It is time to rethink time, in schools in particular. So many uses of time are ingrained in our educational traditions that we seldom question their validity or purpose. We start at the same times even when report after report demonstrates it is not best for our kids. We require a certain length of seat time, in a day, and in a school year, even when it takes many students shorter or longer than that to learn. We assign (or are assigned by higher authorities) testing windows that take away from instructional time, and often cause high stress levels in students, despite serving no learning purpose. (We can argue about whether they serve other purposes another time, no pun intended.)
So let's break some of these down. Many people incorrectly assume the reason for summer breaks is based on farming, check here for an explanation from PBS about the more accurate origins of that decision. Part of the issue was the lack of air conditioning in cities and affluent families leaving those areas for cooler parts of the countryside. Early forms of air conditioning were created in 1902, yet for over a hundred years we haven't revisited the topic of whether schools should continue to run year round, or whether alternative vacation time frames might be more beneficial to student learning. Advocates of year round school often cite research that supports the idea that students not only cease to gain momentum during breaks, but that their learning actually regresses too. Current data suggests it is a more complex issue than that, particularly with regards to socioeconomic factors, yet there is still no solid movement around revisiting this issue of time. Less than 5% of US schools are year round. To be clear, I am not advocating here for year round schools, or for summer breaks for that matter, but I am suggesting that after a century, maybe we should look at that.
What about the issue of seat time? This one drives me particularly crazy as an exceptional education teacher (ie one who works with children that are considered gifted, as well as those with significant learning or other disabilities). There will always be students who are not ready for college or careers directly out of high school, and there will also be those who are ready for either long before. Yet, we keep them all for the same 4 years (in the majority of cases). If Student A can finish an entire year's worth of Algebra 2 homework in 2 months, and Student B needs more than a year to finish Algebra 2, does that mean they learned a different amount of content? NO. So why do we insist on holding them all to the same time frame?
I have heard naysayers of standards based grading and competency based grading argue about what happens if a student doesn't master a learning target in any time frame. Besides the fact that this may be the case in an extremely small population of students, who are likely being served in a non general education manner to begin with, I find it fascinating that once again, it is the rigid adherence to time traditions that is the bone of contention. If that is the case, let's problem solve that as educators. What a wonderful alternative problem to have if we allow a hundred students to move at their own pace and collaborate as teams for 1 student who might be unable to demonstrate a particular proficiency.
The next issue people raise is how are they promoted from grade to grade? Well what if we rethink what grade levels look like? We already have blended elementary grade classrooms, and in high school, multiple grades often take the same math class. More importantly, how about instead of just asking questions motivated to prevent change, what about thinking outside the box about what those answers could like in classroom that broke the status quo?
Here at STEM School Chattanooga, we give students multiple opportunities, and all year, including summer school if necessary, (and in a few cases a bit longer) to demonstrate mastery of all learning targets. They may remediate an assignment 10 times, or work on it in a group or with a teacher, or get it right the first try. They may retake a class, or use dual enrollment to take more advanced classes. They may use an online platform like Edgenuity or Khan Academy to help support or demonstrate their learning. We staff summer school for those that require additional time. We don't put constraints on students who want to accelerate and complete courses in shorter amounts of time and then use that additional time to take other courses or to work on projects etc. In short, we make learning the constant, and time the variable. And it works. Not perfectly, and not 100% of the time. But it does work for the vast majority of students, and more importantly it empowers them. It raises the bar for students who are used to skating by, or who have been dependent on being compliant in behavior alone, for those who are bored in class, or disengaged and looking for a challenge. We owe it to our students, and ourselves, to examine the status quo on the matters of time that may be holding them back and making success much more difficult for all learners.
So let's break some of these down. Many people incorrectly assume the reason for summer breaks is based on farming, check here for an explanation from PBS about the more accurate origins of that decision. Part of the issue was the lack of air conditioning in cities and affluent families leaving those areas for cooler parts of the countryside. Early forms of air conditioning were created in 1902, yet for over a hundred years we haven't revisited the topic of whether schools should continue to run year round, or whether alternative vacation time frames might be more beneficial to student learning. Advocates of year round school often cite research that supports the idea that students not only cease to gain momentum during breaks, but that their learning actually regresses too. Current data suggests it is a more complex issue than that, particularly with regards to socioeconomic factors, yet there is still no solid movement around revisiting this issue of time. Less than 5% of US schools are year round. To be clear, I am not advocating here for year round schools, or for summer breaks for that matter, but I am suggesting that after a century, maybe we should look at that.
What about the issue of seat time? This one drives me particularly crazy as an exceptional education teacher (ie one who works with children that are considered gifted, as well as those with significant learning or other disabilities). There will always be students who are not ready for college or careers directly out of high school, and there will also be those who are ready for either long before. Yet, we keep them all for the same 4 years (in the majority of cases). If Student A can finish an entire year's worth of Algebra 2 homework in 2 months, and Student B needs more than a year to finish Algebra 2, does that mean they learned a different amount of content? NO. So why do we insist on holding them all to the same time frame?
I have heard naysayers of standards based grading and competency based grading argue about what happens if a student doesn't master a learning target in any time frame. Besides the fact that this may be the case in an extremely small population of students, who are likely being served in a non general education manner to begin with, I find it fascinating that once again, it is the rigid adherence to time traditions that is the bone of contention. If that is the case, let's problem solve that as educators. What a wonderful alternative problem to have if we allow a hundred students to move at their own pace and collaborate as teams for 1 student who might be unable to demonstrate a particular proficiency.
The next issue people raise is how are they promoted from grade to grade? Well what if we rethink what grade levels look like? We already have blended elementary grade classrooms, and in high school, multiple grades often take the same math class. More importantly, how about instead of just asking questions motivated to prevent change, what about thinking outside the box about what those answers could like in classroom that broke the status quo?
Here at STEM School Chattanooga, we give students multiple opportunities, and all year, including summer school if necessary, (and in a few cases a bit longer) to demonstrate mastery of all learning targets. They may remediate an assignment 10 times, or work on it in a group or with a teacher, or get it right the first try. They may retake a class, or use dual enrollment to take more advanced classes. They may use an online platform like Edgenuity or Khan Academy to help support or demonstrate their learning. We staff summer school for those that require additional time. We don't put constraints on students who want to accelerate and complete courses in shorter amounts of time and then use that additional time to take other courses or to work on projects etc. In short, we make learning the constant, and time the variable. And it works. Not perfectly, and not 100% of the time. But it does work for the vast majority of students, and more importantly it empowers them. It raises the bar for students who are used to skating by, or who have been dependent on being compliant in behavior alone, for those who are bored in class, or disengaged and looking for a challenge. We owe it to our students, and ourselves, to examine the status quo on the matters of time that may be holding them back and making success much more difficult for all learners.
Comments
Post a Comment