Guest Blogger: The Rise of Blended Learning and the New Opportunities for Edupreneurs and MBAs

Emma Collins, a web writer who just edited a compendium of online education’s best MBA programs by MBAOnline, joins Virtual School Meanderings today to lend some insight to the growing trend of Internet-based learning. Cyber schools are becoming more and more popular, but they are not without their critics. This post should hopefully start a vibrant discussion about the future of education, both on and off-line. As is the tradition at Virtual School Meanderings, this will be the only entry today.

Since the Internet was first introduced to the public in the mid-1990s, online technology has played an ever-increasing role in public education. Today, blended coursework and virtual schools are replacing traditional teaching methods at a substantial rate, while education startups – led by tech-savvy “edupreneurs” – aim in many ways to “disrupt” conventional educational practices with web-based programs.

The field of online education has grown immensely in the last decade alone. According to a report by Innosight Institute titled “The Rise of Blended Learning,” approximately 45,000 public school students at the K-12 level took an online course in 2000. Nine years later, that number had risen to more than 3 million. Furthermore, experts predict that at least half of all high school classes will be taught online by 2019.

The online surge has also impacted the number of homeschooled children. The number of students who learned from home more than doubled between 1999 and 2009, and this is largely due to the growing number of exclusively web-based educational institutions. Elementary and high schools are not the only ones to record substantial growth in online course enrollments, either. According to US News & World Report, more than 6 million American college students enrolled in at least one online course in Fall 2010 – a 10.1 percent increase over the previous year.

The report’s authors note that online learning exhibits the traits of a “disruptive innovation,” which essentially transforms a particular sector by replacing “complicated, expensive, inaccessible, and centralized” services with alternatives that are more affordable, user-friendly, and – in many cases – customizable to meet the needs of a specific group (such as an individual classroom). Web-based learning began as a service for children who learned from home, attended financially deficient schools or otherwise had no other alternative for receiving an effective education. Today, school districts across the country have begun to use web technology to create a blended learning environment.

As the name suggests, blended learning supplements traditional classroom education with varying levels of supervised online coursework. These courses not only prepare students for the technology-saturated job market they will encounter as adults, but also mitigates some of the budgetary pressures facing schools today. The report suggests that, for these reasons, blended classrooms are the optimal solution for several problems that educators currently face. “Online learning has the potential to be a disruptive force that will transform the factory-like, monolithic structure that has dominated America’s schools into a new model that is student-centric, highly personalized for each learner, and more productive, as it delivers dramatically better results at the same or lower cost,” the report states.

Tom Clark, Co-editor of Virtual Schools: Planning for Success, agrees that blended coursework is effectively reshaping the country’s educational dynamic. In addition, he notes another growing trend: virtual schools. These institutions generally fall under three categories. State-run virtual schools, contrary to their name, are not degree-granting institutions; rather, they provide online services to K-12 students and assist school districts with the integration of technology into their standard curricula. Virtual charter schools, on the other hand, provide full-time, tuition-free distance learning opportunities (typically for K-8 students). State charter laws govern these programs. Finally, privately operated virtual schools – like traditional private institutions – charge tuition for full- or part-time online learning programs. While both virtual charter schools and private virtual schools may act as “schools of record,” school districts may also work with them to develop online programs in public classrooms.

As a growing number of school districts have implemented blended coursework in the nation’s classrooms, many critics have raised concerns over the effectiveness of web-based learning. However, Clark writes that many of these worries are unfounded. Contrary to popular misconception, he notes, online coursework is not unsupervised, and students are not isolated from teachers and peers. Rather, most online modules enable teachers to regularly communicate with students online – and many require face-to-face consultations throughout the course. Furthermore, most K-12 students who take online courses are only enrolled part-time or for particular classes, so they are still able to regularly attend high school; in this sense, online courses increase (not decrease) the number of teachers and peers with which a student is able to interact. Other critics have complained that digital coursework, when compared with traditional classroom learning, is too easy. However, Clark argues that most virtual schools operate in accordance with state education department regulations, and certified teachers lead the individual courses.

