University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The effect of reading proficiency on student success in online credit recovery programs

(USC Thesis Other)

The effect of reading proficiency on student success in online credit recovery programs

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY 1

THE EFFECT OF READING PROFICIENCY ON STUDENT SUCCESS IN
ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY PROGRAMS

by

Randolph P. Palisoc

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2013

Copyright 2013 Randolph P. Palisoc
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

2

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the following individuals and groups for the part that they
have played – whether they know it or not – in the creation of this dissertation.
I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Guilbert Hentschke (Chair), Dr. David
Marsh, and Dr. Darline Robles, for mentoring me and guiding me through this process. Also,
thank you to the staff and students of the charter public schools in this study for your
participation and for your insights that made this dissertation possible.
Salamat and mahalo to my family for teaching me the value of education. Thank you to
my wife, Meg, for believing in me and for being there on the many journeys we have shared,
including our time as both undergrads and as doctoral students at USC, as public school teachers,
and as founders of Synergy Academies in 2004. Thank you to my wife’s family for all your
support. Finally, thank you to the students and staff at Synergy Academies whose dreams of
brighter futures inspired this study. Every morning, our students at all of our campuses recite
these two little sentences that capture what Synergy is all about:
At Synergy, we’re all in this together because together we are better. We bring out the
best in each other and in ourselves, every day in every way.
This dissertation was a quest to find out just one more of those ways that we can bring out the
best in you.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

3
Table of Contents

List of Table ..................................................................................................................................... 5
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. 6
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 8
Background .......................................................................................................................... 8
Conceptual Underpinnings for the Study ............................................................................ 9
High School Dropouts ............................................................................................. 9
Online Credit Recovery ......................................................................................... 10
Reading Proficiency .............................................................................................. 11
Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................. 12
Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................... 13
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 14
Justifications for Research Questions ................................................................................ 14
Justifications for Research Question #1 ................................................................ 14
Justifications for Research Question #2 ................................................................ 15
Justifications for Research Question #3 ................................................................ 16
Limitations, Assumptions, and Design Controls ............................................................... 16
Definitions of Key Terms .................................................................................................. 17
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 17
Chapter Two: Literature Review ................................................................................................... 19
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 19
The High School Dropout Epidemic ................................................................................. 20
Individual and Societal Costs of Dropping Out of High School ........................... 20
Causes of High School Dropout ............................................................................ 22
Distance Learning, Online Learning, and Online Credit Recovery .................................. 26
Online Credit Recovery as a Potential Disruptive Innovation .......................................... 33
Self-Regulated Learning .................................................................................................... 34
Designing Online Learning Environments ........................................................................ 35
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 38
Chapter Three: Methodology ......................................................................................................... 39
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 39
Problem and Purpose Overview ........................................................................................ 39
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 41
Justifications for Research Questions ................................................................................ 41
Justifications for Research Question #1 ................................................................ 41
Justifications for Research Question #2 ................................................................ 42
Justifications for Research Question #3 ................................................................ 43
Population and Sample ...................................................................................................... 43
Data Collection and Instrumentation ................................................................................. 44
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 45
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 46
Chapter Four: Results ................................................................................................................... 48
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 48
Research Design and Methodology ................................................................................... 48
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

4
Demographic Information ................................................................................................. 50
Implementation of Online Credit Recovery ...................................................................... 54
Findings Pertaining to Research Question #1 .................................................................... 55
Findings Pertaining to Research Question #2 .................................................................... 63
Findings Pertaining to Research Question #3 .................................................................... 74
Student Completion of Online Credit Recovery Programs ............................................... 85
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 88
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................... 90
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 90
Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 93
Reading Skills Influence Student Performance ..................................................... 93
Basic Academic Skills Influence Student Performance ........................................ 94
The Human Touch Influences Student Performance ............................................. 96
Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................. 97
Implications ....................................................................................................................... 98
References ................................................................................................................................... 100
Appendix A: Interview Protocols ................................................................................................ 103
Appendix B: Anonymous Student Survey ................................................................................... 107

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

5
List of Tables
Table 1: Enrollment in 2012 ......................................................................................................... 49
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

6
List of Figures
Figure 1: Student ethnicity of schools in the study ...................................................................... 51
Figure 2: Percent of students qualifying for free or reduced price lunch ...................................... 51
Figure 3: Percent of students classified as English learners .......................................................... 52
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

7
Abstract
This qualitative study applied the theory that reading skills are predictive of high school
graduation to examine the impact that reading proficiency has on student success in online credit
recovery programs for credit deficient students, many of whom struggle with reading. Since
reading proficiency impacts academic achievement in general, this study sought to understand
whether reading proficiency impacts student success in online credit recovery programs in
particular. The study examined how schools identified students to participate in online credit
recovery, the program components that either facilitated or interfered with learning, and how
reading achievement impacted student success in these online programs. Through interviews
with school staff, observations of students working online, and anonymous student surveys, this
study captured the divergent experiences that five charter public high schools have had with
online credit recovery. Interview, observation, and survey data were transcribed and coded for
analysis. Findings indicated that convenience was a compelling reason to enroll students in
online credit recovery because it opened up opportunities for learning. However, learning online
was made more difficult because of the lack of an actual teacher, although a key advantage was
the ability to self-pace and to neither be rushed nor held back by one’s classmates. Reading
skills mattered in a text-based online environment because it could contribute to better
understanding of the material, it allowed for better self-regulation, and it saved time. This study
contributed to the research base for the relatively new phenomenon of online credit recovery, and
it provided insight into how to improve student success in these programs by taking students’
reading skills into account.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Background
Online credit recovery as a topic of study is actually the convergence of two separate
areas of study that in and of themselves are already of great interest to educators. The first area
of study, online learning, has recently captured the imagination educators, as it uses innovative
technologies to open up opportunities for learning that may not have existed before. The second
area of study, high school dropouts, is not about exciting future opportunities created by
technology, but rather, is about the missed opportunities caused when students fail to graduate
with their diplomas. Therefore, this study of online credit recovery explored how the recent
innovation of online learning may be able to help address the long-standing frustration of the
high school dropout problem that has vexed America’s public education system for several
decades.
Although online credit recovery may have great potential in addressing the long-standing
high school dropout problem, little is known about online credit recovery since it is a relatively
new phenomenon. In fact, online credit recovery still has a long way to go in terms of being a
viable solution to the high school dropout problem, especially since online courses have a high
dropout rate themselves. Online credit recovery does have the potential to be a disruptive
innovation that shifts the status quo and makes a meaningful dent in the high school dropout
problem. However, in order for online credit recovery to make that impact, the quality level of
the services that it provides must continually improve so that more students experience success
with these programs.
One specific factor that may impact student success in online credit recovery programs is
these students’ prior levels of reading proficiency. This factor of prior reading proficiency was
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

9
explored in this dissertation because success in reading has an impact on success in other areas as
well. For example, Hernandez (2011) explained that a national longitudinal study of 4,000
students showed that students who failed to master reading by the end of third grade often
struggled in the later grades and were four times as likely to drop out of high school without
earning their diplomas. Additionally, the Southern Regional Education Board (2009) explained
that reading with comprehension defines learning in every other curricular area. Therefore, since
past reading success may predict future success not just in reading but in many areas of one’s
life, it stood to reason that it might also have an impact on student success in online credit
recovery programs as well. Consequently, this dissertation sought to better understand whether
such a relationship existed.
Conceptual Underpinnings for the Study
High School Dropouts
The high school dropout problem has been an area of focus for the past several decades
because of the great individual and societal costs involved with not finishing high school. The
causes of dropping out of high school have been explored extensively. Suh and Suh (2007)
explained that three of the major factors that caused students to drop out were low grade point
averages, low socioeconomic status, and behavioral problems. They recommended that when
students displayed one or more of these risk factors, early intervention should take place, no
matter what their school level or age, because it can lower dropouts. Additionally, they
cautioned that school systems should not wait until high school to address the dropout issue
because it may be too late for most students.
Along the same lines, Tyler and Lofstrom (2009) pointed to a growing body of research
that indicated that dropout decisions were not made suddenly and did not come out of nowhere.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

10
Instead, dropping out was actually part of a longer process in which students become disengaged
with school over time. Dropping out of high school was a long-term process that often began
well before students reached high school, and the problem could be addressed before high
school.
A report by the Southern Regional Education Board (2009) offered insight into why
students became disengaged with school. In the report, the Southern Regional Education Board
(SREB) asserted that students who do not read with comprehension by the ninth grade were
destined to become high school dropouts. Therefore, the SREB recommended that reading with
comprehension should be the number one priority in middle schools and high schools since
reading defined learning in all other subject areas.
Online Credit Recovery
Online credit recovery, which is a recent innovation, is form of online learning, which
has been around for about twenty years. Additionally, online learning is a form of distance
learning, which has existed for over 100 years when it started at Penn State as correspondence
courses for rural students in the 1800s. For these rural students, time and space were the biggest
barriers to learning since their physical distance from campus limited their access to learning.
Therefore, distance learning via correspondence courses removed these barriers and allowed
them to participate in the education process.
With the advent of the Internet, distance learning led to online learning, and the time
barrier to learning was reduced further. Currently, the most cited reasons for online learning
pertain to convenience and time flexibility. Indeed, distance learning and online learning have
opened up opportunities for many students who would otherwise not have been able to take a
course.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

11
However, just because online learning has helped many students gain access to
educational opportunities, it does not mean that it is currently appropriate for all types of
students. Online learning is more difficult than face-to-face learning because of the physical
separation between teacher and student and because of the isolated nature of the learning
experience. As such, it requires a certain type to student to be successful at online learning.
Desai, Hart, and Richards (2008) explained that students in online learning courses need
greater maturity and discipline compared to traditional courses. They explained that if students
are not accustomed to a less structured and more independent environment, they might
experience frustration, anxiety and confusion. Additionally, Banas and Emory (1998) described
that distance learners need to be more focused, good managers of time, independent workers,
collaborative, self-motivated, self-disciplined, and assertive. Unfortunately, these descriptors of
the ideal distance learners are probably in direct contrast to students who need credit recovery. If
students displayed the characteristics above, they probably would have passed all their classes in
the first place, obviating the need for credit recovery.
Reading Proficiency
According to Hernandez (2011), educators have long had the intuition of knowing the
importance of mastering reading skills by the end of third grade. Students who are not proficient
readers by the end of third grade struggled in subsequent grades and were more likely to drop out
of school. Hernandez described a national longitudinal study of nearly 4,000 students that
confirmed a link between reading proficiency at the end of third grade, poverty, and high school
graduation. The study showed that poor readers were four times as likely to drop out of school
without earning a high school diploma. Additionally, the worst readers were six times as likely
to drop out. These statistics showed the tremendous impact that reading skills have on successful
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

12
high school completion. Online credit recovery programs are increasingly becoming
commonplace components for high school programs, and reading skills may have an impact on
the success of these programs as well.
The Southern Regional Education Board (2009) recently published a guide asserting that
adolescent reading should be an immediate priority in middle schools and high schools. The
SREB explained that reading with comprehension defined learning in all subject areas, and
students who performed poorly in reading tended to struggle in other subject areas as well,
including history, science, and mathematics. In their guide, the SREB explained that
traditionally, reading instruction has been the purview of elementary schools, and reading
instruction usually stopped after the primary grades. However, the type of reading that students
engaged in changed as students get older. For example, younger students tended to read more
narrative texts in school. As they progressed into middle school and high school, they needed to
increasingly be able to use informational and expository texts, which required different skill sets
from narrative texts. As a result, the SREB explained that reading experts began to realize that
reading instruction should continue through the middle grades and on through high school.
These studies underscored the importance of reading comprehension not just at the elementary
school level, but at the high school level as well.
Statement of the Problem
As an innovation that provides greater access to learning, online credit recovery has the
potential to meaningfully address the high school dropout problem that has confounded
America’s public schools for several decades. Online credit recovery is growing rapidly, and
many resources are being directed toward this innovation. As online credit recovery programs
become more readily available, larger numbers of students may end up enrolling in these
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

13
programs. Unfortunately, Uhlig (2002) explained the online learning is not for everyone and that
it is harder than face-to-face learning. Therefore, for the increasing number of students who
enroll in online credit recovery, it will either be an opportunity to finally complete a course for
which success had previously been out of reach, or another opportunity to fail the course yet
again. This all depends on how the program is implemented. As such, it is important to
understand how to help students experience greater success in online credit recovery programs,
especially in light of how challenging these often text-based courses can be in comparison with
face-to-face classes.
While there are many factors that affect students’ success in both face-to-face courses as
well as in online courses, one especially important factor is reading proficiency. Hernandez
(2011) explained that reading proficiency has predicted success several years into the future.
The SREB (2009) explained that reading with comprehension defined learning in all other areas.
It stood to reason, then, that reading proficiency could also impact student success in online
credit recovery programs as well. Indeed, Sadik and Reisman (2004) pointed out that most
online learning programs have been heavily text based, which necessitated that students have
solid spelling, vocabulary, grammar, typing, and writing skills. Therefore, research needed to be
conducted to better understand the impact that reading proficiency has on student success in
online credit recovery programs so that these programs can be designed to actually help students
rather than exacerbating the problem and creating repeated course failure.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study was to understand the impact that reading proficiency has on
student success in online credit recovery programs. Since reading proficiency impacts academic
achievement in general, this study sought to understand whether reading proficiency impacts
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

14
student success in online credit recovery programs in particular. The study also explored how
high schools have designed their online credit recovery programs in order to increase student
achievement, and it explored students’ experiences taking these courses. This provided insight
to practitioners interested in developing effective online credit recovery programs for their
students.
Research Questions
1. What criteria do schools use to identify students for participation in credit recovery
courses?
2. What are the components of online credit recovery programs that schools feel either
facilitate learning or make it more difficult for students to complete a course?
3. How does past reading achievement impact student success in online credit recovery
programs?
Justifications for Research Questions
Justification for Research Question #1: What Criteria Do Schools Use to Identify Students
for Participation in Credit Recovery Courses?
This study hypothesized that students are placed in online credit recovery out of
convenience and sheer necessity and not in the hopes that it will provide a better learning
experience than in face-to-face classes. Reisetter and Boris (2004) explained why online
learning was appealing to students at the postsecondary level. They explained how studies
revealed that convenience, time flexibility, a lack of commute, and not having to “sit through” a
class were reasons that students gave for using online learning. Hsu, Ching, Mathews, and Carr-
Chellman (2009) supported this finding and enumerated the advantages of online learning,
including breaking geographic barriers, saving time, cutting transportation expenses, and
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

15
allowing for flexible scheduling. Interestingly, “better learning” was not a commonly cited
reason for students enrolling in online courses.
At the high school level, due to the relative novelty of online credit recovery, there was a
lack of research that provided insight as to how students were identified for participation in
online credit recovery. However, based on the reasons cited by students at the postsecondary
level, this study hypothesized that the need for convenience and time flexibility were criteria that
high schools used to place students in online credit recovery, especially for students who were
under the time pressure of trying to graduate on time. Additionally, based on findings at the
postsecondary level, this study hypothesized that the provision of a more effective learning
experience than in face-to-face classes was not be a reason that high schools placed students in
online credit recovery courses. If this were the case, it would be in disregard to Uhlig’s (2002)
findings, in which he warned that online learning is not for everybody because in its current
state, online learning is not easier than traditional learning.
Justification for Research Question #2: What Are the Components of Online Credit
Recovery Programs That Schools Feel Either Facilitate Learning or Make It More Difficult
for Students to Complete a Course?
This study hypothesized that the text-based interface of online learning made it more
difficult for students who have low levels of reading proficiency. Also, students with high levels
of reading proficiency were hypothesized to perform better than students with low reading
proficiency. This hypothesis was formed because Sadik and Reisman (2004) pointed out that
most online learning programs are heavily text based and necessitate strong literacy skills on the
part of the student. Additionally, this study hypothesized that online credit recovery programs
that promoted self-regulated learning made it easier for students to complete a course than did
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

16
programs that did not offer tools that promoted self-regulated learning. Prior research showed
that self-regulated learning could have an impact on student success in online learning.
Justification for Research Question #3: How Does Past Reading Achievement Impact
Student Success in Online Credit Recovery Programs?
Based on prior research on the long-term impact of reading proficiency in multiple areas,
this study hypothesized that prior reading achievement had an impact on student success in
online credit recovery programs. Since poor readers were four times as likely to drop out of
school according to Hernandez (2011), it stood to reason that they were likely to struggle in
online credit recovery programs as well.
Limitations, Assumptions, and Design Controls
This study, while it could be informative, had a number of limitations. First, the study
was limited in scale and only included school personnel involved in online credit recovery at five
high schools in the Los Angeles area. The study was limited to approximately 405 students.
Additionally, the high schools were located primarily in urban areas with predominantly
minority populations (Latino and African American). As such, the study was not generalizable
outside of the specific schools in the study.
Another limitation was that each of the schools involved had very different forms of
online credit recovery. Each school used different content providers (such as Aventa Learning or
Apex Learning), and there were different models of implementation. Some used the program as
part of the regular school day, and others had students using the programs after school, on
weekends, or during the summer. As such, it made it difficult to directly compare the findings at
each school against each other.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

