Students with disabilities increasingly are choosing online learning experiences. Research-based interventions need to be applied to online learning to keep these students engaged in school. From the literature on students with disabilities who are at risk, we have identified five areas of impact that can contribute to student engagement. These “5 Cs” are learner control, a flexible and rigorous curriculum, a safe climate, a caring community, and connection to students as individuals and their future goals. The 5 Cs are discussed along with their application to online learning environments, and examples of current online programs employing these strategies are given.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlackE. W. (2009). An evaluation of familial involvements' influence on student achievement in K–12 virtual schooling. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.
2.
Blackboard K12. (July, 2010). Learning in the 21st Century: 2010 trends update. Washington, DC: Author.
3.
BostL.RiccominiP. (2006). Effective instruction: An inconspicuous strategy for dropout prevention. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 301–311.
4.
BradshawC.O'BrennanL.McNeelyC. (2008). Core competencies and the prevention of school failure and early school leaving. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 122, 19–32.
5.
CarpenterJ.CavanaughC. (2012). Increasing student motivation through mentoring practices. In ArchambaultL.KennedyK. (Eds.), Lessons learned in teacher mentoring: Supporting educators in K–12 online learning environments (pp. 103–114). Vienna, VA: International Association for K–12 Online Learning.
6.
CataldiE.LairdJ.KewelRamaniA.ChapmanC. (2009). High school dropout and completion rates in the United States: 2007 compendium report. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 209-064). Retrieved from http://www.dropoutprevention.org/stats/default.htm.
7.
CavanaughC. (2004). Development and management of virtual schools: Issues and trends. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publications.
8.
CavanaughC. (2008). Distance education success factors. In TomeiL., (Ed.), Online and distance learning: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 686–692). Hershey, PA: Information Resources Management Association.
9.
CavanaughC.BlomeyerR. (Eds.). (2007). What works in K–12 online learning. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
10.
ChristleC.JolivetteK.NelsonM. (2007). School characteristics related to high school dropout rates. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 325–339.
11.
CobbB.SampleP.AlwellM.JohnsN. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral interventions, dropout, and youth with disabilities: A systematic review. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 259–275.
12.
CroningerR. G.LeeV. E. (2001). Social capital and dropping out of school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers' support and guidance. Teachers College Record, 103(4), 548–581.
13.
DanielS.WalshA.GoldstonD.ArnoldE.ReboussinB.WoodF. (2006). Suicidality, school dropout, and reading problems among adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(6), 507–514.
14.
DeshlerD.SchumakerJ. (2006). Teaching adolescents with disabilities: Accessing the general education curriculum. Thousands Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
15.
DunnC.ChambersD.RabrenK. (2006). Variables affecting students' decision to drop out of school. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 314–323.
16.
EdyburnD. L. (2010). Would you recognize Universal Design for Learning if you saw it? Ten propositions for new directions for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 33, 33–41.
17.
EisenmanL. T. (2007). Self-determination interventions: Building a foundation for school completion. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 2–8.
18.
FerdigR. E. (2010). Understanding the role and applicability of K–12 online learning to support student dropout recovery efforts. Lansing, MI: Michigan Virtual University.
19.
FerdigR. E.CavanaughC.DiPietroM.BlackE. W.DawsonK. (2010). Virtual schooling standards and best practices for teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(4), 479–503.
20.
FerdigR. E.CavanaughC. (Eds.) (2011). Lessons learned from virtual schools: Experiences and recommendations from the field. Vienna, VA: International Association for K–12 Online Learning.
21.
FichtenC. S.FerraroV.AsuncionJ. V.ChwojkaC.BarileM.NguyenM. N. (2009). Disabilities and e-learning problems and solutions: An exploratory study. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 241–256.
22.
HasselB. C.TerrellM. G. (2004). How can virtual schools be a vibrant part of meeting the choice provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act? Virtual school report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
23.
HitchcockC.StahlS. (2003). Assistive technology, Universal Design for Learning: Improved learning opportunities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(4), 45–52.
24.
HooverJ. J.PattonJ. R. (2004). Differentiating standards-based education for students with diverse needs. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 74–78.
25.
Institute of Education Sciences. (2008). IES practice guide: Dropout prevention (NCEE 2008-4025). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
26.
International Association for K–12 Online Learning. (2011). Fast facts about K–12 online learning. Vienna, VA: Author.
JohnsonG. M., (1998). Principles of instruction for at-risk learners. Preventing School Failure, 42(4), 167–174.
29.
KeelerC. G.RichterJ.Anderson-InmanL.HorneyA. M.DitsonM. (2007). Exceptional learners: Differentiated instruction online. In CavanaughC.BlomeyerR. (Eds.), What works in K–12 online learning (pp. 125–141). Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
30.
