The Innosight Institute has released a new white paper on blended learning, updating the original definition and taxonomy. From the announcement of the release of Classifying K-12 Blended Learning:

“This white paper introduces a refined definition and description of models based on feedback from over 80 organizations and 100 educators who commented on the initial research.

The updated taxonomy includes a number of changes. It eliminates two of the six blended-learning models—Face-to-Face Driver and Online Lab—because they duplicate other models and make the categories too rigid to accommodate the diversity of blended-learning models in practice. The new definitions are intentionally broad and open, rather than specific. They set forth basic patterns that are emerging, but avoid setting tight parameters on how a model “has to be.” The new taxonomy also identifies four sub-categories that are appearing, namely the Station-Rotation, Lab-Rotation, Flipped-Classroom, and Individual-Rotation models.”

The new definition of blended learning is:

“Blended learning is a formal education program in which a student learns at least in part through online delivery of content and instruction with some element of student control over time, place, path, and/or pace and at least in part at a supervised brick-and-mortar location away from home.”

While the taxonomy and examples of programs are valuable, we have always felt that the most important element of Innosight’s work is the definition of blended learning. A critical element is what is not included: layering of educational technology on an existing classroom, without changing the instructional model. To us, the student control is the most important part of the definition, because if students don’t have some control over time/place/path/pace, then it’s likely that the instructional model has not really changed.

Also notable is that flipped classrooms—among the buzzwords of the moment—do not necessarily entail student control, which means that they do necessarily meet the definition of blended learning. Some excellent examples of flipped classrooms exist, and they are changing instruction. But at the other end of the spectrum, we also see teachers assigning YouTube videos instead of reading for homework and thinking they have flipped their classrooms. Have they? I don’t know, because I don’t know the formal definition of a flipped classroom. But I know that example is not blended learning under the definition that we choose to use. The definition is valuable because we can explain that to teachers and administrators, explain why, and subsequently explain what changes would truly be blended learning.

Back in December we wrote about the early and emerging backlash against the Common Core State Standards that we were seeing. For an updated and more in-depth look at these issues, see the recent Wall Street Journal article “School-Standards Pushback:Conservative Groups Oppose National ‘Common Core’ as an Intrusion on States.”

Particularly notable is that the “board of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)… is set to vote on a resolution to formally oppose the standards. The resolution was passed by the ALEC education task force in December.” ALEC members have been generally supportive of online learning in the past, but the connection between online learning and Common Core appears to have been lost, or overridden by concerns about states’ rights and black helicopters.

In the world of blended learning, few schools or management organizations have received more attention than Rocketship Education and Carpe Diem, both of which have been approved to open new schools in the Midwest. Both Rocketship and Carpe Diem rely on a mix of highly qualified teachers and technology-driven instruction to individualize the student learning experience.

Currently Rocketship manages five K-5 charter schools in the San Jose area. California uses the Academic Performance Index (API) to measure academic performance and growth of schools. API is a numeric index (or scale) that ranges from a low of 200 to a high of 1,000; a school’s score or placement on the API is an indicator of the school’s performance level. The statewide API performance target for all schools is 800; Rocketship achieved an overall score of 868 on the 2011 API.

Rocketship has received approval to phase in 20 more schools in Santa Clara County (CA) from 2013-16, and to open eight schools in Milwaukee beginning in fall 2013. The Milwaukee schools will be the first campuses it will run outside of California.

Carpe Diem manages one high school in Yuma, Arizona, and has been approved by the Indiana Charter Schools Board to open six schools. The first two campuses will open in 2012-13; the Carpe Diem Meridian Campus in Indianapolis will serve grades 6-12 with on-site teacher-facilitators and a web-based learning and management system. Carpe Diem Online will be a fully online school serving grades 6-12. The Carpe Diem campus in Yuma had 94% proficiency on state math and reading tests, and has been recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Business Week as one of America’s Top High Schools.

In Keeping Pace 2011, we addressed quality and accountability and online and blended learning. In the section that begins on page 40 we discussed the fact that online and blended learning can work; we are pleased to see two effective models expanding not just in their home states, but in new regions of the country.

