Sign Up For Our Newsletter

Everyday we are inundated with technology. We wake up in the morning and watch television, we listen to the radio on the commute to school; but when we arrive to a traditional school, technology becomes a banned distraction entirely. As technology is enhanced, education has the opportunity to improve simultaneously. Blended learning is a unique method of teaching that combines in-person instruction with online learning. Instead of just throwing some iPads into a classroom, blended learning relies on the effective use of technology in which both students and teachers benefit. Websites like “Edmodo,” a teacher/student interaction page that resembles Facebook, and computers with required books already loaded onto them are small examples of technologies that make a real impact. Center School District Superintendent George Welsh said, “I foresee a time when technology will take the place of textbooks.” In the classroom and in the checkbook, the blending of online and site-based learning has the potential to completely change the way we approach education.

The Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation uses four primary blended learning models: rotation, flex, self-blend, and enriched virtual. Rotation model ensures that students switch between online instruction and in-class lessons. This method seems familiar to the structure of elementary classes in which there are always different stations for separate activities. An example of a rotation model-based setting is a “flipped classroom” where students learn lessons virtually and then apply them in class. Self-blend model involves students taking traditional courses at school and additional courses at home.

When I attended traditional high school a few years ago, many online classes were offered in addition to the required courses. This seems to be the most natural high school level implementation option for blended learning because it is not a major adjustment. Enriched Virtual model is simply when students take courses online and then meet with teachers as needed. Flex model is when an entire course is online and teachers are available for in-person support and tutoring. Blended learning tackles the issue of student achievement and having accessible teachers ensures clear student expectations and ownership of resources. In 2013, RAND Corporation researched the effectiveness of blended learning in an algebra class and found that those who spent 60% of the time in the classroom and 40% of the time on Cognitive Tutor software outperformed students in traditional setting.

Not only does blended learning keep students accountable, it also keeps teachers working their hardest to provide the best education. Teachers report that the online lecture is the easy part; the face-to-face aspect of lesson, however, is where the challenge lies. With less classroom time, teachers must plan purposefully to address exactly what they want the students to gain from the lesson. Blended learning demands the most from both teachers and students and causes individuals to work their absolute hardest.

The thing that fascinates me the most about blended learning is how well it contends arguments against virtual learning. Online learning critics often point at the discipline and time-management skills needed to achieve academic success, but blended learning ensures that students are accountable for their education. Meeting with a teacher face-to-face eliminates the idea that students will not aspire to their best on their own. People, especially children, thrive when they get to make their own choices. There is something compelling about having control of your own decisions, and blended learning ensures that students feel connected to their own educations.

Just like anything you choose to pursue in life, you are only as strong as your team of supporters. While programs with school choice programs are non-discriminatory, the inequity of the system goes deeper than simply sorting through options. The varying income levels that students come from make for a diverse but fragmented group of decision makers. In the process of choosing schools, there is a direct relationship between amount of directional support and income level. While advanced middle-class students are leaning on family and peer support, where are the school advisors to help those who lack foundational support at home?

Carolyn Sattin-Bajaj, author of Unaccompanied Minors, compiled interviews of 46 eighth grade students from IS 725 and demonstrates a fresh perspective on equity struggles and debates. The book paints a very realistic picture of the education system as a whole by honing in on personal narratives that establish what life is like for certain students and their families. Chapter four is an assessment of navigating the school choice system and essentially addresses the inequity in NYC high school choice as a rocky foundation of misconceptions and inaccurate assumptions. While school choice is designed to be a personal decision that allows students to pick a school based on their individual needs, family members and peers influence students the most.

The chapter begins by noting that generally, low-income Latino students at IS 725 seemed to be unclear about school choice direction, while middle-class Asian-origin students at IS 725 were reportedly adamant about the school selection search. Students on the advanced track conveyed extensive knowledge of different school choices and were very much aware of details, policies, and performances. Middle-class parents or guardians may be more inclined to send their children to college and therefore more willing to give substantive input about education choices. “Multiply reinforced orientations” sets the standard for where students feel they belong and distance low-income students from attending a high-performing school. While the decisions middle-class students in the gifted program make are attributed to “strategic choice,” the selections of low-income are chalked up to “passive choice.”

Interactions between peers during school days completely shape the way students learn and the choices they make on a day-to-day basis. On a very logistical level, if you surround yourself with people who are organized about school choice events and application requirements, by association you have the advantage of being informed. Students whose friends do not have an agenda for school searching are left to conquer the act of planning ahead alone. On an emotional level, students who have friends aiming for the highest performing schools and often share similar mindsets. Friends often share common interests or goals, so you tend to mimic their actions and decisions. Sattin-Bajaj noted that for low-income students, the decision is less about finding a school that will allow them to thrive, and instead keeping the safety net of people they know close to them. Often times, a student is the only person in his/her family attending school, friends become family and attending school with them becomes exponentially important.

The most frustrating aspect of this is that, generally, school faculty involvement just isn’t helpful. Advisors reassure the gifted students of their extensive knowledge and the immigrant students are told everything from their advisors and know nothing more. Advisors are helping the two extremes and are neglecting an entire misinformed student population. Bottom line: the students who need the help simply aren’t getting it.

School choice is an amazing program that endeavors to place students in programs where they will flourish. As Sattin-Bajaj states, “high school choice experiences and outcomes put into sharp relief the impact of differential access to supports and resources.” In order for all students to reap the benefits of this program, school faculty members need to monitor the progress of low-income students whose family may not be as accustomed to the school choice selection process. From the moment an application is sent in, to the time a confusing letter is delivered to their mailbox, low-income and minority students must have support through every step of the process to ensure that each student receives the highest quality education.

Brett Swanson, CER Intern