Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Medium)   The way high school is structured is insane; here's the way it should be   (medium.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, High school, Education, Time, high school, next half hour, entire time, high school students, much time  
•       •       •

8742 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Mar 2019 at 6:05 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



110 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2019-03-01 09:42:47 PM  
You do all of this every day, Monday through Friday. On weekends you often have work that wasn't finished during the week. The managers who oversee your various hourly commitments don't really communicate with each other. Each treats their task as the number-one priority of your life-not merely for that hour, but for the day. Overlapping activity is ignored.

Mmmm that sounds suspiciously like life NOW.
 
2019-03-01 10:12:17 PM  
A big problem with education is that it costs money.

I don't mean tuition, I mean educating students is an expense for those who do it. You need time, space, skilled labor, physical resources... and nothing to show for it but the absence of that money and the new knowledge in students' brains.

Now, of course that knowledge is priceless and well educated people  pay it back a million times over, but small minds think small and few minds are smaller than that of the uneducated fellow. They often see little value in something that appears to only cost, so they avoid or even oppose education.

And as luck would have it, small minds can often be quite wealthy, and thus wind up in government or administrative positions where they control education budgets. And lo, the school curriculum is shaped by those less than qualified to shape one and that's backed up by lawmakers.  And here we are.
 
2019-03-01 10:25:26 PM  
This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.
 
433 [TotalFark] [BareFark]
2019-03-02 06:17:31 AM  

bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.


That wasn't left behind in the seventies. The word for it that I knew was "block scheduling," and my district kept trying to buy in to different methods.  Reportedly, the teachers did not like having to prepare double-lesson plans, and that students became fatigued after a while.
 
2019-03-02 06:29:00 AM  

433: bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.

That wasn't left behind in the seventies. The word for it that I knew was "block scheduling," and my district kept trying to buy in to different methods.  Reportedly, the teachers did not like having to prepare double-lesson plans, and that students became fatigued after a while.


That's what I was thinking, reading the article.  The idea sounds really good to me now, as a middle-aged adult.  As a high school freshman it would have driven me nuts.

The perception of time changes with age.  Four hours used to be an eternity.  These days, it's just long enough to warrant a short break.
 
2019-03-02 06:31:26 AM  
The most obvious issue IMO would be the way that classes build upon previous study.

If, say, instead of doing math more-or-less daily for 30 weeks you have 6 weeks of mathematics, spend the next 24 weeks studying various other subjects, come back for another great gulp of maths which depends upon recollection of that earlier 6 week stint, don't see it again for 24 weeks...

It reminds me of the idea that when learning a musical instrument it's more effective to practice for even a brief period daily than to try to cram all your practice into one long weekly session.

/yes, I know you were told there'd be no math
 
2019-03-02 06:40:25 AM  

bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.


That's how my high school worked, and that was in the '90s. I remember 75-minute classes being way too long. After about 40 minutes or so I would just tune out.
 
2019-03-02 06:46:42 AM  
A student with one or two classes a day would be able to focus on a single task for an extended period of time. Excellence would not be fractured. Work would be manageable and focused. And if the actual working world is any guide, deep and effective learning would take place.

An interesting outcome, unaddressed by the article, would be the highlighting of bad teaching. If I had suffered through my Catholic introduction to Hamlet for half a a school day, I would have become a school shooter.
 
2019-03-02 06:47:00 AM  

bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.


I did ninth grade on the first system, then the rest of high school on the second system.  There's no comparison - I'd pick semestering every time.
 
2019-03-02 07:03:13 AM  
yes, because sitting through 2 3-hour classes would be awesome...

those college courses that i took as a once a week for three hours were farking boring.  imaging high school kids trying to sit through that.  the teacher would be throwing shiat at them after 90 minutes because they wouldn't sit still
 
2019-03-02 07:03:20 AM  
My thoughts and prayers are going to Betsy DeVos. She'll fix it.
 
