Public school teachers today are charged with designing standards-based learning experiences that will be effective with increasingly diverse groups of students. To fulfill that goal, they have begun to use a wide variety of the assignments, learning activities, culminating projects and assessments with the students in their classes. But teachers working to improve their practice by differentiating their lesson plans sometimes worry, “How can I be sure my grades are fair and accurate if my students engage in different learning activities and express what they know in different ways?”

This pedagogy requires new, more flexible grading and reporting practices than we’ve used in the past; practices that help us better recognize and support all kinds of learners.  Well-regarded educational leaders believe that grading  practices alone could play an important role in reducing disengagement and school failure. Here are the big ideas.

Four elements of instruction for diverse learners, when considered together, help lead us logically to grading and reporting practices that are fair and meaningful.  These elements can be summarized as follows:

1. Standards are the “what” of teaching. They are the set of criteria describing what a student will know or be able to do when a course is completed.

2. Differentiation is the “how” of teaching.  Differentiation refers to the design of instruction to meet a range of learning needs within a diverse group of students as they progress towards mastering course standards.  Differentiated instruction offers multiple paths for students to take in information, apply knowledge, and express proficiency with content standards.  It makes learning accessible to all students, who vary in their prior knowledge/skills, learning profiles, linguistic/cultural backgrounds, abilities/disabilities, and individual interests.  It makes use of ongoing formative assessment to guide instruction.  Similar to the “universal design” of physical space in architecture and city planning, differentiated instruction is a universal design for learning.

3. Accommodation is a “term of art.”  It has a specific meaning in the context of education that makes it a tool for implementing the programmatic and non-discrimination laws that pertain to educating students with disabilities in public schools.  Accommodations are adaptations to instruction that  DO NOT  alter or lower the essential standards of a course. Accommodations are offered to students with disabilities in order to guarantee access to learning and to non-biased assessment.

Extra time for reading is an example of an accommodation for a student who has dyslexia, unless reading speed is the specific target of your assessment. For example, if the purpose of an assessment is to measure content knowledge, a timed administration of an assessment may not deliver valid results for a student who has dyslexia and can only read slowly with concentrated effort on the decoding process.  Chances are that a timed assessment would actually measure the student’s reading speed rather than his content knowledge.  Providing extra reading time is therefore necessary to create a non-biased assessment that produces valid results. In providing this accommodation, you do not alter the essential course standards, which in this case are about content knowledge and not about reading speed.

Providing accommodations to a student with a specific learning disability is similar to providing eyeglasses to a student who has poor vision.  Disabilities may not be apparent to the casual observer and are usually permanent characteristics that the individual learns to live with by adapting the environment.

Students who meet course standards with accommodations should receive standard grades, report cards, transcripts and diplomas, without notation that accommodations were provided. Indicators regarding accommodations are not appropriate for grade reports because the essential standards of the course were not altered for the individual.  Changes were made only to the format of instruction, to make it accessible and effective, or to the format of assessment, to make it non-biased and valid.  Accommodations are really just good instructional and assessment practices.

How do accommodations relate to differentiation? Any public school student who has been formally diagnosed with a disability has an Individualized Educational Program (IEP) or a Section 504 Plan that specifies what accommodations will be provided to him in school.  However, many students have cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses that are not severe enough to be considered disabilities or to warrant special education services. This is a well-accepted understanding documented in the literature of education, psychology and brain research.  In addition, language proficiency and other variations makes one-size-fits-all instruction and assessment less effective and accurate.  A learning environment that offers flexibility and multiple options for learning and assessment better addresses multiple learning profiles and increases the validity of assessments and proficiency reports.  Accommodations, because they do not lower the essential standards of a course, are not unlike the variations that normally occur between different teachers.  Accommodations are also similar to the variations than can be proactively built into the lesson plans for a single class of learners by using differentiated instructional design. Both differentiation and accommodations make learning more universally accessible and therefore increase student success rates.

4. Modification is another “term of art” that serves an important function in implementing education and disability law.  Modifications are adaptations made to classroom instruction that  DO  lower the course standards. Modifications are used for students with severe disabilities who may not be able achieve general education course standards because of the impact of their disability. Students with severe disabilities can participate in classroom instruction when it is modified to a lower level of difficulty so that it becomes accessible to them. Grades for students receiving modified instruction may be based on alternate standards via their IEP, which specifies individualized learning goals.  By specifying that a child is included in the regular classroom with “modifications” we are able to provide access to the general education program for students with severe disabilities without diluting the meaning of our standards and grades. If grades are based are modified (lowered) standards and instruction, grade reports and transcripts DO include a notation that the grade is a non-standard grade, and therefore is not equivalent to the standards-based course grades.