17
Definition of Key Terms
Academic Performance Index: The Academic Performance Index (API) was an index
score that measured academic performance of California public schools in a variety of measures,
including standardized test scores.
California Standards Test: The California Standards Tests (CSTs) were standardized
criterion referenced tests that were administered to California public school students in grades 2-
11 during the spring semester of each school year. The tests were based on the California
content standards.
Charter Management Organization: A Charter Management Organization (CMO) was an
organization that operated two or more charter public schools.
Online Credit Recovery: Online credit recovery was defined as an online program
designed for students to retake a course that they had previously failed so that they could earn
credit toward high school graduation.
Standalone Charter School: A standalone charter school was a single public charter
school that was not governed or managed by a Charter Management Organization.
Summary
The high school dropout problem is a topic of great concern, and it is a chronic problem
that has yet to be solved in America’s public schools, even after several decades of national
effort and attention. The recent innovation of online credit recovery has the potential to be a
meaningful solution to the high school dropout problem. However, due to the relative novelty of
online credit recovery programs, these programs are not yet fully understood, and their impact is
unclear, especially since these dropout recovery programs have high dropout rates themselves.
A factor that can make these programs more effective involves raising students’ levels of reading
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

18
comprehension since reading with comprehension impacts achievement in other subjects. The
next section will review literature on the high school dropout problem, online learning, and
reading comprehension as well as how these topics are interrelated.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

19
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
As technology has advanced, and as powerful computers and high-speed networking have
become more ubiquitous in society, we have seen numerous solutions emerge that leverage the
power of technology in multiple industries. For example, the Internet has transformed the
commerce industry by making shopping simpler and more instantaneous for consumers. The
telecommunication industry has gone through dramatic changes as well, as e-mail, text
messaging, videoconferencing, and social networking have opened up new avenues of
communication for people. The finance industry has been transformed as consumers can now
reliably conduct their banking and even participate in stock trading online. Even the education
industry has been transformed as online learning has made attaining an education easier for some
students.
One specific educational area in which technology can help to provide solutions pertains
to the chronic and severe problem of high school dropouts. Specifically, online credit recovery
is a new branch of distance learning that targets students who are missing credits, are at risk of
not finishing high school, and are consequently at risk of dropping out. However, adequate
solutions in this area have been elusive. Computers and high speed networking have led to great
success and advances in other industries, but in terms of helping students who are performing so
poorly in high school that they are missing credits and are at risk of dropping out, progress has
been made, but there is still a long way to go.
This literature review first examined the subject of high school dropouts and the students
who are in need credit recovery. In particular, this literature review examined the topic of
reading proficiency and its impact on high school achievement and high school graduation.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

20
Then, it examined how online credit recovery, as a form of distance learning, fit in as a possible
solution to the high school dropout epidemic. Additionally, online credit recovery has the
potential to be a disruptive innovation, and the future steps that can be taken to cause that to
occur were examined.
The High School Dropout Epidemic
According to Tyler and Lofstrom (2009), American high schools have played an
important role in developing the human capital that has made America successful, and they have
done a remarkable job of successfully educating millions of students throughout the twentieth
century. However, Tyler and Lofstrom go on to explain that over the past few decades, our
nation’s high schools have come under increasing scrutiny because there are also too many
millions of other students who have not experienced that same level of success, have dropped out
of school, and have not earned their high school diploma. In fact, approximately one million
students drop out of school each year, underscoring the monumental challenge that high schools
face. Heckman and LaFontaine (2007) estimated the graduation rate to be about 75% to 78%
nationwide, with only 72% of Hispanic students and 65% of African American students
graduating from high school. As a result, Suh and Suh (2007) explained that since the 1970’s,
increasing effort and attention has been focused on reducing the dropout rate, especially in light
of the individual and societal costs of not completing high school.
Individual and Societal Costs of Dropping Out of High School
One of the individual costs of dropping out of high school has been lower lifetime
earnings (Tyler & Loftstrom, 2009). Studies showed that on the average, high school dropouts
earned 30% to 35% less than those who have completed high school. Rouse estimated that over
the course of a lifetime, high school dropouts earned $260,000 less than high school graduates
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

21
(as cited in Tyler & Lofstrom, 2009, p. 87). Additionally, high school dropouts experienced
higher rates of unemployment, and they worked fewer weeks each year. Finally, high school
dropouts who were employed were less likely to have employee benefits such as health insurance
and retirement plans.
In addition to the individual costs of dropping out, Tyler and Loftstrom (2009) explained
that there are also a number of societal costs. One of the societal costs, which was tied directly
to the individual cost of lower lifetime earnings, was that high school dropouts generated fewer
tax revenues. On the average, high school dropouts contributed only approximately 42% as
much in tax revenues compared to high school graduates (Rouse, 2007). Secondly, not only did
high school dropouts contribute less to the public tax base, they also incurred greater public
spending expenditures through public assistance and health care programs. This made sense
since they were less able to take care of themselves financially and were more dependent on
public assistance. Estimates showed that welfare expenditures would fall by $1.8 billion if
welfare recipients who were high school dropouts actually finished high school instead. A third
societal cost of dropping out has been higher crime rates. In fact, there has been an
overrepresentation of dropouts in America’s prisons, with dropouts making up 68% of the prison
population. Finally, Tyler and Lofstrom suggested that dropouts might be less effective at
parenting. This is of particular concern since poor parenting may lead to a repeat of the vicious
cycle of poverty when dropouts start having their own children who may themselves be
unsuccessful in school.
Since there are many individual and societal costs that have been incurred when students
drop out of school, much attention has been devoted to this issue. According to Balfanz,
Bridgeland, Bruce, and Fox (2012), for example, the goal of the “Civic Marshall Plan” to build a
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

22
Grad Nation was to have a 90% graduation rate for the class of 2020, which is composed of
students who are currently in the fifth grade as of 2013. Balfanz et al. explained that during the
eight years between 2001 and 2009, the national graduation rate increased a grand total of three
and a half percentage points to 75.5%. Unfortunately, they explained that this improvement rate
of less than half a percent per year was not nearly fast enough to reach the stated goal of a 90%
graduation rate for the class of 2020. In order to get anywhere close to that goal, the causes of
and possible solutions to the high school dropout problem needed to be better understood.
Causes of High School Dropout
The research literature cited multiple reasons that students drop out of high school.
Bruce, Bridgeland, Fox, and Balfanz (2011) explained that the ABCs that provided an early
warning system for high school dropout were Attendance, Behavior, and Course performance.
Nearly identically, Suh and Suh (2007) explained that three of the major factors that caused
students to drop out were low grade point averages, low socioeconomic status, and behavioral
problems. They recommended that when students displayed one or more of these risk factors,
early intervention should take place, no matter what their school level or age, because it could
lower dropout rates. They cautioned, however, that if school systems waited until high school to
address the dropout issue, it might be too late for most students. Therefore, the dropout dilemma
is not a problem only for high schools to address, but all educators should be cognizant of the
factors of low GPA, low socioeconomic status, and behavioral problems, even at the middle
school and elementary school levels.
In line with this view of the high school dropout problem being a long-term process,
Tyler and Lofstrom (2009) pointed to a growing body of research that indicated that dropout
decisions were not made suddenly and did not come out of nowhere. Instead, dropping out was
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

23
actually part of a longer process in which students became disengaged with school over time. To
use an analogy, when a couple that has been dating for a number of years decides to break up, it
is not always because of a sudden event in an otherwise healthy relationship. Oftentimes, the
relationship had been souring and had been in decline for a number of years, and when the
breakup finally occurred, it was not a surprise when the couple’s friends say, “We saw it
coming.” This was why it was important to understand the notion suggested by Suh and Suh
(2007) and by Tyler and Lofstrom that dropping out of high school was a long-term process that
often began well before students reached high school, and the problem could be addressed before
students reached high school.
Indeed, there were other reasons that were sudden in nature that caused students to drop
out. Tyler and Lofstrom (2009) described these causes as early adult responsibilities, namely
teenage pregnancy and having to work extensively while in school. Fletcher and Wolfe (2008)
showed that teenage parenthood decreased the graduation rate by 5% to 10% (as cited in Tyler &
Lofstrom, 2009, p. 85). Additionally, studies showed that students who had jobs and worked
more than twenty hours a week were more likely to drop out. However, not all students who
dropped out of high school were teenage parents nor had to work more than twenty hours a week
to support their families, and consequently, the primary reason for dropping out as reported by
students was disengagement from school, which occurred over time.
An example of disengagement from school described by Bruce et al. (2011) was
absenteeism, which was the “A” in the ABCs of early warning indicators for high school
dropout. Other indicators of disengagement with school cited by Tyler and Lofstrom (2009)
were student responses such as, “I didn’t like school,” or, “The classes are boring.”
Unfortunately, while comments such as these may accurately reflect students’ sentiments
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

24
towards school, they are not very actionable for school officials. To offer more insight as to why
students did not like school, why they found it boring, and why they were disengaged from
school, it was helpful to review a report by the Southern Regional Education Board (2009)
entitled A Critical Mission: Making Adolescent Reading an Immediate Priority in SREB States.
In the report, the SREB asserted that adolescent reading should be the number one
priority in middle schools and high schools because reading with comprehension defined
learning in every subject. Additionally, too many adolescents could not read well enough to
succeed in school or in their future careers. Further, not only did students with poor reading
skills struggle in English classes, but they also struggled in and became disengaged from other
classes, including mathematics, science, and history. The SREB forewarned that students who
still struggled with reading by the ninth grade were destined to become high school dropouts.
This explained why the SREB believed that reading with comprehension should be the number
one priority in middle school and high school since it kept students engaged in the academic
content of school and prevented them from dropping out. The SREB explained that for most
public school students, formal reading instruction ended after the early grades, but researchers
began realizing that it should continue through high school since reading skills did not advance
automatically just because students got older.
Educators have long had the intuition of knowing the importance of mastering reading
skills by the end of third grade (Hernandez, 2011). Students who were not proficient readers by
the end of third grade struggled as they progressed through the subsequent grades and were more
likely to drop out of school. In national longitudinal study of nearly 4,000 students, researchers
confirmed a link between reading proficiency at the end of third grade, poverty, and high school
graduation. In the study, poor readers were four times as likely as proficient readers to drop out
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

25
of school without earning a high school diploma. Additionally, the worst readers were six times
as likely to drop out. These statistics showed the tremendous impact that reading skills had on
successful high school completion.
Teacher quality was yet another factor mentioned by Tyler and Lofstrom (2009) that
influenced the dropout rate. In fact, Darling-Hammond (1999) explained that teacher quality
was the most important factor affecting student achievement, and it was a more important factor
than student socioeconomic demographics. Haycock (1998) supported this view of the effect of
teacher quality on student achievement. For example, she pointed out that a group of fourth
graders who were assigned three consecutive effective teachers in a row raised their reading
scores from the fifty-ninth percentile to the seventy-sixth percentile by the end of the sixth grade,
a gain of seventeen points. Unfortunately, students in urban schools who were at risk of
dropping out were repeatedly assigned the lowest quality teachers.
As shown in this section, the high school dropout rate is a pressing concern that has
persisted for several decades. Many efforts are being made to address this problem from a
variety of angles, and one of those recent efforts is the use of online credit recovery. Online
credit recovery, which is a form of online learning, has the potential to be a disruptive innovation
described by Christensen and Horn (2008) that dramatically changes the way we educate
students and address the high school dropout problem. In order to better understand how that
can take place, it was helpful to next examine the literature on distance and online learning. The
following section explains distance and online learning as well as describes how online credit
recovery fits in as a potentially disruptive innovation that can help address the chronic problem
of excessive high school dropout rates.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

26
Distance Learning, Online Learning, and Online Credit Recovery
Again, the high school dropout epidemic is a problem that American public schools have
grappled with for several decades. Recently, online credit recovery has garnered much attention
as a possible solution to the high school dropout problem. Online credit recovery is a new form
of online learning, and online learning is a form of distance learning. This section first discusses
distance learning in general, then takes a closer look at online learning as a subset of distance
learning, and finally examines online credit recovery as a subset of online learning.
At first glance, distance and online learning appeared to be a rather recent innovation in
education. However, according to Banas and Emory (1998), distance learning predated the
Internet and can be traced back to the 1800s when Penn State developed a print-based
correspondence study program in 1892. Penn State’s correspondence program was designed to
give rural students greater access to the university curriculum, especially at a time when
geographic distances and remote populations presented significant transportation barriers to
learning. At that time, communication delays and student isolation were givens since long
distances physically separated the student and the teacher. However, it at least gave students
access to the learning despite the physical separation from campus, which was the purpose of
distance education. By 1992, over 22 universities were providing distance programs to students
worldwide.
Delivery technologies have advanced dramatically since then with the advent of the
Internet, which have mitigated time delays and helped lower feelings of isolation (Banas &
Emory, 1998). By 1993, 1.3 million students participated in distance learning. In 1996, over
1,200 four-year colleges and universities, or 55% of these institutions, offered distance and
online learning courses. These figures indicated that online learning, which emerged from print-
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

27
based distance learning, has had a large and growing presence in postsecondary schools for
nearly twenty years.
In addition to colleges and universities, there were other organizations that have provided
distance and online learning to adults. For example, the United States Army has used distance
learning to train soldiers and civilian employees (Banas & Emory, 1998). The Army recognized
that distance learning might not be appropriate for all types of training (for example, training that
required physical skill), but that it was a good option for cognitive courses. The Army had over
1,000 courses, and it could rapidly deploy a significant number of those courses via distance
learning.
Like the Army and the rest of the military, businesses and government agencies have also
taken advantage of distance and online learning by training adults through computer based
training, or CBT (Morrison & Anglin, 2005). Between 2001 and 2003, the number of e-learning
courses was expected to double because of the benefits that distance and online learning offered.
Morrison and Anglin described how IBM was able to save $20 million in training costs, while
Ernst and Young was able to reduce their training costs by 35%.
An area of great interest for all organizations that have used distance and online learning,
including colleges and universities, the military, government agencies, or businesses, was the
quality and effectiveness of these programs (Banas & Emory, 1998). According to
postsecondary studies that used measures such as test scores and grades, there were no
significant differences between distance learning and traditional on-campus learning. When the
Army conducted its evaluation, it measured training effectiveness using task-performance
criteria, examinations, and job-performance surveys. The Army found that distance learning led
to results that equaled or exceeded traditional in-person training.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

28
This section showed that while online learning is a relatively new phenomenon, distance
learning in general predated the Internet and had a long history. Distance learning has been used
not only by colleges and universities, but also by the military, government agencies, and by
private businesses. Additionally, distance learning could indeed be implemented successfully
with positive learning outcomes, as evidenced by evaluations conducted both inside and outside
of academia.
It is important to note, however, the when looking at how distance learning has been used
successfully in the past, all of the examples above have involved capable adult learners who have
already finished high school and are now pursuing their postsecondary degrees or are already
gainfully employed in the workforce. The main target audience for credit recovery, on the other
hand, does not comprise of accomplished adults, but rather are adolescents who have not yet
finished high school and are in fact struggling to do so. It is important to keep this distinction in
mind as we examine the unique issues confronting online credit recovery as a form of online and
distance learning.
Currently, postsecondary institutions have embraced distance learning and are
implementing it more and more extensively. According to Maring, Costello, and Plack (2008),
reports by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) indicated that the number of
postsecondary institutions offering distance education programs nearly doubled between 1994
and 1998. Hsu et al. (2009) cited an annual report by the Sloan Consortium that showed nearly
20% of higher education students in the United States in 2006 took at least one online course. Of
these students, 86% of them were undergraduate students.
Not only were many more students using online learning, research literature showed that
distance learning was a pedagogically sound approach for them at the postsecondary level and
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