In addition to virtual schools, many educational startups have emerged in recent years to tackle specific concerns related to today’s learners by introducing elements of online technology. One example is Nearpod, a company that develops educational apps for iOS and Android devices that can be used in classrooms. Nearpod is the brainchild of edupreneur Felipe Sommer, who told EdTech Digest that educators may use the apps to perform a range of tasks, from checking attendance and monitoring grades to developing interactive lesson plans and engaging classes with multimedia. Another innovative edupreneur, Nic Borg, recently developed Edmodo – a customizable social networking tool that can be used exclusively in the classroom. “Our goal was to develop a space that allowed teachers, students and schools to connect in a more engaging way while keeping students safe and protected,” he told EdTech Digest, adding that Edmodo’s platform enables students and teachers to exchange information, access homework and perform other classroom functions in real-time. Companies like Nearpod and Edmodo that offer unique, technology-based services are helping today’s educators meet their classroom’s increasing digital demands — and ensuring their own long-term market viability in the process.

Between the growing number of blended classrooms and virtual schools in the U.S. and the ever-expanding edupreneur sector, technology stands to greatly disrupt the state of American education in the coming years. As this nationwide shift takes place, teachers and students will receive more opportunities to learn, interact and prepare for future success in the digital world.

Emma Collins is a web writer who just edited a compendium of online education’s best MBA programs by MBAOnline. As is the tradition at Virtual School Meanderings, this will be the only entry today.

EDTECH597 – Guest Blogger: Ways To Build A Relationship Between Teachers And Students In Online Classes

Debra Johnson is a blogger and the editor of live in nanny. As is the tradition at Virtual School Meanderings, this will be the only entry today.

One of the major drawbacks to online schooling is the obvious lack of interaction between students and their teachers. In a traditional school setting forming this relationship can be crucial to the success of a student. However it is all but stripped when you enter the online world… unless you take a very deliberate step in making it a reality. This interaction is crucial to the success of the students in the classroom, an idea that is further explored in a paper written by Gail Wilson and Elizabeth Stacey.To ensure that there is a relationship between the teacher and their students there are steps that can be taken, however it requires the work of both parties:

1. 1. Have regular online discussions with the classroom – With the availability of online chat forums, chat rooms, and Twitter chats, online discussions are a very viable resource to use to facilitate interaction between teachers and students who are otherwise operating entirely through dropboxes and online curriculum. Sherry L. Market, PhD, discussed the importance of online discussion forums in her paper Technology and Education Online Discussion Forums: It’s In The Response. This becomes of the utmost importance for online courses. Being available to answer questions in real-time can break down the barrier that email interaction alone can sometimes create.
2. 2. Create v-logs for lessons – Part of the reason that online classes may create a distance between students and the class itself is the lack of seeing an actual teacher. By providing your students with video blogs (or v-logs) for lessons from time to time you give them the sense of being an actual teacher and not just an anonymous person on the other end of a computer. Rory McGreal and Michael Elliot both touch on the benefits of including videos created by professors to supplement education and circumvent boredom that can result from a class being entirely online.
3. 3. Open lines of communication via email or Skype as necessary – Making it very clear that you are readily available for your students, and opening lines of communication through Skype or email or both, can help students feel more at ease contacting you whenever they have a problem. Some students need this type of interaction to ensure a successful learning experience, and knowing that they can contact a teacher can be the first step towards forming this relationship. In fact, in a report done by Chi-Sung Li and Beverly Irby, it was recognized that the ability to communicate via email with teachers is one of the unique characteristics of online learning.
4. 4. Regularly contact students to see how they are doing in the class – In the 2009 Quarterly Review of Distance Education it was noted that the, “…when asked how their online course could be improved, the second most common written response from students (60 responses) was more direction and communication from the teacher.” (p. 42). Sometimes students don’t reach out to teachers simply because the teacher hasn’t reached out to them. By checking in with students on a regular basis, sending an encouraging email to keep up the good work, or one posed with concern over a low grade, you can foster a positive student-teacher relationship.
5. 5. Students shouldn’t be afraid of contacting the teacher – Likewise, students need to be forthcoming with the teacher if they have a problem, don’t understand a lesson, or need a little extra help. While this may seem obvious, many students instead will turn to using search engines to find answers, however sometimes teachers can offer more insight then an internet search will provide.  Students will never know this unless they simply ask, and the Technology Source Archives at the University of North Carolina lists student-faculty contact as the very first of seven principles of effective teaching in online courses.They should always be well aware of where questions should be directed if they do not fall within the teacher’s realm or would be better handled elsewhere.