Grading and Reporting

The purpose of grading is worthy of philosophical debate, but a simple statement about the purpose of summative, final grades will serve the specific focus of this article. The purpose of summative grading is to communicate meaningfully about what a student knows or can do after completing a course. The goal is to provide information that is accurate and useful for planning a program of study, for documenting achievement of prerequisites, or for documenting qualification for any work that requires a specific standard of knowledge and performance.

In standards-based education the purpose of summative grading is to report what a student knows in can do in relation to the course standards. In other words, standards-based education calls for grading based on the mastery of specified criteria; it is criterion-based grading rather than normative grading.

In normative grading systems grades must be distributed over a curve and students compete for the limited number of high grades that are allowed.  The resulting grades do not provide information about what a student knows or can do, nor even what the teacher presented. They tell you a student’s relative standing amongst a group of learners.

Criterion-based grading does not need to reflect a curve, nor does it involve a competition between students, with winners and losers.  Criterion-based grading does not involve a comparison between students, only a comparison of each individual student to the standards. Criterion-based grading practices provide more meaningful information about what a student knows or can do, and therefore is more useful for planning a course of study, establishing pre-requisite achievement levels, and documenting qualifications.

Common Misunderstandings that Affect Grading

A theoretical framework for grading is suggested by the definitions of standards, differentiation, accommodations and modifications.  How does this model look when we put it into practice?  The following issues come up frequently among educators. Here are some misunderstandings to avoid:

Classroom Curriculum vs. Course Standards

Do not confuse your curriculum with the course standards.  They are NOT one and the same.  All students need to show competence with the same course standards, but not with the same materials, activities or products of instruction that an individual teacher has chosen for use in the classroom. If one student is not thriving with a given assignment, you can adapt it or provide an alternate assignment.  There is no particular reason why any student must to do the same exact work as other students.  Different work and different assessments can demonstrate competency with the same standards. Offering a variety of assignments and assessment that address the course standards is more effective than one-size-fits-all classroom assignments or assessments.  Rubrics can also be used to evaluate individual samples of proficiency.

Tests vs. Reality

Do not treat tests as if they are sacred!  Tests are only as valuable as they are valid. Validity refers to the likelihood that an assessment accurately measures what it is intended to measure.  Tests have no value if they produce inaccurate results about what a student knows or can do.  This can happen whenever there are confounding factors. A classroom test may be an aide to discovering the reality about what a student knows or can do, but it does not necessarily function that way.  Sometimes a test actually measures the impact of a student’s disability rather than the skill or knowledge you intend to measure. In that case, toss out the test data.

Remember also that assessments of proficiency are an attempt to ascertain a student’s usual and true mastery. They are NOT like a game of sport in which only one opportunity “counts.” For example, if you know that the habitual performance in the classroom is significantly better than a single test performance, throw out the test data when you compute your grades. As an assessment professional you are obliged to interpret your assessment data. Do not use invalid test scores when you compute final grades.

Fair vs. Same

Learning is not a competition between students.  A given learning activity or assignment may be effective for one student and ineffective with another.  Moreover, a given assessment instrument may be valid for one student but invalid for another.  Fairness is not using the same exact assessment for every student.  Fairness requires that you use assessment data that is valid for the individual you are grading. Fairness means giving credit for what is true about each individual.

Proficiency vs. Behavior

Avoid using grades for discipline.  The use of grades for discipline can cause inaccuracies in reporting proficiency, it can limit future learning opportunities, and it can cause disengagement from school.

Do not allow scores unrelated to proficiency to depress final grades below a student’s true level of proficiency. This can happen when grades are used as discipline for missing homework or late penalties are imposed for quality work.  Final letter or number grades in a standards-based system must be valid measures of proficiency with regard to the course standards.

Some teachers say they grade homework to build good work habits and study skills.  However, it is difficult to objectively measure effort and study skills unless you know your student very well. One student’s ten-minute effort is another student’s hour –long effort.  The number of practice problems necessary for one student to solidify a skill may be double or half that for another.  The study habits that are benficial for one student may not be the ones that are most beneficial for another.  Students each have to balance different sets of demands depending on their personal skill sets and schedules.

