Reading the policy tea leaves: A closer look at Washington State and a few other bellwethers

Susan Gentz is the founder of BSG Strategies and an education policy expert working to educate district leaders on funding, flexibility, and opportunities for innovation in state and federal policy.

The last two years have given policymakers across the nation an opportunity to examine, identify, and consider possible policy changes for online learning options. Too many education leaders at the state level (before the arrival of COVID-19) were convinced by influential entities that online learning was not really a needed option, and often that online learning was a less than ideal way to teach and learn. (Interestingly enough, over the course of the pandemic, many of these entities became the strongest advocates of keeping schools closed and advocating for remote options.) 

According to the Economist, "Over the past two years, America’s children have missed more time in the classroom than those in most of the rich world. School closures that began there in early 2020 dragged on until the summer of 2021. During that time the districts that stayed closed longest forced all or some of their children to learn remotely for twice as long as schools in Ireland, three times longer than schools in Spain and four times longer than in France."

Because so many government officials were reluctant to see how online pathways are part of the equity conversation, almost the entire country moved to “emergency remote learning” which is the complete opposite of high quality online learning. This has given states and districts mixed reviews on the importance of building or maintaining fully-online options for students.

Policymakers in many states  are starting the 2022 session grappling with policy ideas that either encourage or discourage online learning. Below we look at Washington and a few other states.

Washington: Considering a new law to allow for asynchronous instructional hours

Lawmakers in Washington are considering SB5375, which would:

• Allow school districts to provide up to 20 percent of the instructional hours per week using asynchronous instructional hours.

• Define asynchronous instructional hours as time during the school day that students are provided the opportunity to engage in an educational activity under the direction of school staff, but that does not include two- way interactive communication.

• Require public schools using asynchronous instructional hours to document the methods used to determine student interaction or participation.

During hearings in Washington, notes are published for the public to view. The notes for this bill show that those in favor of the bill testified that, “more flexibility in classroom instruction is needed to adjust to modern educational demands. The bill does not require remote learning, but instead allows flexibility for teachers to educate in different ways, such as mastery- based learning. Students should be able to utilize the educational setting that works best for them. This bill would allow students and teachers to have a breath of fresh air and the space to meet current requirements. Teachers would still be under contract hours so could hold office hours for students. Asynchronous learning is supported by many students as it allows for them to catch up with schoolwork.”

Those testifying in favor of the bill were students, and those opposed were executives from the nonprofit “Coalition 4 Kids”. At the hearing, the CEO of Coalition 4 Kids stated that, There is often a lack of quality in the education being provided to students when not in-person. Many students do not have the immediate supports needed to have asynchronous learning be successful. This bill is not equitable for students who have had a difficult time with asynchronous learning. It is difficult for many parents, including those in the healthcare field, to accommodate asynchronous learning. The asynchronous option should not be in place for elementary or middle school students,” and is also quoted as saying, “Asynchronous is the equivalent of giving a kid a textbook and telling them to turn to page 15 and answer the questions” She is clearly referring to emergency remote learning, and there is a huge opportunity to educate Washington lawmakers on what high quality online learning actually looks like in practice.

Oh, How the Turntables

As alluded to in the introduction, the tides are turning for online learning. Pre pandemc, online options/school choice policy has typically come out of Republican majority states, while strong union states have shied away from policies that promote or even allow for asynchronous options from a traditional brick-and-mortar district. 

Now we have a state like Washington introducing a bill sponsored by four Democrat Senators (Dhingra, Lovick, Nobles, Wellman and Wilson, C) while the Republican Senate Leader believes that this bill leads to a four day school week and it’s not the right answer for students. (The conversation is still too heavily revolving around seat-time, but that’s another blog.)

Then we have a state like Tennessee fighting to keep schools open and discouraging online learning opportunities. According to Chalkbeat Tennessee, “A key Senate panel approved legislation Wednesday that would provide public money for private school tuition for Tennessee students whose school systems do not offer in-person learning all year.” and “Unlike Tennessee’s 2019 voucher law that was promoted as helping low-income students who attend low-performing schools in a few districts, the new legislation seeks to incentivize all 147 of the state’s school systems to keep students learning in person amid COVID-19.”

This completely shifts the conversation from the intent of a voucher system being established to promote school choice and flexible learning pathways, to a system that seems to exist purely to force districts’ hands to stay 100% in person.

If You’re into Advocacy Work…

The hardest part about this conversation is that so many policymakers think it has to be an either or scenario: either fully remote or fully in-person. The word “blended” is rarely mentioned. Hybrid is used more frequently, but that still doesn’t speak to the true flexibility that online learning allows. Additionally, if those who were formerly opposed to fully online options are now advocating for this pathway, they should be educated on pathways to help make online learning engaging and effective, as well as policies that don’t penalize districts for offering it.

Asynchronous is also not synonymous with online but instead could mean opportunities for students to work alongside community members and form some true performance-based learning opportunities. There is so much to educate policymakers on, and in a shameless plug, I will invite you to join the DLC Policy Community as we work together to help policymakers understand all the options on the table, and that none of this is a zero sum game. Here’s to 2022 and leveraging unknowns to allow for more learning pathways for students.