As more and more people turn towards taking online classes or even taking the entirety of their schooling online, forming positive student-teacher relationships becomes even more crucial. One teacher can make all of the difference in a student’s school-life, if only they are willing to reach out and check.

Debra Johnson is a blogger and the editor of live in nanny. She welcomes your comments at jdebra84 @ gmail.com.

EDTECH597 – Guest Blogger: Which Online SAT Prep Course is Right for Your High School Student?

Carlina Yepinski is the primary researcher and writer for networkmonitoring.org. Her most recent accomplishments includes graduating from Kentucky State with a degree in communications and computer science. Her current focus for the site involves network traffic monitoring and network mapping software. As is the tradition at Virtual School Meanderings, this will be the only entry today.

Internet based courses are a great alternative to traditional classroom SAT prep that can run your family thousands of dollars, but with so many companies offering different services, perks and promises, it can be difficult to choose which one will benefit your child the most.  Here are five well-known companies and a break-down of what their online prep courses offer as well as tips to consider before you buy.

1.     Princeton Review SAT Online Course

Princeton Review offers two courses designed with different levels of intensity and individual instruction.

The regular online course costs $399 and offers the following:

20-30 hours of interactive, self-paced online lessons, 4 full-length practice tests and online drills, a full set of printed materials (including 11 practice tests and a student workbook), online instructors that can answer questions, and virtual student discussion groups.

Purchase this course if:  Your student is a self-motivator who studies better independently and needs less support from an instructor.

The live online course costs $699 and offers everything mentioned above and eight online class sessions led by a real-time instructor and a complimentary headset to interact with the teacher and other students during these sessions.

Purchase this course if: You think the eight class sessions are worth the extra $300 and your student would benefit from more personal guided preparation.

2.     College Board SAT Online Course – $69.95

This affordable course offers your student 18 interactive lessons, 10 online tests with essay scoring and 4 detailed score and skill reports.

Purchase this course if: Your student needs more practice than instruction.  College Board’s course offers little in the way of strategies and tips but for the price, it will give your student a good look at what to expect on test day and help him or her to decide if they need further instruction.

3.     Kaplan

Like The Princeton Review, Kaplan offers two programs that differ in intensity and price.

The “On Demand” course will run you $299 and offers video instructed online courses that are available 24/7 with 50+ hours of instruction, a self-paced stud plan based on a diagnostic of the student’s performance, 4 proctored tests, and over 1,000 practice questions.

Purchase this course if: Your student needs a combination of practice and instruction and thrives in a self-paced environment.

The more elite “Classroom Anywhere” includes the “On Demand” features as well as 18 hours of live course instruction you can attend from anywhere with an internet connection.

Purchase this course if: Your student thrives more in a classroom environment and is willing to put in the extra classroom hours in addition to the self-study and self-paced lessons.

4.     Barron’s Online Prep

By far the cheapest option, Barron’s online study prep is only $10.95 for six months.  The saying is true that you get what you pay for, but the self-scoring practice exams can be effective when utilized to their full potential.  The verbal prep only offers a list of the most common SAT words, but the added work of having to look them up and document the definitions can be helpful in retaining their meanings.

Purchase this course if: You’re looking for a super affordable option to get started, pad any other studying your student is doing or as an add-on to any of these other courses.

5.     Peterson’s SAT Online Course

More affordable than Kaplan or Princeton Review but with more in depth study options than the cheapest options, Peterson’s runs $119.95 for four months and offers an initial diagnostic test with a “customized learning path” based on your strengths and weaknesses of the diagnostic.  A computer-generated essay grader, interactive games, electronic vocabulary flash cards and 3 full-length practice tests are also included.

