1. No category

1
Digital Learning
Report Card
2014
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
D I G I TA L
LEARNING
NOW
#DLNReportCard
An Initiative
of ExcelinEd
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Foreword
In the homes on your street and the classrooms in your community, history is being made. The
leaders, teachers and innovators of tomorrow are today’s students. And the quality of education we
offer them now will determine our future.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
The quality of education each child receives will do one of two things. It will either equip the student
to launch into the world ready for life’s challenges and opportunities, or it will shortchange a future
and leave yet another young citizen unprepared to face the demands of college and careers.
Our actions today will decide history.
Leaders across the nation know this, and many are working to create education systems that offer
all students the opportunity to reach their greatest potential. One way states are doing this is
through digital learning.
In 2014, 50 new digital learning laws were passed. In addition to looking at new legislation, many
states focused on implementing the 422 digital learning laws enacted over the past four years. Good
policy is not confined to a single legislative cycle. It takes hard, continuous work, but it is well worth
the effort.
Digital learning has the power to connect students with the best teachers in the world. It can offer
all students access to hard-to-serve courses and groundbreaking career and technical education as
well as vocational training. Digital learning promises better instruction, tailored to the progress and
needs of each student. It can allow advancement when a student masters a concept. It can provide
additional support for subject areas where students are struggling. Digital learning policies offer a
new way to fund education and learning, not fettered by old constraints linked to time, but rather
linking funding to learning and the needs of students.
The 2014 Digital Learning Report Card highlights the efforts of each state to create new
opportunities for students, explore new models of learning and provide needed infrastructure. It
also underscores the opportunities states have to create an environment where digital learning can
help students thrive. Whether it’s Louisiana making sacrifices to expand its Course Access program
and seeing a huge spike in enrollment, or Ohio looking to districts and schools to spark innovation,
states are refusing to let obstacles limit progress.
We have the tools and capability to create an education system that allows all students to flourish.
For the sake of our students and our nation, we must make that vision a reality.
Patricia Levesque
CEO, ExcelinEd
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
About ExcelinEd
Founded by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, the Foundation for Excellence in Education (ExcelinEd)
is igniting a movement of reform, state by state, to transform education for the 21st century economy
by working with lawmakers, policymakers, educators and parents to advance education reform across
America.
About Digital Learning Now
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Digital Learning Now, an initiative of ExcelinEd, works to advance state policies that will create a
high-quality digital learning environment to better equip all students with the knowledge and skills to
succeed in the 21st century. The policy framework stems from the belief that access to high-quality,
customized learning experiences should be available to all students, unbounded by geography or
artificial policy constraints.
Acknowledgements
ExcelinEd and Digital Learning Now would like to thank Getting Smart and the many state
departments and their staff for providing state data, information, interviews and feedback to inform
the development and creation of the 2014 Digital Learning Report Card. In addition, thank you to the
following generous donors for their continued support of the Digital Learning Report Card.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Charles and Helen Schwab Foundation
The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
Walton Family Foundation
Carnegie Corporation of New York
The Kovner Foundation
The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation
The Lynde & Harry Bradley Foundation
Contact Information
Contact Information
DigitalLearningNow.com
@DigLearningNow
Facebook.com/DigitalLearningNow
[email protected]
ExcelinEd.org
@ExcelinEd
Facebook.com/ExcelinEd
Digital Learning Now
ExcelinEd
Table of Contents
05 BACKGROUND
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
10 2014 GRADES
11 2014 OVERALL STATE GRADES
13 10 ELEMENTS & STATE GRADES BY ELEMENT
27 2014 YEAR IN REVIEW
33 STATE POLICY PROFILES
34 COMPETENCY-BASED EDUCATION
36 AZ SB 1255 (2012): Creating Competency-Based Pathways to Postsecondary Education
38 CT HB 6358 (2013): Unleashing Innovation in Connecticut Schools
40 FL HB 7059 (2012): Acceleration Options in Public Education
42 IA HF 215 (2013): Education Reform
44 NH SB 48 (2013): School Performance and Accountability
46 VT Act 77 (SB 130) (2013): Flexible Pathways
49 COURSE ACCESS
50 LA HB 976 (2012): Enabling Course Access
54 MI HB 4228 (2013): Advancing Access in Michigan
56 MN SF 1528 (2012): Encouraging Innovation and Removing Barriers
58 TX HB 1926 (2013): Expanding Online Course Access
60 COMPETITION FUNDING
61 OH HB 59 (2013): Straight A Innovation Fund
64 WV SB 371 (2012): School Innovation Zones Act
67 DATA BACKPACKS
68 UT SB 82 (2013): Student Achievement Backpack
70 SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
78 APPENDIX A: METHODOLOGY
80 APPENDIX B: ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
5
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Background
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
6
8
BACKGROUND
Digital Learning Now
schools, online and virtual learning and
blended learning models that combine online
and on-site learning.
State-focused: The elements are directed
toward state laws and policies with the
recognition that federal and local governments
also play a role in providing a high-quality
education.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Digital Learning Now, an initiative of the Foundation
for Excellence in Education (ExcelinEd), works to
advance state policies that will create a high-quality
digital learning environment to better equip all
students with the knowledge and skills to succeed in
the 21st century. The policy framework stems from
the belief that access to high-quality, customized
learning experiences should be available to all
students, unbounded by geography or artificial policy
constraints.
In 2010, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and former
West Virginia Governor Bob Wise co-chaired the
convening of the Digital Learning Council 1 to define
the policies that would integrate current and future
technological innovations into public education. The
Digital Learning Council united a diverse group of
more than 100 leaders from education, government,
philanthropy, business and technology to develop
a roadmap of reform for local, state and federal
policymakers. The Digital Learning Council was
commissioned to identify a set of policy elements
needed to support digital learning based on the
following guiding principles:
Aspirational: The elements are bold. When
achieved, the elements will transform
education for the digital age.
Comprehensive: The elements encompass
technology-enhanced learning in traditional
1
2
http://digitallearningnow.com/about/history
http://digitallearningnow.com/policy/10-elements/
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Measurable: The elements can be measured.
Long-term: The elements create a roadmap for
states to achieve a high-performing education
system for the long-term. States should be
measured based on their progress toward
achieving the elements.
During the fall of 2010, the Digital Learning Council
defined the elements and identified the actions that
need to be taken by lawmakers and policymakers to
foster a high-quality, customized education for all
students. This includes technology-enhanced learning
in traditional schools, online and virtual learning and
blended learning, which combines online and on-site
learning.
This work produced a consensus around the 10
Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning 2 that
identified specific issues and policies states need to
address in order to support emerging next generation
models of learning.
BACKGROUND
10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning
01
Student Eligibility: All students are digital
learners.
03
Personalized Learning: All students can customize
their education using digital content through an
approved provider.
04
Advancement: Students progress based on
demonstrated competency.
05
Quality Content: Digital content, instructional
materials, and online and blended learning courses
are high quality.
06
Quality Instruction: Digital instruction is high
quality.
07
Quality Choices: All students have access to
multiple high-quality providers.
08
Assessment and Accountability: Student learning
is the metric for evaluating the quality of content
and instruction.
09
Funding: Funding creates incentives for
performance, options and innovation.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
02
Student Access: All students have access to highquality digital content and online courses.
$
10
Delivery: Infrastructure supports digital learning.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
7
8
BACKGROUND
Digital Learning
Report Card
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
To gauge states’ progress, Digital Learning Now identified 42
actionable metrics that examine state laws, administrative rules
and other policy levers that identify what is needed to ensure the
10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning are addressed. These
metrics are divided among the 10 Elements and provide states
with a framework of the policies that should be in place in order
to create an environment that supports a broad system of digital
learning.
In 2011, Digital Learning Now released the Roadmap for
Reform: Digital Learning 3, a comprehensive guide to specific
policies based on the 10 Elements. In 2012 and 2013, the Digital
Learning Report Card incorporated suggestions and feedback.
These improvements have made the metrics more specific and
actionable, eliminating potential duplication to leverage existing
data and minimize the data collection burden on states.
The 2014 Digital Learning Report Card continued to make
improvements based on feedback from 2012 and 2013. Emphasis
was put on amplifying state voices, clarifying metrics to accurately
capture next generation policies, creating a broader picture of
digital learning across the nation and improving presentation for
advocacy and measurement.
The Report Card also recognizes the hard work states—governors,
legislators, state chiefs, dedicated staff and many others—are
making toward achieving the 10 Elements. Multiple levels of
partial credit are identified as states push forward in creating an
environment where digital learning can thrive.
These report cards have been instrumental in helping spur policy
changes as well as offer a roadmap for the reforms needed to
help make personalized learning a reality for all students. Digital
Learning Now’s extensive network of policy experts, state leaders
and innovators provides a powerful facilitator to help state leaders
develop, implement and scale innovations to improve education.
3
http://digitallearningnow.com/about-the-roadmap-for-reform/
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
9
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
10
2014 Grades
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Overall State Grades and
10 Elements of High-Quality
Digital Learning
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
2 0 1 4 OV E R A L L S TAT E G R A D E S
2014 Overall State Grades
WA
MT
ME
ND
MN
OR
NY
WI
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
ID
SD
WY
MI
CA
UT
NM
PA
IA
NE
NV
IL
CO
MO
KS
WV
DE
NC
HI
SC
AR
MS
AL
GA
LA
TX
AK
CT
VA
KY
TN
OK
NM
OH
IN
FL
MA
MD
NH
NJ
RI
VT
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
11
2 0 1 4 OV E R A L L S TAT E G R A D E S
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
12
In 2014, states continued to implement and define the vast amount of legislation enacted over the last
three years. This steady progress can be seen in the change in grades throughout the nation. Over the past
year, half the states improved their grades overall, 14 states moved up one letter grade and nine states
moved out of the “F” category.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Student Eligibility
All students are digital learners.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
01
1. All students must be provided opportunities to access online courses throughout their entire K-12 experience.
2. All students must complete at least one online course to earn a high school diploma.
3. Student eligibility in digital-learning environments is not based on prior-year enrollment in the public school system.
All students have a right to a high-quality education. In the
21st century, a high-quality education must include digital
learning.
Students who are eligible for public school should be
eligible for publicly funded digital learning. Establishing
criteria for eligibility, such as previous attendance in
a public school, only limits, delays and diminishes
opportunities for learning.
Requiring students to take a high-quality college prep
online course ensures students are better prepared to
succeed in life after graduation in the digital age. A robust
offering of digital content and online courses expands
options and ensures students acquire knowledge and gain
skills from the experience of digital learning.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
13
14
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Student Access
All students have access to high-quality digital
content and online courses.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
02
4. Digital learning environments – including online and blended-learning schools, courses and models – have flexibility with class-size restrictions and student-teacher ratios.
5. No school district may restrict student enrollment in a full-time online school or in a part-time individual online course through enrollment caps or geographic boundaries.
6. All students may enroll in an unlimited number of part-time individual online courses.
7. No school district may restrict a student’s ability to enroll in an online course based on course offerings (substantially similar courses).
Digital learning opens the virtual door to a high-quality
education. Where technology has created unprecedented
access to a high-quality education, policies that arbitrarily
limit or control access threaten to erect barriers where
the walls have already come down. Moreover, restricting
access based on geography, such as where a student lives,
is counterproductive in the digital world where learning can
occur anywhere and everywhere.
Capacity and quality – not arbitrary caps on enrollment
or budget – should be the only factors limiting access to
digital learning. With digital learning, teachers can provide
one-on-one instruction and mentoring to many students
across the nation. Artificially limiting class size, prescribing
teacher-student ratios or restricting a teacher’s ability to
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
serve students at multiple schools ignores the freedom and
flexibility that comes with digital learning.
Best of all, students can experience blended learning.
Students can learn in an online or computer-based
environment part of the day and in a traditional classroom,
even one-on-one tutoring, for part of the day – essentially
the best of both worlds combined into one education.
Blended learning offers a powerful new way to combine
the best of face-to-face instruction with the advantages of
online courses and adaptive learning platforms.
The vast majority of states have flexibility for blendedlearning class sizes. Of those who have flexibility with class
sizes, half still have restrictive overall student-teacher ratios
that still must be followed.
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Personalized Learning
All students can customize their education using
digital content through an approved provider.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
03
8. All students may enroll with more than one online course provider simultaneously.
9. All students may enroll in and begin a part-time individual online course on a rolling or frequently scheduled basis throughout the year.
Digital learning allows for a customized educational
experience. In today’s world, learning doesn’t have to
start when a student enters the classroom and end when
the school bell rings. Students can access digital learning
virtually whenever and wherever they are – both physically
and figuratively.
With personalized learning, students can spend as little or
as much time as they need to master the material. Selfpaced programs mean high-achieving students won’t get
bored and can accelerate academically, while students
who struggle can get additional time and tutoring to gain
competency and the confidence that comes with it.
Access to a comprehensive catalog of online courses means
a student in rural Indiana or inner-city Detroit can learn
Mandarin Chinese, forensic science or college-level calculus
– regardless of whether their school offers these courses in
a classroom.
Digital learning can extend the school day or school year
and connect students with community resources with little
or no additional cost. Flexible scheduling allows students
to take full advantage of their peak learning times to
complete lessons.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
15
16
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Advancement
Students progress based on demonstrated
competency.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
04
10.
All students are able to demonstrate proficiency on standards-based competencies to advance/earn credit for a grade/course and to advance to the succeeding grade/course through multiple assessment options including performance assessments.
11. All students advance/earn credit based on demonstrating proficiency in academic standards and are not required to complete a defined amount of instructional/seat time. (Based on Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching’s 50-State Scan of Course Credit Policies.)
12.
All students are provided multiple opportunities during the year to take end-of-course exams.
13.
All districts and state-approved providers in the state accept credits from all other districts and
state-approved providers.
Grade-level promotion has historically been dictated
by birthdays, attendance and minimum achievement.
Instructional pacing, aimed at the middle of the class, may
be too fast or too slow for some students who become
frustrated, disengaged and unmotivated.
the all-too-common practice of social promotion become
obsolete. A student will spend as much time as necessary
to gain competency. Digital learning can be adaptive,
recognizing where a student is in any given subject and
offering the appropriate content.
Digital learning offers the potential for students to study at
a flexible pace and advance based upon competency and
mastery of the material – it is student-centered, not schoolcentered. In this environment, seat time requirements and
Making high-stakes assessments, which are used to trigger
progression, available when students are ready will
accelerate student learning.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Quality Content
Digital content, instructional materials and online
and blended learning courses are high quality.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
05
14.
