Directed study: Quality learning or downtime in disguise?
The Boston Globe
Laura Pappano
January 11, 2004
The start of education reform more than a decade ago heralded the end of study hall, that free period students more often spent on card games than academics.
While
many educators were glad to see it go, state requirements demanding students
receive a certain amount of "structured learning time" has yielded
a new educational loophole: the directed study.
For those unfamiliar with the difference, a study hall does not count as structured
learning time, but directed study does.
-snip-
Overall, the state requires secondary students receive 990 hours of structured learning time and elementary students receive 900 such hours each year.
"The practice of calling something a directed study when it is actually an old-fashioned study hall is particularly widespread now," said Paul Reville, executive director of the Center for Education Research and Policy at Mass Inc., a bipartisan think tank.
Reville, former chairman of the now-defunct Massachusetts Commission on Time and Learning, said directed studies were a compromise to let schools count time for academic coaching. But in some schools, Reville said, directed studies are anything but.
"The interpretation as to what is directed study and what is not is subject
to
abuses," he said. "If we did a close examination, we would find this
particular provision has taken us off track."
While some schools use directed studies to get students help from teachers,
parents say others are toying with semantics.
-snip-
Paul Schlichtman, vice chairman of the Arlington School Committee and president of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, said directed studies cloud the real issue of equity: All students are entitled to at least 990 hours of instruction a year. Falling below that level, said Schlichtman, "shouldn't be an option."