Purchase this course if: You want the most important features of the Kaplan and Princeton Review courses without having to pay several hundred dollars for a prep course.  If your student is able to learn in an online environment with less individual instruction and support, this course could save you money and adequately prepare your student for the SAT.

Carlina Yepinski is the primary researcher and writer for networkmonitoring.org. Her most recent accomplishments includes graduating from Kentucky State with a degree in communications and computer science. Her current focus for the site involves network traffic monitoring and network mapping software.

Guest Blogger: Examining Accelerated Christian Education

Jonny Scaramanga was educated in England with Accelerated Christian Education from ages 11-14. He now teaches music at the undergraduate level. He is researching Accelerated Christian Education and writing about fundamentalism in Britain at his blog, Leaving Fundamentalism. As is the tradition at Virtual School Meandering, this will be the only entry today.

This blog recently asked what Accelerated Christian Education is, and what evidence there is of student achievement (see Questions About The School Of Tomorrow). Accelerated Christian Education is a pre-packaged programmed learning curriculum, which teaches fundamentalist Christianity. It has attracted controversy from Christian and secular academics alike. Criticisms centre on the teaching of Creationism, political propaganda, and an emphasis on rote recall at the expense of higher-order thinking skills.

Learning and assessment methodologies

There are several factors that cause students to take a surface learning approach.¹ From teachers, these include testing for independent facts (inevitably the case when using short answer and multiple-choice tests), and the use of extrinsic motivation. From students, factors include a cynical view of education, and thinking that factual recall is adequate. All of these are found extensively within Accelerated Christian Education.

ACE tests almost exclusively consist of multiple choice, matching, or fill-in-the-blank questions. These means only test factual recall, not understanding. Even if the students are trying to take a deep learning approach, they are not given the opportunity. A surface approach is even more likely when students are tested exessively; ACE students are expected to engage in two summative tests per week.²

At the end of each PACE section, students mark their own work. They obtain permission to leave their seats before going to a score station, where they check their answers against provided answer keys.³ It is difficult to envision a system which rewards cheating, or encourages cynicism, more effectively.

ACE prescribes a system of rewards and punishments for students.⁴ Those who achieve academic and behavioural goals are awarded privileges such as extended break times and the freedom to move without permission. All the rewards offered are forms of extrinsic motivation, emphasising that learning itself is not the thing of value.

ACE assessments do not provide evidence that deep learning has taken place. Options on the multiple choice tests are frequently meaningless, such as “Jesus died on the (cross, toss, chrome)”.⁵

ACE vice president Ronald Johnson writes,⁶

“Our material is not written with conventional viewpoints in mind. We do not believe that education should be non-directive or speculative, or that the final interpretation of facts and events should be left up to immature, inexperienced minds, as minline secular curricula do.”

ACE rejects virtually all modern educational theory.⁷ It is not aiming to teach children how to think, but rather, how to see life from God’s point of view.⁸ Asking questions is seen as a rejection of the divine authority invested in the school’s supervisors. As a result, the curriculum is systematically purged of methods of inquiry. Inevitably, higher order thinking skills are neglected; this is intentional.⁹

Science

The ACE curriculum includes no practical science and accordingly no investigation. This would be troublesome for any ACE student embarking on a science higher education course.

“The PACEs are based on the reading comprehension mode of learning… There is no room within this method of learning for the negotiation of topics, for whole class problem solving, for the generation of ideas, for the formulating and testing of hypotheses, discussion of results and social application.”¹⁰

ACE science teaches Creationism. Leaving aside whether Creationism is true, ACE’s approach is unscientific. Rather than weighing evidence objectively, the ACE system rejects any science that contradicts the Bible, stating:

“True science will never contradict the Bible because God created both the universe and Scripture…If a scientific theory contradicts the Bible, then the theory is wrong and must be discarded.”¹¹

