Should every Georgia high school student take an online course? Why?
Update: This afternoon the House Education Committee passed the online learning bill with the mandate removed.
Now, the bill urges school systems to maximize digital learning rather than mandating that students take at least one online course to graduate.
In presenting his bill, state Sen. Chip Rogers said the legislation was needed to prepare students to work digitally and ready them for “a future outside the classroom. Society is moving in that direction at a rapid rate.”
A second reason to push systems to embrace greater online learning, said Rogers, is that students won’t know if they learn better digitally if they lack the option.
Now, this was the original post this morning:
Senate Bill 289 sponsored by state Sen. Chip Rogers, R-Woodstock, would mandate that all Georgia high school students complete at least one online course starting in 2014.
The problem with the bill is that there’s no reliable body of research documenting the effectiveness of online learning in k-12. This bill seems premature given that lack of evidence.
The bill states: Beginning with students entering ninth grade in the 2014-2015 school year, each student shall complete prior to graduation at least one course containing online learning. This requirement shall be met through an online course offered by the Georgia Virtual School established pursuant to Code Section 20-2-319.1, through an online dual enrollment course offered by a postsecondary institution, or through a provider approved pursuant to subsection (c) of Code Section 20-2-319.3.
The bill will be discussed today at 1 p.m. at the House Education Sub-Committee on Academic Support in Room 506 in the CLOB.
In its own meta analysis of all the research on the issue, the U. S. Department of Education warned that there was a “small number of rigorous published studies contrasting online and face-to-face learning conditions for k–12 students. In light of this small corpus, caution is required in generalizing to the k–12 population because the results are derived for the most part from studies in other settings (e.g., medical training, higher education).”
More promising than online learning is blended instruction, which combines traditional face-to-face classroom teaching with some computer-based activities. Many schools in Georgia are already doing this.
The U.S. DOE concluded:
In recent experimental and quasi-experimental studies contrasting blends of online and face-to-face instruction with conventional face-to-face classes, blended instruction has been more effective, providing a rationale for the effort required to design and implement blended approaches. When used by itself, online learning appears to be as effective as conventional classroom instruction, but not more so.
However, several caveats are in order: Despite what appears to be strong support for blended learning applications, the studies in this meta-analysis do not demonstrate that online learning is superior as a medium. In many of the studies showing an advantage for blended learning, the online and classroom conditions differed in terms of time spent, curriculum and pedagogy. It was the combination of elements in the treatment conditions (which was likely to have included additional learning time and materials as well as additional opportunities for collaboration) that produced the observed learning advantages. At the same time, one should note that online learning is much more conducive to the expansion of learning time than is face-to-face instruction.
Finally, the great majority of estimated effect sizes in the meta-analysis are for undergraduate and older students, not elementary or secondary learners. Although this meta-analysis did not find a significant effect by learner type, when learners’ age groups are considered separately, the mean effect size is significantly positive for undergraduate and other older learners but not for K–12 students. Without new random assignment or controlled quasi-experimental studies of the effects of online learning options for K–12 students, policy-makers will lack scientific evidence of the effectiveness of these emerging alternatives to face-to-face instruction.
I often ask education experts about virtual/distance learning in the k-12 arena and routinely hear the same answer: We don’t know enough yet. In a conference call last week on improving high school rigor, I asked Patte Barth, director of the Center for Public Education, whether it makes sense to mandate online courses as a condition of high school graduation.
“I have been looking into it and one big finding is that we don’t really have a lot data on the effectiveness,” she said. “The ability to work online is a 21st century skill, so I think there is an argument for making online courses a condition of graduation. But we are also dealing with adolescents who are learning how to work independently. It is something they are only developing. When you send kids out to the cyber sea without a lifeguard, I am a little skeptical of what kind of results you can expect. There are some models for what they call blended learning. To me, that seems to make sense.”
The issue also came up during Education Week’s recent Quality Counts panel. Asked about the role of computer learning, Emiliana Vegas, a senior economist in the education research hub of the World Bank, said World Bank had been evaluating the evidence on computer learning.
“It is very thin and mixed,” Vegas said. “Our conclusion is that it is inevitable that schools will use more computer-learning and they probably should because the world is changing in that direction. It is another tool that teachers have at their disposal. But it is not a substitute. It is not solution in itself.”
