Community Input RE: schedule proposal

Dear Berkeley High parent and student leaders,

When the recent Red Bell schedule proposal was voted down by one vote, Principal Slemp wrote, "I am asking SGC to meet from 4 to 8 on Thursday, Dec. 3 to continue our discussions and reach a decision.My hope is that we end this meeting [Dec. 3] with a decision on a proposal to take to the School Board on Dec. 9 for a Board decision of Dec. 16." Any proposal that reduces annual academic instructional time in core courses, including the elimination of separate science labs, should be voted down once again by the SGC, regardless of semester, trimester, block or other format.

How does the bell schedule change affect the education of students, especially struggling students?   Here are some examples. 

75% of African American students and two-thirds of Latino students start 9 th grade at Berkeley High significantly below grade level in English language arts. A BHS 9 th grader takes freshman English for 165 hours per academic year. Under the Red Schedule, she would take English for 136 hours per year-a 17% decrease in classroom learning time. Research shows that students are more successful in all of their classes when they have a strong literacy foundation. Can any BHS students afford this type of cut in academic time focused on essential high school literacy skills?

Chemistry can be challenging for most students. A BHS student takes chemistry, including lab time, for 198 hours per year. An AP chemistry class, including lab time, meets for 231 hours per year. Under the Red Schedule, students taking either regular chemistry or AP chemistry would receive in class instruction for 136 hours per year, no labs at all-a 31% to 41% decrease in classroom learning time. How many hands-on lab activities will be eliminated? How many chapters skipped? Chemistry has one of the highest "D" and "F" rates in the school. How many more students will be academically left behind?

I have heard some administrators and parent leaders characterize a 17% decrease in English, history, math and foreign language, and a 31% to 41% decrease in science classes as a "slight decrease in instructional time."   I beg to differ.  How many tutors will be hired, (for those who can afford them), to make up for lost instructional time?

Student achievement has been declining at Berkeley High in almost all academic subjects-in English, math, biology, chemistry, and US history.   However, there is one promising exception to this trend.  Scores in World History have actually increased, possibly due to the stronger, college-prep, 9 th grade history courses added in BIHS and AC that replaced Freshman Seminar. The various redesign/schedule proposals presented to the SGC over the past year would reduce time in academic core courses by almost 20% to over 40%.  More instructional time, with an "effective and engaging curriculum" that 2020 Vision recommends, is needed to raise student achievement, not less.

If you wish to voice your opposition to bell schedules that reduce academic instructional time, consider signing the petition at: " Berkeley Community Opposed to BHS Redesign Schedule "-- www.petitiononline. com/BHSRed09/petition.html

To SGC representatives: I hope that your vote on a bell schedule is data-driven and focuses on student learning.  Your decision on Dec. 3 will affect the quality of education for all BHS students for years to come.  Extend the school day for advisories and academic support, but don't reduce academic instructional time in core courses. 

"Research has revealed one common correlation that is critical to improving student performance-irrespective of the reform mechanism-increased instructional time produces higher student achievement."

Sincerely, Priscilla Myrick

Former BHS SGC parent rep
Former member, Site Plan/WASC Plan Subcommittee
Member, All City Equity Task Force

----

I am excited about the proposed changes to the Berkeley High schedule.  Seems like a great way to shake some things up and give students and teachers more flexibility.

Thanks for all that you do for our kids!

Laila
--------------------------------------

Nov. 9, 2009

Dear SGC Committee

As a parent of a BHS freshman (and a daughter coming in two years) I am very concerned about the new Redesign Program and the impact it will have on our children.

I don't understand how the proposal will close the achievement gap. In fact, this plan calls for the possibility of different teachers in different trimesters which will probably widen gap without continuity.

If a child has a language in semesters one and two and not three they will surely loose any gains by the time they fall semester starts. That time span in itself has the potential for creating a brand new achievement gap.

Please, before our children and teachers schedules are turned upside down I ask that this proposal be given more thought.

Is our current system so broke that it can't be tweaked to meet the needs of all of the children and the great teachers at BHS.

Thanks for taking a moment to read this and for your continued work and support of our schools.

Diana Correia
------------------------------------------

  (Comments to please read at the SGC meeting if possible.)

Dear SGC Committee,

I am a parent of a BHS sophomore in BIHS.  I am very much in favor of the proposed changes to the schedule.  Most importantly, I appreciate that the class periods would be increased to 70 minutes as it will reduce between period transition times and make for more effective
instruction for my daughter.  It also seems to me that by reducing teaching loads from 5 classes to 4 classes it will allow teachers to have more time to plan/prepare for each class.  And I also feel that the opportunity that the trimester schedule provides for incorporating services such as an advisory period will help BHS address the achievement gap better.  My daughter is doing fine in her studies however it is my opinion that she nevertheless suffers in
many tangible and intangible ways when so many of her classmates are not doing well and when these gaps are so often along racial lines. I fully appreciate the dedication that BHS has given to this issue of the achievement gap.

I also want to say that I attended the BHS PTSA meeting last week to hear about the proposed schedule change.  I expected there to be hard questions about the schedule change and I expected some parents attending would be against the schedule change for very valid
reasons.  However I also have to say that I was aghast at the rudeness and lack of civility that some parents had when making their comments and questions.

Thank you for all your hard work,
Barry Fike
--------------------------------------------


I am writing to express my concern over the proposed schedule changes to the Berkley High School schedule system currently in place.

Having attended meetings last year and most recently last week, I am familiar with the proposals which are being presented.

I acknowledge the achievement gap in the BHS student population, but I am not convinced that a school-wide schedule change and school-wide advisories are the best means to close this gap.  Such a system would limit if not hurt the high achieving students who would have less choice in electives and be forced to take an advisory period when they could be better served academically by not imposing additional limits to what classes they can take.

  I suggest advisory periods for those students who are not obtaining the target GPA and scholastic level .  Once children who are struggling with low academic performance arrive at high school, it is more difficult to reach them and intervention should begin immediately.  The
ground work for academic achievement is laid in earlier years of scholastic experience and in the home.  High achieving students might benefit from advisories,  but perhaps this could be a matter of choice, not mandatory.

  Certain subjects like music and language will be year long, as I understand, but core subjects in two trimester sessions is limiting, and for AP classes and the AP tests in spring, the trimester system would put students at a disadvantage for the AP testing.

I urge the committee to think over and plan this trimester system much more carefully over the next couple of years, rather than trying to implement it next year, if it must be implemented at all.  I came away from last week's meeting with Principal Slemp with the impression that this trimester system has not been carefully planned or well planned at all, with most details and strategies entirely absent from what was presented as the intended trimester system.

Thank you for your attention to my concerns.

Paula De Cristofaro

Mother of a BHS student.

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

TO: Berkeley High School Scheduling Committee
Thank you very much for your extensive research into various options for Redesign.

As parents of a freshman, we would like to make the following observations at this time:

1) Given limited resources, we would agree that advisory should be targeted towards students who will most benefit from this service; advisory should not be universal, should not be daily, and not be four years.

2) It is difficult for us to comment further on the trimester system as it is not clear to us

a) how exactly the current year would be compressed into 2 trimesters (i.e. what is the daily reality for students in terms of workload) b) what freedom of choice, if any, they will have with the remaining 3rd trimester
c) how their electives fit into the trimesters
d) exactly what "expanded requirements" means, and how that will use up any "extra minutes" or even the entire 3rd trimester
d) whether the UC system would recognize trimester courses

We look forward to the November 5 discussion to clarify many of these issues.

Thank you again for your efforts on behalf of the community,

Sincerely,
Casilda Rubio

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

Dear Principal Slemp:

I am writing in connection with the proposed schedule changes that BHS is now considering. I have a daughter who is a freshman in the BIHS program. I am very impressed with the BIHS program so far -- and my daughter is loving Berkeley High both academically and otherwise. I am concerned, however, that shifting to a trimester program may have unintended consequences for the BIHS program (the only program I know much about at BHS).

Will the trimester approach allow BIHS students even fewer electives than they have already (given the number of mandatory courses they need to take under the current system coupled with fewer courses each year)? Will the new trimester approach enable them to prepare adequately for the BI exams their junior year? That is, will they have the class time and teaching support necessary to master the material? Could the new trimester system affect BIHS's eligibility for the international degree -- is it consistent
with the standards that must be met for these degrees?

