New Jersey City University

K-12 RESEARCH PAPER1

K-12 Research Paper[jp1]

James Puglia

New Jersey City University

Dr. Carnahan

K-12 Research Paper

K-12 Online Learning and At-Risk Youth

Introduction

Distance education (DE) began with correspondence courses, though this strategy lacked timely feedback, group interaction, and technology tools to make it a positive experience for many(Anderson, 2008). The transition to computer-based DE coincided with greater personal computer use and Internet access, but early distance learning (DL) methods remained static, with the learner a passive participant.

Recently, DE expansion includesK-12, university, and self-study opportunities. People worldwide partake in classes for credit, personal edification, and work-related training. As bandwidth and web-based applications have improved, the Internet became a dynamic and engaging environment(Pea & Maldonado, 2006).Today, DEprimarily embodies web-based delivery with coursework offered fully online or via blended learning (BL).

A systematicUnited States Department of Education (USDOE) meta-analysis review showed while conditions of time, curriculum and education were not controlled for, student performance was modestly better in online environments compared with face-to-faceclasses, with the best outcomes in the hybrid approach (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).

With a growing body of literature in DE, many areas require more investigation, including analysis and review of research related to secondary students at-risk of dropping out of school, those who have left but could re-enter, and other underserved youththat may benefit from BLand DL environments.

Background

Currently, students in K-12 educational settings are failing to complete high school as alarming rates. Some of the factors that lead to students dropping out of school include repeating a grade, low socio-economic background, having a brother or sister who dropped out of school, and having a learning disability(C. Cavanaugh, Repetto, Wayer, & Spitler, 2013). Can online learning reduce this national problem? According to Almeida (2010), virtual schools offer the potential to help reduce dropout rates for at-risk youth and provide credit recovery for students who are in danger of failing.

K-12 Online

Cavanaugh’s research indicated BL and DL programs as effective in helping students learn material when compared with traditional classes(C. S. Cavanaugh, Barbour, & Clark, 2009). Some of the positive factors that arose form it included the ability to learn with fewer time constraints of exclusively face-to-face classes.

The 2010 National Educational Technology Plan suggests that the outdated notion of “seat-time” should be removed from K-12 settings and promoted DL and BL opportunities for students(2010). The Plan also makes DL opportunities both plausible and acceptable educational options.

Factors for Success

In addition to the notion of anytime, anywhere learning, there are other current factors that make DL feasible today. Instead of teaching to the test, there are forms of online instruction that promote adaptive digital environments where students learn from their mistakes (Feng, Heffernan, & Koedinger, 2009). Simonson (2011) points to abstract learners as succeeding in certain DL environments. Perhaps, this can help some individuals who have been disenfranchised with traditional class settings.

Recovery Programs and Targeting Dropouts

The credit recovery program aims to help students who need to retake a class once they have failed it. This can help students from leaving school altogether (Watson et al., 2011). Archambalut and others (2010) have notes that programs that are successful often have a strong ability to find potential problems before they happen and then continue to address pitfalls that may occur when students are learning online.

Research for Underserved and At-risk Populations

Students who come from underserved populations and/or students with learning difficulties may have different DL outcomes, but there is lack of rigorous research directed at this population(Means et al., 2010). Comprehension problems from dense course material and/or inadequate appropriate skills for self-study may lead to dissatisfaction with DE environments(Levy, 2007). High school students with low rates of success in school sometimes enroll in alternative DL courses, though there are high failure rates(Staker, 2011). Since student boredom and isolation are common in DL, this may place these students at higher risk for failure inalternative DL courses(Anderson, 2008).There is a need for more research evaluating online or blended education usefulness for specific populations, such as high-school drop-outs seeking alternative educational settings.

Practical problems for exploring research targeted at these groups include developing strategies for a variety of learning styles. Research examining comparative effective strategies for making course content more engaging, personal, and supportive would help increase understanding of what may work better for certain groups. However, logistics make it difficult to apply in real-life settings due to various student needs. A plan for engaging high-risk students may include taking advantage of student strengths and delivering engaging courses appropriate for many learning styles(Shear & Lasseter, ; Watson et al., 2011).Now, Students have more online choices that may help them succeed. An online community of practice where learning is situated in appropriate context is another avenue to examine in underrepresented students(Hoadley, 2012).

There are other tactics to support disenfranchised, bored and isolated students. Collaboration and or Computer Support Collaborative Learning (CSCL) approaches tied with blending learning and he exploration of video and multimedia are areas that can be explored (Caladine R., Andrews T., Tynan B., Smyth R. &Vale,D., 2010). A flexible/personal learning environment may also helpserve this group of students, particularly due to the wide-range of students’ competencies prior to class onset. Personal learning may include additional instructional support in blended and fully online settings, where outlined plans may lead to success(Couros, 2010).Comparative effectiveness studies of these approaches with certain populations will help to see if they are possible in practice.

