What's wrong with "shift schedules"? (APS)

[Anonymous]

Every time we talk about potential solutions to high school overcrowding in APS, people darkly mention "shift schedules" as if that is some terrible idea that will destroy the high school experience. But why? I think it sounds like a very sensible solution. I am disappointed my rising 6th grader didn't win the HB Woodlawn lottery, and to be honest, the thing I find most attractive about that school is the 9:30 - 4:00 p.m. bell schedule. I would absolutely love for my kids to have the option of a 9:30 or 10:00 am start time in high school -- it would be so much more conducive to good sleep and good learning. The only drawbacks I can see are (1) it could complicate after school activities/sports, and (2) how to deal with school buses. But if you had half the student body on a "later shift," they would have to find solutions for those issues -- right? For the bus issue, maybe walkers would all be on the later shift.

If you deplore the idea of shift schedules, I would love to hear a detailed explanation of your objections (other than the fact that it is not the "best" solution to overcrowding -- which, I believe most agree, would be a fourth comprehensive high school).

For definitional purposes, I am assuming it would work along these lines: you would take, say, a 7-period day (not having a high school student yet, I'm not sure if this is the correct number of periods in APS, but you get the idea) and make it a 9-period day, and students would either attend periods 1-7 or 3-9. Or am I misunderstanding what is meant by "shift schedules"?

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand. Wouldn’t then since kids have to start at 7am? No one would want that. And when are sports practices? Some kids are done earlier and have to wait around? And play in the dark in the fall?

[Anonymous]

I don't see how what you're proposing would help, since the issue is that the schools can't fit everyone in the building, and you'd still have all the kids from 3rd - 7th period. When I think of shift schedules, I think of it as one group of kids comes in from 6 a.m. till noon, and another group comes in from noon until six. Neither of those sets of hours would work for me.

Even with the 1-7/3-9 schedule, I don't see how it works with after school activities. If a kid is in the first group and is on the soccer team, does he wait two hours before practice, leading to a 12 hour day? That sounds really wrong. Will you see a demographic shift with kids who need to work to help their families all choosing 1 - 7, and kids on sports teams choosing 3 - 9? I know you see that as the "only" drawback, but that's a huge drawback as activities are a major part of most kids' high school activities, and an important part of getting into college and growing up.

Just raising some issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every time we talk about potential solutions to high school overcrowding in APS, people darkly mention "shift schedules" as if that is some terrible idea that will destroy the high school experience. But why? I think it sounds like a very sensible solution. I am disappointed my rising 6th grader didn't win the HB Woodlawn lottery, and to be honest, the thing I find most attractive about that school is the 9:30 - 4:00 p.m. bell schedule. I would absolutely love for my kids to have the option of a 9:30 or 10:00 am start time in high school -- it would be so much more conducive to good sleep and good learning. The only drawbacks I can see are (1) it could complicate after school activities/sports, and (2) how to deal with school buses. But if you had half the student body on a "later shift," they would have to find solutions for those issues -- right? For the bus issue, maybe walkers would all be on the later shift.

If you deplore the idea of shift schedules, I would love to hear a detailed explanation of your objections (other than the fact that it is not the "best" solution to overcrowding -- which, I believe most agree, would be a fourth comprehensive high school).

For definitional purposes, I am assuming it would work along these lines: you would take, say, a 7-period day (not having a high school student yet, I'm not sure if this is the correct number of periods in APS, but you get the idea) and make it a 9-period day, and students would either attend periods 1-7 or 3-9. Or am I misunderstanding what is meant by "shift schedules"?

What they have talked about are schedules really far outside of normal hours, like evening classes, not a matter of shifting between 3 periods. I don't want my HS kids sleeping until noon and then going to class until 7 pm. Also, part of the reason we want a comprehensive HS is for sports, and the practices would have to be held at a set times. Then what you'd have is a HS segregated by interests. The jocks and kids who do the honors clubs and other after school activities all go at one time, while the kids who have to work outside of school go at another time? That's insane. And what if too many kids want one bell schedule? Then you don't get your preferred bell schedule and can't do that sport or activity?