All digital content and instruction must be aligned with state standards or Common Core State Standards.
15.
No additional burdens are placed on the approval and procurement processes for digital content beyond those for print content.
16.
Instructional material funding may be used for purchasing digital content, instructional materials, devices and systems.
The dynamic nature of digital content and its varied uses
requires a fresh and innovative approach to ensuring highquality content. Like print content, digital content should
be aligned to state academic standards or CCSS for what
students are expected to learn. However, digital content
should not be held to a higher standard than print content.
Freedom for interactive engagement that results in higher
student retention and achievement should be encouraged.
States should abandon the lengthy textbook adoption
process and embrace the flexibility offered by digital
content. Tablets, eBook readers and apps are offering new
ways to distribute enhanced content. Digital content can be
updated in real time without a costly reprint. The ongoing
shift from online textbooks to engaging and personalized
content – including learning games, simulations and virtual
environments – makes the traditional review process even
less relevant.
Transitioning to digital content will improve the quality
of content, while likely saving money in production that
can be dedicated to providing the infrastructure for digital
learning.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
17
18
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Quality Instruction
Digital instruction is high quality.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
06
17.
State accepts alternative routes for teacher certification.
18.
State allows reciprocity among other states for certification of teachers.
19.
There is a formal statewide definition for “teacher of record.” (Based on DQC’s Analysis of State Promising Practices4 and definition of Teacher of Record5.)
20.
Teachers are permitted to be “teacher of record” in multiple schools.
The state’s framework for teacher evaluation applies to all teachers in the state (online, blended and 21.
traditional).
22.
Student-performance data is used to evaluate the effectiveness of teachers.
Professional development in digital learning is available to teachers teaching an online or blended learning 23.
course.
Great teachers cultivate great students – wherever they live
or learn. Digital learning erases physical barriers that have
prevented the widespread connection between effective
teachers and eager students. Statutory and administrative
practices that stop instruction – at the classroom door,
school campus, state border or even the nation’s border –
limit access to quality educators.
A retired NASA scientist in Cape Canaveral who is qualified
to teach physics in the Sunshine State should be able
to teach students in any state in the country. A digital
educator in one school should be able to teach students in
multiple schools in state or out of state.
Preparation and professional development programs
should educate teachers and administrators on how
4
5
to engage students, personalize learning, teach online
and manage learning environments using today’s new
technology tools and services. Educators should be
prepared for specific roles – traditional, blended or online
– and then certified based on demonstrated performance.
Performance-based certification will become increasingly
important as the number and type of roles for learning
professionals expands.
Breaking down the barriers to digital instruction can
improve the quality of education, while at the same time
reducing costs. Teachers can serve students across the state
or nation from one location. Digital learning lends itself to
innovative staffing plans and formation of an opportunity
culture that is appealing enough to attract and retain top
teaching talent and to maximize impact and minimize cost.
http://dataqualitycampaign.org/files/Analysis%20of%20State%20Promising%20Practices%20in%20TOR%20and%20TSDL%202012.pdf
http://dataqualitycampaign.org/files/Teacher%20of%20Record.pdf
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Quality Instruction (continued)
06
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Digital instruction is high quality.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
19
20
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Quality Choices
All students have access to multiple
high-quality providers.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
07
24.
Statewide digital-provider authorization includes:
full-time online schools
part-time individual online course providers
virtual charter schools
25.
The criteria, process and timeframe for authorizing online providers are clearly defined.
26.
Digital providers are allowed to appeal decisions or revise and resubmit their applications after a denial.
27.
Multiple opportunities during the year are available for full-time online providers, part-time individual online course providers and virtual charter schools to apply for approval.
28.
Approval of full-time online schools, part-time individual online course providers and virtual charter schools lasts for three or more years.
29.
State maintains a public website that provides information and links to all digital learning opportunities, including all approved full-time online schools, part-time individual online course providers and virtual charter schools.
In the digital age, innovative learning programs are
rapidly evolving and providers can be located anywhere.
Regulations should reflect this new paradigm.
To maximize the potential of digital learning, states must
provide a rich offering of providers that can cater to the
diverse and distinctly unique needs of different students.
States should set common-sense standards for entry,
have a strong system of oversight and quality control and
foster a robust competitive environment where students
can choose the provider who best meets their learning
needs. Unnecessary administrative requirements, such as
having a brick-and-mortar office in the district or state,
create obstacles that prevent high-quality providers from
participating.
Public, not-for-profit and private for-profit organizations
provide different benefits to the education consumers –
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
both the students and the taxpayers. Public providers were
pioneers in digital learning and provide a record of proven
success in providing supplemental education in partnership
with school districts. Not-for-profits extend access and
often make contributions to open education resources.
Private providers have the capital to invest in development
of high-quality content, can administer comprehensive
school management services and offer collaborative
opportunities with their national network of students.
Consumers of education – students and parents – often
provide the best feedback on the quality of providers. A
publicly available database that fosters a feedback loop,
similar to tools used by Amazon or eBay, would help
parents and students make informed decisions about
digital learning.
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Quality Choices (continued)
07
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
All students have access to multiple
high-quality providers.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
21
22
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Assessment and Accountability
Student learning is the metric for evaluating
the quality of content and instruction.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
08
30.
State-mandated assessments in core subjects, including annual assessments, end-of-course exams and high school exit exams, must be administered digitally.
31.
Outcomes-based student-performance data is used to evaluate the quality of full-time online providers, part-time individual online courses and virtual charter schools.
32.
Poor performing providers are not renewed or lose their ability to serve students statewide as determined by outcomes-based performance data.
Administering assessments digitally has multiple benefits.
Tests can be administered and scored quickly and
efficiently. Computerized scoring provides the opportunity
for a cost-effective method to create better tests beyond
multiple choice, including simulations and constructed
responses. Getting the result of tests faster can improve
instruction as well as expedite rewards and consequences,
which in turn strengthens accountability for learning.
Adaptive assessments can more precisely diagnose student
weaknesses and capture richer growth measures.
Learning management systems, digital curricula and online
summative and formative assessments have the distinctive
capability of collecting real-time data on the progress of
each student against learning objectives. Instant feedback
for students and personalized analytics for teachers
provide the support for continuous improvement and
competency-based progress.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
History has proven that inputs, such as teacher
certification, programmatic budgets and textbook reviews,
do not guarantee a quality education. In fact, these
regulatory processes often stifle innovation and diminish
quality. Policymakers should resist attempts to create a
checklist of inputs and, instead, focus on developing an
accountability framework that is based on outcomes. States
should hold schools and online providers accountable
using student learning to evaluate the quality of content
or instruction. Providers and programs that are performing
poorly should have their approvals revoked.
While conversion to digital assessments requires an
initial investment, transitioning to a digital system can
save money in the long run and also provide richer, more
authentic assessments.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
23
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
24
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Funding
Funding creates incentives for performance,
options and innovations.
$
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
09
33.
Public funds are available for online learning to:
all district public school students
all charter public school students
all private school students
all home education students
34.
State funding for digital learning is provided through the public per-pupil school funding formula.
35.
Funding is provided on a fractional, per course basis to pay providers for part-time individual online courses.
36.
Funding follows the student to the school or course of their choice.
37.
The same per-pupil funding with the same payment process is provided to all full-time online schools, part-
time individual online course providers and virtual charter schools, regardless of whether the provider is public, charter, not-for-profit, or for-profit.
38.
Providers receive final funding payment upon course completion based on student performance and competency.
How money is spent is as important as how much money is
spent on education. Funding should fuel achievement and
innovation, not reward complacency and bureaucracy.
Paying for success will yield success. Right now, the
majority of education funding rewards attendance. Schools
get paid when students show up, regardless of what or how
much students learn or achieve. Under that framework, it’s
no wonder achievement is stagnant.
Moreover, digital learning can actually save money in
the long run. Full-time virtual schools can save money
on facilities or transportation compared to traditional
schools. Supplemental programs offering individual course
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
enrollments can offer even bigger savings to states and
districts. As digital learning grows, economies of scale will
drive costs down. Partners within states or across state
lines can further increase the purchasing power.
Given fiscal challenges faced by governments across
the country, states need to be innovative to meet the
challenge of providing access to digital content. To build
a quality digital learning environment, states will have
to spend smarter – not necessarily more. Geographically
unbounded digital learning provides incentive for states to
develop an equalized and weighted funding formula that
better matches resources with individual student needs,
regardless of ZIP code.
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Funding (continued)
Funding creates incentives for performance,
options and innovations.
09
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
$
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
25
26
1 0 E L E M E N T S O F H I G H - Q UA L I T Y D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G
Delivery
Infrastructure supports digital learning.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Metrics
10
39.
All schools have high-speed broadband Internet access. (Based on SETDA’s recommendation, ISP should reach at least 100 Mbps per 1,000 student and WAN at least 1 Gbps per 1,000 students/staff.)
40.
All teachers are provided with Internet-access devices.
41.
All students have access to Internet-access devices.
42.
All of the Data Quality Campaign’s 10 State Actions to Ensure Effective Data Use are implemented.
The proliferation of mobile phones and Internet-access
devices underlines the potential of mobile learning.
Students are already using mobile devices to communicate,
access and share information, conduct research and
analyze data. These devices are the gateway to digital
learning.
Digital learning will also support educators in better
identifying and meeting student needs by providing them
real-time data on student performance, expanded access to
resources to individualize instruction and online learning
communities to gain professional development support.
GRADING KEY
A
B
C
D
F
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
States can adopt a variety of approaches to accelerate
the shift to digital content, online assessment and highaccess environments including learning environments
that take advantage of student-owned devices. While local
choice and options should be empowered, states can use
purchasing power to negotiate lower-cost licenses and
contracts for everything from digital content to access
devices and mobile Internet services. Equipment and
services can be provided based on financial need. Publicprivate partnerships can also become a tool to build and
sustain the infrastructure for digital learning.
27
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
2014 Year
In Review
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
28
YEAR IN REVIEW
2014 Year in Review
and implementation to ensure parents and students
could benefit from digital learning while still having
personal information safeguarded. Getting data
privacy right is key to ensuring that digital learning
works for all students.
Competency-Based Education
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
In 2014, states were focused on implementation.
Across the country, legislators, state departments of
education, superintendents, teachers and parents
grappled with implementing and making adjustments
to some of the 422 digital learning laws enacted over
the last four years. Thus, there was a significant drop
in the number of bills passed compared to those
considered. While over 400 bills were considered for
passage (approximately the same number as previous
years), only 50 of those passed in 2014.
Focusing on students meant ensuring that policies
were aligned with the reality of the 21st century and
received the support they needed to be effectively
implemented. Ambitious plans require solid
foundations. The federal E-rate program received a
much needed update to modernize its structure to
better meet the needs of schools and libraries across
the country.
States and legislators have shown a desire to
implement policies allowing learning to drive the
progression of a student rather than time served.
As states like New Hampshire have quickly realized,
the challenge is in the successful integration of
a competency- (or mastery-) based approach to
learning into traditional classrooms. And new models
raise new questions around federal and state policies
that often deal less with technology and more with
providing the flexibility needed to move forward.
Course Access continues to spread in states looking
to expand options for students, but questions of
funding, scheduling and eligibility are not easily
answered. Over the past year, Louisiana and Michigan
built on previous policy to hone offerings and
work toward ensuring that Course Access will be a
sustainable part of its educational ecosystem.
Building a firm foundation for digital learning means
little without security over the data which drives
much of the personalization of learning. Public
education is built on trust between parents and
school. In 2014, many states seriously consider bills
6
While the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) worked to help improve connectivity to the
classroom, many states took steps to connect
previously passed competency-based policies to
daily instruction and practice. As highlighted later
in this Report Card, Connecticut worked to solicit
state feedback, learn from its league of innovative
schools and implement the requirements of CT HB
6358. This bill allows high school students to earn
academic credits using mastery-based standards.
Arizona is building multiple pathways for students
to demonstrate mastery (SB 1255), and in New
Hampshire the Christensen Institute chronicled 6
how the state is utilizing blended learning to enable
competency-based learning.
The impact of these states’ actions is that other states
are encouraged to examine adopting policies that will
move their education systems toward this studentlearning approach. In 2014, Rhode Island passed SR
3138 requesting the Rhode Island Board of Education
and Department of Education to adopt a competencybased/proficiency-based learning policy. According
to Competency Works, 10 states are currently working
to put an aligned competency-based system in place.
One common theme for every state transitioning
to a competency-based system is finding the right
balance of state policy and local control. Although
it is inherently a school model, state policy tensions
can quickly arise in areas such as accountability and
diploma requirements. As states continue to embrace
competency-based learning, it will be critical they
address these tensions. A shift in funding must also
occur, with funding flowing to the students based on
ability-level rather than grade.
http://www.christenseninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Blending-toward-competency.pdf
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
YEAR IN REVIEW
Data Privacy
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
High-quality digital learning is only possible when
combined with the effective use of data. It is vital that
parents and students know that personal information
is secure and the use of that information is limited.
Clear requirements that include notifications and
remediation should be in place to respond to
data breaches. Operators of education technology
products should use data to support student learning,
not sell it or use it to target advertising to students.
Operators should also delete personally identifiable
information if requested by the school.
The emerging concern around privacy can be boiled
down to one of trust. Many parents are concerned
about how their child’s data is shared and used by
outside providers serving a school or what data is
shared with the state and federal government. The
connected learning environment many students
encounter today – with online curriculum, apps,
online gradebooks, online social media services and
online courses – are generating new tensions around
how to best support innovation and still protect
student privacy.
Over the last year, more than 200 bills impacting
student data privacy have been introduced. These
bills impact a wide range of issues directly and
indirectly related to student data privacy. Some
include blanket restrictions that would limit student
access to digital learning, while others include smart
processes to disclose what information is collected
and how states should secure data.
