Get Schooled

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 8:41 AM | Link to this

I like the “regular” scheduling better, but my reasoning is a bit skewed:

If I have a horrible class, FAR better to see them for 50 minutes than 90!!!!

That said, however, I think both are bogus. Until you get rid of - or at least significantly reduce - the number of detractions from class time (ie school assemblies, morning announcements, afternoon announcements, picture days, pep rallies, etc), there really is no difference…

By TheOne

April 11, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this

My daughters school is going from block to regular schedules next year…they are also becoming a charter school. Right now they have four classes a day for 90 mins. each, but they don’t alternate days, they go to the same classes every day. With the new schedule she will have 8 classes every day for about 45 mins. I’m not sure if this is better, but time will certainly tell. All we do know is that instead of having four magnet, honors and AP classes each semester, she will have 8 magnet, honors and AP classes at the same time each semester!!! Whew!!!!

By Lee

April 11, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this

Which is better? That’s sorta like the age old question, “How much does a three bedroom house cost?” It depends.

We’ve blogged this topic before. I think it depends upon the subject matter, teaching style, and the ability and maturity of the students.

Some classes, such as a science class with lab would seem to me to lend itself to be taught on a block schedule. Other classes, especially those with the lower level students, probably need the daily face time with the teacher.

Seems to me that a hybrid schedule would be ideal. Does anybody do that? If so, I would imagine the logistics to be a nightmare though…

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 9:19 AM | Link to this

Lee:

I don’t know about the yearly logistics, but the daily would be quite simple (and in fact many conferences use it):

Have a 100 min long block for say Science classes and Band or some such, whatever lends itself to the block format. At the same time, have TWO 45 min classes in the subjects that DON’T lend themselves to the block format (such as english, social studies, etc).

Us math people (since I know there are several here) could probably debate for YEARS which grouping math should fall under, though I would put my hat in the “regular” ring.

By jim d

April 11, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this

I’m with you Jeff,

There appear to be pros and cons to both methods so I’m not too sure it really matters but I would think that it would depend on teachers, students and class size and subject matter.

By Matt

April 11, 2007 10:08 AM | Link to this

How can you make a 78’ Volkswagon go any faster? You can’t!

With the drop-out rate as high as it is and the STUDENTS telling us they leave high school early because they are bored, why in God’s name are we still trying to make block and tradtional schedules. The fact is, these are the only two schedules that fit the “adults”. The whole dang system has to be re-invented to meet the needs of the students and not the needs or wants of the adults (parents, politicians, teachers, administrators, counselors, etc…)

Again, a 78’ Volkswagon will only go so fast. At some point, if you want to go faster you have to get out of the old piece of crap and get into a new more developed system. Can you see the analogy, or am I loosing you?

As a teacher who has worked with middle and high school students, the problem is the SYSTEM. Why is it so hard for everyone to figure out. The students who have dropped out, the ones who are thinking about it, and even the ones who are going to graduate tell us the same thing—school sucks, and it shouldn’t.

By SET

April 11, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

I agree with Lee - flexibility is what is important. Scheduling for college bound students should not have to be the same as scheduling for students that read at 6th grade level in 10th grade.

Different schools even within the same school district should be free to experiment with what they think works best for their program. Needless to say we need to have segregated schools for college track vs vocational track - although there should be elements of both programs everywhere.

The different schools should be able to be different.

By AR

April 11, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this

After being told that the block schedule more closely resembled college, my daughter was surprised to find all her classes at UGA were 50 minutes, although they were on a MWF, TT schedule. Her class in high school were the guinea pigs for block - they had the same four 90 minute classes every day for a semester. They developed “skinny” classes for band and chorus, so that the kids wouldn’t end up having a quarter of their credits tied up in those classes. They meet for about 45 minutes every day. I think math and foreign language need more than just one semester of work to cover a year’s worth of material. With my youngest graduating this year (hopefully!) I have found that they do virtually all their work in class with the very rare homework assignment. Of course, we’re in a system where a lot of kids don’t do homework even if assigned, so the teachers tend to not assign it. That way they don’t have to give zeros. I figured that the block scheduling phenomen was about over, California was dropping it about the time we started it. They noticed that test scores were going down. I wish that the education system wasn’t so fad-based. I can’t imagine learning US History in 18 weeks, even the colleges break it up into two eras of study.

