Washington County Schools to Block Scheduling...

[ThomasDenton 79]

http://www2.tricities.com/news/2011/may/07/block-scheduling-washington-countys-high-schools-m-ar-1022710/

 

 

What's everyone's thoughts on this? Like it or not? Personally, I think it'll work well with some classes and not so well with others. Classes like art (which I'm studying to teach) and gym may benefit, but I just can't see kids sitting through a longer math or government class with no problems.

[Lance 228]

Catron doesn’t anticipate that the change will save a lot of money, improve test scores or increase students’ attendance or graduation rates.

 

that about sums it up...longer, boring classes...always a good thing.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

http://www2.tricities.com/news/2011/may/07/block-scheduling-washington-countys-high-schools-m-ar-1022710/

 

 

What's everyone's thoughts on this? Like it or not? Personally, I think it'll work well with some classes and not so well with others. Classes like art (which I'm studying to teach) and gym may benefit, but I just can't see kids sitting through a longer math or government class with no problems.

 

Block scheduling is a terrible, terrible idea. Especially for VA schools. It will not change salary, it may slightly decrease graduation rates, and it will ABSOFREAKINGLUTELY lower test scores. My reasons:

 

1. It will cripple art and music programs. What is going to appeal more to a kid wanting intellectual stimulation? Calculus AB in the fall and Calculus BC in the spring, or 100 minutes of music? It's not a contest. Exhibit A: Bluefield High School's marching band. Block scheduling came in, nothing else changed, and the band lost 70% of its members in 4 years.

 

2. The adherence to a 50-minute class structure isn't an accident. Psychologists have proven that children retain the most information from the first 20 and last 20 minutes of a lecture. With a 90-minute period, you have 50 minutes of time where the children are absorbing little, if any, of the subject matter.

 

3. SOLs are offered in the spring. What about the kid that takes biology and U.S. history in the fall? I don't trust the memory retention of 16-year-olds to regurgitate on a test things they haven't touched in 4 months. You're dooming yourself to substandard test scores under block scheduling.

 

4. Some classes simply can't be taught for just 1 semester (band, art), and other classes really shouldn't (gym, English). A year-long course on a block scheduling format means that's 1 less class a student can take in high school. So, there goes the "gain" of having 1 extra credit earned per year under block scheduling, which is the only redeeming thing in the system, IMO.

 

It just doesn't make sense. I have loads of literature on why it doesn't make sense, but that's from having access to my fiancee, who's going to be an M.Ed. in a year.

[vthokies4life 10]

2. The adherence to a 50-minute class structure isn't an accident. Psychologists have proven that children retain the most information from the first 20 and last 20 minutes of a lecture. With a 90-minute period, you have 50 minutes of time where the children are absorbing little, if any, of the subject matter.

Primacy and recency effect!! What up, Hermann Ebbinghaus.

[Hacker 82]

Observer, one fact you are not aware of is that SOL test for blocked courses are given at the end of the course. Testing for these is in both the fall and spring.

 

Since many schools across the state use block, this is not an obstacle/

[futbolking 766]

As somebody who is familiar with both block scheduling and a 7 period day. I can tell you that block scheduling has many more advantages. For one thing, students only have to be concerned about 4 classes per semester as opposed to 7...They can earn 32 credits as opposed to 28 in 4 years...This opens up a few more spots for advanced placement classes and dual credit for college bound students who want to save money on tuition.

 

Schools will save money, because it takes fewer teachers to teach on a block schedule. Teachers end up teaching an extra section each year and this allows schools to be staffed at about 88% of what a 7 period day required.

 

Schools save money on texts, calculators and other supplies for students, since some courses are offered each semester....there can be 2 sections of Algebra I, 1st semester and 2 sections, 2nd semester, thus cutting the number of texts required in half....

 

Other benefits are that students are not in the hallway as much and this cuts down on tardiness and fights and other discipline problems....

 

Since there are only 3 class changes, as opposed to 6, the school day is a little shorter (or your lunch period is longer, depending on what your school system decides to do)...

 

I could go on longer, but I'm not sure anybody would continue reading...

 

After being on block for a while, you'll never want to go back to a 7 period day...

 

Southwest Virginia is way behind the curve on switching to block...the rest of the state made the switch 20 years ago.....