Before BHS adopts a trimester schedule, I request that BHS discuss these issues with the BIHS community. I believe it would be helpful to provide responses to these specific questions and concerns. At present, given the generality of the proposal, I don't believe that we have sufficient information to fully evaluate how these new proposals will affect the BIHS program or to provide meaningful comment on the proposed schedule change.

Best Regards,
Catherine W. Johnson

I am writing with regard to the proposed Trimester schedule that will be presented to the SGC, and ultimately to the school board. I appreciate the effort that has been invested in examining the schedules used in other schools, and fully appreciate the challenges Berkeley High has in meeting the needs of ALL of its students. The various Small Learning Communities add to the complexities of making a single bell schedule work for all programs.

In considering the trimester schedule I've tried in particular to work through how this schedule will work for students who want to pursue the IB Diploma, given the very strict requirements for doing so. As you know, those students must take exams in 6 demanding areas, and those exams are available ONLY in May of each year. Students may take one or two exams in their Junior year and the remainder must be taken in the Senior year. This schedule suggests that in the Junior and Senior year students
planning to take exams will need to have their course work completed, and have adequate time for review before the exams take place. Ideally, classes would be taking place at the time of a particular exam, but if courses are two trimesters, a class with an exam scheduled for early May would need to be completed during the Fall and Winter trimesters. That suggests that the review time leading up to the exam will take place
outside of regular classroom hours, so students will be preparing for exams while they are taking different classes not directly related to the exams. Alternatively, if a student took the IB course during Winter and Spring trimesters they would be lacking a significant number of the classroom hours that are needed to adequately prepare for the exam. Another option is to make IB Higher Level courses three-trimester courses, but that approach limits student's options for fulfilling all of their requirements.

As BHS is just now graduating its first class of students in the BIHS program, there have been a number of challenges for the students, including exam scheduling and ensuring there is adequate preparation and support. Even this year, with AP/IB science classes offered with two labs, IB Physics students have been informed that they will need to study certain modules that will be addressed in the Physics exam on their own,
without teacher support. When I consider the full range of courses students must take to complete the degree, I have not found a way to make that work with the proposed trimester schedule, unless the expectation is that students will do even more of their work outside of class. For struggling students in particular, this seems to be the opposite of the stated goal of the redesign. Perhaps there is an expectation that
struggling students will not attempt the IB Diploma, but, again, that seems to be opposite of the goal of the IB program when it was implemented.

While these scheduling challenges must be addressed, I am also aware that IB teachers are excited about the availability of an Advisory class, to address the many unique requirements for IB students. Currently those requirements must be addressed during regular class time.

Before this proposal moves forward I request: That a four-year schedule be provided to parents and the school board for review, to ensure that the unique demands of the IB program can fit within the schedule.

That the community receive evidence that all courses under the proposed schedule are accepted by the University of California as meeting its A – G requirements.

That parents be given examples of IB programs with 3-trimester schedules similar to that proposed for BHS. In addition to schedules, data reporting exam success rates relative to those with semester-based schedules is requested.

I believe it would be irresponsible for the school to adopt a schedule that cannot be made to work for even one of the Small Learning Communities at Berkeley High, and advance evidence of the ability to make it work is needed. While I understand that the final schedule for next year will be developed in August, I believe it is essential that the community understands that the proposed schedule will provide their students with
the opportunity to be successful within this demanding program that was highly recommended by you just five years ago.

Thank you for your attention to these concerns. Please forward these comments to the SGC members for their consideration.

_______________________

From: Sandra Hunt

TO: BHS Scheduling Committee 20 October 2009

Dear Committee,

Thank you very much for the continued hard work on the proposed 'redesign' which hopes to close the achievement gap. I understand the very complex nature of such an undertaking. With that said, I urge you to seriously consider studying this proposal
for at least another year in order to achieve the best possible schedule for our diverse student body.

My children came from a school with block scheduling which included an advisory period. I happened to like that type of scheduling, personally.

However, after reviewing the Red and Gold schedules, I still do not agree that instructional time is increased. Many parents are not able to understand the specifics of how the schedule will unfold: 2 vs. 3 trimesters. Perhaps the committee should mock up several schedules for EACH of the schools at BHS. I have attended many of the meetings, and the one constant is the lack of certainty. Prospective families will soon be registering their students for the 2010-11 school year, and there remains a vast degree of uncertainty.

I fully support the agenda here: to bridge a widening achievement gap. However, we want a plan in place that works from the start and requires little change. BHS has been a 'moving target' for years, making it a challenge to accommodate the students' best interests. As I said, my hope is that the committee continues this in earnest over the next year, hoping instead, to implement its plan for the 2011-12 school year..
In the meantime, the achievement gap issue can begin to be addressed in several areas:
1. Looking to the elementary and middle school years to begin this process.
2. At the high school level, by identifying students at risk and providing mandatory tutoring sessions, preferably one on one. Families must support this effort.

Once again, thank you for your time and dedication to this very challenging process.

Sincerely,

Dawn Morris

______________________________

Dear Mr. Slemp,

I prefer the proposed Red Bell Schedule to the Gold Bell Schedule. Having only two class period lengths (53 minutes on Mondays and 72 minutes the other days) is easier for teachers to plan for and students to get used to than the four class period lengths of the Gold Schedule (53, 65, and 72 minutes for regular classes and 29 minutes for advisory). Making the advisory course a regular single-trimester class also seems like a good idea--students are likely to get more out of (and make more of) the 53 or 72 minutes a day than they could in the Gold Schedule's 29 minutes twice a week. If you are concerned about juniors and seniors not having advisory, it could made be an elective.

I wasn't able to come to the last community forum, but look forward to the next one. At last year's meetings I got the impression that the educational studies on various types of block scheduling were split on whether the block schedule helped poorly achieving students. Is there better evidence on the benefits of the 5-course-per-trimester schedule we are thinking about?

Judy Dale

_______________________________

Schedules Committee,

You've requested our input on your gold and red options in relation to our current schedule and in relation to our community's listed goals.

First, as between the red and the gold, I strongly prefer the red option, because it preserves the most minutes of instructional time for each course. The losses under the gold system are unacceptably greater.

While there are arguments to be made for the ongoing, part-time advisory of the gold schedule, the people that we are seeking most to help with advisory is those whose achievement has been intractably low. It's my strong impression that current research supports providing better teachers and more instructional time in each course as the two single mostimportant factors in changing student performance. We made an effort in
the direction of better teaching by supporting additional professional development and mentoring time with the new schedule this year. Now I feel the need to protect instructional time and indeed figure out ways to expand it. Greater personalization is doubtless also valuable, but I haven't seen research that says it's as important as giving teachers enough time to teach the kids who need their time most.

It makes sense that the single biggest change we need to make next would be to create time during the school day for additional skills support for those who most need it. I think that adding advisory just dilutes that effort, since it is directed at all students and thus cannot fairly focus only on the needs of the ones who enter high school scoring far below or below basic on their skills tests and need help moving up. Indeed, the
principal at San Luis Obispo told you during one of your meetings that his school had adopted extra professional development time and had adopted a skills support class but had elected not to also adopt advisory because there simply wasn't enough instructional time to do everything. Just once, I'd like to put closing the achievement gap by raising all students towards proficient skill levels at the top of the priority list and see what schedule would work best.

It seems to me that our existing schedule might be the best in the following sense. With six courses per semester, there are enough courses to use only five towards satisfying the UC/CSU a-g requirements in most semesters. That leaves one course free that could be used for skills support. Any student entering Berkeley High with state test scores of far below basic or below basic in math or English could be automatically
enrolled in a skills support class as one of his or her courses. One day a week in that course could be spent on the subjects intended for advisory, to create personalization. The other four days could be spent on math and English skills until the student reached grade level performance. Any student who got an "F" or two "D"'s during one semester
could automatically be enrolled in skills support for the following semester instead of one elective.

Some of the small learning communities have additional course requirements added to the UC/CSU requirements, and those would make it harder to take a course for skills support and still meet all of the a-g ones as well. But those additional course requirements might be negotiable if we found that a skills support class during the day actually gives kids a chance to get the extra tutoring and study time they need to come up to the level of their peers. And after a semester or two of skills support, students
might be much better prepared to take advantage of the richness offered by those additional courses.

The point is, we could offer that right now, with the schedule we have, without taking anything away from anyone's education. And by focusing our efforts on the kids who need help most, we'd have the greatest impact for the same amount of money. Many kids at Berkeley High have families that have gone to college for many generations. They don't need course work on how to prepare for college -- they just need to prepare and they know how. Let's free up our resources to focus on the kids whose families
can't give them that knowledge.