29
that it was just as effective as traditional learning (Maring et al., 2008). Zhang (2005) cited that
other studies confirmed this finding. These figures and findings showed that online learning
seemed well suited for the adult learners in higher education, and Reisetter and Boris (2004)
described the movement toward online learning in colleges and universities as “inevitable.”
Reisetter and Boris (2004) also explained why online learning was so appealing to
students at the postsecondary level. They explained how studies revealed that convenience, time
flexibility, a lack of commute, and not having to “sit through” a class were reasons that students
gave for using online learning. Hsu et al. (2009) supported this finding and enumerated the
advantages of online learning, including breaking geographic barriers, saving time, cutting
transportation expenses, and allowing for flexible scheduling. Additionally, online learning
allowed large universities with physical constraints on classroom space to more easily provide
mega-sections for undergraduate students taking their requisite general education courses.
Interestingly, “better learning” was the one reason that was not commonly cited as a justification
for online learning. However, “better learning” is precisely what struggling high school students
need to make it to graduation, and this has design implications for credit recovery programs at
the high school level.
While online learning has the many benefits cited above, its current form did come with a
well-documented number of barriers. Chyung described that one of the challenges was that
students often felt overwhelmed by too much information (as cited in Reisetter & Boris, 2004, p.
163). This feeling of overwhelm was caused by information overload that required extraneous
processing, which then lead to cognitive overload and no learning (Mayer, 2010). Ironically,
therefore, access to information was both one of the great blessings of online learning as well as
a curse when information was given in excess.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

30
Another common barrier for online learning was the delayed nature of feedback between
student and instructor (Hsu et al., 2009). As explained earlier, time delays have been a
characteristic of distance learning ever since its beginnings as correspondence courses at rural
Penn State in the 1800s. While the current speed of the Internet has helped to mitigate these
effects, delayed feedback and delayed communication have still presented problems. For
example, a student may ask a professor a question via e-mail and not get a response until one
hour later. When distance learning began as correspondence courses over a century ago, a one-
hour turnaround time for feedback would have been impossible via mail. However, that same
one-hour turnaround time can seem excessive and can be frustrating to students growing up in
the Internet age who are accustomed to instantaneous communication on their mobile devices.
Ironically, again, one of online learning’s benefits (time considerations) could also be a
drawback. Asynchronous learning breaks the barriers of time and allows learning to occur
“anytime, anywhere.” However, even though the content may be available anytime the student
wants it, the instructor may not be available every time he or she was needed.
A third barrier that also involved time occurred when students ran out of time and were
unable to keep pace with the course. Uhlig (2002) explained that online learning courses were
normally accelerated. On one hand, this acceleration that came with asynchronous learning
could be an advantage. Specifically, if students could finish a course in shorter amount of time
than it normally took, they were able to do so in order to get ahead. On the other hand, Uhlig
explained that once a student fell behind, it was nearly impossible for him or her to catch up with
the accelerated content.
Reisetter and Boris (2004) had similar findings and found that time management was a
barrier for many students. In their study of university students taking an online course, 27% of
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

31
students confided that they were unprepared for the amount of time that the online course
demanded, and 25% had difficulty completing tasks on a timely basis. Students in the online
program advised future students taking the class that it was especially important for them to not
fall behind.
The important insight here is that these comments about the dangers of falling behind
because of the difficulty in catching up came from university students who had already
successfully made it past high school and were now pursuing their college degrees. This has
tremendous implications for high school credit recovery programs because the students in need
of credit recovery have already committed in their traditional classes what they can ill afford to
do in an online class – they have fallen behind.
Consequently, Uhlig (2002) warned that online learning is not for everybody because in
its current state, it is not easier than traditional learning. Uhlig explained that while online
learning does offer greater freedom and flexibility, it also requires greater personal
responsibility. It was not surprising, therefore, when Reisetter and Boris (2004) explained that
nationally, about 50% of students enrolled in online courses failed to complete the course.
Currently, this presents a frustrating quandary that online credit recovery programs need to solve.
The students who need credit recovery have failed a class in a traditional format, and they are
likely to fail yet again when they retake it in an often more difficult online format.
Harrington (1999) explained that students could perform well in an online class, but it
depended on how they performed in the past. In a study of a statistics course presented in both a
traditional and online format, students in a traditional setting earned high grades overall,
regardless of their undergraduate GPA. Students in the online class who had high GPAs also
performed just as well as did students in the traditional class. However, students in the online
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

32
class who had low GPAs performed worse than both students in the same online class who had
high GPAs and worse than students who took the traditional course. In other words, low
performing students who were placed in online courses performed even worse than before. This
raised the concern that online credit recovery, which mainly consists of low-performing students,
may actually be widening the achievement gap instead of narrowing it.
While Uhlig (2002) explained that online learning is not for everybody, as shown above,
there was also literature that explained the type of students who were well suited for an online
format. Desai et al. (2008) explained that students in online learning courses needed greater
maturity and discipline compared to traditional courses. They explained that if students were not
accustomed to a less structured and more independent environment, they might experience
frustration, anxiety and confusion. Additionally, Banas and Emory (1998) described that
distance learners needed to be more focused, good managers of time, independent, collaborative,
self-motivated, self-disciplined, and assertive.
Unfortunately, these descriptors of the ideal distance learner were probably in direct
contrast to students who needed credit recovery. If students displayed the characteristics above,
they would probably have passed all their classes in the first place, obviating the need for credit
recovery. Nationally, Reisetter and Boris (2004) described online course participants as young,
professional, female, part-time students who have family responsibilities. For this group of
people, they did benefit from online learning because it provided them with the convenience and
access that online learning did do a good job of providing.
To recap, online learning could work successfully, especially for mature adult learners
who have done well in the past. Even so, online learning as it exists today is still challenging for
even adults to take advantage of, as evidenced by the 50% dropout rate in online courses. A
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

33
relatively new audience for online learning that has not yet been adequately served is students in
need of credit recovery. These students are adolescents who have struggled in traditional classes
and may likely struggle even more in an online course. As Uhlig (2002) warned, online learning
is not for everyone, at least in its current state. However, giving up on online credit recovery
because its current state is imperfect may be a bad idea as well as it would dismiss the potential
of online credit recovery as a future disruptive innovation (Christensen, Horn, & Johnson, 2011).
Online Credit Recovery as a Potential Disruptive Innovation
Christensen et al. (2011) explained that there are two types of innovations – sustaining
innovations and disruptive innovations. Existing companies brought about sustaining
innovations by making incremental improvements to existing products and services for existing
consumers. Disruptive innovations, on the other hand, shifted the status quo in dramatic fashion
and changed entire industries. Disruptive innovations did this not by competing for existing
consumers but rather by competing against non-consumption. For example, Sony introduced the
disruptive innovation of the pocket transistor radio, which was actually of lower quality than
existing tabletop radios (Christensen & Horn, 2008). However, Sony marketed the pocket
transistor radio to teenagers who could not previously afford a radio because to this market, a
low quality radio was better than no radio at all. As technology improved, quality improved, and
Sony already had a foothold on the new market that it created because it was the one that
introduced the disruptive technology.
In much the same way, online credit recovery has the potential to be a disruptive
innovation if its quality can improve. Watson and Gemin (2008) explained that online credit
recovery has great promise because its focus is on helping students stay in school rather than
exiting from their K-12 education without successfully completing it. In other words, it can be a
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

34
disruptive innovation that competes against “non-consumption” (dropping out of school). As
described above, online learning in its current state can be a challenge, even for accomplished
students, as evidenced by the 50% dropout rate in online programs. Since online credit recovery
programs are relatively new, there is not yet a substantial body of research on online credit
recovery, but it has shown potential in the Denver, Volusia, and McKinney school districts
(O’Hanlon, 2009). Online credit recovery programs such as Aventa Learning and Apex
Learning are giving students another chance that they may not have had before. In order for
online credit recovery to become a disruptive innovation, it now needs to give students not just
another chance but a better chance. Although online credit recovery is new and although little
has been published about it, literature did exist that offered lessons learned, which can be used to
design online credit recovery programs that more successfully serve students in the future.
Self-Regulated Learning
Hsu et al. (2009) suggested that self-regulated learning (SRL) skills were critical for
students taking online courses because these courses required independent learning,
metacognition, self-motivation, and personal responsibility. In fact, Hu and Gramling (2009)
explained that self-regulation was a powerful predictor of academic achievement. These self-
regulation skills were the very skills that credit recovery students may have struggled with. To
address this issue, Hsu et al. described two practical tools, an online calendar and an online grade
book, that students found to be especially helpful in exercising self-regulated learning skills.
An online calendar allowed students to engage in advanced planning and made it easier
for them to be personally responsible by keeping themselves on track with assignments. As
explained earlier, a lack of feedback from instructors was one of the drawbacks of online
learning. However, having an online grade book allowed students to monitor their progress and
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

35
gave them valuable feedback about their performance. This gave them the information they
needed to make any necessary behavioral changes. These two tools allowed students to better
self-regulate and engage in goal setting, effort control, and time management (Hu & Gramling,
2009).
Designing Online Learning Environments
In addition to self-regulation tools, Morrison and Anglin (2005) insisted that an
instructional design approach should be used to modify materials for online delivery and to avoid
creating “shovelware.” Shovelware described material that existed in one medium (i.e., printed
materials) and was simply dumped as quickly as possible into a new medium (i.e., online) with
little regard for appearance or usability. Shovelware ignores instructional design principles such
as providing appropriate support for students. Morrison and Anglin argued that such courses
were not truly instructional tools and should instead be labeled as “Web-based information.” For
credit recovery students, it was important that they were exposed to quality instructional tools
and not just web-based information that would overwhelm and further frustrate them.
In order to better design online courses, Morrison and Anglin (2005) explained that
existing materials should be reverse engineered using an instructional disassembler tool. In this
way, content is broken into its smallest units, allowing course designers to more easily figure out
what kind of scaffolding students need along the way. The instructional disassembler tool even
went so far as to take complex sentences from the course and to break them down into phrases
and single ideas that were much easier for the learner to digest. Additionally, content was
broken down into different content types in order to determine if they were being taught in an
adequate manner (clear presentation and sufficient practice). Content types included facts,
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

36
concepts, principles and rules, and procedures. These content types were consistent with the
taxonomy of learning presented by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001).
Sadik and Reisman (2004) described a study that actually put the principals described by
Morrison and Anglin (2005) into practice. The authors of the study explained how online
learning environments should be well designed and should be more than just informational
dumping grounds (shovelware and “web-based information” according to Morrison and Anglin).
Good design was necessary in order to avoid eyestrain, endlessly scrolling text screens, and
confusing navigation that deterred learning. This could happen, as Sadik and Reisman
explained, when textbook material was simply dumped onto the Internet with no value added for
learners.
In their study, lessons that were segmented and broken down were helpful for students,
and it allowed instructors to more easily pinpoint which concepts students had difficulty with.
Learning best occurred when information was presented in short chunks that were visually
pleasing. Additionally, the authors found that online environments were conducive to learning
when it did not require prior experience using the Internet, when the system was easy to learn in
a short amount of time, when communication tools were easy to use, and when there were no
complicated technology issues such as plug-ins and viruses. Other design considerations
included the effective use of color, simple graphics and symbols, and layouts that were clear,
uncluttered, and consistent. In this manner, the online format did not get in the way, allowing
students to focus on the content.
Sadik and Reisman (2004) also pointed out that most online learning programs were
heavily text based, which necessitated that students have solid spelling, vocabulary, grammar,
typing, and writing skills. Therefore, they explained, online learners who wished to perfect their
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

37
responses may have preferred asynchronous activities that provided them with time to perfect
their work, rather than synchronous activities that were more instantaneous. Sadik and
Reisman’s insight into the text-based nature of online learning actually lead to a deeper issue that
they did not explore in their study, and it was an issue that could have profound implications for
struggling credit recovery students. In order for students to be successful with online learning
programs, they needed to be good at the basic skills of reading and writing.
Unfortunately, reading and writing were often the very same basic skills that students in
need of credit recovery are not good at, which precluded them from being successful with the
online credit recovery programs and which may be the root cause of their academic struggles in
the first place. As mentioned earlier, the Southern Regional Education Board (2009) believed
that reading with comprehension should be the number one priority in middle school and high
school because students who struggled with reading in the ninth grade were destined to become
high school dropouts. Since the design of online learning is heavily text-based, students who
struggle with reading may be destined to become online learning dropouts as well.
As explained earlier, research indicated that a major factor that caused high school
dropouts is disengagement from school (Tyler & Lofstrom, 2009) and poor grades (Suh & Suh,
2007). The Southern Regional Education Board (2009) suggested that a lack of foundational
literacy skills caused poor grades, especially since reading with comprehension defined learning
in every subject area. However, more research should be conducted in this area, as there is little
literature examining the extent to which the lack of basic foundational skills in reading, and
possibly in math, is contributing to the high school dropout rate. Additionally, there was no
research on how these root causes of student failure were or were not being addressed by online
credit recovery programs.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

38
Summary
The topics of high school dropouts, online learning, and credit recovery are already
complex topics when examined in isolation, and they are even more intriguing when their
interrelationships are examined. The high school dropout crisis has been an urgent and
unresolved issue for quite some time, and online credit recovery programs are a recent
innovation that can help to make headway towards finding solutions to the problem. In fact,
credit recovery has the potential to be a disruptive innovation that can help students acquire the
skills that they need but do not yet possess. Currently, online learning has given students greater
access to learning, and it still has room to grow in terms of effectiveness for a greater number of
students. Although online credit recovery programs are relatively new, there are already lessons
learned that can make these programs better in the future. These lessons learned that have been
gleaned from literature, including the promotion of self-regulated learning, using sound
instructional design principles, and addressing the root causes of student failure, served as the
conceptual framework for this dissertation.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

39
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The high school dropout crisis is a problem that has vexed the American public education
system for several decades and continues to be an enigma. As discussed earlier, it is imperative
that solutions to this problem are developed because there are great personal and societal costs
that arise for students failing courses in high school and failing to earn their high school
diplomas. Recently, the innovation of online credit recovery has garnered growing attention as a
possible solution to the high school dropout problem as it allows students to make up courses
that they have previously failed. Online credit recovery could be a disruptive innovation that
dramatically changes how we deal with the high school dropout problem. However, because of
the novelty of online credit recovery, little data has existed that showed the effectiveness of this
phenomenon, and there has been little insight as to how to make these programs more effective
so that it can achieve its intended purpose. In fact, it may be exacerbating the high school
dropout problem since online programs can be more difficult than face-to-face classes, thereby
further frustrating students and burdening them with an even greater chance of failing a course
yet again. Therefore, it is important to understand how online credit recovery does or does not
work.
Problem and Purpose Overview
As an innovation that provides greater access to learning, online credit recovery has the
potential to meaningfully address the high school dropout problem that has confounded
America’s public schools for several decades. Online credit recovery is growing rapidly, and
many resources are being directed toward this innovation. As online credit recovery programs
become more readily available, larger numbers of students may end up enrolling in these
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

40
programs. Unfortunately, Uhlig (2002) explained the online learning is not for everyone and that
it is harder than face-to-face learning. Therefore, for the increasing number of students who
enroll in online credit recovery, it will either be an opportunity to finally complete a course for
which success had previously been out of reach, or another opportunity to fail the course yet
again. This all depends on how the program is implemented. As such, it is important to
understand how to help students experience greater success in online credit recovery programs,
especially in light of how challenging these often text-based courses can be in comparison with
face-to-face classes.
While there are many factors that affect students’ success in both face-to-face courses as
well as in online courses, one especially important factor is reading proficiency. Hernandez
(2011) explained that reading proficiency predicted success several years into the future. The
SREB (2009) explained that reading with comprehension defined learning in all other areas. It
stood to reason, then, that reading proficiency could also impact student success in online credit
recovery programs as well. Indeed, Sadik and Reisman (2004) pointed out that most online
learning programs are heavily text based, which necessitates that students have solid spelling,
vocabulary, grammar, typing, and writing skills. Therefore, research needed to be conducted to
better understand the impact that reading proficiency has on student success in online credit
recovery programs so that these programs can be designed to actually help students rather than
exacerbating the problem and creating repeated course failure.
The purpose of the study was to understand the impact that reading proficiency has on
student success in online credit recovery programs. Since reading proficiency has an impact on
academic achievement in general, this study sought to understand whether reading proficiency
impacted student success in online credit recovery programs in particular. The study also
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

41
explored how high schools have designed their online credit recovery programs in order to
increase student achievement, and it explored students’ experiences taking these courses. This
provided insight to practitioners interested in developing effective online credit recovery
programs for their students.
Research Questions
1. What criteria do schools use to identify students for participation in credit recovery
courses?
2. What are the components of online credit recovery programs that schools feel either
facilitate learning or make it more difficult for students to complete a course?
3. How does past reading achievement impact student success in online credit recovery
programs?
Justifications for Research Questions
Justification for Research Question #1: What Criteria Do Schools Use to Identify Students
for Participation in Credit Recovery Courses?
This study hypothesized that students were placed in online credit recovery out of
convenience and sheer necessity and not in the hopes that it would provide a better learning
experience than face-to-face classes. Reisetter and Boris (2004) explained why online learning
was appealing to students at the postsecondary level. They explained how studies revealed that
convenience, time flexibility, a lack of commute, and not having to “sit through” a class were
reasons that students gave for using online learning. Hsu et al. (2009) supported this finding and
enumerated the advantages of online learning, including breaking geographic barriers, saving
time, cutting transportation expenses, and allowing for flexible scheduling. Interestingly, better
learning was not a commonly cited reason for students enrolling in online courses.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

