LIMITS ON HOW MUCH HOMEWORK COUNTS

                                               

                                                                by Jim Buxton

              In 2011, Los Angeles, which has the second largest school system in the country, passed a decree that homework cannot count for more than 10% of the grade in a given course.  (The term homework, in this sense, would not include projects, papers or book reports.)  This decree applied to grades K through 12.  (LA Times: 6/27/11; Howard Blume)  This policy seems to be spreading as there are a number of RI high schools which have adopted similar policies.  South Kingstown HS has a 15% limit.  At Exeter-West Greenwich, it seems to be 10%.     The logic for this policy in many instances is sound, but I would argue that there are many situations where this policy is inappropriate.

               

                I’ll quote from a couple of defenders of this policy, who offer the following arguments:

                1) Judy Elliott, LAUSD’s Chief Academic Officer, stated that “some teachers weighted homework for as much as 60 percent of the grade. This led to an imbalance. Students who studied and received A’s in the classroom failed standardized tests. In turn, students who didn’t do their work failed the classes, and yet did extremely well on standardized test scores. Therefore, students and their families were not receiving a true measure of a child’s abilities.”  She continued, asserting that “many students, due to family issues, from babysitting for their siblings, working to help the family or having no area to do their homework – were punished tremendously in the classroom when homework was an unusually high part of their marks. It didn’t matter how well they did in the classroom or on classroom tests, they were still being dramatically marked down for lacking their homework.” (LA Times; 6/27/2011)

                2) Dr Cathy Vatterott, in her Blog, contends that “many well-established homework traditions just don't make sense in today's world, yet tradition dies hard.  We know that students differ in their ‘working speed’, yet many teachers assign the same amount of work to all students, expecting slower students to simply take the extra time to finish the task.”   She continues: “We know that students have responsibilities and activities after school, yet many teachers assign homework at the end of one day and expect it back the next day.”

                Vatterott also takes issue with the weight it carries in the grade:  “Most U.S. teachers grade homework. In other countries homework is graded much less often.  Within a single school the percentage homework counts in a student's grade can vary from 10% to 80%! Yet teachers have no way of knowing if the student actually did the work, or if they have favorable conditions at home to do homework.   Failing students for not completing homework unfairly punishes students who may be unable to work at home.”

               

                I can see the legitimacy in many of the arguments posed by Elliott and Vatterott.  Certainly, there would be situations where a 10% limit might be very reasonable.  However, I firmly believe that a one-size fits all policy” would hold back all too many capable students.  In my critique of the 10% limit, I will resign myself to high school Social Studies classes in communities very different than Los Angeles.

                I agree with Wheelock College associate professor, Janine Bempechat, who stated that “to make homework worthy of only 10% of a student's grade sends a message that it is not important."  Chris Johnson, who teaches Advanced Placement English in the LA system stated that “students need to realize that they're held accountable. They have to organize their time and be much more mature at a younger age than many students," Johnson said. "If it takes till midnight, then you burn the midnight oil."  Another issue I would bring up is if a teacher assigns a fair amount of homework and is limited to it counting 10%, then each individual homework counts minimally.  Therefore, inevitably, students will not do the homework consistently.  Hence, a teacher who  is planning the next day’s lesson cannot count on the majority of students being prepared for class.

                Aside from stressing the numerical importance of homework, I would suggest that a Social Studies teacher should do the following:

                1) Avoid the routine of walking from desk to desk, merely checking whether students did the homework and perhaps giving them a Check, Check-minus or Check-plus depending on how much was written on the page.  Not only does this routine make a mockery of the importance of homework, it also encourages cheating, as the teacher cannot discern cheating through a mere walk-by

                2) I’d recommend almost always collecting Social Studies homework, grading it to the level of a quiz grade, and returning  it with a lot of content and mechanics feedback. This was my routine, and by second quarter, in my mid-level classes, I would get about 85% of homework handed in on time.  The percentage was not as high first quarter, because it took some kids 3-4 weeks to realize that I do, indeed,  “quality control.”  There are those who contend that homework is a formative assessment, and that it should not be graded.  I’ll deal with that argument in a future post.  (See my post on “Flexible Deadlines” for further defense of my homework policies.) 