7
Fortunately, there is a growing list of resources and
tools to help schools and providers with managing
this process. The Data Quality Campaign has a large
resource bank and ExcelinEd offered model legislative
language to help policymakers 7 inventory what
type of data is being collected, avoid unnecessary
collection, ensure data remains close to the student,
define parental access and establish a Chief Privacy
Officer.
http://excelined.org/data-privacy/
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
29
30
YEAR IN REVIEW
Course Access
To support the thoughtful adoption of these policies,
Digital Learning Now and the Education Counsel
released Leading in an Era of Change: Making the
Most of Course Access Programs 9. This whitepaper
gathered lessons learned from existing Course Access,
provided analysis of key issues faced, encouraged
states to collaborate on Course Access review and
offered seven recommendations for high-quality
state Course Access programs. The recommendations
included the following:
1. Meaningful and rigorous state review of prospective providers and/or courses
2. Strong monitoring systems
3. Flexible and sustainable funding models
4. Alignment with the state’s broader education
systems
5. Deliberate and sustained engagement with
districts and schools
6. Effective communication with students and
parents
7. Clearly defined student eligibility
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Course Access (also referred to as Course Choice in
some states) captured the imagination of lawmakers
in 2013. Multiple bills passed state legislatures,
authorizing new programs or expanding existing
offerings — including HB 1926 in Texas and HB 4228
in Michigan. In 2014, state departments across the
country solicited feedback, drafted rules and took
the hard steps necessary to implement these new
programs.
the previously-limited two courses per term, if the
student has demonstrated previous success in online
courses.
As one of the leaders in Course Access, Louisiana
oversaw some changes to the program in 2014-15 to
ensure its long-term success. For the sake of more
than tripling the pilot year’s budget (to $7.6 million),
modifications made to the Course Access program
provided more school control over the program
and requiring school counselors to approve each
registration. The program then saw a 700+ percent
increase in course enrollments in the Course Access
program. As a result of the continued success in
Louisiana, its multi-stakeholder public education
funding task force recommended a 35 percent
increase in funding for Course Access for the 20152016 school year 8. The program continues to provide
options for students to take high-value and hard-toserve courses.
In Michigan, the state raised the grade-level of the
students allowed to take courses from fifth to sixth,
but opened the door for a student to take more than
Course Access
Statement of Principles
http://bit.ly/1xFXzXw
The Course Access Statement of Principles are
in association with the Clayton Christensen
Institute for Disruptive Innovation, Digital
Learning Now, the Thomas B. Fordham
Institute and iNACOL.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Digital Learning Now will continue to closely track
this policy. It looks like 2015 will be a year where
Course Access continues to spread, whether in pilot
programs or full-scale roll-outs, and provide new
options for students across the U.S.
Tracking the development and implementation of
a policy cannot be limited to one year. It takes time
for the tendrils of directives and mandates to grow
and flourish. Our partners at Getting Smart have
worked with us to look back at some of the key digital
learning policies over the last few years, talk to the
key stakeholders in that state and provide an update
on the growth and the lessons learned. As well as
grading the progress of states and providing a year
in review, this longer term vision will be critical to
ensuring that digital learning policies learn from the
past and don’t simply blindly repeat it.
8
https://www.louisianabelieves.com/newsroom/news-releases/2015/01/07/
course-choice-funding-leads-to-eight-fold-increase-in-enrollment
9
http://digitallearningnow.com/site/uploads/2014/07/DLN-CourseAccessFINAL_14July2014b.pdf
YEAR IN REVIEW
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Lousiana Top 6 Course Offerings Cost by Semester
Louisiana's Course Choice program allows for a vigorous quality review, as well as a unique market framework for course
offerings. This chart displays both the range of pricing for these high quality courses — from $219 to $686 per semester
course — along with the average prices for each course. Without this market framework, Louisiana students could be
limited in both the number of providers within each course and the variety of courses available.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
31
32
YEAR IN REVIEW
E-Rate
The FCC released two orders – one in July and one
in December – ushering in sweeping changes to the
program. Changes include focusing the investment on
broadband and Wi-Fi and simplifying the application
process that was so cumbersome to many schools
and libraries. Incentives were built in to help states
with aggregating demand and supporting innovative
state networks like those in North Carolina. The
majority of these changes would be implemented in
funding year 2015, beginning July 1, 2015.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Since 1996, E-rate has helped provide 10 discounts
to assist schools and libraries in obtaining affordable
telecommunications and Internet access. As the
needs of schools have changed and technology
has advanced, this federal program, overseen by
the Federal Communications Commission, was in
desperate need of reform and modernization. In July
of 2013, the FCC began a rule-making procedure to do
just that.
truly transformative learning. Digital Learning Now
stayed engaged with every part of the process 12,
submitting joint comments on various FCC proposals,
organizing ex parte meetings with FCC officials and
helping link up state leaders with federal officials.
In fall of 2013, Digital Learning Now helped bring
together an Education Coalition 11 to ensure these
proposed reforms would stay focused on the needs
of students, increase efficiencies and support
http://digitallearningnow.com/site/uploads/2013/08/E-RatePolicyBrief.pdf
http://digitallearningnow.com/news/blog/education-coalition-pushes-e-rate-reform/
12
http://digitallearningnow.com/initiatives/erate-modernization-reform/
10
11
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
33
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
State Policy
Profiles
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
34
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Competency-Based Education
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
States pursuing competency-based education policies should consider applying the following
principles in legislation:
1. Provide flexibility from time-based systems in statute or rule.
2. Transition to proficiency-based diplomas.
3. Facilitate acceptance of competency-based diplomas and credits by higher education.
4. Authorize the creation of innovation districts or schools to pilot a competency-based system
and identify a pathway for statewide policy adoption.
5. Encourage policies that support anytime, anywhere learning.
Recent Legislation
AZ SB 1255: Creating Competency-Based
Education Pathways to Postsecondary Education
SB 1255 (2012) provides for multiple options
within and beyond high school for students
that demonstrate minimum college readiness.
CT HB 6358: Unleashing Innovation in
FL HB 7059: Acceleration Options for Public
Education
FL HB 7059 (2012) addresses numerous
areas to provide students with a variety of
accelerated learning options.
NH SB 48: School Performance and
Connecticut Schools
CT HB 6358 (2013) allows for students to earn
academic credits through demonstration
of meeting non-traditional, mastery-based
standards.
Accountability
NH SB 48 (2013) focuses on performance
and accountability measures that reflect
competency-based models and ensure
students are ready for college and career.
IA HF 215: Education Reform
VT Act 77 (SB 130): Flexible Pathways
IA HF 215 (2013) includes two key pieces of
support for competency-based education and
for the state online learning initiative.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
VT Act 77 (2013) provides personalization
through personalized learning plans and
establishes dual enrollment and early college
programs. The Act calls for career exploration
by 7th grade and beyond.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
35
36
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
AZ SB 1255
Provides for multiple options within and
beyond high school for students that
demonstrate minimum college readiness.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Creating Competency-Based
Pathways to Postsecondary
Education
Intention
AZ SB 1255 13 – “Creating Competency-Based
Pathways to Postsecondary Education” – was
passed in 2012. Through AZ SB 1255, the Board of
Education was directed to adopt guidelines to (1)
define competency-based educational pathways and
(2) provide postsecondary pathways 14 that allow
school districts or charter schools to receive per
pupil funding until the student would otherwise have
graduated.
Implementation
Arizona requires local education agencies (LEAs) to
provide opportunities for students to demonstrate
competency of the state standards in the subject
areas required within the state’s minimum course
of study for high school 15. Students have begun
to pursue postsecondary pathways – such as
community college, Career Technical Education
(CTE) or university enrollment – after meeting the
requirements of the performance-based Grand
Canyon High School Diploma. The impetus is in place,
but the competency-based educational pathways as
specifically allowed for through AZ SB 1255 have yet
to be fully realized.
According to Senator Rich Crandall, former Chair of
the Arizona Senate Education Committee, who was
integral in passing the legislation, “We wanted to
open the door for someone to be creative and it is not
happening yet, but we are hopeful it will. While the
Grand Canyon Diploma ensures students are ready for
community college without remediation, we believe
this legislation will expand options for students
to demonstrate college and career readiness,
particularly for those who may be headed toward a
university path.” 16
Once these guidelines are in place and students have
demonstrated competency, these four pathways
will be funded by the state on a per pupil funding
basis until the end of what would have been their
12th-grade year: 1) enroll in a community college,
2) continue taking courses (such as Advanced
Placement) from their high school, 3) enroll in a
career and technical education program or 4) attend
a state university (if accepted for admission). 17
A likely scenario is that organizations and
practitioners involved in this work will offer models of
what the competency-based guidelines could include.
The Center for the Future of Arizona 18 is leading
efforts to support innovations for student learning,
including competency-based learning. According to
Amanda Burke, Director of Strategy and Innovation,
“We work in the nexus between policy, idea
development and implementation with schools and
partners to demonstrate in practice what studentcentered systems change looks like...” 19 Burke said,
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/2r/laws/0149.pdf
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/2r/summary/s.1255ed_asenacted.pdf
15
A.A.C. R7-2-302(5)(c) can be found at http://www.azed.gov/state-board-education/files/2014/06/r7-2-301-and-r7-2-302-draft-aio-rule-change.pdf
16
Interview, December 4, 2014
17
http://ecs.org/ecs/ecscat.nsf/57f3e2d9a671cf028725698500716e9c/f63680024d708a84872579d400548a0c?OpenDocument (ECS summary of text that appears
directly in legislation)
18
http://www.arizonafuture.org/
19
http://arizonagrantmakersforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/arizona_move_on_when_ready-10-2012.pdf
13
14
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
AZ SB 1255
Creating Competency-Based
Pathways to Postsecondary
Education
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Provides for multiple options within and
beyond high school for students that
demonstrate minimum college readiness.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
“I could see, for example, the potential to redesign
the math learning experience of students through
a personalized, competency-based math pathway
that harmonizes math curriculum from high school
through college.” 20 They are working with talented
educators who could advance the process.
Ultimately, the purpose is to provide a multitude
of options for students. According to Christine
Thompson, Executive Director of the Arizona State
Board of Education, “The benefits of these types of
programs are to have options for students to pursue
a path that is best for them while expecting rigor and
meeting established competencies in areas such as
math, science, English and history.” Thompson goes
on to say, “Our public education system provides a
foundation for students to make choices and pursue
options that will help them throughout their lives.” 21
Implications
The legislative intent 22 of AZ SB 1255 was “to enable
all students to progress toward clearly defined
learning outcomes at their own pace, allowing them
to advance when they demonstrate the desired
level of mastery rather than progressing based on a
predetermined amount of seat-time in a classroom.”
The policy uses a competency-based education
“
We work in the nexus
between policy, idea
development and
implementation with
schools and partners to
demonstrate in practice
what student-centered
systems change looks like...
Amanda Burke
Director of Strategy and Innovation, The Center for
the Future of Arizona
pathway to allow students to progress at their own
pace. However, it provides a work-around within the
traditional K-12 system by funding per-pupil through
the 12th grade, no matter whether the student is still
taking courses at their school or taking advantage
of one of the other pathways. One of the potential
deciding factors in the full realization of this policy
will be the guidelines defining and developing the
four outlined pathways.
Interview, December 3, 2014
Interview, December 2, 2014
22
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/15/00795.htm&Title=15&DocType=ARS
20
21
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
37
38
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
CT HB 6358
Unleashing Innovation in
Connecticut Schools
Allows for students to earn academic
credits through demonstration of meeting
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
non-traditional, mastery-based standards.
Intention
The Connecticut Legislature passed CT HB 6358 23 in
2013, allowing high school students to earn academic
credits using mastery-based standards based on
guidelines that will be established by the State Board
of Education. Introduced by Governor Malloy and
supported by Representative Brendan Sharkey, the
dual intent is to allow students alternate pathways to
graduation and to unleash innovation.
Implementation
The implementation is in very early phases, with a
vision in place and a focus on working to quantify
how learning will be demonstrated. Ultimately, it is
the State Board of Education that is responsible for
the approval of the mastery-based guidelines, which
will be informed by state organized feedback sessions
representing a diverse group of stakeholders.
In the meantime, the Connecticut State
Department of Education 24 (CSDE) has a key role in
supporting the implementation and helping schools
disseminate best practices, including convening of
teachers and dissemination of resources and tools
to help educators use digital learning strategies
to promote mastery. The use and availability of
technology are critical to the implementation
of mastery-based learning because they expand
students’ ability to learn and demonstrate
mastery through multiple pathways. June Sanford,
Connecticut’s State Department of Education
Chief of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment,
said “We recognize that key to implementation
is strong communication, evolving policy and
23
24
practice and provision resources and tools...The
transition to mastery-based learning will require
a cultural shift and have implications affecting
curriculum, instructional practices, assessment,
“
We recognize that key to
implementation is strong
communication, evolving
policy and practice and
provision resources and
tools...The transition to
mastery-based learning will
require a cultural shift and
have implications affecting
curriculum, instructional
practices, assessment, use
of technology and overall
logistics. However, the
primary mission identified
in this evolutionary process
is the improvement of
student academic, career
and life success.
June Sanford
Connecticut’s State Department of Education
Chief of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=6358&which_year=2013
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/site/default.asp
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
CT HB 6358
Unleashing Innovation in
Connecticut Schools
Allows for students to earn academic
credits through demonstration of meeting
non-traditional, mastery-based standards.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
use of technology and overall logistics. However,
the primary mission identified in this evolutionary
process is the improvement of student academic,
career and life success.” 25 Also integral to sparking
innovation is the New England Secondary School
Consortium’s League of Innovative Schools. 26
The League provides intensive coaching and other
professional development opportunities for the fivestate consortium schools.
Over thirty Connecticut schools are currently
planning for or are implementing mastery-based
learning. One example can be found in Windsor
Locks Middle School (this school is part of the
aforementioned League). When Sanford visited the
school she observed, “When you visit a classroom you
see students that clearly understand the competency
they need to reach. The rubrics developed by
teachers let them know exactly what they need to
accomplish to meet or exceed mastery.” 27
Prior to CT HB 6358, students could already earn
non-traditional credit through dual enrollment or
online learning. This legislation expands options to
include demonstration of mastery through a variety
of measures such as digital learning. Marcy Reed, the
CSDE Consultant for digital learning, says, “We believe
digital learning will play an important part in Masterybased Learning.” 28 Further, CSDE is working to ensure
parents and students are well informed about their
options.
“
When you visit a classroom
you see students that clearly
understand the competency
they need to reach.
June Sanford
Connecticut’s State Department of Education Chief
of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Implications
This policy encourages innovation and offers students
opportunities to advance through demonstration
of mastery without seat-time requirements.
Connecticut’s integration of feedback from diverse
stakeholders across the state in the development of
competency-based guidelines will take advantage of
the independent progress that is already occurring
around competency-based learning. The state’s
Communication Plan and other resources under
development address questions from teachers,
parents and the community and ease the transition
for schools looking for examples of best practices
already in place around the state. While Connecticut
schools are moving forward independently with
competency-based pathways, the legislation creates
more opportunities for students to take advantage of
current non-traditional credit opportunities, many of
which leverage digital learning.