42
At the high school level, due to the relative novelty of online credit recovery, there has
been a lack of research that provided insight as to how students are identified for participation in
online credit recovery. However, based on reasons cited by students at the postsecondary level,
this study hypothesized that the need for convenience and time flexibility were criteria that high
schools used to place students in online credit recovery, especially for students who were under
the time pressure of trying to graduate on time. Additionally, based on findings at the
postsecondary level, this study hypothesized that the provision of a more effective learning
experience than in face-to-face classes would not be a reason that high schools placed students in
online credit recovery courses. If this were the case, it would be in disregard to Uhlig’s (2002)
findings, in which he warned that online learning is not for everybody because in its current
state, online learning is not easier than traditional learning.
Justification for Research Question #2: What Are the Components of Online Credit
Recovery Programs That Schools Feel Either Facilitate Learning or Make It More Difficult
for Students to Complete a Course?
This study hypothesized that the text-based interface of online learning made it more
difficult for students who had low levels of reading proficiency. Also, students with high levels
of reading proficiency were hypothesized to perform better than students with low reading
proficiency. This hypothesis was formed because Sadik and Reisman (2004) pointed out that
most online learning programs are heavily text based and necessitate strong literacy skills on the
part of the student. Additionally, this study hypothesized that online credit recovery programs
that promoted self-regulated learning made it easier for students to complete a course than did
programs that did not offer tools that promoted self-regulated learning. Prior research showed
that self-regulated learning could have an impact on student success in online learning.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

43
Justification for Research Question #3: How Does Past Reading Achievement Impact
Student Success in Online Credit Recovery Programs?
Based on prior research on the long-term impact of reading proficiency in multiple areas,
this study hypothesized that prior reading achievement had an impact on student success in
online credit recovery programs. Since poor readers were four times as likely to drop out of
school according to Hernandez (2011), it stood to reason that they were likely to struggle in
online credit recovery programs as well.
Population and Sample
The sample for this study consisted of five public charter high schools in or near South
Los Angeles. Public charter high schools were selected for this study instead of traditional
public high schools because public charter high schools have readily adopted the use of online
programs for their students in need of credit recovery. Traditional public high schools with more
resources tended to use traditional credit recovery programs such as adult school, which occurred
face-to-face rather than online. The geographic area of South Los Angeles was examined
because this area has traditionally been one of the lowest performing areas in Los Angeles
County as well as in the state of California. The average Academic Performance Index (API)
ranking for traditional public high schools in the area was a rank of 1 out of 10, which placed
these schools in the bottom 10% of schools in the state of California.
A stratified sample of public charter high schools in South Los Angeles was used and
included schools that were part of large Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) as well as a
standalone school that was not part of a large network of schools. Four schools came from three
large CMOs. One school was a standalone public charter high school that was not part of a large
CMO. In all, these five schools made up the sample for this study. The author of this study
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

44
already had contacts and working relationships with these schools, which allowed access to them
as research sites.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
This qualitative study sought to gain insight into how online credit recovery was used at
various school sites. In order to gain this insight, interviews were conducted with school staff
that were responsible for designing, implementing, or evaluating each school’s online credit
recovery programs. These subjects that were interviewed included:
• Principals who were responsible for the overall academic program at each school,
• Counselors who developed the master schedule, programmed students into their classes,
and made sure they graduated on time, and
• Teachers who supervised students participating in online credit recovery programs, as
well as the teachers of the classes in which students failed.
A series of interview questions was developed, and the interview protocol is located in
Appendix A. The interview protocol was structured as a standard open-ended interview to
ensure that the questions were posed to interviewees in a consistent manner across the various
school sites that were part of this study. Additionally, during the course of the standard open-
ended interview, the interviewer had the ability to also use a more informal conversational
approach to ask probing questions on topics that required elaboration, or to pursue topics that
arose that were not part of the original question set. The interview questions gave subjects an
opportunity to provide their insights in regards to the three research questions.
The first research question asked what criteria schools used to identify students for
participation in online credit recovery programs. Other than the criteria of students failing a
course and needing to make up the missing credits, what other criteria, if any, did schools use
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

45
that either compelled them to ensure that students enrolled in an online course, or compelled
them to disqualify a student from participating in an online course? The second research
question asked about the components of online credit recovery programs that schools felt either
facilitated learning or made it more difficult for students to complete a course. The interview
questions asked school staff to share their insights in this area. Finally, the third research
question involved past reading achievement and its impact on student success in online credit
recovery programs.
In order to provide triangulation of the results from the interviews, field observations
were used as well. Online credit recovery classes were observed in action to gain greater insight
about how these programs operated at the school sites being studied. The field observations
were especially helpful in answering research question #2 about the factors that either promoted
or precluded learning in online credit recovery programs, as well as research question #3 about
the impact of past reading achievement on student success in online credit recovery programs.
In addition to the interview questions and observations, the study conducted an
anonymous student survey to gain the insight of students who were actually using online credit
recovery programs. Students were able to login to a site hosted by surveymonkey.com. The
anonymous student survey was helpful in answering research question #2, which pertained to
features of online programs that facilitated or impeded learning. It also informed research
question #3 about how reading skills impacted student success in online credit recovery
programs.
Data Analysis
The three research questions in this study lent themselves to a qualitative approach. The
three questions were about how students were identified for participation in online credit
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

46
recovery programs, the components of these programs that facilitated or hindered learning, and
the impact of past reading achievement on student success in online credit recovery programs.
These three questions were answered using standard open-ended interview questions as well as
field observations in a qualitative approach. The interview protocol located in Appendix A was
divided into three parts, with each part corresponding to each of the three research questions.
Notes on the responses were taken during the interview. Additionally, audio recordings of the
interviews were made, and the responses were transcribed and coded after the interview. Since
the interview was in a standard open-ended format in which the exact questions asked were pre-
formulated before the interview began, this helped to make sure that questions were asked
consistently across all sites in the study, and this facilitated in coding the responses.
Additionally, the interviewer was allowed to also use a more informal conversational approach in
order to ask probing questions that have the interviewee elaborate on important topics, as well as
provided insight on topics that arose that were not a part of the original interview question set.
The observation notes of credit recovery courses in action were also be transcribed and coded for
analysis.
Summary
A variety of approaches was used to collect data to answer the three interrelated research
questions of how students were selected to participate in online credit recovery, what factors
promoted or precluded learning in these online environments, and how past reading achievement
impacted student success in online credit recovery programs. The primary means of gathering
data was standard open-ended interview questions as well as informal, conversational
questioning. Field observations of online credit recovery courses in action also took place as
well as an anonymous student survey. These provided triangulation for the responses provided
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

47
during the interview. In short, multiple data sources were used to provide as rich a data set as
possible to understand this dissertation topic of high school dropouts, online credit recovery, and
prior reading achievement.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

48
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
Introduction
This chapter presents and analyzes the data collected as part of this qualitative study on
the effect of reading proficiency on student success in online credit recovery programs. As
described in earlier chapters, online credit recovery is a relatively new phenomenon, and little
was previously known about the impact that online credit recovery has had on the high school
dropout problem, much less how reading proficiency impacts student success in these online
programs. However, it was imperative that we found out as much as possible about this topic if
schools hope to use online credit recovery as a tool to make a meaningful dent in America’s high
school dropout problem.
A theme that emerged during the data collection stage was that although the schools in
the study had similar needs and likewise had similar reasons for offering online credit recovery
courses to their students, they had quite divergent experiences with the implementation of their
individual programs. Nevertheless, the experiences of each of these schools was still instructive,
and they all shed light on the novel question of how reading proficiency impacted student
success in online credit recovery programs for high school students. Following is a presentation
and analysis of the findings of the study.
Research Design and Methodology
This following research questions were used to guide this study:
1. What criteria do schools use to identify students for participation in credit recovery
courses?
2. What are the components of online credit recovery programs that schools feel either
facilitate learning or make it more difficult for students to complete a course?
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

49
3. How does past reading achievement impact student success in online credit recovery
programs?
The sample for this study consisted of five public charter high schools in or near South
Los Angeles. Public charter high schools were selected for this study instead of traditional
public high schools because public charter high schools have readily adopted the use of online
programs for their students in need of credit recovery. The geographic area of South Los
Angeles was examined because this area has traditionally been one of the lowest performing
areas in Los Angeles County as well as in the state of California. The stratified sample of public
charter high schools included schools that were part of large Charter Management Organizations
(CMOs) that operated multiple high schools as well as a standalone school that was not part of a
large network of high schools.
In order to answer the research questions, a qualitative approach was used. Interviews
were conducted with school staff that were responsible for designing, implementing, or
evaluating each school’s online credit recovery programs. These interview subjects held a wide
variety of positions at their schools or organizations, and they each had extensive knowledge of
their online credit recovery programs. These positions included a Chief Achievement Officer,
two Principals, an Assistant Principal, two coordinators, and two teachers. In order to provide
triangulation of the results from the interviews, field observations were conducted at each site as
well, and students were observed using online credit recovery programs from different content
providers. These content providers included Apex, Aventa, and Acellus. Finally, an anonymous
student survey was conducted to gain the insight of the students making use of these online credit
recovery programs.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

50
Demographic Information
The five charter public schools that were included in this study had similar demographics,
and they all served high-needs populations. As mentioned earlier, four of the five schools were
part of large Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) that ran multiple high schools, and one
school was a standalone school that was not part of a large network of high schools. The oldest
school was founded in the 2006-2007 school year and was in its sixth year of operation. The
newest school opened in the 2011-2012 school year and was in just its second year of operation.
The total enrollment of each school in 2012 is shown below in Table 1. The average size of the
student body on each campus during the 2012 school year was 421 students, ranging from a low
of 231 students to a high of 781 students. These student body sizes were much smaller than
typical comprehensive high schools in Los Angeles. For example, one comprehensive high
school in Los Angeles that was not part of the study had a student body of 3,496 students, which
is fifteen times larger than the smallest school in this study.
Table 1
Enrollment in 2012
Total Enrollment
in 2012
School A 350
School B 302
School C 781
School D 439
School E 231

In the 2013, School E had a significant increase in the size of its student body, going up
from 231 students in 2012 to 450 students in 2013. School B also had a sizeable increase and
went from 302 students in 2012 to 370 students in 2013. The number of students using online
credit recovery varied at each school. For example, School E, which had 450 students in 2013
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

51
had about 200 students taking online credit recovery courses, while School B had zero students
taking online credit recovery courses in 2013. The divergent experiences that each school had
with students completing their online programs will be described at the end of this chapter after
the findings for the three research questions are presented.
As shown in Figure 1, according to the California Department of Education, all five
schools had student bodies that were overwhelmingly Latino and African American. Four of the
five schools (Schools A, B, C, and D) served populations that were 97% or more Latino and
African American, with one school reaching 100% Latino and African American. The fifth
school (School E) had 88% of its student body consisting of Latino and African American, 3%
Asian, 2% Filipino, and 2% White, with 5% indicating no response.

Figure 1. Student ethnicity of schools in the study.

Figure 1 also shows that the schools had variations in the mix between Latino and
African American students. Four of the five schools (Schools A, B, C, and E) had Latino as their
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

52
largest ethnic subgroup (79% to 100%) with African American as their second largest subgroup
(2% to 19%, with one school having a 0% African American population). School D had a
different mix, as African American made up their largest subgroup (92%), and Latino was their
second largest subgroup (6%). Nevertheless, all five schools taken as a whole had high minority
populations with students predominantly either Latino or African American.
As shown in Figure 2, all five schools also served large numbers of students who
qualified for free or reduced price lunch and were considered socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Schools A, B, and E had 82%, 90%, and 73% of their students classified as socioeconomically
disadvantaged, respectively. Schools C and D had 58% and 57% of their students
socioeconomically disadvantaged. These two schools had higher proportions of African
American students compared to Latino students.

Figure 2. Percent of students qualifying for free or reduced price lunch.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

53
Figure 3 shows the percentage of students at each school that were classified as English
Learners. The schools serving higher proportions of Latino students (Schools A, B, C, and E)
had higher numbers of students who were considered English Learners and were not yet
proficient in English, even though these students were already in high school. The percentage of
English Learners at these four schools ranged from 25% to 34%. Among these English Learners,
the language spoken by students was between 96% to 100% Spanish, which made sense since
they came from Latino backgrounds. School D, which was 92% African American and only 6%
Latino, had a much smaller English Learner population than the other four schools, and they only
had 2% of their students classified as English Learners. At this school, 78% of English Learners
spoke Spanish as their primary language, while the remaining 22% spoke a language described
as “Other non-English languages” according to the California Department of Education.

Figure 3. Percent of students classified as English learners.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

54
Implementation of Online Credit Recovery
As shown in the previous section, all five of these schools served high needs populations
that were considered educationally disadvantaged. They all had high minority, high poverty
student populations, and four of the five schools also had high English Learner populations.
Another commonality among these schools was that they all had a college-bound focus
for their students. All five schools were started within the past six years not only to increase the
number of students who graduated from high school in their underserved communities, but also
to increase the number of students who made it to the next level and got into college. Upon
reading the mission statements of each organization, one could see that they all mentioned
college, and each organization sought to transform the educational system and to improve
outcomes for students. Even the physical environments of each school reflected this vision of
high achievement for their students, as it was commonplace to see graduation photographs and
college pennants adorning the walls. Respondent E even explained that their goal was to send
their graduates to the top 100 universities in the country. However, since there was sizeable gap
between the high expectations that these schools had for their students and the historically low-
achievement levels in the neighborhoods that they served, these schools have decided to
implement online credit recovery programs in order to help their students meet those high
expectations.
What was striking during data collection was that although each of these schools had
similar needs and had similar motivations for implementing online credit recovery programs at
their sites, they each had wildly divergent experiences with the implementation of their
programs. For example, different schools chose different content providers including Apex,
Aventa, and Acellus. One school had upwards of 200 students taking online courses, while
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

55
another school in the same organization had zero students currently enrolled in an online course
and only three students enrolled the year before. This school was still included in the study to
find out exactly why schools would have such vastly different experiences, even compared to
schools within the same organization.
One of the touted benefits of online learning was the ability to take a class any time and
any place, and the schools in the study again had divergent approaches in deciding both the time
and place that online credit recovery occurred. Some schools had students taking classes during
the regular school day, while other schools had students logging in outside of normal school
hours. Some schools had students taking online classes only while they were on campus, while
others allowed their students to log in from home. There were other notable differences in the
systems that each school structured around their online credit recovery programs, and these
differences will be explained later in this chapter.
Although the implementation of online credit recovery at each site varied, the interviews,
observations, and surveys conducted at each site provided tremendous insight about how online
credit recovery does or does not work and about the impact that reading proficiency has on
student success in these programs. The diversity of experiences of each of these schools actually
added richness of the study by providing a wide variety of perspectives. The next section will
review these perspectives specifically as they pertain to each of the three research questions.
Findings Pertaining to Research Question #1: What Criteria Do Schools Use to Identify
Students for Participation in Credit Recovery Courses?
The literature review in chapter two of this study explained that at the postsecondary
level, online learning appealed to college students because of factors such as convenience and
time flexibility (Reisetter & Boris, 2004). In the literature review, it was also noted that studies
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

56
did not mention “better learning” as one of justifications for online learning. However, “better
learning” is precisely what struggling high school students need to make it to graduation, and this
has design implications for credit recovery programs at the high school level. For this reason, it
was hypothesized that students at the high schools that were a part of this study would be placed
in online credit recovery out of convenience and sheer necessity and not necessarily with the
expectation that it would provide a better learning experience than in face-to-face classes. The
interview data collected suggested that this was indeed the case.
One of the first interview questions asked respondents to describe the students who were
struggling academically at their schools. The common theme of poor literacy skills resonated
across the respondents. Respondents A, C, and B each mentioned reading ability as a barrier to
achievement among their struggling students. Respondent D also indicated that his students
needed more explicit instruction with the key literacy skill of vocabulary. Additionally,
Respondent A explained that their students, including their top tier students, were not excellent
writers. These struggles with literacy have had an impact on students’ performance in their
online credit recovery programs. For example, Respondent A explained, “Our students were
never really trained to read, so a lot of the passages are kind of boring for them.” As a result, she
explained, “Apex will assign readings and things like that, and I know my students don’t read
them. I know. I can tell.”
She elaborated that during the previous year, only about 30% of the students who took
online credit recovery courses completed them. Further, she explained that even fewer students
at other schools in her organization completed their online courses. The experiences of these
schools speak to the challenge of completing online courses. Reisetter and Boris (2004)
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

