1.) Overall, what is your opinion of 20 Time based on YOUR experience in class?
Personally, I wasn't fond of 20 time. I felt that the time in class could have been better spent going over the course material that I expected when I was enrolled in Honors American Literature. The only part of the curriculum I really connected it to was the Transcendentalism unit, but before and after that I didn't quite see the point. During those Friday's all I was able to do in class was write blog posts, and read the blogs of others. Most everyone's said the same thing: "I didn't get much done this week." 20 Time wasn't the ideal usage of time.
2.) What are some aspects of 20 Time that you think should be adjusted for students next year?
Diversify it, make it a three week project during the transcendentalism unit, or make it a separate class with focus on art, literature, communication, speech performance, and speech writing.
3.) What are some aspects of 20 Time that should NOT be changed for students next year?
If it were me, I wouldn't be doing it at all, so I can't answer this question.
4.) Is 20 Time something that more students should do in school? Please explain why or why not.
I think not, while it's a huge project, students have all year to "do it" with 7 other classes, and if this project is only being offered to honors students, it makes it especially hard. On another note, 20 Time seemed more like it resulted in an investment in good publicity rather than academic betterment.
5.) What advice would you give to students who are doing 20 Time next year?
Make it doable, make it fun, keep your goals and don't you dare use the words passion(ate), awesome, happy, or failure more than once. Then you sound preachy. Don't forget to always be expansive in your project, there are always different ways to approach it to make it even more interesting and worthwhile.