 

I don't know what the dude was talking about earlier about SOL scores dropping....scores usually go UP when switching to block...since the test is at the end of the course....and the course is only 4 months long as opposed to 9 months long...

 

Also, MORE classes are offered under block....it opens up room for more electives, simple math really....32 credits as opposed to 28 for the typical student.

 

Are you sure you're not an educator that just doesn't want to prepare for a 90 minute class??? because you sure sound like some of them, that I've heard talking....

 

To the original poster, don't believe everything you've heard about block scheduling....If it's 90 minute classes you're worried about...what would you rather do, have homework for 7 classes or homework for 4?

Edited May 7, 2011 by futbolking

[Lance 228]

you must have a longer attention span than most kids I know lol.

[bluefieldRocks 14]

I've done both. 7 peroid deal in middle school. Block schedule in high school. I prefered block schedule because it cut down on the amount of homework. Plus you didn't have to carry 5-6 books at a time.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Primacy and recency effect!! What up, Hermann Ebbinghaus.

 

So that's what it's called? :)

 

Observer, one fact you are not aware of is that SOL test for blocked courses are given at the end of the course. Testing for these is in both the fall and spring.

 

Since many schools across the state use block, this is not an obstacle/

 

I didn't know this. Glad to hear this happen, though.

 

Strike off my original point. The other points stand, especially #1 and #2.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

As somebody who is familiar with both block scheduling and a 7 period day. I can tell you that block scheduling has many more advantages. For one thing, students only have to be concerned about 4 classes per semester as opposed to 7...They can earn 32 credits as opposed to 28 in 4 years...This opens up a few more spots for advanced placement classes and dual credit for college bound students who want to save money on tuition.

 

I've already disproven this, if the student has any interest in the arts or AP classes. This is also disproven for students taking AP exams, which I know for a fact are only offered the first week of May. Said students will have to use 2 blocks in each semester on each course. Students in band/art will only earn 28 credit hours during high school under block scheduling. Students in band/art who take just 1 AP class will earn LESS than they would have during the 7-class setup. Same for students with 5+ AP classes (and there are more than you think). Seems as if we're crippling the arts and the progress of the gifted.

 

Schools will save money, because it takes fewer teachers to teach on a block schedule. Teachers end up teaching an extra section each year and this allows schools to be staffed at about 88% of what a 7 period day required.

 

Wait a minute. You're adding more classes AND cutting teachers? LOL. You simply divided 7/8 and got 87.5%. You're assuming incorrectly that because you're adding 1 more class, 12.5% of the cost magically disappears. It does not. You're adding MORE classes. The workday is not significantly shorter. The student enrollment is the same. Nothing. Changes.

 

Schools save money on texts, calculators and other supplies for students, since some courses are offered each semester....there can be 2 sections of Algebra I, 1st semester and 2 sections, 2nd semester, thus cutting the number of texts required in half....

 

Again, your assumptions are incorrect. You're flatly assuming that the number of students will be divided in half, and all will be well because the school will magically have that number of texts aside. If you believe this Utopia, then your costs will be slashed by exactly half.

 

Let's take a walk in the real world. What will happen is that 80-90% of the students will take Algebra I in the fall simply because the schools under them are still teaching in the proper 7-credit format! Then those 80-90% will take Geometry at the same time, then Algebra II, then Trig. You see? It doesn't reduce costs at all! All it does is create a scheduling glut: you've still got 4 classes of 30+ kids taking the same class at the same time. You'll have to spend the same on supplies, etc.

 

Other benefits are that students are not in the hallway as much and this cuts down on tardiness and fights and other discipline problems....

 

Not exactly. There is no correlation between block scheduling and tardiness or disciplinary problems aside from fighting. There is a very slight positive correllation between having less time to fight and fighting, which is only an indirect benefit (read: not one the system intends). I have the literature to prove this point.

 

Since there are only 3 class changes, as opposed to 6, the school day is a little shorter (or your lunch period is longer, depending on what your school system decides to do)...

 

And to save 15 minutes, you're willing to virtually eliminate art/band and severely hamper AP students. Good work.

 

I could go on longer, but I'm not sure anybody would continue reading...

 

You underestimate me. Much more to debunk.

 

After being on block for a while, you'll never want to go back to a 7 period day...

 

Tell that to the Bluefield High School Marching Beavers.

