Digital Learning in Texas

By Dave Myslinski
April 10, 2013

Yesterday, Texas Senate Bill 1298 was voted out of the Senate Committee on Education and will move to the full Senate for consideration. If implemented, the policies this bill creates would be a huge step forward in advancing course access and the customization of public education for Texas students.

Last month, Texas earned an overall C- on DLN’s Digital Learning Report Card, placing it 12^th in the country when measuring state policy alignment to the 10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning. This bill is part of an emerging trend we’re beginning to see across the country. States are creating clearinghouses where students can access high-quality courses. This leaves the content creation in the hands of the experts: institutions of higher education, traditional public schools and teachers, private providers, and other virtual schools.

SB 1298 contains several policies that would advance the 10 Elements in Texas, creating a more friendly environment for digital learning. Most notably, it would:

• Create a course access program. This program would create a statewide marketplace for students to customize their education to suit their needs. This would be available to all students in the state, at no cost to all students in district schools or open-enrollment charter schools.
• Uses existing funds, but uses them in a more efficient manner, expanding course options for students while ensuring they are of high quality.
• Allow flexibility for student advancement, allowing advancement to be based on content mastery instead of only looking at instructional time.
• Introduce an option for Interstate Course Reciprocity Agreements. Reciprocity agreements would lessen the burden on the state by creating a pathway for courses that have been vetted by other states to be fast-tracked for inclusion in the state course catalog.
• Retain flexibility for districts to provide funding only upon successful course completion.

These policies would be a huge leap forward for digital learning in Texas, but there are important components that could be improved and strengthened:

• The bill, as currently drafted, upholds existing caps on course tuition which are set at a level that will limit the number of options available to students. Flexibility should be granted to the Commissioner to approve tuition amounts at various levels to allow a wider variety of courses to be offered, including those that supply students with lab equipment, specialized training, or even computers to access the course.
• In order to earn a high school diploma, all students could be required to successfully complete an online course. Technology is integrated into every aspect of life, and students who aren’t taught to use technology will quickly fall behind. While a hefty fiscal note was ascribed to this provision in Texas this session it merits further study in the future.

I had the great privilege to testify on this important bill last week. The full text of my written testimony is below.
Written Testimony to the Senate Education Committee on CS SB 1298

Submitted on April 3^rd, 2013 by Dave Myslinski, State Policy Director, Digital Learning Now!

Chairman Patrick and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on CS SB 1298.

Last month, Digital Learning Now! released our second annual Digital Learning Report Card, which grades states according to how their state policies align to the 10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning. An important part of that report card is identifying areas of strength in states, as well as gaps in policy. Texas earned a grade of C-, ranking 12^th of the 50 states. Texas’ 83^rd legislative session provides the opportunity for the state to advance digital learning opportunities for students and move from the middle of the pack to being a clear leader in leveraging the power of technology in the classroom.

Over the past year, we have seen an impressive amount of legislation being introduced and passed across the country and we are seeing states craft innovative policies that are beginning to offer truly customized learning paths for all students. We have also been able to identify some positive trends that are emerging across the country, including some concepts addressed in this bill such as the advancement of course access.

CS SB 1298 would usher in a new level of course access for Texas students. These new initiatives allow students to take online or blended courses that best fit their unique needs. Utah, Georgia, Florida, and Louisiana all have introduced course access programs over the last two years.

While each initiative reflects their unique state circumstances, there are four main common principles:

1. The state’s role is approving courses and course providers, monitoring quality outcome indicators, and maintaining a comprehensive course catalog of all courses available statewide.
2. Students are empowered with the decision to enroll in a course. States address this differently, with Utah and Louisiana prioritizing students in persistently struggling schools.
3. States are using formulas to determine the proportion of funding that follows the child to the course.
4. States are rightly concerned about and committed to quality. States have created financial incentives for student completion and performance, such as final payment only upon successful course completion.

Texas has the opportunity to not only bring course access to students throughout the state, but to become the national leader in supporting next generation models of learning. CS SB 1298 allows public school students the ability to customize their learning experiences by choosing the best course for their needs—looking at format, schedule, and quality. Courses could be online, face-to-face, or in a blended learning format and are offered by a diverse group of providers ranging from institutions of higher education to private providers and other virtual schools. Based on experience in other states, we expect many entrepreneurial public schools and public school teachers to also apply to be providers.

It is critically important that the legislation include a common sense, workable funding solution. Louisiana’s course choice program, which uses similar language to what is included in the filed version of this bill (SB 1298), provides a good starting point for reference. It redirects existing funds on a per-course basis to the course provider. This allows courses to be provided with no additional costs to the state. Utah’s course access program has an annual appropriation of $250,000 for program administration, while existing student funding is used to pay for courses. The fiscal note exceeding 1 billion dollars that has been ascribed to the language as originally filed in SB 1298 stands in stark contrast with fiscal notes on very similar pieces of legislation that have passed in Louisiana and Utah which recognized a cost neutral impact and a cost savings impact to each state respectively.

Currently in Texas law, districts may pay online course providers a fraction of the course funding up front with the remainder being paid upon student completion of the course. We recommend preserving this policy—if not strengthening it—to ensure maximum accountability for course providers. Texas could take this one step further to award a portion of funds not only when the student completes the course, but after they pass a state approved end of course assessment. This would be a true pay-for-performance policy that awards not just completion but also high performance. This language should also be made more explicit to recognize that districts and charter schools pay the tuition for courses where students are enrolled.

The language in CS SB 1298 strengthens the ability for student progress to be funded based on performance, not solely seat time. This is a step forward in allowing students to customize their education and to advance upon mastery, instead of a pre-determined number of hours in a classroom.

In addition, a process should be created allowing the Commissioner flexibility to set different tuition levels to accommodate courses that are fully online, hybrid blended models, provide lab equipment, or other necessary equipment.

Texas is in the position to become a leader in providing online options for students. As you thoughtfully consider CS SB 1298 please keep in mind, national best practice shows that a strong course access bill meets each of these key reform principles:

1. Use Online Learning to Accelerate Education Reform: Online learning can help support other broad-based education reforms by making high-quality education options to every Texas family.
2. Make an Unwavering Commitment to Quality: The legislation should be open to any and all providers that submit to a rigorous review process. What should drive approval and renewal is improved student outcomes as measured by student growth, student proficiency, completion, AP/IB passing scores, and other similar outputs. Low-performing providers and schools should be shut down and high-performing ones should be scaled. Online providers have the capacity to generate a wide array of data on student engagement, performance, and other outcomes that can be useful for accountability purposes.
3. Expand Student Eligibility: Ensure all students in the state are provided access to high-quality online courses.
4. Reform Funding Streams: Reform funding models, particularly for online learning, to award completion and success instead of simply attendance. Funding should reinforce quality and improved outcomes.
5. Fund the Student: Fund the student instead of the system, so portions of the per-pupil funding follow the student to the course providers and schools serving them.

We stand by to help provide any technical support needed to strengthen the bill and help make an expanded digital learning program work for students in Texas.

Dave Myslinski serves as the State Policy Director for Digital Learning Now! at the Foundation for Excellence in Education. He previously has served as the Education Task Force Director at the American Legislative Exchange Council where he focused on digital learning, K-12 education reform, and higher education. Prior to that, Dave worked on state issues relating to health care and telecommunications. Dave is a graduate of Rutgers University.