Virtual High School Meanderings

May 23, 2008

Textbooks Face Ban Under e-Learning Finance Bill, Arizona

This was just posted in one of the NACOL forums - which would be interesting if pass because it would mean that virtual schools would have to use virtual content, maybe even open source content (see The Open High School of Utah).

Textbooks face ban under e-learning finance bill
Books would be banned from computer curricula
by Mary Jo Pitzl - May. 23, 2008 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Textbooks would have to be eliminated from classrooms that move to a digital curriculum under legislation that would provide a new way for schools to pay for computers necessary for “e-learning.”

“The modern world has moved beyond textbooks,” said Sen. Barbara Leff, R-Paradise Valley.

Computer-based learning is becoming the norm, she said, and can provide a variety of viewpoints, instead of those in just one textbook.
And, she added, “This is the less-expensive tool than textbooks in the long run.”

Leff is the sponsor of an amendment to House Bill 2475, which would allow school districts to ask their voters for approval to issue bonds for computer purchases.

Currently, schools can pay for computers through capital-outlay overrides, but money from those elections flows in equal annual amounts for the length of the override. General-obligation bonds provide all the money up front, to be paid back over the length of the bond.

The amendment received preliminary, but narrow, Senate approval on a voice vote Thursday. It requires that any bond used to purchase computers last only as long as the lifespan of the computer. That is designed to avoid long-term borrowing for a product that might last only a few years.

If a school launches a digital curriculum and provides a computer for every child, textbooks for that subject would be removed in favor of the digital version.

The proposal, added to a bill that deals with disciplinary procedures for school bullies, drew a skeptical reaction from some.

Sen. Ken Cheuvront, D-Phoenix, said it could lead to inequities between school districts, as wealthy school districts have a much better chance than those in poorer parts of the state to get their voters to approve a specific bond issue for computers.

“The rising inequities we have in our schools greatly concerns me,” he said.

The amendment allows for more borrowing by school districts, he said, which could lead to bigger bills for taxpayers in those districts.

But Minority Leader Marsha Arzberger, D-Willcox, said the Legislature is not imposing an automatic tax increase on anyone.

“Voters do get to vote for themselves if they want to make this expense,” she said.

Cheuvront said he is not opposed to equipping schools with more computers, but expanded technology should not hinge on whether a district’s taxpayers are wealthy enough to support bond elections. “If this is so important, we should put it in the budget,” he said.

While the senators focused primarily on the financial aspects of the bill and its amendment, Leff said she views this as a way to usher in a new chapter in learning.

“The fact that attracted me the most was the digital learning,” she said after the Senate debate.

“You’d have vast amounts of information available to students at their fingertips.”

Leff said she got “no push-back” from school officials on her proposal to eliminate textbooks if digital-learning programs for a given subject are available. For those subject areas where such e-learning is not available, textbooks would still be allowed.

Digital learning is in its “infancy” in Arizona, said Chris Cummiskey, director of the Government Information Technology Agency.

Bids are being accepted for a pilot program that would use a digital curriculum for middle-school math classes, said Cummiskey, who also is a member of the E-learning Task Force established by the Legislature two years ago.

The Legislature set aside $3 million for the pilot program, which will be launched in 10 schools.

Other schools are already involved in computer-based learning, although the ability to purchase computers in bulk could expand programs much more quickly, said Rep. Rich Crandall, R-Mesa and president of the Mesa Public Schools board.

Reach the reporter at maryjo.pitzl@arizonarepublic.com.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/200…puters0523.html

Florida Virtual Education Legislation

Bill Tucker e-mailed me this a few days ago (maybe yesterday, I’m not sure anymore).  Below you can see the text of an entry he posted to the Education Sector’s blog about this issue

Hi Michael,

I know that you follow these issues, so wanted to alert you to legislation in Florida…

–Bill Tucker

A Wrong Turn for Virtual Education in Florida
http://www.quickanded.com/2008/05/wrong-turn-for-virtual-education-in.html

Last December I flew to Tallahassee to testify as part of the Florida State Legislature’s K-12 Virtual Education Workshop. As a native Floridian, I’ve been proud of my home state’s leadership in virtual schooling. Florida Virtual School is the largest and one of the most successful state-run virtual schools in the country. It’s widely regarded as a nationwide model. And, while I’m less intimate with the details of the state’s two full-time K-8 programs, Florida Connections Academy and Florida Virtual Academy, they have consistently achieved As and Bs in Florida’s state accountability system. At the legislative workshop in December, most participants emphasized that Florida was doing things the smart way.

So, I was shocked to read the new virtual education bill that has just recently cleared the legislature (the governor has not yet signed the bill). The bill has a number of flaws, but the most egregious is its mandate that each of Florida’s 67 school districts contract with a provider or develop its own program to provide a full-time K-8 virtual schooling program, beginning in the 2009-10 school year. Thus, Florida will move from a well-run, successful, state-authorized program to a system that forces each district to manage and authorize its own program.

This is a horrible idea for a number of reasons:

Reduced Accountability and Quality: From the charter movement, we’ve learned that high-quality authorizing is one of the essential components leading to high-quality educational experiences. Moving to a district-by-district model, especially when many of the districts have neither the capacity, nor desire, to authorize this type of program, almost ensures that there will be much weaker authorizing and relatively little oversight for these programs.

Reduced Competition and Fewer Student Options: Ironically, this change will likely reduce student options. Under the current statewide model, families in Florida have at least two options. And, there’s no reason that this number couldn’t grow. But, it’s highly unlikely that districts will provide multiple options. It’s almost certain that they will contract with either one of the current providers or start their own program. So, not only do students have fewer programs to choose from, but it’s likely that a mini-monopoly will develop in each individual district.

Wrong Emphasis: A district-by-district scheme makes sense if it allows each district to customize virtual education programs to integrate and strengthen its current educational offerings. But, districts can already do this by working with the state’s existing supplemental program, the Florida Virtual School. This bill addresses full-time virtual education–a parallel system that does not integrate with the district’s current programs. And, as noted above, it’s very likely that the providers and offerings will be the exact same.

To date, Florida has been wise in its virtual education program design, avoiding the problems in a number of states such as Colorado, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. While almost every other state looks to Florida’s
current programs as a model, this bill takes that model in the opposite direction.

Bill Tucker - Chief Operating Officer

EDUCATIONSECTOR
Independent Analysis, Innovative Ideas
www.educationsector.org

1201 Connecticut Ave., NW, Ste. 850, Washington, DC 20036
[t] 202.552.2848 * [f] 202.775.5877 * [e] btucker@educationsector.org
————————————————————————-

SUBSCRIBE to our Biweekly Digest and other updates at
http://www.educationsector.org/subscribe.
I’ll try and tack a close look at this legislation myself later this month or early next month and post my own entry.

Blog at WordPress.com.