 

Southwest Virginia is way behind the curve on switching to block...the rest of the state made the switch 20 years ago.....

 

Something about friends jumping off bridges, and if you'd follow them.

 

I don't know what the dude was talking about earlier about SOL scores dropping....scores usually go UP when switching to block...since the test is at the end of the course....and the course is only 4 months long as opposed to 9 months long...

 

The literature I have shows a NEGATIVE correlation between block scheduling and test scores. Mainly because of the primacy and recency effect (thanks, VT4Life) that I have mentioned previously. Plus, you're jamming the same amount of information into half the time.

 

Also, MORE classes are offered under block....it opens up room for more electives, simple math really....32 credits as opposed to 28 for the typical student.

 

You've already said this. It's not any more correct the second time you said it.

 

Are you sure you're not an educator that just doesn't want to prepare for a 90 minute class??? because you sure sound like some of them, that I've heard talking....

 

I'm not one, but I am engaged to one who will be. She's #1 in her M.Ed program. And she cannot stop harping about how awful it is.

 

To the original poster, don't believe everything you've heard about block scheduling....If it's 90 minute classes you're worried about...what would you rather do, have homework for 7 classes or homework for 4?

 

Again, a false assumption. You're going to get roughly double the normal homework for a 90-minute class than you will for a 45-minute class. The amount of material ideally does not change. And if it does, then all the more of a reason to abandon this system.

 

It's like the issue of mountaintop removal. I'm sitting on a heap of evidence to show how poor it is. We can run around the bush several more rounds. I'm willing to agree to disagree. But I will not concede that I have strong, peer-reviewed evidence to back up my assertions, not inherently flawed assumptions.

Edited May 7, 2011 by UVAObserver

[Lance 228]

i've never done block, we always had 7 periods when I was in school...i know there were many days i could barely stay awake in class from boredom and if they were twice as long I would have been miserable...I'd much rather get up and move to a new room and new class after 45 minutes or so.

 

maybe i would have liked it better? I don't know...just seems like it would be boring.

[deuceswild 15]

i've never done block, we always had 7 periods when I was in school...i know there were many days i could barely stay awake in class from boredom and if they were twice as long I would have been miserable...I'd much rather get up and move to a new room and new class after 45 minutes or so.

 

maybe i would have liked it better? I don't know...just seems like it would be boring.

 

I felt it made the days fly by and like someone else said there is less homework. More time for one-on-one learning. Classes go at a slower pace, always felt I learned more. Built better relationships with the teachers.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

i've never done block, we always had 7 periods when I was in school...i know there were many days i could barely stay awake in class from boredom and if they were twice as long I would have been miserable...I'd much rather get up and move to a new room and new class after 45 minutes or so.

 

maybe i would have liked it better? I don't know...just seems like it would be boring.

 

As I mentioned earlier, there is a psychological reason for what you felt.

[ThomasDenton 79]

For the regular core classes, I don't know how it'll pan out. Could be good, could be bad. The teachers will definitely have to have a little more educating on how to teach a longer class. Whole new classroom management style for some. That'll be an obstacle that only devoted teachers will overcome (those that don't probably just don't want to teach for longer periods of time).

 

As for art classes, I've been doing observations and internship at different schools across Washington County and Bristol and the one thing I ask the students and teachers about is how they like the amount of time they have in each art class. Every time I ask this, it's always the same answer: they all want a longer class, even the kids that aren't that serious about art, mainly because it gives them more time to work on their projects. Everyone I've come across in these classes hates having only about 20-30 minutes of work time after you consider time to take roll, announcements, setting stuff up, and cleanup.

 

I think the block schedule will work out for electives like art and I think it will also work out for PE (who wouldn't want a longer PE class, even if you're not the involved type? Less sitting around in some other class listening to lectures and more time either sitting around on the bleachers, which I hope most kids won't do in PE, or more time running around playing games/sports). For the core classes like English, Math, Science, and History, the teacher is just going to have to change their teaching style to keep the kids interested for longer periods. This could involve taking breaks during class to break things up or doing lessons that gets everyone more involved and even more physical (like some of those History Jeopardy games or something on the overhead/smartboard).

 

It'll be a bit rough at first, but if the teachers are willing to adapt and put a little more effort to make this work, I think it can.

[ThomasDenton 79]

As I mentioned earlier, there is a psychological reason for what you felt.