2019-03-02 07:09:52 AM  
I went to a 6 class a day high school for freshman year, then spent sophomore-senior years at a high school that did block scheduling. 4 classes a day for the first half of the year, then a different 4 classes for the second half. The teachers semi-regularly ran out of stuff to teach us and we'd spend the last half hour of class having free time or doing busy work. Some of them liked to assign extra homework because we didn't have homework from other classes.

I preferred the 6 class a day model. Teenagers can only focus for so long, and stretching your legs between classes was nice.
 
2019-03-02 07:12:37 AM  
No mention of the 4:20 session.
 
KIA
2019-03-02 07:12:59 AM  
They forgot some important precursors:

1) Throw everyone's cell phone in a bucket the moment they walk in the door, put a signal-blocking lid on the bucket and leave them there for the entire class.

2) Yes, I know they will freak out, claim anxiety and every other thing in the world, but with literally nothing else to distract them, they might actually learn.

3) Have you ever been stuck in a long business meeting?  Nobody pays attention for more than about an hour to an hour and a half.  That's the longest realistic class they can manage, then there should be a break of like 10 ore 15 minutes before the next one.  Yes, I know the kinds of mischief teens can get into in fifteen minutes.  But they can also get into trouble in five minutes as well.  Four-hour classes are a pipe-dream.

4) They need two additional classes in the very first part of the cycle: one on scientific method, logic and structured thought process along with the learning process itself so they have guidance on how to think and learn.  A second that takes them outside on hikes and to nature preserves to give them real-world, hands-on lessons on biology, forests, ecology, water, plants, animals, rocks and minerals, geology, the kinds of things that give them valuable information about the non-electronic world around them.
 
2019-03-02 07:22:11 AM  

433: bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.

That wasn't left behind in the seventies. The word for it that I knew was "block scheduling," and my district kept trying to buy in to different methods.  Reportedly, the teachers did not like having to prepare double-lesson plans, and that students became fatigued after a while.


I teach high school English, and we have block scheduling. Our students have three 95 minute long content classes and one 50 minute seminar. Our blocks are nine weeks long.

Our students also only take the classes they need, so if they failed an English class (yes, we still fail students, unlike some schools), they may have two English classes in one block.

I don't run out of things to teach because I'm fitting a semester into a nine-week period. If anything I prefer not having to rush through lessons. The best part of it, for me, is that if I have a difficult student I only have him or her for nine weeks!
 
2019-03-02 07:24:34 AM  

bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.


My high school went to block scheduling in the 90s.
 
433 [TotalFark] [BareFark]
2019-03-02 07:32:50 AM  
That's great, strandedinAZ!, and thanks for taking a moment.  It sounds like things are working well.

I had four different scheduling structures as a student. As a teacher, you can imagine how that would be frustrating.  I think they eventually ironed it out, but of course, it's always somethin'.
 
2019-03-02 07:33:46 AM  
Different people learn in different ways. I learned the best by concentrating on one subject until I mastered it. I would spend hours or days on a topic until I knew it inside and out. I had a lot of trouble switching classes every hour and almost failed in school because of it.
 
2019-03-02 07:34:09 AM  
For ADHD kids, lots of change can be a positive, like the constant shifting.  But for kids with issues if retention, the longer sessions with fewer changes is better.  For me, getting to college with only 3 or 4 subjects in a term was ideal.

My kid is currently taking 2 subjects 3 days a week and one subject one day a week.  He went from failing to now passing with B's.  Amazing what school choice and competition for students can do.  He actually likes school now.
 
2019-03-02 07:36:30 AM  
Wrong wrong wrong.

This sounds great for a teacher, who is gonna teach the same subject all day anyway and wants more continuity.  For students it's a total nightmare.  The amount of information that students are absorbing is immense compared to almost any "grown up" job.  A change is as good as a rest, so switching subjects every hour or sometimes two hours is very important to keep the energy levels and concentration levels high.
 
2019-03-02 07:36:47 AM  
I've been saying this since middle school. Why not teach a different subject but only one class a day? Had I been able to stay focused and absorb what I was learning that day, I would've been better off.

Who the hell thought up the current structure?
 
2019-03-02 07:39:23 AM  

cherryl taggart: For ADHD kids, lots of change can be a positive, like the constant shifting.  But for kids with issues if retention, the longer sessions with fewer changes is better.  For me, getting to college with only 3 or 4 subjects in a term was ideal.

