Synchronous Learning Time Changes
BY AVA WONG '23
Just as school districts settled into new COVID-age schedules, the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education changed the rules. On December 15th, the Board declared an emergency amendment to the synchronous learning time requirements for students in grades 1-12. It stated that “districts and schools operating a hybrid learning model must provide students with access to at least 35 hours of live instruction” over a two week period. Further, the amendment mandated that synchronous time must occur daily and cannot consist of office hours or recorded videos. Through the school year, AB continues to grapple with abrupt state demands and the possible ripple effects of an unwanted schedule change.
This amendment had far more consequences for AB than for other school districts. According to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 70 percent of hybrid learning schools already met the required hours. In comparison, the ABRHS Hybrid program completed 29 hours of synchronous instruction every ten days, 6 hours short of the new regulation.
The Board of Education deemed these changes “emergent” and mandated the requirements to be in effect by January 19th. If they were not met, the school would have to make up live learning at the end of the school year. The Board offered a limited number of schools a waiver to opt out of the mandate, which AB applied for, but the Board denied AB’s request. And though many dreaded the idea of more Zoom time, AB adapted to the extended schedule by lengthening both advisory and Wednesday Zooms.
However, why now? What suddenly made more Zoom time essential to the students of Massachusetts? The answer lies in an issue our school is well acquainted with: mental health. In an interview with NBC Boston, Jeffrey Riley, the Commissioner of the Department of Education, stated that the new time regulations are “addressing the isolation and disconnection caused by the COVID-19 pandemic that is driving a youth mental health crisis.” Riley and the Department drafted the proposed amendments, which the Board approved by majority vote on December 15th. In the actual proposal, the department cites two studies on children’s mental health, but neither of the studies detail the benefits of increased synchronous learning time, leaving a disconnect between the purpose of the amendment and the proposed solution.
The new requirement received a lot of pushback, especially from teachers and students whom they largely failed to consult. The day after the Board announced the amendments, the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) released a statement criticizing the new amendment. The headline read, “[The new regulations] are... not a coherent strategy for ensuring equity and improving students’ mental health.” The MTA argued that more Zoom-based instruction does not result in less isolation. Instead, it worsened student mental health by replacing free time with screen time. Moreover, the association stated that the public education system is attempting to use these amendments to provide analytical solutions to emotional problems.
Similarly, in a poll on the new synchronous learning changes, most AB students responded that more Zoom time caused moderate disruption to asynchronous days, rather than boost their productivity. Although students agree that the isolation of remote learning is detrimental to mental health, many have spent their asynchronous time on passion projects, extracurriculars, and sleep, all factors that contribute to a happier state of mind.
In preparation for a year of increased mental health challenges, the ABRHS Counseling Center has also adapted to serve its students. As Todd Chicko, the Counseling Chairperson explained, a major concern shared by teachers, counselors, and parents is students’ “increased isolation, lack of social connections, and exposure to experiences that make coming to school fun.” To combat this, the counselors continue to hold one-on-one and group meetings with students, and they also use presentations to reach students in this time of isolation.
In classes, teachers have asked for student feedback on making Zoom meetings more engaging. By listening to student input, they have introduced technology tools like Kahoot, Gizmos, and PearDeck to foster a more interactive synchronous learning environment. This effort went a long way to help ground students in a time of uncertainty and alleviate some Zoom fatigue.
In the end, while the dust from a series of schedule changes has settled, it has become clear that balancing relevant data as well as community input is imperative in this challenging educational age. The state pushed for more synchronous time as a solution to mental health issues without consulting the actual hearts and minds involved, which caused yet another learning curve for students. However, the pandemic has also pushed the education system toward prioritizing student wellbeing. These series of new regulations ultimately lead us to think more critically about the role of teaching and how to improve student lives, especially during such tumultuous times.
This amendment had far more consequences for AB than for other school districts. According to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 70 percent of hybrid learning schools already met the required hours. In comparison, the ABRHS Hybrid program completed 29 hours of synchronous instruction every ten days, 6 hours short of the new regulation.
The Board of Education deemed these changes “emergent” and mandated the requirements to be in effect by January 19th. If they were not met, the school would have to make up live learning at the end of the school year. The Board offered a limited number of schools a waiver to opt out of the mandate, which AB applied for, but the Board denied AB’s request. And though many dreaded the idea of more Zoom time, AB adapted to the extended schedule by lengthening both advisory and Wednesday Zooms.
However, why now? What suddenly made more Zoom time essential to the students of Massachusetts? The answer lies in an issue our school is well acquainted with: mental health. In an interview with NBC Boston, Jeffrey Riley, the Commissioner of the Department of Education, stated that the new time regulations are “addressing the isolation and disconnection caused by the COVID-19 pandemic that is driving a youth mental health crisis.” Riley and the Department drafted the proposed amendments, which the Board approved by majority vote on December 15th. In the actual proposal, the department cites two studies on children’s mental health, but neither of the studies detail the benefits of increased synchronous learning time, leaving a disconnect between the purpose of the amendment and the proposed solution.
The new requirement received a lot of pushback, especially from teachers and students whom they largely failed to consult. The day after the Board announced the amendments, the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) released a statement criticizing the new amendment. The headline read, “[The new regulations] are... not a coherent strategy for ensuring equity and improving students’ mental health.” The MTA argued that more Zoom-based instruction does not result in less isolation. Instead, it worsened student mental health by replacing free time with screen time. Moreover, the association stated that the public education system is attempting to use these amendments to provide analytical solutions to emotional problems.
Similarly, in a poll on the new synchronous learning changes, most AB students responded that more Zoom time caused moderate disruption to asynchronous days, rather than boost their productivity. Although students agree that the isolation of remote learning is detrimental to mental health, many have spent their asynchronous time on passion projects, extracurriculars, and sleep, all factors that contribute to a happier state of mind.
In preparation for a year of increased mental health challenges, the ABRHS Counseling Center has also adapted to serve its students. As Todd Chicko, the Counseling Chairperson explained, a major concern shared by teachers, counselors, and parents is students’ “increased isolation, lack of social connections, and exposure to experiences that make coming to school fun.” To combat this, the counselors continue to hold one-on-one and group meetings with students, and they also use presentations to reach students in this time of isolation.
In classes, teachers have asked for student feedback on making Zoom meetings more engaging. By listening to student input, they have introduced technology tools like Kahoot, Gizmos, and PearDeck to foster a more interactive synchronous learning environment. This effort went a long way to help ground students in a time of uncertainty and alleviate some Zoom fatigue.
In the end, while the dust from a series of schedule changes has settled, it has become clear that balancing relevant data as well as community input is imperative in this challenging educational age. The state pushed for more synchronous time as a solution to mental health issues without consulting the actual hearts and minds involved, which caused yet another learning curve for students. However, the pandemic has also pushed the education system toward prioritizing student wellbeing. These series of new regulations ultimately lead us to think more critically about the role of teaching and how to improve student lives, especially during such tumultuous times.