By catlady

April 11, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

Block Scheduling is developmentally questionable for many younger high school students.

By Louisiana Girl

April 11, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

I’m new to this blog, but the subject is very interesting to me. Obviously I’m not from Georgia and this block scheduling was a new thing to me. My son is a 6th grader in Clayton County and his school does this now. I think it’s all about the No Child Left Behind and their concentration on getting the test scores up so the kids have to spend more time in those classes. I can see how a kid will get bored with school. There’s no way I could see myself sitting in math class for 100 minutes! In my middle and high school (in Louisiana) classes were 50 minutes and alternated days. I think that is a much better schedule.

By just a teacher

April 11, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this

I did my student teaching in Nashville in a magnet school that did a hybrid schedule. It was complicated, but really successful. There were seven classes, each of which met for 45 minutes on Monday. First, fourth and fifth met for 45 minutes every day; on T-F we ran blocks for 2/3 and 6/7. It was a small school so all of the lab sciences, arts, etc. could be scheduled for those periods.

(Side note to Jeff: as an English teacher, I think English and Social Studies would certainly lend themselves to longer classes, but 100 minutes in MATH?!? Yikes! And herein lies the problem: everyone thinks their subject deserves more time.)

By Tony

April 11, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

Scheduling decisions are best made at the school level. I applaud Shiloh High School for evaluating the needs of the students and deciding to change the master schedule in response. There is no strong evidence that indicates one method of scheduling is better than the other. That’s why schools must have the flexibility to institute decisions like this one based on the students’ needs.

Matt-While there may be some systemic concerns linked to the high school drop out rate, there is plenty of evidence that drop outs are more frequently influenced by social factors rather than school factors. Boredom is much more a work ethic issue than it is anything else. Many students choose the word boredom as an excuse to avoid meeting academic expectations.

Family and community expectations regarding the importance of a good education help to influence students to complete high school. The schools can not (and should not be expected to) solve all the social issues like this one. Schools can partner with parents and communities to improve the value of a good education, but there is still a choice on the part of the student and family when they must accept the challenge.

By Dick

April 11, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

Isn’t teh children being born today the same as they were back in 60;s. ten fingers, ten toes, either boy or gril. If this is true, why change from the original 3 R’s our grand parents were taught. Instead of havng the children change to the old school philosphy, we have changed teh school philsopy to the new children and guess what? It has been screwed up since.

By scv

April 11, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

Jeff, I’ve had only a small amount of teaching experience…part-time hs math teacher during grad school. However, I would agree that, for math classes, I would rather have a regular schedule vs. block. I think one would have huge attention span issues…formulas would run together, etc.

Oh, and a shoutout to my alma mater mentioned in the link to the Shiloh principal’s letter…Spring Valley H.S.!

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

scv:

The ONLY advantage to having the longer periods of time in a math class that I have seen is this:

With the longer time, students can theoretically do more problems in class with the teacher there if they have questions. Note that how I would run such a set up is that I would probably do my lesson for 45min - 1 hour. At the end of the lesson, I would give the assignment. I would then use the remainder of class to get caught up on paperwork, while managing the (all too often) fights, talking, and the FEW students who were actually doing their work. And with this set up, I would ABSOLUTELY give zeroes. After all, they had the chance to do the work in class, and I took it up the NEXT day…. meaning what they didn’t do when I GAVE them the chance with me present, they could do at home.

By HS Teacher Too

April 11, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

The high school I attended had a hybrid schedule. We had an 8-period day, but certain classes met for double periods (back-to-back) on alternate days. So, for example on “A” days you might have two periods of chemistry, to allow for lab time; but on “B” days one of those periods would revert to either PE (required for all four years where I grew up) or a study hall. (I am an advocate of study halls, if they are done right, but this is for another day!)

Subjects that were afforded double-periods were all of the sciences, to allow for lab time; and AP calculus. I could certainly see an argument for social studies or english taking double-periods as well, especially in the upper-level courses. Also some shop classes had double-periods, to allow students to actually work on the cars, etc., before the bell rang!

As a math teacher, I have found that when I tutor students who are on the block schedule, they are forced to go EVEN faster, and when they are lost — well, it hurts even more because the pace is (theoretically) so much quicker. What happens in actuality is that sometimes, the teachers end up having to slow down to the pace of the kids and the course either isn’t completed, or is sooooo watered-down it’s not fair to call it what it’s called. Bear in mind that this is in Gwinnett, where I maintain that they already try to do too much, too fast, in the math classes anyway.