[Anonymous]

PP here, but I'm also wondering if you'd be as happy during the 2 years when your kid got the other schedule, and had to be at school at 7:00, and had unstructured time starting at 1:00.

Or are you assuming that you'd get the schedule you liked all 4 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here, but I'm also wondering if you'd be as happy during the 2 years when your kid got the other schedule, and had to be at school at 7:00, and had unstructured time starting at 1:00.

Or are you assuming that you'd get the schedule you liked all 4 years?

Of course they would get the schedule they want! Of course!

[Anonymous]

So are we hiring twice as many teachers, or are we paying overtime?

[Anonymous]

Shift solutions work for a bubble, not for the long term.

There are many things in high school that are done after hours- sports, plays, concerts, clubs....... those would have to be curbed as the facility would be in use.

[Anonymous]

W-L does have some shift schedule opportunities, but they are optional. At last night's work session, NVD (whose children did use the shift schedule option at W-L) pointed out that shift schedules necessarily would mean that some school shifts would conflict with extracurricular schedules, so the result of mandatory shift schedules would be students having unequal extracurricular opportunities depending on which shift they were assigned to.

[Anonymous]

I have personal experience during high school with a true shift schedule (and FYI, OP, that does not mean 9am to 4pm, that means that you come in, when the other high school kids have gone home, and you stay until late in the evening), and while we initially thought it was an interesting novelty, it got old pretty quick, and ended up being absolutely awful. Thankfully we had to do it only for a few months as my school's building was renovated. I can't even imagine this as a permanent solution! Dreadful.

[Anonymous]

I did the schedule you are imaging in high school. I graduated in 2010. We have “zero” hour that started at 7:30ish. Then some more students came for first period then everyone was there for 2-6. Then students started ending their day. For athletes that practiced after school, they didn’t take zero hour. The early morning classes were a mix of everything from gen ed to AP. If you went a traditional school day your hours were 9:15-4:30. It worked well. It let you take classes early to get kids to work in the afternoon or let the non early risers come in later. I had 1800 kids in my graduating class, so I’m familiar with big schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I did the schedule you are imaging in high school. I graduated in 2010. We have “zero” hour that started at 7:30ish. Then some more students came for first period then everyone was there for 2-6. Then students started ending their day. For athletes that practiced after school, they didn’t take zero hour. The early morning classes were a mix of everything from gen ed to AP. If you went a traditional school day your hours were 9:15-4:30. It worked well. It let you take classes early to get kids to work in the afternoon or let the non early risers come in later. I had 1800 kids in my graduating class, so I’m familiar with big schools.

I don't see how that solves the over crowding problem. I see how it solves other issues, like getting kids who need to work out early, or allowing kids to take an extra subject. But if you've got all your kids there is some periods, then you still need the same sized building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did the schedule you are imaging in high school. I graduated in 2010. We have “zero” hour that started at 7:30ish. Then some more students came for first period then everyone was there for 2-6. Then students started ending their day. For athletes that practiced after school, they didn’t take zero hour. The early morning classes were a mix of everything from gen ed to AP. If you went a traditional school day your hours were 9:15-4:30. It worked well. It let you take classes early to get kids to work in the afternoon or let the non early risers come in later. I had 1800 kids in my graduating class, so I’m familiar with big schools.

I don't see how that solves the over crowding problem. I see how it solves other issues, like getting kids who need to work out early, or allowing kids to take an extra subject. But if you've got all your kids there is some periods, then you still need the same sized building.

So extreme crowding it doesn’t solve, but it did open up more class slots so the classes all didn’t have 36+ people in them. For instance, instead of only 5 AP sections offered during the typical day, but the zero hour opened 2 more sections.

[Anonymous]

I can’t imagine keeping my kid in a high school where the options are 7 to 1 and 1:30 to 7:30 (because you have to get shift one out before shift 2 starts). When are sports practices and meets, extracurrical meetings, marching band, drama practice and everything else that kids love about high school? The facilities they need are in use for class, and everyone would opt for the slot that lets them march, play in the band, be in the play. It sounds just awful.

[Anonymous]

If you don’t want shifts, make sure to vote out Libby Garvey next time she is up for re-election. She is very pro shift schedules and distance learning.