 

As for the psychology thing you mentioned, there are numerous psychological theories, philosophies, classroom management methods, and such and this, I'm sure, is just one of them. You have the original guys who didn't really do research for education in schools, but who's work is used anyway, who's names are Pavlov, Skinner, Thorndike, and Watson. Then you have specific classroom management plans like Assertive Discipline, Discipline with Dignity, Building Community, Character Education, and more. Many different views on education and what students can do and are capable of. Really depends on the individual students. Statistics mean nothing. Each teacher just has to see what style works best for their individual classes and students.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

As for the psychology thing you mentioned, there are numerous psychological theories, philosophies, classroom management methods, and such and this, I'm sure, is just one of them. You have the original guys who didn't really do research for education in schools, but who's work is used anyway, who's names are Pavlov, Skinner, Thorndike, and Watson. Then you have specific classroom management plans like Assertive Discipline, Discipline with Dignity, Building Community, Character Education, and more. Many different views on education and what students can do and are capable of. Really depends on the individual students. Statistics mean nothing. Each teacher just has to see what style works best for their individual classes and students.

 

Strongly disagree with your assertion that "statistics mean nothing". Let's start with a simple hypothetical. Say that you have a trial run with 2 interim teachers, Teacher A and Teacher B. The top 80% of Teacher A's students do better than with Teacher B, and the bottom 20% of Teacher B's students to better than with Teacher A. Who should we hire? I guess without statistics, we just flip a coin. Or perhaps, we look at statistics to see what method works the best and what method gives you little ROI. Statistics mean EVERYTHING when you're trying to derive a standardized system that gives you the greatest bang for your buck.

 

Also, I have not referenced Pavlov nor Watson. Some of my sources are derivatives of Skinner and Thorndike. I disagree with your take on Skinner; his work had a rather clear focus toward educational settings. However, I find it closed-minded to discount the findings of Thorndike simply because his research wasn't modeled after a structured educational system.

 

The part I do agree with you on, is that individual students are unique and will have different ways of learning most efficiently. But again, if a certain way is working for the majority of students, why switch it to suit the minority while at the same time causing harm to the majority? Put another way: don't fix something that isn't broken.

 

There's a LOT in education today that is badly, badly broken. The structure of the day isn't one of them.

[Hacker 82]

Any good teacher will tell you that you have to break the class time into 15-25 minute chunks. I teach in a hybrid system and have to prepare for both 90 minute blocks (English) and 45 minute periods (History.) Because of the extra time in English, I do about 4 activities per block. The focus issue applies to both teacher and student. The more I mix activities the more the students attention is held, and the more engaged I am.

[ThomasDenton 79]

Strongly disagree with your assertion that "statistics mean nothing". Let's start with a simple hypothetical. Say that you have a trial run with 2 interim teachers, Teacher A and Teacher B. The top 80% of Teacher A's students do better than with Teacher B, and the bottom 20% of Teacher B's students to better than with Teacher A. Who should we hire? I guess without statistics, we just flip a coin. Or perhaps, we look at statistics to see what method works the best and what method gives you little ROI. Statistics mean EVERYTHING when you're trying to derive a standardized system that gives you the greatest bang for your buck.

 

Also, I have not referenced Pavlov nor Watson. Some of my sources are derivatives of Skinner and Thorndike. I disagree with your take on Skinner; his work had a rather clear focus toward educational settings. However, I find it closed-minded to discount the findings of Thorndike simply because his research wasn't modeled after a structured educational system.

 

The part I do agree with you on, is that individual students are unique and will have different ways of learning most efficiently. But again, if a certain way is working for the majority of students, why switch it to suit the minority while at the same time causing harm to the majority? Put another way: don't fix something that isn't broken.

 

There's a LOT in education today that is badly, badly broken. The structure of the day isn't one of them.

 

I didn't mean that Skinner, Pavlov, Thorndike, or Watson's work wasn't important or in no way connected to education. I was using their work as examples of different educational theories and that they were mainly theorizing on education in general, not coming up with specific plans for teaching in schools. Also, by statistics mean nothing, I meant that if people take statistics too seriously, we come up with cookie cutter models for education. There are better ways to teach than using cookie cutter models and assuming all students are the same. This is why I'm completely against standardized testing like the SOL's. Some students just aren't good test takers. They can pass every other part of a class but not do so well on tests, while some are better at tests. It's not very individualized and some students suffer. Longer classes can also give teachers more one on one time with the students so there can be some individualized education with block scheduling. I also agree that teachers in a block schedule need to give breaks during the class. Working for 90+ minutes straight is just too much.

