Do the benefits of advisory after second period outway the inconvenience that the schedule change causes?

Supporters of the schedule change argue that the combined advisory and lunch presents a problem with stopping students from leaving school without permission. Whether or not students like it, the school has a closed lunch policy, meaning that students are not allowed to go off campus. This is not a county policy, as certain schools all throughout Montgomery County let students leave campus for lunch. Administrators claim that students leaving during lunch creates a safety issue, as they can not ensure people’s safety off campus. “It was a challenge to monitor the building,” Principal Douglas Nelson said in a summer community update.

This makes sense to some degree, as security personnel are constantly worried about students leaving school, and it distracts them and hinders their ability to ensure the safety of the school. Nelson went on to say that the schedule change is needed to keep the school “safe and operational.”

But let’s face it, students still sometimes leave during lunch regardless of the shortened time. Instead of getting back in time for school, students who leave are late to sixth period or opt to skip fourth period entirely. This loss of instructional time interrupts students’ learning and can cause them to fall behind in their classes.
Sure, students could just choose to stay, but the combination of mediocre cafeteria food and the desire for well-known name brands will encourage students to leave campus to eat lunch elsewhere, whether allowed or not.
Students who leave campus regardless of the shortened lunch block and do not want to miss class time often have to rush back to make it in time. This can cause them to make unsafe and rushed decisions, such as driving faster/recklessly, that would not be made if they had enough time.

This is not just a safety issue. The schedule change also presents inconveniences to both students and teachers. Last year the combined advisory/lunch period stretched from 10:48 to 12:09 and totaled to one hour, 20 minutes. This allowed ample time for people to eat lunch without having to stress, and enough time to do the work or meet with teachers as needed.

Now, if there are retakes, help from a teacher, homework, or anything that needs to happen even slightly over the 30 minutes allotted for advisory, students need to plan a separate time to finish. This often eats up time into lunch, causing students to stress and sometimes not have time to eat lunch. It is also more challenging for teachers to plan for retakes and extra help because they are often busy at lunch.

While it is the same timing on paper, it is not that simple. The combined period allowed students and teachers for a ‘one stop shop,’ enabling students to do all of the work and get the help needed without having to coordinate two separate times with the teachers. With endless tests, retakes, and homework assignments, it is already hard enough to navigate around a teacher’s busy advisory and lunch schedules, let alone two different times.

Planning teacher help aside, the separate advisory period is more frustrating for students to complete their homework. By the time they get to where they want, or need to go, take out their work, and start, it seems like advisory is already almost over.

This schedule change does not just impact student safety, it impacts our success in the classroom.