57
explained that nationally, about 50% of students who enrolled in an online class failed to
complete the course.
Respondent B also mentioned that students at her schools lacked foundational skills,
including basic multiplication and division skills. In a similar fashion, Respondent E explained
that his students were not prepared to engage in a rigorous program of study, and that his
struggling students had failed classes such as foreign language, biology, and world history.
Earlier, it was explained that there was a noticeable gap between the college-bound
expectations of these charter public schools compared to the historically low achievement levels
in the neighborhoods that they served. It was interesting to note that when respondents were
asked to describe their struggling students, they prefaced it by elaborating upon this gap between
high expectations and the historically low levels of achievement in their neighborhoods, and they
described the challenges that arose when students first entered a culture that was markedly
different from what the students were accustomed to. When asked to describe her struggling
students, Respondent B explained:
Over the course of the year, we have had a large influx of new students. They
don’t have the foundational skills that are needed in our specific school culture
that says rigor is at the forefront of what we do.
Respondent C’s take was:

A year ago, we took about 200 new students into our high school campus with not
great success, and I think it was a little bit of a culture shock for our school and a
little bit of a culture shock for students who had possibly come from schools that
were not doing well.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

58
Respondent A was on a campus that just opened the previous year, and she explained,
“We inherited a lot of students that didn’t want to be here and were pulled from their previous
high schools.” She further elaborated about the problems encountered when there was a
difference in culture by explaining:
Here, in order to receive credit, you need a C or above because we try to line it up
to college applications. Colleges don't accept Ds or Fs, so that’s our reason for
doing that. So when we inherited a lot of our students from other schools, a lot of
them were passing with Ds. Whereas in those schools, they were okay with
credit, here they’re now credit deficient, and a lot of those students are really
angry when they're in a class that they’ve quote unquote “passed” before, and
here we’re telling them, “No you didn't pass it. You have to take English again.”
So right now, we have about 60% of our school is credit deficient.
In order to better address their students’ needs and to provide them with greater
opportunities for learning, schools have gone out of their way and have done whatever it took to
help students improve academically and to make up missing credits. For example, schools have
instituted a number of intervention classes to help students acquire the skills that they are
missing. These interventions included English and Math intervention as well as tutoring for
other subjects. Intervention or tutoring occurred after school, on Saturdays, and even during
winter intervention and summer intervention.
In addition to intervention classes, schools described the great lengths that they have gone
to in order to help students make up classes so that they could earn their missing credits. This
was an especially big challenge for smaller schools such as charter public schools that did not
have the resources and infrastructure of large school systems. As mentioned earlier, one
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

59
traditional high school in South Los Angeles was fifteen times as large as the smallest school in
this study, which meant there were fewer resources and a less established infrastructure for
smaller schools to access. Respondent B described how they have had to deal with this
constraint by explaining:
Sometimes, there is a need to share teachers across campuses. Let’s say if a
certain number of students have failed biology, so maybe the teacher worked part
of the year at one school, and then go to another school for the other part of the
year.
This was an example of what the charter public schools in the study were willing to do and
needed to do in order to make do with what they had.
Respondent C talked about how her school had used community colleges in the past to
help students make up classes, but how that option was becoming increasingly difficult to
implement, and she explained:
Something that’s been very successful for us is East LA Community College.
We’ve had great success with their math classes over the summer, and students
going in there and doing really well. Hopefully, they’ll stay open because right
now, West LA and Santa Monica City College are not offering summer courses,
so that limits that.
Another challenge of using community colleges was the great distances that students had to
travel in order to access these campuses, which were far beyond the boundaries of their
neighborhood. Additionally, Respondent C explained the frustration of not having any access at
all to certain credit recovery options that were within their neighborhood:
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

60
Another unfortunate thing for us is that because we are not considered a part of
the school district, they will not often allow charter students into their summer
programs. We found one or two that had a couple of spots for charter kids, and
we’re able to get them in there, but other than that…
As a result of these access hardships and the difficulty of providing credit recovery classes to
large numbers of credit deficient students, the schools in this study have had to be creative and
have decided to try online credit recovery as a solution.
Two of the interview questions asked respondents to describe their online credit recovery
programs and to describe the benefits of such programs. Just as was hypothesized, convenience
was a major consideration and was cited numerous times as a reason for implementing online
credit recovery programs. For example, after Respondent A revealed that 60% of her school was
credit deficient, she explained:
So that brings in a large need for Apex and for online learning because it speeds
up the process of them getting their credits. It’s allowing students to get their
credits without doing summer school, without doing adult school. It’s fast, if they
take it seriously.
This showed that online credit recovery programs offered a great convenience for students
because they could recover their credits quickly. She further detailed the convenience of the
program not just from the students’ perspective, but the convenience factor from the school’s
perspective as well:
One of the things that interested us about it was how cost efficient it was because
all you have to do for any subject is buy the rights to the class and you do that for
every student… But then the neat thing about it is that that license doesn’t expire
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

61
for the semester. So the moment that a student finishes that class, you can put
another student in their spot.
Additionally, she detailed another benefit for the school when she explained:
It’s also UC certified. All the UC schools approve it and accept it for credit,
which is the other big factor. We want to make sure that our students are getting
credit not just for our school, but for the universities as well.
Since the courses were certified by the UC system (University of California), it was very
convenient for schools because they did not have to go through the tedious process of getting
every single one of their courses reviewed and approved for UC credit. All that work had
already been done for them.
Respondent D also illustrated how convenience for both students and the school was a
deciding factor for his school to use online credit recovery courses. He wanted to see how viable
it would be to use those courses as a solution for credit deficient students who came from other
schools:
We didn’t have a geometry class that we could move them into because most of
our geometry was taken during the summer, and I wanted them to finish the
course in the spring. For the two students who took Aventa, they needed a
semester. They needed the Geometry B section. Because they needed just part of
the course, it was more efficient than trying to give them the whole course over
the summer…. So, “Here’s your online course.”
An insight about Respondent D’s explanation was that online programs were convenient for
students who were not severely behind and have actually made it through a substantial portion of
a course of study but just need to take care of some unfinished business. Respondent F explained
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

62
that this convenience factor was used the same way for seniors at her school who were right at
the cusp of graduating and were missing just a few credits. She explained, “Sometimes, a
student only needs fifteen, twenty credits, a few classes, and so enrolling them in a traditional
year-long program is really of no social benefit to them.” In this way, taking a class online was
more convenient for students because they did not have to sit through an entire yearlong
program. They just took the few courses that they needed in order to graduate, and they could
complete their program mid-year rather than having to wait an entire year to finish.
Additionally, other students at her school had issues with truancy, not because they were
missing an entire day’s worth of instruction, but because they had trouble getting to school on
time in the morning and were consistently missing just their first period class. She explained that
they either did not wake up or, since the school was in a high crime area, “They feel that it’s not
safe for them to walk a certain way in the mornings, so they wait an hour before they walk to
school.” In cases such as these, students were enrolled for part of the day in an online course
because it was more convenient for them than trying to make it to a face-to-face class during the
first period of the day.
As a final benefit, Respondent C explained that online courses gave both students and the
school access to resources that a small school would not normally have. She stated, “For small
schools like us who don’t have all of the extra electives and real depth of programs, that it would
allow students to go in and explore other things.”
Respondent A echoed those sentiments when she said that an ideal student for online
classes would be, “Anyone who’s interested in taking a class that’s not offered in the school.”
After reviewing all the responses, it was important to note that none of the respondents
said the online courses provided a better learning experience for students than a face-to-face
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

63
class. Just as hypothesized and consistent with the research literature, convenience was a major
factor that made schools decide to enroll students in online credit recovery courses. It was more
convenient for students because they could finish courses faster, and it was convenient for
schools because they had greater access to resources and it freed them from having to spend time
getting UC course approval. Not a single respondent explicitly mentioned “better learning” as a
justification for online credit recovery. However, better learning was precisely what struggling,
credit deficient students needed.
Even though “convenience” rather than “better learning” was cited as justification for
online credit recovery where instead “better learning” may have been preferred, it does not
diminish the value of the convenience factor when using online programs. In fact, Christensen et
al. (2011) would describe this as a potentially disruptive innovation that could dramatically shift
the status quo. They would argue that even if better learning did not occur, some learning did
occur, and for a high school student at risk of dropping out completely, some learning was better
than no learning at all. The next section will explain the kinds of learning that does or does not
occur in online credit recovery programs, and it will describe what schools have done to increase
the likelihood that better learning did occur.
Findings Pertaining to Research Question #2: What Are the Components of Online Credit
Recovery Programs That Schools Feel Either Facilitate Learning or Make It More Difficult
for Students to Complete a Course?
The previous section explained that convenience for both students and the school was a
compelling factor that encouraged schools to enroll their students in online credit recovery
programs, especially when they had a large number of credit deficient students that needed to
make up classes. However, Uhlig (2002) warned that online learning is not for everyone because
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

64
in its current state, it is not easier than traditional learning. This section presents findings on
exactly what respondents felt made online credit recovery more difficult than an in-person class,
and conversely, what factors, if any, facilitated learning.
The first interview question in this section asked respondents about what aspects of an
online program facilitated learning. Respondent E immediately confided, “I don’t think the
online program really does a good job facilitating learning for our population.” He then further
elaborated, “And when I speak of our population, again, many of our students qualify for free or
reduced lunch.” As was shown earlier in the demographics section, Respondent E’s school, as
well as all the other schools in the study, served a high needs population, including many
socioeconomically disadvantaged students who qualified for free or reduced price lunch. As a
result, he explained that students lacked academic fortitude because they did not have a support
system in the home. Consequently, he said that students were not prepared to engage in a
rigorous course of study, which was consistent with what the other respondents said about
students lacking foundational skills. Earlier in the interview, Respondent E stated, “This
program just isn’t a good match for where my kids are. Our kids really don’t have the fortitude
to attack the program with fidelity.”
At the time of the interview, Respondent E described the success rate of the program as
“dismal.” Students were supposed to finish their class on November 2, but he ended up giving
them an extension until December 21. Quantitatively speaking, at the end of the semester, only
one student out of over 78 students enrolled in the online program actually completed the course.
Based on students’ lack of progress online, he stated quite simply, “I’m not gonna do it next
year.” Further, he made a key point when comparing an online course with a face-to-face course
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

65
by asserting, “There’s no substitute for good first instruction. No matter what canned program or
what new program rolls out, there really isn’t a substitute for just a phenomenal teacher.”
Respondent D also made nearly identical comments when he said, “There isn’t a
substitute for a high quality instructor in front of the student, checking for understanding, moving
them through the thinking process.” Both of these respondents’ comments were consistent with
the findings of Darling-Hammond (1999), who explained that teacher quality was the most
important factor affecting student achievement, even more so than socioeconomic demographics.
Haycock (1998) supported this view of the effect of teacher quality on student achievement. As
a result, Respondent D also planned on discontinuing his online program next year, explaining
the economic reasoning that went into the decision:
If I had to do an online class again, it would be with a teacher. So then the
question becomes, “What’s the cost?” If I had to pay for a teacher and pay for an
online program simultaneously, that’s double the price…. So if I have 20 online
kids, then it costs me a teacher, so I might as well have a teacher.
Respondent A had similar feelings about whether better learning takes place in an online
setting or a face-to-face setting. She offered:
Now do you want my honest opinion on it? I still believe that an actual class is
better with an actual teacher, that a student gets out more, the student learns more,
perhaps, and they’ll remember concepts because maybe the teacher taught them in
a particular way or made a fun activity…. Ideally, I would prefer a real class.
In line with these respondents’ remarks, the comments submitted by actual the high school
students themselves as part of the anonymous student survey reflected the value of an actual
teacher. Students were asked about what made online learning more difficult than an in-person
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

66
class, and they repeatedly mentioned the lack of a teacher as being a challenge. Some of these
students’ written comments on the anonymous student survey are shown below exactly as
submitted, with all their typographical errors and spacing errors included:
• you dont get as much help as you would from a teacher
• 1) You can’t ask questions
• You can’t really have guidance with the online teacher as you can with a
teaching class.
• You don’t have a teacher to answer your questions when you are confused
and need explanations.
• You can’t have the teacher always
• 1.) You don’t have the teacher in front of you 2.)Some assignments you
need the Teacher to give one-on0one help with on the spot
In an online program, rather than interacting with a live person, students interacted with a
computer. In the student responses above, students explained how their learning was affected
when the human touch went missing.
Perhaps Respondent C best summarized and captured the hesitation that many may have
felt when considering an online program for credit deficient students. When she was asked about
what aspects of her online program made learning easier for students, she responded,
Hmm… [seven-second pause] That make online learning easier… [twelve-
second pause] I’m not exactly sure… [eleven-second pause] I don’t know that if
I were to survey any of our students who’ve taken Aventa that they would
actually say it was easier. They might say it’s less time, that it’s faster… [nine-
second pause] I don’t know about that.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

67

The uncertainty that Respondent C displayed in her response vividly illustrated Uhlig’s (2002)
point that online learning is not easier than traditional learning. Respondent C went into
specifics when asked about what made learning more difficult in an online setting. She
explained, “The lack of support. That sort of face-to-face support, finding out where a student is
stuck and being able to help push them through…. Again, it comes back to the immediate
feedback from an instructor.”
Respondent C’s comment about the lack of immediate feedback was consistent with Hsu
et al. (2009), who explained that the delayed nature of feedback between student and instructor
was a common barrier to online learning. Respondent C then gave an example of students who
were not doing well online because of the lack of human support.
If I’m allowing the student to be at home just working through the lessons and
they’re stuck, they don’t call me. I have not had a student call me and say I
needed help. I’ve had students get here and I’ll say, “You haven’t done any
Aventa for three days. What’s going on?” and they say, “Well, I don’t know. I
don’t understand. I don’t get it.” So I think it’s that lack of human support.
Respondent C also made an important distinction between the ease of a program versus the
speed of a program when she said that her students wouldn’t say that online learning was easier,
but that it was faster and that it took less time. This insight was consistent with Respondent A’s
assertion that online credit recovery programs could be faster, although not necessarily better,
than taking an in-person class.
Respondent A did go into further detail about precisely how some students were able to
go faster in an online environment compared to a face-to-face class. She explained, “The neat
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

68
thing about self-pacing is you're not slowed down by your classmates.” She then gave a personal
account to explain how this played out for her when she was a high school student herself:
I think the coolest thing about this program is the ability to self-pace because I
was always one of those students in class where sometimes, for instance my
French class in high school, I had a lot of students that were slackers that didn’t
want to be in the class, but they had to. And then you have students like myself
who were actually really interested in learning French, and I always felt slowed
down, like I could be learning a lot more or advancing and progressing, and I was
just kind of held back. The cool thing about this program is that a student, once
they learn something, they can move on, and they’re doing it at their own pace.
The student responses from the anonymous student survey echoed Respondent A’s
comments about self-pacing. Students were asked to describe two things that made online
learning easier for them than in a face-to-face class. Some of these high school students' actual
written comments from the anonymous student survey are below, with every single one of their
typographical errors included:
• 1.) No annoying students to deal with 2.) Work at your own space [sic]
• You can go on your own paste [sic] Easier to understand because its [sic]
just me and my class online.
• I can go slow and take my time or if I’m ahead i can go head [sic]. I don’t
have to wait for anyone else.
• you go at your own pace and you can finish half a semester in a little
amount of time
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

69
The written student comments revealed that they appreciated the self-paced nature of
their programs because going at their own pace actually helped them learn better than in a
face-to-face class with more distractions, namely other students.
This was the first instance of how better learning actually could take place in an online
setting compared to a face-to-face setting and how online learning could be easier than
traditional learning, even though there was no live teacher. It also illustrated how student
outcomes can improve because students who are ready to move on can do so without being held
back by their peers. Conversely, if other students needed to slow down and take their time in
order to better understand a concept, they had the ability to do so as well.
As a result, this individualization could lead to better learning for both faster learners and
for slower learners. The outcome – learn the material – stayed constant across all students, while
the time required to reach that outcome was adjusted on a student-by-student basis. Unwittingly
and quite humorously, the typographical errors in the written comments from these high school
students also illustrated the point that respondents made in their interviews regarding students’
weak literacy skills. The topic of how weak literacy skills hindered learning in an online setting
will be covered in detail when the findings for the third research question are discussed.
There are two parts to Uhlig’s (2002) assertion that online learning is not for everyone
because in its current state, it is harder than traditional learning. One part of his assertion was
that online learning is harder, and the responses from interviews and surveys supported this by
illustrating how learning became more difficult when there was no human touch from a teacher.
The other part of his assertion was that online learning is not for everyone. Again, the interviews
and surveys indicated that some students did benefit from an online setting because they were
able to go at their own pace. This then raised the question, “Even though online learning was not
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