Interview, November 24, 2014
http://newenglandssc.org/league/about_the_league
27
Interview, November 24, 2014
28
Interview, November 21, 2014
25
26
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
39
40
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
FL HB 7059
Acceleration Options in Public
Education
Addresses numerous areas to provide
students with a variety of accelerated
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
learning options.
Intention
In 2012, Governor Scott and the Florida legislature
approved HB 7059 29, Acceleration Options in Public
Education. This legislation addressed numerous
areas, including provisions for early high school
graduation, increased access to challenging
curriculum and greater awareness of career and dual
enrollment options. Senator John Legg, Chair of the
Florida Senate education committee, stated the goal
is to ensure that attention and dollars are focused on
giving all students the chance to achieve and suceed.
Senator Legg captured the essence of the policy in a
simple question, “If a child is excelling, why are we
handcuffing them?” 30
Implementation
A key factor in implementation success is that
parents are aware of and ask for services such as a
challenging curriculum and early graduation options
for their students. The legislation requires districts
and schools to implement and inform families of
these acceleration options.
According to Chair of the Florida Senate’s Higher
Education Committee Senator Kelli Stargel,
“Programs are only as successful as the awareness
surrounding them.” 31 Often times, parents play
a key role in ensuring the options are activated.
For example, after moving in from out-of-state
Senator Stargel’s daughter was able to take an
exam to demonstrate that she mastered Geometry.
Had Senator Stargel not known of this option, her
daughter may have spent an entire year wasting
her time by going over material she already knew.
According to Stargel, “The ways we are obtaining
knowledge is changing and the education system has
to change with it.” 32
“
Programs are only as
successful as the awareness
surrounding them.”
Senator Kelli Stargel
Chair of the Florida Senate’s Higher Education
Committee
A significant portion of the legislation creates the
Academically Challenging Curriculum to Enhance
Learning (ACCEL) which provides educational
options for academically challenging curriculum
or accelerated instruction to eligible public school
students in grades 6 through 12. For example, schools
must offer whole-grade and midyear promotion,
subject-matter acceleration, virtual instruction in
higher grade-level subjects and implement the state’s
Credit Acceleration Program. Additionally, schools
must inform parents and students of what the options
are and the related eligibility requirements.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2012/7059
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/gradebook/content/school-districts-prepare-answer-parent-requests-acceleration
31
Interview, October 22, 2014
32
Interview, October 22, 2014
29
30
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
FL HB 7059
Acceleration Options in Public
Education
Addresses numerous areas to provide
students with a variety of accelerated
learning options.
“
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
This policy also outlines requirements for schools to
inform all students of options for early high school
graduation, allows for student progression based
on demonstrated achievement, requires career and
education course planning, expands career-themed
course offerings, outlines reporting requirements
regarding end-of-course assessments, encourages
dual enrollment and allows accelerated students to
remain eligible for the Bright Futures Scholarship
Program.
Implementation
Students and families who choose to progress at a
faster pace can now do so and take advantage of
opportunities for increased course rigor while likely
saving time and money. Senator Stargel has observed
that programmatic success will depend on thoughtful
implementation and building awareness. Parents
The ways we are obtaining
knowledge is changing and
the education system has
to change with it.
Senator Kelli Stargel
Chair of the Florida Senate’s Higher Education
and students can only benefit from the options of
which they are aware. Sometimes there are incentives
for local systems to not always promote these
opportunities. As a result, success will rely on other
statewide efforts and incentives to help secure buy-in
and support from schools.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
41
42
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
IA HF 215
Education Reform
Supports for competency-based
education and for the state online
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
learning initiative.
Intention
Iowa’s comprehensive education reform legislation,
HF 215 33 (2013), includes components focused
on competency-based learning and the state
online initiative. While the teacher leadership and
compensation elements of the bill received the
most attention, the legislation also included funding
geared toward competency-based education and
online learning. These initiatives were a result of
collaboration between the Iowa Department of
Education, Governor and Legislature.
Implementation
While very early in the implementation process (year
two of funding for what is designed as a five-year
initiative), this legislation establishes a competencybased instruction collaborative and a competencybased education grant award.
This legislation led to the establishment of the
Iowa Competency-Based Education (CBE)
Collaborative 34 with 10 districts working together
to advance a framework for CBE best practices.
According to the Director of the Iowa Department
of Education, Dr. Brad Buck, “A group representing
these districts are investigating what it looks like
to transform Iowa education to be completely
competency-based. We couldn’t do it without the
regional education agencies, which provide for a hub
for the learning and engaging.” 35
Through HF 215, funding continues for the
Department of Education’s Iowa Learning Online 36.
This is a supplemental online program that partners
with local school districts. Local districts continue
to award their students the credits earned upon
successful completion of Iowa Learning Online
courses 37.
“
We don’t want to mandate
innovation – we want to
see it as a well thought-out
initiative that will benefit
students for an intelligent
future.
Dr. Brad Buck
Director of the Iowa Department of Education
Many districts in the Collaborative are focusing on the
intersection between CBE and online learning. One
school level implementation example can be found in
Spirit Lake, Iowa, where competency and technology
are integrated with a project-based and personalized
9th grade academy. Mason City is leading the
charge in moving from standards-based learning to
competency-based learning.
http://coolice.legis.iowa.gov/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=BillInfo&Service=DspHistory&var=HF&key=0242C&GA=85
https://www.educateiowa.gov/pk-12/standards-and-curriculum/competency-based-pathways/iowa-cbe-collaborative
35
Interview, October 13, 2014
36
http://www.iowalearningonline.org/
37
http://www.iowalearningonline.org/about.cfm
33
34
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
IA HF 215
Education Reform
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Supports for competency-based
education and for the state online
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
learning initiative.
Buck’s vision emphasizes the importance of local
teachers and schools leading the way to something
that will impact all schools in the future. He says,
“We don’t want to mandate innovation – we want to
see it as a well thought-out initiative that will benefit
students for an intelligent future.” 38
Implications
Buck foresees current examples of powerful learning
spreading to impact all students in Iowa in the near
38
39
future. He is also realistic about the fact that change
isn’t easy. “This is an incubator model where people
need to be willing to accept the inherent messiness,
spin arounds and risk,” 39 he explains. However, Iowa
has designed a thoughtful and intentional five year
plan that allows the state to create a competencybased system with willing participants. The state
has also created the space to build upon existing
district and regional examples to foster the growth of
early leaders and establish a feedback loop of best
practices.
Interview, October 13, 2014
Interview, October 13, 2014
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
43
44
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
NH SB 48
School Performance and
Accountability
Focuses on performance and
accountability measures that reflect
competency-based models and ensure
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
students are ready for college and career.
Intention
As a key component of New Hampshire’s goal of
preparing students to succeed in college, careers
and life, SB 48 40 (2013) is the next step in the
state’s shift from traditional school performance
and accountability measures toward a system with
clear outcomes, competency-based learning and
assessments that reflect those goals. This legislation
also emphasizes a decentralized accountability
system, allowing district choice in determining
accountability measures and learning processes
through a variety of options. 41
Implementation
The accountability model outlined in the legislation
aims to accomplish the following: enable all students
to progress toward college and career readiness;
promote and measure knowledge and skills that lead
to readiness; and allow students to advance when
they demonstrate mastery; provide an educator
support system; allow for flexibility in the way that
credit can be awarded and that courses can be
delivered. 42
This legislation recognizes the larger picture. If
students are to graduate ready college and career
ready, then the education system must advance
students as they demonstrate mastery of content,
skills and work study practices. With a funding
model and culture that relies heavily on local dollars
and expertise, this policy inherently supports local
implementation and dissemination.
New Hampshire Department of Education 43
Commissioner Paul Leather reflects on the role of
the state, “The decentralized funding model in New
Hampshire makes for unique implementation. The
State’s role is more to unify and build networks than
to mandate. We are currently piloting accountability
systems in multiple districts and sharing examples
statewide.” 44
To bring the implementation to life, accountability
reforms seek to provide options in addition to
traditional assessments – for example, options that
are dependent upon and reflective of meaningful
content, instructional quality and student
engagement. Quality performance assessments are
multi step assignments with clear criteria to measure
how well a student transfers knowledge and applies
complex skills.
The Performance Assessment of Competency
Education 45 (PACE) is a pilot with four New
Hampshire districts and results will be shared
statewide. An example of such an assessment which
requires the application of Algebra II knowledge and
skills is “What is a ‘Better Deal?’” Throughout this
assessment, students need to identify and research
a good or service they would like to purchase. The
assessment instructs students, “Using mathematical
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2013/SB0048.pdf
http://www.ecs.org/html/NF2014/NF2014agendapresentations/Makingperformancebased-Kahl.pdf
42
http://digitallearningnow.com/news/blog/in-plain-english-nh-sb-48/
43
http://www.education.nh.gov/aboutus/index.htm
44
Interview, October 13, 2014
45
http://www.education.nh.gov/assessment-systems/
40
41
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
NH SB 48
School Performance and
Accountability
Focuses on performance and
accountability measures that reflect
competency-based models and ensure
students are ready for college and career.
“
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
reasoning skills, your lab report should include a
system of equations that provide a model of the rate
for the different options.” 46 Students will then present
their options.
The State also partners closely with the New England
Secondary School Consortium 47 (NESSC) to
encourage best practices. As the Executive Director of
Great Schools Partnership 48, David Ruff coordinates
efforts of the NESSC and the League of Innovative
Schools. The League is a regional professional
learning community that works to connect educators,
spread good ideas and accelerate improvement. 49
Ruff says, “It’s hard to get people to climb on board
until they can see examples within their own state.
You’ve got to have support. Policy is not just an act
for legislators.” 50 He also noted that New Hampshire’s
efforts have built upon previous and long-standing
efforts concerning competency-based learning.
Implications
New Hampshire serves as an example of the longterm nature of a competency-based education
transition. After more than ten years, New Hampshire
It’s hard to get people to
climb on board until they
can see examples within
their own state. You’ve got
to have support. Policy
is not just an act for
legislators.
David Ruff
As the Executive Director of Great Schools
Partnership
is continuing to serve as an innovative pioneer in
competency-based education by continually and
consistently iterating on their policy and addressing
the underlying policy challenges that inevitably
emerge with a new system. This policy’s model for
performance continues this trend by placing students
and teachers at the center of the assessment process.
http://www.ecs.org/html/NF2014/NF2014agendapresentations/Makingperformancebased-Kahl.pdf
http://newenglandssc.org/
48
http://www.greatschoolspartnership.org/
49
http://newenglandssc.org/league/about_the_league
50
Interview, October 14, 2014
46
47
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
45
46
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
VT Act 77
(SB 130)
learning plans and establishes dual enrollment
and early college programs. The Act calls for
career exploration by seventh grade and beyond.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Flexible Pathways
Provides personalization through personalized
Intention
In order to encourage creativity within schools and
districts, promote opportunities for postsecondary
readiness and increase the rates of postsecondary
persistence, Vermont SB 130 51 (2013) establishes
statewide dual enrollment and early college
programs.
The statute amends the state’s high school
completion program by allowing students to pursue
pathways to graduation that include applied or workbased learning opportunities, including internships. It
also calls for career exploration no later than seventh
grade and a personalized learning plan for all seventh
through twelfth grade students.
Implementation
Vermont is relatively early in the implementation
process. While many of the pathways are currently
open to students (e.g. virtual learning and work-based
learning), the key unifying component of a Personal
Learning Plan for each student will be phased in over
the next four years.
policy and its implementation: personalization, workbased learning, virtual/blended learning and dual
enrollment/early college.
According to Tom Alderman of Vermont Agency
of Education (VAE) 54, “The essence of Act 77 is
personalization.” 55 One key component that helps
to drive other components is that each student in
grades 7-12 will develop a Personalized Learning Plan
(PLP). 56 This plan becomes particularly important
because it ensures students, families and schools
are regularly engaging in the planning process. This
helps families look ahead to their long-term career
goals and is key to accessing options provided for
through this legislation 57. For example, accessing
dual enrollment courses, early college options,
work-based learning and virtual/blended learning
opportunities all require advance planning, and
Vermont is working with the college and career
planning provider Naviance on the PLP process.
Flexible pathways 52 are defined as “any combination
of high-quality academic and experiential
components leading to secondary school completion
and postsecondary readiness, which may include
assessments that allow the student to apply his or her
knowledge and skills to tasks that are of interest to
that student.” 53
There are four main components at the core of the
http://legislature.vermont.gov/bill/status/2014/S.130
http://education.vermont.gov/flexible-pathways
53
http://education.vermont.gov/flexible-pathways, Introduction to Act 77
54
http://education.vermont.gov/
51
52
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Interview, October 13, 2014
http://education.vermont.gov/plp-working-group/main
57
http://education.vermont.gov/documents/EDU-PLP_Conceptual_Framework_
for_Students.pdf
55
56
VT Act 77
(SB 130)
Flexible Pathways
Act 77 creates three pathways to expand
personalization and college and career exploration:
1. Work-Based Learning. One goal of this policy
is to ensure work-based learning opportunities
are accessed by making them more accessible to
all students (not just Career Technical Education
students) throughout high school. Act 77 requires
that schools provide students with career
development resources and opportunities for
experiences such as service learning or work-based
learning beginning no later than seventh grade.
2. Virtual/Blended Learning. Another goal of Act
77 is to expand virtual and blended learning
opportunities and ensure students are supported
in the process. Tom Alderman recognizes this
requires an evolving role of the teacher, “In a
personalized proficiency-based system, some
teachers in some situations will assume a
managerial role in student learning. For example,
they may coach a student engaged in distance
learning. That is a valued role as well.” 58
3. Dual Enrollment and Early College. Dual
enrollment, whereby students can earn credit from
a postsecondary institution while in high school,
predated the legislation. What Act 77 did was to
make Dual Enrollment the responsibility of the VAE
instead of Vermont State Colleges. This encourages
schools to bring college courses to their regular
campuses so that dual enrollment is not just the
domain of students who live nearby a college. 59
47
Provides personalization through personalized
learning plans and establishes dual enrollment
and early college programs. The Act calls for
career exploration by seventh grade and beyond.
“
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
In a personalized
proficiency-based system,
some teachers in some
situations will assume a
managerial role in student
learning. For example,
they may coach a student
engaged in distance
learning. That is a valued
role as well.