I believe my children are getting a good education in Academic Choice at Berkeley High, with the existing schedule. Their education could be made stronger and better, but I do not believe that changing the schedule under either of the proposals would accomplish that, as it would take a fairly well-modulated, six-course plan and produce winners and losers – courses that get shorter or longer in ways that don't really seem to serve a
purpose but that wouldn't be terrible either. The big impact would be the loss of science instructional time in the form of 0 and 7 period labs to pay for a schedule change.

Jim Slemp has said that we have more labs than other high schools but that our AP science test scores are not significantly better. However, it's my understanding that our extra lab time has given our teachers a rare ability to successfully prepare students for AP exams without requiring that they first take a year in the high school level science prior to the AP level. Thus, our kids are able to take three years of AP level science in high school, if they are so inclined, rather than only one at the end of the normal high school science sequence. And if one of our goals is to create high demand, high support curriculum for all students, then it would be a real pity to remove one of the shining lights at Berkeley High -- the ability to graduate with AP training in 2, 3, or even
4 science classes. My kids so far have not taken full advantage of this opportunity, but their education is nonetheless stronger because they have classmates who have done so and who raise the standards for all the kidsin the process.

Thanks for all that you are doing to weigh our many goals and options for achieving them!

Margit Roos-Collins

_____________________

Calculations of differences in instructional time per course for the different schedule options

October 20, 2009

As much as possible, we need to be operating off of common understandings about how the red and gold proposals would differ from our current schedule and from each other. This document is my effort to figure out how much the instructional minutes in each type of course would increase or decrease, depending on whether we changed to the red or gold proposal and whether a course was two or three trimesters long within that, and
whether it had originally been taught with one or with two-plus labs.

Please speak up if you see any mistakes in my arithmetic or assumptions. Thanks! I've underlined the critical conclusions to try to make this easier to skim. If the underlying assumptions interest you, then you can read the non-underlined portions.

Lastly, because I'm not familiar with how upper level courses work in BIHS, I haven't tried to address them.

1. Average minutes per day under the three options:

Currently, each regular [non-lab science] class meets 55 minutes four times a week and 43 minutes once a week, on Monday, for a total of 263 minutes per week, or an average of 52.6 minutes per day.

Under the proposed red schedule, those classes would meet 53 minutes once a week and 72 minutes four times a week, for a total of 341 minutes per week, or an average of 68.2 minutes per day.

Under the proposed gold schedule, those classes would meet 53 minutes once a week, 65 minutes twice a week, and 72 minutes twice a week, for a total of 327 minutes per week, or an average of 65.4 minutes per day.

2. Total minutes per year for a two-semester course currently

Right now, Berkeley High has 180 days of school per year, but six of those days are for finals, in which each course has two 2-hour exams per year. So on those 6 days, the time per course per day is 4 hours [equals 240 minutes] divided by 6 days equals 40 minutes per day. So right now, each regular [non-lab-science] class has 52.6 minutes per day times 174 days per year, plus 40 minutes per day times 6 days, for a total of 9392 minutes per course.

NOTE: this is a rough average for comparison purposes. I'm not examining whether more holidays fall on Mondays (short class hour days) or on Tuesdays-Fridays (longer class hour days), which would skew the averages slightly. I haven't subtracted the hours spent on state testing either. Since the hours spent on mandated testing will be the same under any schedule, by reducing all totals by the same flat amount, it will increase the percentage difference in instructional time between the current system
and either proposal.

3. Total minutes per year for a two-trimester course under red and gold options

Using the same math, with the same caveat, under a trimester schedule, there'd be 180 days per year divided by 3 trimesters equals 60 days per trimester, multiplied by 2 trimesters per course or 120 school days per two-trimester course. One difference is that instead of having exam periods, with only two exams per day and two hours for each exam, the draft comments indicate there'd be "no Finals schedule -- finals held
during regular class period." So for the red and gold proposals, the math is just for a flat 180 days, with no change for exam days.

Therefore, under the proposed red schedule, there'd be 68.2 minutes per day times 120 days per year or 8184 minutes per course, or 13 % less instructional time per course.

Under the proposed gold schedule, there'd be 65.4 minutes per day, times120 days per year, equaling 7848 minutes per course, or 16.4 % less instructional time per course.

4. Comparing total instructional minutes for science courses that currently have one lab per week

Currently, non-AP science courses and AP Environmental Science have one lab in 0 or 7 period, giving them 58 additional instructional minutes per week, or 11.6 minutes per day. Over the course of a year, that adds 11.6 times 174 non-finals days per year equals 2018.4 additional minutes, for a total of 2018.4 plus 9392 equals 11410.4 minutes per course.

Under the red or gold schedule, there would be no 0 or 7 period labs. All labs would be taught during the regular class time.

Thus, the red schedule would reduce non-AP science course instructional time by 28 %.

The gold schedule would reduce non-AP science course instructional minutes by 31 %.

Comparing total instructional minutes for science courses that currently have multiple labs per week [e.g., most AP sciences]

Currently, most AP science courses have two and sometimes three labs per week in 0 or 7 periods. AP Chemistry, as an example, has 2.5 labs per week [two one week and three the next, alternating], giving them 145 additional instructional minutes per week, or 29 minutes per day. Over the course of a year, that adds 29 times 174 = 5046 instructional minutes per course. Added to the 9392 minutes of all classes, that's 14,438 total instructional minutes per AP science course per year.

When comparing this to the trimester schedule, I use 180 days per year, because AP science courses would have to be taught as three trimester courses.

Thus, the red schedule would include 68.2 minutes per day times 180 minutes per year, for 12276 instructional minutes per AP science course per year. The red schedule would reduce AP science instructional minutes by 15 % even if the science is taught as a three trimester course.

The gold schedule would include 65.4 minutes per day times 180 days per year, for 11772 instructional minutes per AP science course per year. The gold schedule would reduce AP science instructional minutes by 18.5% even if the course is taught as a three trimester course.

6. Comparing total instructional minutes for non-science AP classes

Non-science AP courses, such as AP Language and Composition are typically taught as three trimester courses, or as two-trimester courses plus the third trimester for review. They would get more instructional minutes under either the red or gold schedule than they do currently, if they were taught as three-trimester courses.

Under the red schedule, non-science AP classes taught in three trimesters would have 12276 instructional minutes per year. Thus, compared to the current 9392 minutes per course, the red schedule would increase non-science AP course instructional time by 30.7% if the course were taught all three trimesters.

If a non-science AP course were taught in two trimesters, instructional time under the red schedule would be reduced by 13% per course.

Under the gold schedule, non-science AP classes taught in three trimesters would have 11772 instructional minutes per year. Thus, the gold schedule would increase non-science AP course instructional time by 25.3% if the course were taught in all three trimesters.

If a non-science AP course were taught in two trimesters, instructional time under the gold schedule would be reduced by 16.4%.

7. Comparing total instructional minutes available for extra support classes

Finally, the trimester schedule offers the opportunity to increase the amount of time spent on a course, to consolidate skills when needed. So, though a course might typically be taught as a two trimester course, it could be taught as a three trimester course for those who struggle in the first trimester.

Under the red schedule, a course that currently gets 9392 minutes of instructional time per year and that would get 8184 as a two-trimester course, would get 12276 minutes if taught all three trimesters.

Thus, the red schedule would offer the possibility of teaching a course with 30.7% more instructional minutes compared to the present schedule.

Under the gold schedule, the same course that would get 7848 minutes as a two-trimester course, would have 11772 minutes if taught all three trimesters.

Thus, the red schedule would offer the possibility of teaching a course with 25.3 % more instructional minutes.

On the other hand, under the current, six-period schedule, the school could decide that for any student who struggles in the first semester of math, for example, it would offer an additional support class the second semester instead of one elective. That would double the spring instructional time for a course, for a yearly total of 1.5 times 9392 =
14088 instructional minutes, or 50 % more instructional minutes.

Alternately, any student coming into 9th grade math or English with an 8th grade STAR test score of below basic or far below basic could automatically be put into a skills support class as one of his or her six classes. That would double the time for mastery of that course. Or the skills support class could be divided between time for English and time for math, adding 50% to the instructional time for each compared to taking just the regular classes.

I'll send my comments on the proposals separately. This document is intended to give us all a common set of numbers, or to inspire someone at the school to produce a similarly complete but even more accurate set.

