Below is my third op-ed column. It ran at the end of May 2000 in the same Seattle-area papers as its predecessors. After my first two forays into education editorials, I’d found laminated newspaper columns of my work in my school mailbox. A complimentary note from our district superintendent accompanied each. Made me feel as if I had support within “the system.” Made me proud. Things were about to change.
I heard rumblings that our district was considering the shift to block scheduling. Experience taught me that such decisions came down from above with little or no faculty input. In passing one day I asked a young administrator if there were any truth to the rumor that block scheduling was in our district’s future. He said it was indeed being discussed. That’s when I knew I had to get in my two-cent’s worth.
I’m reasonably certain our superintendent DID get phone calls after the editorial appeared. She wasn’t happy. I found no congratulatory note in my mailbox. Instead I did find a message to call the superintendent A.S.A.P. Oops! The gist of her point was that I should henceforth clear all editorials with her BEFORE I sent them for publication. I politely but firmly refused by saying the public forum I sought for my professional viewpoint was open to all. If the superintendent disagreed with what I had written, she was free to write a rebuttal. She was neither persuaded nor amused. That phone call was the beginning of the end of my teaching career. I managed another dozen or so articles and letters to the editor.
In the meantime I battled health issues stemming from high blood pressure, sleep apnea, acid-reflux, three vocal cord surgeries, panic attacks, and depression. My career died, but I’m lucky to be alive.
FAS
P.S. Our district has still not adopted a block schedule.
Block scheduling: Another poor trend in public education
Has it reached your school? Block scheduling is sweeping the county if not the country, and your district could be next. Blocking is just the latest in a long line of ``progressive'' Band-Aids slapped over education's gaping wounds. Prepare for the sales pitch: ``Mercer Island already has block schedules, and just look at their test scores!'' Careful, that's bandwagon propaganda, a fallacy in logic. You do not buy it when your daughter wants a tattoo just like all her friends. Do not fall for the same line from your local school.
Block scheduling replaces the traditional six-period school day with three double periods, usually on an odd-even, alternating-day basis. To cover the same six classes, students need two consecutive days of school. The con job will continue with, ``Blocking increases teacher-student contact time. Think of all we can accomplish with two-hour periods.''
The truth is just the opposite. Two-hour blocks actually decrease weekly contact time. Half the classes meet Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for a total of six hours. Tuesday-Thursday courses only get four. It takes two successive weeks before blocked periods equal six-period contact time.
Regular weekly tests in any subject won't work. Monday-Wednesday-Friday students will have four days to study while Tuesday-Thursday kids get six, counting the weekend. Of course, total study time eventually evens out -- again after two weeks. Teachers with duplicate classes will need to create two versions of every test; otherwise, Friday testers will share the questions with friends who test on Mondays. Given two extra days and all the questions, cheaters will ace Monday exams. The favor gets returned the following week. Don't be shocked. It's just human nature.
Kids aren't the only ones who will take the easy way out if your school adopts block scheduling. Don't forget to factor in human nature for teachers, too. How many teachers will plan and faithfully execute double lessons for each double period? Some surely will. Most will be veteran teachers who will draw from their wealth of lessons and experience. But, just how many veterans remain in your school?
The cold, hard truth is not positive. Most teachers will complete one lesson then turn students loose to do homework in class. Few have the stamina, the management skills, and the enthusiasm to engage teenagers for two hours of direct instruction. Colleges don't do it, and they teach older students, motivated students who want to be in class and pay big bucks for the privilege. What rational adult believes double periods will be effective in high school?
Most attention spans I deal with barely survive an hour. In a double-period schedule, kids will get weary. They'll need a half-time break. During that break, they'll get antsy. Good luck getting 30 teens back on task. Most teachers will eventually surrender. Students will eagerly take charge, but will they really learn? Ignorance loves company. Block scheduling and human nature will essentially cut teacher-student contact time in half. The 180-day school year might as well be 90.
Students need structure, especially high school freshman. Fourteen-year-olds do not instinctively prepare for class like college students. Ninth-graders arrive without note-taking skills, and sophomores need more practice. Even upperclassmen rarely review their notes daily. All high school students benefit from a consistent study routine. Experience is still the best teacher. A structured, traditional schedule reinforces lessons and study habits daily. Block scheduling doesn't.
How many teenagers have the self-discipline to plan two days ahead? How many are willing to do schoolwork on weekends? Miss a Thursday class and the average student won't start catching up until the following Monday. Learning delayed is learning denied. Dedicated scholars will still succeed, but public schools aren't just for the brightest. Watch the failure rate rise if your school abandons the six-period schedule.
Progressives love the block scam. It perfectly fits their paradigm of student-centered learning. If your district bleats the progressive line, block scheduling is in your future. Anticipate the facilitator hard sell next. Do not buy it. Student-directed discovery, cooperative learning, and group projects will keep kids busy for a double period. But will they learn? When your district hires progressive facilitators for block schedules, they will phase out traditional direct instruction, the best way to learn. Once the scheduling shift is made, traditionalists will have two choices, adapt or quit.
Principals and their assistants love the block charade. It makes their jobs easier. Filling three slots a day with teachers and students is a cinch compared to six. The real appeal to blocking, however, deals with discipline. Most discipline problems flare up between classes. With just three periods, students have fewer chances to cause trouble. That translates into fewer fights to break up, fewer parents to call, and fewer lawsuits to fear. Such a deal for the dean of students!
Truth is, in the block scheme, overt anger and rebellion will go underground. Students will soon erupt in the classroom instead of the hall. The day your school buys blocking, administrator duties decrease. Who picks up the slack? The classroom teacher, who else?
Twenty years ago the best principal I've known reflected on the ``old/bold'' dichotomy during his retirement speech. He declared: ``There are old principals, and there are bold principals. But there are no old/bold principals.'' We chuckled then. Now it's too true to be amusing. Old-bold principals are precisely what we need now -- leaders old enough to remember traditional success, and bold enough to reject the sheep who blindly promote block scheduling.
Is your local principal old enough and bold enough to lead your community's high school where you want it to go? If you reject block scheduling, don't call your favorite teacher to speak out. Teachers have no veto power. Call your local superintendent. Then call your high school principal.
