The thirteenth K-12 distance, online and/or blended learning session from the 2019 annual meeting of the American Education Research Association that I am blogging about is:
The Impact of Prolonged Poverty on the Mathematics Academic Performance of Online Students
- In Event: 75.036 – Learning Mathematics, Reading, and Foreign Languages
Tue, April 9, 8:00 to 9:30am, Metro Toronto Convention Centre, 600 Level, Room 603
Abstract
As the K-12 online learning student population increases so does the diversity of students choosing to school online. This shift in student population includes students who are considered economically disadvantaged. This research study examines the impact of prolonged poverty (3 years of being economically disadvantaged) on the mathematics achievement of online students in grades 3 through 8.
Author
- Elizabeth Anderson, K12 Inc.
Elizabeth introduced her session by stating that this presentation was based on a white paper that was published by K12, Inc., which she described as a for profit vendor that operated online charter schools – specifically 65 schools in 35 states. This study looked at only 8 schools. The purpose of this study was to examine mathematics performance by those students that were consistently disadvantaged.
Elizabeth explained that initially students that enrolled in the K12, Inc. schools were typical or average students. But as time went on, there were more and more challenged students enrolling in K12, Inc.. In her role at the company, school leaders come to her with problems or questions, and she is responsible for selecting projects and examining the data to see if they can find trends and possible solution.
The study itself was informed by a policy change in Michigan that reexamined the definition of being at-risk. The research question for the study focused on whether students who were in poverty over time had lower academic performance than other groups of students. The students who participated in the study were only ones that had spent three consecutive years at a K12, Inc. school. As a part of the analysis, the results had to be normalized using a Z score to allow comparisons across states (and because of a change in state testing in seven of the eight states). Various other variables, such as special education designation, were controlled for.
The results showed that from year one to year two there was a similar increase or growth in student performance, but also that the students that had never been disadvantaged scored consistency higher. From year two to year three there was a significant decline in student performance for both groups – and the persistently disadvantaged students had a bigger drop (i.e., the gap increased). The students that had never been disadvantaged again scored higher. Elizabeth attributed the group in both groups to the change in state testing in seven of the eight states in the third year, all of which were perceived to be rigorous than the previous testing.
Overall, Elizabeth indicated that the performance after enrolling in K12, Inc. that students performance growth or decline was relatively consistent in both groups (i.e., the line slopes up or down on relatively the same angle on a bar chart), but that students who were persistently disadvantaged began their journey with K12, Inc. so far behind in terms of performance than their never been disadvantaged counterparts.
Subscribe: Feedly
12 Unique Blogs Are Written By Professors
