1. COLLABORATION PRACTICES AND ATTITUDES FOR STUDENTS IN CYBER CHARTER CLASSROOMS Middle School Level

2. OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION  1. Introduction to Cyber Charter Schools (5 minutes)  2. Supporting Research(3 minutes)  3. Rationale Behind our Work (4 minutes)  4. Methodology and Sample (4 minutes)  5. Results and Discussion (5 minutes)  6. Implications (5 minutes)  7. Questions and Discussion (Remainder of Time)

3. WHAT ARE CHARTER SCHOOLS? Charter School Traditional Public School

4. WHAT ARE CYBER CHARTER SCHOOLS? Cyber CharterCharter

5. SUPPORTING RESEARCH Taken from Garrison, Anderson, & Archer(2000)

6. RATIONALE BEHIND OUR WORK - Student voice has been used in other K-12 settings (Jenkins, 2008) but not yet in cyber charter school science classrooms - Hasler-Waters, Barbour, and Menchaca (2014) call for more research into cyber charter schools

7. METHODOLOGY  We created a survey based off of Pyo’s (2001) thesis  Modified to focus on student research participants  Amended reading level to middle school appropriate  Survey created in REDCap

8. SAMPLE  Target Population – Middle school students in cyber charter school  Gained parental/guardian consent via an online document and then google form to complete to provide contact information  52 parents expressed interest in having their child complete the survey  20 student completed the survey  This represents.9% of the total middle school population but 38% of the available student population

9. RESULTS GenderMaleFemale 614 Ages1112131415 24761

10. AGES OF PARTICIPANTS Ages1112131415 24761

13. Computer Choice DesktopLaptop 614 Time Spent on Schoolwork (Daily) Less than 1 hour0 1-2 hours2 2-3 hours2 3-4 hours6 4-5 hours5 5-6 hours1 6-7 hours3 7-8 hours1

16. Attitudes Towards Learning and Interaction Mean Supports Science Learning 3.89 Positive Interactions with Peers 3.67 Positive Interactions with Teachers 3.78 Positive Online Learning Environment 3.91

17. Interactions with Peers Bullied MeanSocial Anxiety MeanOverall Population Mean I feel very connected with other students in the class 3.173.333.26 Working with other students helps me learn about science. 3.173.833.74 Gives me lots of opportunities to work with other students. 3.333.833.65 Gives me a chance to learn what my peers think about science 3.674.173.95

18. IMPLICATIONS  Questions revolving around interactions with peers were near the bottom when sorted by mean  50% of students were identified as choosing the school for social anxiety/bullying reasons  This suggests that extra emphasis needs to be put into making a collaborative learning environment safe and secure  We suggest all students in online K-12 school take an orientation class for proper behavior online and how an online learning community may be different than other learning settings they have been in  Lack of generalizability due to small sample size  More research needs to be done in this area, including qualitative research, focusing specifically on interactions with peers, and understanding more about the media through which discussions and communication take place

19. QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION

20. REFERENCES  Arbaugh, B. J., & Garrison, R. D. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172. Doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001 10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001  Brady, K. P., Umpstead, R. R., & Eckes, S. E. (2010). Uncharted Territory: The Current Legal Landscape of Public Cyber Charter Schools. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, (2), 191-273.  Garrison, D.R. (2007). Online Community of Inquiry Review: Social, Cognitive, and Teaching Presence Issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72.  Hasler-Waters, L., Barbour, M. K., & Menchaca, M. P. (2014). The nature of online charter schools: Evolution and emerging concerns. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 379-389.  Jenkins, E. W. (2008). The student voice and school science education. Studies in Science Education, 42(1), 49-88. Doi: /10.1080/03057260608560220  Polman, J. L., & Pea, R. D. (2001). Transformative communication as a cultural tool for guiding inquiry science. Science Education, 85(3), 223-238. doi:10.1002/sce.1007.  Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241-250.  Pyo, Sunhee. (2001). The Development and Validation of a Technology-integrated Learning Environments Instrument to Measure the Contributions of Online Communications to Prospective Science Teachers' Learning. Diss. Pennsylvania State University, 2001. Ann Arbor, MI: Bell & Howell Information and Learning. Print.