Tom Alderman
Vermont Agency of Education (VAE)
Senator Dick McCormack, Chair of the Senate
Education Committee, summarizes the essence of Act
77 by emphasizing the importance of personalization
and connecting it to long-held principles of
education. McCormack shares, “My grandfather
taught me when I was first a teacher – never think
of your room as a class; think of them as a group of
individuals.” 60
Implications
Within Vermont, students and families have an
opportunity to access a variety of pathways, and to do
so in an intensive and cohesive manner. To maximize
the impact of Act 77, additional professional
Interview, October 13, 2014
http://education.vermont.gov/flexible-pathways, Introduction to Act 77
60
Interview, October 20, 2014
58
59
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
48
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
VT Act 77
(SB 130)
Flexible Pathways
learning plans and establishes dual enrollment
and early college programs. The Act calls for
career exploration by seventh grade and beyond.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
Provides personalization through personalized
development and awareness is needed. The VAE
has started to engage in this support by developing
resources to implement personal learning plans that
are readily available to Vermont educators through
the Agency’s website.
This policy also needs to be reviewed in light of
state board policy in Rule 2000, Education Quality
Standards. In this policy, the state board established
the learning standards required for graduation and
promotion in Vermont. Absent this parallel policy, the
power of multiple pathways as promoted through Act
77 could result in radically inequitable personalized
outcomes for students. By combining pathways with
the proficiency-based learning requirements of Rule
2000, Vermont has assured equity of both opportunity
and results for all Vermont students.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Through Act 77, Vermont provides a great example
of how to integrate multiple initiatives – such as
dual enrollment, work-based learning and virtuallearning – and ensure these initiatives are accessed
intentionally on a student-by-student basis through
the development of individual learning plans. The
state could take an even more ambitious approach to
implementing this bill through a Course Access like
initiative to ensure students throughout the Vermont
have access to high-quality online and blended
learning courses. Approving a range of providers –
including school districts throughout the state – to
offer courses to Vermont students could provide
the acceleration, enrichment and remediation
opportunities students will identify through their
Personalized Learning Plans.
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Course Access
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
States pursuing Course Access policies should consider applying the following principles in legislation:
1. Clearly define student eligibility and opportunity to select courses and providers.
2. Design program to provide access to a range of delivery models and course types.
3. Develop meaningful and rigorous state review of prospective providers and/or courses.
4. Create strong monitoring systems to ensure course quality.
5. Establish flexible and sustainable funding models.
6. Align with the state’s broader education system.
7. Engage with districts and schools in a sustained and deliberate manner.
8. Communicate effectively with students and parents.
Recent Legislation
LA HB 976: Louisiana Course Choice
LA HB 976 (2012) expands Course Access
options including virtual course providers,
postsecondary institutions and business and
industry.
MI HB 4228: State School Aid Act
MI HB 4228 (2013), commonly known as the
State School Aid Act, focuses on both course
eligibility and access, providing guidance
for families and districts regarding online
learning options.
MN SF 1528: Encouraging Innovation and
Removing Barriers
MN SF 1528 (2012), Innovative Delivery of
Education Services and Sharing of District
Resources, seeks to encourage innovation and
remove barriers to online learning.
TX 1926: Expanding Online Course Access
HB 1926 (2013) taps into the state’s virtual
school network; this legislation expands the
online Course Access program.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
49
50
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
LA HB 976
Enabling Course Access
Expands Course Access options including
virtual course providers, postsecondary
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
institutions and business and industry.
Intention
Louisiana’s HB 976 61 (2012) addresses a variety of
elements of education reform, however, the focus
of this profile is Course Access. This policy seeks to
reach students who do not have access to all the
high-quality courses they may need to prepare for
college and career. The Louisiana Course Choice
program originally targeted students in schools with
lower accountability grades. This was to provide
these students with the course options necessary to
complete their academic preparation and/or attain
industry-valued credentials that lead to entrylevel employment and future 2- and 4-year college
matriculation.
According to Senator Conrad Appel, Chairman of the
Louisiana Senate Education Committee, “The overall
goal was to reform education top to bottom with the
thought that the old way of doing business was not
successful. We wanted to highlight three principles
across the board – accountability, higher expectations
and parental choice.” 62
Implementation
Implementation efforts centered around providing
options for students, establishing a process for
determining providers, developing quality control
mechanisms and resources, informing school staff
and implementing a funding formula that follows
student enrollment and recognizes success. Since the
original passage, the bill has broadened its mission to
serve all students in all schools.
http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/BillInfo.aspx?s=12RS&b=HB976&sbi=y
Interview, October 27, 2014
63
https://www.louisianabelieves.com/courses/supplemental-course-academy
61
62
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
“
The overall goal was
to reform education
top to bottom with the
thought that the old
way of doing business
was not successful. We
wanted to highlight three
principles across the board
– accountability, higher
expectations and parental
choice.
Senator Conrad Appel
Chairman of the Louisiana Senate Education Committee
Students are able to choose from a wide range of
courses offered by 37 providers, including courses
such as Advanced Placement, hands-on CTE courses
and test-prep for the ACT. These courses are accessed
via the Supplemental Course Academy 63 (also
known as the SCA and LouisianaCourseChoice.net).
This policy distinguishes itself from others by
recognizing the key role of school counselors in
course selection. Accordingly, the SCA specifically
provides a hotline and information for counselor
assistance. Further, school counselors must certify
that a student’s enrollment in the course would
LA HB 976
Enabling Course Access
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Expands Course Access options including
virtual course providers, postsecondary
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
institutions and business and industry.
be academically appropriate, logistically feasible
and would keep the student on track for on-time
graduation.
The application and selection process for course
providers is facilitated through the Louisiana
Department of Education 64. The process is open
to providers in a variety of categories. For example,
providers may come from the K-12 virtual or brickand-mortar environment, postsecondary education or
even industry training organizations that make their
technical coursework available. Each course provider
must be approved by Board of Secondary and
Elementary Education 65 (BESE).
Funding can often be a complicating component of
Course Access. Louisiana began the Course Choice
program through a per-pupil funding mechanism,
which mid-way through Year 1 implementation was
deemed unconstitutional by the Louisiana Supreme
Court. Currently, the Course Choice program is
funded at $26 multiplied by the number of students in
grades 7-12 in any LEA and is a part of the Minimum
Foundation Program 66 (MFP – Louisiana’s K-12 public
education funding mechanism). Every year, the State
Board submits an MFP proposal to the legislature,
which must be accepted or rejected in full. If an MFP is
not passed, then funding reverts to the last MFP that
did pass. In 2014, Louisiana locked in $7.5 million to
the Course Choice Program in the MFP. This means that
even if a future proposed MFP does not pass, funding
for the Course Choice program is secure at $7.5 million.
Under the current funding mechanism Course Choice
funding continue to increase along with enrollments.
64
65
http://www.louisianabelieves.com/
http://bese.louisiana.gov/
Senator Appel indicated “The single biggest
impediment to the growth of the concept is the lack of
access to technology, particularly in rural areas. You
can’t expect this to take root and grow like wildfire
if you don’t have the technology access or resources
going to the classroom.” 67
Implications
This legislation established Louisiana as a national
leader in Course Access policies. The state has put in
place provider approval and monitoring processes so
students can select from a range of vetted courses that
are offered online, in blended learning settings or in
person. The statewide catalog is a resource for school
counselors, students and parents to identify and
research potential courses. Counselors have a key role
to ensure students are enrolling in courses that will
keep them on track for an on time graduation.
Louisiana has learned that the critical challenges
once a Course Access program is operational are:
a) maintaining the quality of the courses during the
school year, and b) communicating to school leaders,
school counselors and stakeholders the educational,
funding and portfolio benefits the Course Access
program offers. Students and parents must be aware
of the options available to them. Counselors must
become more familiar with an expanding portfolio of
courses and providers to find a best fit for the student.
Schools must integrate the Course Choice Program into
their school enterprise models to create opportunities
that are otherwise unavailable to students. And the
Department of Education must ensure that the courses
providers and courses are implemented effectively.
66
67
http://www.louisianabelieves.com/funding/minimum-foundation-program
Interview, October 27, 2014
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
51
52
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
LA HB 976
Enabling Course Access
(continued)
Expands Course Access options including
virtual course providers, postsecondary
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
institutions and business and industry.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
53
54
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
MI HB 4228
access, providing guidance for families and
districts regarding online learning options.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Advancing Access in Michigan
Focuses on both course eligibility and
Intention
In 2013, the Michigan legislature passed MI HB
4228 68 in an effort to increase student access to
quality digital learning opportunities through the
establishment of Section 21f 69 of the State School
Aid Act. Section 21f expanded student choice,
allowing students in grades 6-12 to enroll in up to
two online courses per term. It also allowed districts
to engage as an online learning provider, established
a statewide course catalog that includes title and
syllabus, and created the performance payment
process or 80/20 rule based upon course completion.
Implementation
Key to the implementation process is the role
of the Michigan Department of Education and
Michigan Virtual University (MVU, established in
1998). According to MVU President and CEO Jamey
Fitzpatrick, “These entities work together to catalyze
innovation, facilitate governance and provide
services.” 70
Regarding expansion of student choice,
implementation shows up on two levels: students
have the option to choose online learning as a delivery
option and the ability to select specific courses from
a statewide catalog. As of 2014, there are over 1,900
courses from which students can choose, and this is
vital to provide equitable access whether a student
resides in a city, suburban or rural district.
All courses included in the statewide catalog must
meet certain criteria and utilize a standard format
for all syllabi. State academic content standards
are assessed, as are iNACOL’s online learning
standards 71. A key distinction from the policy
highlighted in Louisiana, however, is that there is not
a process for the state to review providers or courses
in Michigan – either before they are approved or to
ensure that students are succeeding in their courses.
Another key component of implementation is local
control regarding which courses students take to help
ensure students are prepared for success in virtual
courses. Local school administrators have a final say
in whether a course fits based on criteria such as
graduation requirements or assessed competency
level.
On the delivery level, districts maintain the right to
determine their level of engagement as an online
learning provider. For example, districts can choose
to develop their own content per state criteria and/
or partner with a third party vendor. In either case,
local school board control remains a key part of the
equation.
The law also requires that the Michigan Virtual
Learning Research Institute (MVLRI), that is part
of MVU, release annual research reports 72 on
virtual learning throughout the state. This unique
requirement highlights the growth of virtual learning
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2013-HB-4228
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28e10cqqm1h3qcv345vrlibjyp%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-388-1621f
70
Interview, October 14, 2014
71
http://www.inacol.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/iNACOL_CourseStandards_2011.pdf
72
http://www.mvlri.org/Publications/ID/79/Over-76000-Michigan-public-school-students-participated-in-online-learning-during-the-past-school-year
68
69
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
MI HB 4228
Advancing Access in Michigan
Focuses on both course eligibility and
access, providing guidance for families and
districts regarding online learning options.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
throughout Michigan as well as statistics on students’
successful course completion rates.
Implications
Building upon preceding policies such as Section
21f, this policy has increased student access to and
requirements to help ensure the quality of digital
learning opportunities. Simply stated, more students
have access to more options that have met iNACOL’s
quality thresholds.
One lesson learned within the state is that a policy
such as this comes with the responsibility to ensure
families are informed about their available options.
Jamey Fitzpatrick of MVU reflects on key lessons and
what he would advise to others implementing such
policies, “If I could wave my magic wand and do it
over again, I would create greater parental awareness.
The biggest challenge with implementation has been
awareness.” 73
“
If I could wave my magic
wand and do it over again,
I would create greater
parental awareness. The
biggest challenge with
implementation has been
awareness.
Jamey Fitzpatrick
Michigan Virtual University President and CEO
states should emulate. Reporting on enrollment
growth and student success in these courses can
highlight important issues for policymakers and
practitioners to ensure these expanded options are
helping students graduate ready for college and
careers.
The annual research reports on virtual learning in
Michigan from MLVRI are a requirement that other
73
Interview, October 14, 2014
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
55
56
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
MN SF 1528
Seeks to encourage innovation
Encouraging Innovation and
Removing Barriers
and remove barriers to online
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
learning program.
Intention
Key findings from the report included
recommendations that Minnesota:
In 2012, Governor Mark Dayton signed MN SF 1528, 74
seeking to improve innovation related to online
learning by focusing on topics such as student
options and access, governance, teacher preparation,
professional development and ongoing support. This
statute built upon the foundation laid in 2005 by the
Minnesota Online Learning Option Act, 75 which was
reauthorized in 2009.
Implementation
This legislation addresses a variety of topics pertinent
to digital learning, including but not limited to calling
for policy review, approval of statewide providers and
professional development provisions. Accordingly,
implementation is carried out in a variety of settings,
including within and beyond K-12 schools and
districts.
Through this statute, Minnesota’s Online Learning
Advisory Council 76 (OLAC) was deputized to review
Minnesota rules and laws to determine which, if
any, inhibit online learning and to determine the
overall effectiveness of policies such as MN SF 1528.
The Council researched and published “Removing
the Barriers to Digital Learning In Minnesota:
A Review of State Laws and Rules and Policy
Recommendations”77 to inform future policy decisions.
“
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=senate&f=SF1528&ssn=0&y=2012
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=124d.095
76
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Welcome/AdvBCT/OnlineLearnAdvCoun/005760
77
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Welcome/AdvBCT/OnlineLearnAdvCoun/
74
75
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Provide students and families with information
about and access to digital learning options.
Accelerate the adoption of digital curriculum.
Fund online student learning.
Measure and assess student outcomes.
Invest in trained teachers and “human capital.”
Create a robust and reliable infrastructure.
Encourage and embrace new model schools and
programs.
The bottom line is that
we want policies that
open doors for options
for parents, teachers
and students – and that
encourage innovation.
Karen Johnson
OLAC Member and former Minnesota Department
of Education Online Learning Specialist
Ultimately, the goal of such a report is to positively
impact implementation. Karen Johnson, lead author
of the aforementioned report, longtime OLAC member
MN SF 1528
Encouraging Innovation and
Removing Barriers
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Seeks to encourage innovation and
remove barriers to online learning
program.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
(continued)
and former Minnesota Department of Education
Online Learning Specialist, says, “The bottom line is
that we want policies that open doors for options for
parents, teachers and students – and that encourage
innovation.” 78
Implementation of this legislation also focuses on
ensuring high-quality providers. Accordingly, the
Minnesota Department of Education 79 reviews and
approves digital learning providers per established
guidelines. The department also develops and
maintains a catalog of publicly available digital
learning content currently aligned to Minnesota
academic standards. The goal is to ensure a friendly
environment both for in-state providers and out-ofstate vendors that can help districts.