70
for everyone, since there are some students that did benefit from it, exactly who were these
students?”
As was shown in the literature review, the main beneficiaries of online learning have
been capable adult learners who had already completed high school and were now pursuing their
postsecondary degrees or were already gainfully employed in the workforce. The main target
audience for online credit recovery, on the other hand, did not comprise of accomplished adults,
but rather were adolescents who have not yet finished high school and were in fact struggling to
do so. This is an important consideration when determining which students would actually
complete an online program, and the respondents provided insight into the type of student that
would be able to navigate an online system.
As was discussed earlier, online environments are different from face-to-face classroom
environments. After respondents had already described the literacy challenges of their struggling
students, they were asked to describe what they thought would be an ideal student for a high
school online credit recovery program. Their comments included:
• You have to have a certain kind of character to make it through. You have
to be a pretty good self-starter. You have to be pretty resilient. Your
personal motivation has to be high.
• A student who’s very self-motivated.
• It requires that students are highly self-directed.
• Someone who needs credits… if they’re serious.
These comments reflected the high level of maturity and independence that was
required to be successful in an online program. Since students could not count on a live
teacher to provide them with support, they had to be able to count on themselves. The
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

71
descriptors used by respondents including the terms “self-starter,” “self-directed,” “self-
motivated,” and “personal motivation” all spoke to this requirement. When describing
the benefits and drawbacks of an online program, Respondent F responded:
Part of the drawback is inherent in the benefits. We have students who are very
motivated. We have students who are not motivated at all. So part of the problem
with doing a system online is it’s very self-paced, so if a student is having
difficulty in a normal setting, they will most likely have those difficulties in a
self-paced setting where there is not a teacher motivating them or redirecting
them.
Additionally, Respondent F elucidated, “In an online program, there’s no one there to pat
you on the back.”
Respondent C gave an example of a student who, in her words, “sailed” through
an Aventa course:
We had a math recovery, Algebra II recovery student last year who somehow it
had gotten by us that she had not passed Algebra IIB. We realized this in the final
semester of her senior year. We were like, “Oh, no.” We put her in Aventa and
she did it in two weeks. Done. Got an A. It was awesome. Worked out great.
Respondent C contrasted this with another student who failed miserably in his
classes. When asked about the student who sailed through the program and what set her
apart from the student who failed miserably, Respondent C explained:
Her drive. I think drive had a lot to do with it. I think because there was a true
sense of urgency in her situation, that she truly understood, “If I don’t get this
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

72
done, I’m not getting a diploma,” and she had college acceptances. So the sense
of urgency, I think, is huge.
These anecdotes given by the respondents are examples of the self-regulated
learning that Hsu et al. (2009) described in the literature review. They suggested that
self-regulated learning (SRL) skills are critical for students taking online courses because
these courses required independent learning, metacognition, self-motivation, and personal
responsibility. In fact, Hu and Gramling (2009) explained that self-regulation was a
powerful predictor of academic achievement, and the respondents of this study indicated
that they agreed with that.
Hsu et al. (2009) described two practical tools, an online calendar and an online
grade book, that students have found to be especially helpful in exercising self-regulated
learning skills. As part of this study, classroom observations were conducted at the
various school sites. Through observations, it was noted that students did indeed make
use of these features while working online. Respondent A gave a demonstration and
explained:
Your classes appear on a menu, and then it breaks things down by color and by
percentages…. It shows a little progress bar, and that progress bar is an indicator
of the entire course, and so the more you complete, that bar starts to move right,
and it stays a certain color. Red means you’re far behind, yellow means you’re
just slightly behind by a few assignments, and then green means you’re OK. I
don’t always have to tell the student where they are because they have access to
that information.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

73
This was one of the tools that allowed students to regulate their own learning. She then
added, “I just go in when I really need to annoy the students about their progress, you
know, I need to kind of give them that wake-up call.”
In addition to the ability to self-regulate, Respondent D explained additional
characteristics of an ideal student for an online program. He explained, “It would
probably be an English-only student who’s already fairly proficient in that subject matter.
You need to have strong prior knowledge of some of the basic concepts, the basic
vocabulary, then you’re off and running.”
Respondent D advised against putting English Learners in an online program that had
little support. He said that if an English Learner came in below an intermediate or basic level, he
would not put them in an online program. When Respondent D looked both at self-regulation
and at basic skills in this way, it was consistent with Respondent C’s approach for putting
students in online credit recovery courses. She explained:
When one of the counselors comes to me and says, “I want to recommend a
student for Aventa,” the first questions are going to be, “Are they self-directed?
Are they going to put in the time, and do they understand what a commitment it
is?” And then I also want to know what the counselor thinks of the student’s skill
level in that area because I think if we get a sense that there is little or no skill and
that they failed the actual classroom class miserably because they did not
understand the concepts, we're only setting them up for failure to put them on
Aventa.
The next section will examine what those basic skills are that Respondent D and Respondent C
mentioned, specifically as they relate to students’ levels of reading achievement.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

74
Findings Pertaining to Research Question #3: How Does Past Reading Achievement Impact
Student Success in Online Credit Recovery Programs?
This section presents findings on the final research question about how student success in
online credit recovery programs is impacted by students’ level of reading achievement. The
literature review included a report by the Southern Regional Education Board (2009), which
forewarned that students who still struggled with reading by the ninth grade were destined to
become high school dropouts. Hernandez (2011) supported this view based on a national
longitudinal study of nearly 4,000 students that confirmed a link between reading proficiency at
the end of third grade, poverty, and high school graduation. Hernandez explained that the worst
readers were six times as likely to drop out as proficient readers. This dissertation hypothesized
that if poor readers have struggled in a regular academic program, it would stand to reason that
they would struggle in an online program as well, especially if these programs required
substantial independent reading. Two of the survey instruments in this study, the interviews and
the observations, provided most of the data for this research question. The interviews provided
good insight about the importance of reading skills in online programs, and the student
observations were especially helpful in illuminating this final research question.
The first interview question in this section asked respondents to explain how students’
proficiency in reading impacted their success in other subjects. Based on the responses, there
was consistent agreement among the respondents that reading skills do matter. Their responses
included:
• I think there’s a direct correlation.
• I believe that skill is fundamental to their success.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

75
• We see a huge correlation. If they are, say, two to three grade levels below, we
see less academic success across the board. When we did assessments, it
definitely correlates to their success.
• As a rule of thumb, we’ve noticed that students who score below an eighth grade
level on their SRI, on a reading test, really struggle with online recovery
programs.
Respondent F then went on to explain how students’ low reading levels influence the school’s
placement decisions for online credit recovery programs:
We, as a rule of thumb, do not enroll them in online programs without reading
support. We have several tracks for students who score below an eighth grade
level. They’re put into an intensive reading program their ninth grade year.
Ideally, Respondent F said that that students should be at least above the eighth grade level in
order to succeed in an online program. Otherwise, problems occurred if a student was
significantly behind grade level. “If a student comes in with a third grade level, even if they’ve
grown leaps and bounds and they’re now at a sixth grade level, they will still struggle with a self-
paced reading program.”
Respondent F’s practice of paying attention to students’ skill level before placing them in
online programs was consistent with Respondent C’s and Respondent D’s earlier comments.
Respondent D described an ideal student for an online program as being already fairly proficient,
having strong prior knowledge of basic concepts, and having at least basic vocabulary for the
subject. Respondent C said that putting students with low skill levels into an online program
would be setting them up for failure.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

76
Respondents A and B provided insights into why reading skills would be important in an
online environment, and their explanations were quite similar to each other. Respondent A
explained:
I think the biggest issue with the reading is when you don’t have the teacher to
rely on, if it’s not homework or if it’s not an assignment in class. Take, for
instance, a test where the teacher can’t help you.
In similar fashion, Respondent B explained:
Online classes have an audio portion. There’s also a read aloud, if you will,
where they’re highlighting the words as the students are receiving the oral
instructions, so I probably could get by a little bit easier in the online program.
However, when it comes down to taking the assessment, I’m probably going to
struggle. So I can get through the activities… but the assessment, I have to read
all on my own.
Both Respondent A and B were insightful as they gave an indication of exactly where
students’ poor reading skills may be most detrimental to their success – the ever important
assessment. Students could “get by” and progress through the program when they had support
either from a teacher or from program features such as an audio portion, but when it came to the
assessment where the teacher could not help you or you could not rely on the audio, that is when
students were left to their own devices and tended to struggle.
This insight was also related to the self-regulated learning factor that was discussed with
the previous research question. Earlier, respondents universally mentioned self-regulated or self-
directed learning as being a key characteristic of an ideal online learning student. In an online
environment where there was little or no support from a teacher, students had to be able to rely
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

77
on themselves. Nowhere was this more applicable than when a student was taking an
assessment, where a teacher was not allowed to read for them or explain a text passage for them.
Students had to take the assessment on their own, including reading and understanding the
material on their own, so it made sense that this was where they tended to struggle the most if
they did not have strong reading skills.
Not only could poor readers struggle in an online credit recovery program during the
assessment portion, but they could also struggle during the instructional portion of the program
as well. This could occur not only when they failed to understand a piece of writing, but when
they failed to appreciate it as well and found it “boring” because of their lack of comprehension.
Respondent A confided,
The other day made me so mad. One student came up to me and asked me a
question. Are you familiar with “The Tell-Tale Heart”? Edgar Allen Poe’s “The
Tell-Tale Heart”? Well, he came up to me and he’s like, “Ms., I can’t answer this
question. I don’t get it.”
And I’m like, “Well, did you read it?”
And he’s like, “Yeah, I looked at it. It’s about this man kills this man,”
blahdey blah.
And I’m like, “Did you appreciate the story?”
He’s like, “Eh, it was OK.”
I’m like, “No! It’s not OK!” because I love that story! I think the wording
is so, it’s fascinating, and it’s so well-written, and it really adds to the suspense
and the tone. And I read it with him and I explained as I was reading it. I’m like,
“You see how into it you are right now, now that I’m reading it to you?”
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

78

This was why Respondent A explained earlier that despite the benefits of an online course, she
would still prefer an actual class with an actual teacher because in her words, a student gets more
out of it. This was certainly the case in which this student who neither understood nor
appreciated what he had just read benefited greatly when provided with teacher guidance. As
Respondent D and E asserted, there is no substitute for a phenomenal teacher.
When examining how reading proficiency affected student success in online credit
recovery programs, it was important to find out precisely what might be going on in students’
thinking processes that may lead to difficulty comprehending what they were reading. It turned
out that often times, it was the little things that interfered with comprehension and learning.
Respondent A explained:
I feel like where our kids are in terms of their reading and writing, they’re really
affected by it. Like I said, a lot of them are stumped by simple questions that
have the word not or except or all the following.
Site visits and classroom observations of the various respondents’ campuses suggested that even
simple misunderstandings of written text such as the example above could interfere considerably
with learning.
At Respondent F’s campus, a student working online in a Spanish 1, Semester 2 course
asked the teacher for help on a question that she did not understand. The observation unfolded as
follows:
Computer: “Which sentence does not contain a grammatical error?”
Teacher: “So it’s asking which one does NOT have a grammatical error. Three of
them are right, and one of them is wrong.”

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

79
Student: “So I find the one with the mistake?”
Teacher: “Yes.”

At both Respondent A’s and Respondent F’s campuses, students were thrown off by the word
not in a question because they did not understand how negative wording completely reverses the
meaning of the question. In fact, it threw a teacher off as well, and the teacher should have
corrected the student and explained that she needed to find the sentence without the mistake
instead of the sentence with the mistake.
Other observations of struggles with basic reading included the following two
explanations that a teacher gave to two different students:
• Jim and Mark. That’s plural. Have, not has. Has is for singular.

• He claps. They clap. Claps is singular.

If simple words like not or the difference between clap and claps can confuse students, one can
only imagine how overwhelming it may be for a student when they encounter grade level text.
In the same room as the previous observation, the following interaction was observed for another
student taking a Spanish course:
Computer: “What is the affirmative Ud. command for the verb levantarse?”

Student: “What’s affirmative?”

Teacher: “It means positive.”

This example spoke to the point that Respondent D brought up about the need for
students to have at least a basic vocabulary in order to be successful in an online environment.
During the observations at the various sites, it was noted that various programs had features to
assist with vocabulary. For example, in Apex at one campus, students could mouse over certain
content vocabulary words that were specific to the subject, and a definition would pop up.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

80
However, for this student who was using Apex at a different campus, the word “affirmative” was
not a content vocabulary word specific to the subject, but rather was a general academic
vocabulary word, so it did not have a mouse-over definition. Not knowing the definition of the
word “affirmative” precluded the student from successfully answering the question.
Respondent C explained that at her campus, only the higher performing readers are
enrolled in online courses. She explained, though, that even these higher performing readers
struggled at times with vocabulary and still needed instruction:
We spend a lot of time on vocabulary…. I find that as an English speaker that it’s
interesting to me they have made this far and they are such good readers at, you
know, what's presumably a high reading level, and they're still struggling with
basic English language. But they comprehend, they’re putting it together, they’re
the kids who are successful in our Reading Counts. I know they’re
comprehending because we’re having these discussions about the books. So I
think for students like that who it’s a word here or there, they’re still able to put
enough of it together that it makes sense.
That last sentence in Respondent C’s response is a key point explaining why students
need at least a basic level of vocabulary in order to be successful online. While they naturally
will make mistakes and have misunderstandings as they are reading, if it was “a word here or
there,” they will comprehend enough of it to make sense of the passage. When it was more than
a word here or there, when students do not have a basic vocabulary, or when the reading became
more rigorous, those gaps widened and could lead to frustration. In one observation, a student
was working on a Chemistry Semester 1 class. This observation was made:
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

81
Computer: “Mass Number: The mass number is the number of protons plus the
number of neutrons. Protons and neutrons have about the same mass. Each
proton or each neutron has nearly 2,000 times the mass of an electron.”
[Student tapped a portable light on to indicate that she needed help. After a about
a minute, help had not yet arrived, so she just went on.]
Computer: “Isotopes: How many protons does an atom of N-15 have?”
[Student selected an answer, which the computer indicated was incorrect.]
Student: “I can’t find the answers to these.”
Teacher: “You have to look back in the lesson.”
Student: “I know. I tried.”
This experience must have been especially frustrating and overwhelming for this student. As she
indicated to the teacher circulating around the room, she honestly tried her best, but she could not
answer the question correctly.
At Respondent E’s campus, a student was observed using Acellus to learn about humor
devices used in writing. The passage being studied was a challenging essay written by Benjamin
Franklin about daylight savings. The questions asked her to differentiate between the humor
devices of sarcasm, hyperbole, puns, and verbal irony. She did not seem to find any humor at all
in Benjamin Franklin’s daylight savings essay as she was unsure of the answer to the question,
and she threw the palms of her hands up in a gesture of confusion and frustration.
A few minutes later, she was working on a passage from another challenging text from
The Lady or the Tiger. The computer asked her to define the meaning of the word, imperious, in
the sentence, “The imperious king ordered his subjects around.” Not having a clue of how to
answer the question, she blurted out loud, “I actually don’t know what these words mean.” As
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

82
these observations illustrate, the inability of students to make sense of the reading materials in an
online setting can be frustrating and overwhelming, especially for credit deficient students who
are trying to make up a class that they have already failed in the past.
Respondent C did point out that when students were stuck on a question or a concept, that
one of the benefits of an online program was that students could be taught to take control of their
own learning by using online resources:
I think one of the advantages I see is that I’ve been able to show students ways to
find information that they need that I don't know they necessarily get all the time
in traditional teacher directed classes…. I can show them other things online,
other resources online where they can go and sort of help themselves figure out
how to learn the material. So I think there's some advantage, that it teaches them
to be resourceful when maybe just in a traditional class with one teacher, they
think the only resource is the teacher.
This did in fact occur during the observations on her campus. As one of her students was
working online, he encountered the question, “The model looked ________ with her sunken in
cheeks and protruding cheekbones.”
The student was unsure as to which of the four answer choices was correct, so he
switched over to Google and looked up the definitions of the answer choices. He then selected
gaunt as the correct answer. As Respondent C pointed out, students can be taught to be
resourceful and use online resources to figure things and not depend solely on the teacher.
A major caveat of accessing online resources in this way, though, is that it may actually
lead to less learning if not done correctly or without guidelines. For example, Respondent G
explained that without checks and balances, there are easy ways to “game the system.”
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

