District 203 has proposed changes to the school day across all grade levels, including a shift from the standard eight-period day to a modified block schedule at the high school level. The Central Times Editorial Board believes that, should the proposal be adjusted to remove SOAR periods, it will improve learning opportunities while addressing critical flaws in the current school day design.
The current form of the proposal will shift the high school day to four 85-minute instructional periods each, including a modified version of the current SOAR period, with two opportunities for targeted support. Wednesday would be made an “anchor day” with seven instructional periods.
203 currently utilizes a nested school day design in which high school starts first and ends last, then middle school starts second and ends second and finally elementary school starts last and ends first.
Because of this schedule, many high school students who take the bus arrive an hour before the school day even begins, with some students getting on the bus before 6:30 a.m. Early start times and long days do nothing but harm students’ health and well being. A meta-analysis of 28 studies on school start times, sleep and youth outcomes found that better overall developmental outcomes, longer sleep duration and less negative moods were associated with later school start times.
Furthermore, the traditional high school schedule bears little resemblance to life after graduation. College schedules typically include slates of classes that extend far beyond Central’s current 50 minute periods providing a stark contrast to student experiences in high school. With its comparatively longer class periods, the proposed block schedule would not only better prepare Central students who attend college but also those who don’t. Any career path demands extended periods of focused work on a single task. Rarely do employees switch between tasks within just a short timeframe, as they are rather expected (and required) to work on the same projects for hours at a time. The current schedule does not allow for this critical skill to be developed in the classroom, though its cultivation should be an important goal for any high school education.
However, it’s important to still recognize the unique developmental stage of high school students. College schedules, for instance, rarely involve back-to-back classes, and there’s a reason high schoolers aren’t typically in the professional workplace. Educators and administrators should be mindful of these differences and adapt accordingly. This means creating engaging and interactive lesson plans that make classes worthwhile to students. Potential breaks built into lesson plans may also be an effective strategy to adapt the classes to adolescent minds. A mix of lectures, hands-on projects, asynchronous learning and one-on-one support should be used to support a variety of student needs with an extended class period. The school day shouldn’t mimic a professional environment, but it should instead help prepare students for it.
Although the proposal contains mostly positive changes, the addition of four periods throughout the week dedicated to SOAR and Homeroom is a waste of students’ and teachers’ time. Implemented in 2022, SOAR only benefits a small segment of students who necessitate targeted support and turns into a de-facto study hall for the rest of the student body. Homeroom is even a bigger waste of time, with teachers and students alike finding little to no value, and a critical lack of community building as originally intended. Three years after its implementation, the only thing SOARing in support periods are absences. Doubling the amount of time given to these offerings each week will only serve to exacerbate the issues SOAR creates, rather than solve them as intended. The district could instead propose a shortened advisory period on Wednesdays to carry state-required or non-instructional tasks such as fire drills or school-wide surveys.
One of the largest concerns students have voiced is their fear that they won’t be able to hold focus for an 85-minute period. While the Editorial Board understands and relates to these concerns, we hold that many students will be able to quickly adapt to such changes and will learn necessary executive functioning skills in the process. Kids are adaptable, and as we’ve seen through the 50 different grading pilots, pandemic and three different weekly schedules, our student body has an ability to maintain academic performance through such change. Nonetheless, this still requires administration and teachers to be forward thinking in developing curriculum that meets the ever-developing teenage minds. An 85 minute lecture about the joys of U.S. history isn’t an effective way to meet students’ learning needs. In the same vein, departments like Physical Education will need to significantly change their class structures and find creative alternatives to a potential class with 85 minutes of rock climbing or badminton.
A new school day won’t function well if teachers simply combine what would have been two lessons into one class period. The district needs to provide time and support for teachers to develop new instructional plans for this new schedule. Increased professional development opportunities and possibly paid time over the summer devoted to redeveloping curricula would help assist in the transition and support student needs. If teachers are failed to be given the adequate amount of support to develop these plans, students will be negatively impacted next fall.
While some may support pushing back the implementation of the plan to a later date or switching to a staged implementation, we believe for simplicity, all such changes should be implemented by the start of next school year. Staggering these changes will only confuse the community versus ripping off the band-aid and implementing the proposal. A block schedule or staggered school day is hardly innovative in the broader educational environment, as both are structures that have existed for years in other districts. Logistical concerns expressed by elementary and middle school parents, who will face earlier and later start times, respectively, have plenty of time to be addressed and should not present a challenge come fall.
The block schedule will solve many problems that are present in the high school day. Similar benefits exist across all levels of the proposal. With a few caveats and proactive work by administration, the redesign will offer a valuable opportunity to shift a 20th century instructional model to something that fits the needs of a 21st century student. We recommend the school board adopt the proposal with changes.