Local classroom teachers are also part of the
implementation story, particularly as it relates to
professional development. Districts are required
to provide training to enhance teacher content
knowledge and instructional skills for the delivery
of digital and blended learning and curriculum
and toward the goal of engaging students with
technology.
In addition to districts supporting professional
development, consortia such as the grassroots
Minnesota Partnership for Collaborative
Curriculum 80 (MPCC) also provide a space for
growth. According to MPCC Program Manager (and
former chair of OLAC) Jessica Wiley, “We empower
and equip teachers to promote the creation of open
digital curriculum.” 81 Postsecondary institutions that
are preparing teachers are also directed to include
in their preparation programs the knowledge and
skills teacher candidates need to deliver digital and
blended learning curriculum and engage students
with technology.
Implications
Minnesota learning options continue to expand, and
the experience of students continues to improve
with the removal of barriers to digital learning. There
are now 31 approved online learning providers 82
representing a doubling of approved providers in the
past five years. Minnesota’s legislative requirement
of an annual report creates a feedback process and
discussion between the state and legislature. The
state can analyze its current implementation and
barriers and report publicly to the legislature. The
legislature can improve upon the digital learning
environment through removal of barriers or
introduction of new legislation.
Interview, October 12, 2014
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/index.html
80
https://sites.google.com/site/innovativeinstruction/
81
Interview, August 19, 2014 and February 12, 2015
82
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/StuSuc/EnrollChoice/Online/OnlineLearningProviders/004409
78
79
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
57
58
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
TX HB 1926
Expanding Online Course Access
HB 1926 (2013) taps into the state’s
virtual school network; this legislation
expands the online Course Access
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
program.
Intention
Texas HB 1926 83 (2013) seeks to expand and
improve student access to high-quality learning
options through increased access to online
courses, enhancement of the course approval and
review processes, and attention to professional
development. The 2013 legislation widens the
portfolio of providers and gives students access to up
to three online courses, at no charge to the student.
Implementation
The Texas Education Agency 84 (TEA) offers courses
through their Texas Virtual School Network 85
(TxVSN). Established in 2009, the TxVSN houses the
statewide course catalog 86, which denotes the
provider and offers a tool through which students
can compare courses. Changes made to the program
in 2011 resulted in a nearly 80 percent decline in
program enrollment 87. HB 1926 signals an adjustment
and attempt to recover from this decline through
renewed attention to support implementation with
improved processes and expanded access.
TxVSN catalog courses are open to students who
are working towards their graduation requirements.
Because Texas administrative rules (TAC §74.26(b) 88)
allow students to enroll in high school courses even
before grade nine, middle school students may enroll
in courses offered through TxVSN. HB 1926 played a
key role in ensuring that students and their families
were made aware of these opportunities, by requiring
local districts to send a copy of their local policy on
TxVSN to students in both middle school and high
school.
For example, an advanced middle school student
could access an upper level math course that
may not be offered at his/her school, via a virtual
environment. From a provider perspective, the
course review process has been modified to increase
flexibility regarding timing, expand provider eligibility
and maintain an increased focus on standards. In
addition to previously eligible districts and higher
education institutions, HB 1926 also allows private
and nonprofit providers eligibility to apply for
inclusion in the statewide course catalog.
Central Operations manages the review process, and
courses must meet the Texas Essential Knowledge
and Skills (TEKS) standards. In this process, two
independent reviewers assess alignment with Texas
Skill standards and the iNACOL National Standards
for Quality for Online Courses 89. According to
Barbara Smith, Project Director at TxVSN Central
Operations, “With this process, reviewers look at a
variety of indicators, including accessibility, state
curriculum and national standards. Nobody wants
to hear their course isn’t perfect, but some aren’t
initially accepted. In the end, our providers are happy
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB1926
http://tea.texas.gov/
85
http://txvsn.org/
86
https://catalog.mytxvsn.org/
87
http://www.hro.house.state.tx.us/pdf/focus/virtual83-10.pdf
88
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter074/ch074c.html#74.26
83
84
89
http://tea.texas.gov/Curriculum_and_Instructional_Programs/Learning_Support_and_Programs/Texas_Virtual_School_Network/Texas_Virtual_School_Network/
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
TX HB 1926
Expanding Online Course Access
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
HB 1926 (2013) taps into the state’s
virtual school network; this legislation
expands the online Course Access
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
program.
because we have raised consciousness of what a
great course is.” Smith also emphasizes that providers
can re-apply and can do so in a timely manner.
For districts and schools, there are a couple of key
implementation factors, including funding and
communication processes. Statute has capped the
cost of a TxVSN catalog course at $400. HB 1926
establishes that a district may not be required to pay
the cost of more than three, year-long courses taken
through the TxVSN course catalog or their equivalent.
Funding for TxVSN courses is based on student
success completion with 70 percent paid up front and
30 percent only upon successful completion of the
course.
“We set the threshold that we pay for success,” 90
according to Connie Swiderski, who heads up
90
communications for TxVSN Central Operations.
The right to award credit and the responsibility to
communicate options remains with school districts
and charters.
Implications
Within the state, there are increased opportunities
for students and providers. However, there are still
concerns around the $400 cap limiting and possibly
discouraging some high-quality course providers
from participating. While districts have a key fiscal
role, they also have the option to decline payment
if they offer a similar course in house. There is still
some subjectivity in the application of these criteria,
so Texas is working to add clarity. Challenges that
will continue to be worked out include the funding
formula and enhanced professional development for
Texas public school teachers.
Interview, October 15, 2014
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
59
60
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Competition Funding
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
States pursuing competition funding policies should consider applying the following principles in
legislation:
1. Prioritize blended learning and student-centric policies with the innovation grants, focusing on
student outcomes.
2. Reward applications able to deliver efficiencies and savings – financial and time.
3. Track the results of the grant and clearly publicize the success and failures to ensure
accountability, maintain quality and celebrate success.
Recent Legislation
OH HB 59: Straight A Innovation Fund
HB 59 (2013) is the legislation for Ohio’s state
budget for the 2014 and 2015 fiscal years and
includes a unique Straight A Fund.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
WV SB 371: School Innovation Zones Act
In SB 371 (2012), legislative funding created
Innovation Zones to allow testing of
innovative teaching and learning methods
often contrary to code and policy that could
be replicated in other school systems.
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
OH HB 59
Straight A Innovation Fund
61
The legislation for Ohio’s state budget for the
2014 and 2015 fiscal years includes a unique
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
competitive grant called the Straight A Fund.
Intention
Implementation
A $250 million Straight A Innovation Fund was
created by Governor John Kasich and supported by
the legislature within Ohio’s two-year $17 billion
state education budget. As outlined in HB 59 92
(2013), Straight A Funds are distributed through
a competitive grant process with the intent of
encouraging innovative strategies to meet learning
needs, reduce costs and driving dollars to the
classroom. 93
91
Ohio awarded its first two rounds of grants in
fiscal years 2014 and 2015 and is in the early
stages of implementation. Interest has been high
and the process competitive, with applications
simultaneously focusing on innovation and efficiency.
According to former State Representative and
Education Committee Chairman Gerald Stebelton,
“The goal of the provision is to be able to innovate
in a way that streamlines rather than impedes both
spending and progress.” 94
Straight A Innovation Fund Project Goals
http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Straight-A-Fund
http://archives.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText130/130_HB_59_EN_N.html
93
http://digitallearningnow.com/news/blog/in-plain-english-oh-hb-59/
94
Interview, October 20, 2014
91
92
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
62
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
OH HB 59
Straight A Innovation Fund
(continued)
The legislation for Ohio’s state budget for the
2014 and 2015 fiscal years includes a unique
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
competitive grant called the Straight A Fund.
While the Ohio Department of Education 95 facilitates
the award process, the realization of the goals comes
through implementation on the ground. One example
includes the expansion and replication of a robotics
and manufacturing education center by a consortium
of career tech centers. Another brings access to online
college courses offered by the University of Maryland
at College Park to nearby high school students. 96
Straight A Innovation Fund District
Typology: Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015
Innovations seldom happen in isolation, and the
Straight A Fund has spurred numerous partnerships.
Through the Young Entrepreneurs Consortium, 97
a group of 29 Ohio education, community and
business partners came together to increase student
achievement through a strong education-toemployment model. The consortium’s grant involves
20 partners including school districts, three colleges
and the Wayne Economic Development Council. 98
Stebelton noted, “A distinguishing aspect of these
funds is that they encourage collaboration. As a
result, many districts have partnered to create joint
ventures with large/small, urban/rural districts.
There are also strong partnerships between state aid
agencies, universities and local districts.” 99
To provide a sense of distribution, $88.6 million was
distributed to 24 grantees representing over 150
school districts and pattern organizations during the
first round of funding in fiscal year 2014. 100 A second
round 101 of 34 grants totaling $141.9 million reached
more than 100 individual entities. The state measures
and communicates not only how many grant dollars
were allocated, but also the anticipated spending
reductions to be realized through the innovations
http://education.ohio.gov/
http://stateimpact.npr.org/ohio/2014/06/23/straight-a-funds-governorning-board-makes-final-grant-recommendations/
97
http://southeast.k12.oh.us/sites/southeast.k12.oh.us/files/files/Yount%20Entrepreneurs%20Consortium.pdf
98
http://stateimpact.npr.org/ohio/2014/06/23/straight-a-funds-governorning-board-makes-final-grant-recommendations/
99
Interview, October 20, 2014
100
http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Straight-A-Fund
101
http://education.ohio.gov/Media/Media-Releases/2014-Media-Releases/Ohio-Straight-A-Fund-Governing-Board-Recommends-Ap#.VO9m6fnF_jU
95
96
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
OH HB 59
Straight A Innovation Fund
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
63
The legislation for Ohio’s state budget for the
2014 and 2015 fiscal years includes a unique
competitive grant called the Straight A Fund.
“
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
supported by the grant. For the second round of
grantees, an estimated $246.7 million in reductions
will be realized over the next five years. 102
Implications
Within the state, there was strong support from the
beginning, continually building momentum with
strong interest and strong implementation. Stebelton
summarizes, “When you create the environment,
space and funding for collaboration, it will happen.” 103
Ohio encourages flexible models and participation by
allowing collaboration across districts, academics,
education and community partners, while also
ensuring that efficiencies and anticipated savings are
considered in the implementation through a builtin application requirement. Ohio’s commitment to
102
103
When you create the
environment, space and
funding for collaboration,
it will happen.
Gerald Stebelton
Former State Representative and Education
Committee Chairman
transparency is evident in the wealth of tracking and
publishing they’ve made public – from the progress of
grant winners towards their proposal and anticipated
savings to district types, project goals and funding
breakdowns.
http://education.ohio.gov/Media/Media-Releases/2014-Media-Releases/Ohio-Straight-A-Fund-Governing-Board-Recommends-Ap#.VTqr963BzRa
Interview, October 20, 2014
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
64
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
WV SB 371
School Innovation Zones Act
Created Innovation Zones to allow testing of
innovative teaching and learning methods
often contrary to code and policy that could
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
be replicated in other school systems.
Intention
Implementation
The intent of West Virginia’s Innovation Zones Act, as
outlined in WV SB 371 104 (2012), is to test teaching
and learning innovations for replication by other
school systems, increase interest and planning within
districts and schools around those innovations, and
expand virtual course options as a method whereby
to keep students involved and decrease the number
of students dropping out of school.
A core belief that connects the intent to the
implementation of this policy is that Innovation
Zones are a way to explore the potential of education
innovations that can be supported by research. An
Innovation Zone is a designation by the West Virginia
Board of Education that provides schools with the
support and flexibility to collaboratively implement
innovations to enhance student learning, which
may currently be restrained by policy or code, in an
effort to yield new best practices. Innovation Zone
applicants must apply for a waiver of the particular
codes/policy which they are requesting relief from.
The zones created by SB 371 are relatively mature in
process, as the state has been awarding Innovation
Zone grants since 2009. As of January 2015, over 80
grants 106 have been awarded.
Additional priorities include: improving student
performance through innovative approaches to
learning and providing schools the flexibility of
removing certain policy, rules and interpretive
and statutory constraints. The goal is to develop
a testing ground for such innovative programs
while disseminating information about the impact
of innovations being used and documenting what
strategies work.
Another strategy to keep students in school is the
“community schools model.” This model partners
with community-based organizations – both
public and private – to offer expanded services
for at-risk students and families. The addition
of “entrepreneurship” further supports student
engagement in real world activities as another
method to reduce dropouts. 105 A 2012 amendment
to original 2009 legislation allows districts to propose
an Innovation Zone plan that may include utilizing
virtual school courses.
Applications are accepted on an annual basis and are
awarded to schools, schools partnering with higher
education, teachers or teacher teams within or across
schools. Since the act encourages schools to focus
on strategies that address dropout prevention and
recovery, an Innovation Zone designation means that
a school or schools have been awarded a grant to
specifically target these issues through one of several
approaches. For example, the 2013-14 grants had five
priority areas: Comprehensive Literacy Development,
Career Development, Redesign of Instructional Time,
Personalized Learning through Technology and
Community/School Partnerships. 107 Provisions are
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/bill_status/Bills_history.cfm?input=371&year=2012&sessiontype=RS&btype=bill
https://wvde.state.wv.us/innovationzones/faqs.html
106
https://wvde.state.wv.us/innovationzones/
107
https://wvde.state.wv.us/innovationzones/
104
105
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
WV SB 371
School Innovation Zones Act
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Created Innovation Zones to allow testing of
innovative teaching and learning methods
often contrary to code and policy that could
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
be replicated in other school systems.
stipulated regarding the application process and
designation of eligible schools by the State Board of
Education.
Michele Blatt, Assistant State Superintendent
of Schools for the West Virginia Department
of Education 108 (WVDE), reflects on the initial
experience, “The main barrier was to get schools
and districts to think outside the box. We tend to
put people inside a box and slap hands with policies
when they get outside of it. It is not enough to say you
can waive policy and code – we have sought to give
concrete examples of how to use time differently.” 109
“
The main barrier was to get
schools and districts to think
outside the box. We tend to
put people inside a box and
slap hands with policies when
they get outside of it. It is
not enough to say you can
waive policy and code – we
have sought to give concrete
examples of how to use time
differently.”
Michele Blatt
Assistant State Superintendent of Schools for the
West Virginia Department of Education
The success rate for Innovation Zone awarded schools
continues to demonstrate results. At North Marion
High School 110 students were surveyed before the
school applied to be a zone school, asking what they
would like to see done differently at school. Results
included a desire for more technology and a focus
on problem-based learning. Now three years into
the zone, students have taken ownership and are
collaborating and connecting with the community.
