Describing the Types of Virtual Schools

Rachel Nachman

University of Maryland University College

EDTC650

Introduction

Due to the introduction and evolution of technology, virtual learning is becoming increasingly popular throughout the United States. In fact, the number of students enrolled in an online learning program is changing on such a consistent basis that statistics included in recently published articles may be outdated or inaccurate (Wicks and Associates, 2010). Although the quantitative data may continuously change, one thing is definitive virtual learning is on the rise and does not seem to be disappearing anytime soon.

As virtual learning gains popularity, various types of virtual schools and programs are being created. As illustrated in Wicks and Associates (2010) and Barbour & Reeves (2009), there are differing views as to how virtual schools should be categorized. When describing virtual schools, there are many components that can be identified and analyzed. This paper aims to highlight the most helpful way to describe the different types of virtual schools.

Review of Existing Categories

Watson (as cited in Barbour et. al, 2009) identifies five different categories of virtual schools. These include:

Statewide supplemental programs Virtual programs that are operated and

monitored through the state

District-level supplemental programs Virtual programs that are operated and

monitored through a specific district

Single-district cyber schools Virtual schools offered by a specific district and

serve as an alternative to a face-to-face school

Multi-district cyber schools Virtual schools that are operated through a specific

district; however, allow students from other districts to enroll

Cyber charters Virtual charter schools which are charted within a single

district; however, these schools also allow students from around the state to

enroll. These schools also utilize commercialized curriculum.

According to Barbour et. al (2009), Watsons method of categorizing virtual schools is commonly used. However, this method of classification is solely based on the agency that operates and manages virtual schools. It does not take other factors into account such as method of instruction delivery, types of programs offered, or types of students served. Thus, due to the absence of many critical descriptive elements, Watsons method of categorizing virtual schools is quite vague.

Wicks et. al (2010) identified ten different, specific defining dimensions of online programs. These include:

Comprehensiveness The type of program offered by the school (either

individual courses or a full course load)

Reach The geographic range of students served (district-wide, state-wide, etc.)

Type Types of virtual schools including district, magnet, contract, charter,

private, and home

Location Where the virtual learning is taking place (home, school, or other)

Delivery Whether the instruction is taking place in real-time and at the same

time for all students, or whether the instruction is taking place at different times

for each student

Operational Control The governing agency that operates and manages the

school

Type of Instruction Whether the instruction is taking place solely online or

through a combination of online and face-to-face classes

Grade Level The grade level(s) of students served

Teacher-Student Interaction The amount of interaction between the teacher

and student

Student-Student Interaction The amount of interaction among students enrolled

in the class or schoolThese ten dimensions provide a more specific look at the different components of virtual schools, which the Watson method lacks. In essence, it would be possible to describe a virtual school by referencing only one of the dimensions as many people do. However, this would also lead to a lack of specificity. Thus, this poses an additional question should virtual schools be described by referencing all ten of these components? Vanoureks diagram (as cited in Wicks et al.) highlights all possible subcategories of each of the ten dimensions. If we were to consider every subcategory, there would be 209,952 possible combinations of ways that we can classify virtual schools. Therefore, this does not seem like the most logical way to describe virtual schools, either.A Helpful Way To Describe Virtual Schools

After reviewing the existing literature, I concluded that the most helpful way to categorize virtual schools lies somewhere in the middle of the methods discussed above. I feel that the description of virtual schools should be descriptive, yet not too specific as to create such a narrow category. My proposal for the most helpful way to describe the different types of virtual schools embodies the ideas referenced by Wicks et. al (2010) as well as Watson [as cited in Barbour et. al (2009)]. I am proposing that virtual schools be described as a culmination of the answer to each of the following questions:

Describing the Types of Virtual Schools

When describing the types of virtual schools, one should answer the following questions:

Scope of Program Offered

Does the virtual school offer a full, comprehensive educational program? Or, does the virtual school only offer a select few individual courses that do not amount to a full program of study?

Geographic Reach

What is the geographic reach of students that attend this school?

Content Delivery and Location

Is the instruction delivered asynchronously or synchronously?

Are students attending class solely via online means, or is a blended learning approach being utilized?

Student Population

What grade level(s) does this virtual school serve?

Are students with special needs or who require remediation enrolled in this school?

If so, is this a school solely for students with special needs? Or does this school employ an inclusion model?

My proposed method for describing the type of virtual schools addresses five main components. While there are numerous questions that should be answered, this description method is not as general at Watsons, nor is it as specific as the method discussed in Wicks et. al (2010). By answering the questions above, one is presented with a detailed look at a specific virtual school.