What really stinks, though, is when kids fail a class and because of the requirement for four years of math, end up in rather dire predicaments in the spring of their senior year; the weakest students end up with the most unfair (based on what is a reasonable expectation for what they should take in order to have hope of success) schedules.

Again as a math teacher, my position is that at some point, you can only cover so much in a day, because students still need processing/practicing time. SO, even before we calculate the ACTUAL hours lost, there are also collateral hours lost because you really CAN’T cover the material twice as fast, regardless of intention. I imagine this is similar to social studies or english, where students can only read so fast; and surely there are other analogies in the rest of the subjects.

By JustMe

April 11, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this

It is wrong to define block schedules as classes not meeting every day. There are various block schedules. For example, the 4x4 block classes do meet every day.

IMHO, I like the block with longer class periods. Teachers can keep on topic for longer and do various activities with the longer time. Otherwise, the topic may be to be divided into 55 minute parts - which can be confusing to students. The block does require for students to be more mature and serious about learning. The block also requires for teachers to use the entire period - and some teachers find it difficult to create lessons for that length of time when they have taught for years with only a 55 minute period.

Under those conditions, I feel that block schedule is superior to the ‘standard’ schedule. But, if you don’t use the block schedule properly, I can see why some would claim it to be inferior.

By HS Teacher Too

April 11, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Jeff, With the set-up you propose, do you cover more material in a partiular day, or just allow more practice time? I suppose it would matter whether it’s a 4x4 schedule, or a full-year block.

I hate that your teaching experiences were so negative to skew you the way they did. Your set-up sounds so defeated!

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

HST2:

With that set up, I would probably do 2 to 3 book sections worth of material in one lecture, probably assign 10 - 15 problems per book section.

Note that later in my teaching year, I learned how to get away from going just “by the book” (because the book truly sucked and we were testing various new books), but even then, it equated to basically what I just said, it just wasn’t strictly from the book.

Eh, believe it or not in some ways I miss teaching. But overall I really am MUCH happier now as a programmer. Nowhere NEAR the stress, the boss actually supports me (it is SOOOO nice to FINALLY be the one pushing myself to the limit, rather than feeling someone else’s proverbial breath on my neck!), no whiny parents (or students) to deal with. Main drawback is that I don’t have an inside track to volunteering for a HS football team in the fall….

All that said, I’ll probably get my Master’s within a couple of years, start teaching night classes, see how that works, and maybe eventually go into collegiate level teaching full time. (We’ll see what the then-wife -getting married Oct 13!! - lets me get away with there!)

By Matt

April 11, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

Tony, Are you kidding me? When have you walked down the hall and looked into a high school classroom. Very few are worth sitting through.

While social factors certainly play a role in drop-out rates, schools would be more successful if they were more conducive to all children, instead of trying to get all children to fit in one box of learning. As a dropout prevention counselor for seven years, I can assure you that if the students felt like the learnning was beneficial they would be more likely to not only stay in school, but they would also try to be successful while they are there. Schools are have done a poor job of relating to real world experiences and teachers have done a horrible job of transitional teaching. I have visited over 50 schools in Geogia meeting with students who were dropout candidates, I can assure you that the SYSTEM is more problematic than social background and even work ethic. Most loose work ethic when they loose interest in school. Sitting in class 6 to 8 hours a day learning how to pass an end of course test or graduation test is not what teaching and learning is supposed to be (I do favor testing to measure student achievement, so don’t misunderstand me here).

