Principal Selesnick recommends “minor” changes to Greeley schedule

May 8, 2009
by Susie Pender

Top billing for the board of education meeting on May 5 went to “Public hearing on the budget,” but no one was there to discuss that. Those in the know, an apparent select few given what little was done to promote the evening’s other topic, were there to hear Horace Greeley Principal Andrew Selesnick explain what he was going to do to fix the “new” schedule that has students whiling away hours at a time, a major parental complaint.

In a brief, six-slide power point presentation, Principal Selesnick laid out how the administration had gathered feedback on the schedule and its reasons for looking to shorten the schedule cycle from eight days to six days. 

He also provided a sample schedule for next year, leaving out, several parents noted, any indication of free time, its frequency and length on any particular day. And finally, he offered a graph demonstrating how many minutes each major subject area met under the old schedule, last year’s schedule and will meet under next year’s schedule. He acknowledged that this graph was unreadable as projected. The slide presentation is now available on the board’s website.

In short, the eight-day cycle of four days of six 60-minute classes and four days of four 80-minute classes, will be changed to a six-day cycle by eliminating two days of four 80-minute classes, effectively just lopping off Day 7 and Day 8. In addition, the first-thing-in-the-morning staff development time on Day 5, one of the remaining 80-minute period days, will revert to an activity period for clubs, similar to what existed under the old “mod” schedule. During that time, a ninth grade study skills program will be added to help ninth graders transition to the high school by buttressing their time management skills and note-taking skills, among others.

The staff development time will move to mid-day on Day 6, the other 80-minute period day. During that time, peer groups will meet as well. Based on comments received from parents at this meeting, the administration will consider moving the new staff development time and peer group meetings on Day 6 to the morning to lessen the possibility of students having long blocks of free time in the middle of Day 6. 

Not a time for conclusions, just a beginning

Selesnick prefaced his presentation with this thought: “I’m not drawing any major conclusions tonight and I don’t think it’s a time for drawing conclusions [about the new schedule]. In the first nine months of a new schedule, I wouldn’t expect there to be sweeping changes. A lot of this year, for the teachers, was about adapting what they used to do to the new schedule. I see this year as a beginning, not a time to draw conclusions.”

He then offered a laundry list of the changes he believes have been brought about by the new schedule: 

“A little more work in reading and writing outside of English, in math, for example”
“Experiments with student choice in English”
“A little more hands-on activity with technology,” particularly smart boards and the hand-held devices for immediate feedback used on math and science
“More talk about talk”
“More talk about motivation”
“A little more reading, other than in English, for background”
“A lot of talk about independence”

Reasons for switching to a shorter cycle

He also acknowledged, when questioned by board members and parents, some failings of the new schedule, five of which were incorporated into his slide on “Reasons for looking at a shorter cycle (and other minor changes).”

Increases frequency of meetings, particularly for once a cycle activities, clubs, etc.

“Teachers noticed a significant difference, and not necessarily one that they liked, when classes and activities met less frequently,” acknowledged Selesnick. Although he insisted that no teacher missed the “mod,” in response to a question from Board Member Janet Benton, he explained that “they missed the daily contact [provided by the “mod” schedule].” 

Increases number of 60 minute classes relative to 80 minute classes.

“More faculty will be happier and useful to their students [with this change],” explained Selesnick. “The hoped-for deeper relationships between teachers and students generated by the longer 80 minute periods did not materialize,” he admitted in response to a question by Board Member Susan Habermann. 

Board Member Jeffery Mester, upon hearing of the recommendation that two of the four long period days would be eliminated, asked, “if it’s better to eliminate two of the long period days, why not eliminate all four?”  Selesnick responded, “This is a compromise. We believe it is beneficial to have some long blocks of time in the schedule.”

Restore one meeting per cycle and time to 11th and 12th grade English classes. 

Under the “mod” schedule, all classes met five out of the six days of the cycle. Although most classes under the new schedule met five out of the eight days of the cycle, upper level English classes only met four out of the eight days. “The English teachers were not thrilled with the result of that,” reported Selesnick. “Under the old schedule, an English teacher might assign 20 pages of a book to be read per night. Over a two or three day period under the new schedule, the teacher would assign much more. Students struggled with time management and hanging on to their reading over the long gaps between meeting times.”

Increased time for science (and a number of other academic areas).

Science and math teachers have reported difficulty in getting through all the material they taught successfully under the old schedule. “I am aware that some teachers are a little further behind than they have been in the past,” Superintendent Fleishman acknowledged. With the longer breaks between class meetings, teachers found that they needed to review material from prior classes more frequently.

One parent, who pronounced this year’s schedule an “unmitigated disaster,” stressed the importance of content acquisition, especially in the math and sciences. “I’m biased,” he began, “I’m a doctor, and you want your doctor to know content.”  He encouraged the administration to pursue formal feedback from high school parents about issues created by this year’s schedule. 