Grades given for effort or study skills are often really given for compliance with one-size-fits-all assignments that may not match an individual’s needs.  But according to Reeves (2008) and Gusky (2000), no studies show that using grades to punish students for missing work will prompt greater effort or help students learn good study habits.  In fact, low grades cause students to withdraw from learning.  Study habits for older students require the development of meta-cognitive regulation, and intrinsic control.  That is gained when teachers offer student-centered learning options, provide feedback with ongoing formative assessment, and foster student ownership of learning.

Do not grade missing work.  Missing work is something different from work that is of failing quality. Faced with students who do not turn in assignments, teachers sometimes feel they need to do something to increase participation, but there are at least 3 problems with assigning a failure for missing work: 1) It is not a valid measure of proficiency, 2) If averaged into final grades it distorts true proficiency, and 3) using grades as punishment doesn’t work for increasing student participation, engagement, or learning.  Besides these short-comings, assigning failures for missing work makes it difficult and unlikely that a student can recover from a setback when learning to learn.

Assigning grades for missing work is an easy way out for schools.  If something is not working, it is simpler to attribute the problem to the student and keep on doing what we’re doing.  In a way, it helps us to avoid facing the crisis of disengagement.

A better practice is to grade only real work and assign “I” for incomplete work, investigate the reason for a student’s missing or late work and attempt to hold the student accountable.  What type of assignment is missing – a practice assignment or a project? Does the assignment provide a meaningful learning experience for the individual student? Is a student’s learning disability, learning profile or another special need interfering with completing the assignment? Is it too easy or too difficult? Does the student understand the assignment?  Does he know where to begin?  Does he have a plan for how he can get it done?  Is the student over scheduled?  Is the student disengaged because of repeated negative school experiences? What does the student think is the problem?  What are the student’s goals? Does your formative assessment system give enough feedback to the student about how his effort contributes to reaching his goals?  What does the student say he needs?  Can the instruction be adapted to better meet the student’s needs? What else can be changed?

If you can be sure the student has been assigned work that is meaningful for his individual needs, is at his instructional level, he has enough time, he knows how to start, he has a plan for getting it done, and he understands how his efforts will affect him in reaching his goals, you may have solved the problem.  Once the work is turned in, assign full and accurate credit for proficiency. Do not distort proficiency with late penalties.  There is no standard that requires all students to become proficient on a specific day.

Of course, if a student does not complete enough work in order to evaluate his proficiency by the end of the semester, he cannot be given credit for the course.  Some districts have begun to replace traditional grading and reporting systems with new systems that assign Incompletes for courses that are attempted but not completed in a semester.  This is based on the theory that time and pacing must be a variable in learning to address the needs of some students.

Zero vs. 50%

Reeves (2004) and Wormeli (2006) have written extensively about the misuse of zeros. On a 100-point scale, using zeros distorts true proficiency in final grades. On a 4 point scale, it may be acceptable to use zero as a failing score.  However, these authors argue that on a 100 point scale, a “50” should be entered into your grade book if the student’s raw score is anything below 50.  Why?  The distance between the steps of the grading scale must be equal to prevent distortion when used in computations for final grades.  If failing grade, F, has a larger range (60 points as compared to 10 points each for A, B, C and D), a single zero can have a disproportionate impact on the final number.  A student who receives a zero may subsequently have to demonstrate a true proficiency at the high end of the grading scale several times in order to end up with a low passing final grade. Besides the distortion to proficiency, if it is too hard to recover from a mistake, a student may give up.  Using  “50” for failing leads to summative grades that more accurately reflect true proficiency and encourage students to recover from mistakes on the learning path.

Conclusion:

This doesn’t solve all our problems.  If we don’t have good way to report about personal progress, we lack important information.  This is particularly true for students at each end of the performance spectrum, those who repeatedly score either low or high with regard to uniform standards. A low performer may be making good steady personal progress, and a high performer may be making negligible improvement.  Personal progress information can be more helpful to fostering the success of individual students.

Secondly, today’s overcrowded classrooms, limited resources and large high schools make knowing kids well and using flexible grading practices a logistical challenge for many teachers.

