Welcome, Guest!
Current schedule to stay for next year
Gargoyle graphic by Isaac ChambersPublished: Thursday, May 21, 2009 - 11:12pm
URBANA — Director Steve Epperson has elected to preserve Uni's current 8 a.m. to 3:50 p.m. schedule for the entire 2009-10 school year.
Epperson weighed the merits of shortening each of Uni's eight class periods to 45 minutes, as well as extending the lunch break to the same length. These changes would have ended regular school days at 3:20 p.m. Currently, class periods are 50 minutes long and lunch is 35 minutes.
"I just think there are still a few things that need to be worked out before we can implement it," Epperson said today after he sent a schoolwide e-mail informing the Uni community of his decision.
"I'm just a little reluctant to push those problems and issues onto my successor [Jeffrey Walkington, who will take over in July]."
Keeping the status quo
In his e-mail, Epperson offered the following reasons for not changing the schedule:
- "Shortening the periods to 45 minutes would require students to take seven classes (or some other creative arrangement) to meet the 300-minute rule. There are around 50 students who are currently enrolled in fewer than seven classes for next year. Requiring these students to add another class (even if it were a study hall) might have some unpredictable effects on the current schedule."
- "Requiring students to add a seventh class at this time would make it impossible for them to get into some classes that are now filled up."
- "I am somewhat concerned that if we had clearly mentioned to students and parents that students would be required to take seven classes, the survey responses might have been different."
- "I feel more time is needed to plan activities and set guidelines for the extended lunch period."
- "I am reluctant to make this decision and then force my successor to deal with any problems associated with the change."
- "After many years of making significant decisions such as this, I just have a 'gut' feeling that it would be better to firm up our plans more before making the change."
Despite his decision to forgo an immediate change, Epperson said he hopes the deliberations regarding Uni's daily schedule will continue next year after Walkington becomes director.
"He and I have talked about this already, and I know he's interested in continuing the discussions," Epperson said. "I think he agrees with me, and most other people, that the school day here at Uni is a little too long — and adjustments eventually need to be made."
The proposal for changing the schedule came after a faculty committee co-chaired by chemistry teacher David Bergandine and college counselor Lisa Micele studied ways to improve the school day.
"I would guess that Dr. Walkington will probably put together some type of a committee next year to continue to look at the proposed schedule, as well as ... more creative schedules than just simply shortening each class five minutes," Epperson added.
"I don't think we're ever going to find a perfect schedule, but hopefully we can find something that will address the length of the school day as well as not do anything to hurt the educational program here."
A temporary letdown, but with hope for the future
In late April, students, faculty, and parents had the opportunity to take an online survey about the proposed changes. According to Epperson, most survey respondents supported implementing the shorter schedule this fall.
Supporters of the change, such as English teacher Steve Rayburn, expressed disappointment over Epperson's choice but praised the initiative to continue discussions.
"I think that the decision was made for very solid reasons," English teacher Steve Rayburn said. "While I might be disappointed that we are not instigating something immediately, I think that maybe we have the ball rolling — so we'll see what happens."
In fact, Rayburn added: "I don't know that the 45-minute schedule is the exact answer. Maybe in the future we'll take a little more time and look more in depth, get the input of our new director ... and see if there might be something that would work better."
Unchanged, contrasting student opinions
Junior Ben Lee was among the students relieved to hear of Epperson's decision.
"This is the best thing to happen all year," Lee said exultantly.
In particular, Lee noted that the shorter schedule would restrict students to just one free period, in order to comply with the state's required minimum instructional time (300 minutes). Currently, students can take up to two free periods — a nice privilege, Lee said.
But while Lee and others celebrated the current schedule's preservation, student proponents of a change shared Rayburn's disappointment.
"I was looking forward to it — a half hour more to have time on my own," sophomore Fiona Weingartner said.
Shorter Schedule at a Glance
The Proposal
- 1st period — 8 to 8:45 a.m.
- 2nd period — 8:50 to 9:35 a.m.
- 3rd period — 9:40 to 10:25 a.m.
- 4th period — 10:30 to 11:15 a.m.
- Lunchtime — 11:15 a.m. to noon
- 5th period — 12:05 to 12:50 p.m.
- 6th period — 12:55 to 1:40 p.m.
- 7th period — 1:45 to 2:30 p.m.
- 8th period — 2:35 to 3:20 p.m.
The Current Schedule (which will remain for 2009-10)
- 1st period — 8 to 8:50 a.m.
- 2nd period — 8:55 to 9:45 a.m.
- 3rd period — 9:50 to 10:40 a.m.
- 4th period — 10:45 to 11:35 a.m.
