Still assigning homework
After taking some time to reflect on the last discussion we had about homework, I'm definitely not moving away from assigning it. First of all, I think that this discussion is really irrelevant for junior and senior level courses. We were asked, "Could you do everything that you need to do in class instead of assigning homework?" I would say that the variable schedule, which I value very much because it allows students to take a variety of classes, creates a situation in which I must assign homework. If my Western Civ classes met 5 days per week, I probably could assign less homework. However, the entire point of the variable schedule is that we don't do everything in class. My students read material outside of class so that we can discuss more in-depth topics in class. In other words, the "who, what, where, when and how" items are less important in class than the "why" question. (This is more in line with constructivism, by the way.) Futhermore, I do teach freshmen as well, and to prepare them to complete the reading later in high school, I think that they do need to complete reading assignments as freshmen and sophomores. I don't assign worksheets, etc., to any students because they're meaningless. I do expect the students to prepare for class by reading, however. Futhermore, I think that some things got mischaracterized. When I give homework assignments, I expect them to take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Some students may take more time than that, and some may take less. However, I would say that I only assign new reading 3-4 nights per week. Do I think that 1 1/2 - 2 hours outside of class per week is too much time for them to spend reading for a core class? Definitely not.
For the purposes of this discussion, I am ignoring the "homework in elementary school" issue. I can't speak to that issue because I don't teach elementary school.
I also stand by my comment from the meeting - high school students have to make choices. Yes, they can choose to participate in many things, or they can choose to excel at a few things. I do not think that harms them in any way.
For the purposes of this discussion, I am ignoring the "homework in elementary school" issue. I can't speak to that issue because I don't teach elementary school.
I also stand by my comment from the meeting - high school students have to make choices. Yes, they can choose to participate in many things, or they can choose to excel at a few things. I do not think that harms them in any way.
posted by Crosby at 9:27 PM
11 Comments:
Well, first, I think you’ve given this a whole lot of thought over the years and I expect that you have eliminated any meaningless homework. If I took a look at your assignments I imagine that at least 95% of the time I’d say, “Yep, good one. Yep, good one.” I’m not sure that is true across the board here at AHS, though. Your thoughts on that?
Second, in my usual extremely annoying fashion, let me parse your post (like that alliteration?), make some observations, and ask some questions. As always, I’m just trying to push your thinking – and my own – and not trying to be combative.
“I would say that the variable schedule . . . creates a situation in which I must assign homework.” and “the entire point for the variable schedule is that we don’t do everything in class.”
Well, the obvious question here is to ask whether the variable schedule is the best option we have available to us. Your arguments are predicated on the assumption of a variable schedule, not on the value of homework in relation to learning. It also conveniently absolves all of us from decision making when you say “I must assign homework” – let’s keep in mind once again that we are the ones deciding to have a variable schedule. I’m not sure I’d agree that that’s the “entire” point of variable scheduling either. I certainly agree, of course, with focusing on the “why” in class, and trying to offload (outsource?) the “who, what, where, when and how.”
“I do teach freshmen as well, and to prepare them to complete the reading later in high school, I think that they do need to complete reading assignments as freshmen and sophomores.”
You’ve heard me complain about this before, but let me do it one more time. Any argument that starts with “I have to do this now so that we can do it to them again later” doesn’t work for me. It’s based on the assumption that they have to do it later. Take that away, and there’s no argument left.
“When I give homework assignments, I expect them to take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Some students may take more time than that, and some may take less. However, I would say that I only assign new reading 3-4 nights per week. Do I think that 1 1/2 - 2 hours outside of class per week is too much time for them to spend reading for a core class? Definitely not.”
Lots to think about here. First, the idea of a “core class.” That’s tricky territory, and I know you value all the “non-core” classes at AHS, so I think I understand your meaning. But does Kelly think it’s not unreasonable to spend 2 hours per week practicing singing? And does Joan think it’s not unreasonable to spend 2 hours per week painting? And does Andrea think it’s not unreasonable to spend 2 hours per week in physical activity? And those are, of course, “non-core” classes – add in the core’s and what do you have? Kids who are expected to “work” a minimum of ten hour days, and that’s before athletics/activities/outside of school stuff/family – and that’s for the kids that don’t need extra time. Is that an okay thing, or not? The Puritans would certainly think so (see, I remember a little bit of history), but I don’t know – and I think it’s worth thinking about. When you combine all this with the lack of research evidence that homework actually improves learning, I think it’s definitely worth thinking about.
