Our educational system has been adapting to an unprecedented situation at record speed. Though this last year has been anything but easy, one silver lining of virtual learning is that it forced educators to break out of the box that U.S. public education has been stuck in for over 100 years. As our school systems move toward fully reopening, some successful aspects of virtual learning should continue. We must examine what new precedents have been set that might prove more beneficial than practices employed before the pandemic struck. We should be using this time of change and experimentation to plan for a new educational system that is more efficient and relevant to all student populations.
My school system began last fall like many others—completely virtual. As the coordinator for a career pathway program that serves roughly 80 students who come from 10 different high schools in Maryland, I was curious how students were perceiving and adjusting to the changes. I administered a survey to all students halfway through the first term. Analysis of the results revealed that although students prefer learning in person, they highly valued many of the new components of virtual learning: later start times, the freedom to tackle coursework on their own terms, more efficient use of class time, and flexible scheduling options. Their feedback provides some ideas for schools that do not wish to return to the way things were, but instead advance toward a new and improved normal.
Change One: Later Start Times for High School
Without bus routes, commutes, and after-school activities to consider, one change my school system implemented during virtual learning was a later start to the school day. Research indicates that adolescents benefit from a later start time and younger students perform just as well (Bartel, 2014 & Knutson, 2009). I noticed that starting just one hour later (at 8:30 a.m.) made students more alert, engaged, and productive. In fact, 87 percent of students surveyed indicated that the later start time was a positive change. "For the first time in my school career, I actually feel like I'm getting enough sleep, which has had a significant positive impact on me," one student told me.
We should do everything we can to preserve these later start times for adolescents. At present, my school system plans to return to regular school start times next fall, partly because of school buses' and drivers' availability and daylight times. Do we want elementary students waiting in the dark for the bus? Do we want high school students going to school until 4:00 and missing out on outdoor time for sports practice, marching band, or the ability to work? Schools will have to make decisions about the primary purpose of education. If we can reach more students and help them learn better with more flexibility, then we should consider different investments in transportation and prioritize the educational schedule over extracurriculars. It will take creative thinking to reorganize the school day in this way, but the benefits could be worth the effort.
Change Two: More Student Agency
Another positive effect of virtual learning is that students have taken more ownership of their education. A "sit and get" style of teaching information was simply not possible. In virtual settings, many students regulated their learning habits and engaged with material on their own. To be fair, not having any access to a teacher face to face is not ideal, and not all subject areas or students are adaptable to a freer learning style. But, generally speaking, putting students in the driver's seat and allowing them to determine when they want to solicit help from their instructor is beneficial.
According to Daniel Pink's Drive, one of the most effective forms of motivation is empowerment (Pink, 2009). We should continue to let students lead the way with their instruction when learning resumes in person. About 13 percent of my students reported a decrease in anxiety levels and say they are thriving on the independence virtual learning afforded. One student said, "I feel like I can complete my work way more efficiently due to the fact I don't have to spend hours on end listening to lectures … or just sitting in class unable to be productive. Also, my test anxiety has gotten much better … I feel like I'm actually learning as opposed to drilling terms into my head out of stress that I will forget in a month."
In our district's distance learning formula, students engage in video conferences for the first half of the day and have "student support" time during the second half of the day. Teachers are available for video conferences individually or in small groups, and students take the initiative to seek out help while working on assignments. In my academy, 67 percent of students reported that they voluntarily meet with their teachers at least twice a week and that the support time has been a positive change. Others reported that they are more comfortable soliciting help from teachers when distractions like lunch, friends, and clubs are not present.
School should consider offering some form of student support time (perhaps even virtual) going forward. When students can choose when to engage their course material and when to interact with staff, many feel more invested in the outcome. At the beginning of our second semester, my school implemented the hybrid schedule and brought students in face-to-face two days a week. We kept the shortened school day as well as student support time in the afternoon. Students still take advantage of the time to talk to their teachers during the afternoon hours, and some even choose to come in person for the extra help. Unstructured time for teachers to work with students outside of full class instructional time has the potential to reach those who might otherwise fall behind.