The research shows high failure and dropout rates in distance learning. Here is an excerpt from a study by University of Tennessee researchers M.D. Roblyer and Lloyd Davis:
Despite anticipated and real benefits of virtual schooling, it is not unusual for virtual schools to report a dropout rate of from 40-70% (Oblender, 2002; State of Colorado, 2006), though some established schools claim a dropout rate from 10-20%. In the case of one program, it was found that virtual students were forced to repeat grades at a rate four times that of students statewide (Rouse, 2005). Some virtual school programs have addressed high dropout and failure rates through front-end means such selecting and admitting students on the basis of identified criteria, instituting required pre-course orientations, and increasing the length of the drop-add period to 28 or more days. Some schools have also increased levels of students monitoring and facilitation. Virtual schools report no data on the success of the latter strategies, but informal reports indicated they have met with at least some success (Pape, Revenaugh, Watson, & Wicks, 2006).
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
129 comments Add your comment
@RenPrep
March 14th, 2012
10:38 am
Hmmm…this smells like a cost saving measure to me.
Online is a great supplement and can be incredibly beneficial to the autodidacts among our student population…but most students really need a person who is an expert in their content to facilitate their learning.
Forcing students to take an online course seems like a bit much. Offer the option. But making it mandatory ? I can’t get behind that.
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
10:41 am
Oh, by the way. Teachers, don’t feel threatened by this legislation. If you watched the 60 Minutes segment Sunday night with Sal Khan and his Khan Academy, you will see that he is reiterating what i said in my TED Talk 3 years ago: that teachers need to become mentors. Students become empowered, and, ultimately, students learn. Watch the episode online and you’ll see how energized the teachers are. They are not threatened. This is “blended learning” at its best.
Hillbilly D
March 14th, 2012
10:44 am
Should online courses be available? Sure, as long as it’s economically feasible. Should they be required for everybody? Of course not.
Mary Elizabeth
March 14th, 2012
10:45 am
@teacher&mom, 10:17 am
” ‘AGAIN A NOTE TO THE AJC INVESTIGATIVE STAFF: When are you going to do an investigative report on ALEC and how it is heavily influencing Georgia’s educational legislation, i.e. Charter Schools, School Vouchers, On-line Courses Mandated, School Choice Week.’
Great question. ‘Any comments from the AJC staff regarding Mary Elizabeth’s question?’ ”
—————————————————————————–
AND
@Maureen Downey, 10:20 am
“@teacher&mom, The AJC education investigative team has been working on a yearlong project that is close to publication. I will pass these notes to the editors who head the projects reporters.
Maureen”
==========================================================
Thank you for your question to Ms. Downey, teacher&mom.
And, a thank you, also, to Ms. Downey for the revealing response. I was delighted to read it. I will look forward to reading the education investigative team’s yearlong project uncovering ALEC’s influence in Georgia’s educational legislation.
Becky Milton
March 14th, 2012
10:46 am
My question is: How will our children with disabilities be affected by this?
Maureen Downey
March 14th, 2012
10:49 am
@Becky, If you look at the full bill — the link is there in the first line — you will see that the bill does exempt students who cannot take online courses.
It states:
The State Board of Education shall be authorized to provide for exemptions 25 to the requirements of this Code section for students who are disabled and not able to participate in an online course.”
C Jae of EAV
March 14th, 2012
11:02 am
@God Bless The Teacher & @Catlady – It certainly sounds like this bill is a boondoggle waiting to happen.
@Mary Elizabeth – I’ve been saying public edu is a big biz for a while on this blog. The info you provided strengthens my point and clearly indicates the problem isn’t exclusive to charter school movement. Every sector of public education is subject to corruptive influence of private enterprise. As stakeholders, we need to be ever dilligent in holding our civic representatives on every level accountable for their stewardship of public funds.
teacher and parent
March 14th, 2012
11:07 am
As a mother of two and an experienced teacher, I am most pleased with the progressive movement of Senate Bill 289. The bill not only represents a forward movement in instruction, but also Georgia’s interest in presenting students of diverse educational backgrounds with an opportunity to participate in the benefits of online learning.