“Yes, they can choose to participate in many things, or they can choose to excel at a few things. I do not think that harms them in any way.”
So what if they choose to ignore Western Civ – does that not harm them? If it doesn’t harm them, then it’s not essential and we shouldn’t make them take it. If it does harm them, then obviously we have a problem if we burden them with so much that they are forced to “choose” to ignore something that’s essential.
I guess I’m still stuck on the fact that I don’t think we at AHS have defined what is essential. I don’t think we’ve figured out what it is that we’re trying to accomplish (as a school) here. I don’t think we have a clearly defined mission, a vision of what we want to become, or values and goals that we measure everything against to help us determine if it’s essential. And that worries me. A lot.
Yep - I'd agree on the first point. Unless a homework assignment is specifically relevant to what we're trying to figure out the next day in class, I don't assign it. I would like to have the students think, "I had better do this reading so that I can participate tomorrow."
In regard to the variable schedule, I am biased, having been both a student and a teacher at AHS. In fact, it's the main reason I wanted to teach here. This school allows students to experience more of a broad liberal arts education than a 5x5 schedule would allow. How lucky are our students to be able to take multiple practical arts, fine arts, and PE classes? In fact, as a student whose strengths were more in the core classes, I would say that it was extremely beneficial to "have to" take classes like drama. No, it wasn't my best subject, but taking that class gave me new appreciation for the skill required to act, and it "forced" me to try something challenging. I consider that good.
I know that some people would say that my reference to a 5x5 implies 5 core classes (math, science, language arts, social studies and foreign language), and would also say that maybe that's not the best option for some kids. I agree. But I took a job at this school precisely because the schedule and requirements emphasize what I truly think is most important at, let's face it, a college prep high school. People can argue that point, and I readily admit that college is not on the horizon for a percentage of AHS students, but most (90% or more) are here precisely because they want a college prep education. Furthermore, in a state like Colorado, there are so many choices about where to go to high school. I'm NOT saying, "you're here, deal with it." Rather, I am saying, "if this program doesn't meet your needs, and you find one that does, exercise your right to choose and choose something else. That's great, if it's right for you." If AHS didn't have the variable it would be like most other high schools out there, and I like the fact that we're a bit different. So, basically, yes, I have the assumption that we will continue to have a variable schedule, and I value that VERY much! What is the point of the variable schedule if it is not exactly what I have described above?
I don't see any problem with the "do the homework as a freshman so you know what to do as a junior" argument. I made the junior year argument first, and then explained how I would prepare the students to do well during their junior year by having them practice as freshmen. Furthermore, being prepared for junior year isn't the only reason they're doing the homework freshman year - they're doing the reading as freshmen for the same reason they're doing it as juniors - to be able to focus on the "why" question as much as possible during class.
Finally, I guess I don't understand the statement that we haven't defined what is essential. Sure we have. It is essential that students learn and practice skills in many different content areas, while learning to balance outside-of-school activites. In doing so we are preparing them for life. Each day I complete many tasks necessary for my job, including communicating, estimating, and thinking analytically. I learned those skills in school. I have also learned to choose which activities I can and would like to complete outside of my job. No, I can't do every hobby I'd like to do - but that makes me really think about what is important to me - important enough to spend my valuable time doing.
I also really like that the variable schedule allows students to take a variety of classes. But at what point does “more” become a bad thing? If students end up taking nine classes in a semester, but seven of them end up being next to irrelevant because they can’t focus on the essentials (because they have too much to do and “cover”) and never get a chance to “go deep,” then is that in their best interest?
I was disagreeing with your assertion that the entire point of the variable schedule was to make kids do things outside of class. As far as “college prep” and giving them what they want, that’s a short step to the slippery slope of abdicating all responsibility for what goes on here. If all they want is a B+ average and to get into CSU, then that’s all we need to provide them? Well let’s just skip all the classes and print their transcripts now.