Margit Roos-Collins

__________________________

Dear Mr Slemp.
I attended the last forum and read the your letter regarding the schedule proposals and have the following questions and comments about the proposed trimester system. I hope to hear some of them addressed at the upcoming community forum:

Absent any sample curriculum or even broad suggestions it is very difficult to ascertain the usefulness of the advisory period. Can we get some examples please? I think most parents would be extremely reluctant to forgo an hour of instruction time for advisory per week without more specific information.

Neither proposals clearly indicate the net effect of instructional time. I think it is important that all parents are aware that a 2 trimester class results in a 15% reduction of instructional time. (As well as the fact that 3 trimester class would be a 26% increase). What criteria will beused to determine which classes will be longer and which will be shorter? Can we get some examples of how classes will be sequenced, and assurances
that all students won't be waiting out a spring or fall semester to advance to their next language course, for instance.

Do you anticipate adding new electives and what might they be? If a student has mainly two semester courses, could or would all the electives be clumped in one quarter?

How can you describe this as a "cost-neutral" proposal when the superintendent himself stated that this would result in a 3% increase. Sounds small but how much exactly is 3% and what is the source of the revenue?

What are the proposed student teacher ratios for advisory and is there a ceiling whereby the personalization is lost? What would be that # just incase we implement the program and can't financially sustain the low ratios?

I think changing the district calendar to adjust break times would be really difficult for most parents unless is was implement for all grade levels.

Do you anticipate more counselors on staff to deal with all the wrinkles in this major shift? If so, how will they be paid for?

How does all this fall under Measure A and class size reduction? I am aware that class size averages are being honored by there are many classes that are in excess of 35 and are held in small rooms. 72 minutes without a desk or chair is a long time--will overcrowding be addressed in this plan?

That's all for now. I look forward to the next forum.

Catherine Lazio
Mother of BHS Sophmore

__________________________

Dear Mr. Slemp,

Thank you for soliciting public written comments and distributing them to your committees.

Thank you also for all the hard work that the Scheduling Committee is doing. I am the parent of a son (BHS 2009, now a freshman in college) and a daughter who is currently a junior. I travel a lot for work and am generally unable to follow all the news of BHS on email but I always read my mail. The last timeline I received regarding the review process that the Scheduling Committee’s proposal would go through, was in late
September. (It came with the back to school night information.) It seems that those dates are now all wrong. I understand this – deadlines changein my work also. But now I don’t know anything about the new dates for the process. Do you think that the committee could publish a new timeline with the revised dates for proposal review, the SGC vote and the school board vote? It really helps to see all this information on one page.

When will the proposal be finished, posted online, and available for comment before the SGC votes on it? I saw the red and gold bell schedules that you mailed home but am waiting to see the draft proposal so that I can fully understand how it would work at BHS with its many diverse programs. Because my work is in research, I am familiar with drafts, the review process, more drafts, etc. This is my life! I do not quite understand the process that your proposal is going through though, since the new timeline has not been published as one document (has it?)

I am sure you cannot proceed with this proposal until you have received confirmation from the UC system that a two-trimester course will count for one year. The public will need to see that published confirmation. I understand that other schools have that agreement but as one who works for UC myself, I can tell you that there are occasional inconsistencies inside a large bureaucracy that need to be ironed out ahead of time or they can really bring down a project. Believe me, I know. This is probably how Jonah felt inside the whale.

Last, because my children managed to be successful students but they also both have some learning differences, I want to express concern about courses needing to pack more content into less time. The trimester system has some obvious advantages but it has some glaring disadvantages as well. I am not at all sure that putting high school students into a more pressurized, more college-like system is to their advantage. Preparation for college is very different than college itself. Our high school kids are still teenagers. Their lives seem pretty full of pressure as it is now. I’ll need to hear a pretty good argument as to why this new system is good for them.

Also, I care how the teachers feel about this proposal and will be listening to their wise and experienced voices regarding this very significant proposed change. I think we are all on the same side here.

It doesn’t matter if you have an A+ student in AP classes or a student who is having a hard time taking regular classes, having to learn the same amount of material in less time cannot be good for any student. Or would the students be learning less material? With California ranking #48 out of 50 states in education, having our students learn even less than they do now seems unwise at best.

I’ll read the committee’s proposal carefully to evaluate the arguments as to why we should like this new plan. I remain open to it, and look forward to seeing the complete proposal.

Sincerely,
Susan M. Kegeles

________________________________

While the trimester plan has the potential to provide positive opportunities, if it is not implemented carefully it could cause a lot of problems. I was very concerned that at the forum I attended, it was clear that no one had thought about the details of how many trimesters each course would be. The committee was asked repeatedly for details, and the response was always "we haven't thought about that yet".

In order to properly assess the impact of the schedule change, it's going to be necessary to have a much more specific proposal as to the duration of courses; otherwise teachers, students, parents and counselors will not be able to do the "what if" exercises necessary to determine whether the schedule changes will be beneficial or not.

Two things that seemed pretty clear to me were (a) most AP courses will need to be 3 trimesters, and (b) many 2 trimester courses will need to be structured as independent parts to allow students the flexibility to juggle their schedules - it seems like this will require a significant adjustment in some of the curriculum.

I look forward to seeing this more specific proposal soon - hopefully the committee has learned from last year's experience of not addressing the logistics of a schedule change proposal in sufficient detail.

Thanks,
John Kenny (parent of 10th and 7th graders)

_________________________

Public comments to be forwarded to the Scheduling Committee:

I have only recently been made aware of the new school wide class scheduling changes that are being proposed for next year. Though I have not had time to fully review the information I have about these changes, I understand that the scope of changes will be will be quite large. I have heard from other parents that no one is really sure exactly how all of this will work and I know several parents do and will have questions, especially about insuring that AP courses will retain recognition from UC, and how this may effect the development of the small schools and their ability to keep options option for its students.

I am interested in seeing the actual draft proposal for these changes, so I may better understand everything the committee is proposing, but I do not know if it is available or when it may be.

I am also concerned about the effort to keep the parents and students in the loop and completely informed of the full scope of the proposed changes. Such drastic changes to the school scheduling process should not be rushed, especially without adequate forums to explain the changes and to allow adequate parent and student inquiries and input.

I am unsure of the proposed timeline for approving these changes and have not seen a schedule regarding the public forums that may be offered concerning this issue. I hope the committee remains committed to making sure all parents, especially those of next years incoming freshmen, are fully informed and made aware of all public forums on this subject in a timely manner.

Thank you all for taking on this enormous task.

Charles Bryant

Dear Principal Slemp,

I'm the parent of a BHS freshman. I'm concerned because I've heard that there could be a problem with the proposed trimester plan being recognized by the UC system. I hope and trust that no new system will be put into place without the express assurance of the University of California that it meets their entry requirements. We cannot rely on the kindness of UC bureaucracy when it comes to our children. Thanks for listening.

Sincerely,
David Dudley

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

Mr. Slemp,
Is there something in writing from the UC system and possibly a few other schools to confirm that they will accept two trimester classes as 10 units. I'm all for the trimester system, but this detail would be worth seeing in writing to include in transcript submissions to any college. thanks for looking into this,
Lauren Meyer
mom of 9th grader

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

Dear Principal Slemp:

Not a week goes by that I don't have a conversation with parents about school readiness. Over the last 15 years, I've come to accept the fact that kindergarten is really first grade, that read to learn happens now in 3rd, not 4th grade. Despite this acceleration, students really aren't doing all that better.

Must my high school freshman be put on a compressed college trimester system for her sophomore year of high school?

What I hear from my daughter is how much she likes meeting every class every day. How going to every class every day has helped with continuity and getting connected with her teachers and classmates at Berkeley High.

I am concerned that compressing classes and making meetings less frequently will make high school feel like college classes. Fewer, longer class meetings means more concentrated teaching sessions and longer homework assignments. The ancient wisdom as I went though college and medical school was that attention could not be maintained much past 50 minutes. I am not aware of any controlled research that disproves this.

I am not in favor of the block schedule or the idea of trimesters. In the absence of certainty that all college system will recognize trimesters, the district must not proceed at this time.

Yours Sincereley,

Lisa M. Asta, MD
Casa Verde Pediatrics, Inc.

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

Dear Mr. Slemp,

I am writing as a parent of a BHS 10th grader and concerned about the proposal to go to a trimester program especially in terms of any impact to UC requirements and time spent in honors and/or AP classes. I would like to see written confirmation from the UC system that the BHS plan will not result in any detrimental impacts to BHS students seeking admission. I would also like to see what this proposed change means in terms of teaching time.

