By Birk Buchen
Last week — after a long, often contentious period of decision making, scheduling meetings, and parent/faculty dialogue — Principal Cohen announced that the new Master Schedule implementation will be postponed to the 2020-21 school year.
But are we really surprised by this sudden turn of events?
The postponement is not as unexpected as one might think. There are an a litany of reasons why the administration would find it implausible to introduce the hybrid period-block schedule as soon as next year. Although the new schedule is promising, its effectiveness was deterred by the process by which it was introduced.
I began to have serious doubts after attending the sluggish parent information meeting that was held on December 11th, 2018. The atmosphere in the theater that night initially supported an optimistic outcome: that it would allow for better communication and involved decision making. After speaking a few words, Mr. Cohen opened by officially introducing Michael Rettig, the hired consultant, who would comment on the new schedule and provide a brief history of work that has been done.
Rettig’s portion of the night took over an hour long, making the meeting nearly 2 ½ hours in length. Mr. Rettig gave a presentation on the history of American school system schedules and then, at the end, tied it back into explaining what our new schedule would look like. Many parents, who were taking their own time to come discuss real solutions and strategies, seemed frustrated by this format. Both the parents and the administration came into the night expecting different things, quite symbolic for the entire Master Schedule process thus far.
The evening concluded with a brief Q&A that would frustrate any reporter. Members of the scheduling committee, as well as higher ranking administrators, collected question cards and categorized them before Mr. Cohen began addressing them to the audience.
Although this was done with good founded intentions, the format appeared to annoy some parents in attendance. Many parents already felt cut out of the process since the last time such a meeting took place was more than a year earlier on September 11th, 2017.
After spending time interviewing committee members, administration, and opinionated students, hoping to find out the truth from the rumor, I believe the delay was a recognition of the lack of input by both parents and students and transparency by administration. The scheduling committee, a group of hardworking individuals that care for the students’ well being and education, did their best, but there needs to be more input from the community and more professional development for teachers before pushing ahead for next year.
Many students were relieved by the news that the new Master Schedule roll out would be postponed.
Nick Papapanou, sophomore, said, “I’m happy that [the schedule] is postponed until [my] senior year because junior year is a really stressful year and changing the schedule would make it an even harder adjustment.”
Sophomore Karina Ulrich was concerned that the school’s infrastructure and culture couldn’t support the change for next year. “During free periods a lot of people like to complete school work and how can they accommodate technology with so many people? And I think an extra year would help so that it would run more smoothly.”
Elliott Dwyer, junior, will graduate before implementation, but he thinks the delay is for the best as well, in order to establish, “better relations with community” and allow for “more time to work and improve flaws.”
At the end of the day, the postponing the implementation of a new Master Schedule was the right thing to do. If Irvington is to maintain our high level of academic excellence, more planning and community immersion in this process will be crucial.
