Block scheduling has been the norm in many high schools and an increasing number of middle and junior high schools for nearly a generation - but is it really the best way to teach the kids?
Yesterday morning, twenty-three of my juniors and seniors marched into a nearby church's fellowship hall armed with pencils, pens, and 400 years' worth of knowledge in an attempt to conquer the the College Board's AP U.S. History exam. At this time every year, I always end up reflecting on how the class went; what I could've done better, what worked, what didn't. That line of thinking often transitions into a reflection on how SHORT the class was.
Most schools in North Carolina, my school system included, operates on a four-by-four block scheduling system; in other words, students take four classes of 90 minutes in length the first semester, then take four new classes in the spring.
The AP exams for this year began on Monday, May 4, and will continue nationwide through May 15. Since our second semester did not start until January 26 (an issue that I brought up in my last diary), that equated to sixty-eight class days to teach everything from Jamestown to 9/11, review it, and teach the kids the nuances of AP-style essay writing before they sit for the exam. The one saving grace is that my students have to take the standard college preparatory-level U.S. History course before taking AP due to state graduation requirements, so some of the material covered in AP is just a review; anyone who knows or teaches high school students, though, probably knows that information retention over an entire year is not always one of their fortes, even for the top students.
So this situation begs the question: is block scheduling worth it?
Students often point out the advantages of using this scheduling system. Since there are eight classes instead of six or seven per year, for example, they are able to take more courses that will look good on college resumes. Since they only take four classes a year, there is less homework to worry about. Similarly, teachers often point out that block scheduling means less students to worry about at one time and, as a consequence, less grading to do. From the standpoint of a high school student, these are valid points; furthermore, I attended school on block scheduling and actually enjoyed the experience. It was not until I became a teacher that I started to think of the downsides.
The drawbacks are obvious to many teachers. Anyone who's ever tried to hold a high schooler's attention for an hour and a half at a time knows that it is often a herculean task. The theory behind block scheduling is that it allows more diversification of instruction within a class period - time for teacher input as well as student-centered activities; but a simple round of arithmetic shows that in a 90-minute-over-90-day block, students are in class a grand total of 135 hours (not including fire drills, snow days, and the like), whereas a traditional schedule would allow students closer to 170 hours of classroom time per year. In an atmosphere of constantly pushing teachers and students to produce better and better scores on a litany of standardized tests, that statistic alone makes little sense. As a result, teachers often have to load students down with homework to cover the large amounts of material required; as a result, students may ironically have more homework with four classes than they would with six. The decreased amount of classroom time has been shown in several studies, including this one, to correlate with a decrease in standardized test scores (disclaimer: this study is a bit dated, but it's from my state).
Then there's the issue of my AP U.S. History class that has to be taught at such a break-neck pace. I'm told every year that I have the option of teaching AP U.S. History in the fall semester, when I'll have the full 87 days to cover the course. That would be fine, but it would exclude juniors who haven't taken the Honors course yet from taking AP as a junior, AND it would leave a nearly four-month gap between the end of the class and the May exam. I've decided to keep the class a spring class so the information will at least be fresh in their minds when the exam comes around.
Every so often, teachers in our county have to vote to approve block scheduling by waiving the requirement that students be in each class a minimum of 160 hours. I voted against it last year, but I think I was one of the few teachers that did. I simply think it would be nice to not have to cover Reagan, George Bush, and Clinton in one day in AP U.S. History because we were so rushed before the exam. Deep down, if presented with the alternative, I think the students would appreciate it too.