The system also takes an intellectually dishonest approach to discrediting evolution. ACE claims¹² evolutionists use the “hopeful monster” theory to save the “sinking ship” of evolution. In fact, this theory was put forward by one scientist, Richard Goldschmidt, whose ideas were dismissed by his colleagues. Another PACE claims that the Loch Ness Monster exists and is evidence for a young earth.¹³

Elsewhere, PACEs ridicule the theory of evolution:

“No branch of true science would make these kind of impossible claims without proof. Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!”¹⁴

They also claim that Young-Earth Creationism has “unquestionable proofs” and “unarguable evidences,”¹⁵ both deeply unscientific claims. The result is not just that ACE students learn incorrect facts, but that they are taught incorrect methods of reasoning, and gain a distorted view of the scientific method.

Racial insensitivity

The ACE curriculum shows insensitivity towards blacks, Jews, and natives.¹⁶ Cartoon strips used for the teaching of “Godly character” in the PACEs depict students attending racially segregated schools.¹⁷ ACE materials about Aborigines are unacceptable to the Aboriginal people.¹⁸ ACE’s stance on apartheid is also of concern. During apartheid, ACE claimed that if blacks were given the vote, it would destroy the South African economy.¹⁹ Subsequently, they have written about apartheid in terms that are equivocal at best:

“For many years, the four racial groups were separated politically and socially by law. This policy of racial separation is called ‘apartheid’. South Africa’s apartheid policy encouraged whites, Blacks, Coloureds, and Asians to develop their own independent ways of life. Separate living area and schools made it possible for each group to maintain and pass on their culture and heritage to their children.

“For many years, Blacks were not allowed to vote in national elections and had no voice in the national government. Reporters and broadcasters from all parts of the world stirred up feelings against the white South African government. These factors contributed to unrest within South Africa. In addition, there are at least ten separate, distinct tribal groups in the nation. Because these tribes are not a cohesive group but are often in conflict with each other, much of the violence in South Africa has been between different groups of Blacks. In spite of apartheid and the unrest in recent years, South Africa is the most developed country in Africa, and Blacks in South Africa earn more money and have higher standards of living than Blacks in other African countries.”²⁰

Political Bias

ACE materials do not allow the consideration of any opposing point of view. This fails to develop skills required for degree-level study such as forming an argument, considering different opinions, and analysing the validity of claims. Rather than engaging with differing points of view, ACE derides them.²¹ ACE’s approach to politics borders on propaganda, with opinions presented as fact.²² An ACE Wisdom supplement (1987) claims that God’s values are those of right-wing politics. The further left a person moves on the political spectrum, the further they move from God’s absolutes: “Men on the left cannot walk in wisdom.”

ACE promotes coverage over depth, virtually ruling out deep engagement with the subject.²³ World History, from Creation to the present, is covered in a series of 12 PACEs, each of about 40 pages. Because all the answers are contained within the PACE, the student will not learn how to conduct research or evaluate sources.

Evidence for Success

There is little research into the performance of ACE graduates in higher education, but the data available is negative. ACE used to claim that standardised test results showed their students performing up to 1.7 years above their expected grade level, but this was misleading. Speck & Prideaux explain:²⁴

“What is less well known is the testing procedure ACE uses to arrive at these results. ACE developers use the 1957 California Achievement Test (CAT) with 1963 North American norms (Hunter, 1984, p. 59). The tests do not rely on problem-solving approaches to learning which are now current in most curricula are not useful in making reliable comparisons between ACE and other students.”

There have been just three studies comparing the performance of ACE graduates with either nearby public schools, or national averages, on standardised tests, from 1985,²⁵ 2005, and 2007. In all three cases, ACE students performed below average. This data is highly limited, but it’s all that’s available.

The only positive academic literature on ACE is from Jacqui Baumgardt, an ACE employee in South Africa. Her qualitative data (a self-selecting sample of 77 – 9% of ACE’s South African graduates in that period) indicated that South African ACE graduates in higher education were generally satisfied with their own performance. Even this, however, was not without criticism for ACE. It indicated that many ACE students struggled to get their qualifications recognised by universities, and some were refused entry entirely. One parent was told by a university, “We’re not taking any more ACE students because their performance has been unacceptable.” Baumgardt dismisses the suggestion that this is due to any weakness with ACE, arguing that it is down to a lack of awareness of the system on the part of the admissions officers.

