‍The high school schedule is often an untapped innovation when it comes to the design of the instructional day, the way students attend and engage with school, and school improvement efforts in general. Moving from a traditional schedule to a block system has its pros and cons, but can ultimately provide more options for students, teachers, and school leaders when it comes to building a schedule that meets the needs of an ever-changing landscape of course offerings at the high school level. 

With the introduction of more advanced studies courses (AP, IB, etc.), more career and technical education (CTE) courses, more dual enrollment and articulated courses, work-based learning experiences, and more mandates for what is expected to be on the transcript, it is imperative that school leaders weigh their options and adjust accordingly.

Problems with the Traditional High School Schedule

The traditional high school schedule—typically 7 to 9 periods between 35 and 50 minutes—has limits that make it less desirable than an upgrade to the block system. In a time when teachers used direct instruction as their primary method for content delivery, the 35- to 50-minute period made sense. If students are merely listening and taking notes with the intention of regurgitating that information on a paper-pencil test, this format is understandable. But, as research emerges about the implementation of 21^st century skills in schools—critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, project-based learning, authentic assessments, student choice and voice, and team assignments—among other classroom strategies, the need for a new schedule becomes necessary. Taking the first step to identifying new skills that students need is one thing; changing the conditions in schools for them to attain them is yet another. 

The limited number of minutes in a traditional period of instruction simply makes it very difficult for teachers and students to engage in meaningful ways, diving more deeply into the content, before running out of time. In many cases, this is the primary reason to make the switch. The other major reason is that 7 to 9 different classes in one day is difficult for teachers and students to manage. For students, it is hard to handle this number of changing periods in one day, cramming the learning of so many subjects into such a compressed timeline. For teachers who have embraced a more project-based approach and who now teach multiple preps, 9 periods is much more work than it was when they were delivering 9 identical lectures. The block model is certainly not without flaws, but it is a far superior approach to scheduling than the traditional model. 

The Pros and Cons of the Block Schedule for High School Students

Research suggests that the block model, either an A/B or 4X4 schedule, improves student performance, diminishes discipline referrals, and increases teacher and student attendance. That said, making any change to the high school schedule can come with stress and anxiety from teachers, students, and families. School leaders must examine, understand, and weigh the changes that they may potentially make. The block schedule has stronger pros than cons, but leaders are going to need the necessary information to combat the inevitable backlash that comes with changing something as critical as the student schedule. Defining the models and outlining the changes are two critical first steps. 

The good news is that it is fairly simple to explain in terms of the math and the number of minutes that are not lost in the translation. The 4X4 block takes the previously mentioned traditional ~8 periods, divides them in half, and provides students with 4 periods of instruction per day with double the number of minutes. If a period was 45 minutes in the traditional model, it becomes 90 in the block model. And, that means that students have a set of 4 courses in their first semester and another set of 4 in the second semester rather than having 7-9 courses every day all year. The A/B model does exactly the same but spreads the courses over the entire year, just every other day rather than every day for a semester. The number of total minutes stays the same but the number of minutes per period is expanded, providing the time needed to accomplish a more rigorous learning experience. Again, that is not to say that there are not a few setbacks to review. 

Pros of the Block Schedule

• As noted above, when students are challenged with a greater degree of problem-solving, critical thinking, collaboration with peers, and project-based learning, they need more time within one period of instruction to do so. The block schedule provides double the number of learning minutes per period than does the traditional schedule. 
• In the 4X4 block and the A/B model, students do not take more than 4 courses per day, while they may still manage up to 8 courses at a time (as in the A/B model), they do not have more than 4 in one school day, making it more manageable in terms of transitions, materials, and focus. The same is true for teachers. 
• In a time when the value of homework is being questioned, and some educators are either modifying the way they do it or eliminating it altogether, the block schedule at least compresses the number of subjects that students must study and/or complete work for in their evenings. 
• The block schedule is much more aligned to what students will experience in a college or university schedule than the traditional model. The features of a longer period of instruction or courses that are not taken at the same time every day give students more of an understanding of how colleges and universities build their course schedules. 
• Block scheduling opens up the ability for students to accelerate their learning. For example, a student is more likely to be able to take two mathematics classes in one year with a block schedule, allowing them to take more than 4 mathematics courses in high school and giving them an upper hand with the transcript when applying to college. 

Cons of the Block Schedule

• While the block schedule provides more time for students to learn within a given period of instruction, truly making the shift to a 21st century classroom requires educators to think differently about other structures that are prohibitive to the learning, including assessment practices and the number of minutes that students are required to attend school each day, week, and year. 
• While the course load is often more reasonable per semester, students may not be taking a tested course when the test is scheduled to occur. For example, students could be finished with a first semester AP course in January while the test is scheduled for May. 
• The block schedule is harder to build for counselors and school leaders. With the inclusion of more options and literally a different schedule in the second semester, the block schedule is more tedious to create and takes longer to develop than a traditional schedule. When more CTE courses, advanced standing courses, and pathway courses are offered, the schedule becomes more-and-more difficult to piece together. 
• Lesson planning takes a turn with a longer period of instruction. Teachers must learn to use more time and do so effectively with a change in their instructional design or the time can be lost or wasted. An argument against the block schedule is that students cannot focus for periods of 80-90 minutes yet the antidote is a stronger lesson plan, which takes more time to design.  
• Because the block schedule’s instructional time is double the number of minutes than the traditional schedule, when students are absent from school–due to illness, inclement weather, or other reasons–they miss more instruction than they would have with shorter periods. 

Making the Decision as a School Leader

Deciding to transition from a traditional schedule to a block schedule should not be taken lightly. Some even call for a three year approach: a committee meets in year-1 to research and design, in year-2 to train and communicate, and in year-3 to implement, making adjustments as needed. While the popular opinion suggests that the block schedule is superior to the traditional model, there are still many skeptics who claim that students are unable to focus for these longer periods of time and that the research is still too unclear about the tangible benefits of making the change. That said, given the pros and cons outlined above, the pros do not necessarily outweigh the cons in terms of numbers but the pros are too beneficial to forfeit, and none of the cons are entirely insurmountable. 

There is potential that the future of the block schedule is a modified version of the 4X4 schedule and the A/B schedule combined. There is no reason why a student should be limited from taking some semester every day courses at the same time they are taking all-year every other day courses. In fact, the combination of the two allows for additional flexibility to include work-based learning (WBL) experiences on and off campus and course sharing with other schools as well as colleges and universities who offer in-person courses (travel time needed) or online courses (taken in school or at home). And, when students can use time in their day to travel to WBL experiences, they may also benefit from earning credits through skill attainment and earning micro-credentials through training and assessments. 

This is not to say that students cannot leave campus during the use of a traditional model, but the A/B advantage allows them to use periods of instruction on their off days to access off-site learning experiences without missing instructional time. Other modifications embrace the use of a shorter period in the beginning of one day per week (or month) for complementary learning regarding social and emotional curriculum, college and career exploration, and more. The future of the high school schedule is about flexibility, and the block schedule is an obvious place to start. 

‍