Scheduling and Curriculum

As I have stated before, my principal is considering a change to the master schedule. The impetus for this change centers around budget, failure to make AYP in Math and English and needs to change due to RTI.

This class has got me thinking about our curriculum and how it is affected by a school's master schedule. I can't stop thinking about how schools need to tap in to what the students are interested in and also, the many strengths and passions of their faculty. Like Zhao's Olympic analogy, schools need to use the resources available to them in their community as well to make their curriculum come to life.

So what is it that drives the creation of a school's master schedule? Is it the bus schedule (that's the word in the teacher's room)? Exposure to core subjects in order to improve test scores? Meeting the needs of students who aren't meeting the learning targets?

In the 21st Century article, the author stresses the importance of adaptability and flexibility in preparing students for an ever-changing workforce. I believe that schools need to look long and hard at their schedule and to attempt to be flexible and adapt to the needs of as many of their students as possible.

Defining Curriculum and Passion Invoked Learning

In looking at the variety of ways to define curriculum, it became very difficult for me to settle on one that made sense for the student, teacher and school as a whole. Ultimately, the definition that made the most sense to me stated...

Curriculum is all the experiences learners have under the guidance of the school.

A school and/or school district needs to have a curriculum that provides depth in subject areas, is diverse in order to meet the needs and interests of a variety of people and learning styles and adequately prepares students for life after a student is exposed to it.

Upon reading the articles for this week, I'm not sure we (the public schools) are meeting the needs of students in our information-rich society. It is difficult to create a system that meets the needs of all students and also provides the flexibility for students to come and go and be exposed to information that is relevant, rich in content and peaks their interests. I don't see us starting over or throwing out the system as Toffler suggests. I do think that we are going to have to personalize a student's education and encourage them to explore areas of interest to them and integrate the curriculum around these interests. Information is so easily available to students now. It seems to me that synthesizing this information and applying it is a logical step.

I agree that students or anyone for that matter, learn most effectively when we are passionate about something. The key is to discover the passions of our students and connect them to a passionate teacher or expert and allow them to explore the possibilities. Students will learn more about what it is they are passionate about and, if connected to a good teacher, learn about other subjects and life lessons indirectly.

These readings have opened my eyes to the possibilities within my own teaching and the offerings currently available. I am not sure of a systematic way of approaching this "curriculum" but at the high school level, it would not be hard for a student to identify his or her passion(s) or for the individual teacher to encourage students to explore them relative to the subjects they are teaching. I love the idea of having students explore blogs related to their passion and connecting to other experts. If a school could simply agree that they wanted to tap into the interests of their students, the ball could start rolling to a more individualized education.

Is your school regular?

I would say that my school, Hampden Academy (HA), is fairly regular. I have been teaching at HA for 9 years and although we have had a few changes, our standard operating procedure has stayed relatively the same. We have good teachers and historically have been one of the higher performing public schools in the state. The school operates on a rotating schedule with 4 eighty minute periods that meet every other day. We have incorporated an advisor-advisee program, began the process of RTI, and for the first time, we are actively looking at making changes to our master schedule. The impetus for this change has come from the fact that we have not made AYP the past few years in English and Math and teachers in these departments feel as though they need to meet in greater frequency in order for their material to become more "sticky" for the students. The other possible reason for this change is financial. Due to the current budget shortfall, a change to the master schedule may mean a need for less teachers and a chance for the district to save money.

The threat of this change has caused great stress amongst the faculty in fear of their jobs, not seeing the students at the current time and frequency and wondering how this change will effect learning. Any major change is going to met with resistance by some, acceptance by others and a whole bunch of people who are sitting on the fence. How do you know when it is a good time to change something that will effect everyone? And if you do change. What happens if you can't or don't have the time, resources or forsesight to execute the plan you put in place?

1st Post

Just checking to see if this works. I can't believe I have my own blog.