                Numbers 1 and 2 above may not apply in Honors or AP courses where the students clearly see the value in doing the homework because they are intrinsically curious, or because they see the connection with test grades.  

                3) Work hard to make all or parts of your homework intriguing.  Avoid busy work.  My son had a teacher in high school who merely assigned outlining the text for homework.  Tragically, grading seemed to be based on who had the most notes.  There was serious competition between the students as to who could come up with the most notes.  The homework policy didn’t promote learning; it promoted madness!  It was a travesty!  Again, avoid busy work!

                4)  One way to get around the limits on homework, which seems to be employed in schools with limits, is to give quizzes based upon the reading homework assignment.  It seems to have a positive effect on kids coming to class prepared, however it takes up class time, leading to less breadth of content covered.

                Additionally, I would argue for greater flexibility in the Social Studies realm vis-à-vis Math, for example, because homework for Social Studies often has a different purpose than homework for Math.  In Math class, you learn new concepts during class time, and then you practice those new concepts at home.  Social Studies, generally, is not as dependent on practice.  Thus, in History class, the student might learn about the long term causes of World War 1.  For homework, he reads and analyzes the short term causes (such as the assassination), and he prepares for a discussion the next day.  Indeed, the next day there is a discussion/debate as to which country was most at fault for causing the outbreak of the “Great War.”  That discussion/debate was only possible if at least three-quarters of the students did the homework. 

                So, in math class, you learn A, and then practice A at home, and the next day you learn B.   In History class, you learn A, for homework you learn B, and the next class you learn C.  Hence, homework can be used by the History teacher to cover more breadth.

                My view regarding the breadth of content covered is influenced by the following:

                                1)  The USA has just about the shortest school year in the industrialized world, which I consider to be completely irresponsible, seeing as how we are the most influential country on Earth.  The “world’s policeman” should have a citizenry that is the most knowledgeable.  If anything, we should have the longest school year.

Here are the school years of a variety of different countries:

220: South Korea 

216: Luxembourg and Israel

211: Russia

200: South Africa, Brazil, Mexico, Philippines, Netherlands, Australia, Iran, Japan and Thailand

195: Hong Kong, United Kingdom and Germany

190-191: New Zealand, Nigeria, Switzerland and Finland

187: Canada

180: Sweden, Portugal, Costa Rica and Spain

180: most of the USA, although Maine has 175, and Michigan 170.

                               

                Lengthening the school year was proposed in the Nation at Risk report in 1983, and also by the Obama administration.  (“Should the School year be longer”; Amy Crawford; Boston Globe; June 2, 2013)

                Now, granted, just because a country has a longer school year, it does not mean the students learn more.  You’d have to take into consideration length of the school day, efficiency of the teaching, and many other factors.

                                2) A second influence on me is the drastic reduction in the breadth of Social Studies content delivered to students in the past 10 years.  For further thoughts on this issue, see my post on the loss of breadth of content in high school Social Studies classes.  You will find that post in the post archive.

                                3)  Lastly, a major concern is in regard to our democracy.  I think we’d all agree that an educated citizenry is vital to a successful democracy.  Polls measuring American political, historical and geographical illiteracy would indicate that we are far from an educated citizenry.  (See the post listing videos dealing with American illiteracy in these matters.)  Our low voter turnout rate is a significant indicator here.  (to be a subject for a future post)

                So, who does the policy help?  It certainly can help the student who, for no fault of his own, cannot spend more than an hour on homework per night, or who does not have the support at home which other students do. 

Who does it hurt?  It probably doesn’t hurt the AP students.  Most high schools, I would think, have a hands-off policy regarding AP workload.   It’s left up to the teacher, and if the teacher gets good AP scores, then that’s all that matters.  The students hurt the most, in my opinion, are the “upper-middles”, those not in AP courses, but who are capable of so/ much more, but who are held back by homework limits.  Who or what is the biggest loser?  I would argue that, from a Social Studies standpoint, it’s our democracy!!

                Bottom line:  I would argue that increasing the value of homework in many high school Social Studies classes, combined with intriguing assignments which are “quality controlled”, might well lead to greater breadth of content knowledge, and more legitimacy to our democracy!  Idealistic?   Yes, I won’t apologize for that!

