By Risha Rohera
Copy Editor
Mira Costa should not implement block scheduling, as it would provide more obstacles than advancements to the learning process.
A common type of block scheduling is an alternate-day schedule in which students and teachers meet every other day for an extended class period, as opposed to meeting everyday for a shorter class period. Costa’s schedule should not be replaced, considering that it already operates successfully and is educationally efficient.
One of the greatest deficiencies in block scheduling is the longer class periods. According to Redondo Union High School junior Allegra Peelor, who has block scheduling at her school, having long classes can become tedious, especially in subjects like history, where lectures can be given for a full two hours. In the case of in-depth, rigourous courses, which require constant attentiveness and concentration, implementing block scheduling would be detrimental for students who could easily lose concentration.
Costa science teacher Daniel Sponaugle also believes that block scheduling would be especially disadvantageous to Advanced Placement classes, as learning two back-to-back hours of AP material would not allow for complex ideas to be processed well. Longer periods would not be optimal for learning the dense material that AP classes offer and could likely make it more difficult to comprehend the information.
According to a study cited by Time.com, students generally have 10 to 18 minutes of optimal focus during a lecture. After 10 to 18 minutes, there is a lapse in attentiveness which, thereafter, only returns in three to four-minute spurts. Considering that student attentiveness is already minimal, engaging students for an even longer period would hinder comprehension. Therefore, longer class periods would be ineffective in advancing the learning process.
There is no tangible evidence that a block schedule actually enhances student learning. Costa’s API Score is 912, and Palos Verdes High School’s, which utilizes block scheduling, is 884. Considering that Costa’s API Score remains higher than PV High’s demonstrates that block scheduling does not create a significant tangible impact on students’ learning. Because Costa is succeeding academically without the implementation of block scheduling, there is no need to switch from the traditional scheduling system.
Both teacher and student absences under block scheduling would lead to complications. If a teacher is absent, a substitute teacher would have to instruct a longer class period on a particular subject he may not be familiar with. This would cause students to lose two hours of class time, rather than one. When a student is absent, it would be harder to catch up with schoolwork, as missing one day of school under the block scheduling system is equivalent to missing two days under the traditional scheduling system.
According to Costa Vice Principal Ian Drummond, math and foreign language teachers may not find block scheduling beneficial to the daily practice of their respective subjects. Foreign language teacher Lauri Gonalons prefers having foreign language classes for shorter blocks of time more consistently, rather than longer blocks every other day. Having a block schedule would disrupt the continuity necessary to learn a language by only allowing it to be practiced in separate chunks, rather than allowing for consistent daily practice.
Considering that the obstacles created by block scheduling are greater than the advantages that it may provide, Costa should continue to use traditional scheduling, as it successfully benefits students.
Leave a Reply