The New Tech Model 111 and has been a huge success
at Buffalo High School 112 in Putnam County. The
school was scheduled to move into a new facility
and the Innovation Zone funding allowed Buffalo to
design around a new instructional model around the
brick-and-mortar featuring free moving furniture,
one-to-one technology, co-teaching and embedded
credits.
Implications
Within West Virginia, the intent is that other schools
and districts will learn from the initial Innovation
Zones and take note of innovative teaching and
learning strategies used to increase achievement,
lower the dropout rate and increase graduation
rates. WVDE has been able to highlight successes
at the annual Student Success Summit which
is co-sponsored by the Higher Education Policy
Commission. The results of all Innovation Zones are
published bi-annually in a report to the West Virginia
Legislature. Success is measured on summative
assessments results along with attendance, dropout
and graduation rates.
http://wvde.state.wv.us/
Interview, November 24, 2014
110
http://wvde.state.wv.us/ed_directory/?county_id=47&school_id=503
111
http://www.newtechnetwork.org/
112
http://wvde.state.wv.us/ed_directory/?county_id=72&school_id=505
108
109
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
65
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
66
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Data Backpacks
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
States pursuing competency-based education policies should consider applying the following
principles in legislation:
1. Provide clear definitions on what data is provided for parents and teachers on students in the
backpack and guarantee the data can be easily understood and used.
2. Ensure there are clear requirements on when requests for information must be responded to, so
that parents and teachers can make informed choices to improve student learning.
3. Protect the data collected by this backpack through the use of high-quality data privacy and
security policy.
Recent Legislation
UT SB 82: Student Achievement Backpack
SB 82 (2013) allows for parents and guardians to access a digital learning profile for K-12 students that
include grades, course history, assessment data and more.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
67
68
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
UT SB 82
Allows for parents and guardians to
Student Achievement Backpack
access a digital learning profile for K-12
students that include grades, course
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
history, assessment data and more.
Intention
With the goal of giving all parents and guardians
access to relevant student achievement information
for their children, Governor Gary Herbert signed the
Student Achievement Backpack legislation, SB 82 113,
in March 2013. As the first state in the country to pass
such legislation, Utah seeks to provide a common
electronic student record – one that follows students
within the state – to all students and parents by June
of 2017. Robyn Bagley, chair of Parents for Choice in
Education 114 and a key driver in the process, reflected
back on her early realization that, “The state is
collecting student information. Parents are entitled to
it. Administrators and teachers need it.” 115
“
The state is collecting
student information.
Parents are entitled to
it. Administrators and
teachers need it.
Robyn Bagley
Chair of Parents for Choice in Education
Implementation
While the impetus behind the legislation came
from parents and sponsor Senator Jerry Stevenson
(member of the Senate Education Committee), it
http://le.utah.gov/~2013/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0082S01.htm
http://www.choiceineducation.org/
115
Interview, November 6, 2014
113
116
114
117
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
is the Utah State Office of Education 116 that is
responsible for implementation.
This legislation is unique to Utah and, accordingly,
is very early in the implementation process. There
are three phases to the roll out process, and Utah
is currently focused on the first two phases, both of
which are “behind-the-scenes” processes to ensure
effective implementation. The first two phases
involve all student data becoming cloud-based and
an expansion of the data currently collected from
Student Information Systems (SIS). The final phase
includes a final mobility integration of all required
data will be ensured so that it can be made available
in an accessible viewing format by June 2017.
Once rolled out, this learner profile will provide a
holistic view of a student’s progress and achievement.
It builds upon the concepts outlined in the Digital
Learning Now Smart Series paper, Data Backpacks:
Portable Records and Learner Profiles 117. Through
its implementation, teachers and administrators can
focus on tailoring the learning experience equipped
with readily available information. Information to be
provided includes data such as:
Course enrollments
Course grades
Course history
Section attendance
Staff identification
Teacher qualifications
State assessment results, including growth scores
http://www.schools.utah.gov/main/
http://digitallearningnow.com/site/uploads/2012/10/DLN-Smart-Series-Databack-Final1.pdf
UT SB 82
Student Achievement Backpack
(continued)
S TAT E P O L I C Y P R O F I L E S
Allows for parents and guardians to
access a digital learning profile for K-12
students that include grades, course
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
history, assessment data and more.
Reading level at the end of grade 3
School’s grade pursuant to School Grading Act
Student demographics
Summary attendance
Special education summary information
Discipline records (general discipline like
suspension and expulsion are not included,
only incidents required to report to state)
Implications
For parents and educators within the state of Utah,
this one-stop collection of student information will
provide a comprehensive view of a student’s progress
and achievement that can help both to ensure
effective monitoring in any given school year and
will also help students, counselors and families in
their postsecondary planning. As Bagley, who is now
118
serving as a school administrator, asserts, “We can’t
have personalized learning plans without a student
data backpack.” 118
This portable record will allow students to create
more meaningful personalized learning paths.
Teachers and parents will be able to track a student’s
progress not just within a single course, but also
among different courses and grades. A student
taking part-time online courses will be able to share
information about their progress in that course with a
connected course in a brick-and-mortar environment.
However, a shift to a more comprehensive and
holistic data system to improve student learning also
will require additional securities and likely strong
communications and professional development to
onboard parents and teachers.
Interview, November 6, 2014
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
69
70
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Selected 2014
Bill Summaries
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
71
72
SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
Selected 2014
State-Enacted
Bill Summaries
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
The following are brief summaries of digital
learning legislation that passed in 2014.
Alabama
HB 191 (Open States or Alabama Legislature) 119
requires that any student who withdraws from a
public school to enroll in and attend an accredited
online course be counted as a transfer student. The
bill also requires grade placement testing for any
student who later returns to a public school. Arizona
HB 2265 (Open States or Arizona Legislature) 120
allows school districts and charter schools to count a
computer science course for a required math credit.
Arkansas
SB 48 (Open States or Arkansas Legislature) 121
appropriates $3 million for technology development
and research grants as a part of the state’s
appropriation of over $2.8 billion to the Arkansas
Education Department.
http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/alison/searchableinstruments/2014rs/bills/HB191.htm
http://www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=HB2265&Session_ID=112
121
http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2013/2014F/Pages/BillInformation.aspx?measureno=SB48
119
120
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
California
AB 2007 (Open States or California
Legislation)
authorizes, until January 1, 2018,
that a virtual or online charter school can claim
independent study average daily attendance for
a pupil who is enrolled in the school and moves
to a residence located outside of the geographic
boundaries of the virtual or online charter school for
the duration of the school course or courses in which
the pupil is enrolled or until the end of the school
year, whichever occurs first. SB 858/Chapter 32 (Open States or California
Legislature) 124 an education omnibus bill, explains
the intent of the Legislature that that school districts
will prioritize the use of one-time funds appropriated
for professional development, instructional materials,
technology infrastructure and any other investments
necessary to support implementation of California
Next Generation standards in English language arts
mathematics and science.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
122
SB 1200/Chapter 518 (Open States or California
Legislature) 123 allows high school computer science
courses to count for the mathematics subject area
requirement.
Colorado
HB 1078 (Open States or Colorado
Legislature)
clarifies, for purposes of
accreditation, that a public school includes an online
school but not an online program. The bill also
authorizes the Colorado Department of Education to
125
automatically renew a district’s or the state charter
school institute’s accreditation contract if the district
or the institute is accredited with an improvement
plan.
Florida
HB 7031 (Open States or Florida Legislature) 126
clarifies requirements for graduation and states
that beginning with students entering grade 9 in the
2013-2014 school year, the online course required for
graduation may not be a driver education course.
SB 864 (Open States or Florida Legislature) 127
attempts to maximize local control by eliminating the
state-level instructional materials review, selection
and adoption process. The bill also identifies
parameters for district school boards to satisfy their
constitutional duty in providing adequate materials
to K-12 students. It includes accountability and
transparency requirements.
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB2007&search_keywords=
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB1200&search_keywords=
124
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB858&search_keywords=
125
http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2014a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/3E77C928ED6B8F5987257C360075FF40?open&file=1078sedu_01.pdf
126
http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/7031/BillText/er/PDF
127
http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0864/ByCategory
122
123
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
73
74
SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
Idaho
HB 643 (Open States or Idaho Legislature) 128
establishes and defines standards to receive funding
referred to in Idaho’s current wireless appropriation
for education. In order to be eligible to receive
state funds, school districts must: demonstrate
functionality and sufficient capacity to connect all
devices to the LAN; undergo validation testing to
ensure the wireless meets or exceeds functional
requirements; and ensure content filtering and the
security of the wireless internet.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
appropriates $16,803,500 for the Educational Support
Program/District of Central Services for fiscal year
2015. Up to $2,250,000 of the appropriation is
reserved for the installation, repair, replacement
and support of a wireless technology infrastructure
at each public school serving high school grades.
In addition, up to $150,000 is reserved for the
development and maintenance of an online catalog
of the courses available in the state.
SB 1410 (Open States or Idaho Legislature) 129
Louisiana
HB 944 (Open States or Louisiana Legislature) 130
requires a career diploma to be considered and
recognized by all public postsecondary education
institutions and to be treated the same as a regular
diploma for the purposes of school and district
accountability. Among several key provisions, the
legislation requires schools to partner with economic
and business leaders to review course offerings in
dual enrollment, industry training and digital learning
programs.
SB 622 (Open States or Louisiana Legislature) 131
requires the Education Department to develop a
statewide education technology plan for public
elementary and secondary schools to ensure every
classroom has sufficient infrastructure and capacity
to provide a high-quality, digital instructional
environment. The plan must establish standards for
devices, technology readiness, ensure high-speed,
wireless broadband access and provide for ongoing
professional development.
Massachusetts
HB 4355 (Open States or Massachusetts
Legislature)
designates $38,000,000 toward a
competitive matching grant to assist public school
132
districts in improving student instruction and
assessment through information technology and
broadband access.
Michigan
HB 5314 (Open States or Michigan
Legislature)
changes the age of eligibility for
students enrolling in online courses from grades 5
to 12 to grades 6 to 12. The legislation also allows
133
http://legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2014/H0643.htm
http://legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2014/S1410.htm
130
http://www.legis.la.gov/Legis/BillInfo.aspx?i=224973
128
129
students to take more than two courses per term if
they have demonstrated previous success in an online
course.
http://www.legis.la.gov/Legis/BillInfo.aspx?i=225614
https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4355
133
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%283s4s1pb25acebirzgk0iyor3%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=ge
tObject&objectName=2014-HB-5314
131
132
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
New Mexico
SB 159 (Open States or New Mexico
Legislature)
defines “educational technology
infrastructure” and establishes an initiative to
134
help correct education technology infrastructure
deficiencies. The legislation also provides up to $10
million per year for the initiative through FY 2019.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
New York
SB 5509 (Open States or New Mexico
Legislature)
directs the commissioner of
education to establish an online learning advisory
council. The purpose of the council is to make
recommendations for the establishment of a
135
statewide online and blended learning network,
including best practices, academic programming,
outside partnerships and reviews of teaching and
professional development policies.
North Carolina
HB 884 (Open States or North Carolina
Legislature) 136 requires the State Board of Education
to establish a two year Dropout Prevention and
Recovery Pilot Program. The purpose is to engage
students through an educational program that
provides flexible scheduling and a blended learning
environment.
Oklahoma
HB 2357 (Open States or Oklahoma
Legislature) 137 repeals the Virtual Internet School in
Oklahoma Network (VISION) Act. It also creates pilot
program for providing verifiable information on the
advantage of web-based instructional programs.
SB 1461 (Open States or Oklahoma
Legislature) 138 requires that virtual education
providers and school districts must submit
performance data for students receiving full-time
instruction to a student who is a non-resident of that
district.
Rhode Island
SR 3138 (Open States or Rhode Island
Legislature)
requests the Rhode Island Board of
Education and Department of Education to adopt a
competency-based/proficiency-based learning policy
139
and a model district policy to increase opportunities
for students to earn credits through demonstration of
competency.
http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/legislation.aspx?Chamber=S&LegType=B&LegNo=159&year=14
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=SB5509&term=2013&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Votes=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y
136
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2013&BillID=H884
137
http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=HB2357&session=1400
138
http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=SB1461&session=1400
139
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText14/SenateText14/S3138.pdf
134
135
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
75
76
SELECTED 2014 BILL SUMMARIES
Utah
SB 104 (Open States or Utah Legislature) 140
assists educators and parents in teaching reading
through a clinic. The reading clinic must provide
instruction to teachers in the use of technology and
blended learning to personalize individual reading
instruction and student access to reading services
through distance learning technology.
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Virginia
HB 1115 (Open States or Virginia Legislature) 141
allows the Education Department to contract with
school boards that have created online courses to
make the courses available through Virtual Virginia.
It also requires the department to establish the
Virtual Virginia Advisory Committee. The bill permits
the department to charge a school division or
multidivision online providers requesting to offer a
course through Virtual Virginia an application fee.
West Virginia
HB 4619 (Open States or West Virginia
Legislature)
authorizes eight school districts to
be designated as Innovation School Districts through
a competitive application process to the State
Board. Two school systems each may be selected
from each of the four student population density
categories (sparse, low medium and high). The
142
district must develop a plan for the innovations it
seeks to implement and it must be approved at the
local level. If selected by the State Board, the district
is authorized to seek waivers of statutes, policies,
rules and interpretations over a five-year period as it
progresses with implementation of its plan.
Wisconsin
AB 40 (Open States or Wisconsin Legislature) 143
contains a nearly $70 billion spending plan. Some
provisions include:
Requires the Department of Public Instruction
to ensure that every school is providing
academic and career planning to students in
grades 6-12 including through technology.
Prohibits the department from requiring a
virtual charter school teacher from completing
professional development not required by
teachers who do not teach in a virtual public
charter school.
Prohibits the department from requiring that
a licensed teacher be physically present in the
classroom when instruction is being provided
digitally or through an online course.
Requires the department to develop and
maintain an online resource to provide
educational opportunities for parents,
teachers and students; offer online learning
opportunities; provide regional technical
support centers; and provide professional
development for teachers.
http://le.utah.gov/~2014/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0104.htm
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?141+sum+HB1115
142
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Status/Bills_history.cfm?input=4619&year=2014&sessiontype=RS&btype=bill
143
http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2013/proposals/ab40
140
141
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
77
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
78
APPENDIX A
Appendix A: Methodology
For the 2014 Digital Learning Report Card, states were
graded based on their progress toward achieving the
10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning 144.
