JLARC Study of Alternative Learning Experience Programs Interim Report February 8, 2005 Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee Robert Krell, JLARC

JLARC Study ofAlternative Learning Experience

Programs

Interim Report

February 8, 2005

Joint Legislative Audit and Review CommitteeRobert Krell, JLARC Staff

2/8/05 ALE Programs Interim Report 2

Introduction Study mandate included in 2004

Supplemental Budget• Interim Report by 2/01/05• Final Report by 6/30/05

Interim report does 3 things: Provides background information Presents school district survey results Focuses on ALE programs that rely on digital/

online curriculum (most time-sensitive issues) Includes six recommendations

Joint effort with State Auditor’s Office


Alternative Learning Experience

An individualized course of study, primarily distinguished by off-campus instruction, that can be claimed for full basic education funding

Intended to provide districts flexibility to serve a diverse student population

Program types include:• Digital/online programs (focus of this report)

• Parent/Partner programs (focus of final report)

• Other miscellaneous types


School District Survey Results Purpose: information not previously available

Of 268 responding districts, accounting for 97 percent of all K-12 students:• 155 (57%) operate at least one ALE program

• 267 total ALE programs identified for 2004-05• 21,406 estimated headcount

• 18,874 estimated FTE students

More complete survey results shown in Figure 1, page 6 of report


Background on Concerns Singled out in statutory mandate

Issues came to light as result of SAO review of ALE Parent/Partner programs• As part of that review, SAO found instances where Federal

Way Internet Academy was not in compliance with ALE rules

• That and other similar programs faced prospect of having funding disallowed

Legislature allowed districts operating these programs to continue doing so until June 30, 2005


Digital/Online Programs - Overview Encompass broad range of activities

• This report focuses on internet-based programs

Rapid growth in programs nationwide

Students who may be able to benefit include those who:• Live in remote locations• Have health or emotional issues• Need scheduling flexibility for employment or parenting

reasons• Wish to accelerate their learning program or earn additional

credits


Digital ALE Programs in Washington

38 separate ALE programs rely on internet based curriculum – 1,731 FTEs• Excludes Digital Learning Commons courses

Two main program types• Federal Way and Evergreen (Vancouver) Internet

Academies: full-scale internet-based programs• Curriculum developed in-house• Courses actively taught by a teacher

• Other programs rely primarily on digital or electronically-mediated curriculum programs


Background on Current Rules Major problem areas involve failure to comply

with current rules

Rules promulgated before this technology was widely available

OSPI acknowledges rules are not adequate in many respects

• Has been trying to revise for several years

• Rules that could change how FTE student is defined must be approved by House and Senate fiscal committees


Issue 1: Teacher/Student Contact Current rules require minimum of 1 hour

face-to-face contact per week Problematic because: a) many students live out-of-

district, and b) time constraints

OSPI previously proposed revisions Allow telephone or other electronic communication

& remove minimum time requirement

Issue is one of accountability and program quality


Recommendation 1

Retain rule as a general matter of course, BUT:

OSPI should amend rules to provide for a process whereby local districts can waive the requirement for any program it operates, if it meets certain criteria (to be developed by OSPI)


Issue 2: Student Learning Plans

Current rules require individualized learning plans

Internet academies use course syllabi, which are not individualized

Recommendation 2• OSPI should amend rules so that course syllabi

can be used for part of the learning plan• Should also clarify what additional information is

needed


Issue 3: Tracking Student Hours Current rules require FTE equivalency, for funding

purposes, be based on number of hours student is engaged in learning activities – hours must be tracked

Federal Way based justification for funding on course participation and completion

OSPI previously proposed revisions• Base equivalency on estimated weekly hours of learning

activity in learning plan

Recommendation 3: OSPI should revise rules to allow

Also clarify which programs it’s appropriate for


Program Approval & Oversight

Can be wide variations in program quality

Current rules do not require program approval or oversight – though OSPI has proposed

Recommendation 4: OSPI should amend rules to require online programs be approved by local school district, and to require annual report to board


Program and Student Outcomes Program quality is a major issue nationally, but

little research has been done

Current rules do not require any type of evaluation. Thus no system to assess effectiveness or determine if one program type better than another

Recommendation 5: OSPI amend rules to require online programs have some form of self-evaluation component

Recommendation 6: Require districts to report annually on ALE programs


Other Issues

Funding, and lack of guiding state policy• No recommendations – information provided

for Legislature’s consideration

• If Legislature wishes to examine further, may want to consider appointing a special task force


Final Report

Mandate requires final report by June 30, 2005

Questions: Robert Krell, JLARC Staff

[email protected]

360-786-5182

Documents

JLARC Study of Alternative Learning Experience Programs Interim Report February 8, 2005 Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee Robert Krell, JLARC