As noted on the Georgia Virtual School website, the scores on the End of Course exam continue to surpass those of the state, and this, as parent, is a wonderful example of the focused instruction offered in the online classroom. Students are encouraged to become independent thinkers and learners, and online learning is the fusion of focused instruction and the opportunity for students to gain more ownership of their individual learning processes , as well prepare students for online learning requirements at the university level.
I remain a proponent of Senate Bill 289, as well as a supporter of the virtual classroom and all on-line instructors. Well done, Georgia!
Becky Milton
March 14th, 2012
11:28 am
Thanks, Maureen!
Mary Elizabeth
March 14th, 2012
11:29 am
C Jae of EAV, 11:02 am
“@Mary Elizabeth –I’ve been saying public edu is a big biz for a while on this blog. The info you provided strengthens my point and clearly indicates the problem isn’t exclusive to charter school movement. Every sector of public education is subject to corruptive influence of private enterprise. As stakeholders, we need to be ever dilligent in holding our civic representatives on every level accountable for their stewardship of public funds.”
===============================================
I am in agreement with you regarding your statement, above, C Jae. And, I thank you for your input.
I hope that you have had a chance to read my post of 3/13/12 at 12:17 am (late Monday night) which was written to you, specifically, (on the March 8th thread, “Micromanaging from Atlanta. . .”) in response to a post you had written me. I took the time to illustrate, with several examples, how the growing movement toward charter schools, if not handled prudently and wisely, has the potential for even more misuse of public funds, for private gain, than do traditional public schools. We must be made aware of the many factors which are effecting educational choices, today, especially those factors which spring from private sector agendas for education within our state’s legislature.
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
11:30 am
@teacher and parent, amen!
Marilynn
March 14th, 2012
11:53 am
As a classroom teacher who is being asked to reach more and more students with less and less and a stalwart proponent for technology in the classroom. I applaud the forward looking, forward reaching focus of this bill. People, simply put this is the way to reach more and more students. Our students were born and raised on technology, then they go to school and we snatch it away, even ban it and expect them to be happy about it. Rather than that, shouldn’t we meet students where they are and show them how to use technology to further their educations.
Technology, and yes online classes, provide students with an opportunity to learn the way they like to learn. Differentiation based on learning style is so simple through online classes. I fear the idea of online classes invokes ideas of a teacherless classroom which is far from the truth. A good well organized program gives the teacher the time to deal with a student’s educational needs far more effectively than in a face to face classroom with dozens of students seeking the teacher’s attention. Properly designed, the online courses can provide even more student interaction through chats and online collaboration than in the regular classroom.
Online classes are also a natural extension of Dr. Barge’s push to have students college and career ready.Students headed to college can almost certainly can expect to take a class or two online. Professional development and training in the world of work also is provided extensively online. So should our students wait until they leave high school to have their online learning experience? I think not!
Since the bill and the article mention Georgia Virtual School specifically, I decided to check them out. Their statistics are pretty good. I teach Economics at a face to face school with excellent teachers and only a 65% EOCT pass rate. The introduction of technology enabled us to raise that pass rate to 75% in a trial this year. Georgia Virtual School on the other hand boasts a 90+%. No small feat there.
Further more, why shouldn’t every student in Georgia have the same access to all sorts of courses that those in in the wealthier school districts do? Should smaller districts deny the gifted student the right to take AP classes because it doesn’t fit in their budget. Should the student who longs to be a nurse have to wait until they are out of high school to take a course because their district cannot afford a health occupations teacher? Online education is the answer to so many needs that our students have and it should not be dismissed out of hand. So, for the gifted student who needs the stimulation of an advanced class, for the special needs student who needs a different approach to content, process, or product, or for the student who just has passion and a dream, we should say a resounding YES! to online classes for all Georgia students.
Mary Elizabeth
March 14th, 2012
11:59 am
The problem with SB 289 is that its content is mandated for every student. Online education has its place in overall public education, as do charter schools. But to mandate a course of online instruction for every student, regardless of his or her unique academic needs, should raise some questions as to why online instruction is being mandated, instead of simply being encouraged? In that case, educators could handle encouraging it, especially through guidelines from Georgia’s Department of Education. There would be no need for legislators sponsoring a mandated online course bill. Why is SB 289 being pursued as legislation now?