Edited May 8, 2011 by ThomasDenton

[futbolking 766]

What would I know...it's not like I teach AP classes or anything...

[futbolking 766]

Any good teacher will tell you that you have to break the class time into 15-25 minute chunks. I teach in a hybrid system and have to prepare for both 90 minute blocks (English) and 45 minute periods (History.) Because of the extra time in English, I do about 4 activities per block. The focus issue applies to both teacher and student. The more I mix activities the more the students attention is held, and the more engaged I am.

 

I teach both AP and SOL courses...never had a problem with any scores, but the school systems scores were higher when we were on block...

[futbolking 766]

I've already disproven this, if the student has any interest in the arts or AP classes. This is also disproven for students taking AP exams, which I know for a fact are only offered the first week of May. Said students will have to use 2 blocks in each semester on each course. Students in band/art will only earn 28 credit hours during high school under block scheduling. Students in band/art who take just 1 AP class will earn LESS than they would have during the 7-class setup. Same for students with 5+ AP classes (and there are more than you think). Seems as if we're crippling the arts and the progress of the gifted.

 

 

 

Wait a minute. You're adding more classes AND cutting teachers? LOL. You simply divided 7/8 and got 87.5%. You're assuming incorrectly that because you're adding 1 more class, 12.5% of the cost magically disappears. It does not. You're adding MORE classes. The workday is not significantly shorter. The student enrollment is the same. Nothing. Changes.

 

 

 

Again, your assumptions are incorrect. You're flatly assuming that the number of students will be divided in half, and all will be well because the school will magically have that number of texts aside. If you believe this Utopia, then your costs will be slashed by exactly half.

 

Let's take a walk in the real world. What will happen is that 80-90% of the students will take Algebra I in the fall simply because the schools under them are still teaching in the proper 7-credit format! Then those 80-90% will take Geometry at the same time, then Algebra II, then Trig. You see? It doesn't reduce costs at all! All it does is create a scheduling glut: you've still got 4 classes of 30+ kids taking the same class at the same time. You'll have to spend the same on supplies, etc.

 

 

 

Not exactly. There is no correlation between block scheduling and tardiness or disciplinary problems aside from fighting. There is a very slight positive correllation between having less time to fight and fighting, which is only an indirect benefit (read: not one the system intends). I have the literature to prove this point.

 

 

 

And to save 15 minutes, you're willing to virtually eliminate art/band and severely hamper AP students. Good work.

 

 

 

You underestimate me. Much more to debunk.

 

 

 

Tell that to the Bluefield High School Marching Beavers.

 

 

 

Something about friends jumping off bridges, and if you'd follow them.

 

 

 

The literature I have shows a NEGATIVE correlation between block scheduling and test scores. Mainly because of the primacy and recency effect (thanks, VT4Life) that I have mentioned previously. Plus, you're jamming the same amount of information into half the time.

 

 

 

You've already said this. It's not any more correct the second time you said it.

 

 

 

I'm not one, but I am engaged to one who will be. She's #1 in her M.Ed program. And she cannot stop harping about how awful it is.

 

 

 

Again, a false assumption. You're going to get roughly double the normal homework for a 90-minute class than you will for a 45-minute class. The amount of material ideally does not change. And if it does, then all the more of a reason to abandon this system.

 

It's like the issue of mountaintop removal. I'm sitting on a heap of evidence to show how poor it is. We can run around the bush several more rounds. I'm willing to agree to disagree. But I will not concede that I have strong, peer-reviewed evidence to back up my assertions, not inherently flawed assumptions.

 

It's not like I've done this for over 20 years or anything...I'm sure your fiancee who is "going to be" an educator knows more about it...so I'll step out of this conversation, since you all seem to know everything about it...."

[Deleted Account 5,203]

It's not like I've done this for over 20 years or anything...I'm sure your fiancee who is "going to be" an educator knows more about it...so I'll step out of this conversation, since you all seem to know everything about it...."

