Educational funding and staffing levels are based on enrollments, and this is serious business in my area. If a school becomes aware that a student is outside the zone for a particular school, he/she is immediately sent packing. If a particular department has to "destaff" somebody, due to an unforeseen drop in enrollments, it all comes down to a "last in, first out" system all dependent on when a particular candidate's initial signed contract was received at the district office--and these are time- and date-stamped in case more than one is received on a particular day. Even after reading about the MI procedures for attendance/participation, I wonder how enrollments can be accurately determined and staffing decisions made in situations where sizable numbers of students are enrolled online. If an online student's district has to cover costs of enrollment online (at least up to a given number of courses), how can each school really know what proportion of its budget to allocate for that versus toward face-to-face classroom instruction? Do individual schools have to provide textbooks for online courses that have no local, physical equivalent? I do not remember seeing that issue referenced in the docs I read, but it could get expensive considering that some AP textbooks can cost upwards of $200. Could online enrollments have an adverse long-term impact on number of teachers employed? If a student is expelled, and he/she opts to complete coursework online, is the student still considered enrolled in a physical school environment for budgetary purposes? While each school has to provide every student with the same options in terms of technology, will having a computer lab at school really suffice--legally--for students who, for example, cannot physically do their online work on site? The idea that every student must have a facilitator available at his/her school but that there is no limit on how many students can be assigned to any given facilitator seems really shortsighted. I am trying to picture this in terms of "best case" and "worst case" scenarios.
I seriously doubt that most schools are ready for every available option to be implemented. Virtual schooling offers the promise of tremendous opportunity, but undoubtedly there will be some growing pains. Around here, that translates to "expensive" and "litigious."
Rebecca,
ReplyDeleteYou point out a fantastic point regarding staffing for students attending their classes online. If a student decides to complete a course within the classroom, however they started the course online, the needed instructors could possibly vary throughout the semester. In all reality, students would probably have to sign a contract stating they must complete the semester online, if they begin the course online; however, under certain circumstances, I am sure the school would have to allow the student to transfer the setting in which they receive their content.
It is interesting when thinking about all the 'what-ifs'!
The idea of a contract is interesting. In my county, if a student is not recommended for an AP or honors-level course, the student and a parent/guardian have to sign a form acknowledging that the course will be rigorous and difficult, that it will require a greater time commitment and such. However, this never stops anybody from dropping it, and in some years, so many kids have dropped AP US History that extra sections of US History have had to be added to take the overflow. At the same time, nobody is going to knock down enrollments in the gen-ed classes just in case a bunch of kids drop AP because then if they don't, if those classes stay small, other teachers will cry "FOUL!" for having huge classes. It's complicated.
DeleteRebecca I agree that there are going to be some growing pains however we are still dealing with the growing pains from mainstream traditional education. I am proud to say that our school requires online instructors to have the same certification as a traditional instructor so students are still being taught by a qualified teacher so why is the staffing issue any different from any other class ?
ReplyDeleteI'll use an example to illustrate. In a high school with 500 rising seniors, and with every senior required to take a year of American government to graduate, school staff can rightly schedule enough sections of American government to accommodate every student. However, with students being given the option to take the course online, this potentially opens a big can of worms because enough sections of the course could have to be deleted (due to low enrollment) that employees could end up being destaffed.
DeleteRebecca you bring out a good point however if 500 rising seniors need to take this course then if they spread it out throughout the year students will get what they need as well as teacher.
ReplyDeleteThat is what I cannot see, as well. How are the districts going to know how many teachers they are going to need? Then if part way through the year some students find out they cannot handle online learn and come back to the building, what do you do them? It to makes me think about the "What If's"
ReplyDeleteAs long as all the teachers are qualified it really shouldn't matter if they are teaching in a school building or online . Schedules should be made to accommodate students to complete the classes in there entirety regardless of the type of class which should tell Principals how many teachers are going to be needed.
ReplyDeleteI think it matters a great deal to the teachers who might lose their jobs because someone else is teaching those particular students online. Yes, absolutely, the students' needs must be accommodated. Nobody has said otherwise. However, I can't ignore the uncertainty that this could create.
Delete