- Lunchtime — 11:35 a.m. to 12:10 p.m.
- 5th period — 12:15 to 1:05 p.m.
- 6th period — 1:10 to 2 p.m.
- 7th period — 2:05 to 2:55 p.m.
- 8th period — 3 to 3:50 p.m.




Comments
All right!
Preserving the status quo is what "innovative" Uni seems to do best.
Are you for real? You
Are you for real? You actually think that this decision is a reflective of whether or not we are innovative?
Yes
Yes, I do. It's just one more example of the resistance to change of any kind that permeates Uni culture. Too bad for a place that is supposed to embrace change. In my observation, what Uni embraces most often is an infatuation with our own self-perceived awesomeness and self-conscious quirkiness for its own sake.
But why embrace change when
But why embrace change when it's not necessarily going to do us any good? Change simply for the sake of change is pointless - and not innovative at all.
Exactly. You just come off
Exactly. You just come off sounding bitter that nothing is happening.
By no means is this decision
By no means is this decision indicative of some sort of school-wide resistance to change. The majority of people surveyed (I believe) seem to want to try this new schedule. Now, you include yourself in your reference to members of the Uni community, so I can only assume that you are a student or otherwise a member. Dr. Epperson's email to the Uni parents and students (or even, *gasp*, the article we are commenting on here...), explains that it was his decision, not a product of resistance by Uni students or faculty. There would certainly be a lot of difficulty in finding a seventh class for 50 students, most of whom are upperclassmen that might have different choices than what would now be available. I applaud Dr. Epperson for electing not to pass these problems on to Dr. Walkington, and for sending the message that this new schedule should not be put in to place simply to say we tried something. Once we have had an extra year to study how issues like the 300-minute rule and longer lunch periods would be handled, this schedule can be implemented in a way that would allow all students and teachers to form opinions based on the schedule itself, not the problems involved because it was implemented with too little planning
Uni High: We have the Longest Days Anywhere
OK here we go again....as we reflect on the schedule, may I offer these as considerations?
1. In my experience the day is definitely too long for students (not necessarily for teachers btw). But Dr. Epperson made the right choice in not forcing this monumental change onto the new leadership.
2. If we really want to shorten the day, then somebody is going to have to give up something.
(a) We may have to shorten the time per class or go from 8 to 7 periods per day.
(b) We may have to shorten lunch, or let students eat lunch during a scheduled free period in the middle of the day, with perhaps a tiny school-wide break in the middle to let people with no free periods eat.
We are going to lose something...just tell us what it should be.
The rational part ends here. And now for my opinions...
(A) I don't mind 45 min periods, as I have a lot of flexibility in how I teach my classes...but not every teacher does. If some of the best teachers in the country object to losing 3 weeks of instruction time, then I think we need to show them how we would make up for it in lack of early dismissals and shortened periods. The people who have done this calculation need to share it with us.
(B) Lunchtime has become some sort of sacred space for student clubs. In fact some of those clubs are excellent, and it would be a shame to lose them. Others are just pure entertainment, which is OK, but we need to recognize them as such. Others still are just really pointless.
But what everyone needs to understand is that lunchtime clubs will probably NOT help you get into prestigious colleges, if that is your goal. (See below.)
(C) There has been---and continues to be---a sense among some in our community that Uni needs to do more "school-wide" stuff like assemblies. I oppose this for a lot of reasons; but what worries me here is the vague notion that we can somehow cram worthwhile assemblies into an extended lunch period and not damage instruction time. It will not work that way (it never has).
(D) Almost all Uni upperclasspeople need more sleep than they get. This is the fault of the homework load. It's also the fault of Facebook, which reaches out of our monitors and forces us to take lame quizzes like "Which Milliken School of Music Faculty Member do you most closely resemble?" (I did not make that up. I think I am "On a Boat," but I have not checked.) It's also the fault of people wasting time talking during lecture and then having to catch up at home. It's also the fault of people squandering study opportunities during free time in and out of class. So I say, everyone: what are we willing to give up??
There's no reason everyone should want to get into a supposed prestigious school. Every year roughly (more or less) half of the best graduating students go to the U of I anyway. That does not mean Uni was a "waste" for them. But if you want to be competitive, then you need to learn not to dabble: applicants who do a little of everything are a dime a dozen nowadays. My thought is: if you want to be competitive, find something important (a science project or a musical instrument or a social cause or community need) and put your heart into it. Make free time for that project; keep at it when everyone else is wasting time on Facebook; get your homework done early so you can apply yourself to it. This is how I got into prestigious colleges. Ironically, shortening the school day could be a tremendous plus for people who want to get into those adorable little Ivy League schools....
Post new comment