My kid is currently taking 2 subjects 3 days a week and one subject one day a week.  He went from failing to now passing with B's.  Amazing what school choice and competition for students can do.  He actually likes school now.


Well. There's my counterexample. :)

I'm intrigued that it works for your kid, then there must be types of learners, I guess.   I would still maintain that without individual-paced computer learning, one or two hour sessions are enough for most students without them getting fatigued.
 
2019-03-02 07:44:56 AM  
My high school went to blocks in the 90s as well. It saved jobs and no one seemed to have a problem with it. Except freshmen, who had to stay in the cafeteria if they had a free block. We called it the freshman storage unit.

We didn't have any bells or buzzers to signal the end of class. When the school was built in the 70s, the classrooms didn't have any walls, so walls for classrooms were permanently temporary. Oh, and every floor but the cafeteria was carpeted.

There was an official smoking section, too. The dean would come out with us and talk. When break was over, he made sure no one cut class.
 
2019-03-02 08:04:20 AM  
My high school did an eight period day. Three before recess, two between recess and lunch, and three between lunch and home time. If I remember rightly they were half hour or 35 minute blocks.

We also did a six day rotation for a bit then changed to a M-F 5 day week.

Still didn't stop us not learning, nor the teachers fiddling with the kids, but then again this was Catholic school and they insisted we do an additional course in religious studies (not comparative, just Catholic) while we were snowed under with Year 12 coursework and exams. The entire system was shiat.
 
2019-03-02 08:10:27 AM  
Each of these hourlong periods leaves you with work to do outside the office

This is where I stopped. I never did homework during school because it isn't a thing that exists in real life. I have never worked outside of the job (being paid) and I never will.
 
2019-03-02 08:16:37 AM  

doglover: A big problem with education is that it costs money.

I don't mean tuition, I mean educating students is an expense for those who do it. You need time, space, skilled labor, physical resources... and nothing to show for it but the absence of that money and the new knowledge in students' brains.

Now, of course that knowledge is priceless and well educated people  pay it back a million times over, but small minds think small and few minds are smaller than that of the uneducated fellow. They often see little value in something that appears to only cost, so they avoid or even oppose education.

And as luck would have it, small minds can often be quite wealthy, and thus wind up in government or administrative positions where they control education budgets. And lo, the school curriculum is shaped by those less than qualified to shape one and that's backed up by lawmakers.  And here we are.


Education and elections are too important to the nation as a whole to be left in the hands of the locals.

Have you met many school board members?  How about your county clerk (who runs ALL the elections you vote in)?  There are a shocking number of county clerks who STILL DONT USE ELECTRONIC METHODS TO TALLY VOTES and will have to mail you results.  When I found that out, I began to rethink the value of "local control" for a lot of things.

Also, Sheriff and Judge are positions that should not be elected.
 
2019-03-02 08:17:21 AM  
Way to long to read. Where are the cliff notes for this?
 
2019-03-02 08:28:21 AM  
People have been saying this for 30 years...

The author could have saved a lot of time and pointed to how colleges schedule classes, with many only meeting one or two times a week for long periods, and who the hell enrolls in a class that starts before 9.

On issue with high school is that it's partially babysitting. The day doesn't need to be as long as it is, but parents don't want their kids home alone.
 
2019-03-02 08:36:11 AM  

thornhill: On issue with high school is that it's partially babysitting.


And it's transitioned to a cafeteria for lots of people, sometimes year-round. Every snow day you get stories of "What will kids do for meals?!"
 
2019-03-02 08:39:14 AM  

bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.


My high school did that in the early 90s.

One big problem in education: shiathead consultants who want to pretend their cureall has never been tried before
 
TWX
2019-03-02 08:39:37 AM  

doglover: A big problem with education is that it costs money.


I don't necessarily agree with the rest of your post but I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

Education costs money. For everyone in this discussion positing their own improvements to education or why education was unsatisfactory to them, education is structured the way it is because it's the most bang for the buck.

