Walk, Don't Run-To Online Learning: The Financial Lure of Lower-Cost Online Learning during a Period of Tight Budgets Shouldn't Prompt Schools to Proceed before Giving Serious Consideration to a Multitude of Factors
Wayne Journell
Abstract
Wayne Journell
Abstract
In 2003, my first year of teaching high school, the district technology representative approached me about creating an online U.S. Government course that would become one of the first courses offered in the district's new e-learning program. My district had prided itself on being on the cutting edge of technological advancements. At the time, it was one of the few districts in Virginia to maintain a one-to-one laptop initiative, and all courses had been equipped with Blackboard course management software. An e-learning program was the next step in this evolution. I agreed to create the course that summer and taught it about 12 times over the next four years. My class sizes ranged from one student who needed to take the class to satisfy a graduation requirement to more than 20 students in summer sessions. My district implemented online education to embrace the anytime, anywhere learning environment that was gaining popularity in higher education. The district advertised the program as a way for homebound and nontraditional students to earn course credits without coming to school and for giving students flexibility to take summer courses without keeping them from jobs or vacations. Within a few years, however, the district began designating some courses as online only during the summer in order to reduce costs and maximize online enrollment. Over the past decade, as states and localities began feeling the effects of rising gas prices and a crumbling economy, more districts have begun to regard online education as a way to save money. Nearly every state has some form of virtual high school program (Schrum, 2004), and many districts are creating their own online courses. In 2006, Michigan even took the unprecedented step of requiring all students to take at least one online course during high school. Online education is a favorable alternative to firing personnel or cutting programs, but district leaders should proceed cautiously. Online learning may be cheaper than traditional schooling, but it isn't necessarily equivalent to face-to-face instruction, nor is it an appropriate substitute in every case for classroom instruction for adolescents. Benefits of online learning What makes online learning so attractive to school districts is perceived cost efficiency, at least in the long term. Once appropriate supports are established, including teacher training, e-learning theoretically enables districts to manage increasing enrollments without creating additional infrastructure. Certain courses, especially those with low enrollments, could also be moved online to create additional classroom space in crowded schools. Moreover, as technology improves and gets into more students' hands, the cost of online learning will decrease. Beyond cost efficiency, online learning offers other potential benefits to K-12 schooling, principally as an education path for homebound students and as a way for students who have difficulty with traditional educational environments to interact with peers. Considerable research on e-learning in higher education has also shown that when students take courses online, many of the discriminatory factors that occur in face-to-face classes are alleviated (Coombs, 2005; Enger, 2006; Davidson-Shivers, Morris, & Sriwongkol, 2003). Also, it has been argued that online education could be used to bridge gaps between affluent districts and districts in low-income urban and rural areas (Journell, 2007). E-learning promotes curricular democratization in which all students are privy to the same types of academic options. Some states already have used their virtual high schools to make Advanced Placement courses and other electives available to inner-city students who would be unable to take them otherwise (Blaylock & Newman, 2005). Proceeding cautiously While shrinking budgets entice districts, K-12 administrators interested in exploring online instruction should proceed cautiously. …
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In 2003, my first year of teaching high school, the district technology representative approached me about creating an online U.S. Government course that would become one of the first courses offered in the district's new e-learning program. My district had prided itself on being on the cutting edge of technological advancements. At the time, it was one of the few districts in Virginia to maintain a one-to-one laptop initiative, and all courses had been equipped with Blackboard course management software. An e-learning program was the next step in this evolution. I agreed to create the course that summer and taught it about 12 times over the next four years. My class sizes ranged from one student who needed to take the class to satisfy a graduation requirement to more than 20 students in summer sessions. My district implemented online education to embrace the anytime, anywhere learning environment that was gaining popularity in higher education. The district advertised the program as a way for homebound and nontraditional students to earn course credits without coming to school and for giving students flexibility to take summer courses without keeping them from jobs or vacations. Within a few years, however, the district began designating some courses as online only during the summer in order to reduce costs and maximize online enrollment. Over the past decade, as states and localities began feeling the effects of rising gas prices and a crumbling economy, more districts have begun to regard online education as a way to save money. Nearly every state has some form of virtual high school program (Schrum, 2004), and many districts are creating their own online courses. In 2006, Michigan even took the unprecedented step of requiring all students to take at least one online course during high school. Online education is a favorable alternative to firing personnel or cutting programs, but district leaders should proceed cautiously. Online learning may be cheaper than traditional schooling, but it isn't necessarily equivalent to face-to-face instruction, nor is it an appropriate substitute in every case for classroom instruction for adolescents. Benefits of online learning What makes online learning so attractive to school districts is perceived cost efficiency, at least in the long term. Once appropriate supports are established, including teacher training, e-learning theoretically enables districts to manage increasing enrollments without creating additional infrastructure. Certain courses, especially those with low enrollments, could also be moved online to create additional classroom space in crowded schools. Moreover, as technology improves and gets into more students' hands, the cost of online learning will decrease. Beyond cost efficiency, online learning offers other potential benefits to K-12 schooling, principally as an education path for homebound students and as a way for students who have difficulty with traditional educational environments to interact with peers. Considerable research on e-learning in higher education has also shown that when students take courses online, many of the discriminatory factors that occur in face-to-face classes are alleviated (Coombs, 2005; Enger, 2006; Davidson-Shivers, Morris, & Sriwongkol, 2003). Also, it has been argued that online education could be used to bridge gaps between affluent districts and districts in low-income urban and rural areas (Journell, 2007). E-learning promotes curricular democratization in which all students are privy to the same types of academic options. Some states already have used their virtual high schools to make Advanced Placement courses and other electives available to inner-city students who would be unable to take them otherwise (Blaylock & Newman, 2005). Proceeding cautiously While shrinking budgets entice districts, K-12 administrators interested in exploring online instruction should proceed cautiously. …
Key concepts: Laptop, Popularity, Graduation (instrument), Government (linguistics), Feeling, Class (philosophy), Flexibility (engineering), Mathematics education