KellerJ. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e-Learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175–185.
31.
KennedyK.CavanaughC. (2010). Development and support of online teachers: The roles of mentors in virtual schools. Journal of Technology in the Classroom, 2(3), 37–42.
32.
KnestingK. (2008). Students at risk for school dropout: Supporting their persistence. Preventing School Failure, 52(4), 3–10.
33.
KohlerP. D. (1993). Best practices in transition: Substantiated or implied?Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 16(2), 107–121.
34.
KorteringL.BrazielP. (1999). School dropout from the perspective of former students: Implications for secondary special education programs. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 78–83.
35.
LeeY.ChoiJ. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 593–618.
36.
LiuF.CavanaughC. (2011). Online core course success factors in virtual school: Factors influencing student academic achievement. International Journal of E-Learning10(4), 43–65.
37.
MeansB.ToyamaY.MurphyR.BakiaM.JonesK. (2009). Evaluation of evidenced-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, U.S. Department of Education.
38.
MenziesH. M.LaneK. L. (2011). Using self-regulation strategies and functional assessment-based interventions to provide academic and behavioral support to students at risk within three-tiered models of prevention. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(4), 181–191.
39.
MeyerA.RoseD. H. (2000). Universal Design for individual differences. Educational Leadership, 58(3), 39–43.
National Longitudinal Transition Study 2. (2005). Facts from NLTS2: High school completion by youth with disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/fact_sheet_2005_11.pdf.
42.
PaceB. G.RodesilerL. B.TrippL. (2010). Pre-service English teachers and Web 2.0: Teaching and learning literacy with digital applications. In MadduxC. D.GibsonD.DodgeB. (Eds.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2010 (pp. 177–184). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education.
43.
PiccianoA.SeamanJ. (2009). Class connections: High school reform and the role of online learning. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.
44.
PishaB.CoyneP. (2001). Smart from the start: The promise of Universal Design for Learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 197–203.
45.
RepettoJ.CavanaughC.WayerN.LiuF. (2010). Virtual high schools: Improving outcomes for students with disabilities. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(2), 91–104.
46.
RepettoJ.WebbK.NeubertD.CurranC. (2006). The middle school experience: Successful teaching and transition planning for diverse learners. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
47.
RhimL.KowalJ. (2008). Demystifying special education in virtual charter schools. Alexandria, VA: Special Education Technical Assistance for Charter Schools Project.
48.
RiceK.DawleyL.GasellC.FloresC. (2008). Going virtual! Unique needs and challenges of K–12 online teachers. Washington, DC: North American Council for Online Learning.
49.
RoseD. (2001). Universal Design for Learning: Deriving guiding principles from networks that learn. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(2), 66–67.
50.
RoseR.BlomeyerR. (2007). Access and equity in online classes and virtual schools. Vienna, VA: North American Council for Online Learning.
51.
RoseR.SmithA. (2007). What works in online discussions. In CavanaughC.BlomeyerR. (Eds.), What works in K–12 online learning (pp. 143–160). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
52.
RovaiA. P. (2002). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 197–211.
53.
ScanlonD.MellardD. (2002). Academic and participation profiles of school-age dropouts with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 68, 239–258.
54.
SchultzD.FitzpatrickJ. (2011). The Michigan virtual school. In FerdigR.CavanaughC. (Eds.), Lessons learned from virtual schools: Experiences and recommendations from the field (pp. 167–188). Vienna, VA: International Association for K–12 Online Learning.
55.
SetzerB. (2011). The North Carolina virtual school. In FerdigR.CavanaughC. (Eds.), Lessons learned from virtual schools: Experiences and recommendations from the field (pp. 207–228). Vienna, VA: International Association for K–12 Online Learning.
56.
ShoreR.ShoreB. (2009). Reducing the high school dropout rate. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
57.
U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Digest of education statistics, 2008. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
WatsonJ.GeminB. (2008). Promising practices in online learning: Using online learning for at-risk students and credit recovery. Vienna, VA: International Association for K–12 Online Learning.
60.
WatsonJ.MurinA.VashawL.GeminB.RappC. (2011). Keeping pace with K–12 online learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Evergreen, CO: Evergreen Education Group.
WestEd. (2008). Evaluating online learning: Challenges and strategies for success. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
64.
YoungJ. (2011). Florida virtual school. In FerdigR.CavanaughC. (Eds.), Lessons learned from virtual schools: Experiences and recommendations from the field (pp. 79–106). Vienna, VA: International Association for K–12 Online Learning.