What percent of our students (wait, the freshmen that start at AHS) graduate from college? Of those, what percent pursue a job or an avocation that their college studies prepared them for? (I would even go so far as to say, “What percent of those are happy?” – but please ignore that for now.) It’s not 90%. It’s not 80%. Is it 50%? 30%? I don’t know the number, but there’s a very large percent of our students for whom our current college prep system is perhaps not really meeting their needs.
Yes, your argument for juniors is fine when applied to freshmen, but that’s not the way I read your original post. It sure seemed like the only reason you stated was to prepare them for being juniors and seniors. So I wonder why you broke it out that way? My problem in general with that type of argument is that if you take it to it’s logical conclusion, we should be preparing them for death. :-)
Sorry, but you haven’t convinced me we’ve defined what’s essential. Ask ten teachers in ten different departments, or ten teachers in the same department (if it’s large enough), and you’ll get ten different answers. Then ask ten students . . .
“It is essential that students learn and practice skills in many different contents areas . . .”
1. Why?
2. What skills?
3. Which content areas?
4. For what purpose?
5. Show me a list for AHS that fits on one page or less, preferably less than eight items. That would be essential.
“. . . while learning to balance outside of school activities.”
1. Balance with what? School?
2. Why? If we’re “preparing them for life” – implying that school right now isn’t “life” for them, we’re simply preparing them to “live” later - then why wouldn’t we get rid of school and simply do the outside of school activities?
How much choice do students really have about “spending their valuable time?” If they do what they’re “supposed to do,” attend classes and do their homework - then that’s the aforementioned ten hours a day that basically isn’t their choice. (Yes, they have some control over their classes, but come on – is that really choice?) Add in family “responsibilities,” eating, sleeping and bathing, and it doesn’t appear like they have a whole lot of choice to me. So we’re preparing them to make choices by not giving them very many real choices.
I think we can do better.
Well - the point about freshmen was that they better start thinking about the "why?" question early, and not wait until junior year to think about it. My hope is actually that they start thinking about it before freshman year, but usually social studies before high school is just about memorizing names, dates, places, maps, etc. That's useless because they can always look facts up, but they can't look up directions on how to think and be critical. Thinking is a skill and that's ultimately what I am here to teach, not facts.
If we are all doing our jobs at this school, we are getting to the one essential - the skill of thinking. This is why "essential learnings" aren't about content at all - they're about ways of thinking in different content areas. In drama that may be something like "what are a character's life experiences, and how do they motivate her, and how do I convey that to an audience?" In science that might be something like "just because we have the capability to clone living things, should we actually do so?" In social studies it may be something like "if we really care about humanity, why do we let genocide continue to take place?" Content is important (you can't even start to think about the genocide question unless you know what genocide is and where and when it has happened), but content is really the vehicle through which we model and teach thinking skills. So, am I bothered by the fact that kids might take 9 classes? No - if the focus in all of those 9 classes is thinking, not memorizing facts. I am only one person, but my job is to try and influence other teachers to consider how they teach thinking, not facts.
My argument about college prep was that we're preparing them to think, and they'll have to do that in college, or whereever else they go. And regardless of how many of them graduate from college, they all need to be able to think critically about their world. That's really what college teaches, especially in the liberal arts. My college classes didn't "train" me to do a job - they taught me to think critically. My major (American Studies) is the path many take to law school, journalism and teaching. All of those jobs have content which can be looked up, and therefore cannot and should not all be memorized, but more importantly they require a person to think critically.
I wasn't trying to say that the variable's only point is variety - that is just one of its most important features.
I guess I am just missing your point about choice. If you ask me, our students have tons of choices. What would your vision of real choice look like?
Thinking about “why?” – agreed.
Skill of thinking – agreed. But the phrase “may be something like” worries me, because I think that’s part of my point – we haven’t defined it here at AHS, so it “may” be something “different” for every teacher and class in this building, and some of those things might not look like thinking at all. Just because you’ve given this a lot of thought, doesn’t mean everyone has. And – as impressive as you are – could even your thinking not be improved by a school-wide discussion of what’s essential? A school-wide discussion of what our mission is; what our vision is of what we can become as a school; what our values and goals are?