Ivan Cohen
March 14th, 2012
12:01 pm
I have to wonder if state senator Chip Rogers R-Woodstock has factored in the digital divide. There will not be enough hours in the day to take online courses at school. So for those who have no computers at home, one of the options will be the public libraries in the event community centers and churches aren’t available. You only get a finite amount of time to do anything on a library computer before it is someone else’s turn. It might behoove the student to have flash drives to save course work and to afford him or her the opportunity to take up where they left off when they get to a computer or they will have to start over again.
3schoolkids
March 14th, 2012
12:04 pm
My college daughter has enjoyed her hybrid math class this semester. However, if they are going to require it of all high school students they need to make delivery (GAVS) better. One of my children has taken 2 classes through GAVS, an AP Lang and Math III. The AP Lang was great, Math III not so much. The Math is not a good option for a student who needs extra support in Math (unless you take Math support with it). Math quizzes and tests are timed and don’t provide the opportunity to go back and work on a problem you need more time with (not like a paper test that you can look over, work the easiest problems first then delve into the more difficult ones). It is not for everyone and I don’t think it should be REQUIRED. As an OPTION it does provide a student the opportunity to accelerate their pace if they are motivated and possible graduate early, or take classes not offered at their home school.
Inman Park Boy
March 14th, 2012
12:05 pm
Howard Gardner developed his theory of multiple intelligences years ago. Essentially, it says that some of us are good at math, others at writing, and still others at athletics. The upshot of his theory is that we all LEARN, we just dont all learn in the same way. Some us are visual learners, some of us are auditory learners, and some of us are kinesthetic learners. A good classroom teacher knows this and tailors a lesson to address the earning styles of all the students in the classroom. Somehow, I don’t see a computer doing this. I know on efamily that decided to home school with their 14 year old son, who nor only was an auditory learner but he also had slight ADD. It was a disaster. For him, sitting front of a compouter screen that was not interactive was impossible. They put him back in a private achool. In my estimation, a lot of the crackpot theories about “on-line learning” have been sold by the computer manufacturers.
Inman Park Boy
March 14th, 2012
12:06 pm
By the way 3schoolkids is absolutely correct.
Virtual and Face to Face Teacher
March 14th, 2012
12:15 pm
I have taught in a face to face classroom for 17 years. I also, have been an online adjunct instructor for the past four years. What SB 289 is trying to do is necessary. Students that I have in my face to face classroom today are not the same students that I had when I first started teaching. While today’s student is much different, the way that they are taught is mostly unchanged. Students today spend a much of their away from school day on a computer, smartphone, ipad, or ipod. Yet, we wonder why the students of today don’t seem to be motivated in the classroom. While lectures, worksheets and textbooks still serve a purpose in the face to face class setting, education in general needs to adjust to the learner of today.
Most school districts limit or ban the use of the above technology during the school day. This is either because of school policy or budget issues in purchasing the equipment. As a virtual classroom teacher I have the ability and flexibility to utilize all of the technology that students already use on a daily basis. Students are much more engaged when I do things like, have them use a cell phone to text a quiz question or use a webcam to explain a concept that a student is struggling with. This is where education is now and where it is going in the future. If changing of education with the times is left up to the local school boards , I am not totally convinced that it will ever happen. SB 289 is a step in the right direction.
techie,teacher, parent
March 14th, 2012
12:20 pm
Thank you Georgia! I like that you have taken the initiative to be on the forefront of education versus lagging behind. In this household, we are a techie and a teacher by profession but also the parents of 2. I want nothing more for my children then to be successful, contributing adults. Let’s face it – the world is changing from when we were kids and I want my kids to change with it. The skill sets needed are those that require my child to work with someone on the other side of the world and online courses can help bring that skill set to him. From reading several posts, it sounds like some of us need to really check what online education is and what various kinds there are. There is a difference between an online school (GAVS) and a resource (Khan Academy). Online schools have the ability to reach all students, they are not just reading anymore – they are interactive, you meet with teachers synchronously, you have auditory of content, videos, etc. In most cases, you have LIVE content expert teachers!!! As quoted from the GaVS site, mainpage “Georgia Virtual School provides a teacher led, virtual classroom environment.” I want my student to have the best of both worlds so that he is adaptable in any situation. Thank you Georgia for looking out for my children’s future!