K-12 Distance Education Challenges for Underserved and At-risk Youth

Self-regulated, mature, motivated, independent and reflective learners stand greater likelihood of success in DE environments(Sansone, Fraughton, Zachary, Butner, & Heiner, 2011; Sun & Rueda, 2012). These traits are linked with online collegiate learners, and DEresearch has typically focused on this group(Barbour & Reeves, 2009; Means et al., 2010). In addition, Castek and others (2011) that learning online requires students to be able to comprehend information within the context of text. Once teachers are able to understand this they can provide new strategies for students with learning difficulties and may be able to help many succeed.

Conclusion

While it is clear that online and blended learning opportunities exist for many individuals, there is also growing evidence that this mode of learning can help students who have left school and those in danger of falling short of a high school diploma. By evaluating new and emerging programs that are working with these students, more effective programs can be designed to help meet their needs. Cavanaugh’s framework for success that supports a well-designed class with a supportive environment as two keys to success that would also translate with students in the at-risk and underserved categories (C. Cavanaugh et al., 2013). The future is promising to help ensure students have the opportunity to attain a high school diploma and to help those that have dropped out to consider returning to complete their degree with the help of online learning programs.

References

Almeida, C., Steinberg, A., Santos, J., & Le, C. (2010). Six pillars of effective dropout prevention and recovery: An assessment of current state policy and how to improve it. Jobs for the Future,

Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton, AB: AU Press, Athabasca University.

Archambault, L., Diamond, D., Brown, R., Cavanaugh, C., Coffey, M., Foures-Aalbu, D., . . . Zygouris-Coe, V. (2010). Research committee issues brief: An exploration of at-risk learners and online education. International Association for K-12 Online Learning,

Barbour, M. K., & Reeves, T. C. (2009). The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 52(2), 402-416.

Caladine R., Andrews T., Tynan B., Smyth R. &Vale,D. (2010). In Velestianos G. (Ed.), New communications options: A renaissance in videoconference use AU Press. doi:978-1-897425-77-0

Castek, J., Zawilinski, L., McVerry, J. G., O’Byrne, W. I., & Leu, D. J. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: New opportunities and challenges for students with learning difficulties. Multiple perspectives on difficulties in learning literacy and numeracy (pp. 91-110) Springer.

Cavanaugh, C., Repetto, J., Wayer, N., & Spitler, C. (2013). Online learning for students with disabilities: A framework for success. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(1), 1-8.

Cavanaugh, C. S., Barbour, M. K., & Clark, T. (2009). Research and practice in K-12 online learning: A review of open access literature. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(1), Article 10.1. 4.

Couros, A. (2010). In Velestianos G. (Ed.), Developing personal learning networks for open and social learning AU Press. doi:978-1-897425-77-0

Feng, M., Heffernan, N., & Koedinger, K. (2009). Addressing the assessment challenge with an online system that tutors as it assesses. User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction, 19(3), 243-266. doi:10.1007/s11257-009-9063-7

Hoadley, C. (2012). What is a community of practice and how can we support it? In D. H. Jonassen, & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed., pp. 286-301; 12). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Levy, Y. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Computers & Education, 48(2), 185-204. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.12.004

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. (). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved on July 21, 2014 from

National educational technology plan. (2010). (). Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Educaiton.

Pea, R. D., & Maldonado, H. (2006). Wild for learing: Interacting through new computing devices anytime, anywhere. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 427-441; 25). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Sansone, C., Fraughton, T., Zachary, J. L., Butner, J., & Heiner, C. (2011). Self-regulation of motivation when learning online: The importance of who, why and how. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(2), 199-212. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9193-6

Shear, L., & Lasseter, A.Understanding the implications of online learning for educational productivity.

Simonson, M., Schlosser, C., & Orellana, A. (2011). Distance education research: A review of the literature. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2), 124.

Staker, H. (2011). The rise of k–12 blended learning. ( No. 7).

Sun, J. C., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191-204. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x

Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., Rapp, C., & Evergreen, E. G. (2011). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An annual review of policy and practice, 2011. ().Evergreen Education Group.

[jp1]Interesting topic. One thing that you need to look at is parental involvment. The biggest two factors that impact student achievement are parents and teachers. In an environment where students don't see the teacher face to face, this means that the parent is the main role model and facilitator of learning. How do you make a parent who doesnt care about their child do work? Sadly I saw this happen often. Just something to think about. From Dr. Carnahan