Conclusion

The most telling aspect about ACE is that criticism comes from both Christian and secular educators, but support for it comes only from fellow fundamentalists. Even if the biased nature of its history, politics, and science education is ignored, the system can be dismissed on academic grounds. Fundamentalists are unlikely to see this, because the primary goal of Accelerated Christian Education is not education – it is religious conversion.

[1] Biggs & Tang 2007: 23, 35

[2] ACE 2010: 84

[3] ACE 2010: 111

[4] ACE 2010: 119

[5] Speck and Prideaux 1993: 286

[6] Johnson 1987: 520

[7] Berliner 1997

[8] ACE 1999: back cover

[9] Fleming and Hunt 1987: 523; Speck and Prideaux 1993: 283; Alberta 1985: 18

[10] Speck & Prideaux 1993: 290

[11] ACE 1996a: 9

[12] ACE 1996b: 24

[13] ACE 1995: 30

[14] ACE 1996b: 24

[15] ACE 1996a: 31

[16] Alberta 1985: 25

[17] ACE 2010: 20-23

[18] Speck and Prideaux 1993: 285

[19] Dent 1993; ACE 1990: 29

[20] ACE 1996c: 27

[21] Alberta 1985: 24

[22] Paterson 2003: 14; Speck & Prideaux 1993: 283

[23] Biggs & Tang 2007: 40

[24] Speck & Prideaux 1993: 283

[25] Cited in Gehrman 1989: 89

References

Accelerated Christian Education (1990) Social Studies 1086. Lewisville: Author.

Accelerated Christian Education (1995) Science 1099. Lewisville, TX: Author.

Accelerated Christian Education (1996a) Science 1096. Lewisville, TX: Author.

Accelerated Christian Education (1996b) Science 1107. Lewisville, TX: Author.

Accelerated Christian Education (1996c) Social Studies 1099. Lewisville: Author.

Accelerated Christian Education (1999) The Great Commandment and the Great Commission: God’s Mandate for Christian Education. Nashville: Author. Available online from http://aceministries.com/aboutus/pdf/Great_Commandment_Commission.pdf. Accessed 25/5/12

Accelerated Christian Education (2010) Procedures Manual I: Learning Center Essentials. Unknown: Author.

Accelerated Christian Education (2012) ‘A.C.E. Curriculum’ [Online]. Available from http://www.aceministries.com/curriculum/?content=fourthEd. Accessed 14/5/12.

Alberta Dept. of Education, Edmonton (1985) An Audit of Selected Private School Programs: Accelerated Christian Education, Alpha Omega, Mennonite Schools, Seventh-Day Adventist Schools, and A BEKA Instructional Resources. Edmonton: Author. ED 256 022

Berliner, D. (1997) ‘Educational Pyschology Meets the Christian Right: Differing Views of Children, Schooling, Teaching, and Learning’. Teachers College Record, 98 (3), pp. 381-416.

Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2007) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Third Edition. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Dent, D. J. (1993) ‘A Mixed Message in Blacks Schools’. New York Times, 4/4/93, Education Supplement p. 28.

Fleming, D.B. and Hunt, T.C. (1987) ‘The World as Seen by Students in Accelerated Christian Education Schools.’ Phi Delta Kappan, 68 (7), pp. 518-523.

Gehrman, M.B. (1989) ‘Reading, Writing, and Religion’. In: Basil, R., Gehrman, M.B., and Madigan, T. eds. On the Barricades: Religion and Free Inquiry in Conflict. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, pp. 81-90.

Johnson, R.E. (1987) ‘Ace Responds’. Phi Delta Kappan, 68 (7), pp. 520-521.

Kelley, L.J.L. (2005) An Analysis of Accelerated Christian Education and College Preparedness Based on ACT Scores. Ed.S. Thesis. Huntington, WV: Marshall University.