Missing Assignments--and the Real World

By Nancy Flanagan on January 22, 2016 8:09 PM

  It's a story that every teacher has heard--and if they've been in the classroom for a couple of years, recognizes from personal experience:

The teacher is relatively new, and working hard to build an effective practice (in this case, a band program). She goes away for three days, to a conference, leaving behind sub plans which involve sending students to the computer lab to craft a PowerPoint on composers. Only five of her 67 students submit any work. Her question to the Band Directors Group professional network: How do I not freak out on Monday? How do I handle this?

The post hit a nerve--she has about 50 responses so far. What's surprising to me is how many are bent on blame and punishment: What an incompetent sub! Give 'em all zeros! Candy and a free day for the five compliant ones! Make sure your administrator backs you up, then nuke 'em--that's how they learn.

Just what they learn from these retaliatory strategies--or the impact on a young teacher trying to nurture enthusiasm and membership in a school music program--seems unimportant. Kids blew off an assignment--make sure their grades reflect that choice. (The words "choice" and "choose" appear frequently in the comments.) Get tough. They deserve it.

I once wrote a blog about a similar experience I had as a teacher. I assigned a big project, giving my students six weeks to complete it, and a lot of what teachers call scaffolding: things to read, ideas to help them select and shape their work, graphic organizers and outlines, the option of working singly or together. I had more than 300 students at the time, and over 90% turned the project in on time.

When the work was turned in, I realized it would take me weeks to read/listen to the projects, provide feedback and grade them. I offered the 25 or so students who hadn't completed the project a grace period of a week to turn something in--since I wanted to make sure they engaged with the assignment's materials and ideas. All but one or two of the original non-completers finished the work--and what was submitted was mostly of acceptable quality. A handful were top-notch. I also got a couple of thank-you messages from parents.

That blog also drew a lot of ire. From teachers. The word most teachers chose was "unfair"---unfair to the kids who did the work on time. Unfair to let students think they would get a reprieve in the (here it comes) real world. Unfair to other teachers, who insist on meeting deadlines and punish kids who don't.

I've been musing about this. These are the questions that emerge for me:

• What were the teacher's learning goals for this assignment? Were they communicated to the students?  If the goal was "keep kids busy and out of the band room for three days," then the outcome was predictable, even if not defensible.
• How do our students--all our students, from kindergarten to Chemistry--perceive classes taught by substitutes? What do teachers say to their students about subs and days when they must be absent? What do teachers say to their students about what can be accomplished with three days in a computer lab?
• What does it tell our students when compliance matters more than acquiring knowledge or skills? When getting a good grade becomes the only goal?
• How "unfair" is it to students who must work or mind siblings, that other students have long blocks of discretionary time available for schoolwork? Can we ever provide equitable opportunity for all students, equitable access to time and materials for optimum learning?

The two mega-issues that emerge whenever teachers talk about missing assignments and justifying their actions toward late work are grades--always grades--and the idea that we owe kids "real" experiences to prepare them for the big, bad world where they will be presumably be working in a few years.  Paul Thomas, in an excellent piece on grading and late work has this to say:

In my 30-plus years as an educator at nearly every level possible, I witness daily teachers and professors who fail to meet deadlines (regularly); talk, do other things (grade papers), stare at their computers/smart phones, etc., during meetings; and behave in a number of ways that they do not tolerate by students in their classes, behaviors that negatively impact students' grades.

I also drive daily with adult motorists who exceed the speed limit without any punishment--as most of us have come to realize a grace zone of staying less than ten mph over that limit. In other words, the real world of rules is much fuzzier than the rules of formal schooling.

My fellow Education Week Teacher blogger Starr Sackstein has been pushing educator thinking on grades for years. She also had a brilliant blog on late work last week, where she wrote this:

As I have moved away from grades, one things I've noticed is that learning takes time and for different children, it takes different amounts of time. Doesn't mean they aren't learning. Doesn't even mean they are purposely not working. It just means they have a different process. Students like this require more time and there is no reason not to give it to them. The goal is by the end of the year that he will have achieved mastery in the skills and standards of the class. Not necessarily right now when the teacher determines it should be ready.

In the case of the young music teacher and the chorus of "Off with their heads!" that followed her post--a lot the recommendations felt like habitual, unexamined teacher practice: I always give half-credit for one day late OR I wouldn't waste important class time talking about it--just tell them to check the on-line gradebook.