Beverly Fraud
March 14th, 2012
12:33 pm
Mary Elizabeth,
I’m right there with you on the questions about the ALEC story. It took YEARS for the AJC to acknowledge the fact that WIDESPREAD, SYSTEMIC cheating took place in APS. (Notice I said “acknowledge” as people like MACE and the AJC’s very OWN Paul Donsky were talking about it way back in 2001, all while the editorial board was singing the praises of Beverly Hall)
Hopefully the AJC has seen how investigative reporting has ENHANCED their image, and they’ll report on this, as Maureen’s comment seems to indicate.
Which leads to the question; what the heck ever happened to the PROMISED report on the E-Rate scandal at APS? Not the old one, the new one.
Mary Elizabeth
March 14th, 2012
12:34 pm
Why not satisfy everyone? Make the online course an elective course, and not a mandatory one. By promoting it as an elective choice, students and their parents would be able to decide for themselves, individually, if an online course would serve well their individual situations and needs.
Again, as an elective course, this online course would be initiated through Georgia’s DOE guidelines and from local school districts, and not through mandated legislation, sponsored by those who are not educators.
Mary Elizabeth
March 14th, 2012
12:39 pm
@Beverly Fraud, 12:33 pm
“Mary Elizabeth,
I’m right there with you on the questions about the ALEC story.”
=====================================
Thank you for your words, Beverly. Much appreciated.
3schoolkids
March 14th, 2012
12:41 pm
Before I would support required online learning for high school students, I would like to see GADOE’s statistics on the number of students that enroll in a GAVS class versus the number that complete and pass the course. Yes it is innovative and offers a great option, but it needs to be OPTIONAL!
Don’t know about other schools, but our high school library closes at 3:45pm, what about students that don’t have the technology (or support) needed at home? Now do we suddenly have the money in the budget to outfit the schools with all of the technology and personnel needed to accomplish this?
Atlanta Mom
March 14th, 2012
12:42 pm
As I previously stated, I have a child who is majoring in physics. She took Algebra on line. Two years after taking the class, she complained that she could remember none of it.
In this particular course, the student took a pretest. Get a hundred on the pretest, skip that section and on to the next. Sounds good, unless you your child has great test taking skills. I think she managed to get hundreds many pretests without having complete understanding of the material.
At any rate, it was not a good experiance in our household.
Atlanta Mom
March 14th, 2012
12:46 pm
I also had two children take health through GAVS. They could have finished the 18 week course in 3, but were not allowed to. If they had one word to describe GAVS, it would be : disorganized.
Ron F.
March 14th, 2012
12:55 pm
I would expect that if the bill passes, the virtual school would have to offer a variety of courses so kids could choose based on their strengths. It wouldn’t take long to look at a kid’s grades and help him choose an online course. A lot of kids will take hybrid or totally online courses in college, so this could be a good way to find out which work. My youngest would probably do very well as he is an independent learner who generally likes to do things at his own pace. I did a master’s a few years ago that was totally online and we even had group projects to research and compile online. It was pretty intense, with a lot of research and writing and no tests to guess my way through. I haven’t worked that hard in a college class in a long time and I loved the flexibility of choosing the hours I worked on it.
Really amazed
March 14th, 2012
1:02 pm
As I have stated before, the way of the future for ALL educational needs!!!! Elementary, middle, high school, college and continuing ed!!!!!
techie,teacher, parent
March 14th, 2012
1:43 pm
I think many of us are focusing on particular classes – the core. However, if you look the bill does not indicate which classes the student has to take. There is no specific wording that says it has to be an English class, a Math class or any of the other core. Since reading this blog, I have looked around the GaVS site along with some others including online charter schools and they all offer more than the core classes. I can see classes on Agriculture, Banking, Broadcast, and several different languages (more than any school district I have been in and I have been in the big ones) to name just a few. I would think that with the options that are available a student can find a class that fits their intellectual curiosity and even excel at an online class.