83
Respondent G demonstrated how some students have overly relied on Google, not to learn the
material for themselves, but simply as a zero-effort approach of getting the right answer on a test.
Respondent G logged in to the system, pulled up a student’s quiz, and copied and pasted the
following multiple choice question into the Google search field: “What gives Congress the
ability to do more than is stated in the Constitution?”
The search results page came up, and the very first link from wiki.answers.com
displayed, “Answer: the elastic clause.” The Google search result yielded not only the exact
wording of the question, but the exact wording of the answer as well, just as they appeared on the
test, and it demonstrated how students could indeed easily game the system. They did not even
have to read a single word from the passage in order to get the right answer. All they had to do
was Google the question verbatim, and someone somewhere on the Internet had already posted
the answer. Students did not even need to type the question. A simple copy and paste did the
trick, and the answer appeared, with no reading and no real learning required. This was akin to
students getting a hold of the teacher’s answer key before the test, except that this answer key
was available online and could not be locked safely away in a file cabinet or in a teacher’s desk.
Observations at other campuses also revealed how easy it was for students to opt out of
doing the reading and the impact that that had on their achievement. At Respondent C’s school,
a student was observed working on Aventa. After reviewing his grade book for about five
minutes, he proceeded to the lesson on Advertising. The student scrolled through the pages
rather quickly. The instructions on the computer screen read, “Before you begin this section,
download and print this study guide and take notes.” However, he bypassed the download,
skipped the vocabulary list, watched only a portion of the video, and skimmed through the
attachment. His results were mixed on the three quizzes that he took. He passed two quizzes
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

84
with scores of 70% and 90%. However, he failed a third quiz two times in a row with scores of
60%, followed by 50%. At the end of the session, he confided to his teacher, “I didn’t review. I
went through it too fast.”
Respondent A and Respondent G both explained that an accountability system needs to
be in place to make sure students were actually reading the material and were actually learning.
At both of their campuses, in order to receive credit for their assignments, students were required
to take notes on paper and turn them in. Respondent A explained:
The reason why I required students to do all of this was because from what I saw
they weren’t learning much. So I thought, yeah, I can take the risk of making
them do all these notes and maybe it’ll slow them down, maybe it’ll discourage
them from completing the class, but what I have actually found is that because
they learn the stuff from doing their notes and from actually reading the material,
it kind of motivates their learning because they see how they’re actually doing
well.
Additionally, she added that with this accountability system in place, “This year already
is going better. Like I said, I’m not resetting quizzes as often. I see students actually
learning.”
The examples throughout this chapter demonstrated that the reading demands
placed on students in an online setting can be quite daunting, even for stronger readers,
and especially for weaker readers. Unfortunately, credit deficient students tended to be
those weaker readers who were more likely to struggle in an online setting and therefore
needed more systems and support in place. As the examples showed, there are many
ways in which comprehension can go awry for students, ranging form lack of proficiency
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

85
with grammatical inflections that change the meaning of text to vocabulary words needed
in the content areas. As Respondent E put it, “If you look at literacy in it’s entirety…
when you look at reading, it’s a very sophisticated process.”
Respondent A further explained:
Just to make this clear, it’s a challenge in my opinion in and out of the online
setting…. It’s a challenge that teachers have to get their students to want to read.
I think it’s a challenge everywhere, not just in an online class.
This comment about reading being a struggle for students across the board was consistent with
the sentiments of the Southern Regional Education Board (2009). The SREB asserted that
adolescent reading should be an immediate priority in middle schools and high schools because
reading with comprehension defines learning in all subject areas, and students who perform
poorly in reading tended to struggle in other subject areas as well. The findings for this research
question supported this notion, suggesting that reading skills matter and make a difference in an
online environment as well.
Student Completion of Online Credit Recovery Programs
As was described earlier, each of the schools in this qualitative study had similar reasons
for implementing online credit recovery programs, yet each had wildly divergent experiences
implementing these programs. Each of the schools had vastly different numbers of students
using online credit recovery, ranging from zero to 200, and the implementation at each school
varied considerably as well. This section summarizes the diverse experiences that these schools
had in terms of students completing their online credit recovery programs. Keep in mind that
“School A” in these descriptions does not necessarily correspond to “Respondent A” as each
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

86
school in this qualitative study may have had more than one respondent answering interview
questions.
School A had total enrollment of approximately 350 students in 2012 and currently has
just 10 licenses for Aventa. School A only uses online credit recovery for specific, higher
achieving students when they feel that it will actually be effective for them. According to staff,
these students need to be self-driven and motivated, and they need to “drive their success.” The
school had mixed results with student completion of their online credit recovery programs,
ranging from a senior who “sailed” through the program and completed an Algebra II course in
two weeks to another student who failed miserably because he did not have enough basic math
skills. The student who failed miserably was able to “sit through the quizzes,” but when it came
to the final exam, it was too overwhelming for him. This student is now in an English credit
recovery class and is doing better because he was stronger in reading than he was in math. This
suggested that how you perform in an online credit recovery course depended on how you have
performed in that subject in the past. As the respondent explained, if a student does not have at
least basic skills, then putting them in an online course would be setting them up for failure. The
exact overall completion data for this school in the previous year was not available as the person
who was in charge of the program last year was no longer with the school, but the current person
in charge did have anecdotal data of specific cases such as those above that stood out.
School B had total enrollment of 302 students in 2012 and currently has zero students
enrolled in online credit recovery. The previous year, they had three students enrolled in online
credit recovery taking geometry. Two of the students passed, and one did not. The third student
who did not pass was able to get through the quizzes, but he could not get past the essay portion
and the geometric proofs. The principal explained that he was discontinuing he program next
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

87
year because there was no substitute for good first instruction and he preferred an actual teacher.
He explained that if he had to do an online program again, he would have a live teacher to
support the students. Consequently, he explained, if he had to pay for the program and pay for a
teacher at the same time, it would be double the cost, so he might as well hire another teacher.
School C had a total enrollment of 781 students in 2012. This year, they have
approximately 50 students enrolled in pure online credit recovery and an additional 70 students
in a hybrid model where there is both an online element and a traditional face-to-face element as
well. When asked about student completion of these programs, staff explained that all students
complete their courses and that there is no option for them to not complete a class. Further, the
length of the program is different for each student. Staff explained that some students are there
for six months, some are there for two months, and some are there for two years. Therefore,
since the time frame by which course completion is measured is not bound by a traditional
quarter or semester schedule, it made it difficult to pin down a specific completion rate for this
school. This also illustrated the point that each of the schools in this qualitative study had wildly
divergent experiences implementing online credit recovery programs. On the average, though,
School C explained that students usually complete a class in approximately four to six weeks and
that ten students have already graduated at this point in the year.
School D had a total enrollment of 439 students in 2012, and this year, 78 students were
using online credit recovery. The principal inherited the program, which was already in place
when he became principal of the school. Of the 78 students enrolled in online credit recovery,
only one was able to successfully complete the course, which was described as “dismal.” As a
result, this school was discontinuing the program next year in favor of traditional face-to-face
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

88
instruction. Like the principal of School B, this principal explained that there is no substitute for
a phenomenal teacher.
School E had 231 students in 2012, which grew to 450 students in the current year.
Currently approximately 200 students are enrolled in online credit recovery. Last year, staff
explained that the completion rate was only about 30%, which was one of the higher percentages
among schools in the organization. In the previous year, the program was staffed by a collection
of staff members who taught other subjects and were asked to cover the computer lab during
their free periods. As a result, implementation was very inconsistent. This year, there is a full
time person in charge of the entire program, and there is a new accountability system in place.
Consequently, students are performing better this year with fewer quiz resets, and the staff
member in charge felt that they would have a higher completion rate this year than the 30% from
the previous year.
Summary
The following excerpt from a credit deficient high school students’ writing assignment
(with typographical errors and incorrectly spaced punctuation included) simultaneously captures
both the promise and the challenge of using online learning for credit recovery:
My greatest challenge was graduating highschool and I am still working on it ,I
plan on graduating this year since I slacked off last year .I want to graduate
highschool so I can have better opportunities and to prove everyone who doubted
me wrong.
This excerpt shows the opportunity that online learning opens up for motivated students who
would otherwise have limited opportunities to prove themselves by making up for past
shortcomings. At the same time, the basic errors in writing of this high school student such as
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

89
not knowing that the term high school was made up of two words and was not the single word
highschool reveal just how deep those shortcomings are, and they forewarn of the challenges that
lay ahead for this student in a text-heavy online environment. This data analysis section sought
to gain insight into how to make those opportunities wider and make the struggles smaller.
The chapter analyzed the qualitative data that was collected as they pertained to the three
research questions. The first research question about how students were placed in online credit
recovery showed that convenience was a major justification for online credit recovery because it
could be used to help students quickly make up missing credits. However, better learning was
not an explicitly stated justification for using online credit recovery. The second research
question showed that the lack of teacher support made learning more difficult, but that the ability
to self-pace was a key advantage. Additionally, self-regulation and having basic foundational
skills were prerequisites to online success. The third research question explained how reading
proficiency was one of those foundational yet complex and highly nuanced prerequisites for
students to succeed online. The next chapter will provide summary conclusions and
recommendations.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

90
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
Summary
As a novel approach to addressing the long-standing high school dropout problem, little
was previously known about online credit recovery for credit deficient students and the impact
that reading proficiency had on student success in these programs. Online credit recovery has
the potential to be a disruptive innovation that dramatically shifts the status quo and makes a
meaningful dent the high school dropout problem. However, based on the findings of this
qualitative study, online credit recovery still has a long way to go in terms of being a viable
solution, especially since online courses have a high dropout rate themselves.
While there are many factors that impact student success in online credit recovery, this
dissertation examined the specific factor of reading proficiency. This factor was explored
because success in reading has an impact on success in other areas as well as was shown by
Hernandez (2011) and the Southern Regional Education Board (2009). Therefore, since past
reading success may predict future success not just in reading but in many areas of one’s life, it
stood to reason that it might have an impact on student success in online credit recovery
programs as well. Consequently, the purpose of this qualitative study was to better understand
whether such a relationship existed, thereby providing insight to practitioners interested in
developing online credit recovery programs for their students.
This study was guided by the following three research questions:
1. What criteria do schools use to identify students for participation in credit recovery
courses?
2. What are the components of online credit recovery programs that schools feel either
facilitate learning or make it more difficult for students to complete a course?
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

91
3. How does past reading achievement impact student success in online credit recovery
programs?
The sample for this study consisted to five public charter high schools in or near South
Los Angeles. Charter public high schools were selected because they have more readily adopted
online credit recovery programs compared to traditional public high schools, which tend to use
more traditional face-to-face credit recovery options such as adult school. This study used a
qualitative approach to collect data. Interviews were conducted with school staff, including a
Chief Achievement Officer, two Principals, and Assistant Principal, two coordinators, and two
teachers. In order to provide triangulation, observations at the various school sites were
conducted, and an anonymous student survey was administered.
A number of key findings emerged to shed light on each of the three research questions.
In regards to the first research question, convenience turned out to be a major factor that
compelled schools to use online credit recovery. It was more convenient for students because
they could finish courses faster. It was convenient for schools because they had greater access to
resources, and it freed them from having to spend time getting UC course approval. Not a single
respondent explicitly mentioned “better learning” as a justification for online credit recovery.
However, even though “better learning” may have been preferred over “convenience,” it did not
diminish the value of the convenience factor when using online programs. Christensen et al.
(2011) would argue that even if better learning did not occur in an online setting, some learning
did occur, and for a high school student at risk of dropping out completely, some learning is
better than no learning at all.
The second research question explored the components of online credit recovery that
facilitated learning or made it more difficult for students to complete a course. Respondents
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

92
explained that the lack of support from a live teacher was a factor that made learning more
difficult online. As one respondent expressed, “No matter what canned program or what new
program rolls out, there really isn’t a substitute for just a phenomenal teacher.” Since online
programs lacked that human touch and there was no live teacher to rely on, respondents
expressed that students needed to be able to rely on themselves. In other words, they needed to
be self-regulated learners. Additionally, respondents explained that students needed to have at
least basic foundational skills in order to make it through an online course. These findings
supported Uhlig’s (2002) assertion that online learning is not for everyone. However, for
students who were self-motivated and who did possess at least basic skills, online learning
allowed students to go at their own pace and neither be rushed nor held back by their classmates.
Therefore, a factor that facilitated learning was the ability to provide customized learning. This
also showed how “better learning” actually could occur in an online environment if the
conditions were right.
Since online programs tended to be text heavy and required a lot of reading, the third
research question looked at how reading proficiency impacted student success in online credit
recovery programs. The respondents felt that students’ proficiency in reading affected their
performance in other areas, including in an online environment. They explained that poor
readers were especially impacted when they could not rely on the teacher, such as during
assessments. Interviews and observation revealed that reading skills impacted achievement not
only during the assessment portions of online programs, but during the instructional portion as
well. There were many ways in which reading comprehension could go awry, including being
confused about the nuances of basic grammar to grappling with challenging academic
vocabulary. These literacy barriers could be frustrating and overwhelming for credit deficient
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

93
students, especially since they have already failed the class at least once before and found
themselves struggling yet again.
Conclusions
Reading Skills Influence Student Performance
Through a series of interviews, observations, and surveys, this qualitative study captured
the divergent experiences that various charter public high schools have had with online credit
recovery. Some have had positive experiences with online credit recovery programs, while
others have found it to not be a good fit for their students. Although the overall experiences of
each of these schools varied, one commonality among them was that the staff members of these
schools all perceived that reading skills influenced student performance in a text-based online
environment.
First of all, for credit deficient students in an online credit recovery course, reading skills
mattered because you end up understanding the material better if you are a better reader. An
anecdote that stood out that illustrated this point is that of the student who was unable to fully
appreciate Edgar Allen Poe’s classic short story The Tell-Tale Heart. The student “looked at”
the story but did not really understand what he was reading, and subsequently, he did not “get it,”
to the dismay of his teacher. He was unable to extract meaning from the text, and according to
the Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (2001), “If readers can read the
words but do not understand what they are reading, they are not really reading” (p. 48).
Subsequently, if students are not really reading in an online environment, they are not really
learning. Therefore, it made sense when respondents indicated that stronger readers tended to do
better in online courses. They simply understood more of the material that was presented to
them.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

94
Secondly, reading skills mattered in an online environment because students were better
able to rely on themselves, which was especially important when there was no teacher present.
Respondents perceived that poor readers tended to struggle online when they were unable to rely
on the teacher for help, such as during assessments that they were supposed to take on their own.
Hu and Gramling (2009) argued that self-regulation was a powerful predictor of academic
achievement, and based on this study, one could argue that in turn, self-regulation may then be
predicted by stronger reading skills.
Third, reading skills mattered in an online environment because it saved time. It is
unfortunate when students spend an entire semester in a course only to wind up failing in the end
because it means they have to take the entire course again. When that happens and students do
not learn something right the first time, it then takes at least twice as long as it should to learn
something. From an economic standpoint, this is a tremendous opportunity cost because that
time spent repeating a course could have been spent learning something new instead. An
example that illustrated this is the student who was observed scrolling too quickly through the
reading material. He ended up failing a quiz, retaking it, and failing again. He confided to his
teacher, “I went through it too fast.” Ironically, in an attempt to save time by rushing and not
really doing the reading, he ended up wasting time by having to repeat the lesson at least two
more times. A better reader would have taken his time and would have saved time in the
process.
Basic Academic Skills Influence Student Performance
In addition to the conclusion above that reading skills matter is the conclusion that the
basics such as vocabulary, grammar, and background knowledge matter as well in an online
environment. During the interviews, respondents perceived that credit deficient students
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

95
encountered stumbling blocks when they lacked these fundamental skills. As one respondent
expressed, putting a student online who has little or no skills would be setting them up for
failure. Unfortunately these days, basic skills are too often dismissed as trifling and mundane.
This may stem from the common misconception that the word “basic” only means “plain,”
“ordinary,” or “unsophisticated.” After all, when you purchase a “basic” roll of paper towels
from the supermarket, you are buying the cheapest brand that merely does an adequate job but is
not the highest quality product available. With this limited definition of “basic,” it is no wonder
that basic skills are often looked down upon and undervalued.
However, the primary definition of the word “basic” is not “plain,” “ordinary,” or
“unsophisticated.” In fact, the word “basic” actually means forming a “base” or a “foundation.”
This means that something that is “basic” is “foundational,” and therefore, that makes it
“essential.” When something is thought of as “essential,” it evokes a far different emotion than
using the word “ordinary.” It is true that credit deficient students who lack the basics are missing
ordinarily skills that everyone should have. However, it stirs up a greater sense of urgency when
the primary and more powerful definition of the word “basic” is used instead. Then, one can
more easily understand why the basics matter so much and why students who lack the basics
struggle. They are not simply missing ordinary skills, but rather they are missing essential skills.
As a result, it is important to view basic skills with a proper mindset, including when
having students work in online environments. To view basic skills as “unsophisticated” and
“ordinary” rather than viewing them as “essential” would be a disservice to students because it
would fail to recognize the power of having a solid base or foundation. As was shown in the
study, credit deficient students who lacked basic skills struggled needlessly and repeatedly
because they lacked foundational skills. Schools need to make sure their students have solid
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

