After reviewing both VHS and VLACS, two similar virtual education schools, I've discovered that they are not equal for all students. VLACS offers free tuition to any individual student who resides in the state, which is fantastic. However, the cost to enroll into a class if you are not a resident is a bit shocking. Paying for these courses could pose a challenge for some students. One reason a student may seek out virtual learning may be from a result of not passing traditional classes, or other life issues created some barrier to traditional public education. On the other hand, some students may be seeking a course that is not offered at their school. If a student were not a resident, enrolling into a VLACS course would be a difficult financial decision. Who would pay for the course? Would the students public school help cover the cost or would the student be expected to pay? Similarly, VHS offers courses to all students, and the cost is pretty low. If the school is part of the "collaborative" there may be funding available to help the student cover the tuition.
Both virtual schools advertise as a flexible learning environment with the ability to house full-time and part-time students. I would envision VLACS offering more opportunities for students who are seeking alternative courses because the public education or other school doesn't quite offer what they desire, or they have some other scheduling conflicts that hinders them from obtaining the course they need at their school. I envision a typical VLACS student as one who has high intrinsic motivation, and is seeking alternate routes to gain credits and courses to help carve out their future. While, VHS offers some challenging courses up to the AP level, I would envision this program being popular with public schools who have students that are struggling to achieve the appropriate graduation credits, or have gaps in their education, for various reasons.
Within a public school system, the ideal virtual learning arrangement should be one where there is little to no cost. Whatever tuition cost might exist, the sending school should help the student acquire appropriate funding. The goal for a partnership school would be to offer enrichment courses that are not available in the school where the student can access alternate curriculum. For example, many high schools lack some AP programs, or some elective courses. On the other hand, public schools should also be able to use the Virtual Learning partnership as an alternative option for struggling students, or students who have barriers to the typical education and require a flexible schedule. This could be a result from medical issues, to life altering events, or even disciplinary circumstances. Again, students should be able to access education with the aide of the the sending school acquiring appropriate funding for tuition.
Based off the two schools reviewed, I would argue that VHS offers a more global program where schools can become collaborators or partners to take advantage of low tuition, and potential grant funding opportunities. If a school is in New Hampshire, then they should absolutely form a partnership with VLACS, because it is FREE for all resident students. IF a school is outside of the state, VLACS may not be the best option for various virtual learning scenarios.