Sincerely yours,

Margaretta Lin

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

Dear Mr. Slemp,
I have serious concerns both of the block schedules proposed. There are some very serious challenges involved in fitting six academic classes into five class periods. For example, my daughter is in the IB program. She has 3 core classes every year, (which hopefully would run all year long, since these core class promote student bonding, particularly in the first year). Then, if she is to complete at least the UC requirements,
she must take three other academic course, a language, math and a science. Under the block schedule, one of these classes would have to be forfeited, at least for the first two trimesters. Which class would then be squeezed into one trimester? Math, science or language? I cannot see that a student could effectively do any of those course in one trimester.

I spoke with Matt Meyers at the PAG meeting on Friday, but he said he had not gotten enough information from the administration to allow him to answer this question about how six classes will be covered under either of the proposed block schedules. If these block schedules are to jeopardize either the IB diploma program, or the ability of our students to complete UC requirements, I think we have a right to know.

Could you please explain in writing how the block schedule would allow IB students to complete all of their IB and UC requirements?
Thank you very much,

Jeanine Castello-Lin

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

Hi Jim,

As I told you at the BHS Redesign forum on October 7, I am impressed with the thought that has gone into the redesign proposal that recommends adoption of the trimester schedule beginning next year. There are many potential benefits for students under the proposed trimester system and I there is general support for it among parents, myself
included. However, I am writing to express my concern that the plan may have a serious flaw that must be addressed immediately.

In the October community forum, you informed parents that 2 trimesters of a course would hold the same weight as 2 semesters, and the trimester plan is based on that stipulation. In a letter sent out to BHS families earlier this month, you wrote: "In general all current year long classes will last for two trimesters and give a full 10 units of credit. This credit plan is already approved by the UC/CSU system."

Last week, a BHS parent spoke with Nina Costales in the Articulation Unit of the UC Office of the President (510-987-9570). Costales stated unequivocally that UC requires that a course must be 3 trimesters long in order for the course to be equivalent to a year long course.

The UCOP information comes from a qualified source, and it must be verified. I am writing to request that the BHS redesign committee not move ahead with the proposed plan until BHS has received written confirmation from the UC Office of the President that two trimester courses will be granted one-year of credit within the UC system.

Throughout your tenure as principal of BHS, you have actively upheld the vision of BHS as a rigorous college preparatory school. As I know you will agree, acceptance of BHS courses by the UC system is a baseline requirement for any plan that is adopted at BHS. Thanks for your hard work and for your consideration.

Kate Spohr

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

Hi Mr. Slemp.

I have a child attending BHS - a 9th grader. I received the various plans for a trimester schedule in the mail last week, and, on the surface, it looked good. We'd love the opportunity for more electives, etc.

Now I'm hearing that UC very well may NOT give credit for a year long course after 2 semesters, which was presented as the norm in the letter. Yikes! We need assurance that this is not true, or if it is, what does that do to this whole rescheduling plan?

Thanks for all of the work that you do, and here's to keeping the public informed!

Please designate my email as a public comment. Thank you.

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

Dear Principal Slemp -

My son, Kyle Hamilton-Lecky, is graduating this year. Our family has been blessed to have you at the helm during his time at BHS. Thank you for your strong leadership.

My daughter, Colleen, starts at BHS next year as a freshman. I have real concerns that she will not receive the same excellent education provided to my son. Virtually every math and science teacher has voiced concerns that AP classes will not be able to be sustained under either proposed plan because not enough time is allotted to these classes. Now I have been told that the 2-trimester courses proposed in your most recent letter home will not be acceptable to UC.

I have two requests. (1) Can you please address the concerns voiced by math and science teachers that there will not be enough time in the new schedule to teach AP courses? and (2) can you please obtain written confirmation from the UC Office of the President that the two trimesters is acceptable to UC before the plan is recommended to the BUSD board of directors?

Thank you again for your commitment to BHS. I look forward to your
response.

Sincerely,
Jeane Hamilton (cell: 510/676-4373)

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

Jim,

I believe the proposed trimester system is both innovative and promising, but I am concerned about the claim that moving to trimesters would be revenue-neutral. When you consider the work needed on the PowerSchool system to support trimesters (especially where 2 trimesters is a year of credit), the impact of having the high school on a different grading period than other schools in BUSD, the impact on your Registrar's office of adjusting transcripts going into and out of BHS, and the possible impact on scheduling systems of mid-year schedule changes as students need to repeat trimesters, I am forced to conclude that you will need some additional resource (either at BHS or the district or both) to handle this systems impact.

dan brotsky

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

Dear Principal Slemp,

I regret that I have been unable to attend these important scheduling meetings but I do have some concerns. First, I am curious how teachers will manage to cram a 2 semester course into 2 trimesters without cheating the students out of true preparation for college. In light of that and the fact that it just doesn't seem likely that 2 trimesters would equal a year long course, I would feel much more comfortable to have an official
approval given by the UC system before we move forward.

Counting my blessings,

Laura Howard

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

10/19/ #1
I have two children at BHS, one a senior in BIHS, and the other a freshman in AHA. I also have a 7th grader at King. I am open and supportive of the trimester plan, but I do have a few concerns.

1) Having had a student go through the IB program I can't possibly see how the trimester plan would work for that curricula because it seems that each class would need to use all three trimesters. However, I can see how a student in this program could benefit from only taking 5 classes at a time, and how the advisory period all the way through could facilitate the extras required in the program. I look forward to seeing the proposal for IB and the teachers comments and suggestions as to how it would work.

2) In order to really address the "achievement gap" (which is the whole point of the new schedule) I think that it is imperative to allow students to choose their Math sequence in the trimester program, and then at their desired rate, i.e. complete course in 1, 2, or 3 trimesters. If math were taken back out of the small learning communities and students were allowed to choose either the traditional math sequence or IMP, or both, there may
be some great accomplishments by students in this area.

I have a few reasons for thinking that the trimester plan could be a great thing if students had a math choice, and why it would be such a critical factor in the adoption of the "close the achievement gap – trimester schedule". 1)The two math paths are extremely different, and even though a child choose a small learning community, that does not mean that each of those students need the same math exposure. 2) I can see the validity of both math sequences, and see the challenges and simplicities of both. If
the trimester plan were adopted and math were a choice for all BHS students then a student could add an extra semester or two of the other math sequence, for the experience if it.

As I have watched my student in AHA work in IMP I can see how all students could benefit from actually being able to take both math sequences. (Currently with one choice I personally prefer the traditional sequence for my child, based on his strengths, and I am very disappointed that the choice was taken away.) I happen to have been blessed with children that are quite adaptable and capable and achieving is not an issue, but from watching them and their self-inflicted struggles (which come from high expectations of themselves) I can see how a student that has had "achievement issues" could benefit from slowing down their math learning and picking up a different math perspective. Math is an area where students feel great accomplishments when they "get it", much more so than any other subject. When a student starts to feel any sort of accomplishment then it will carry over into other subjects, and increase their self-confidence, worth, and expectations. We can not even begin to address the "achievement gap" if we are working with students that have no evidence that they can achieve, or the desire to do so. If a child does not have a support system at home with any expectations then they have even more necessity to create their own. BHS can be a place where a student can establish healthy expectations and realistic goals.

If students were actually put into Math classes (please note I do not hold this view for other subjects) with other students of the same skill level, and their desired and realistic rate of learning (I'm sorry but this is an area that we must be cash and color blind), and let the teachers teach them at the rate of the class as a whole, not at the rate of the average student in the class, then the students that are struggling with math will come along quicker. They will learn it together as a group and succeed as a group. There will be no pressure on or from any one individual. There is much power in the success of the group and it can be a great inspiration for the individual. Let the students that want to, and are capable of excelling be allowed to do so, and then perhaps have them spend
some time tutoring, but not by mixing them into the same class, but bringing them in from another class. Yes it sounds like segregation BUT Math does not see color or social-economic status. If the students were able to place themselves and forget about the computer lottery system, small learning community, zip code and every other factor that goes into the math assignment, we might see some healthy competition among students and give the teacher a chance to actually teach the concepts and forget about teaching to the test. If kids learn the concepts then they will be able to succeed at the tests. Teaching math to the middle and constantly taking an average only waters down the actual knowledge and success of the individual students. But by actually having each and every student excel in math then we might also see more success in other areas too, thus having a real and lasting effect upon the "achievement gap".
[signature removed, not sure why]

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

10/19/ #2
Mr. Slemp:

Please forward my public comment appropriately.