The only upside I see is that the novice teacher who asked for help got it--and there was enough variety in the responses to prove that there is no one right way to address common problems. I wish her well. And I'm guessing she won't use the assignment again.

Flexible deadlines for student work????

Note: this piece is a lot longer than the piece which appeared in the Independent, which has a limit of 750 words                          

by Jim Buxton            

              I know of a number of schools which are adopting flexible deadlines for student work.  This seems to mean that homework due Tuesday could also be handed in on Wednesday, with “no charge”.  The logic seems to be that hard deadlines impact certain kids unjustly.  We’re asked to imagine the student who goes home from school, and then has to manage all the younger siblings while the single Mom works the night shift.  Wouldn’t it be more fair if that student could hand in homework on Wednesday if his Mom is home on Tuesday nights, and he can get work done then?   I would certainly agree in this case.  It is a reality that some students have much less support at home than others.  Although, some students get far too much help at home!

                Another argument in support of flexible deadlines is that kids learn at different rates.  What takes one student 30 minutes to complete may take another student 90 minutes.  The first student may be able to complete it by Tuesday, while the other student will need the extra day and hand it in on Wednesday.  Another related argument is that it doesn’t matter whether they got it in on Tuesday or Wednesday, the important thing is that they learned the material, right?

                Although the aforementioned arguments do carry some weight, I wouldn’t recommend basing my classroom policies on these “exceptions to the rule.”  For most of my 32 years at South Kingstown HS, my policies were directed to the “flock”, and not to the “lost sheep.”  This may sound like a pretty insensitive policy coming from a pretty sensitive guy.  Let me explain my policies dealing with deadlines which I would employ in a “college prep, non-honors” class (perhaps 2/3 of the SKHS students during my tenure).

                Firstly, in regard to minor homeworks, they could not be turned in late.  However, I would drop the lowest homework each quarter.  So, if a student tells me that their dog ate their homework, I’d say (sensitively) that I was sorry they had such an insensitive dog, but lucky for them, they could drop their lowest homework.  In regard to more significant homeworks, essays and papers, they can be turned in, but they lost 2/3 of a grade per day late.  Therefore, if a student turned in a paper, valued for 100 points, one day late, the most they could get was a 93.

                Why the difference between minor homework and papers, for example?  This can be seen by looking at the problems resulting in accepting minor homeworks late:

                                1) Let’s say I’m teaching the causes of World War 1 on Monday, and on Monday night the students had homework relating to the assassination of the Archduke, and the declarations of war which were to follow.  On Tuesday, I had planned to review the course of the war, leading to a debate as to which country was most at fault for World War 1.  However, on Tuesday morning, I collect homework and only 5 out of the 20 students did it.  Only one quarter of the class understands how the war broke out.  What do I do?  Do I carry on with the Tuesday plan, or do I go over the Monday night content?  If I go over Monday night’s homework in class, doesn’t this do a disservice to the 5 kids that completed the homework?  If I carry on with the original plan, then 15 out of the 20 kids are lost.  Either way, because of the flexible homework policy, I don’t know what to expect on Tuesday.

                                My policy was that a deadline was a deadline, and if it was late, it was a zero.  As a result, I would say that I averaged 80 – 85% completed homework over my final 20 years of teaching.  (It took me a decade to get to this level)  Note:  a typical homework might be worth 30 points in a 700 point quarter.  It’s not the end of the world if you get a 0/30, but it does have an impact!  I would show the students the Mathematical impact, and most responded by getting the work done regularly.

                                2) Another problem I have is this.  My goal was to hand back the homework the next day.  I think most educators would agree that prompt feedback is crucial for student learning.  However, if I have loose deadlines, if I hand Monday night’s homework back on Tuesday, then couldn’t Johnny copy Mary’s returned homework, and hand it in on Thursday? Additionally, doesn’t that put Mary in a tough spot when Johnny demands she share her returned homework.  One could say that Johnny could also do this if Monday night’s homework was due on Tuesday, with no lateness allowed.  However, the difference is that I have both Mary and Johnny’s homework with me on Monday night, and I can check if there was any copying.  With flexible deadlines, the only way to ensure there was no copying is if I photocopied all homework handed in so I can tell if someone copied later on (that month??)