I agree that if all nine of those classes focused on thinking, that would be a good thing. But I’m still not sure that that’s the best way to help students learn about and understand the world around them. “Okay, students, think about history for 55 minutes. Okay, stop, the bell rang, stop thinking about history, go think about trig.” Repeat seven more times. It just doesn’t seem to match up with how human brains work (both my own impression and the research we’ve looked at).
Thinking critically – agreed. But I still don’t think we’ve addressed the “college prep” idea. Let’s just pick a number for my earlier thought experiment – say, 50% (probably high). If only 50% of the freshmen that start at AHS are destined to graduate from college, and if our entire program is predicated on “we’ve got to prepare them for college,” then I think we have a problem. (And even that is ignoring the very big issue of whether colleges are doing things poorly). Yes, a focus on critical thinking is good for all students, but too often I hear explanations of why we have to do something based on “because they’ll need to do that in college.” So I much prefer your revised explanation about critical thinking, but I think your original invocation of college prep – and that they can choose to go to another school if this isn’t right for them - is much more the norm.
I’m still struggling mightily with my vision of real choice – I’m currently in about year five of thinking about that and still don’t have many answers. But I believe our students only have the mirage of choice, because they are forced to choose among options that we’ve already ordained for them. That’s not really choice – that’s “paper or plastic?” How about “canvas”? Or how about, “Let’s redesign the food production and delivery system in this country to make it self-sustainable, environmentally sound, and socially responsible?” What if all the choices we think we are offering them are really Hobson’s choices? We’ve done the very best job we can with the system we have, but what if the system we have is a bad system?
Amanda and Karl,
I enjoyed reading this post and comments. A few weeks ago, I also posted a comment (on Lary's blog) about Variable Scheduling and homework. I don't know how to link directly to my comment--so I'll paste it below. (Maybe it's silly to repeat a comment that's posted elsewhere on The Fischbowl, but because the blog is so huge, often comments get ignored.)
When I first started teaching at Arapahoe (in 1974), Variable Scheduling was at its peak. To allow for the large number of electives, teachers were told to use class time "efficiently." This meant that teachers were expected to "teach" from bell to bell and that students were expected to complete their work outside of class. During their "free" hours, students were supposed to go to the library, their teachers' offices (for one-on-one instruction), or to the cafeteria to complete their homework. The whole point of such "efficiency" was to give students more freedom. Students were in charge of their own education: they selected from a wide array of classes, they picked their teachers, and they decided how to spend their free time. Variable scheduling was an attempt to free students from tedious hours wasted in dull classrooms. The belief was that "efficiency" gave students more independence and forced teachers to be more vigorous and interesting in the classroom.
If we stop assigning homework, then we must also give up Variable Scheduling. The original intent of the Variable was to create "a room of one's own" here at school--in the library, the cafeteria, the academic offices. We allowed students to succeed or fail in their use of free time. We believed it was important to encourage independence and to grant them the power to make their own decisions about how to spend their time.
If we must "slow down," "learn a lesser amount of material," and let the kids do their reading and writing in the classroom, then I can't imagine that the Variable will survive.....
Maybe it's time to revise the way we schedule our school day. Maybe the Variable is archaic. What alternatives are there? What must we do to give our students that precious "room" of their own?
Cheryl - I saw your comment on Lary's blog a while back but didn't really want to take on variable scheduling in that context so I didn't comment - nor do I still want to take that on - at least not yet :-).
But I will say this (just can't help myself!), I'm not sure that giving up homework necessarily equates to giving up variable scheduling. If we somehow miraculously agreed that we could cover less - cover the essentials - then that would eliminate some of those time constraints you mentioned.