 

I know that you're an educator, and it's why I expected a much stronger defense of your position. Just because you have experience in a field doesn't mean you can throw out flawed premises and flawed assumptions and have them stick. I feel as if I've given a reasoned, supported argument against every significant point you've mentioned.

 

I truly don't have anything against you at all; in fact, you're probably one of my favorite posters here. But as others will tell you, if your arguments are flawed, I will not sit idly by.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I didn't mean that Skinner, Pavlov, Thorndike, or Watson's work wasn't important or in no way connected to education. I was using their work as examples of different educational theories and that they were mainly theorizing on education in general, not coming up with specific plans for teaching in schools. Also, by statistics mean nothing, I meant that if people take statistics too seriously, we come up with cookie cutter models for education. There are better ways to teach than using cookie cutter models and assuming all students are the same. This is why I'm completely against standardized testing like the SOL's. Some students just aren't good test takers. They can pass every other part of a class but not do so well on tests, while some are better at tests. It's not very individualized and some students suffer. Longer classes can also give teachers more one on one time with the students so there can be some individualized education with block scheduling. I also agree that teachers in a block schedule need to give breaks during the class. Working for 90+ minutes straight is just too much.

 

Alright, I see where you're coming from now. I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on statistics, if for the reason that I don't find it economically viable to develop anything other than a cookie-cutter model vis-a-vis public schools.

 

I, too, am against standardized testing for the reasons you just posted. However, I have another reason. I feel as if it limits a teacher in what he/she would want to teach the students about the particular subject. I hate this expression, but teachers seldom have the opportunity to "think outside the box", comparing the SOL material to the box. Pennsylvania has the PSSAs, which are just like the SOLs. Much greater support here to do away with them than I've seen in Virginia with the SOLs.

 

You do make well-reasoned arguments about block scheduling. However, it does require a teacher that is cognizant enough to recognize the psychological benefits of breaking down the class time into appropriate increments. I'm sure that you would, I'm sure that Hacker would, and I'm sure that Futbol would. However, you three are more "on the ball" than most teachers, IMO. I just don't trust teachers to do that, especially teachers so ingrained in the 7-credit system. If you don't break up the time, there is significantly more harm than good to come from it.

 

I still simply can't support it, if anything, based mostly upon (1) how it holds back gifted students for the sake of a small percentage at the bottom, and (2) the irreparable damage it does to art/music programs. The other reasons, I'm sure you've read from me already.

[ThomasDenton 79]

I, too, am against standardized testing for the reasons you just posted. However, I have another reason. I feel as if it limits a teacher in what he/she would want to teach the students about the particular subject. I hate this expression, but teachers seldom have the opportunity to "think outside the box", comparing the SOL material to the box. Pennsylvania has the PSSAs, which are just like the SOLs. Much greater support here to do away with them than I've seen in Virginia with the SOLs.

 

You're exactly right about SOL's limiting teachers. I forgot about that, which is probably the biggest reason most teachers (that I know anyway) hate standardized testing.

 

Also, another thought just occured to me. For the teachers who aren't "on the ball", maybe most of them are older and this will push them to retire, opening up jobs for fresh, new teachers (which would be good for me, lol).

[futbolking 766]

I know that you're an educator, and it's why I expected a much stronger defense of your position. Just because you have experience in a field doesn't mean you can throw out flawed premises and flawed assumptions and have them stick. I feel as if I've given a reasoned, supported argument against every significant point you've mentioned.

 

I truly don't have anything against you at all; in fact, you're probably one of my favorite posters here. But as others will tell you, if your arguments are flawed, I will not sit idly by.

 

I have no problem with anything you've posted....it's just a difference of opinion, that's all. Maybe I'm personally biased, I just had a much better experience on Block Schedule, sorry if I sounded a little chippy....did a lot of yard work today (grouchy...lol)... good luck to your fiancee in the field, with all the cutbacks and everything, it's tough getting your foot in the door (unless of course you're related to somebody on the school board in Tazewell County...) I admire people getting into the field of education nowadays, because it's getting harder than ever and the scrutiny over what you're doing in the classroom is much harder to deal with too....gone are the days when a teacher would just sit and give you something to do out of a book (I had a lot of teachers like that)...one of the reasons I wanted to become a teacher, because I wanted to do much more...Anyway, you have a lot of good points, my argument comes from the good experiences that I've had with block schedule.

Edited May 8, 2011 by futbolking