                                3) Another problem occurs when dealing with # 2 above.  Teachers will delay handing back homework until everyone has done it.  By the time the work is returned, students don’t even recognize it!!

                                4) Another problem resulting from flexible deadlines is that we cannot flip the classroom, as many suggest.  We can’t make class more interactive and dynamic because they didn’t do the work at home.  Student homework output drops, and teacher centered teaching is the result during class time.

                So, why do I have different lateness policies for papers, for example?  Firstly, papers might be weighted out of 100 in a 700 point quarter.  Getting a zero out of 100 would hurt one’s grade too drastically.  Thus, you can hand it in late, but for 7 points off per day.  I would note that major papers are not returned the next day, therefore the copying issue is not a concern.  Additionally, the paper is a culminating (summative) activity, whereas the minor homework is formative, therefore the formative assessment (homework)  can be used to track the progress of the class as a whole or of individuals within it.

                Now there are some that argue that formative assessments should not count for your grade.  I disagree with that policy as it would lead to all the problems mentioned earlier.  For more on formative assessments, see the Blog post on that topic.

                Lastly, perhaps the most important reason for hard deadlines is because that’s the way the world is!  For the most part, if your boss says get it to me by Tuesday, he/she means Tuesday, not Thursday or next Tuesday!  If the first class at your high school is supposed to start at 7:35, you’re not going to be looked on with favor if you frequently show up at 8 AM.  Additionally, if a high school senior has flexible deadlines, then what happens when he goes to URI where a deadline is a deadline?  I heard that one principal said that it’s not the high school’s job to prepare the kids for URI.

                 Having stated my case, I have to acknowledge that this policy may not work as well in a culture where students just do not do homework.  Therefore, I would accentuate that the policies above worked well for me with the top two tiers of SK classes (which covered about 80% of SKHS students during my tenure.)  With the lowest of the three tiers, these policies did not work as well.  I grant you that.  However, if this is so, then I think it is unwise to make policies geared for the lowest tier which would be applied for the entire student body.

                 Homework deadline policies should be made with the flock in mind, and separate policies should be, sensitively enacted for the "lost sheep."

Block Scheduling: A Solution or a Problem?

by Sharon Cromwell:  Education World

The merits of block scheduling are a subject of great debate. Is it a flexible scheduling alternative that benefits students -- or is it a fad that's sure to pass?
Schools throughout the United States are adopting block scheduling in dramatically increasing numbers. The move to block scheduling, however, has sparked controversy.
Hailed by proponents as a vehicle for greater depth and flexibility in education, block scheduling has turned off some educators and parents, who criticize it as a faddish approach that fails to enhance academic performance.

WHAT IS BLOCK SCHEDULING?
In an article titled "All Around the Block: The Benefits and Challenges of a Non-Traditional School Schedule," Michael D. Rettig and Robert Lynn Canady estimate that "more than 50 percent of high schools in the United States are either using or considering a form of block scheduling."
In contrast with the traditional daily, six-, seven-, or eight-period schedule, a block schedule consists of three or four daily longer periods. Widely used forms of block scheduling are the alternate-day schedule, the 4/4 semester plan, and the trimester plan.

In the alternate-day schedule students and teachers meet every-other-day for extended time periods rather than meeting every day for shorter periods.

In the 4/4 semester plan students complete four "yearlong" courses that meet for about 90 minutes every day during a 90-day semester.

Students take two or three courses every 60 days in a trimester plan to earn six to nine credits per year.

Many schools work with schedules that are variations or combinations of these plans. For example, a school in Broward County, Florida, has adapted the trimester plan by adding three year-long classes to six trimester courses in order to accommodate musical performing groups and Advance Placement subjects, which need or prefer to go year round. Other school districts combine long terms and short terms to provide time for remediation and enrichment for students, as needed.

THE PHILOSOPHY BEHIND THE TREND
Rettig and Canady maintain that a handful of factors are motivating middle and high schools across the United States to adopt block scheduling:

• When students attend as many as eight relatively short classes in different subjects every day, instruction can become fragmented; longer class periods give students more time to think and engage in active learning.
• A schedule with one relatively short period after another can create a hectic, assembly-line environment;
• A schedule that releases hundreds or thousands of adolescents into hallways six, seven, or eight times each school day for four or five minutes of noise and chaotic movement can exacerbate discipline problems.
• Teachers benefit from more useable instructional time each day because less time is lost with beginning and ending classes.

