Changes to class lengths / schoolday structure

pernod_oclock

While on TP, doing some of that fabled "reflection" in a conversation with another teacher, I realised that I wasn't too fond of the class length in place in the school. There are 9 classes of 35 minutes, with the last two classes only 30 minutes on a Friday evening.

While at school they were fine, maybe even a bit long. But looking at it having been in a college setting where a double class was 2 hours, not just over 1 hour, it felt a shockingly short space of time. The time flew while teaching, and it seemed hard to get all the information-giving packed into the short time, let alone get feed-back. For example, I was doing a cluastuiscint with some first years. I wanted to get the full section done with them in a consecutive unit of classes which took over 2 1/2 classes (half a week) in all in a 35-minute-class-at-a-time way, what with re-explaining things from the last day, getting my laptop sorted, taking roll and giving them little tips for doing the cluastuiscint. The remaining part of the 3rd class felt a bit wasted, rushed. I'm very sure that a double class would have sufficed for the full cluastuiscint. I always seemed to remember getting much more done in a double at school. And teachers in the staffroom count the double classes as the times they'll get optimum progress gained.

Are there any secondary schools in Ireland that work on around an-hour-a-class timetable? Is it at all possible or practical within our Irish school day? Do we cover too many different subjects for this to be practical?

Maybe I'm remembering wrongly, but in Leaving French, I recall that France had days of 1 hour long classes in a more spaced out day. Wednesday or Thursday evening (can't remember which) were taken off but Saturdays mornings were for school. If we couldn't do the 1 hour class system within the confines of 9-3 model, would it be palatable to introduce a longer day, with longer breaks and maybe dismissing the Wed/Sat swap in Ireland? It would definitely more closely resemble college and future employment timescales than quick bursts of 35 mins.

Any thoughts?

spurious

We have hour long classes and I know of at least one other school does them.
It tends to happen after a WSE where the recommendation is made to give the full 28 hour student week (i.e. no bits off two morning classes to make a small break).

We did not wish to lose our Wednesday Sports time in the afternoon, so we start at 8.40, have two classes to small break at 10.40, two more from 10.50 to 12.50, lunch from 12.50 to 13.30, then two classes to 15.30.

It's actually a good length of time for a class. Long enough to actually get stuff covered properly and check that they 'got' it. It's a great length for any classes with a practical element.

gaeilgegrinds1

I would much rather four hour-long classes a week, hmm...what a progressive idea!

EoghanRua

pernod_oclock wrote: »

While on TP, doing some of that fabled "reflection" in a conversation with another teacher, I realised that I wasn't too fond of the class length in place in the school. There are 9 classes of 35 minutes, with the last two classes only 30 minutes on a Friday evening.

While at school they were fine, maybe even a bit long. But looking at it having been in a college setting where a double class was 2 hours, not just over 1 hour, it felt a shockingly short space of time. The time flew while teaching, and it seemed hard to get all the information-giving packed into the short time, let alone get feed-back. For example, I was doing a cluastuiscint with some first years. I wanted to get the full section done with them in a consecutive unit of classes which took over 2 1/2 classes (half a week) in all in a 35-minute-class-at-a-time way, what with re-explaining things from the last day, getting my laptop sorted, taking roll and giving them little tips for doing the cluastuiscint. The remaining part of the 3rd class felt a bit wasted, rushed. I'm very sure that a double class would have sufficed for the full cluastuiscint. I always seemed to remember getting much more done in a double at school. And teachers in the staffroom count the double classes as the times they'll get optimum progress gained.

Are there any secondary schools in Ireland that work on around an-hour-a-class timetable? Is it at all possible or practical within our Irish school day? Do we cover too many different subjects for this to be practical?

Maybe I'm remembering wrongly, but in Leaving French, I recall that France had days of 1 hour long classes in a more spaced out day. Wednesday or Thursday evening (can't remember which) were taken off but Saturdays mornings were for school. If we couldn't do the 1 hour class system within the confines of 9-3 model, would it be palatable to introduce a longer day, with longer breaks and maybe dismissing the Wed/Sat swap in Ireland? It would definitely more closely resemble college and future employment timescales than quick bursts of 35 mins.

Any thoughts?

I'm not sure that resembling college (where kids are older and there is phenomenal downtime) or employment (where someone is an adult) is necessarily the way to go for teenage students. I think we need to be aware of the limited attention span of people at that age as opposed to judging things by what would ideally suit the teacher, as well as the number of subjects done by the students.

If you are struggling to cover the material in the alloted time then maybe you are trying to cover too much. And, I don't mean this to sound terribly negative but adjusting of laptop/equipment etc. should be part of class preparation or at worst an absolute minimum part of the actual class.

pernod_oclock

On reflection, the equipment situation probably wouldn't arise outside of Teaching Practice, it was from moving from room to room whereas an employed teacher would have more of a fixed presence in their own room.

I still think fewer, longer classes would be a good idea. It would half the settling down times, the roll-calling times. It might also be more conducive to a theory+active learning combination - spending the first 25 mins on the theory of a topic and then spending the rest of the class actually putting the theory into practice. The attention span is a problem, but even more so when they leave the class after 30 mins of actual work and come back the next day and having to remind them of all the past work to ensure they can complete their active aspect on the topic.

The last 2/3 mins of any class (the important re-cap time) are wasted with half the class dreaming of getting out and physically getting from the bell of the preceding class to having the new set of students sitting in front of you, roll called is at least another 2 mins. If you even you got an extra minute dreaming at the end of the double, you'd have at least a good 3 extra minutes that could be used each class to give a good overview of what was done in the hour.

Of course a longer class would have to include different learning methods, it would be madness to keep children on one train of thought even for 35 mins. But a change is often as good as a break and might help prevent restlessness about the longer time in the class.

Obviously there's a good reason behind the current widespread 35/40 min system otherwise it wouldn't be in place. It's good for covering a lot of subjects. But the French and spurious' school's model must have a good reason for being too. I wonder which is more widespread internationally?

Toto Wolfcastle

pernod_oclock wrote: »

On reflection, the equipment situation probably wouldn't arise outside of Teaching Practice, it was from moving from room to room whereas an employed teacher would have more of a fixed presence in their own room.

I'm in my 3rd year of teaching in the same school and I still don't have my own room. It could be years before I do get one, depending on retirements. We have 40 minute classes and while I've mastered setting up a data projector quickly, it still takes time out of my classes. I don't use it that often anyway, although because of the lack of TVs (or remote controls) in my school I sometimes have to use the laptop and projector to show DVDs.

In many schools each student class group has their own room and the teachers travel. That's what it was like in the school I attended.

While I have no problem with 1 hour classes in theory, I think that it would take awhile for the students to get used to the idea. As it is a lot of them get distracted before the end of a 40 minute class. However, if it became the norm I'm sure they'd get used to it.

I like our current set up though. 5x40 minute classes work well.

gaeilgegrinds1

Your own classroom might never really happen. I can think of a lot of teachers in our school who don't have one and are there long before me. Funnily enough all the permanently pregnant teachers like me got one straight away, isn't that positive discrimination? Or negative depending on where you stand!

rainbowtrout

pernod_oclock wrote: »

On reflection, the equipment situation probably wouldn't arise outside of Teaching Practice, it was from moving from room to room whereas an employed teacher would have more of a fixed presence in their own room.

I'm teaching 10 years and I'm still a travelling teacher. I move between 3 science labs, 2 computer rooms and 2 classrooms in one building and 2 computer rooms in another building 300m away (PLC centre). It certainly keeps me fit.

Until last year we had 9 40 min classes a day. Due to cutbacks classes were shortened to 35 mins to keep all the subjects on the timetable. Mon, Tues, Wed we have 10 35 min classes (a total disaster as the students are completely loopy by the time they get to last class and the teachers are wiped out the day they have 10 in a row) and 9 35 min classes on Thurs/Fri. We also start/finish/change classes at a different time those two days, so I usually spend Thursdays having a day long panic attack trying to figure out what time classes start and end and what building I'm in (no bell in PLC building).

gaeilgebeo

EoghanRua wrote: »

I'm not sure that resembling college (where kids are older and there is phenomenal downtime) or employment (where someone is an adult) is necessarily the way to go for teenage students. I think we need to be aware of the limited attention span of people at that age as opposed to judging things by what would ideally suit the teacher, as well as the number of subjects done by the students.

If you are struggling to cover the material in the alloted time then maybe you are trying to cover too much. And, I don't mean this to sound terribly negative but adjusting of laptop/equipment etc. should be part of class preparation or at worst an absolute minimum part of the actual class.

I couldn't agree with you more and I have my own classroom.
I think a 40 minute lesson is an effective time for delivering a lesson.
I would dread to think how the students in my school would cope with an hour long class of Irish.

gaeilgebeo

gaeilgegrinds1 wrote: »

Your own classroom might never really happen. I can think of a lot of teachers in our school who don't have one and are there long before me. Funnily enough all the permanently pregnant teachers like me got one straight away, isn't that positive discrimination? Or negative depending on where you stand!

I don't mean to go off topic but I have to comment on this.
I think it is disgraceful that any principal would allow this.
Classroom allocation should go by seniority(with the exception of spesialised subjects obviously).
We've all spent our years traveling from room to room, lugging around copies, cd players, exam papers etc...
There would be all out war in our school if somebody got a classroom(which are like goldust) over somebody who was there a lot longer.
Completely unfair.

gaeilgegrinds1

I should have explained this better. Things are not always as they seem. Most of these, if not all, are men who do not want a room. Reason is that our principal takes it really seriously to give you one and you are expected to do it up and keep it to that level. He asks who wants one and you go to him and explain. I was the only one who wanted one lasttime, it's the farthest away from the office so some of the teachers won't teach there and also very isolated. I was in a week early doing it up with posters I had to laminate and cleaning all the tables etc. Most of the teachers do not seem to want the hassle.

gaeilgebeo

gaeilgegrinds1 wrote: »

I should have explained this better. Things are not always as they seem. Most of these, if not all, are men who do not want a room. Reason is that our principal takes it really seriously to give you one and you are expected to do it up and keep it to that level. He asks who wants one and you go to him and explain. I was the only one who wanted one lasttime, it's the farthest away from the office so some of the teachers won't teach there and also very isolated. I was in a week early doing it up with posters I had to laminate and cleaning all the tables etc. Most of the teachers do not seem to want the hassle.

Wow, I would think the hassle of moving from room to room far outweighs the hassle of doing up a room.
I find it a huge advantage having a room for many many reasons.
Each to their own I suppose, it just would never happen like that in my school nor the few schools I've taught in in the early days.

gaeilgegrinds1

To be honest I'd have agreed with you til I moved here. There is a huge emphasis placed on appearances and other staff members wanting to see the place look nice and we have a lot of teachers who just could not be bothered and would prefer to be in a less perfect room. I see their point, mine was done up by me and now I have to keep it to that level, means every Friday the Cif is out to be honest as when I'm not there others move to it as it is nice. It's odd but we have loads of male teachers and I think they're more interested in actually teaching (which is what is important) than appearances but lately in our place it's all about that too. Not just the men but a lot of them in particular. I have to say, I was in better shape and did a LOT less cleaning without a room.

clartharlear

I teach only leaving cert, and all my classes are 1 hour long. It works well for that maturity level, but I'd say it'd be too long for anyone under 16.

Have you read Sousa and about the theory of prime time and down time with respect to the length of learning episodes?
He suggests that as the lesson time lengthens, the percentage of down time increases faster than the percentage of prime time. Therefore, shorter classes are much more effective for the learner.

Of course, this leads to the issue of 9 or 10 intense classes in a row, which can be exhausting for the teacher more so for the student.