Step Right Up...

The charter and for-profit schools generally presented themselves better than the state schools.  Better content. Better information design.  Better graphics design.  This is most likely due to the fact that they are competing directly for student dollars.  If state schools do not care about the competition, then everything is fine, but I noticed wording and dead links on their sites to the contrary.  Development funds are always an important resource that larger institutions are fortunate to have, but a strong web initiative can be developed completely and inexpensively with better planning, organization, and a little bit of creative drive.

The NACOL check list seemed to be mostly common sense sprinkled with odd and often vague requirements.

For example, "The course intentionally emphasizes 21st century skills in the course, including using 21st century skills in the core subjects, 21st century content, learning and thinking skills, ICT literacy, self-directed learning, global awareness, and includes 21st century assessments, as identified by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills."

What are 21st century skills?  Do we really want to focus on these 21st century skills in the online domain?  I was part of a cultural exchange program to Cuba a number of years ago and attended a lecture about their career planning at the university level.  The government assigned students to careers that they believed would be important in the coming century.  I chuckled at their planning then as I do about the partnership's now.  We should be very careful here.  I don't think we need radical shifts as much as we need better execution on what we do now.

Another checkbox that I had problems with was, "The course reflects multicultural education and is accurate, current and free of bias."

Is that possible?  How would Alpha Omega Academy score on that one?  How about coursework on wars or global warming?

The NACOL list did not speak to me about online coursework as much as it did about coursework in general.  There is nothing wrong with that, but it feels like it misses the mark coming from the NACOL.

I was disappointed to find more externally sourced content at my schools than their press, FAQs, and course descriptions led me to believe.  Is there greater value in internally produced content?  Do students care?  Do parents care?

I'm surprised how many minor contraints there are on the online learning environment: class pacing,  content sourcing, platforms, tools, etc...  For example, it looks to me like most courses still originate from a single source as opposed to being composed of the best content for each topic regardless of where it comes from.  

Isn't this truly the wave of the future?