Through the annual Keeping Pace survey, we learn more about what online and blended learning options are available to students around the country. (The survey will be released in a few short weeks for those of you anxious to fill it out in 2012!) Occasionally, however, we appreciate the opportunity to dig into a particular segment of the online or blended learning field and get a better understanding of what is happening – or in this case, perhaps why something is not happening.

The Evergreen Education Group is pleased to be working with the Colorado Department of Education, the Colorado Rural Caucus, and the Colorado BOCES Association to better understand what fully online, supplemental online, and blended learning options are available to students and teachers in rural Colorado, and what barriers stand in the way of starting or growing online and blended programs.

To begin to understand the rural landscape, we have deployed a survey out to rural Colorado districts, BOCES, and online schools. We would like to know what types of online and blended options are available to students in rural Colorado, how many students are enrolled in online and blended programs, and what models of blended learning are being used. We are also very interested to find out what barriers prevent schools and districts from starting and growing online programs.

In addition, Evergreen will conduct a series of interviews with education leaders in rural Colorado to dig in a bit deeper. The survey results and interviews will help us to generate a report to be delivered in June that will focus on actionable policy and practice ideas that the legislature, Colorado Department of Education, and school leaders may consider in order to bring 21st century learning opportunities to students across Colorado.

The results are also likely to be included in Keeping Pace 2012, and perhaps in a VSS session!

If you represent rural Colorado students, please take 5-10 minutes to fill out the survey. It can be accessed here http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FCWGXPN, and will be open through April 13.

Keeping Pace has focused largely on state-level policy issues, occasionally touching on district policies such as online learning graduation requirements. This focus has reflected the fact that most online learning policies are state laws or regulations. But we’re also increasingly realizing that federal policy and action plays an important role as well, from ESEA to funding to research that is needed at a scale that only the federal government can support.

iNACOL has been thinking about federal policy issues, which has helped our thinking on these issues. We plan to explore federal issues in Keeping Pace 2012 in more detail than we have in past years, using the issues that iNACOL has highlighted as a starting point. We are basing our thinking on the recently-released iNACOL brief entitled “Top 5 Federal Policy Issues” that details background and recommendations around five key issues. The issues below are pulled directly from the brief; the comments following are ours.

ISSUE 1: Accountability should be based on individual student growth models to support student-centered, competency-based learning.

For the last 11 years accountability has been guided by No Child Left Behind; as Congress considers ESEA reauthorization, it should encourage competency-based learning models and build accountability models tied to student success.

As we research growth models, we are realizing that such models are not all created equal. We will be posting on this topic in the near future.

ISSUE 2: Support performance-based systems of assessments.

Instead of relying entirely on end-of-course exams, support a varied assessment approach that more accurately assesses student knowledge and skills.

ISSUE 3: Support Federal Research for high-quality online learning.

There is a lack of quality research into the effectiveness of online and blended learning. We must fund the development of baseline data, and support research into the effectiveness of instructional models, approaches, and implementations for online and blended learning.

Keeping Pace 2011 addressed the issue of quality (see pp. 40-49), and we took a deeper look at the NCES report here in our blog. In both pieces we discuss the lack of quality research. While there has been a lot of press lately about the performance of online schools, most sources are extrapolating from very small samples, and not digging deep enough.

ISSUE 4: Support human capital development through redesigned pre-service/in-service training for online and blended learning.

As the demand for online learning opportunities increases, so does the need for the human capital to lead innovative, large-scale change in districts and programs.

ISSUE 5: Ensure reliable and ubiquitous student access to the Internet and quality learning materials.

As opportunities expand for some students, others are being left behind. Expanding broadband access, supporting models of online and blended learning, and expanding access to digital materials will level the playing field.

Most of our policy research will continue to focus on state legislatures and boards of education, and 2012 has already been an incredibly active year in many states. We will, however, begin looking more closely at federal issues and their impact on blended and online learning policy and practice.