Although this bill claims to support on-line education, in reality the bureaucracy it proposes would stifle and diminish the comprehensive on-line programs currently available in the state of Washington. Some dangerous points to consider:
1. It would require approval by the Digital Learning Commons of each individual course. This approval would cost a fee. For comprehensive programs such as the Washington Virtual Academy which offers complete curriculum in kindergarten through high school, this would be incredibly costly and unwieldy. Curriculum is already required to be accredited and held to the A.L.E standards to put another separate layer unconnected to OSPI is needless and stifling bureacracy.
2. It would require students to go through their individual districts to access the program, thus fragmenting a cohesive program into tiny unconnected parts. Although it claims to further access through this, it would actually limit access to a programs already available through the choice law to any student in the state of Washington. They just need to register with the sponsoring district. (In the case of WAVA this is Steilacoom.) To use WAVA as an example: This comprehensive program hires teachers throughout the state of Washington to service students throughout the state of Washington. Outings and other activities are offered in their community, but they also have access to the wider WAVA community through on-line Elluminate classes with their peers which are in addition to the quality national K12 curriculum provided by the program. Teachers meet face to face in monthly staff meetings to provide a cohesive quality program. To split this up into several districts would fragment this program and deny access to students who live in districts that do not have membership in the Digital Learning Commons or who choose not to put WAVA on their list of offerings.
3. It would only require teachers of 7th grade through high school to be certificated. Currently on-line teachers from kindergarten through high school are certificated. This would greatly diminish the quality of the program if the teacher overseeing the on-line education were not certificated.
4. It makes the assumption that teachers in these programs are hired by the private companies who provide the curriculum rather than being hired directly by districts in Washington state. This is a dangerous precedent that could lead to teachers from other states (or even other countries) teaching these programs rather than the current teachers who are available in the communities where the students live.
5. It would require on-line teachers to pay back the districts the cost of every student who does not succeed with the curriculum. This strips any responsibility from the student and the parent-teacher at home. It also encourages a lowering of standards to ensure that all students "pass".
These are just some of the flaws in this bill. Do not be deceived by its claim to support on-line education. It will only work for a collection of separate, disparate courses such as those a student might need to make up missing credits in high school. In no way does it support the comprehensive on-line programs being used by thousands of students in the state of Washington.