Devil's Advocate
March 14th, 2012
1:49 pm
Why are all these (R)s proposing bills that would drive up costs for public education? I thought that was the (D)s job? Oh yeah, forcing online courses for everyone means someone has to provide additional IT infrastructure, oversight of implementation, and ongoing management which means some consultants and several vendors get business opportunities on our tax money.
Should every Georgia high school student take an online course? Why? – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)
March 14th, 2012
2:39 pm
[...] here: Should every Georgia high school student take an online course? Why? – Atlanta Journal Constit… Tags: archives, classifieds, digital, economy, georgia, ipad, safety, sports, technology, [...]
no more govt
March 14th, 2012
3:10 pm
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/03/15/25states.h31.html?tkn=LTTFhgSt1OKIqGnBKjS%2FJTREtVUevdaKWoYp&cmp=clp-edweek&utm_source=fb&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=mrss
here is a link that says states cannot afford the virtual school they have now
so is mr rogers paying for this or cutting the teachers salaries again to pay for more programs to impress the constiuents?
Brandy
March 14th, 2012
3:14 pm
Still waiting for an answer to my questions…
Would also love to hear how this mandate will affect students without access to computers and/or the internet. Even here in Cobb, even in East Cobb, there are students without at home internet access. In rural Georgia, I imagine that there are far larger numbers of students without home internet access. Many schools struggle to provide enough computers in-school to meet the daily needs of their students. I can’t imagine that every child in Georgia would be able to have equal access and opportunity with the mandate.
@Mary-Elizabeth, Are you sure none of the major investigative news outlets are not owned by ALEC supporters? If they are, I would imagine a lack of desire to devote investigative man hours to the cause.
Maureen Downey
March 14th, 2012
3:18 pm
Brandy, House Ed Committee passed the bill but without mandates. So, rather than requiring systems to make students take an online course, systems are urged to encourage online learning.
Maureen
Chaos
March 14th, 2012
3:35 pm
Much better Bill without the mandates. It now gives local systems the encouragement they may need to implement online learning without forcing it upon everyone. Kudos to the House Ed subcommittee.
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
3:51 pm
I suggest all of the naysayers read Seth Godin’s manifesto, “Stop Stealing Dreams.” It’s an eye-opener for all those who oppose this bill.
slp98
March 14th, 2012
4:43 pm
Reinvent_ED – I have no problem with systems offering online classes, but why is it appropriate for our state legislators, with no educational experience and questionable motives, to force this upon school systems? Shouldn’t each system have the flexibility to make the decisions that are best for their students? Or at least allow the state DOE to make decisions? Let’s face it; our legislators in GA have a long and terrible record when it comes to making education decisions. Shouldn’t those with some knowledge about EDUCATING students (including parents) have some input into policies? Isn’t that why we elect local school boards – so that communities can decide what’s best for their students?
On-line advocate
March 14th, 2012
4:44 pm
Online learning prepares students for many realms: social life, college and professional performance. All of these life roles required advanced networking and software skills. Georgia students will need to be competent in all of these areas. What better way to gain these valuable skills than to apply them in the learning environment. Sounds like a cost saving way to ensure students are successful
Brandy
March 14th, 2012
4:44 pm
Thanks, Maureen! I was hoping that would happen. Finally, a tiny bit of common sense out of our legislators.
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
March 14th, 2012
5:32 pm
I suspect, in time, we will be prepared to offer quality online education to students in settings that will truly make the best use of interactive technology and virtual interfaces. Teachers will incorporate online lessons and face to face instruction in ways that will benefit each individual student and access their talents. However, we are not there yet. Online classes are not ready to meet the needs of non-motivated students. And often they are not particularly challenging to high level students. Too many students till do not have access to computers in their homes. In general, such courses do not yet have fast enough feedback to deal with the need for clarification or student confusion. They do not yet have the ability to stretch student thinking beyond what is included in the lesson offered. They lack the spontaneity and creativity offered by classroom instruction. I have taken several online courses to complete college credits and to further my education. I found all of them boring, unchallenging, and far too dependent upon rote learning. If I missed a question, there was no remediation or explanation offered no additional material to help scaffold my understanding, just a chance to reread the same material and try again.