A 1995 study by Carl Glickman, a University of Georgia professor, of 820 high schools and 11,000 students reported that schools in which active learning methods were predominant had significantly higher achievement as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Teachers at schools with block scheduling may use longer instructional periods to engage students in experiments, writing, and other forms of active learning, as opposed to merely lecturing students.
In addition, the alternate-day schedule reduces the time teachers spend in record keeping because records need be kept only every other day instead of every day.
In the 4/4 format, in any one semester teachers prepare for fewer courses and work with fewer students. Grades and records need be kept for fewer students per semester. In addition, some students graduate in three years or earn a year of college credit while still in high school because eight credits can be earned each school year.

THE COPERNICAN PLAN
Like block scheduling, the Copernican Plan, developed by Joseph M. Carroll, also challenges the traditional organization of secondary schools. According to Carroll, a former superintendent who is now an education consultant and author, nothing is wrong with the traditional schedule "except that it prevents teachers from teaching well and students from learning well." Carroll also says that under a traditional secondary schedule, "teachers cannot deal meaningfully with every student every day..."

"Four hundred years ago, the renaissance scholar Copernicus demonstrated the unsystematic movements of the planets could be systematically explained if one begins with the assumption that the sun, not the earth, is the center of the universe (as was then thought)," Carroll explains. "Similarly, our Copernican Plan [challenges] tradition, the traditional organization of our secondary schools and particularly our high schools. Like Copernicus, the plan deals with facts and research that has been known for a long time, but which never seemed to make sense in the real world of schools."

"The Copernican Plan is not about 'block scheduling.' It is about the relationship between time and learning," Carroll adds. It involves change based on research and change that is systemic. It has a built-in method of continuing evaluation.
Carroll emphasizes that the Copernican Plan is not an end; it is a means to an end.

POTENTIAL PROBLEMS
Even though more and more schools are switching to block scheduling, the approach has drawn fire from some educators and parents. Critics of block scheduling assert that the new scheduling format creates or exacerbates certain educational problems.
What will students do for 90-minute periods? critics ask. Proponents of block scheduling cite active learning as the key to keeping students engaged and learning during longer periods. But, even with a block-scheduling format, critics say, many teachers continue simply to lecture students rather than engaging them in active learning. Block scheduling in itself is no guarantee of active learning. And if active learning doesn't take place during, for example, a 90-minute class period, students may have trouble paying attention for the entire class.
Opponents of block scheduling, like the group Parents for Academic Excellence based in Lansdale, Pennsylvania, point out that student absences create problems under block scheduling. Making up missed work is always difficult. But when a student misses one day of classes under block scheduling, the student misses the equivalent of two days of instruction under the traditional system. A weeklong absence means the student misses two weeks of material. Such an absence may cause a student to fall behind to the extent that making up the work is difficult.
Teacher absences may lead to other problems, according to doubters. Under block scheduling, will a substitute teacher be qualified to teach 90-minute periods of, for example, physics?
Courses like languages or mathematics are sequential. Some critics of block scheduling point out that a student may take French I in the fall, not take French at all in the spring, go through the summer, and then take French II the following fall. At issue is how much French the student will recall after a break of several months. Advocates of block scheduling say most forgetting happens in the first few weeks after a course is taken. Yet critics point to studies that indicate greater memory loss over longer periods of time.
A practical hurdle also stands in the way of block scheduling in some school districts. A state arbitration panel in Connecticut recently ruled that Region 13, covering the towns of Durham and Middlefield, would have to pay teachers more under a proposed block schedule plan because teachers would be required to teach six different courses a year instead of five courses. The panel ruled that teachers should be compensated for added preparation time involved in an extra course, even if the teachers would teach for the same length of time. The school district still adopted block schedule after the ruling, but it reconfigured its scheduling to ensure that each teacher is responsible for only five courses.