A particular student might be underserved by this current model, but most of the students are adequately served by this model, assuming this given level of funding, and many students excel with this model. The system has only so much money committed to it, and it's having to make the best of what it can with that money. Some school districts have concluded that the one class per hour, six or seven subjects a day method best serves their students, others have implemented block or partial block scheduling and it works for them. In all cases though, some kids are underserved, some kids are adequately served, and others absolutely thrive.

You're not going to get a system that perfectly serves everyone unless you can afford to pay for incredibly small class sizes. Compare to daycare, it easily costs $250 a week for unsubsidized infants/one-year-olds daycare where I live; subtracting a summer from that would equal around $10,000 per year. That $250 a week yields a group size of no more than eleven but doesn't provide skilled instruction for advanced subjects, and daycare workers don't make very much money. To reach even just the kind of salaries that skilled teachers of advanced subjects receive now, that weekly tuition would have to more than double, so call it $25,000 a year for class sizes small enough for something approaching individualized instruction.

Now consider that at least my state pays the school districts somewhere around $6000 per kid per year.
 
TWX
2019-03-02 08:42:05 AM  

thornhill: People have been saying this for 30 years...

The author could have saved a lot of time and pointed to how colleges schedule classes, with many only meeting one or two times a week for long periods, and who the hell enrolls in a class that starts before 9.

On issue with high school is that it's partially babysitting. The day doesn't need to be as long as it is, but parents don't want their kids home alone.


Flaws in your argument; not everyone goes to college, many in college drop-out, and most of the people there want to be there and thus apply themselves of their own volition. When the have-to-be-there kids are removed from the equation it naturally will yield those that at least try to apply themselves, regardless of how classes are structured or how flawed the professors are.
 
2019-03-02 09:06:47 AM  
Block schedules are great.  There is less homework because there is more time in class to do "classwork", what otherwise would be "take-home" homework.

One example:  https://www.northsideprep.o​rg/apps/pag​es/index.jsp?uREC_ID=239098&type=d

Another example:  https://www.jonescollegepre​p.org/apps/​bell_schedules/printerfriendly.jsp
 
2019-03-02 09:08:29 AM  
I'll go back into education once we have this perfected

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2019-03-02 09:25:05 AM  
Our school ran a block schedule in the 90s as well. We still had 8 classes per semester.  Divided into A days, and B days, with 4 periods each. I found it very effective for subjects like gym, chemistry, and shop.  A little bit less effective for band and choir.  One major downside was when you missed a day you were twice as far behind on that subject.  It is my understanding that they have tried several variations of it since I left.  I liked the system, but recognize it has some of the drawbacks mentioned above.
 
2019-03-02 09:46:15 AM  
TWX:

And lo, Exhibit A proves what I was just saying.
 
2019-03-02 09:50:57 AM  
My ah ha moment for the month: work is run just like high school. No wonder we're so unproductive.
 
2019-03-02 09:58:53 AM  

bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.


The year round schools are doing this now too.
 
2019-03-02 10:03:22 AM  
The writer forgot a few things intertwined in there.

In between all the transitioning and attempted learning you also have to cramp in:

-socializing

--figuring out how and where you're going to grab your next bag and or booze

-trying to bang everything with a pair of legs and voobs.

-trying to find out where the party is at.
 
2019-03-02 10:04:11 AM  

433: bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.

That wasn't left behind in the seventies. The word for it that I knew was "block scheduling," and my district kept trying to buy in to different methods.  Reportedly, the teachers did not like having to prepare double-lesson plans, and that students became fatigued after a while.


Weird.  I had block scheduling in the '90s.  We didn't do half-semesters.  Instead, we had one "block" MWF, and the other block TTh.  You swap weeks so that one week you have each class 3 times, the next week you have those same classes only twice a week.  It seems complicated but if you communicate well and label the blocks, no one had any problem following the schedule.  Of course, my high school only had 800 students so that makes things simpler.
 
2019-03-02 10:10:38 AM  

doglover: A big problem with education is that it costs money.