That said, please know that I am not advocating giving up homework altogether at the high school level (although, come to think of it, I might want to give up the term "homework" - somehow I think there's a better descriptor we could come up with for what it is we want students to accomplish in that time - but I digress). As I commented previously, I bet I would "agree" with Amanda's choice of homework at least 95% of the time. Just like Amanda, I want students to spend as much time in our classes pondering, exploring, and discussing the "why's." But that doesn't negate (for me) all my other concerns about the total work/time load placed on students, the choice issue, and the mission, vision, values and goals issues.
As I write this, I'm thinking that perhaps a huge part of the variable schedule problem right now might be that we aren't implementing it the way it was intended. So much of our staff is new enough that maybe we've lost sight of the bigger purpose of the variable, and probably our students have as well. I'm not saying that there might not be better options out there, for me I think there probably are, but as long as we have it - maybe we should focus a little bit more on implementing it well. Hmmmm . . .
Finally, I wanted to comment on your "teach from bell to bell" comment. Good 'ole radical me would like to tweak that just a tad. I would like our students to "learn from bell to bell" - and beyond.
Good thoughts from all! Thanks for your comments, Cheryl. Your vision of the variable is the one I have had in mind while writing here. I also agree with Karl that as a community (teachers AND students) we have lost our way a bit. Let's face it: the AHS environment is not really as set up as it used to be to allow students to study during their unscheduled hours. We have taken a step back in the right direction with the new Study Center, I think, (although the name implies that only one place is really for studying . . .) but I have to admit that I find the rest of the building not exactly study-friendly. Does anybody who is reading this remember the old library - with a LARGE room for quiet, individual studying and three small rooms with tables for group work? Now, I know that people had other complaints about that set-up, but for a student like me who got lots of studying done during unscheduled hours, it was ideal. These days, I'm not sure where students go if they need quiet spaces to study. (However, I also readily acknowledge that the library should be a welcoming space, and I'm not sure that it really was before, except for those of us who were actually studying!)
Furthermore, maybe I'm just out of it (quite possible), but does it strike anyone else who's been around for 10-15 years or more that our students spend more unscheduled time off campus today? Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I really don't recall my classmates going off campus 2-3 times per day to visit establishments such as Starbucks. (Don't get me started on Starbucks - what a waste of $$$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Karl wrote something else important that I would like to address: "But the phrase “may be something like” worries me, because I think that’s part of my point – we haven’t defined it here at AHS, so it “may” be something “different” for every teacher and class in this building, and some of those things might not look like thinking at all. . . .And – . . .could even your thinking not be improved by a school-wide discussion of what’s essential? A school-wide discussion of what our mission is; what our vision is of what we can become as a school; what our values and goals are?"
Yes, I totally agree, and in a best-case scenario, that's exactly what PLCs are supposed to do and that's why we're changing our entire schedule next year. I'm on the PLC Leadership Team and we're discussing vision, values and goals, and how to get the staff to consider and contribute to that discussion. Teachers in each content area should be discussing the "what matters?" topic thoroughly in PLCs. This works out particularly well for content areas that have recently done curriculum revision as we have in Social Studies this year.
I guess I feel like more is happening in a positive direction because I am involved in the Social Studies District Revision Committee, the District Grading and Tracking Implementation Committee, the AHS PLC Leadership Team, 21st Century, and have led / helped lead the course level committees for the 2 courses that I teach. In other words, I can see how everything is fitting together because I spend all of my after school time thinking about it. (That's also why I'm blogging at 11:30 PM!) Yes, I'm running myself ragged, but I also feel like we're on the verge of something pretty awesome. I can see how my own teaching and, more importantly, my students' learning, has evolved during the course of my six years at AHS, and I am excited to think about how it will further evolve. I really don't want to be the same teacher every year, I want to be better. Some people look at me, I know, and think, "Get a life!" But I would say that I am incredibly happy with this entire experience. I guess my biggest question is this: what can we do as a school to "free" people to have more time to do more of this personal reflection? The revised schedule seems to be the answer at the moment, and hopefully it helps.
Your question, "What can we do as a school to "free" people to have more time to do more of this personal reflection?" is important. One of the greatest strengths of the Variable is that it grants both students and staff this free time. I love teaching at Arapahoe because the Variable gives me time to redefine my courses every year. I bring more energy and creativity into my classroom when I have the time it takes to design fresh and exciting lessons.
