Features

As winter break drew near this year, students sighed with relief. Their time to relax was nearing, and, thanks to a new vacation homework policy, they thought their break workload would be low. However, some students were unpleasantly surprised when teachers began piling on homework. Math papers 12 pages long and 360-question chemistry handouts were just two of the many tedious break assignments.

“I put the policy into effect because a convincing argument was made that students need a little downtime,” Principal Stanley Teitel said. “The intent of the policy was to give students an opportunity to take it easy during their break. As much as anybody else needs it, I think students do need it as well.”

The policy, which is exclusively effective for the winter, mid-winter and spring recesses, was the brainchild of junior Sean Gordon-Loebl, Teitel, the School Leadership Team (SLT) and Assistant Principals of various departments. According to Teitel, the policy requires teachers to assign no more written homework than is necessary for the retention of prior learning, to provide ample time before and after vacation to complete projects, and to refrain from requiring that students visit a site in New York City during vacation. Additionally, teachers are not required to assign homework over break. Although the policy went into effect during the 2007 spring break, a lack of publicity left many unaware. In order to inform the Stuyvesant community for the 2007 winter recess, both the Stuyvesant and Parents’ Association’s (PA) Web sites heavily publicized the policy. According to Teitel, the policy will be printed in school planners next year “so everyone knows what the policy is.”

The policy’s efficacy was tested in a recent survey. The Spectator asked 100 students—25 from each grade—to share their opinions on how much the policy had affected their workload. On a scale of one to 10, 10 being the most, students on average said the policy’s effectiveness was a four—less than satisfactory.

Students also said many teachers either did not follow the policy, or found ways to skirt regulations. Only 18 percent of polled students said all their teachers followed the policy’s guidelines.

“Teachers usually assign work before breaks and make it due right after break. It follows the policy because they allow enough time, but obviously, everyone does the work over break,” senior Rachel Sullivan wrote in one survey.

Junior Xo Wang said that the policy “does not help much because teachers can assign projects to be due before vacation, which is a lot worse.”

However, there were also teachers who assigned their projects with the spirit of the policy in mind. Physics teacher Neil Wang said that he “did not give any specific homework over break,” but instead, a six-week long project. “I gave them quite a long time,” Wang said. “It was not like a one-week-long assigment.”

“I attended a meeting at the Parents’ Association [...] and certainly many parents stated that the application of the policy varied across the faculty,” Teitel said. “In some cases, it was applied as it should be. In other cases, the spirit of the policy was clearly not met.”

“In a staff of 150 people, you’re going to see varying degrees in the amount of homework assigned [...] and compliance with the spirit of the policy overall,” Assistant Principal English Eric Grossman said.

The most common loophole used was assigning homework before break began and making it due a few days after students returned to school. Though the practice did not break any regulations, students felt pressured into doing their work during the break.

“Teachers are still clearly not thinking in terms of the new policy,” sophomore Garreth O’Brien said. “The homework assigned […] necessitates a large chunk of our vacation to complete.”

But this did not apply to all teachers. Math teacher Richard Ku assigned a “regular amount of homework [over break],” he said. “They were review problems of what we did in class. [...] That way we didn’t lose any time doing review after break.”

Some teachers avoided the policy by giving a test the day students returned. These tests forced students to study most of their break. In many cases, the studying was just as time consuming as the homework assignments.

On the other hand, teachers such as Ku and history teacher Deborah White gave tests the Friday before. “And for break, I gave a regular homework assignment that I would’ve given over any regular school night,” White said.

Even though 82 percent of the polled students had one or more teachers who did not follow the policy, there have been no complaints from students or parents.

“I know that a lot of teachers will assign a chunk of reading over break, [...] but no one seems to have objected to the idea that students should read a chunk of “Anna Karenina” or something like that,” Grossman said. “That suggests to me that teachers are following the spirit of the [policy].”

Although 96 percent of the polled students think the policy is a good idea, there are still those who say otherwise. These few students believe that “vacation homework was never a big deal to begin with,” junior Erik Zyman Carrasco wrote. “Most teachers were kind enough to obey this policy [...] before it was made official, so it didn’t make much of a difference. [...] It’s not like we don’t have time to do the work and still relax.”

Senior Rachel Segal-Sklar wrote, “Teachers assign projects a month before it’s due and make it due right after break. Most people end up doing it during break anyways.”

In addition, 22 percent of the students polled had teachers who either assigned barely any or no homework at all over break. “A lot of my teachers don’t believe in vacation homework,” sophomore Vinay Chodha wrote.

“All the assignments were fair in the amount of work they delivered,” sophomore Charles Chan.

In the end, it’s a matter of opinion and teachers. Many feel that the policy needs to be revised so that loopholes can be prevented. Even so, Teitel will not create a new policy.

“We just have to try to adhere to this one. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the policy,” Teitel said. “I think what’s wrong is the way it’s being interpreted.”