However, greater clarity about final grading practices that are fair and meaningful for differentiated, standards-based assessment is a place to start. If we can begin to give appropriate credit for the different ways and rates that students learn and express what they know and can do, we may reduce disengagement and school failure rates. Drop out statistics suggest we can’t afford to alienate our students by measuring success in narrow and rigid terms that don’t match our rich diversity of intelligence, skills, abilities, learning rates, backgrounds and personal interests. We can’t afford to assert that a student who doesn’t complete a one-size-fits-all assignment according to a one-size-fits-all timeline is a failure.  We can’t afford to under-report proficiency and create unnecessary barriers to future learning opportunities for our students. We need to create universal designs for learning that allow us to appreciate each student’s strengths and empower each unique student to win at learning.

Works Cited

Conner, Jerusha, Denise Pope, and Mollie Galloway. “Success with Less Stress.” Educational Leadership 67.4 (2010): 54-58. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec09/vol67/num04/Success-with-Less-Stress.aspx

Darling-Hammond, Linda, and Olivia Ifill-Lynch. “If They’d Only Do Their Work!” Educational Leadership 63.5 (2006): 8-13.

Guskey, Thomas R. “Grading Policies That Work Against Standards…and How To Fix Them.” NASSP Bulletin 84.620 (2000).

Jung, Lee Ann, and Thomas R. G. “Grading Exceptional Learners.” Educational Leadership 67.5 (2010): 31-35. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb10/vol67/num05/Grading-Exceptional-Learners.aspx

Popham, James W. “Report Cards, Test Gaps, and Item Types.” Educational Leadership 65.2 (2007): 87-88. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/oct07/vol65/num02/Report-Cards,-Test-Gaps,-and-Item-Types.aspx

“Principles and Indicators for Student Assessment Systems | FairTest.” The National Center for Fair & Open Testing | FairTest. 28 Aug. 2007. Web. 10 June 2010. http://fairtest.org/principles-and-indicators-student-assessment-syste

Reeves, Douglas B. “Effective Grading Practices.” Educational Leadership 65.5 (2008): 85-87. Web. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb08/vol65/num05/Effective-Grading-Practices.aspx

Reeves, Douglas B. “The Case Against Zero.” Phi Delta Kappan 86.4 (2004): 324.

Stange, Alan. “Grading Practices for 2009-2010: The Big Ideas of Our Assessment Practice.” Weblog post. PrairieSouth Staff Sites. Oct. 2009. Web. 10 June 2010. http://staff.prairiesouth.ca/sites/stangea/2009/10/16/grading-practices-for-2009-2010/

Vatterott, Cathy. “Homework Myths.” Web. 1 June 2010. http://www.homeworklady.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=13&Itemid=34

Vatterott, Cathy. “What Is Effective Homework?” ASCD Express 3.7 (2007). Web. http://www.ascd.org/ascd_express/vol3/3-07_vatterott.aspx

Wormeli, Rick. “Accountability: Teaching Through Assessment and Feedback, Not Grading.” American Secondary Education 34.3 (2006).

Wormeli, Rick. Fair Isn’t Always Equal: Assessing & Grading in the Differentiated Classroom. Portland, ME: Stenhouse, 2006.

Preparing Final Grades? Towards Fair and Meaningful Grading Practices for the Differentiated Standards-Based Classroom by Denise Herrenbruck is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.  You are free to copy and distribute this work as long as you attribute the work to the author.  You may not use this work for commercial purposes.  You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://headinthecloudsfeetontheground.com/contact-2/.

A Tribute to a Special Teacher

News:

Oregon Department Of Education
Google Blog
Oregon Virtual School District
Association for Supervision and Curricuum Development Inservice Blog
Education Week
Government Technology
eSchool News

What Are Google Apps for Education?

Google Apps Product Features and Demos
Free Tech for Teachers Blog – Google Guide
Free Tech for Teachers Blog – Google Tools Tutorials

The Agreement

Google Apps Agreement between the State of California and Google Inc. (pdf)

1. Establish a Time Frame for Each Asynchronous Discussion Forum.

A one-week time frame often works well for allowing students to log in several times according their own schedule and ensuring several back and forth exchanges.  Sometimes I use two-week forums for peer feedback on projects and assignments.  In general I find that the longer the time frame for the forum, the more moderation it needs to keep it dynamic.