I understand that a trimester schedule is being recommended. I am concerned about college credit being afforded to classes that go 2 vs. 3 trimesters, and would like written confirmation from the UC Office of the President, at a minimum, that 2 trimester courses will be considered year-long courses for UC admissions purposes, prior to the plan movingforward to the BUSD board of directors.

Thank you.
[signature removed, not sure why]

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

10/19/ #3
Dear Mr. Slemp-

as a parent of a current 10th grader at Berkeley High, I would like my opinion about the Redesign Plan to be forwarded to the Scheduling Committee. I am very much opposed to a trimester plan as I believe it will be a disservice to the students. Two-trimester courses do not
fulfill the UC requirements.
[signature removed, not sure why]

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

Hello Principal Slemp--
 
It seems that since a new schedule is under discussion there is a firestorm brewing almost by unconscious reflexive action. I am glad that the process was slowed to investigate the schedule options that other schools and districts had undertaken and I, for one, see some real possibilities in the plan currently referred to as the Red Bell Schedule. But, with a daughter in BIHS and with lots of friends' kids in both BIHS and AC, I have questions about the matter of in-class instructional time comparisons because both of these programs require that the kids master specific, demanding curricula and then perform on standardized tests.
 
1)     How can we say that the Red schedule provides an additional 91 minutes of instructional time per week if the only real gain is the elimination of 5 passing periods per week? Does this 91 minutes include the Freshman/Sophomore adivisory periods? If so, the description of those minutes as 'instructional' will not fly. People who are concerned about this issue are concerned about in-class subject instruction. The committee may feel that it is justified in calling this time instructional time but it will not be accepted as such by the public. My calculation shows the current week at 1675 minutes per week [{(5x43)+48}+ {(5x58)+63}]and the Red schedule at 1705 minutes per week [{5x53}+{5x72}], for a difference of 30 minutes. 
 
2)     In any case where a class is subject to reduction from year-long to two-trimester status it seems to me that those classes will experience about a 20% loss of in-class instructional time (341 minutes x 12 weeks = 4092 minutes; 275 minutes x  18 weeks = 4950 minutes; 4092/4950 = .82) assuming that the current semesters are 18 weeks and that two of them include the same number of days as the proposed three trimesters. A question may arise about the accuracy of that figure as well, since the current schedule seems to cover 38 weeks, after subtracting christmas vacation and spring break.
        There may well be classes where this reduction is not an issue, since students can improve their reading, writing, art, music, and other similar skills just as well in one class as another and so can benefit equally in those areas by taking a similar or related class for a single trimester. But one can only learn chemistry in chemistry class and geometry in geometry class. And one cannot necessarily cover the AP or IB curricula in 20% less class time than is currently allotted. Students already find that the math and science teachers are too pressed for time in class to provide much in the way of explanation or discussion or to answer their questions. I am certain that parents will be looking for assurance that virtually all college prep, IB, and AP math and science classes will be three-trimester classes. And if so, these classes will suddenly have considerably more time allotted to them than they have had so far.
 
3) Under the Red schedule, if most math and science classes are full-year classes, how will a kid who is pursuing a rigorous academic schedule take any art or music electives at all? Since a math class would now occupy 1/5 of the student's schedule, rather than 1/6, it seems that elective options could actually be reduced for such a student.
 
4) What are the classes that will now be taught in the 'extra' trimester that will be created in many cases? Or do you anticipate that some classes would now bridge across school years? This seems like it could well require development of a lot of new classes that would have to be targeted at specific grade and achievement levels in order to be effective.
 
5) How would language classes be reconfigured? Learning a language occurs by repetition. And--especially at the higher levels where the class is conducted in the language--time in class is extremely valuable. Do the language teachers imagine that a full current year of instruction can take place in 2/3 of a year? And if not, then full-year language classes will further detract from the elective options (as mentioned above) for kids that are studying languages for 3 or 4 years at BHS.
 
Please understand, I do not intend to be overly critical of these proposals. I like the idea of longer class periods and fewer passing periods per day. I think that there would be a modest but real benefit in reducing somewhat the number of students that each teacher sees in a year.  But for each of the anticipated benefits there seems to be a corresponding cost or a different way to interpret the results. So what I am trying to say is that, in order to argue successfully for these proposals, you will have make sure that the relative amounts of in-class instructional time are compared fairly. And then you will have to demonstrate that most of the material that is now taught in about 5000 minutes of class time will be covered at least equally well in about 4000 minutes of class time. You will also need to assure people about which classes will remain 'full year' courses. And you will have to convince them that the 'extra' trimesters will not result in a lot of oddly configured and unproductive classes. In order to do this it might be worthwhile to develop, consider, and then present, several 'model' 4-year academic careers that might be fashioned by hypothetical students of the future under this schedule proposal.
 
As I said, I favor several features of the proposed Red schedule. And my preference would be that the administration could successfully answer all of the challenges that it will face in convincing the parent body to embrace it. But if it seems impractical to fully argue the case in the above terms at this point it might be worth stepping back and considering whether the modest schedule change now contemplated warrants the upheaval that will be generated by implementing it without being able to fully explain it in advance. Assuming you feel absolutely confident that educational standards and accomplishment at BHS will be improved across the board by this innovation, wouldn't it be better have the parent body fully on board and fully informed prior to its adoption and implementation? Since the teachers already have their PD time allotted, it does not seem so urgent to proceed impulsively to the next step. The Frosh/Soph advisory period clearly does not require the Red Bell Schedule because the draft schedule does not include any allowance for it.
 
So, if the Red schedule will require the complete course survey and catalog retooling that I imagine, and if convincing the parents of the schedule's value will be facilitated by presenting them in advance a fully considered catalog (that they have perhaps helped to develop . . .) based on the new school-year configuration, then I would argue for taking an additional year to develop those plans and ensure a smooth and fully-supported transition. The fact that the project has been underway for a long time does not eliminate the benefit of making sure that a new plan is implemented rationally and with sufficient preparation.
 
best wishes,
 
Steve Sullivan
BIHS Sophomore Parent
President, The Acme Bread Company

--------------------------------------------
 
Written comments submitted to the Scheduling Committee

“God is in the details.” Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
People will want to know how this new schedule works. It may be tempting to give yourselves the easy out that you cannot possibly dot all the I’s and cross every T, but there is a vast area of bedrock detail you will need to provide to demonstrate that you can actually accomplish your goals with this new plan.

Please do not give us just bones. We cannot say yes to a skeleton. We need to see flesh & blood on the body of this plan – it needs to be alive. It doesn’t need to be dressed up and ready to go to the prom. But it needs to be alive and breathing, and be able to stand up on its own two feet.

The proposal must address each and every one of these basic points.

1.Advisory plan must be clearly described.
2.Advisory plan must have enough classrooms and enough teachers. Explain how this will work.
3.Not every teacher will be a good advisor; make a plan that only needs to use some teachers as advisors – the ones who will be good at it.
4.Calculations of instructional minutes need to add up, including Advisory, professional development, and passing period.
5.If advisory is one trimester long: Try to assure that all advisors also have that kid in one of their classes. This will ensure continuity between student and advisor all year (or at least 2/3 of the year.) Studies show that successful advisories include this correlation. See how many teachers of freshman classes would be good and willing advisors. I’m sorry I cannot quote chapter and verse of the study. An Albany High parent told it to me, I think (they have advisory at AHS.)
6.Please consider using the AC Social Living Curriculum as part of the advisory plan. It is terrific. Just a suggestion.
7.Please consider the SLO plan of AP classes having 2 trimesters of curriculum plus one trimester of seminar and review for the AP exam. This looks like a good way to ensure preparedness for AP exams. I’d like to see this plan include a goal of increased success in AP exams. What CPA does in this regard is positive and should be considered.
8.Please include a plan for which classes would be 2 trimesters long and which would be 3 trimesters long. I presume that AP classes and science classes would all be 3 trimesters long. If you do not agree, please show some very good documentation and supporting data as to how those classes could be taught in so much less time.
9.Line out your plan for an academic support plan for struggling students, (or maybe you want to do that for all students.) This is probably the most crucial detail in this plan as regards the 2020 vision. This must be well detailed. What are the main features that will directly affect the Achievement Gap? Indirect features like the Advisory period are fine but we need to see specific programs that will offer (perhaps mandatory) academic support and to see how they will fit into the schedule. No fudging.
10.SCIENCE:
a.Background: When science classes were double period, they met for 90 minutes, 5 times a week (450 minutes per week).   AP classes were able to successfully present the course material and this amount of class time could also support students who struggled a bit. Our current schedule is 55 minutes -5 times a week with an extra 55 minutes for regular classes (total 330 minutes per week) and an extra 137 minutes each week for AP (412 minutes per week).  This loss of minutes has increased the pace, and made it more difficult to support students.
b.A 70-minute class 5 times a week has a total of 350 minutes per week. This will be sufficient to include lab if all science classes are 3-trimester classes. AP science classes will need one extra lab per week to cover AP curriculum, so will need one extra lab during the 0 period or 7th period. We need to remember that many high schools only offer AP as a second year course (as with IB) so if Berkeley wants to be able to continue to offer a possible total of three AP science classes, this is the only way it would work.
c.Science is not more important or better than other classes; it is harder to learn and we do none of our students any favors by shrinking their exposure to the material. This is true for all students, strugglers and AP kids alike.
11.Give some examples of 1-trimester courses and the names of teachers who will teach them.
12.Show the plan for meeting IB requirements and don’t fudge on this. This one will be hard…how will you make it work?
13.Include (in supporting materials) data and studies that support this proposal in concert with your goals. This is exactly what the School Board will demand so please include that now.

