Provo eSchool principal reports falling K–8 enrollment, steady overall enrollments and targets math gains

Clint Smith, principal of Provo eSchool, told the Provo City School Board on April 15 that the district’s online school currently lists 1,434 total enrollments and that K–8 enrollment has dropped to about 60–65 students.

Smith said eSchool uses rolling enrollment. Students are given 60 school days to complete a course, with an optional 60‑day extension; a $15 extension fee applies unless a fee waiver is in place. He described staffing as “1.5 FTE” for the K–8 program and about 25 high‑school teachers working on stipend (he said three are retired teachers and about 22 currently teach in the district). Teachers are paid $500 per section plus $20 per student per term for high‑school sections.

Smith described the program’s assessment results and goals: midyear Acadience reading data show 56% of eSchool students on track to meet or exceed end‑of‑year reading levels, 23.5% approaching and 20.5% below. He reported 2024 RISE results of 57.1% of eSchool students meeting or exceeding standards in English language arts, 37.5% in mathematics (a 26.4 percentage‑point increase from the district’s 2023 figure for the program) and about 50% in science. For Trust Lands planning, Smith said the district set a 2025 amendment to aim for 77% of students on level or above in Acadience reading and a 2025 math goal of 40% meeting or exceeding RISE math (with a 2026 Trust Lands target of 45% in mathematics).

Smith noted operational details and services: eSchool offers rolling enrollment; K–5 uses year‑long classes and a purchased K‑12 curriculum, grades 6–8 use semesters, and high‑school terms run on a shorter cycle. He said the program has awarded 325 credits through the first three terms of the school year, posted nearly 2,000 grades in those terms and awarded almost 80 credits last summer. Summer quarter credit is charged at $35 per quarter credit, and eSchool charges $15 for extended course time unless waived.

Smith identified several challenges: competition with statewide providers (he named Utah Online and said roughly $900,000 a year leaves students to that provider), the lack of NCAA approval for many eSchool courses, difficulties ensuring parents provide the supervision needed for online learning, meeting IEP obligations when special education services are delivered at students’ home schools and high student mobility that causes frequent enrollments and withdrawals.

Board members asked about comparisons to other districts’ online programs; Smith said he did not have comparative enrollment figures. On math support, he described district interventions including i‑Ready diagnostics and IXL practice, and emphasized outreach to parents to reinforce math facts and regular monitoring for students who are behind.

Smith closed by saying eSchool remains a valuable option in the district despite the challenges and thanked staff and families who work with the program.