2. Clearly Define Expectations for Participation.

I usually require my students to post at least one initial message in the forum to reflect on the assigned readings and media, and at least two replies to classmates.  I ask them to log in at least 3 different times during the week to spread out their participation over the time frame and increase interaction.  These guidelines also allow flexibility.  Students may interact back and forth with one person several times or interact with more than one person.  I think it is also helpful to add a rubric for forum participation in your course syllabus.  A rubric can provide a more detailed guide about the message quality and may be used for ongoing formative assessment and to give students feedback about their participation.  If you will be assigning grades in your course, you may want to use students’ rubric scores towards evidence of proficiency with the course content. Given this structure I find that most students contribute generously.  In classes of 20-30 adult students, I typically have 125 -175 messages in a one week-long forum.  Here is an example of a grading rubric I have used in my college classes for teachers:

4: Exceptional Performance

• Messages characterized by depth of insight into theoretical issues in assigned readings and media, clarity of argument supported by references or quotes, and originality.
• Replies contained insightful comments and questions that prompted further on-topic discussion, and/or helped clarify or synthesize other class members’ ideas.
• Participant submitted 3 or mores messages in the discussion forum.  Participation was distributed throughout the assigned week to facilitate ongoing discussion.
• Any disagreement with ideas of others was expressed respectfully.  Spelling/grammar appropriate to an academic environment.

3: High Quality Performance

• Messages contained insight and supported argument with reference to assigned readings/media.
• Replies included questions that stimulated discussion or answers to questions raised by others.
• Participant posted at least 3 messages in the discussion forum and distributed participation over at least 2 days during the assigned week to facilitate ongoing discussion.
• Any disagreement with ideas of others was expressed respectfully.  Spelling/grammar appropriate to an academic environment.

2: Partially Met Performance Objectives

• Topic was partially addressed and/or replies partially supported discussion.
• Partially met requirements for quantify and distribution of replies during the assigned week.
• Posts were respectful. Grammar and spelling may have been somewhat informal for the academic environment.

1:  Minimal or No Performance

• Minimal or no participation.
• Participants’ expression may have been unclear or off-topic.
• Written communication may have been of poor quality or inappropriate.

3. Provide 3-5 Open-Ended Questions as Discussion Prompts.

For each forum, I provide open-ended questions.  Although answering them is optional, it provides students with ideas for reflecting on their readings and media.  Do not ask questions for which you want a correct answer or you will get 25 variations on the same response, and no discussion.

4. Use Subjects to Good Advantage.

For example, in my forum for discussing the course material on learning disabilities I ask my student teachers to use the subject line to state the learning disabilities subtopic that they will write about.  A first grade students teacher may post a message about “Dysgraphia in First Grade” and another student teacher may respond to the course readings and media with a message about “Dyslexia in High School English.”  If the forum software you are using does not offer a subject field, tell your students to create a subject heading for their message and then skip to the next line to write the body of the message.  When the message is posted, the subject will then stand out.

5. Nurture Your Threads!

Make sure students understand that there are two ways to participate in a discussion forum.  They may respond directly to the instructor’s prompts by clicking on the reply button directly below the teacher’s message.  Or, they may reply within a thread by clicking on the reply button immediately below another student’s message.  Keeping the discussion organized into threads leads to deeper discussion.  For example, if a second or third student in my class has more to say about “Dysgraphia in First Grade,” he should respond within that thread and not respond to the instructor in the main thread.  Each thread then evoles into deeper discussion about a subtopic.

Forum Threads

6. Model Good Messages.

The instructor should take part in discussion, adding a message whenever she has clarification, resources or questions for the student.  I always start my messages by re-stating my understanding of the student’s point or question, and end with validating that he contributed to discussion, whether I have agreed with him or not.  This deepens understandings and sends the message that contributions to discussion are valuable, even when there are different points of view or incomplete understandings.   It also models good forum etiquette.  In the middle, between my opening and closing statement, I add my contribution, be it information, links to further resources, or a question that challenges to the student to a higher level of thinking.  Finally, this is another opportunity for instructors to model appropriate use of the threads.

7. Debrief the Discussion.

A large percentage of the learning in my classes comes from the discussion as students work to apply the course content to their real life situations.  Much is lost if students do not review the conversation to make sure they caught all the issues, responses, and extra resources that were linked during the week.  Offer a summary assignment.  You can do this as an individual or group assignment on a rotating basis.  I often reserve it for students who have missed the discussion due to illness or another difficulty participating on the discussion schedule.  A good make-up assignment is to have at least one student read the completed discussion and summarize the main topics, ideas and resources that were discussed.  Have him post the summary at the end of the discussion forum for all to benefit.