Reduces the student management issues on the 80 minute days – crowding in cafeteria and library – and the long blocks of free time in the middle of the day.

“Parents have raised this issue as well as teachers,” Selesnick reported. Many students, particularly ninth graders, were not able to manage their time well, both their free time and preparation time for classes that met less frequently. 

This last problem, student time management, was the hot topic of the evening’s discussion.  “This year’s schedule has presented many parental challenges,” commented one parent in obvious understatement when she described the difficulty as a working mom of getting her daughters to return to school after coming home to spend their long blocks of free time. 

Another parent, who was one of the parents who provided feedback to the administration as the new schedule was developed, reminded the administration that many of the time management and study skills difficulties encountered this year were identified as likely problems before the schedule was implemented. At that time, parents were assured that the administration would take care of that.

“ ‘The highly directed and motivated students, they will do all the things necessary [to succeed under the new schedule]. But the reserved student, we’re concerned about that student,’ ” she recalled parents telling the administration. “We were told, ‘we’ll take care of that.’ But [the students] didn’t have the tools and resources available to them to learn how to use the time well. When is all the stuff that was promised going to be delivered?” She concluded, “You asked for our input, we offered it, and I don’t see that it was used.” 

Board’s response to reports of students leaving campus for extended periods of time

Another parent explained to the board, “some kids don’t mature as quickly as others as much as you wish it as a parent. For some, when they leave school for lunch, it’s party time. Hopefully they go back to school and are in the frame of mind for learning.” She echoed the concern of other parents that days when a student doesn’t have a class until 10:30 a.m. or only has three classes out of six, it doesn’t seem like a school day. “It’s important that you take this seriously. And I’m not sure you’ve heard that,” she told the board. 

The board’s response to parents’ concerns ran the gamut from joking about whether Keith was still out terrorizing kids in the parking lot, to assuming that with more time, they could drive more slowly when they left for lunch rather than race to Rocky’s and back in a two mod, to paternalistically explaining that time management skills involve a maturation process, and reassuring the parents that their kids would eventually get it. 

One board member wondered aloud if more students were leaving campus and whether that included freshmen, sophomore and junior students, who are technically not permitted to leave except if signed out by a parent. She was answered by the audience with a resounding “yes.” When asked whether he wanted to know if more kids were leaving campus, Superintendent Fleishman responded, “absolutely.” 

Board Member Mester pointed out an inconsistency in the administration’s discussion of the advantages of the longer periods. One of the purported advantages of the longer period days is that only four courses meet, so the nights prior to those days, students should have less homework. 

However, when discussing time management skills, Principal Selesnick commented, that students need to ask themselves, “‘what should I be doing if I don’t have class the next day?’”  Mester responded, “we have to be realistic about the nature of people who do more the day before something is due.” 

When asked by Board Member Habermann whether the hoped-for decrease in stress levels expected by having some nights without everything due the next day, Selesnick responded: “We have made some progress on relieving pressure on a daily basis, but regarding the tests, we haven’t made that much progress. At the end of the quarter, at the end of the semester, students can still have four tests in a single day. There is no reason to think it will be different next year [after the schedule is adjusted.]” 

What do students need to know, besides content, before they graduate?

Selesnick reported that much of the talk generated by the failures of the new schedule has revolved around what the high school needs to teach students, beyond content, to prepare them for life beyond Greeley. It become apparent that students in all four grade levels need help with motivation, time management and independence. 

When asked, should the ninth and tenth grade experience be different from the eleventh and twelfth grade experience, Selesnick responded: “if we were starting from scratch, we might do that. We are wrestling with that question now.” 

How the feedback was gathered and from whom

Selesnick reported that the Schedule Feedback Committee met once a cycle all year, and was comprised of an English teacher, a math teacher, a science teacher, a foreign language teacher, a special education teacher and an administrator. The committee surveyed the faculty in October and November to identify areas of concern regarding learning and student behavior. 

Committee members visited the academic departments in February and conducted in-depth discussions on student learning, the impact of the cycle length, class length and any other issues of concern. The committee shared their feedback and facilitated faculty-wide discussions on these issues. 

As for the administration, they monitored grades throughout the year and took informal feedback from students and parents. This consisted, Selesnick explained, of asking students randomly how things were going under the new schedule and asking parents the same thing whenever he encountered them. Fleishman pointed out that the teachers changed their mid-term exams this year to reflect the material taught through mid-terms, so there could be no comparison made from last year to this year regarding mid-term grades. They will look to standardized tests, Regents and APs, to assess how the schedule change may have impacted content instruction and retention.

To view all articles and letters to the editor on the high school schedule change, see “From the Archives: Greeley Schedule Change Letters-to-the-Editor and Articles, Newest to Oldest.”