Accountability for Students in K-12 Online Learning: Perspectives from Michigan Stakeholders and Beyond

Leanna Archambault, Kathryn Kennedy, Joe Freidhoff

Abstract


Policy surrounding K-12 online learning continues to evolve as the field grows exponentially. In Michigan, Section 21f of the State School Aid Act enacted in 2013 strengthened parents’ and students’ ability to request online courses: “A student enrolled in a district in any of grades 6 to 12 is eligible to enroll in an online course as provided for in this section.” The passing of 21f raised concerns around accountability in a choice environment. Examples of such concerns included a pervasive belief about the lack of rigor or quality in online courses, an aversion to another district educating a student for one or two courses yet remaining responsible for that student’s growth, and uncertainty about how mentors and teachers would be evaluated on their online students. Consequently, a legislative directive was issued to the Michigan Virtual Learning Research Institute, the research arm of Michigan Virtual University that centered on accountability. In response to that directive, Michigan stakeholders, as well as experts from other course access states and national organizations, were interviewed to better understand the conversations surrounding accountability in K-12 online learning in Michigan and beyond and to make key recommendations for moving the field forward in an informed way. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Implications for research, policy, and practice are shared.

Keywords


K-12 online learning, accountability, policy, course access

Full Text:

PDF

References


Author. (2016).

Bailey, J., Martin, N., Coleman, A., Taylor, T., Leichty, R., & Palmer, S. (2014). Leading in an era of change: Making the most of course access programs. Digital Learning Now and Education Counsel. Retrieved from http://digitallearningnow.com/site/uploads/2014/07/DLN-CourseAccess-FINAL_14July2014b.pdf

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gemin, B., Pape, L., Vashaw, L. & Watson, J. (2015). Keeping pace with K-12 online & blended learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Evergreen, CO.: Evergreen Education Group.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Karger, H., & Stoesz, D. (2009). American Social Welfare Policy (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Miles, M. B, and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil rights. (March 2014). Civil rights Data Collection Data Snapshot: College and Career readiness. retrieved from: http://ocrdata.ed.gov/Downloads/CrDC-College-and-Career-readiness-Snapshot.pdf

Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2014). Keeping pace with K-12 online & blended learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Evergreen, CO.: Evergreen Education Group.

Worthen, M. & Patrick, S. (2014). Course Access: Equitable Opportunities for College and Career ready Students. iNACOL. Retrieved from http://www.inacol.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/iNACOL-State-Policy-Frameworks-5-Critical-Issues-to-Transform-K12-Education-Nov2014.pdf




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i3.975