Block or modular scheduling involves restructuring the school day or week so that students are in classes for longer stretches of time. Numerous types of block schedules exist. A modified block schedule typically works within the normal context of the school week. In some instances, classes are longer on some days and are shorter or aren't taught at all on other days. Here is one example of a modified block schedule:

According to this schedule, students meet only four times in a week for any given class, although the instructional teaching time remains the same. Likewise, teachers have only four planning periods in a week. However, the amount of planning time remains the same.

The 4×4 Block Schedule

A more radical block schedule is the 4×4 block. On this schedule, students complete a few classes very quickly. For example, students might take only four classes each term with 100-minute periods. Semester and year-long classes are completed in half the time, so students could conceivably complete sixteen semester classes or eight year-long courses each year.

Arguments for the Block Schedule

There are many good arguments that proponents use to support implementation of block schedules. For one thing, students have longer periods of time in class with each teacher, facilitating cooperative learning and longer science labs. Teachers have more flexibility in their planning. They can create more complicated assignments than they could normally teach in one traditional period. Teachers also have longer stretches of planning time in which to prepare better lessons.

Since fewer students are seen each day, and teachers are with the students they see for longer stretches of time, they are able to spend more quality time with the class. Students have less information to deal with each day and less homework on any given day during the week. It is also easier to spend extra time with students with disabilities because more time is available.

Arguments Against the Block Schedule

On the flip side, opponents argue that there are some major problems with the block schedule. For one thing, students who miss one day actually miss two in terms of class time. In a 4×4 block, if a student misses a week because of illness, she has actually missed two weeks' worth of material. This can be difficult for students to make up.

Opponents also point out that just changing the time spent in each class will not solve the problems with education. Even though students are in class the same amount of time under a block and a traditional schedule, student attention spans are such that it can be very hard to sit still for eighty or 100 minutes.

While the block schedule does lend itself well to varying instruction, the truth is that many teachers do not use the full amount of time. In effect, this counteracts one of the main benefits of the block schedule. In many instances, the extra time at the end of the class is left for students to do homework. Therefore, students could end up learning less and not more.

The most compelling arguments against block schedules discuss the studies that have been done in schools using this system. One study completed by the Texas Education Agency in 1999 found that there was little evidence to support the claim that the block schedule results in increased student learning.

Further, a study completed in 2002 by Iowa State University in conjunction with ACT, Inc., showed a potential correlation between block scheduling and decreased ACT scores. Clearly, more work needs to be done to prove the effectiveness of block scheduling.