NCAA No Longer Accepting Coursework from 24 High Schools

Today the NCAA announced that 24 schools which use a company called K12 Inc. to provide their curriculum were no longer approved. All of the schools are nontraditional high schools, and their courses were found to not comply with the NCAA’s nontraditional course requirements. The schools are:

  • California Virtual Academy – San Joaquin
  • California Virtual Academy – San Diego
  • California Virtual Academy – Los Angeles
  • California Virtual Academy – Sutter
  • California Virtual Academy – Jamestown
  • California Virtual Academy – Kern
  • California Virtual Academy – San Mateo
  • California Virtual Academy – Kings
  • California Virtual Academy – Sonoma
  • San Francisco Flex Academy (CA)
  • Silicon Valley Flex Academy (Morgan Hill, CA)
  • California Virtual Academy – LA High
  • California Virtual Academy – Santa Ysabel
  • Colorado Virtual Academy Cova (North Glenn, CO)
  • Georgia Cyber Academy (Atlanta, GA)
  • Nevada Virtual Academy (Las Vegas, NV)
  • Ohio Virtual Academy (Maumee, OH)
  • Oklahoma Virtual Charter Academy (Nicoma Park, OK)
  • Agora Cyber Charter School (Wayne, PA)
  • South Carolina Virtual Charter (Columbia, SC)
  • Washington Virtual Academy – Monroe (Tacoma, WA)
  • Insight School of Colorado (Westminster, CO)
  • Insight School of Washington (Tacoma, WA)
  • IQ Academy Washington (Vancouver, WA)

As a result, the NCAA will stop accepting coursework from these schools starting with the 2014–15 school year. Coursework completed from Spring 2013 through Spring 2014 will undergo additional evaluation on a case-by-case basis when a prospect tries to use it for initial eligibility purposes. Coursework completed in Fall 2012 or earlier may be used without additional evaluation.

In addition to the 24 schools above, other schools affiliated with K12 Inc. remain under Extended Evaluation. This means the NCAA will continue to review coursework coming from those schools to see whether it meets the NCAA’s core course and nontraditional course requirements. Prospects with coursework from those schools must submit additional documentation no matter when the coursework was completed.

Posted on by John Infante
This entry was posted in Bylaw Blog, Bylaws, Headlines. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to NCAA No Longer Accepting Coursework from 24 High Schools

  1. Shari Armstrong says:

    So these schools are going to punish families for choosing a better educational choice for their children than the local brick and mortar schools? The curriculum that these schools use is amazing and well above what is often used at the local schools. I have two students in OHVA and will have a third in a couple of years. While our students are not involved in athletics, others are, and they should not be punished for an unfair bias. Show me a school that gets its curriculum from a company who just donates it out of the goodness of their hearts, instead of a publishing company that is designed to make a profit. Other articles I read brought this up, about the money. This is not about education, this is about money, just like everything else. They have said that our choice takes money away from the local school, however at least in Ohio, that is not entirely true. While part of our tax money follows our students, as it should, part of it still goes to the local school district, without our students ever setting foot in their building. They are getting extra money, they are not losing it.

    This decision should be reversed, as all it is doing is punishing families who want better for their children. Many of these families chose an online school just so their child CAN participate in a sport that may not even be offered at their local school.

    • Dr_Doctorstein says:

      “a company who just donates it out of the goodness of their hearts”?

      What are you talking about? K12 Inc is a for-profit corporation. They’re in it for the money.

      • Anonymous says:

        That’s right, and perhaps if you attended one of these for profit schools, your critical reading skills would be better. Her point is that many, if not all, “not for profit schools” are still developing their curriculums based on “for profit” publishing companies. Thus, harping on the “for profit” aspect of K12 and singling them out ignores the “for profit” impacts on most schools. My point, without commenting one way or the other on her point, is if you are going critique someone else’s comments, understand them first.

Leave a Comment