Charter schools and the new Career Academies have changed their models to meet the needs of the students, while the traditional high schools lag behind producing students who can not wait to get “out”. They should be crying that they have to leave, however the system has burnt them, me, you and everyone else out. Also, while boredom may be used by some as an excuse, it is a term used my many who have already dropped out and they honestly felt it was a waste of time. If you honestly believe that work ethic is the problem (not saying is isn’t for some), we are in trouble. Low work ethic that leads to dropout should have our state at about 10% for dropout. We are at a 50% dropout rate. Your rationale would be that 50% of high school dropouts have no work ethic. I have a degree in Sociology, Advanced degrees in education and experience working with at-risk and high performing students. As a tax-payer and a parent, this is a problem for every social class, every ethnic group, and all stakeholders. It is such a huge problem, that the federal government can not even recommend changes because they do not know how to better educate high schools students. When you factor in things like work ethic, social class, reading levels - which by the way is the number one predicter of dropouts, and a constant changing society, you have your hands full. At this point, career academies for ALL students seems like the best way foward to a solution to a complex problem. These academies, however, have to be diverse enough to meet the needs of college bound high performing students and technical skilled students and students with varying needs. Should we take this course, these academies could be refined to lead Georgia and America out of the dark and produce a workforce eager to apply their talents and skills to our societies and economy.

To understand why kids are dropping out, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS ASK THE KIDS — EVEN THE ONES IN SCHOOL RIGHT NOW! Scheduling is not the problem, learning, or lack thereof, is the problem.

By debg45

April 11, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

My daughter was in a school that was on block. It was ok for some classes. But for biology, it was way too fast a pace. They never seemed to have time to really get into an area and enjoy learning. It was simply a matter of jamming facts into their heads, and then spitting them out for the test. They were tested on 2 to 3 chapters of information EVERY WEEK! Needless to say, she failed miserably.

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

debg45:

2 - 3 chapters a week?

a) Sounds like it was getting her ready for college.

b) In MIDDLE school, that was an EASY pace (in anything but math anyway!).

Require me to memorize or even analyze facts -> piece of cake.

Require me to actually USE the facts or analysis -> much harder.

Hence the reason most people hate math…

By HS Teacher Too

April 11, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I am glad you are happier. Congrats on setting the date … October 13 will be here before you blink!

My problem with the block is that depending on the content area in question, sometimes doing what you suggest in terms of covering 2-3 “sections” in a day is not practical. Of course in other areas, it would be wonderful to have that opportunity, right?! Grass is always greener … No, I take that back. I am a big fan of the hybrid plan, which gives extra time to classes that meaningfully can use it; but doesn’t waste it on classes/credits that don’t “need” it (someone earlier mentioned things like chorus), or on teachers who can’t/don’t/won’t capitalize on how rich the experience can be.

But in Gwinnett, as I said — it’s dump as much as you can in 90 minutes for the math classes, which is NOT how they should work; and too often I have seen teachers in other subject areas not manage the extra time efficiently to maximize what the KIDS get out of it.

By Janine

April 11, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

I am with those above who have said that the scheduling issue should be a local school issue…. AND it does not have to be totally one way or the other… IF our educrats would recognize that all kids do not fit into the same pidgeonhole AND that all of this testing insanity is just that….insanity. As Matt implied, all schools must begin to address the needs of their students. They must recognize that college is not the only valid option and begin offering options and alternative paths.

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

Janine:

The first, last, and only “need of the students” that schools need to address is their ability to get a job after graduation. And one thing about a job? Your boss isn’t going to care what you like. You do as the boss says or you don’t have a job anymore. Therefore students need to learn RULES and HOW TO FOLLOW THEM more than any other single topic. And in that category more than any other, the current educational system is a COMPLETE AND UTTER FAILURE.

By Janine

April 11, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

Totally agree, Jeff…about learning how to follow rules. However, they will have a much easier time getting a job IF the graduate and IF , while they are in school, there are classes that address training for some of the jobs that will be available if they do not choose college. Example: Instead of requiring calculus and organic chemistry for EVERYONE, offer alternatives…maybe balance sheets/checkbook balancing….typing, and maybe some kind of personal health courses.

By Ernest

April 11, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this

Which type of scheduling is better should be decided at the local school level. Hats off to Shiloh HS for making a decision they feel is best for their students. At the end of the day, this is how it should be handled.

Listening to the teachers and students at my childs’ school, they indicated a strong preference for block. Part of the reasons being fewer class (thus fewer books to lug and classes to keep up with) and longer class time.

My concern was whether true ‘bell to bell’ instruction would be done. There were legitimate concerns about this when the block was initially implemented however I understand through teacher training, this has been addressed. The impact it would have on those taking AP classes during the fall semester then taking the exam in May was another concern. The seemed to ‘tweak’ the schedule wit ‘paired’ class allowing the AP class to be taught all year. As long as there is flexibility and a genuine effort to improve student achievement, I’m OK with the decision.

