COLLABORATION PRACTICES AND ATTITUDES FOR STUDENTS IN CYBER CHARTER CLASSROOMSMiddle School Level

OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION

1. Introduction to Cyber Charter Schools (5 minutes)

2. Supporting Research(3 minutes)

3. Rationale Behind our Work (4 minutes)

4. Methodology and Sample (4 minutes)

5. Results and Discussion (5 minutes)

6. Implications (5 minutes)

7. Questions and Discussion (Remainder of Time)

WHAT ARE CHARTER SCHOOLS?

Charter School Traditional Public School

WHAT ARE CYBER CHARTER SCHOOLS?

Cyber Charter Charter

SUPPORTING RESEARCH

Taken from Garrison, Anderson, & Archer(2000)

RATIONALE BEHIND OUR WORK

- Student voice has been used in other K-12 settings (Jenkins, 2008) but not yet in cyber charter school science classrooms

- Hasler-Waters, Barbour, and Menchaca (2014) call for more research into cyber charter schools

METHODOLOGY

We created a survey based off of Pyo’s (2001) thesis

Modified to focus on student research participants

Amended reading level to middle school appropriate

Survey created in REDCap

SAMPLE

Target Population – Middle school students in cyber charter school

Gained parental/guardian consent via an online document and then google form to complete to provide contact information

52 parents expressed interest in having their child complete the survey

20 student completed the survey This represents .9% of the total middle school

population but 38% of the available student population

RESULTSGender Male Female

6 14

Ages 11 12 13 14 15

2 4 7 6 1

AGES OF PARTICIPANTS

Ages 11 12 13 14 15

2 4 7 6 1

02468

1012

Internet Service

Superior academics

Being able to stay home and complete classes

Religious beliefs

Medical reasons

Ease in participating in extracurricular pursuits

Parent/guardian decision

Interest in technology

Social anxiety in attending traditional school

Bullying at previous school

Commute to school is difficult

Other

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Reasons for Attending Cyber Charter School

Computer Choice

Desktop Laptop

6 14

Time Spent on Schoolwork (Daily)Less than 1 hour 0

1-2 hours 2

2-3 hours 2

3-4 hours 6

4-5 hours 5

5-6 hours 1

6-7 hours 3

7-8 hours 1

Working With Other Students to Learn Science

Flexibility to Add to Discussion when Ready

Strongly Disagree DisagreeNeither Agree nor Disagree AgreeStrongly Agree Not Applicable

Working with Other Students to Learn Science

Strongly Disagree DisagreeNeither Agree nor Disagree AgreeStrongly Agree Not Applicable

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Not Applicable

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Connection with Other Students in this Class

Content with Quality of Discussions

Strongly Disagree Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree

Strongly Agree Not Applicable

 Attitudes Towards Learning and Interaction

MeanSupports Science Learning 3.89

Positive Interactions with Peers 3.67

Positive Interactions with Teachers 3.78

Positive Online Learning Environment

3.91

Interactions with Peers

Bullied Mean Social Anxiety Mean

Overall Population Mean

I feel very connected with other students in the class

3.17 3.33 3.26

Working with other students helps me learn about science.

3.17 3.83 3.74

Gives me lots of opportunities to work with other students.

3.33 3.83 3.65

Gives me a chance to learn what my peers think about science

3.67 4.17 3.95

IMPLICATIONS Questions revolving around interactions with peers were near the bottom when

sorted by mean

50% of students were identified as choosing the school for social anxiety/bullying reasons

This suggests that extra emphasis needs to be put into making a collaborative learning environment safe and secure

We suggest all students in online K-12 school take an orientation class for proper behavior online and how an online learning community may be different than other learning settings they have been in

Lack of generalizability due to small sample size

More research needs to be done in this area, including qualitative research, focusing specifically on interactions with peers, and understanding more about the media through which discussions and communication take place

QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION

REFERENCES Arbaugh, B. J., & Garrison, R. D. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review,

issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172. Doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001

Brady, K. P., Umpstead, R. R., & Eckes, S. E. (2010). Uncharted Territory: The Current Legal Landscape of Public Cyber Charter Schools. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, (2), 191-273.

Garrison, D.R. (2007). Online Community of Inquiry Review: Social, Cognitive, and Teaching Presence Issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72.

Hasler-Waters, L., Barbour, M. K., & Menchaca, M. P. (2014). The nature of online charter schools: Evolution and emerging concerns. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 379-389.

Jenkins, E. W. (2008). The student voice and school science education. Studies in Science Education, 42(1), 49-88. Doi: /10.1080/03057260608560220

Polman, J. L., & Pea, R. D. (2001). Transformative communication as a cultural tool for guiding inquiry science. Science Education, 85(3), 223-238. doi:10.1002/sce.1007.

Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241-250.

Pyo, Sunhee. (2001). The Development and Validation of a Technology-integrated Learning Environments Instrument to Measure the Contributions of Online Communications to Prospective Science Teachers' Learning. Diss. Pennsylvania State University, 2001. Ann Arbor, MI: Bell & Howell Information and Learning. Print.