Change Three: Increased Efficiency of Class Time
Since our virtual schedule only has classes during the first half of the day, teachers have been forced to use their instructional time more efficiently. For some, this was a struggle. For others, it was a motivating challenge. I examined how I had used classroom time in the past and the value of every assignment I gave. I had to admit that not all the activities and lessons I provided were essential.
If we really look at how time is spent in every classroom in a traditional schedule, we will likely find that a significant portion of each day is wasted. When comparing traditional school schedules with block schedules, research implies that no single schedule can be associated with student achievement. Seeing kids every other day has no more of an effect on test scores than seeing kids every day (Zepeda, 2006). What does alter achievement is efficiency with classroom time and consistent use of effective teaching strategies (Zepeda, 2006; Evans, 2002).
Most of my students seem to appreciate not having classes meet every day. Only 24 percent of students surveyed indicated that they feel their classes need to meet daily, and many of those who did prefer that option were referring to the arts courses in their career pathway program. Limiting instructional time to two or three face-to-face meetings per week for some classes can benefit students by allowing them a day to process the material.
Even with the lost instructional time, I was able to get further with one of my classes than I have in the past. I did this through maximizing formative assessment. I collected more data from each student, and if students were ready to move on, I did. If they struggled, I worked with them during student support time to fill in the gaps. If the whole class struggled, I focused on reteaching using a different format. The mix of group time two to three days a week coupled with unstructured time for student support has provided a pathway for all of us to be more intentional about how we use our time.
It's time to continue asking difficult questions about seat time and graduation requirements. Is it absolutely essential that students be inside a four-walled classroom every day for learning to take place? Why is seat time important? Why is the idea of the Carnegie Unit (120 hours of class time with an instructor over the course of a year) still driving educational policy? Do we care more about learning, or the appearance of learning?
Change Four: Virtual Learning Options for Students
If we take away anything from virtual learning, it should be that students need more learning formats when it comes to public education. As frustrating as virtual learning has been, there is a population of students who are thriving right now who struggled pre-COVID-19, such as students who are prone to social anxiety or experience bullying and students who learn best through self-directed work or in a quiet environment. One of my students shared that her grades are better, she is more confident, and she is happier this year than she ever has been in the past. She suffers from a social anxiety disorder and was never able to fully concentrate on studies because of the anxiety sparked by a crowded, noisy building. We need to acknowledge that traditional public education models simply don't work for everyone.
One example of a successful virtual program is the Palisades Cyber Academy in Pennsylvania, which has found success offering scheduling options for students based on their lifestyle situations—those who need to be home to assist younger siblings, those who work, those who need to make up graduation requirements. Hybrid and in-person options are available in a variety of formats (Marcinek, 2011). Similarly, the Alt School brings a small number of students into a building set up much like the workplace (Bellafante, 2015). Students regulate their own learning based on playlists from a blended learning model and decide when they want to accomplish specific tasks during the week. Staff are there to facilitate and assist with the learning process, but student agency is central.
If we retain fully virtual education for those who want it, in-person class sizes would shrink, which creates a more efficient use of space and allows for teachers to get to know their students better. Adjusting in this way would necessitate thinking through operating procedures like master schedules and how to provide enriching options like visual and performing arts classes virtually. However, being willing to think outside the box about time will allow us to better serve students in the long run.
One possibility to carry schedule changes into the future is the blended learning model, which allows for in-person classes to take place on a rotation. Blended learning can serve as a resource for teachers with limited classroom time because it offers multiple models for instruction (Horn, 2015). Even on the off days, students are still responsible for learning. In my program, 63 percent of students said they were interested in more asynchronous virtual courses, which would free up room for them to pursue the courses they are most interested in face to face. In this model, one teacher can run an online course and reach students from multiple buildings, translating to greater opportunity for students regardless of zip codes and addresses.
Flexible Thinking
Virtual learning has forced us to abandon long-held educational constraints. As we examine what we can learn from the last year, it is important for us to remember why public education exists: to prepare students to be successful, contributing members of society. When children are under our care, we are tasked with making the most of every minute. Why not seek to create learning that meets students' physical and emotional needs and varying learning styles and life situations? We must leave behind the industrial complex model of U.S. education in favor of a more personalized model that addresses the unique needs and gifts of each student.
