And it's not a matter of them not understanding the material, it's that they openly admit they didn't watch/read it and don't think they have to.
And it's not a matter of them not understanding the material, it's that they openly admit they didn't watch/read it and don't think they have to.
This is the attitude that I think is the problem. It comes down to what we think the purpose of education should be, and that's where there's a fundamental disconnect. For what it's worth, I see the point, but I think the purpose of education should be producing a student with basic understanding of a variety of subjects, not just teaching what is relevant to their future life.
Sadly, I'm not sure how much of the grouping I'd like to see is legal. I know my school got in trouble for offering 'Core' classes which were basically remedial education classes in core content areas (So you'd have 'accelerated algebra 2', 'algebra 2' and 'core algebra 2'), which worked as you could find ways to focus on real-life examples for those students, but gave rise to a host of other issues. But, overall, I see the only real way to do online learning entirely is through group segregation, at least at the secondary level. Hearing some of our AP teachers complain, it'd almost need to be a double split -- one on ability and one on motivation.
Of course, a lot of the latter, in my opinion, stems from the culture of the area. Sadly I'm in a rural area where well-paying jobs used to be plentiful right out of high school (or even without a degree!) and so a very anti-intellectual culture developed. Sadly, even though those jobs aren't present, the culture stays as most who have other values move out and leave. Me and a few of my colleagues (all from the area) are exceptions, but I know several of us would leave if we could. So you're also fighting a cultural battle on top of all the other stuff.