By Janine

April 11, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this

OOPS…that would be IF theY graduate…sorry

By Matt

April 11, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this

Jeff, Are you from China? Just kidding? I understand where you are coming from, however, do you believe that schools should teach children how to follow rules and that by being good “rule followers” they will be good employees?

Learning to follow rules starts at home. Schools can only do so much. When parents do not teach their children to follow rules, they are setting their children up for failure. That’s a different blog.

Today’s economics and human management encourage good employers or managers to utilize the skills of their employees. Employees must have skills, which comes from education. Proper manners and respect begins at home, not school. All the manners classes in the world will not correct what bad parenting brings to school each day, trust me I see it everyday.

Schools are not complete and utter failures, bad parenting and a non-supporting judicial system to get rid of the rift-raft contribute, but schools are not prisons or mental hospitals although they are responsible for teaching those who might qualify for both.

To REDUCE the number of rule breakers, bad work ethic, and lazy attitudes of students, we must make it worth their while. We will never eliminate these things, but Jeff voices what many of us see everyday. We have to make school more interesting and more diverse to reduce these things.

Jeff, I am speaking from what schools can actually do. I understand what you are saying, however the schools are limited. One solution, outside the school circle, would be to reduce government funds to parents of students who continually act up and disrupt schools. A fine in the form of reduced government assistance for students with excessive absences and those that disrupt schools may help the BAD PARENTS get involved a little more instead of using schools to babysit and feed their children. Probation officers should work more closely with schools as well. Those people have no idea what school is like with these kids in the classrooms. They have got to tighten down on these kids and quit babying them. Schools are limited in thier punishment levels, the judicial system is not.

And, contrary to what you believe—student’s do have needs, educational needs mind you (let’s be clear about needs, we are talking learning styles and goal setting and things that connect school to work).

By Dragonlady

April 11, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this

I teach at a school-within-a-school, similar to a magnet school but still part of the regular high school in our system. My school-within-a-school is based upon a very rigorous curriculum where students must apply to be accepted. We are on block schedules, 100 minutes for core classes, 45 minutes once a day for things like band, art, p.e. plus other interesting classes. I teach English and like the 100 minutes block very much. We have time to write, to discuss what we read for homework and to do some grammar drills.

We don’t meet everyday. There are classes that meet on Mon. Wed., others that meet on Tues. Thurs, and Friday rotates. Next year, however, we are going to meet every class on Friday for 45 minutes. It was a problem not seeing some students for several days and we think this will work better.

These are good students who, for the most part, want the challenge of the rigorous curriculum. Like Jeff, I wouldn’t want 100 minutes dealing with an unruly class.

By Tony

April 11, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this

Matt - I assure you that there are three ways in which I am deeply familiar with high school classes. First, I taught HS chemistry and physics for 11 years. I have two children in high school right now. And, I worked in our central office as a science curriculum specialist.

Currently, I am an elementary school principal and have been able to use my background to help one school recover from years of poor performance.

I congratulate you on your work as a drop-out prevention counselor and I am certain that your experiences with students have help to make a world of difference for them. One of the reasons we now have to provide these kinds of services within schools is because the students do not have that support at home.

One additional insight I have gained is from having an exchange student live with us. Her immediate reaction when attending classes in the local HS were about the low standards of the students. One of her first summary remarks was, “The kids want the teachers to hand them the answers.” This is indicative of our community standards and it is a very sad statement. My own children bemoan the lost time in class because classmates do not even attempt to recall what was learned from the previous years.

And to Jeff, the parents of the children who do not teach them that rules must be followed are the culprits and not the schools.

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this

Matt:

The only “learning style” students need to know is this:

adapt to whatever your teacher demands

As I’ve said here before: Students having to adjust to 6 learning styles is FAR easier than teachers having to adjust to 120!

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this

Tony:

I lay the blame at the feet of BOTH the parents AND the school administrators that cave to parents, Tony.

Fair enough?

By Matt

April 11, 2007 2:48 PM | Link to this

Easier does not equate to better! Schools are for children, not for adults. Yes, it’s hard. We knew that before we got into teaching.