I don't mean tuition, I mean educating students is an expense for those who do it. You need time, space, skilled labor, physical resources... and nothing to show for it but the absence of that money and the new knowledge in students' brains.

Now, of course that knowledge is priceless and well educated people  pay it back a million times over, but small minds think small and few minds are smaller than that of the uneducated fellow. They often see little value in something that appears to only cost, so they avoid or even oppose education.

And as luck would have it, small minds can often be quite wealthy, and thus wind up in government or administrative positions where they control education budgets. And lo, the school curriculum is shaped by those less than qualified to shape one and that's backed up by lawmakers.  And here we are.


So, smart people get rich, but rich people are often small minded?  Public school, amirite?
 
2019-03-02 10:15:51 AM  
No...dont even need to read the article to know hes skipping all the actually stupid stuff because its bad for his job security.

Stop teaching useless things in high school. No more latin, no more shakespear, none of this stupid stuff thats only useful to know in high school and nowhere else. Focus on what is actually needed in the real world.
 
2019-03-02 10:20:04 AM  

433: bingethinker: This teacher should have done some research before writing the article. Back in the 70s, a lot of schools changed to having only four periods a day. They studied four subjects for half the school year, then four different subjects for the second half.

That wasn't left behind in the seventies. The word for it that I knew was "block scheduling," and my district kept trying to buy in to different methods.  Reportedly, the teachers did not like having to prepare double-lesson plans, and that students became fatigued after a while.


Block-scheduling is done primarily due to finances, not the educational benefit.  Fewer, longer classes = fewer teachers needed.  That's it.
 
2019-03-02 10:23:47 AM  
The education model was created in an age of generalists. Everybody needed to be able to do a little bit of everything because it was almost guaranteed there wouldn't be any experts around when you needed them. Now we all carry around an expert in our pockets.  This is how education should go.

Early grade school: The primary goal is teaching cooperation. Always have students working in teams and learning to interact with each other. Make it the normal thing to do.
The subjects:
Reading
Math
Cleaning
Swimming. Yes swimming. It's the one physical activity that could save thousands of lives per year.
That's it. The rest is structured playtime. Competitive games for the mind and body.

Upper Grade School: Simple life tasks.  How to cook. How to use tools like screwdrivers, hammers, saws.  Build a bird house. Patch a hole in your pants. Do laundry. Repair a faucet. Make your own lunch every day as part of a class. And more structured play with the games also involving learning such as solving math problems, interpreting word puzzles, learning trivia. Continue on with cleaning as part of the curriculum. If you are using the school then you are the one keeping it clean.  Sorry Scruffy, you're out of a job. Also free time of choice. Play non structured games, read a book, go run laps.  Whatever the student thinks is fun.

Middle School - High School: You keep up the basics with structured playtime, cooking your own lunch, cleaning the school, changing a tire, doing laundry.  What are the more advanced subjects?  Whatever the student wants. They already know the basics they need to get by day to day.  Let them learn what they want to learn. The same people who are drawn to STEM subjects under current methods will still be drawn to them. People who want to work on cars will be drawn to that. Right now until college we force students to pretend like they are learning things they have no interest in and will never use in life.  And the teachers waste more time trying to force them to learn than helping the eager students. Stop it.  Let them focus on what they love. They will want to stay in school and by the time they reach college age they will be much better educated in the area of skill they are likely to use for the rest of their life.
 
2019-03-02 10:26:28 AM  

thornhill: who the hell enrolls in a class that starts before 9.


People with off-kilter circadian rhythms.

All through my school years, I kept farmers' hours - up at 4-5 in the morning, blast through any remaining homework, go to school, get home, and I'd be asleep by 8:30 at the latest. I may have been the only kid whose parents asked him why he wasn't staying up later. In college, I discovered the glories of the afternoon nap. I'd take a bunch of early classes, leave the early afternoon free to crash, then do my writing and take more classes in the late afternoon and at night, which transitioned nicely into important drinking time.