WHAT ABOUT COMPROMISE?
Once advocates and opponents of block scheduling become entrenched, compromise between the groups can be difficult. In districts that have experienced a smooth transition to block scheduling, the administration has generally dealt with internal opposition that might exist among the staff and brought teachers on board before.
Here are Joseph M. Carroll's recommendations for handling the change process:

• "Process is not product." Don't let the process of change itself dominate for too long.
• "Successful change must be research-based and systemic." Center the process of change on developing a system based on sound instructional research and research-based evaluations of programs that led to improved student performance.
• "Leadership is critical." Leaders must be crystal clear about what they want.
• "Change the whole school at once." School-within-a-school or pilot programs threaten people without establishing a program.
• "Evaluate, evaluate, evaluate." Make evaluation an integral part of the program.
• "A caveat: Beware of the gifted opposition." Teachers and parents connected with honors courses are succeeding under the current system; often they view change as a threat to their position.
• "Determine how much change a school community can absorb." Limit the number of changes and sequence them carefully.

REFERENCES
Block Scheduling: A Catalyst for Change in High Schools, by Robert L. Canady and Michael D. Rettig, Eye On Education, Princeton, N.J.
The Copernican Plan Evaluated: The Evolution of a Revolution and The Copernican Plan: Restructuring the American High School, by Joseph M. Carroll, Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast and Islands, 300 Brickstone Square, Suite 900, Andover, Mass. 01983.
Think About Block Scheduling, by Robin J. Fogarty, IRI Skylight Training and Publishing, Palatine, Ill.
Retooling the Instructional Day, by Gerald E. Kosanovic, National Association of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA, (703) 860-7227
"Debunking the Semesterizing Myth," by Dennis Raphael, M.W. Walstrom, and L.D. McLean, Canadian Journal of Education, Winter 1986
"Science Achievement in Semester and All-Year Courses," by David J. Bateson, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, March 1990

***************************************************************************
WHAT'S BEEN YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH BLOCK SCHEDULING?
  

Teacher evaluation: redoing work: Open Forum # 3

        In the current teacher evaluation rubric, in Component 2b: "Establishing a culture of learning," there are possible examples listed in the right hand column.  At the 4 Level, one of the examples is as follows:  "A student asks the teacher for permission to redo a piece of work since she now sees how it could be strengthened."  I assume, judging the context, that the redo would lead to a higher grade, and the Level 4 teacher would say, "Yes, of course!"   How do you feel about "re-dos?"
Is allowing re-dos a mark of a top teacher?  Should we all be doing that?  On which pieces of work?
Post your opinion on revising work here.  What are the benefits?  What are the costs? When is it appropriate?

Flexible deadlines for student work????

                          by Jim Buxton             

              I know of a number of schools which are adopting flexible deadlines for student work.  This seems to mean that homework due Tuesday could also be handed in on Wednesday, with “no charge”.  The logic seems to be that hard deadlines impact certain kids unjustly.  We’re asked to imagine the student who goes home from school, and then has to manage all the younger siblings while the single Mom works the night shift.  Wouldn’t it be more fair if that student could hand in homework on Wednesday if his Mom is home on Tuesday nights, and he can get work done then?   I would certainly agree in this case.  It is a reality that some students have much less support at home than others.

              Although, some students get far too much help at home!

                Another argument in support of flexible deadlines is that kids learn at different rates.  What takes one student 30 minutes to complete may take another student 90 minutes.  The first student may be able to complete it by Tuesday, while the other student will need the extra day and hand it in on Wednesday.  Another related argument is that it doesn’t matter whether they got it in on Tuesday or Wednesday, the important thing is that they learned the material, right?

                Although the aforementioned arguments do carry some weight, I wouldn’t recommend basing my classroom policies on these “exceptions to the rule.”  For most of my 32 years at South Kingstown HS, my policies were directed to the “flock”, and not to the “lost sheep.”  This may sound like a pretty insensitive policy coming from a pretty sensitive guy.  Let me explain my policies dealing with deadlines which I would employ in a “college prep, non-honors” class (perhaps 2/3 of the SKHS students during my tenure).

                Firstly, in regard to minor homeworks, they could not be turned in late.  However, I would drop the lowest homework each quarter.  So, if a student tells me that their dog ate their homework, I’d say (sensitively) that I was sorry they had such an insensitive dog, but lucky for them, they could drop their lowest homework.  In regard to more significant homeworks, essays and papers, they can be turned in, but they lost 2/3 of a grade per day late.  Therefore, if a student turned in a paper, valued for 100 points, one day late, the most they could get was a 93.