Many of us have had this experience:
My daughter wants to watch TV. I say yes, when your homework is done. Later, she flips on the TV. I ask to see her homework. The (fill in the blank: English/Math/Spanish is half-baked, incomplete, whatever.) I say, “This isn’t finished.” She says,”But Gossip Girl is on.” I say, “We had a deal. You can watch when your homework is done.” We record the show, she completes her task freed up from the constraint of time deadlines; she gets her reward.

You know your deadlines. Please don’t hand us a half-baked proposal just because it is due. If you are not quite ready, take another 1-2 weeks and make it great. Many of us want to endorse a good, well-supported proposal that will serve all BHS students well, and will help our struggling students achieve the success they so richly deserve. I understand that with BHS’s current inflexible schedule, you are having trouble finding ways to do that.
All students at BHS need enough time to complete the curriculum for each course. Don’t skimp on the basics.
Help the strugglers. Lay out your plan with details.
Finish your homework. No term papers without a bibliography and good footnotes; no proposals without supporting materials and a good persuasive argument. All you history and English teachers know that the hardest part of writing a big paper is finishing it well, so please don’t give us 80% and figure you will finish it later. Go for 100% the first time and know you will be asked to make improvements from there.
You are all to be commended for the extraordinary amount of good work you have poured into this process. Thank you for all your hard work.
Peggy Scott 10/14/09

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

October 20, 2009

To: Berkeley High Scheduling Committee

Dear Committee Members:

We are parents of 9th and 12th graders in Berkeley International High School, and we would like to thank you for your work on the BHS scheduling issues. We would like to see the BHS experience be a more personal one for students and teachers alike, and the whole community would love to see all students succeed. We are writing to share some thoughts we have about the proposals:

Advisories:
Based on information provided at a Community Forum we attended this month, we are in favor of advisories like those proposed in the Red Schedule – those that support Transition in the Freshman year, and College Culture/Prep in Sophomore year. These advisories would contain the essentials for success described at the forum: teachers who want to teach advisory, and structured curriculum with specific goals.

We do not support advisories for every student each year as this takes too much time away from academics, and the 29-minute periods are too short for meaningful work.

Instructional Minutes:
While the Red and Gold schedules indicate that instructional minutes will be increased, it appears that both proposals will ultimately reduce instructional time for many classes. Reducing instructional time is likely to be bad for all students, but is hardest on struggling students. It is not clear what the mechanism will be for deciding which classes are three trimesters vs. two, but student achievement in AP and IB classes will suffer if these classes are taught in two trimesters. Even with three trimesters it will be difficult to teach all the information required from these courses.

Some downsides to a plan are acceptable if they are outweighed by benefits, but they must not be ignored or glossed over. We are grateful that BHS and the district working hard to address the achievement gap. We hope that comparable or greater efforts are being made to support students in lower grades so they arrive at BHS ready to succeed.

Thank you.
Betsy Bigelow-Teller and Chuck Teller

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

COMMENTS ON PROPOSED TRIMESTER SCHEDULE FOR BERKELEY HIGH SCHOOL

As a community member, taxpayer and parent of two BUSD students (BHS ’08 and BHS ’12), I wish to comment on the BHS Redesign proposal that has been distributed for community input. 
Please forward these comments to appropriate decision-makers:

ANY BHS SCHEDULE SHOULD GUARANTEE ALL STUDENTS VIABLE ACCESS TO PERFORMING ARTS INSTRUCTION

I am very concerned about diminution of performing arts instruction at Berkeley High.

On the importance of performing arts instruction:
I believe, as many others do, that instruction in performing arts disciplines helps the versatility of student learning overall.  That is important for all students.  While I’m aware of some research which supports the premise that performing arts instruction promotes overall achievement (see, e.g., www.danafoundation.org ), I primarily rely on lay observation and some anecdotal evidence.  For example, the BUSD school with the most comprehensive arts curriculum ensuring all students instruction in each of the four major arts disciplines [dance, drama, visual art, music], Malcolm X Elementary, has also been the highest performing school in the district as measured by API. 

In addition to teaching artistic perception, creative expression, and so forth, performing arts classes which include work with performance ensembles teach students to work with others and to connect with their community (as well as helping the community to connect with students).  Certainly there are other ways to serve those goals, but my lay observation as a student, as a parent of students, and as an active volunteer for 14 years at each level of the BUSD, is that performing arts instruction is a less costly, more effective, more sophisticated, less likely to be dismissed as “gimmicky” by students, and most enduring mechanism for achieving those collaborative goals. 

On more limited access to performing arts classes:
Sadly, far fewer students are able to take BHS performing arts classes now than when my first child (BHS ’08) attended Berkeley High with a 6-period day. Today, nearly two-thirds of BHS students are required to be enrolled in small learning programs which impose course requirements in 9th or 10th grade or both years (in AHA, BIHS, CAS, CPA & SSJE), that effectively prevent students in those programs from enrolling in performing arts class those years. There are exceptions, but the generality holds. The economies of scale needed to run performing arts classes at Berkeley High is undermined, so this also has an impact on Academic Choice students who wish to take performing arts classes.

On the achievement gap:
Many of our students are lucky that there are non-school performing arts programs available. This community is rich in non-school-based performing arts programs which provide youth and teen instruction. Many of our students have been able to build upon their experiences in non-school programs by leading student-run, student-directed performances at Berkeley High. However, as wonderful and important as student-directed performance are, they do not really serve to improve access to the disciplines. Simply put, our students, while often highly accomplished and talented, are not professionals paid to reach (or, at least, attempt to reach) all students. I have seen that if quality professional instruction is not in the schools in the first instance, there is an access problem, with only those students with families having the right combination of resources (money, time, logistical support) being able, realistically, to participate in the performing arts.

It is vital that our schools continue to provide classes in performance arts disciplines with well-qualified professional instructors. A failure to do only exacerbates the achievement gap. While the relationship between performance arts instruction and standardized test performance may or may not be well understood, I would hope that educators in our district recognize that the achievement gap should also be measured in terms of access to instruction in and engagement with important disciplines such as the performance arts.

Can the proposed trimester schedule improve access to performing arts classes??
If the newly proposed trimester schedule increases students’ viable access to performing arts classes, that’s good and important.  However, it is unclear how that can work, especially if the small learning communities retain the option of making some of their “year-long” classes 3 trimesters in length. Even if all “year-long” classes are held to be two trimesters in length, it is unclear how students would be able to take one or more “year-long,” i.e., two-trimester length courses in a performing arts discipline if they are seeking to fulfill recommended UC requirements (as well as BHS graduation requirements). How can a student take a year of math, a year of English, a year of social studies, a year of world language, a year of science AND a year of performance art under this system?

