A successful Extended Day program strikes a careful balance between structure and fun. The time between 3pm and 6pm is unique; students’ emotions run high while energy runs low. This combination can create an unpredictable atmosphere if proper structure and support is not in place. Our Extended Day program has been intentionally built with a structure that resembles the school day in areas, and also offers the time and space for children to let loose and be free to make choices–whether that be joining a drop-in class, shooting hoops on the basketball court, or resting with a book in the library.

As an elementary teacher of seven years, my first priority in taking on the Extended Day Director role in 2012 was to set up systems that allow students to be successful in a less structured environment. We begin each year by discussing community agreements with the students. That gives us a common foundation from which to build, as well as a reference point to return to throughout the year.

With the introduction of faculty-wide Professional Learning Community (PLC) groups this year, Extended Day staff have had deep discussions about how to strengthen our program structurally using our agreements as a foundation. Our focus on classroom management has been enriched by the Responsive Classroom book Rules in School. Our monthly conversations have continuously returned to logical consequences, a concept that Responsive Classroom discusses at length–you can read more about it here.

For me, logical consequences have always been, well, logical; however, when it comes to determining a consequence that follows the three R’s of logical consequences (respectful, relevant, and realistic), it’s helpful to think about natural consequences as the frame. At the heart of it, logical consequences are meant to prevent natural consequences. Consider the following two scenarios:

A student arrives late to the bus stop, misses the bus and must find an alternative way to school.

A student arrives late to the bus stop. The bus driver waits and then punishes the student by shaming him/her.

In the first scenario, the natural consequence occurs and teaches the student the relevant lesson that will hopefully prevent the same result in the future. In the second scenario, the punishment causes discomfort and teaches the student to avoid the punisher, which might prevent the student from being late again, but won’t necessarily inspire a change in habit since it focuses on obedience rather than responsibility. Take away the bus driver’s shaming and the lesson is not learned.

In Extended Day, we consider this line of thought as we establish our agreements and determine logical consequences to reinforce them. For example, if a student runs down the hallway, the natural consequence could be the danger of slipping or colliding with others. In that case, we implement the logical consequence of asking students to go back and practice walking down the hallway in the hopes that it will become a habit. Our goal is to be transparent about the meaning behind the consequence, so that the understanding is connected to the agreements and the agreements have a meaningful origin.

Over the last few months, I have seen the result of our efforts in both structured and flexible components of our program. With the strength and consistency of our foundational agreements, we are able to provide a robust program that enables children to make choices, have positive interactions, and learn a thing or two all during, what is arguably, the most challenging part of the day.

If you haven’t given our roster of classes a gander, view our new winter selections here!

Kyla O’Neill
K-8 Extended Day Director