9. Keep the Forum Online.

Keep your discussion forums available for the duration of the course.  Students often like to re-visit the discussion later as they remember something somebody said, or a resource that was shared.  Even though the class moves on to the next discussion forum, a few students may want to also continue their conversation about last week’s topic.

9. Use Simple Forum Settings.

Turn off subscriptions if you can.  Unless the forum allows subscriptions to individual messages or threads, in-depth discussion will produce too many messages for email.  Encourage students to log in to the forum and view the discussion in thread order.  Allow students to edit their own messages.  You will get more participation if students can change their mistakes or regrets.  (I find this especially true for adults; digital natives share online more easily.)  However, do not activate the message deletion option in your forum, as it typically causes deletion of any replies that have already been posted below the deleted message in the same thread.  Most forums will date stamp an updated message and this will avoid any potential confusion when messages are modified.

10. Nurture your Discussion Community Over Time.

Make your first discussion forum straight-forward and uncomplicated.  By doing so, you can accommodate a full range of technology skills in your student body.  I have 3 goals for my first forum.  The first is a process goal: I want my students to understand how to use threads.  I ask them to post an initial reply to me in the main thread, and to respond to other students in separate threads.  My second goal is a content goal: I want to find out about my students’ background with my course content, their strengths and interests.  I ask my students to post an introduction that includes a description of their prior experience with the subject matter, as well as to say what they hope to get out of my class.  This gives me an excellent needs assessment to use as I teach, and helps me to focus my course materials and discussion on my group of learners.  It allows me to draw on the strengths of class members at the appropriate time, as well as offer more support and resources when necessary.  My third goal is begin to develop my learning community.  As students learn to use threads to respond to each other, they begin to develop the connections of shared background and interests that will develop further during the course.  In this first forum I think it is very important for the teacher to respond briefly to each student to welcome him to the class and assure him that his voice has been “heard.”

In later forums, the teacher can take part intermittently in discussion as the situation demands.  However, I like to keep an informal tally of my responses so I am sure to touch base with each student every so often.  Each forum can get a little more complex and you can vary the forum instructions to address different purposes.  For example, I may ask students to post a first draft of an assignment in the discussion forum, with the subject “Jane’s first draft.”  They then read one another’s drafts, offer feedback by replying within each students thread, and post subsequent drafts or final versions below the peer feedback.  This is an effective way to watch how each assignment evolves with feedback, and can even offer samples for debriefing the process of using feedback well. But this is just one example of how forums can be used creatively — use your imagination!

Well structured asynchronous discussion forums can be used in many creative ways for interaction, collaboration and learning within a class group.  Even technology novices can learn how to interact online if you structure your forums well.  Once students learn the conventions you have established for the forums, interaction can be targeted and support deep learning.  Your students will be sad to say goodbye to their asynchronous learning community at the end of the course but will have learned something about how to work productively in groups online.

These ideas, while they can occasionally be accurate, are partial understandings of online learning that miss it’s fundamental importance. Here is my short, overview of online learning for beginners.  I hope I can illustrate that online learning is not primarily about offering an alternate delivery method for learning.  Learning online is an important element of all learning, and of becoming literate in our electronic age.  New online networking tools are enhancing personal connections for learning and mentorship.  For those who have not yet experienced learning online first hand, I will offer a description of the many ways that learning online “works.”

What is Online Learning?

Fundamentally it is about using the internet for learning.

It may involve:

• accessing information, knowledge and resources, including text and multimedia
• discussion and collaboration in electronic group forums and wikis
• student writing in blogs and multimedia presentations in digital portfolios
• students connecting globally to learn with others and building networks that support their learning goals
• synchronous communication (at the same time, such as using Skype)
• asynchronous communication (similar to email), allowing individuals to log in to electronic forums at different times of day to contribute to discussion or collaborative work.

Why is Online Learning Important?

1. The internet is a primary tool for accessing information and for communication today.

Check out this short video: Did You Know 2.0

2. The internet has changed the nature of Literacy.

The “New Literacies” include learning how to:

• research, evaluate, organize, store and share online resources
• use the internet safely and responsibly
• comply with copyright and creative commons licenses
• read, write and publish in a variety of online formats
• consume and produce communication in a variety of media
• create products with others via online tools
• form and sustain networks for education and business
• work productively amongst diverse perspectives and cultures

These videos may be interesting too:
Example of Social Bookmarking
Wikis in Plain English
What’s the Big Deal About Blogging?