Details of schedule operation should be worked out in advance:
I am concerned that the proposed trimester schedule could prove to be too logistically challenging for BHS to manage. In my brief experience as a parent at Berkeley High (five+ years), scheduling logistics has not seemed to be a strength at the school. Therefore, a proposal for what seems to be complicated scheduling system gives me concern, and this should give all decision-makers some concern. I urge that, if SGC plans to go forward with this scheduling proposal, all the details should be spelled out for the Board of Education and the community, including details about which/how many classes (if any) would be three trimesters in length, how access to year-long performing arts classes and other electives can be improved by this system, etc. so that the proposal can be evaluated fairly.

Is the proposal consistent with the spirit of BSEP?
There are many people in this community who support the local parcel tax which supplies 20-25% of the BUSD budget (BSEP) with the expectation that the provision of performing arts instruction will be maintained as a high priority in Berkeley schools.

The largest portion of BSEP funds, about two-thirds, are to be spent to reduce class sizes and to expand course offerings at secondary schools. It is unclear to me whether the proposed trimester schedule can functionally and realistically expand elective course offerings. If the schedule would serve to limit elective class availability, then the proposal would seem to undermine one of the most important aspects of the local tax measure. In any event, I hope this proposal can be reviewed by the BSEP Planning & Oversight Committee before the proposal goes to the Board of Education for approval.

In 2004, a “bridge” measure was enacted requesting additional funds from local taxpayers, including increased monies to run a more effective grades 4-8 music program with the stated purpose of preparing those students for the high school music program. The student-beneficiaries of those increased revenues are now in middle school and younger; it would be more than a shame if those students were effectively prevented from taking music classes upon their arrival to BHS. Limiting access to performance arts instruction at the high school level significantly undermines that community investment.

It is my sincere hope that the details of the scheduling proposal can be worked out so that access to performance arts instruction will continue to be maintained and well-supported at Berkeley High.

I thank all BHS decision-makers for reading and considering these comments.

Respectfully submitted,
Marjorie Alvord
Parent of BHS ’08 and BHS ‘12

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

October 19, 2009

To Principal Slemp, the Schedule Committee and the SGC:

Thank you for your thoughtful work on behalf of the students of Berkeley High School. You have clearly put in countless hours and a great deal of thought into this process. I have attended a community forum, an SGC meeting, and a schedule committee meeting in an effort to better understand the proposal. I've also done some reading online about other schools who have instituted a trimester system, , and read a few higher education articles which delved into the advantages and disadvantages of various schedules.

I can certainly see some potential benefits to a 5 x 3 schedule for students, who would have fewer courses in a day, but possibly more options across the year. With longer periods there would be the opportunity to incorporate science labs into the day, or have more time to work on an art or performance project. For teachers, the primary advantage seems to be more prep time and a reduced teaching load, at least in terms of number of classes and students taught each trimester. At the same time, teachers will need significant professional development time and support to reorient their teaching methods toward a longer session with students, many of whom may struggle as it is with attention and focus.

Today I sat down and tried to create trimester schedules (in Academic Choice) for both of my
daughters, one who is now a Junior, one coming in next year as a freshman, to see how this schedule could play out for two students with different abilities and interests. Even within the greater flexibility of an AC schedule, I found a number of sticking points in a real live schedule. Given the complexity of the programs in place at Berkeley High, and the range of strengths, interests and struggles of our students, I think it’s important to figure out how a trimester schedule would play out for a range of students in a variety of programs. I believe that team leaders are working in groups on this type of exercise, and I hope their work will inform the SGC's decision about the trimester proposal, so there is a shared understanding of how a schedule change would actually play out, and what resources would be necessary to implement the change so that the teachers and administration are prepared to offer the best program options possible.

PLEASE CONSIDER THESE ISSUES

1. Which classes would require three trimesters? Science? Some math? APs?

A two trimester class would represent a reduction in instructional time of about 17% for most classes. I could imagine that in theory, for many classes the loss in time could be made up for by improved instruction and greater focus in the longer blocks. However a science course would have a reduction of 32% (one lab) to 42% (two labs)! So it seems as though lab classes must be taught over 3 trimesters, and having the lab incorporated in the class will be more efficient than doing it separately, so that's great! But the more trimester courses you have (science, maybe math, AP classes), the fewer options. Again, it’s important to build some model schedules.

2. How can the trimester schedule address the “gap”?

I attended an SGC meeting at which there were two superb professional development presentations looking at equity issues in math and in AP humanitiess. The SGC can look at how and whether the schedule permits the implementation of support and acceleration options that would address these types of issues. For instance, a student who was failing Geometry A in the fall could either restart in the winter, or have a remedial class in the winter before attempting Geometry B. And a kid who did well in sophomore English or History A/B would be encouraged to join a “kick it up” class in the spring as a “pre-AP” English class. But in both cases, the kids need to start their sequence in the fall in order to have time for
support or acceleration by spring. (Kids might also “kick it up” to honors math with help in the spring…)

3. Can discontinuities, teacher changes, and schedule conflicts be minimized?

Currently a student can usually expect to have the same teacher for a given subject for the whole year. With a trimester system, might they have a different teacher every trimester? And could a student have gaps of one, two, or even three trimesters in a sequenee? English A in the fall with one teacher, and English B in the spring with another, so that both the subject and the teacher were discontinuous? And what about those 1 trimester electives? Are they necessarily all stand-alone, or might photography A be offered in spring and resumed as photography B in the fall of the following year? We also need to be certain that 1 and 2 trimester classes are structured such that they can be guaranteed UC (a-g) credit.

4. How will language sequences be affected?

In theory, being able to complete 3 years of language in 2 years is a great option. However, given the five period day, there’s still the problem of squeezing in P.E. for kids who don’t have after-school sports. So a student might take Mandarin 1 and 2 in the fall/winter, then have P.E. elective in the spring, and then resume with Mandarin 3 in the fall of the following year, but would need a great deal of review. And perhaps there wouldn’t be a Mandarin 3 in the fall, as with only 5 periods per day and one teacher there may not be enough sections. So that kid might have to wait until the spring of the following year. For kids wanting to take AP exams, they have to get the sequence to work so that they are at the right level by spring when the exams are given.

4. How likely is it that a student will have an advisory or other form of personalization?

We know that students can move through the day and the year without a sense of community or connection to other students, or an adult who knows and cares about them. While the reduced teaching load each trimester means that teachers have fewer students to keep track of, they may only have 12 weeks to get to know a student rather than 18 to 36. I understand that the gold bell schedule attempts to rectify that with the advisory, but the 29 minutes
twice a week seems unlikely to become more than a study hall run by unwilling teachers, and seems not worth the transition time. Under the red bell schedule, with advisory just for 9/10 grades, a smaller number of teachers would be available to provide some real content and support. Another option, and one that might be necessary with this more complex schedule, is to hire more counselors who will meet with each student every trimester.

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

I have only looked at this schedule through the lens I know best, that of the Academic Choice curriculum, but I assume there are other questions to be posed due to the specific requirements of BIHS or the small schools. Many of these questions might best be answered by the creation of several sample four-year schedules within each program. May I suggest you post those examples online for parents, teachers and students to review and discuss.

The proposed schedule change will require a great deal of work from the teachers as they retool their curriculum planning, and from the counselors as they juggle an even more complex system, but it will be worth it if it leads to an improved experience and better outcomes for our students.

Sincerely,
Natasha Beery
BSEP Committee Member
Parent of a junior in A.C. and another coming in next year to who knows what?

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

Dear Principal Slemp,

As a parent of two BHS students, I have important questions about the proposed new trimester system:

1. what will it cost?

Many at the University of California are talking about changing all 8 campuses from the quarter system (which is trimesters) to the semester system, like UC Berkeley, because it is less costly to have two rather than three terms in the school year. In light of the budget challenges we now face in California-- which are only likely to get worse-- how will a change at Berkeley High from semesters to trimesters be paid for?

2. how does it actually affect the achievement gap?

According to educators, how will a switch from semesters to trimesters create a process that closes the achievement gap? Specifically, what is the key mechanism inherent in the 12 week--5 subject trimester compared with the longer--6 subject semester that narrows the achievement divide? This is an important question and the answer is fundamental to the reasons for making the change. If more is demanded of students in less time (e.g., 2 semesters of material transposed into 2 trimesters), how will this benefit students whose achievement level needs to be brought up? If students take math or foreign language in the first two trimesters but then not for the third one, how will they retain this information for 6 months (including summer) so that they can move to the next level in Fall? It's difficult to see how with trimesters teachers will have the time to review topics after summer and a 6-month break. Won't that long of a break necessitate a long review? And if so, how does this impact the amount that can be covered in the trimester?

Thank you for your responses.

Kim Voss

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