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....
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....