If it hasn’t worked for the past 50 years, what makes you think it will work tomorrow. Let’s DEMAND students do it our way. Oh, my gosh—we have been and guess what, we have a drop out rate of 50%. I could DEMAND that you agree with everything I type on here, does that mean you will listen and follow me. NO, you will re-butt, drop-out, or get kicked out of here for cussing me or threatening me. Sound familiar. Kind of sad, becuase you are passionate about this and that energy could be used to help with a solution.

Now, if I somewhat agreed with you (and I do, more than you know)and we could comprimise to make some adjustments at both the SYSTEM LEVEL and the STUDENT LEVEL, would you be more willing to work with me?

Students need to adapt to teachers, I agree. But, it goes both ways. But, more specifically I am talking about the system in which the students and teachers both work. It could be revamped to benefit both. It’s being done in some places (see Dragonlady above). My arguement is that this should be done everywhere to reduce apathy and increase student achievement.

You can not demand somone like you, learn from you, or even respect you. It has to be earned, even from students.

Tony, you so right.
High expectations (behavior), high expectations (academics), high expectations (career goals) + good teaching = great learning.

Have a good one guys, got to go to ball practice.

By Melanie

April 11, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this

Up here in Burlington, Vermont, area high schools use various hybridizations of the block schedule. One in particular has students taking 8 classes per semester. Three days out of the week, all 8 classes meet. On each of the remaining two days, 4 out of the 8 classes meet. Each class enjoys a mix of long and short periods. I’m pretty sure the “block” days are Wednesday and Thursday, so each class meets on Monday, Tuesday, and Friday.

Another high school has students taking 8 classes per semester, but the classes alternate days. Four classes meet on “A” days and the other four classes meet on “B” days. Most courses are year-long, so there is none of the “cram a year’s worth of material into a single semester.” The only difference is that a semester’s worth is broken into half the class sessions, but each class session being twice the normal length.

I would like to see more school systems getting creative with scheduling instead of going whole hog with one system or another.

By jim d

April 11, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

Again we agree jeff,

Teach the kids to follow rules. I’m teaching mine to be a rule maker not a rule follower.

By HS Teacher Too

April 11, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this

Jeff, “The first, last, and only “need of the students” that schools need to address is their ability to get a job after graduation. And one thing about a job? Your boss isn’t going to care what you like. You do as the boss says or you don’t have a job anymore. Therefore students need to learn RULES and HOW TO FOLLOW THEM more than any other single topic. And in that category more than any other, the current educational system is a COMPLETE AND UTTER FAILURE.”

Gotta disagree a little here. The best “employees” are also good thinkers (even if they are on an assembly line, they need to recognize anomalies …), and to that end the schools need to teach them to be thinkers; not just to follow the rules. Sometimes questioning the status quo is what makes for advancement at all.

Now, we do need people who function within social norms and understand chain of command, sure … but to say that the most important thing is to know how to follow the rules — well, I disagree. I think a better way to say it is that we need to know WHEN to follow the rules, and when to question them!

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 3:42 PM | Link to this

jim

But your son has to know how to follow them before he can learn to make them. (Though I agree that certain situations REQUIRE a “bending” of the rules - if not outright breaking them-, it takes DISCIPLINE to effectively know when such is the case.)

HST2:

Agreed. (Particularly on the last sentence). However, again: Before one can learn when the appropriate time to QUESTION a rule is, one must first be able to FOLLOW a rule.

For example:

My parents had a rule about staying out after dark when I was a child. As a child, I wasn’t fully aware of the true dangers that could in fact be lurking in the shadows. My parents were. Now, as I grew older I began to learn more and with new knowledge was eventually able to make the case that since I work 3rd shift, I should be able to stay up be out as late as I want, even on my off nights. But I first had to have the experience of following the rule…

By jim d

April 11, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I’m not too sure if he must know how to follow the rules to make them.

As a dear friend on the GCPD expalins it; He with the gun makes the rules. :-) It is rather difficult to argue with that logic.

By Brett

April 11, 2007 4:51 PM | Link to this

Jeff, You said it:
“My Parents…..”.
Enough Said!!!!

By OldSchool

April 11, 2007 4:54 PM | Link to this

I’ve taught 33 years with about half on traditional 55 minutes (6 classes) and half on block (4-90 min classes each semester.)

