Block scheduling vs 7 period day

ejr1
Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:37:31 +0000

I have been involved through the years with school districts wanting to go to block, change from block, etc. There are many arguments pro and con - supposedly you lose time in the classroom with block, because you only have 90 minutes of classroom instruction every 2 days and with the regular, you have 100. While that seems miniscule on a daily basis, if you add it up, it means a lot over the year. However, proponents of block say that the time is make up by not having to take attendance twice, not having to review the second day, and it actually affords the teacher time to complete a unit while able to get more in-depth. These are just the few arguments, but eventually, it all boils down to this: it all evolves around money. Even though most people admitted that it would be better for the kids to have two four-period days, it costs more to have block than to have regular schedule. That is because you have a teacher teaching 6 periods out of 8, whereas in the traditional or regular, you have a teacher teaching 7 out of 8. You need more teachers to make it work. Personnel is the largest line-item budget item for a school district. (BTW, I used 8 periods as an example, because historically, when they went to 7 periods, they did it for a few years, then got us accustomed to it, then added the 8th period. There go the time arguments! It still all boils down to money.) And if you think doing 7 subjects a day with homework every day is hard, just try to do it 8 times a day. If we go to more classes, then clock is superior. I have now taught both, and prefer block.