The new intervention policy at Skyline has been in effect for over a semester now, but the question still remains of whether it has been beneficial for the school overall.
It is well known by teachers, staff, and students that most students use intervention as a long lunch period, and that is still true despite the new policy. Sophomore Sarthak Das said, “Most people just walk up to Macy’s or get in their friend’s car and drive to some restaurant.” He added, “I only use intervention for academics when I have things to turn in work, re-take a test, or if I really like the class.”
The truth is that most students are not called down by teachers for “mandatory” intervention, making the new policy feel like just an extended version of intervention. The school put the new policy in place to allow more time primarily for test retakes, as they can often take more than an hour. Many students and teachers believe this has helped improve the productivity of intervention. English teacher Lisa Brown said, “I have seen students raise their final grade significantly,” and, “Intervention has proven to be a valuable resource.” Brown is in support of intervention, as it allows students to avoid taking time out of class to ask questions or get help. In addition, the extended intervention time allows the teachers to reach students who may need help.
On the other hand, many students (and I) have noticed that students now have more time to walk, eat, and drive. Extending the intervention that was already used for long lunch may have only furthered the issue of students using it only as a long lunch period. If more students were called to intervention by teachers, perhaps it would be more useful to students.
Brown said, “Intervention does not have an effect on my workload. […] I keep intervention open to students.” The teachers, despite not requiring students to go to intervention, are ready to help and contribute their time for students’ benefit. Students are able to take initiative if they are experiencing difficulty in their classes and seek help, even if it is not asked of them. I believe it is to the school’s overall benefit to find ways to encourage students to use intervention for themselves rather than because a teacher made them.
Some students also argue that taking a long lunch period is beneficial for the student, as it may help relieve stress. Das said, “Intervention gives me something to look forward to, and it helps me relax and hang out with friends.” I have also found intervention to be an event I often look forward to and connect with peers during, taking a well needed relief from school work. This new extended intervention makes taking the long lunch easier and more fun.
Overall, the results of this new policy remain very mixed, especially when it comes to the very underused “mandatory intervention.” Some students continue to use intervention as a relief, long lunch, and time to have a break from school. Some other students now can take/retake full tests, get real help, and fix their grades. But both students and teachers believe intervention should not be removed, and it is important to our school. Brown said, “Students would lose opportunities.” Das added, “If intervention were removed, I would be upset with the school.”