3. The electronic revolution has caused a profound change in how we work, communicate, and learn, and this has implications for education.

• Much learning has already moved outside school walls and hours: home-schooling, virtual schools, workplace training and certification programs, web communities of interest, open education.

• U.S. “high school graduation rates – stuck at about 70% – have dropped from first in the world to the bottom half of industrialized nations.” (Darling-Hammond, 2010)

• Trends suggest that schooling needs to be networked to remain relevant to the way we live and work in the electronic information age.

How does online learning work?

1. There are many styles of online learning – it is not one style.

Here an is example of what learning might involve at each end of the instructional design spectrum.  (Keep in mind that most instruction combines many strategies along a continuum.)

2. Classroom and Online Learning are not mutually exclusive.

Online learning is an important component of learning in regular classrooms as well as for students learning from a distance.  Most learning environments will involve a blend of physical and virtual space.

Selected Resources:

Articles About Changes in Work, Communication and Learning in the 21st Century

Cookson, Peter W. “What Would Socrates Say?” Educational Leadership. September 2009, Vol. 67:1
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/sept09/vol67/num01/What_Would_Socrates_Say%C2%A2.aspx

Richardson, Will. “Chapter 9: What it All Means.” Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms,  Second Edition, Corwin Press, (2008) p.129 – 136.  (Overview of “new literacies” and important “shifts” due to the electronic revolution.  To read in Google preview: click on “Contents” and then on “What it All Means”)
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ms3v4pWNkIgC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_navlinks_s#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Richardson, Will. “Footprints in the Digital Age.” Educational Leadership. November 2008, Vol. 66:3.
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/nov08/vol66/num03/Footprints_in_the_Digital_Age.aspx

Collins, Allan and Halverson, Richard.  “Chapter 1: How Education is Changing.”  Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology. (2009) Teachers College Press, NY (Read page 1-6 in Preview)
http://www.amazon.com/Rethinking-Education-Technology-Education-Connections-Education-Connections/dp/0807750026/ref=pd_rhf_p_t_3#reader_0807750026

Darling-Hammond, Linda.  “Chapter 1: The Flat World, Educational Inequity, and America’s Future.” The Flat World and Education. (2010) Teachers College Press, NY.  (Read page 1-6 in Preview)
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0807749621/ref=rdr_ext_sb_ti_hist_2#reader_0807749621

Herrenbruck, Denise.  “A Strategic Vision for Online Learning.” The Oregonian. December 4, 2009
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/12/a_strategic_vision_for_online.html

Standards for 21st Century Learning:

The Partnership for 21st Century Skills
Framework for 21st Century Learning identifies core knowledge, skills, and infrastructure needed for 21st century education.
http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/

The International Association for K-12 Online Learning
Non-profit association provides research, professional development, and networking.  Find summaries of current practices, online learning standards, state level policies.  http://www.inacol.org/

“The NTCE Definition of 21st Century Literacies.” National Council of Teachers of English. (February, 15, 2008)
http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition

Quality Online Learning:

Henry, Jim and Meadows, Jeff.  “An Absolutely Riveting Online Course: Nine principles for Excellence in Web-Based Teaching.” Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. Vol. 34:1 Winter, 2008
http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/179/177

Moorman, Honor.  “Adventures in Web 2.0: Introducing Social Networking into My Teaching” Horace. Summer 2009, Vol. 25 No.1 http://www.essentialschools.org/resources/414

]]> http://headinthecloudsfeetontheground.com/online-learning-demystified/feed/ 0 http://headinthecloudsfeetontheground.com/a-strategic-vision-for-online-learning/ http://headinthecloudsfeetontheground.com/a-strategic-vision-for-online-learning/#comments Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:28:48 +0000 Denise Herrenbruck http://headinthecloudsfeetontheground.com/?p=458 As a response to unprecedented rapid enrollment growth in virtual charter schools in Oregon, the state legislature has put a temporary cap on enrollment while it studies the effects of this growth on equity, compliance with education laws, public education spending and quality.  The enrollment cap, while not intended as a permanent solution, is angering the group of parents who have had access to virtual schools for their children.  The solution to the conflict is a long-term strategic vision for online learning that assures access, good pedagogy and choice for all of Oregon’s students.

A Strategic Vision for Online Learning