Eventually, I believe we will be ready to open that brave new world of online learning for k-12 students – however, using technology merely because it exists, without any indication that it actually does a better job in general of educating children, is not wise. If we push this too soon, before the content, instructional methodology, equipment and training is in place, and before we have data to prove its worth, we risk throwing money into something that will fail, and turning people against the very idea of online courses. We are in a fiscal crisis in schools right now. The idea that we should spend billions paying for support for virtual schools while brick and mortar schools are being stripped to the bone is short sighted.
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
5:33 pm
@slp98 – the only way behavior changes if you create incentives or policies to foster such change. I can assure you that without creative goals such as the mandate that has now regrettably been removed, that behavior will NOT change.
And to your other points, I would rather not leave this decision to communities, who thus far, have failed our children every step of the way. We need to embrace change and embrace new ways of learning. Our children deserve it!
Mary Elizabeth
March 14th, 2012
5:53 pm
@Brandy, 3:14 pm
@Mary-Elizabeth, Are you sure none of the major investigative news outlets are not owned by ALEC supporters? If they are, I would imagine a lack of desire to devote investigative man hours to the cause.
========================================================
You have broached a very important point of truth. I will elaborate somewhat. Some analysts refer to what you allude to as an ideological “Echo Chamber.” There are powerful monetary interests in our nation who are invested not only in that which will benefit their corporation’s (not all corporations) livelihood (as well as their own), but also in that which will promote their ideology of “starving the beast of government” through minimizing the influence public sector and maximizing the influence of the private sector in American life.
That “Echo Chamber” consists of conservative Think Tanks, such as The Heritage Foundation, conservative liasons such as ALEC which connects corporate interests with conservative legislators in every state, conservative news media such as FOXNews and a number of other groups (some generated from Texas), which coordinate a conservative ideology in our nation, through agencies and through personal contacts. Some examples of their influence are seen in attempts to dismantle Social Security, Medicare, and now Obamacare, as well as public education, all of which would serve the common good. I believe that your are correct in your inquiry that some of the top financial contributors to one part of that ideological Echo Chamber, also, contribute to other parts within it. Most of these people have great wealth and power within our nation.
I do not support the thinking behind their ideology. I believe that, in America, which was created from the basic belief that “all. . .are created equal,” every citizen should be treated as equal to every other, inherently, and that our nation should fully live out its creed. That is why I supported Civil Rights as a Southern white woman in the 1960s. That is why is support collective bargaining for those without power except through their numbers. That is why I support public education so that every child will have the equal opportunity to a good public education, regardless of his or her station in life. I do not support a paternalistic, hierarchial view of humanity, which we see in most corporations and which I lived through in the Old South. I support the same egalitarian world vision that Jefferson had and that Martin Luther King, Jr. had. Their vision is one that is antithetical to a hierarchial vision of human beings. That is why we separated from England in the 1770s – because Americans, inherently, do not believe in inequality based on wealth, power, or prestige positions. Americans believe that all are inherently equal and, therefore, all deserve equal opportunity for “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
I place much faith in the public sector in which all citizens are taxed for services for the common good of all. The public sector is the great leveling field in American life because public funds, through public taxes are meant for public services for all – everyone equal. Those public funds are not meant to be used to embellish the financial wherewithal of those with special interests, and certainly not private market business interests. Those public funds are not meant for profit, but for services rendered to all, equally.
As far as I am aware, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, under Anne Cox Chambers (and her family), is not a part of this conservative Echo Chamber. From an interview for the 50th anniversary of The Atlanta Magazine, on May 1, 2011, Mrs. Chambers is quoted as saying this answer in response to the question, “What appeals to you about the Democratic party?”
————————————————————-
Anne Cox Chambers: “Well, goodness! Well, that’s just so obvious. I just am a Democrat. I could never, never be a Republican. I remember someone asked Daddy if he would ever think of voting for a Republican, and he said, “Sure I would, if I ever found one worth voting for.” It’s the ideals of the Democratic party.”
http://www.atlantamagazine.com/features/anniversary/story.aspx?ID=1457384
———————————————————————————
I am grateful that Mrs. Chambers is still at the helm, through her voice, of the AJC. It matters not that Mrs. Chambers is a billionaire. She retains a vision of equality within all humanity, as did millionaire and Patrician Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and as did aristocrat and wealthy landowner, Thomas Jefferson.
