Okay, the last two or three entries related to the K-12 Online Learning Presentations at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in San Diego. The first one of Thursday was part of a session entitled Distance Education in Rural Contexts and it was delivered by folks from the National Research Center on Rural Education:
Barriers to Distance Education in Rural Schools
Schedule Information:
Scheduled Time: Thu, Apr 16 – 12:25pm – 1:55pm Building/Room: San Diego Marriott Hotel & Marina / Newport Beach
In Session: Distance Education in Rural ContextsAuthors:
Matthew J. Irvin (University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill)
Wallace Hannum (University of North Carolina)
Claire de la Varre (University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill)Abstract: This investigation examined barriers to distance education (DE) as perceived by rural school administrators in 417 districts randomly selected from the 2004-2005 Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP). This study is the first to examine rural schools’ barriers to DE and related factors (district characteristics, course subjects, delivery format, student preparation, course completion, and satisfaction with DE). Results indicate that barriers are most consistently related to district characteristics, course subjects, delivery format, student preparation, and satisfaction with DE. Results suggest that rural schools with district and personnel barriers need to address other related issues to ensure successful DE efforts. Additional implications and suggestions for dealing with these barriers and issues will be discussed.
This presentation was based on an article that these individuals had published earlier in:
Hannum, W. H., Irvin, M. J., Banks, J. B., & Farmer,T. W. (2009). Distance education use in rural schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 24(3). Retrieved 17 April 2009 from http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/24-3.pdf
A couple of the main things that I took away from this presentation, was the order of the barriers found in their study. However, I digress a bit. This presentation was a survey study of 394 randomly selected rural schools from across the country (which was a 95% response rate) conducted in 2005.
In their responses, these rural districts indicated the following as barriers to K-12 distance education
- Not needed for curriculum requirements – 67.7% (District barrier)
- Lack of sufficient funding – 63.7% (District barrier)
- Problems scheduling – 58.7% (Logistical barrier)
- Not a district priority – 53.2% (District barrier)
- Personnel not trained to support – 46.8 (Personnel barrier)
- Difficult to implement – 45.2% (Logistical barrier)
- Do not have personnel to support – 33.7% (Personnel barrier)
- Difficulty finding courses needed – 31.1% (Logistical barrier)
- Not part of the strategic plan – 28.3% (District barrier)
- Lack of technical expertise – 17.1% (Personnel barrier)
- Lack of technology enhanced rooms – 15.1% (Technology barrier)
- Technology inadequately maintained – 9.5% (Technology barrier)
- Insufficient connectivity – 7.4% (Technology barrier)
A couple of take aways for me from this list and the presenters discussion of it. The first is that three of the top four barriers were classified as “district barriers” or things that the district had or had not done that prevented or made implementing distance education difficult for these schools. The second thing that really stood out to me was that the three technology barriers were all at the very bottom of the list, which seems to me to indicate that state and federal programs in the United States have done an adequate job in providing the necessary computer technology and connectivity/bandwidth to access distance education opportunities.
Anyway, you should be able to access both their paper and their PowerPoint slides soon at the National Research Center on Rural Education website:
12 Unique Blogs Are Written By Professors
Virtual School Meanderings 
You have provided some interesting information. I would have to agree with you when you stated that “state and federal programs in the United States have done an adequate job in providing the necessary computer technology and connectivity/bandwidth to access distance education opportunities”. I think that when schools lack the resouces, it is because they choose not to invest in the time needed to get those resources. Working in a small public-charter school, I am amazed at how much funding our school gets for technology resources. As long as the school puts in some time and effort and provides adequate data and reasoning, they should have no problem receiving the funds needed to get their school up to date on the latest technology. Also, many public schools have teachers who have been there for a really long time. It is very difficult to get teachers who have been teaching a certain way for a really long time to change their ways and begin to implement technology into their lessons. Are the schools in this study public schools or charter schools?
Comment by Asmaa — April 19, 2009 @ 8:57 pm |
It seems to me that some of these issues —Personnel not trained to support – Difficult to implement –
Do not have personnel to support – Difficulty finding courses needed -and- Lack of technical expertise will disappear as more trained professionals enter the field.