Description of Components and Rationale

According to Freeman (as cited in McFarlane, 2011), distance learning is:

An educational situation in which the instructor and students are separated by

time, location, or both, and it can be either synchronous (real-time, instructor led

event in which all participants are virtually in class at the same time) or

asynchronous (interaction between instructors and students occurs intermittently

with a time delay) using a variety of distribution methods including technology

(p. 85)

McFarlane (2011) defines virtual schools as schools that have no physical location and which depend solely on computers and the Internet to facilitate the teaching and learning process or deliver instructions and learning materials to students (p. 86). When choosing the five components to address in my proposed description method, I used these two definitions to identify the most unique features and aspects of virtual schools. Below, I provide a rationale of why I chose these five components, as well as a description of these components.

Wicks et. al (2010) identified the comprehensiveness, or scope of programs offered by a virtual school, as one of the most significant dimensions. Unlike traditional schools, virtual schools do not need to serve as a full-time school; rather, they can simply deliver individual, supplemental courses. However, on the contrary, there are some virtual schools that do offer full, comprehensive programs of study. The scope of the programs offered by a virtual school is an important characteristic of the school; as mentioned in Wicks et. al (2011), full-program virtual schools must also address accountability measures, as well as provide students with a well-rounded, comprehensive education. Full-program schools also make learning more accessible for those students who have external commitments, such as health issues or family obligations. Additionally, supplemental programs can allow students to still have access to individual courses that may not be available in their full-time school.

Geographic reach is the next component addressed in my description method. According to McFarlanes (2011) definition of virtual schools, they have no physical location. Thus, in essence, virtual schools can reach students all over the world. However, this is not to say that all virtual schools enroll students from all over. When describing a virtual school, it is critical to identify the students served. For example, do the students in the school solely belong to one school district? Do they all live in the same state or even in the same country? According to Wicks et. al (2011), one of the most important reasons to identify the geographic reach is because of educational policy. Since educational standards differ from state to state, we must identify the geographic location of the students enrolled in a virtual school.

Freeman (as cited in McFarlane, 2011) addresses the idea of asynchronous and synchronous instruction. This instructional delivery is the next component I feel should be considered when describing virtual schools. When instruction occurs synchronously, all students (and the teacher) are online and engaging in the course at the same time. In essence, synchronous instruction is quite similar to traditional face-to-face schooling; however, rather than everyone being in the same physical classroom or location at the same time, they are all using the technology and logged on to the course at the same time. Asynchronous delivery, however, is different. In this model, the teacher and students do not necessarily need to be logged in at the same time. Rather, the learning takes place at a time that is convenient for the student. Thus, not all students are logged into the course at the same time. This method of instructional delivery is quite flexible, and allows for students to work and learn at a pace that suits their needs. The method in which instruction is delivered is a defining element of virtual schools, and is critical to address when describing virtual schools.

Furthermore, when describing virtual schools, one should look at the location in which the content is being delivered. Some virtual schools take place solely online; that is, students never meet face-to-face and all of the learning is done via technology. However, virtual schools can also adopt a blended learning approach, which is when there is a combination of face-to-face instruction and online instruction. According to Wicks et. al (2011), a blended learning approach is becoming increasingly popular among many virtual learning programs. In theory, a blended learning approach contradicts McFarlanes definition of a virtual school. In his definition, he states that virtual schools depend solely on computers and the Internet to facilitate the teaching and learning process or deliver instructions and learning materials to students (p. 86); however, with a blended learning approach, technology is not the only means of delivering instruction. Because instructional delivery is clearly a crucial component of any school, it is important to address the location in which instruction is taking place when describing a virtual school.

The last component addressed in my description method is student population. This should not be confused with geographic reach when describing the student population, it is important to consider the individual learning characteristics of the students. All students learn differently, and thus, differentiated instruction is critical in an online learning environment. While some virtual schools may serve students of varying ability levels, other schools may specialize in a certain student population (such as students with disabilities, students who are gifted and talented, and students who require remediation). According to Hashey & Stahl (2014), schools that serve students with disabilities may differ in the resources they provide, or in the way that students access these resources. It is important to describe a school in this aspect in order to gain a better insight into the mission of the school as well as the resources and services it offers.

Conclusion

It is evident that there are various ways to categorize virtual schools, and there may not be one correct way to go about this categorization. When describing a virtual school, it is important that the description not be too vague. Thus, my proposed description method highlights what I consider to be the main components of virtual schools. When looking at a virtual school through the lens of each component, we are provided with a detailed look at the schools student population, instructional method, and content delivery.

References

Barbour, M., Reeves, T., (2009). The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature.Computers and Education, 52, 402-416.Hashey, A. I. & Stahl, S. (2014). Making online learning accessible for students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(5), 70-78.Matthew Wicks and Associates. (2010).National Primer on K-12 Online Learning.Washington DC: iNacol.McFarlane, D. A. (2011). Are there differences in the organizational structure and pedagogical approach of virtual and brick-and-mortar schools? Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(2), 83-98. Rubric

Criteria100-9089-8079-70