Submitted by D. King (not verified) on October 12, 2007 - 08:05.
(The author is currently teaching seventh and eighth grade social studies and is a member of his school's Corrective Action committee. He has also taught sixth grade, special education, tenth and twelfth grade social studies and seventh grade math in schools utilizing both traditional scheduling and block scheduling.)
Block scheduling is yet another well-intentioned but misguided attempt at overhauling our nation's troubled education system.
While block scheduling may have esoteric benefits such as more "imagination" time, the hard, scientific data shows students actually learn less, and retain less, in block scheduling than they do in traditional, teacher-centered education models utilizing 45-50 minute periods daily for the entire year.
Is this really surprising? Every major scientific study of this aspect of education concluded that "spaced practices" (shorter periods occuring daily) led to significantly higher rates of retention than "massed practices" (longer periods occuring less often). Just as an example, no language course on earth recommends an hour of study every other day. They recommend twenty to thirty minutes of study daily. This is because the mind picks up on repetition and is most prone to remember the first, and last things heard. All that space in the middle ... that 50+ minutes of "creative" time ... is time that is most often NOT retained. One major scientific study found that students in traditionally scheduled classrooms out-scored students in block scheduled classes on EVERY MEASURE regarding retention AND implementation of learned material.
Lastly, block scheduling forces teachers to abandon parts of the curriculum. The mantras "less is more" and "focus on the essentials" are pure nonsense. Less is more makes as much sense as Orwellian phrases like "war is peace" and "freedom is slavery." There is NO reliable data I've ever seen, other than sheer conjecture that leads me to think "less is more" is anything other than a simplistic slogan.
As for focusing on the essentials, that should be the focus of ANY class, whether traditionally scheduled, or block scheduled. In my opinion, most curriculums are bare-bones essentials as it is. What is there to be trimmed off? The last thing we need as a nation is a further dumbed-down curriculum that encourages our children to hold hands together and learn nothing while the rest of the world marches past us.
Sources:
Productive Use of Time," in Timepiece: Extending and Enhancing Learning Time, ed. L.W. Anderson and H.J. Walberg, National Association of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA, 1993, p. 6, as cited by M. Czaja and J. McGee in American Secondary Education, 23(4):37-39 (July, 1995)
["Science Achievement in Semester and All-year Courses," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3): 233-240 (1990)
Block Scheduling is Hurting our Children
Submitted by D. King (not verified) on October 12, 2007 - 08:05.
(The author is currently teaching seventh and eighth grade social studies and is a member of his school's Corrective Action committee. He has also taught sixth grade, special education, tenth and twelfth grade social studies and seventh grade math in schools utilizing both traditional scheduling and block scheduling.)
Block scheduling is yet another well-intentioned but misguided attempt at overhauling our nation's troubled education system.
While block scheduling may have esoteric benefits such as more "imagination" time, the hard, scientific data shows students actually learn less, and retain less, in block scheduling than they do in traditional, teacher-centered education models utilizing 45-50 minute periods daily for the entire year.
Is this really surprising? Every major scientific study of this aspect of education concluded that "spaced practices" (shorter periods occuring daily) led to significantly higher rates of retention than "massed practices" (longer periods occuring less often). Just as an example, no language course on earth recommends an hour of study every other day. They recommend twenty to thirty minutes of study daily. This is because the mind picks up on repetition and is most prone to remember the first, and last things heard. All that space in the middle ... that 50+ minutes of "creative" time ... is time that is most often NOT retained. One major scientific study found that students in traditionally scheduled classrooms out-scored students in block scheduled classes on EVERY MEASURE regarding retention AND implementation of learned material.
Lastly, block scheduling forces teachers to abandon parts of the curriculum. The mantras "less is more" and "focus on the essentials" are pure nonsense. Less is more makes as much sense as Orwellian phrases like "war is peace" and "freedom is slavery." There is NO reliable data I've ever seen, other than sheer conjecture that leads me to think "less is more" is anything other than a simplistic slogan.
As for focusing on the essentials, that should be the focus of ANY class, whether traditionally scheduled, or block scheduled. In my opinion, most curriculums are bare-bones essentials as it is. What is there to be trimmed off? The last thing we need as a nation is a further dumbed-down curriculum that encourages our children to hold hands together and learn nothing while the rest of the world marches past us.
Sources:
Productive Use of Time," in Timepiece: Extending and Enhancing Learning Time, ed. L.W. Anderson and H.J. Walberg, National Association of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA, 1993, p. 6, as cited by M. Czaja and J. McGee in American Secondary Education, 23(4):37-39 (July, 1995)
["Science Achievement in Semester and All-year Courses," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3): 233-240 (1990)