The Variable has been eroded over the years, though. That's especially sad for the students, who now indeed seem to be given "Hobson's choices." They now lack the freedom to change teachers in the middle of the year. They have fewer unscheduled hours. They no longer have as many of the "fun" enrichment courses that used to be offered on Tuesdays and Thursdays and that were intended to be "easy" with little homework. They are now required to attend pep assemblies, motivational speaker assemblies, etc. They are expected to stay out of hallways during their free time and to adhere to rather strict standards of dress.
Obviously, many of these changes reflect the changes in our society since the laid-back 1970's. And many of these changes are very good. (When I started teaching here, discipline was out of control. The kids ran the schools, quite frankly--and not always in good ways. I could go into lurid detail, but I won't.)
As you can tell by this rambling comment, I go back and forth on the merits of "freedom" for our students. I also go back and forth about the issue of homework. As a young teacher, I prided myself on being difficult, intellectual, and demanding. I used to assign tons of homework. Now that I'm a parent I realize how homework erodes family life. I hate to see my own kids struggle to complete hours of work and at the same time try to find some joy in life. Now that I'm a parent, I give far less homework than I once did. For example, I try to avoid giving homework over weekends and vacations. (A.P. English students, however, always have reading to do. I'm sure they spend weekends doing work for my class........)
I tend to agree with Karl. We need to be very careful that the homework we assign is meaningful. If possible, we should not assign homework. When in doubt, don't assign it....
And Karl, I agree with your "tweak": kids should be learning from bell to bell. I like the shift of focus from teacher to student!!
Hahaha, hello...I'm not sure if students can post here, but I feel like I should interject an opinion on the fate of us as students and homework!
All right, here's the deal: all teenagers hate homework. We have to. It's genetic. But I also believe that all teachers must hate it too...I mean, who gets their kicks and grins grading papers. whooHOO let's not get too excited ;)
However, I do agree with a lot fo your points Ms. Crosby: it's important we can read so we can discuss and all. The thing about this is that you are a REASONABLE teacher. Read 15 pages. Awesome. Done. No problem. However, I know teachers (we all do, in fact) who assign, oh, you know, like a giant paper, 56 math problems because they are "easy" ones, tests, etc, etc etc! There is USEFUL hoemwork and there is useless homework.
Like Mr. Fisch pointed out too: we have so many classes it can be hard to juggle things. I'm in orchestra. I wish with all my heart I coudl practice my violin and get even better, but when you have those 56 math problems to contend with, there's just no way it's happening.
Also, I feel obligated to point out that teachers do things. I bet you guys like to go out for coffee and read books and play...golf, or something, and build fences (haha, Ms. Crosby!). Well, remember what it was like when YOU were a teenager? You liked to do things then too! I'm in theater, so I can't speak for the athletics kids, but i'm assuming it is just as hard to do all 5 hours of homework (no, not an exagerration, a statistic, a FACT) after playing soccer as it is when you've been baked under stagelights, pulling batons, singing, dancing, and painting things until ten pm.
Really, teenagers at AHS don't ask for less homework. We ask to be treated like human beings. We all have our lives, and if we acknowledged the lives of our teachers and our teachers acknowledged our lives, then we could all get along better. We're only teens for so many years...let us remember more than Geometry!
Haha, sorry, me again, but this is important!
About what is essential...
We need to know. But I don't think teachers can tell us.
Me: I want to be a writer when I grow up. What is essential to me right now is what I love....my violin, my family, books, theatre, friends, tea, and on and on. I do well in history and english and theatre because I love it and make it essential to me. Maybe this is crazy, one of those "teenage" things, but nothing a teachers says or does will make Geometry essential to me, for example, or even Spanish. I take classes like that, or like Computer Applications, because I have to to get into college. And I have to get into college to grow up and become what I want to be and do what I want to do. So I'll do it, I'll find tangents and repeat the preterit tenses of verbs and run laps in circles around a track like a lab rat and type up whatever you ask of me...but nobody can make something essential to a student. A student makes things essential to them.
;) hope that makes sense.
Post a Comment
<< Home