Each state was awarded 11 grades: one grade for each
of the 10 Elements and one overall grade.
The overall grade for each state was calculated by
averaging the equally weighted grades of the 10
Elements.
Rubric
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
The 10 Elements were evaluated equally, with each
Element comprised of multiple metrics. States earned
points based on how far along they were in achieving
each Element’s metrics. This progress was then
presented as a percentage for each of the 10 Elements
and converted into a letter grade (see conversion
chart below). The points each state could earn for
each metric was awarded based on a standardized
grading rubric.
144
http://digitallearningnow.com/policy/10-elements
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
Using state input from last two years, we updated
the grading rubric from 41 to 42 metrics within the
10 Elements. This rubric allowed for an objective
evaluation of policies across all states.
APPENDIX A
This example shows that metric 1 carries more weight
in the overall grade than metric 4 carries. However, it
is important to keep in mind the metrics are used to
evaluate each of the 10 Elements and those remain
weighted equally in developing the overall state score
and grade.
Each metric is worth up to 4 points. The total possible
value for each Element is as follows:
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
Additional partial credits were included in the 2013
rubric to better capture how states are progressing
towards each metric and Element. The grading rubric
was built in a way that enabled Digital Learning
Now to award partial credit consistently across the
states to recognize the multiple steps states have
made toward creating an environment that supports
comprehensive digital learning, even if the metric has
yet to be fully met.
Process
States were provided an online survey to complete,
looking at all 42 metrics within the 10 Elements of
High-Quality Digital Learning. The grading rubric was
built into the survey, with text boxes available for
comments, citations and sourcing for all answers.
In an effort to provide consistent data, we
prepopulated several of the survey’s with data from
the 2013 survey to better understand how states
were changing and progressing annually. States
were provided their personalized survey, with the
opportunity to adjust those prepopulated answers.
After states submitted initial results for the survey,
their responses were assessed, adjusting credits
awarded where appropriate in order to present the
clearest and more comprehensive picture of each
state’s digital learning policies. Preliminary state
profile summaries were provided to each state to
comment on and refine their answers further.
Element 1 – Metrics 1, 2, 3 = 12 points
Element 2 – Metrics 4, 5, 6, 7 = 16 points
Element 3 – Metrics 8, 9 = 8 points
Element 4 – Metrics 10, 11, 12, 13 = 16 points
Element 5 – Metrics 14, 15, 16 = 12 points
Element 6 – Metrics 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 = 28
points
Element 7 – Metrics 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 = 24 points
Element 8 – Metrics 30, 31, 32 = 12 points
Element 9 – Metrics 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 = 24 points
Element 10 – Metrics 39, 40, 41, 42 = 16 points
After data collection was completed, the percentage
of points met out of possible points was calculated
for each of the 10 Element and converted into a letter
grade using the scale listed below. Those 10 Element
scores were then averaged for each state in order to
calculate the overall grade.
Grading
Each of the 10 Elements of High-Quality Digital
Learning is weighted equally for the overall state
grade. Because of this equal weighting of the
elements, the 42 metrics that comprise this survey
may carry different weights, based on how many
metrics are in each element.
For example, Element 1 is composed of three metrics,
making metrics number 1, 2 and 3 are each worth 33.3
percent of Element 1’s grade. Element 2 is composed
of four metrics, making metrics number 4, 5, 6 and 7
each worth 25 percent of Element 2’s grade.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
79
80
APPENDIX B
Appendix B: Additional Resources
ExcelinEd Resources
ExcelinEd Policy Library
ExcelinEd.org/Policy-Library
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
The ExcelinEd Policy Library features research, policy
briefs, model legislation and videos around seven
reform actions in education. The searchable database
has information on college and career readiness,
digital learning, effective teachers and leaders, K-3
reading, outcome-based funding, school choice and
standards and accountability.
Funding Students, Options and Achievement:
http://bit.ly/1DjGnGm
Improving Conditions and Careers:
http://bit.ly/1aXUqnJ
Online Learning: Myths, Reality and Promise:
http://bit.ly/1egVDsL
Blended Learning Implementation Guide Version
2.0: http://bit.ly/1mxaPUz
Smart Series Guide to EdTech Procurement:
http://bit.ly/1fRAl1g
Core & More: Guiding and Personalizing College
& Career Readiness: http://bit.ly/1FB7qwo
Using Prizes and Pull Mechanisms to Boost
Learning: http://bit.ly/1ljA0vx
DLN Smart Series Papers
http://digitallearningnow.com/policy/
publications/smart-series/
The Digital Learning Now Smart Series is a collection
of interactive papers that provide specific guidance
for policy makers and education leaders regarding
the adoption of the Common Core State Standards
and the shift to personal digital learning. The recently
released ebook, “Navigating the Digital Shift” offers
updated versions of the papers originally released in
the DLN Smart Series including contributions from 11
authors representing leading organizations such as
Public Impact, the International Association for K-12
Online Learning (iNACOL), CompetencyWorks and The
Learning Accelerator.
The Smart Series is a project of Digital Learning
Now in association with Getting Smart. These
organizations have come together to accelerate the
shift to high-quality digital learning for all students by
addressing a different implementation challenge with
each white paper. Topics include:
Funding the Shift to Digital Learning: Three
Strategies for Funding Sustainable High-Access
Environments: http://bit.ly/1jEjROj
Data Backpacks: Portable Records and Learner
Profiles: http://bit.ly/1mxaJMM
Getting Ready for Online Assessments:
http://bit.ly/1hmVOTT
The Shift from Cohorts to Competency:
http://bit.ly/1bJQhH4
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
DLN Course Access Whitepapers
Leading in an Era of Change: Making the
Most of State Course Access Programs:
http://bit.ly/1BDZQUL
Online Education: A Framework for Selecting
Quality Course Providers at Competitive Prices:
http://bit.ly/1DXXf6u
DLN Smart Series Videos
Digital Learning Now has released a series of five
videos complementing the Smart Series ebook and
white papers. Videos feature policy experts including
Governor Jeb Bush, President of the Alliance for
Excellent Education and former West Virginia
Governor Bob Wise, Michael Horn of the Clayton
Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation and
Sal Khan of Khan Academy, as well as students and
teachers from Mooresville Graded School District and
schools across the nation.
Blended Learning Models:
http://bit.ly/1fpwMod
Blended Learning Implementation Guide:
http://bit.ly/1mFPdZH
Common Core and Digital Learning:
http://bit.ly/NvgeyM
Funding the Shift to Digital Learning:
http://bit.ly/1hPXKqK
The Promise of Digital Learning:
http://bit.ly/1eu196K
APPENDIX B
81
Organizations
Aspen Institute Taskforce on Learning
and the Internet
AspenTaskForce.org
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
The Aspen Task Force on Learning and the Internet,
with support and guidance from the John D. and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, is a group of
20 innovative and respected minds in technology,
public policy, education, business, privacy and
safety. The Task Force’s goal was to understand
the ways in which young people learn today and to
optimize learning and innovation within a trusted
environment. After a year of study, outreach to
stakeholders, public input and internal deliberations,
the Task Force believes that a new vision of learning
is emerging. But to ensure that young learners are
able to take full advantage of the opportunity, we
must resolve serious issues of trust, safety, privacy,
literacy and equity of access. To help resolve some of
these challenges, the Task Force has highlighted five
essential principles and twenty-six action steps with
the intention they be used as a guide for action – a
tool to help those who wrestle with these issues at
the local, state and federal levels to tackle them with
new insights, clarity, and efficiency.
Clayton Christensen Institute for
Disruptive Innovation
ChristensenInstitute.org
The Education Program at the Clayton Christensen
Institute examines K–12 and higher education issues
through the lens of disruptive innovation. Its research
aims to transform monolithic, factory-model systems
into student-centered designs that educate every
student successfully and enable each to realize his or
her fullest potential. The Institute offers a wide range
of white papers, policy briefs, case studies and videos
around innovations in the education sector.
Data Quality Campaign
DataQualityCampaign.org
The Data Quality Campaign (DQC) is a nonprofit,
nonpartisan, national advocacy organization based
in Washington, DC. Launched in 2005 by 10 founding
partners, DQC now leads a partnership of nearly
100 organizations committed to realizing the vision
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
APPENDIX B
of an education system in which all stakeholders—
from parents to policymakers—are empowered with
high-quality data from the early childhood, K–12,
postsecondary and workforce systems to make
decisions that ensure every student graduates high
school prepared for success in college and the
workplace. DQC supports state policymakers and
other key leaders to promote the development and
effective use of statewide longitudinal data systems.
DQC provides a wealth of analysis around state data
systems, policy guidance, data 101 resources and
other tools to help advance the strategic use of data
to improve education.
profit organizations, research institutions, corporate
entities and other content and technology providers.
Resources include:
Keeping Pace with K-12 Online Learning:
An Annual Review of Policy and Practice
http://bit.ly/1FVyKYJ
iNACOL Quality Assurance:
http://bit.ly/1BU6AqV
CompetencyWorks: http://bit.ly/1yqcf7X
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
82
Getting Smart
GettingSmart.com
Getting Smart is a community passionate about
innovations in learning. The group believes the
shift to personal digital learning holds promise for
improved student achievement in the developed
world and access to quality education in the
emerging economy. Getting Smart are advocates for
better K-12 education as well as early, post-secondary
and informal learning opportunities for all students.
They attempt to accelerate and improve the shift
to digital learning by covering important events,
trends, products, books and reports. Getting Smart:
How Personal Digital Learning Is Changing the World
by Tom Vander Ark, a well-known education expert,
examines the facets of educational innovation in
the United States and abroad. Vander Ark makes a
convincing case for blended learning and personal
digital learning.
iNACOL
iNACOL.org
The International Association for K-12 Online
Learning (iNACOL) is a non-profit organization
focused on research; developing policy for studentcentered education to ensure equity and access;
developing quality standards for emerging learning
models using online, blended and competency-based
education; and supporting the ongoing professional
development of classroom, school, district and state
leaders for new learning models. iNACOL represents a
cross-section of K-12 education from school districts,
charter schools, state education agencies, non-
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
The Learning Accelerator
LearningAccelerator.org
The Learning Accelerator is a non-profit organization
whose mission is to transform K-12 education by
accelerating the implementation of high-quality
blended learning in school districts across the U.S.
The “What is Blended Learning?” video provides a
good overview of concepts around blended learning
and examples of different models.
The One-To-One Institute
One-to-OneInstitute.org
One-to-One Institute grew out of Michigan’s
successful, statewide one-to-one initiative, Freedom
to Learn. One-to-One Institute is a national non-profit
committed to igniting 21st century education through
the implementation of one-to-one technology in
K-12 settings. Our mission is to transform education.
We believe that by personalizing learning through
universal, uninterrupted access to technology
students will take ownership of their learning and
maximize their potential. One-to-One Institute offers
professional learning, consultancy, expertise and
hands-on experience in all aspects of developing
learning environments that meaningfully integrate
technology. Based on the latest research and our
experience in hundreds of 1:1 environments, OTO
has crafted a set of best practices for leadership,
infrastructure and instruction to help ensure that
your program is successful and sustainable.
State Education Technology Directors
Association
SETDA.org
Founded in 2001, the State Educational Technology
Directors Association (SETDA) is non-profit, national
APPENDIX B
good overview of concepts around blended learning
and examples of different models.
Project 24
www.Plan4Progress.org/Domain/42
The Alliance for Excellence in Education launched
Project 24 to help school districts address seven
areas:
1. Academic supports
2. Budget and resources
3. Curriculum and instruction
4. Data and assessments
5. Professional learning
6. Technology and infrastructure
7. Use of time
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
member association that serves, supports and
represents the interests of U.S. state and territorial
educational technology leadership. SETDA provides
a wide range of resources to assist states with
advancing digital learning:
The State Education Policy Center (SEPC)
http://bit.ly/1a7UvsK
The Broadband Imperative
http://bit.ly/1cJy3nv
National Trends and State Profiles:
http://bit.ly/1D8JS48
Online Assessment: http://bit.ly/1G07QAs
Interoperability: http://bit.ly/1xMOdcG
Other Resources
Blend My Learning
BlendMyLearning.com
An online community of blended learning schools
and practitioners which offers a venue for these
educators to share lessons learned from their own
implementations. There is an urgent need to connect
peers and develop information within this relatively
small and nascent blended school community.
Michael and Susan Dell Foundation
Blended Learning Case Studies
MSDF.org/Programs/Urban-Education/
Initiatives/United-States/Blended-Learning
The Michael and Susan Dell Foundation produced
a series of helpful case studies around blended
learning models used at Alliance College-Ready
Public Schools, FirstLine Schools, KIPP LA Schools,
Rocketship Education and Summit Public Schools.
Each case study provides a background on the school,
the instructional model, the operations model, the
financial model and lessons learned.
Next Generation Learning Challenges
NextGenLearning.org
The Learning Accelerator is a non-profit organization
whose mission is to transform K-12 education by
accelerating the implementation of high-quality
blended learning in school districts across the U.S.
The “What is Blended Learning?” video provides a
The “24” in Project 24 represents the next twentyfour months, during which the nation’s education
landscape will change greatly as states and districts
implement college- and career-ready standards for
all students, utilize online assessments to gauge
comprehension and learning, deal with shrinking
budgets and contend with the demands of states’
waivers from key provisions of the No Child Left
Behind Act.
Project Red
ProjectRed.org
Project RED conducted the first and only national
study of education technology to focus on student
achievement and financial implications. In our
research of nearly 1,000 schools, we discovered
a replicable design for successfully introducing
technology into the classroom- one that leads to
improved student performance and cost benefits.
SchoolSpeedTest
SchoolSpeedTest.org
SchoolSpeedTest is an EducationSuperHighway
project designed to survey the actual internet
connection speed available to schools and
classrooms across the US. It is hoped that the
information gathered by schools running tests will
help inform policy makers and demonstrate the need
for improvements in education infrastructure.
D I G I TA L L E A R N I N G N OW A N I N I T I AT I V E O F E X C E L I N E D
83
EM
4/ B
28 A
/2 RG
01 O
5 ED
at
12 UN
:0 TI
1a L
m
84
DigitalLearningNow.com
@DigLearningNow
Facebook.com/DigitalLearningNow
[email protected]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
D IAttribution-ShareAlike
G I T A L L E A R N I N G N O W 3.0
A N Unported
I N I T I A T I V License.
E OF EXCELINED