For last week, we read about block scheduling in Best Practices and the handout, and about what happens when states invest strategically (or don't) in The Flat World and Education. I was most fascinated by the idea of block scheduling. I came from a high school where we had seven periods a day, five days a week, and I thought it was the best possible system. But reading about block scheduling, it actually sounds much, much better to me.
What did anyone else think? Ultimately, is one better than another? When would it be better to have a traditional schedule, i.e. what demographics, and vice versa? That is to say, would a block schedule be better for students who are disadvantaged somehow? What do we value more, depth in a subject or breadth in a subject? Should we have to choose?
I feel like the comment of do we have to choose, was very interesting. In some schools there are a mix of block and traditional employed. This seems to be the best of both worlds.
ReplyDeleteI come from a high school with a traditional 7 period schedule as well. For a brief period of time when I was junior, my school decided to sample a block schedule. At the end of the trial period, I voted to change our traditional schedule to a block schedule because I enjoyed not feeling rushed in class and having time to really understand the concepts before moving on. I also remember feeling less stressed about homework because I had an extra day to complete my assignments. Even though I preferred the block schedule, the majority of teachers and students must have voted to keep the traditional schedule because we did not permanently make the switch. After reading this chapter, I imagine that teachers might have felt overwhelmed by having the same class for an extended period of time because they had grown accustomed to a 50 minute period and that students were more concerned with getting to have their elective classes daily.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I can see how a block schedule/a modified block schedule would benefit all high school students regardless of race, socio-economic status, and location. I think having extended class periods would foster better relationships with students and teachers and allow for content to be fully understood. However, I agree with Alex that the mix block and traditional is a good solution to the "having to choose" question posed.
Throughout my high school career, my school switched from a 4x4 schedule, to an A/B block schedule, to a 9-period schedule, and I have seen the pros and cons of each. One of the motivations behind the schedules that met daily (4x4 and 9-period) was that it would allow teachers to better keep up with student work. Students who excelled in school tended to like the A/B day schedule because it gave them more time to do homework. But many teachers felt that meeting with students daily worked better for the struggling students who needed that daily reminder to do their work.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, at my school, scheduling was a budget issue more than anything else. On the 4x4 and A/B schedules, teachers taught 6 classes a year (three classes each day, with one planning period). On the 9-period schedule, teachers had 2 periods off for lunch and planning, so they could teach 7 classes a year. THis way, the school didn't have to hire more teachers when the student population continued to grow.
The change from 4x4 to A/B was motivated by TAKS testing. The school believed that test scores were struggling because students finished some core classes in December, then had to take a test in April. With the A/B schedule, students would still be in the classes that the TAKS was testing. This makes sense to me, and not just for standardized testing purposes. I took Geometry in the fall of my freshman year, and didn't get to Algebra II until spring of my sophomore year; basically, there was a full school year between math classes. Yikes! The teacher had to spend the first 9-weeks getting us caught up on all the math stuff we had forgotten.
In the end, I think that scheduling needs to be motivated by what is best for the students of a particular school. There is no one answer that will fit all school situations. For a school with a weekly internship like Best Practice, the mixture of schedules makes sense. It fits the reality of their school, and the programs that they have put into place (like advisory).
My middle school had block scheduling for two years, then switched to traditional scheduling for the third.
ReplyDeleteI remember students that went to other school without block scheduling were jealous of my school because block scheduling seemed like such a fantastical idea. It felt less like a fordian assembly line with teachers dumping knowledge and assessments, then passing us on to the next worker in line. In fact, it seemed much more like the university system where professors have time to create interesting lesson plans and students have time to devote real attention to their homework--or in many cases have time to do their homework at all.
What did you think after you saw the German high school schedule for students? And it's good that you are picking up on questions and themes like: how does scheduling serve student learning? what happens when what is best for students costs more? what are the trade-offs? what should the priorities be? And what serves students both now and in the future? Academically and habits of mind/skills/dispositions?
ReplyDeleteMy high school had an A/B schedule and I think it improved my learning due to the fact that I had more time with my teacher on certain days and if I had a question on my homework I could go and meet with the teacher on the day we did not meet. The German high school schedule seemed as if some classes were considered more important than others and thus took up more time in the day. I don't understand how some subjects get more priority than others, but in my high school all the classes took up the same amount of time and I enjoyed the amount of time spent in each. I don't think I could choose which classes I would spend the most time in or which ones were more important.
ReplyDeleteMy high school tried out a different schedule every year that I was in high school (and finally settled on one after my senior year). The school switched from traditional scheduling to 6 classes a day (every class meeting four times a week) to block scheduling with alternating Fridays to block with all classes meeting Friday. It sounds like a lot of our schools were trying out different schedules so this must be a pretty common problem that schools are exploring.
ReplyDeleteI liked parts of both schedules. One thing that I like about meeting classes every day or almost every day was the daily repetition, which I think is especially important for language classes and music classes, where daily repetition really helps. For classes like labs I really liked having more time in a class period, so I thought the block schedule worked best for those.
I also think students are expected to keep track of so many things and so many classes. Having too many classes in one day can be overwhelming and can make it hard for kids to focus. For that reason, I really preferred the block schedule, and I was able to do a lot better work having fewer classes (4 to 5) in one day.
It's interesting how different schools function with completely different schedules, and I think that shows that different types of schedules work for different schools and that there is not one perfect schedule, just the best schedule for a certain school or situation.