Somehow, I even managed to get a job which allowed me the flexibility of a midday siesta, except my bosses knew that if they wanted me to agree to something I'd ordinarily disagree with, they'd ask me to be at a noon meeting when I was a farking zombie. But it was great when my kids were little, because we only had to pay for half-days of day care most of the time. My naps coincided with theirs. (<-- THIS IS KEY FOR ALL YOU NEW PARENTS. LIE THE FARK DOWN WHEN THEY DO OR YOU'LL BE A MORAN UNTIL YOU'RE 50.)

This 9-to-5 schedule I'm on now is bizarre.
 
2019-03-02 10:26:47 AM  
Four or five math problems for homework?

I had 50 every night.

It was THE homework I had to do the most of.  I remember getting home and finishing it before anything I did anything else.

/To be fair, that was only for half the year.
 
2019-03-02 10:31:33 AM  

lifeslammer: No more latin


Fark off. Latin makes it easier to learn other related languages, and you can fake your way through a lot of what you don't already know. Latin also comes with a nice big helping of history, literature, drama, mythology, architecture and engineering.

And orgies.
 
2019-03-02 10:33:38 AM  

thornhill: and who the hell enrolls in a class that starts before 9.


I got an NROTC scholarship while I was on active duty.  I sat around the base legal office to 4 weeks while my paperwork was being handled.  The higher-ups dragged their ass on it for so long, despite my pleas, that I arrived at the university just 3 days before classes began.  I'd never been on the campus, or even in that town.

When it was time to schedule classes, naturally all the "good" slots were full.  I ended up taking a Honors Chem course over the regular course, and my English class met at 9AM on Tuesday, Thursday and FARKING SATURDAY.  Ugh.

CSB:  6 of us (3 men, 3 women) formed a study group for Honors Chem.  Eventually, all of us guys earned Ph.D.s.  One of the women has a Master's (went back to school 20 years after graduating); the other 2 just got on with their lives.  Still, a 50% rate for obtaining a Ph.D. has to be fairly rare for any study group.  We still keep in touch via FB.
 
2019-03-02 10:34:19 AM  
There's so much right in that article. High School is absolutely the only time in most people's lives when they will have 5 to 7 supervisors who all believe the work they assign is of paramount importance. In most career fields, if we took work home every single day and weekend, we would demand time and half or a hefty raise.

It's actually worse in most high schools than the author describes. Twenty new kids a class sounds like Nirvana. I suspect most high schools are like those in this area - with classes ranging from 35 to 40 students. Two years ago, a local high school considered implementing classes in the auditorium with up to 100 students per class.

Maria Montessori recognized that most people need an average of 3 hours to fully engage a subject. Some private schools respond to the fractured school day by having a block schedule with two subjects taught on Monday and Wednesday; another two subjects taught on Tuesday and Thursday; and art, p.e. and other electives taught on Friday. However, a block schedule works well for those schools because they are relatively small. They do not serve four lunch shifts with a crush of hungry students at each shift. Often high school students at private schools are still allowed off campus further alleviating any lunch time crowding. Handling the lunch program to accommodate two 3 hour work blocks per day would be a logistical nightmare.

Then there are classes like P.E.. Does anyone really need a three hour P.E. class? What about the health class taught by a coach? The one where students learn, from grotesquely outdated materials, that they should bathe at least once a week and hang up their clothes to air out at the end of the day? Do we dedicate three hours a day to that? Also, many schools now substitute tutoring for a traditional elective for struggling students. So, while top students march off to volleyball, struggling students work with a reading specialist and review their class work done to that point. The following hour, they return to the regular classroom with their peers. How would they be included in the curriculum? Would they be segregated? Or have a three hour tutoring block?

I'd need a lot more details on how this new public school would work before I throw my support behind the idea.
 
2019-03-02 10:46:59 AM  

Dead for Tax Reasons: yes, because sitting through 2 3-hour classes would be awesome...

those college courses that i took as a once a week for three hours were farking boring.  imaging high school kids trying to sit through that.  the teacher would be throwing shiat at them after 90 minutes because they wouldn't sit still


The theory was you were supposed to break it up with multimedia presentations or some other buzzwords of the time. I'm sure now it would be a bunch of "breakout sessions" so lots of time could be wasted in transition.
 
Displayed 50 of 110 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report