                Why the difference between minor homework and papers, for example?  This can be seen by looking at the problems resulting in accepting minor homeworks late:

                                1) Let’s say I’m teaching the causes of World War 1 on Monday, and on Monday night the students had homework relating to the assassination of the Archduke, and the declarations of war which were to follow.  On Tuesday, I had planned to review the course of the war, leading to a debate as to which country was most at fault for World War 1.  However, on Tuesday morning, I collect homework and only 5 out of the 20 students did it.  Only one quarter of the class understands how the war broke out.  What do I do?  Do I carry on with the Tuesday plan, or do I go over the Monday night content?  If I go over Monday night’s homework in class, doesn’t this do a disservice to the 5 kids that completed the homework?  If I carry on with the original plan, then 15 out of the 20 kids are lost.  Either way, because of the flexible homework policy, I don’t know what to expect on Tuesday.

                                My policy was that a deadline was a deadline, and if it was late, it was a zero.  As a result, I would say that I averaged 80 – 85% completed homework over my final 20 years of teaching.  (It took me a decade to get to this level)  Note:  a typical homework might be worth 30 points in a 700 point quarter.  It’s not the end of the world if you get a 0/30, but it does have an impact!  I would show the students the Mathematical impact, and most responded by getting the work done regularly.

                                2) Another problem I have is this.  My goal was to hand back the homework the next day.  I think most educators would agree that prompt feedback is crucial for student learning.  However, if I have loose deadlines, if I hand Monday night’s homework back on Tuesday, then couldn’t Johnny copy Mary’s returned homework, and hand it in on Thursday? Additionally, doesn’t that put Mary in a tough spot when Johnny demands she share her returned homework.  One could say that Johnny could also do this if Monday night’s homework was due on Tuesday, with no lateness allowed.  However, the difference is that I have both Mary and Johnny’s homework with me on Monday night, and I can check if there was any copying.  With flexible deadlines, the only way to ensure there was no copying is if I photocopied all homework handed in so I can tell if someone copied later on (that month??)

                                3) Another problem occurs when dealing with # 2 above.  Teachers will delay handing back homework until everyone has done it.  By the time the work is returned, students don’t even recognize it!!

                                4) Another problem resulting from flexible deadlines is that we cannot flip the classroom, as many suggest.  We can’t make class more interactive and dynamic because they didn’t do the work at home.  Student homework output drops, and teacher centered teaching is the result during class time.

                So, why do I have different lateness policies for papers, for example?  Firstly, papers might be weighted out of 100 in a 700 point quarter.  Getting a zero out of 100 would hurt one’s grade too drastically.  Thus, you can hand it in late, but for 7 points off per day.  I would note that major papers are not returned the next day, therefore the copying issue is not a concern.  Additionally, the paper is a culminating (summative) activity, whereas the minor homework is formative, therefore the formative assessment (homework)  can be used to track the progress of the class as a whole or of individuals within it.

                Now there are some that argue that formative assessments should not count for your grade.  I disagree with that policy as it would lead to all the problems mentioned earlier.  For more on formative assessments, see the Blog post on that topic.

                Lastly, perhaps the most important reason for hard deadlines is because that’s the way the world is!  For the most part, if your boss says get it to me by Tuesday, he/she means Tuesday, not Thursday or next Tuesday!  If the first class at your high school is supposed to start at 7:35, you’re not going to be looked on with favor if you frequently show up at 8 AM.  Additionally, if a high school senior has flexible deadlines, then what happens when he goes to URI where a deadline is a deadline?  I heard that one principal said that it’s not the high school’s job to prepare the kids for URI. 

 

                Having stated my case, I have to acknowledge that this policy may not work as well in a culture where students just do not do homework.  Therefore, I would accentuate that the policies above worked well for me with the top two tiers of SK classes (which covered about 80% of SKHS students during my tenure.)  With the lowest of the three tiers, these policies did not work as well.  I grant you that.  However, if this is so, then I think it is unwise to make policies geared for the lowest tier which would be applied for the entire student body. 

 

                Homework deadline policies should be made with the flock in mind, and separate policies should be, sensitively enacted for the "lost sheep."