Laats, A. (2010) ‘Forging a Fundamentalist “One Best System”: Struggles Over Curriculum and Educational Philosophy for Christian Day Schools, 1970-1989’. History of Education Quarterly, 49 (1), pp. 55-83.

Paterson, F.R.A. (2003) Democracy and Intolerance: Christian School Curriciula, School Choice, and Public Policy. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation

Speck, C. and Prideaux, D. (1993) ‘Fundamentalist Education and Creation Science’. Australian Journal of Education, 37 (3), pp. 279-295.

UK Naric (2012). ‘Benchmarking ICCE Qualifications’ [Online] ECCTIS. Available from: http://naric.org.uk/article.asp?article=106. Retrieved 14/5/12.

Jonny Scaramanga was educated in England with Accelerated Christian Education from ages 11-14. He now teaches music at the undergraduate level. He is researching Accelerated Christian Education and writing about fundamentalism in Britain at his blog, Leaving Fundamentalism.

Guest Blogger: Successful E-Learners vs. Successful Classroom Students

This guest post is contributed by Christine Kane from internet service providers, she is a graduate of Communication and Journalism. She enjoys writing about a wide-variety of subjects for different blogs. As is the tradition at Virtual School Meandering, this will be the only entry today.

The option of online education, which at first seemed to be limited to those who were working and going to school, is now readily available everywhere these days. In fact, people of all age groups, not just those who have already been through college once or can’t afford to go to college full-time, are gravitating toward it in droves – even those in the K-12 age range. There have been many technical articles that have explored the traits that make some e-learners successful, such as this one from Pennsylvania’s Department of Instructional Technology, and it has become clear that not everyone is cut out for taking classes online. There are marked differences between those who fare well in a traditional school setting and those who are more likely to succeed with online learning.

1. Personal responsibility

With the traditional classroom setting there is a lower level of personal responsibility involved than in the e-learning setting because you have a teacher guiding you in what to do, and your work is due at certain times during the class period. E-learning, on the other hand, requires students to be in charge of completing their work in a timely manner and facilitating submitting it to their teachers, thus more personal responsibility falls on the e-learner than the traditional student.

2. The need for direction

A typical e-learner will turn to their teacher for guidance on what tasks to complete, but they will not fully rely on them for that. In a traditional setting the teacher instructs students with exactly what to do and how to complete it. There is less freedom in the traditional setting because everything follows a more rigid daily schedule than those who are learning online and have a more generalized schedule. In a study done examining successful e-learners and those who are not it has been found that having good self-direction is vital for success in the e-learning environment. This study brought varied responses in regards to K-12 learners feel about asking for direction, which demonstrates how well some people fare in a traditional setting where others do not.

3. Working with others vs. independently

A lot of traditional classroom settings, especially in the younger years, not only encourage group work but require it. In a virtual setting, however, group work may be accomplished in a discussion form online, but that’s about the extent of it because the students don’t have a set schedule each day, only a guideline for what work needs to be accomplished.

4. Discrimination

Being in a traditional classroom setting where you interact with students on a daily basis can lead to bullying and discrimination amongst those students who are different from their peers. With online education there is no discrimination because you are behind a computer screen and there is no one to judge you based on your age, weight, appearance, etc. Bullying has taken a front seat in media attention right now, and e-learning all but eliminates exposing kids to the bullying that is prevalent in the more traditional school setting.

5. Social interaction

There are many valuable social skills that are formed during adolescent school years that kids in a traditional school setting are exposed to through interactions with kids their own age and adults alike. E-learners have the potential to miss out on forming these valuable social characteristics because of a lack of interaction. If those participating in online education don’t have other ways of interacting with kids they may lack certain social skills.
The differences between traditional education and online education are vast and varied. Both settings offer many pros and cons, and the results are fully dependent on the person involved in the education. Where some thrive others will suffer, making the type of education they receive a distinctly personal choice.

This guest post is contributed by Christine Kane from internet service providers. She can be reached via email at Christi.Kane00@gmail.com. Christine welcomes your comments below.