  300+ enrollees
  30. 30. Lessons Learned Authoring verse Buying Curriculum costs and alignment LearningManagement System (LMS) and Student Information System (SIS) systems integration Teacher Training pedagogy and tools Technology Infrastructure
  31. 31. Our Charge “All our efforts have one purpose. It is to ensure all students are ready by exit.” ― Superintendent Dwight D. Jones
  32. 32. Virtual Learning Network VLN Primary Te Kura Several tertiarys10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 32
  33. 33. Common Obstacles • Funding and resources • Lack of vision • Lack of consistency between clusters • Lack of co-operation • inter-cluster • intra-cluster10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 33
  34. 34. Pockets of Innovation • Changing teacher practice • Opening classrooms • Mentor teacher • Considering student learning space10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 34
  35. 35. 10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 35
  36. 36. Interactive Dialogue • What can North American and International educators learn from each other?10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 36
  37. 37. Q& A • What questions do you have for our panelists? • What policies or practices would you like to share? • What are you interested in learning about International & North American programs?10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 37
  38. 38. Thank You! Moderators Moderators Tom Clark Michael Barbour (Skype) Panelists Allison Powell[ Paul Bacsich Jhone Ebert jhone@interact.ccsd.net10/22/2012 North American & International Programs 38