96
basic reading skills because it gives them Power Over Words, and it gives them the ability to
reach higher levels of achievement. The counterpart to Power Over Words is Power Over
Numbers, which pertains to basic or foundational skills that are essential for reaching higher
levels in mathematics.
The Human Touch Influences Student Performance
A final conclusion from this study is that for credit deficient students, many of whom are
poor readers, the human touch does matter. This is ironic because although online courses are
marketed and perceived as driven by technology, credit deficient students tend to do better in an
online environment when they have the support of an actual person. Darling-Hammond (1999)
and Haycock (1998) argue that teacher quality is the most important factor affecting student
achievement. It turns out that this may be true not only in a traditional face-to-face classroom
setting, but in an online environment as well, especially for credit deficient students who struggle
with reading.
An important interview response from this study seemed rather immaterial at first, but
upon closer inspection, provided insight about how to use an online setting for credit deficient
students who struggle with reading. The respondent was simply explaining her job duties, and
she explained that it was her responsibility to make sure that, “…students are able to access
curriculum in a nurturing and safe environment where you have adults who are equipped and
prepared each day to ensure students are achieving academically.”
At first, it may seem that the “nurturing and safe environment” that she spoke of referred
to a face-to-face environment, but a “nurturing and safe environment” is just as applicable in an
online environment as well. When she spoke of adults being “equipped,” it could have meant
equipped in the traditional sense as in equipped with classroom materials and teaching skills, but
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

97
it could also have meant equipped with online resources as well. This would support the view
that for struggling readers who needed that human touch, online credit recovery courses could be
used to equip teachers and not necessarily to replace them. Additionally, when she spoke of
students being able to “access curriculum,” this access could apply to both a face-to-face
environment as well as an online environment. Schools can do much to make sure that students
have the reading skills needed to better access and understand the curriculum, whether that
curriculum is delivered face-to-face or online, and not be intimidated by it or feel powerless
against it. In short, those human touch factors that make a traditional face-to-face environment
successful are the same factors that can make an online environment successful as well.
Recommendations for Future Research
Prior to this study, little was previously known about online credit recovery for high
school students and the impact that reading proficiency had on student success in these
programs. This study provided an extensive review of this topic and has contributed to the
research base of this relatively new phenomenon. Additionally, this study compels one to ask
future research questions in order to understand the topic more in-depth. These questions
include the following:
• Since you need to read in order to understand, what are aspects of a good
accountability system that ensure that students actually read in an online course?
• This dissertation focused on how reading skills impact student success in online
credit recovery programs. Similarly, what is the impact of foundational math skills
on student success in online credit recovery programs?
• Suh and Suh (2007) cautioned that school systems should not wait until high school
to address the dropout issue because it may be too late for most students. Knowing
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

98
that students have been slipping through the cracks and are arriving at high school
unprepared, what are effective strategies that can quickly bring their reading skills up
to speed so late in the game? Similarly what are effective strategies that can quickly
bring up students’ math skills as well?
• Hu and Gramling (2009) explained that self-regulated learning is a powerful predictor
of academic achievement. By the same token, to what extent is reading achievement
a predictor of self-regulated learning?
• Stronger readers tended to do better in online courses than struggling readers. With
this in mind, what are specific subgroups of stronger readers who would benefit from
online courses? Some subgroups may include advanced students, teenage parents,
and students with special needs. Two respondents indicated that students who had
Attention Deficit Disorder and Asperger’s Syndrome performed better in an online
setting than in a face-to-face setting surrounded by other students.
• The cost of online credit recovery programs was an important consideration for two
of the respondents. Therefore, what is the return on investment (ROI) on online
credit recovery programs compared to face-to-face classes?
• Since respondents indicated that there was no substitute for a phenomenal teacher,
how do you provide exponentially more students with access to these phenomenal
teachers by using online learning as a distribution channel?
Implications
About a million students drop out of high school each year, and this is a problem that has
vexed the American public education system for several decades. As more and more schools
adopt online credit recovery as a means to address this problem, it is important that they
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

99
understand the nuances of such programs and recognize the impact that reading proficiency has
on student success in the these programs. For example, an important nuance is that online credit
recovery programs as they exist today, even good ones that are thoughtfully administered, cannot
by themselves fully address the full range of learning challenges of students who have amassed
credit deficiencies. There are too many problems such as reading issues that have been
compounding for years that need to be addressed. For the increasing number of students who
enroll in online credit recovery, it will either be an opportunity to finally complete a course for
which success had previously been out of reach, or another opportunity to fail the course yet
again. By increasing reading proficiency and giving students “Power Over Words,” schools can
do much to make sure more students fall into the former category and not the latter.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

100
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY:
Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Balfanz, R., Bridgeland, J. M., Bruce, M., & Fox, J. H. (2012). Building a grad nation: Progress
and challenge in ending the high school dropout epidemic. Washington, DC: Civic
Enterprises.
Banas, E. J., & Emory, W. F. (1998). History and issues of distance learning. Public
Administration Quarterly, 22(3), 365-383.
Bruce, M., Bridgeland, J. M., Fox, J. H., & Balfanz, R. (2011). On track for success: The use of
early warning indicator and intervention systems to build a grad nation. Washington,
DC: Civic Enterprises.
Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. (2001). Put reading first: The
research building blocks for teaching children to read. Ann Arbor, MI: Author.
Christensen, C. M., & Horn, M. B. (2008). How do we transform our schools?: Use technologies
that compete against nothing. Education Next, 8(3), 12-19.
Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2011). Disrupting class: How disruptive
innovation will change the way the world learns. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy
evidence. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
Desai, M. S., Hart, J., & Richards, T. C. (2008). E-learning: Paradigm shift in education.
Education, 129(2), 327-334.
Harrington, D. (1999). Teaching statistics: A comparison of traditional classroom and
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

101
programmed instruction/distance learning approaches. Journal of Social Work Education,
35(3), 343.
Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters… A lot. OAH Magazine of History, 13(1), 61-63.
Heckman, J. J., & LaFontaine, P. A. (2007). The American high school graduation rate: Trends
and levels. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hernandez, D. (2011). Double jeopardy: How third-grade reading skills and poverty influence
high school graduation. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Hsu, Y., Ching, Y., Mathews, J. P., & Carr-Chellman, A. (2009). Undergraduate students' self-
regulated learning experience in web-based learning environments. Quarterly Review of
Distance Education, 10(2), 109-121.
Hu, H., & Gramling, J. (2009). Learning strategies for success in a web-based course: A
descriptive exploration. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(2), 123-134.
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and instruction (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Merrill Prentice Hall.
Maring, J., Costello, E., & Plack, M. M. (2008). Student outcomes in a pathophysiology course
based on mode of delivery: Distance versus traditional classroom learning. Journal of
Physical Therapy Education, 22(1), 24-32.
Morrison, G. R., & Anglin, G. J. (2005). An instructional design approach for effective
shovelware: Modifying materials for distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 7(1), 63-74.
O'Hanlon, C. (2009). Credit recovery software: The new summer school districts are using
online programs to get at-risk students back on track to graduation. T.H.E. Journal
(Technological Horizons In Education), 36(2), 16-19.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

102
Reisetter, M., & Boris, G. (2004). What works: Student perceptions of effective elements in
online learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(4), 277-291.
Sadik, A., & Reisman, S. (2004). Design and implementation of a web-based learning
environment: Lessons learned. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(3), 157-171.
Southern Regional Education Board. (2009). A critical mission: Making adolescent reading a
priority in SREB states. Atlanta, GA: Author.
Suh, S., & Suh, J. (2007). Risk factors and levels of risk for high school dropouts. Professional
School Counseling, 10(3), 297-306.
Tyler, J. H., & Lofstrom, M. (2009). Finishing high school: Alternative pathways and dropout
recovery. The Future of Children, 19(1), 77-103.
Uhlig, G. E. (2002). The present and future of distance learning. Education, 122(4), 670-673.
Watson, J., & Gemin, B. (2008). Promising practices in online learning: Using online learning
for at-risk students and credit recovery. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online
Learning.
Zhang, Y. (2005). Distance learning receptivity: Are they ready yet? Quarterly Review of
Distance Education, 6(1), 45-53.
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

103
Appendix A
Interview Protocols

PART 1: Questions About Identifying Students for Participation in Credit Recovery
Courses
1. What is your job title at the school?
a. What are you responsible for in this capacity?
b. What are your responsibilities specifically as they relate to student achievement?
2. The students at any given school have a wide range of academic abilities from high
achieving students to struggling students at risk of dropping out. Tell me about the
students who are struggling academically at your school.
a. What have you noticed are common struggles amongst these students that cause them
to do poorly in school?
b. How does the school take this into consideration when scheduling students’ academic
programs?
3. How are you involved with scheduling students’ academic programs in light of their
academic needs?
i. How are you involved in scheduling students’ regular courses?
ii. How are you involved in scheduling intervention courses such as after school,
summer school, or Saturday school?
iii. How are you involved in scheduling credit recovery courses?
4. What is the process used to identify students who have failed a class and are now missing
credits?
5. If a student fails a class and is now missing credits, how does the school respond?
6. What is done to help these students make up missing credits?
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

104
7. Is there an online credit recovery program?
a. Please describe this program for me.
b. What are the benefits of taking an online credit recovery course versus a face-to-face
course?
c. What are the drawbacks of taking an online credit recovery course versus a face-to-
face course?
8. How are students selected to participate in this program?
9. Other than the fact that a student has failed a class and is missing credits, what other
criteria are used to determine whether a not a student should participate in an online
credit recovery course?
10. Describe an ideal student who would benefit from the program.
11. What factors would preclude students from being successful in an online credit recovery
program?
PART 2: Questions About Online Credit Recovery Courses
1. Earlier, you gave an overview of the online credit recovery program used at the school.
An online learning environment can be quite different from a traditional face-to-face
classroom setting. From your observations, what are the key differences between a face-
to-face setting and an online environment?
a. Which of these differences facilitate learning?
i. How?
b. Which of these differences make learning more difficult for students?
i. How?
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

105
2. What have been your students’ reactions to the online environment compared to a face-
to-face setting?
a. What have they found helpful about an online learning environment?
b. What have they found frustrating about an online learning environment?
3. How does the school know when students are struggling in online credit recovery
courses?
4. How does the school know why students are struggling?
5. What kinds of students have been more successful in an online credit recovery course?
6. What kinds of students tend to struggle in these courses?
7. Describe the success rate of your school’s online credit recovery program so far.
8. What has been your students’ response when they fail a traditional face-to-face class, take
online credit recovery to make up the course, but then fail the class again, this time in the
online format?
9. What are the ways, if any, that the school prepares students to negotiate the differences
between an online learning environment and a traditional face-to-face classroom setting?
10. If you could redesign the credit recovery program to dramatically increase the success
rate of the program, what would you do?
11. If you could better prepare students to participate in credit recovery program to
dramatically increase the success rate of the program, what would you do?
PART 3: Questions About How Past Reading Achievement Impacts Success Rates in
Online Credit Recovery Programs
1. At your school, to what extent do students’ proficiency in reading impact their success in
other subjects?
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

106
2. At your school, to what extent do students’ proficiency in reading impact their success in
online credit recovery programs?
3. What has the school done to find out why struggling readers have difficulty
understanding what they are reading?
4. What does the school do when they know that students are struggling with reading?
5. Often, students have been promoted to high school even though they did not have basic
academic skills necessary to make it though high school. What does the school do when
a high school student is not reading at a high school level (i.e., at a middle school or an
elementary school level)?
6. Since online learning courses tend to be text heavy, how does the school address
students’ reading proficiency levels when students take online credit recovery courses?
7. How would addressing students’ reading skills help them to do better in credit recovery
programs?
8. What does the school do to make sure students have the prerequisite reading skills before
enrolling them in online credit recovery programs?
9. Are the any other questions that I didn’t think to ask?
READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

107
Appendix B
Anonymous Student Survey

What online credit recovery class are you taking right now?
In your opinion, which is harder overall? Taking a class in person or taking a class online?
Circle one.
1

Taking a class
in person
is much
harder
than taking a
class online.
2

Taking a class
in person
is a little
harder than
taking a class
online.
3

Taking a class
in person and
taking a class
online are
about the
same.
4

Taking a class
online
is a little
harder than
taking a class in
person.
5

Taking a class
online
is a much
harder than
taking a class
in person.

Think about your experience in your online credit recovery class.
What are two things about the online class that make learning easier for you than an in-person
class?
1.
2.
What are two things about the online class that make learning harder for you than an in-person
class?
1.
2.
How comfortable are you with the reading assignments in the online course? Circle one.
1

The reading
assignments are
very difficult
to understand.
2

The reading
assignments are
somewhat
difficult
to understand.
3

The reading
assignments are
neither difficult
nor easy.
4

The reading
assignments are
somewhat easy
to understand.
5

The reading
assignments are
very easy
to understand.

READING PROFICIENCY AND ONLINE CREDIT RECOVERY

108
Please describe your reading skills. Circle one.
1

I struggle a lot
with reading
2

I struggle a little
with reading.
3

I’m an average
reader.
4

I’m a good
reader.
5

I’m an excellent
reader.

If you had to take a credit recovery class again, what type of class you would prefer?
1

Strong
preference for
online class.
2

Medium
preference for
online class.
3

Equal
preference for
online or in
person
4

Medium
preference for
in person class.
5

Strong
preference for
in person class.

Why would you prefer to take this type (online or in person) of class?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative study applied the theory that reading skills are predictive of high school graduation to examine the impact that reading proficiency has on student success in online credit recovery programs for credit deficient students, many of whom struggle with reading. Since reading proficiency impacts academic achievement in general, this study sought to understand whether reading proficiency impacts student success in online credit recovery programs in particular. The study examined how schools identified students to participate in online credit recovery, the program components that either facilitated or interfered with learning, and how reading achievement impacted student success in these online programs. Through interviews with school staff, observations of students working online, and anonymous student surveys, this study captured the divergent experiences that five charter public high schools have had with online credit recovery. Interview, observation, and survey data were transcribed and coded for analysis. Findings indicated that convenience was a compelling reason to enroll students in online credit recovery because it opened up opportunities for learning. However, learning online was made more difficult because of the lack of an actual teacher, although a key advantage was the ability to self-pace and to neither be rushed nor held back by one’s classmates. Reading skills mattered in a text-based online environment because it could contribute to better understanding of the material, it allowed for better self-regulation, and it saved time. This study contributed to the research base for the relatively new phenomenon of online credit recovery, and it provided insight into how to improve student success in these programs by taking students’ reading skills into account.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Self-regulation and online course satisfaction in high school

PDF

The relationship of students' self-regulation and self-efficacy in an online learning environment

PDF

Addiction recovery: success in the recovery process

PDF

Blended learning in a credit recovery program: emerging insights and issues

PDF

Analysis of southern California Title I high school student utilization of online courses to fulfill graduation requirements

PDF

Program elements for special needs students in a hybrid school setting

PDF

Perceptions of TESOL teacher education: strengths, weaknesses, characteristics, and effective components

PDF

The influence of parental involvement, self-efficacy, locus of control, and acculturation on academic achievement among Latino high school students

PDF

Comparing the effectiveness of online and face-to-face classes among California community college students

PDF

Instructional proficiency strategies for middle school English language learners

PDF

The impact of dual enrollment programs on first-year college success for Hispanic students from low-socioeconomic-status communities: a promising practice

PDF

An exploration of student experiences in a preparation program for online classes in the California community college system

PDF

Organizational leadership and institutional factors related to the implementation of online educational programming in California community colleges

PDF

Vocational education graduates: a mixed methods analysis on beliefs and influences of career choice and persistence

PDF

A study of the leadership strategies of urban elementary school principals with effective inclusion programs for autistic students in the general education setting for a majority of the school day

PDF

Taiwanese students' perceived English oral proficiency in relation to communication strategies

PDF

The critical aspects of oversight that suburban superintendents, as instructional leaders, must employ to improve instruction

PDF

A study of online project-based learning with Gambassa: crossroads of informal contracting and cloud management systems

PDF

The implications of using online classes with at-risk students in an alternative education setting

PDF

Blended learning: developing flexibility in education through internal innovation

Asset Metadata

Creator Palisoc, Randolph P. (author)

Core Title The effect of reading proficiency on student success in online credit recovery programs

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/10/2013

Defense Date 03/18/2013

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag credit recovery,dropout,high school dropout,high school reading,OAI-PMH Harvest,online credit recovery,Reading,reading proficiency

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hentschke, Guilbert C. (committee chair), Marsh, David D. (committee member), Robles, Darline P. (committee member)

Creator Email randypalisoc@gmail.com,rpalisoc@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-234912

Unique identifier UC11293851

Identifier etd-PalisocRan-1535.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-234912 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-PalisocRan-1535-2.pdf

Dmrecord 234912

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Palisoc, Randolph P.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA