Scheduling Committee Minutes

Monday, September 26, 2005

 

  • Jeff Maher facilitated

 

  • He discussed the “nature” of this committee and his understanding of the necessity for the administration to take a leadership role by facilitating.

 

  • Note: minutes and agendas will be posted on the campus web site at www.shsbtc.org

 

  • Jeff led the group in a Re-cap of last year:
    • Re-Set the Timeline: Group came to a consensus that implementation should be feasible for the 2007-2008 school year.  (But also agreed that to go any longer would only serve to lose the momentum we have with campus wide changes that are occurring through design committee work)
    • Jeff  mentioned that  a timeline will be developed and distributed at the next scheduling committee meeting along with binders for each committee member’s research
    •  
  • Steve Coultas mentioned that any schedule we adopt needs to have flexibility to accommodate a variety of needs: particularly technical education courses which need completion hours

 

  • Jeff discussed that we are looking at long-term fundamental schedule reform that encompasses the big vision of where our campus is heading

 

  • Jeff discussed the need to develop a needs assessment both internally and externally. 

Ř      Felicia Smithers, Sue Chickering, Stefanie Ayers Cravedi, Dave Chevalier, Kevin Beard and Brett Murphy volunteered to be the work group in charge of developing the internal survey.  This survey must be based on best practices needs (and not individual wants)

Ř      Jeff discussed the opportunity of getting community input at the community forum scheduled for November 8 in the campus auditorium

 

  • Dave Lammare asked our group to consider the driving forces and to be sure to get all of the information first.  This led into discussion about the need for us to schedule site visits to see how other schools have adapted the block schedule

 

  • CULMINATING ACTIVITY:  Jeff asked everyone present to write down some of their reasons for wanting schedule change.  Every member then shared.  The results follow:

---------------

Building Trades

 

                Longer/Earlier

 

                Tech salaries paid by sending schools.  TA only addresses Barre needs

 

                More time for sending school needs

                                                                                                                To access academic classes here

                More time for sending school students

 

Human Services

 

                Ditto time. 

 

English requirement makes students ineligible for CCV credit. 

 

TA Ditto – move to AM – 12:25 ending cuts time children may stay in program

 

TA – is it meeting goals?

 

Seniors drop Block 4 others resent TA

 

Propose Modular schedule 30 minute mods

 

Too much like study hall

 

15 minutes better

 

Have students form class in TA

 

Include music as part of school day

 

More full year classes

 

Better in AM

 

Shorter, question need

 

Too long

 

Productive some (many) students use it well

 

Use morning block for instruction

 

Too early to tell

 

Semester classes waste of time

 

                2 x finals

 

                Introductions, etc. 2 x

 

                More classes are suited to a full year than to a block

 

Traffic safety

 

                More time needed to meet state requirement

 

                Instructional time more important than TA

 

                Block does help combine teaching/driving

 

Science = 3 x 50 min 2 x 100 min in one week

 

Auto needs more time for competencies

 

Correct inequities of block

 

                Reevaluate full year courses

 

                Length of day – later day problem for athletics

 

More flexible schedule for interdisciplinary classes ie. American Studies

 

Allow love level – English early in day

 

Cosmetology

 

                Meet minimum hourly requirements

 

                Be able to finish in two years

 

Lunch – longer

 

Tech – meet transport issues

 

4 x 4 limits slots over four years

 

Length of block – too long/too short

 

Different classes need different lengths

 

Seniors need later start time

 

Music - - morning block hurts transportation need to teach and rehearse with 150 –250 students together

 

PE – 60 min block is ideal max class size = 24

 

4 x 4 language – continuity is difficult

 

Block too long for Freshmen

 

Athlete’s absences hurt ythb.

 

Mix different types of schedule

 

JROTC  - schedule discourages some – many conflicts with tech

 

Attempt to meet conflicting needs tech/art/academic

 

Same class same time see note

 

AP compromise

 

Allow “exploration” of tech programs

 

Building space – at capacity staggered schedule would help

----------

 

  • Meeting schedule TO BE DETERMINED

 

  • An Email list was developed for communication