I have no doubt that the AJC will do what it needs to do to uncover ALEC’s influence on Georgia’s legislation. I think I should state, at this point, that in my opinion that investigation from the AJC should pursue more than simply educational legislation, but all areas of Georgia’s legislation which may be under the corporate influences of ALEC and others within that ideological “Echo Chamber.” The direction of this nation could be at stake. The direction of our nation needs to hold steady to the authentic and timeless beliefs of our Founding Fathers and not to the current beliefs of today’s corporate moguls. Besides, I do not trust anything that must be done in secret.
Patrick Thompson
March 14th, 2012
6:36 pm
Interactive or digital learning is the least effective way to teach and learn – it shoud always be considered a tool that augments face to face learning, not a cure all. There is enough access to electronic tools, but not enough investment in people – the teachers and parents who really make education happen. Besides, legislators like Chip Rogers need to come clean with their financial interests in digital learning software companies and his place in organizations like Jeb Bush’s Digital Learning Initiative.
Ron C.
March 14th, 2012
8:16 pm
Oh sure, technology will save the day!
Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should.
I hate to see education go in this direction so soon, without evidence, as has been noted. Also, it does smell of “getting rid of teachers.”
One question– are kids going to stay at home by themselves during the day to complete the course? It would be absurd and mean to require them be at school all day, only to come home to more school work online. GET A GRIP!
Bryant & Stratton College Online Hosts Free Webinar on How to Write an … | Home Finance Plus
March 14th, 2012
8:19 pm
[...] Should every Georgia high school student take an online course? Why? Update: This afternoon the House Education Committee passed the online learning bill with the mandate removed. Now, the bill urges school systems to maximize digital learning rather than mandating that students take at least one online course to … Read more on Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) [...]
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
9:28 pm
Teacher2, you 100% out of line by stating I am not “impartial.” I get ZERO FINANCIAL GAIN from anything in the education space. My views have been formulated over years of studying the roots of innovation, as well as education. I come from a family of teachers and so you have no right to make the statement you made. I recommend you retract your comments immediately. It is people like you that create the noise in the intellectual debate about public policy in education.
Teacher2
March 14th, 2012
9:41 pm
@Reinvent_ED
I am entitled to my opinion just as you a have stated your opinion throughout the blog. My views also come from years of teaching experience. So I “recommend” you learn the definition of opinion. Furthermore, you have solicited your educational website on this blog that should have been a disclaimer, which of course is my opinion. Wow, the marvels of a blog!
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
9:45 pm
My blog is not my business, so you should not have assumed I do it for financial gain. I reference my blog because it has years of empirical research on it. I would ONLY put a disclaimer on something if I had a conflict of interest. If i had an investment in an education related project and I mentioned it in a blog post, I would issue a disclaimer.
I need no disclaimer, and I suggest you use your time to make baseless accusations to someone else.
I have already reported your blog post and asked for its removal, because you have slandered my reputation.
Reinvent_ED
March 14th, 2012
9:49 pm
I have reason to add a disclaimer, because I have no conflict of interest. I author a free blog that has garnered national recognition. It has years of research in it, and you had no right to make a baseless claim that risks tarnishing my reputation. I have requested that your post be removed. Better you focus on the issues and not make personal attacks!
FYI
March 15th, 2012
10:54 am
@ Reinvent_ED. The hit dog squeals.
If you’re going to claim “slander,” then you have to prove that your professional reputation has been damaged (which you can’t prove on an anonymous blog, and where’s your proof it’s been damaged?) and you have to prove the “slander” is false. All that Teacher2 has claimed is that you linked to your own educational blog and are not impartial to Bill 289. Where exactly is the slander?
I too thought when I read all of your one-sided posts that you were seeking free advertising for your own blog…though I thought you were a Republican lobbyist for the bill. It’s really kind of funny to read your sputtering after Teacher2 punctured your balloon at 8:40 pm.
Reinvent_ED
March 15th, 2012
11:51 am
FYI – you are also out of line. Mark my words – HR 1162 is going to pass, and change is coming to Georgia’s education system. You can either embrace change, or you better get out of the way!