In looking at the suggested link I discovered something I had not thought about —“early intervention is one proven, essential strategy for closing the reading gap”—that led me to considerations of face to face learning at this age for reading comprehension, (“phonological awareness, phonics knowledge”). I wonder about mispronouncing words because one hasn’t heard them spoken. Most of my learning during the past decade or so has been from independent reading and I often don’t take the time to check up on how to pronounce new terms.(I suppose therein lies the solution.) That leads me to another question. What role is played in learning by hearing the sounds. I know this is important in poetry and in rhetorical discourse. A little off topic, but still related to online learning that does not offer audio (and perhaps should).
Its amazing that they received a 95% response rate. I didn’t think anyone got those numbers without offering something tangible in return. Good for them!
Comment by davidmbsr — April 19, 2009 @ 11:50 pm |
Thanks for both of your comments!
The schools in our study were all public schools. As part of another on-going project of ours, students in rural schools across the U.S. are provided an advanced online class. Most of these schools have never offered their students online classes. We are finding that often the schools want to continue offering such courses following their experience in our course. Point is, I think that from this experience with an online course they see how it may be needed to enhance their curriculum and/or then make it a district priority. After having seen the potential benefits, they may then take steps to secure the funding that is needed, deal with scheduling issues, etc.
I agree that the entrance of professionals who are better trained to use technology will help. In addition, as rural schools in the U.S. already use distance education (and even more so the urban and suburban schools) this suggests to us that when feasible we need to provide training to those already in the schools.
Comment by Matt Irvin — April 20, 2009 @ 9:01 am |
How can the rural schools overcome the financial issue? In these economic times even schools with some money are very reluctant spending.
Comment by Brian Fritz — April 20, 2009 @ 6:44 pm |
I was browsing your article, and I was found it very interesting that the largest reason for schools stopping virtual schooling programs was because of a lack of student interest and participation. I wonder how well the schools publicized their virtual school programs. Did the students generally know what opportunities were available to them via distance education?
Comment by Andrea — April 20, 2009 @ 10:52 pm |
Ironically, it is because of economic constraints that many rural schools use distance education. That is, because of the small number of students, fewer residents, higher rates of poverty, and lower tax bases rural schools can’t afford to hire a teacher for some classes (e.g., advanced or enrichment classes that only a few students would take) and/or have difficulties recruiting and retaining teachers to fill vacancies. The U.S. federal government has several grants and programs to provide funds to rural schools. In addition, the recent stimulus funds have some support that will be going to schools for improvements and such so maybe they can use that. It is my understanding that there was actually an explicit part of the original stimulus package for improving technology in rural schools or areas but that it was eventually taken out of the bill. However, many are saying that this may be reintroduced in a bill in the near future. Many schools also seek out state funds as well as grants from various foundations. I’m sure there’s many other possibilities as well that I’m not aware of as school finance is not my area of expertise.
Good question Andrea. Unfortunately we do not have data on how well the schools publicized their programs that can speak to that. Given that rural schools are typically small and that teachers/counselors/etc. and students know each other very well (in some cases we even find the same teacher has had the same students for several years) I would suspect that most are aware of all that’s going-on at their school and whether they have online courses available. On the other hand, in some of the rural schools I have been in I have definitely seen more advertisement (e.g., signs/posters about online courses outside of counselor’s office) at some schools than in others.
Comment by Matt Irvin — April 21, 2009 @ 10:35 am |
This article really is interesting to me because it examines the place at which some people feel that public education was born in the rural areas. I do not really agree with that, but people do have their ideas. Anyway, I would like to think that maybe there could be a systematic solution built to dispell the myths and the rumors and help to break down these barriers that seem to be so common for so many districts. Is that the intent of the study or was it just for fact finding? I would also like to know how many of the district employees were a product of the district in which they now work? I mean if it was good enough for me why not my kids, attitude can help to hinder this study. It would also be very interesting to examine whether or not these “barriers” are real or if they are a percieved reality for the different people. Perception can change the world, and it can make good things stop dead in their tracks. Regardless, is there a sense of need for these districts to change? I mean their students enter the same world and universities that ours enter and this sounds like it could be holding the students back.
Comment by Matt — April 21, 2009 @ 5:35 pm |