For me, the traditional schedule was a nightmare. I started teaching at my current school (32 years ago) the second year of the new Comprehensive High School concept. I was given 6-1hr classes, 3-2hr classes, and 2-3hr classes. The Guidance department decided that any student wanting 2 or 3 hours of drafting could take it whenever! As a result, I had a stack of class rosters a mile high and students coming and going until I was loopy!

Personally, I LOVE block. I have plenty of time to introduce new skills and concepts, give students time to practice, give them feedback, and still get the room cleaned up for the next class (my planning block is after school). The classes block works badly for are our heavy shops. They went from 3-2 hr classes to 4- 90min classes- adding an entire class with the same level of instructional funds. Less time and no more money spread out for more students. For them block makes no sense.

My youngest LOVED block. Only 4 EOCTs to prepare for, more opportunities to take electives, and more time with her math and science teachers for labs and extra help.

The trick is to vary the instruction and the deliver. Shake up your bag of tricks and be creative with assignments. School systems need to monitor and provide opportunities for teachers to refresh their teaching skills with meaningful workshops and idea exchanges.

Having said all that, if we could just be allow to TEACH, maybe students would learn regardless of the number of minutes we have them each day. Quit forcing someone else’s methods on me and evaluating me based on those methods. It may not be my style.

By Jeff

April 11, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this

jim:

true. However, just because he has the gun does that mean he has the best judgement? A man with a gun can be easily disarmed. A man with good judgement is not as easily defeated.

Personally, I prefer a good judge that has the gun to back it up if needed…

By Grant from Columbus

April 11, 2007 5:53 PM | Link to this

Does it matter? Time remains constant. We expect students to be a certain point of achievement by a certain time. If they are not there then achievement now varies and time does not change.

Set the standard and allow students to achieve and move at their own pace. Allow time to vary. Some students could learn algebra in 9 weeks. Some take 27 weeks but the point is when they move to the next course, they know algebra.

There are circumstances that make this proposition difficult for a few students but we hold back the achievers and the middle because of this. Let them learn at their own pace.

By thomas

April 11, 2007 6:18 PM | Link to this

I do not teach high school. However I remember my high school experience. Five years of murderous hll (This was back in the days when elementary was K-7 and high school 8-12). Tedious boredom without end. With the exception of a few electives classes and a few dmn beautiful girls, it is an experience I could have done without.

The one time our school tried “block” was pure torture. They took the regular 55 min schedule and told us that we would stay in classes 1, 3, and 5 on Mon/Wed, and 2, 4, and 6 on Tues/Thurs, and a regular schedule on Fridays. This foolishness lasted no time.

It is my belief that most classes are not good for block. Not even shop classes, because you have to be doing projects everyday for the time to be effective and most teachers don’t do that. Most high school teachers still lecture and you KNOW that the average teen is NOT going to still through 80 minutes of teacher yak. This is why many teachers have a traditional lesson and let the kids “start on homework” for the last twenty minutes.

By Lisa B.

April 11, 2007 6:42 PM | Link to this

From today’s posts it has been said several times that students are bored, that they see no relevance between school work and success in life, and the drop out rate is horrendous. I honestly don’t see that block or non-block scheduling addresses these issues. First off, we are all going to be bored sometimes. Life is simply not exciting every single minute. Neither are jobs and school. Sometimes we just have to roll up our sleeves and get through the “boring” parts so we can get to the “fun, exciting” stuff. That would be a helpful lesson for kids to learn.

I am all for whatever flexibility it takes to positively impact the most students. Something must be done to slow the drop-out rate.

I don’t know the answer.

By JustMe

April 12, 2007 8:16 AM | Link to this

Lisa B.

Want to know how to decrease drop out rates? The answer is rather simple, but it reveals a “dirty little secret” kept in most school systems….. stop promoting students in elementary and middle school that are failing.

Elementary and middle schools in most systems have this policy of promoting students even when they haven’t learned the content at all. This is “social promotion” and they don’t want their poor little egos damaged. And, they argue that having a physically larger, more developed kid in a class room of smalled kids would also pose a problem.

However, IMHO, promoting these kids from grade to grade when they don’t learn a darn thing is far more damaging. These students quickly “learn” that they don’t have to do anything in school and there are no repercussions to their laziness. Suddenly, they land in 9th grade high school where the State mandates EOCT and High School Graduation Tests where there are no exceptions. Those students get frustrated and drop out.

The CRCT was supposed to help fix this problem, but there are so many loop holes and exceptions to this, those kids are promoted without passing the CRCT.

