Questions on Readings #8Daniel CoffinConcordia University, Nebraska

Submitted in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for EDUC 501June 25th, 2015

School districts facing budget shortfalls often look to reducing the fixed costs of running the district, like electrical usage and personnel costs, in order to meet those financial challenges. There is a limit to how much districts can cut, however; states mandate that their students attend school for a minimum number of days yearly, generally 180 (Koonce, 2014, p. 233). What if schools could cut the number of days of attendance without cutting instructional time? This is the allure of the four-day school week. On its face, extending the amount of time students spend in class seems like a no-brainer. If X amount of time spent in school is productive, then X + Y additional time must be better; one cant get enough of a good thing, right? Unfortunately, as Larry Cuban points out, Most of the studies [on the effect of extended school time on student achievement] have serious design flaws and, at best, show slight positive gains in student achievement except for students from low-income families, for whom gains were sturdier (as cited in Koonce, 2014, p. 242). Chris Gabrieli, in describing how one school achieved extraordinary gains in student achievement as a result of adding time to the school day, noted that The single biggest change in the academic program at Edwards was adding an hour each day during which students receive small-group instruction and tutoring in the subject in which they lag most, adding that We need to follow the example of Edwards and use the time well (as cited in Koonce, 2014, p. 235). The key issue then, is not the length of time students spend under the roof of the school but the duration of time spent in meaningful work which has been adequately differentiated to meet the academic needs of students. This, thankfully, can be done without extending the school day by hiring additional instructional staff or changing the amount of time students spend within each particular class. On a personal note, I would be fine with a four day week of 10 hours per day because I spend anywhere from 11 to 13 hours a day at school anyway, between my regular duties, afterschool program, and tutoring before school. I do this because I love my school and I love spending time there (okay, not every day, but most of them). Forcing students who, as Gabrieli puts it, show alienation from school to spend additional time in school beyond what is now required seems like an odd way to change their feelings, even if some of the additional time is taken up by fun extracurricular activities (as cited in Koonce, 2014, p 236). There is no conclusive evidence showing that lengthening the amount of time spent in school helps students to achieve, and I can think of plenty of anecdotal evidence suggesting precisely the contrary. Even as a highly competent and motivated educator and graduate student, I occasionally need to take a break, put down the lesson plans or the response paper, and do something else for a while. It seems counterintuitive to me to forced students with less motivation and maturity to do something they dislike and are frustrated by for an even longer period of time and expect an improved response. Furthermore, what of students lives outside of school? I have many middle schools students who are expected to care for younger siblings while their parents are at work. What is to be done with them? Even assuming that the transition from an eight-hour, five-day week to a ten-hour, four-day week is cost-neutral, which is subject to interpretation (Koonce, 2014, p. 241-242), there is not enough evidence that extended time per day alone (as opposed to more effective use of the current time spent in school) is the solution for poor student achievement. Another way to get more out of the school day would be to spend more time working with students individually or in small groups rather than in lecture or whole-class teaching. Such is the idea behind the flipped classroom, in which students access lecture materials, videos, or slide shows at home prior to coming to class and then spend class time working on practicing what they have learned from home study. This idea certainly intrigues me as an educator. I am always keen to find ways to better use my time and differentiate my instruction to meet my students needs. If, through the implementation of flipped learning, I can trust my students to review direct instruction at home, quickly assess at the beginning of class, and then spend my time only reteaching to those that didnt get it while assigning an authentic project for students to use the information gained, everyone wins. I have used my time effectively, the student who needed additional help got it, and the students who didnt were given an extra challenge to extend their learning. My concerns with the wide-scale adoption and implementation of the flipped learning model are concerned primarily with matters of technological infrastructure. Teachers might be uncomfortable with flipping their classrooms at first, but this can be addressed through peer coaching or professional development. Students might not want to complete this new style of homework any more than they did the old style of homework, but this can be addressed, as in a traditional classroom, with assessment and accountability in conjunction with administrators and parents/guardians. What about the students who genuinely dont have the ability to access online class materials for home? There are more of these students than one might think. My school, Camdens Promise Charter School, is a Title I school located in Camden, NJ. We already have an online grade reporting system called Real Time, and a common frustration for parents is that they do not have the means to check student grades and missing work from home as they do not have Internet access in the home via computer (as opposed to a handheld mobile device, which is impractical for school work and, depending on access plan, potentially cost-prohibitive for long periods of access). The Greater Philadelphia area has one of the highest broadband adoption rates in the country, and even so, broadband adoption in my county as of 2013 is only 601-800 connections per 1,000 households (Governing, n.d.) Thats a lot of people without reliable broadband Internet access. Considering it would only take a handful of students to throw off a flipped classroom, I dont think the time is quite right for widespread implementation of what appears to be a very promising innovation in education. As more locations, especially urban ones, plan and build city-wide wi-fi networks, I believe that this idea will do very well.

References

Governing (n.d.). Broadband adoption: U.S. county map. Retrieved from http://www. governing.com/gov-data/broadband-adoption-rates-data-for-counties-map.htmlKoonce, G.L. (2014). Taking sides: Clashing views on educational issues, eighteenth edition expanded. McGraw-Hill Education.