Wonder why there are drop outs? You shouldn’t.

By WFC

April 12, 2007 8:38 AM | Link to this

Thirty-year veteran now retired history teacher here. Also was an administrator for four years.

By JustMe

April 12, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this

WFC -

I agree with you 100%. Experienced teachers in schools going from standard scheduled to block really do need training. Too often, they are left to their own accord without training and become frustrated. Then, they throw up their hands and blame bock scheduling.

New teachers that start out with block scheduling love it. They quickly learn how to take advantage of the longer periods and their students excel.

By Lisa B.

April 12, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this

Just Me,

I absolutely agree that we MUST end Social Promotion. We’re taking the CRCT next week, and I have a 4th grade boy who has never passed it or been promoted to a grade. He landed in my class in Feb. When other students express concern for the boy’s inattention, bad attitude and lack of skills, he brags to them that he never passes and never has to stay back. When the students worried that he’d have to attend summer school, the boy told them he fails the CRCT every year, has never attended summer school, and here he is in 4th grade. He then loudly informed them that no matter how he does on the test, he will see them in the 5th. I’m sure he’s right. However, he cannot function even close to a 4th grade level. I will probably retain him just on principal, but feel certain it won’t stick.

REALLY ending Social Promotion will do more to decrease the drop-out rate than schedule changes.

Sorry for the vent. This boy is allowed to leave my class whenever he wants so he can call his dad. His dad has checked him out of school every morning this week, because the boy wants to go home. He’s seldom here after lunch for math. ARGGGGHHHH!!!!!

I am still accountable for his test scores. Look out middle and high school teachers. He’ll be there soon.

By Lisa B.

April 12, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

By the way, I understand WHY kids drop out. I am frustrated in our unwillgness or inability to stop it from happening.

By JustMe

April 12, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this

Lisa B -

My heart goes out to you and the elementary and middle school teachers that are trying to do your job. This social promotion makes it next to impossible.

For this situation to change, we have to have administrators and Boards of Education that grow a backbone. Evidently, they are scared of idiot parents that scream when their little kid is to be held back - not realizing that it is in the best interest of their little kid.

By Jeff

April 12, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this

Lisa:

ICK!!! The sad fact is that given your description and knowing your area, I would be AFRAID to make a guess as to his ethnicity. (I have a suspicion, but both are pretty equally as bad down there in those type cases!)

More turmoil at the fiance’s school though. To the point that she is worried about next week…. (she comes back from surgery Monday, against Doc’s orders….)

By JustMe

April 12, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

Lisa B. -

Your example of your boy student is perfect regarding what is wrong with our system. Teachers can work our tail off, but in the end (no pun intended) ultimate responsibility falls on the student and parent. And, the responsibility of this messed up ‘system’ falls on the administration and Board of Education.

Do you hear me, jim d? This is why your “idea” of teacher pay being linked to student performance is STUPID!

By jim d

April 12, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Not nearly as stupid as the GCPS Board of Education making all the curriculum CP and ignoring the needs of students that will not be continuing their education.

http://www.gwinnett.k12.ga.us/gcps-mainweb01.nsf/8E13BEE2C44DC9FC8525729F0071C6DA/$file/CommuniqueSpring07.pdf

See the bottom of page 1

By Lisa B.

April 12, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

Don’t even get me started on all the stupid things we do in education. Normally, at this time of day, I’m grading papers, reading narratives, etc. However, since we’ve spent the entire week so far on CRCT drills via the overhead, I have a little time to glance at the blog. Drill and Kill. I hope it works. I hate it, and the kids hate it, but we’ve been forced to comply.

Jim D. What do GCPS students do who want to become auto mechanics and air-conditioning techs? What if they don’t want to take CP classes? Do they just drop out, get their GED’s and then head for Tech School?

By jim d

April 12, 2007 5:00 PM | Link to this

Looks like that may be the direction GCPS is headed to enable them to “show improvement” Run everyone off thats not college bound.

By JustMe

April 13, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

jim d-

As long as NCLB is holding schools feet to the fire, do you really blame them for running off the lower performing students? Isn’t this what Bush and the republicans really want - to ensure creation of a large lower class? The allowed illegal immigrants to fill the lower class void up to now, but needed to do something to do this for the future.