Intensity Instead of Fragmentation

Top image: Block teaching in the upper school allows for an in-depth exploration of all content, as seen here in a biology class.
Bottom image: Identifying plants in a twelfth-grade biology class using books at the Freie Waldorfschule Mannheim.

«Spaces have emerged that allow for experimentation—spaces of resonance that invite immersion.«

Time is a scarce commodity that is often lamented today. There is too much to do and too little time to fit it all in. This applies to modern life in general as well as to everyday life at school. The hours available for one subject or another do not seem to be enough to accomplish everything that the curriculum suggests as conducive to development or mandates for exam purposes. When classes are canceled on top of that—whether due to field trips, projects, school trips, or internships, all of which are important and should by no means be cut back—it’s easy to get nervous.

Added to this are the increasing fragmentation of society and the ever-accelerating pace of activities, which have led to ever-shorter attention spans, especially among children and adolescents—a trend we also feel at school. The fact that new important topics are constantly emerging—which absolutely must also be covered in school—leads to an even greater compression of the curriculum and creates an additional sense of stress and overwhelm among teachers. Among students, we observe, on the one hand, a certain restlessness in the face of tightly packed schedules—and, on the other hand, joy in immersing themselves in projects and internships.

Subject lessons as block lessons

The phenomena described are by no means unique to Waldorf schools; rather, they pose a challenge for all educational institutions and have led to various approaches to addressing them. With the principle of lesson blocks, Waldorf education already offers an effective alternative to an approach that is «fast-paced, short-lived, and fragmented». At most schools, however, it is limited to the core subjects. If we set aside the classic rationale of head, heart, and hand for dividing subjects among the morning, noon, and afternoon—which, for staffing and space reasons, usually cannot be implemented so clearly anyway—we can take the block teaching principle a step further.

I witnessed such an expansion at two schools. In one case, the impetus came from the upper school faculty meeting, where we had been discussing the spatial and temporal organization of learning environments. We observed that the students attached significantly more importance to block-scheduled subjects than to subject-specific classes, as evidenced, for example, by their commitment to attendance and homework. Block-scheduled subjects always seemed to take precedence. In addition, subject teachers complained that it was difficult to engage in in-depth, intensive work within a 45-minute period in upper secondary school. The shorter class periods, which were appropriate for lower grades, led to a fragmentation of work steps in upper secondary school. In arts and crafts subjects, a disproportionate amount of time was spent on setup and cleanup during 45-minute sessions.

So we decided to try out block scheduling for subject-specific classes. We started with daily double periods on three days, during which English, music, and math practice sessions alternated on a five- to six-week cycle. Soon, the principle was extended to other subjects, and a second block of units was created with three-week units, each corresponding roughly to one weekly lesson per year. Two weekly music lessons thus correspond to two music units per year.

Cross-Class Learning

In addition to other positive effects, this change also made things much easier for those planning the units. Since all subjects were treated equally, there was more flexibility in assigning teachers to the two tracks. Now, not all subjects taught in blocks had to be scheduled between 8 and 10 a.m. This provided some relief, especially for teachers who teach many subjects across multiple classes.

There were variations in the arts and crafts subjects: In tenth grade, there were blocks in printmaking and drawing that overlapped with English, since both subjects were taught in split classes. This also made it possible to incorporate themes from language classes into art classes.

In ninth grade, the classes on basket weaving, spinning, weaving, and woodworking were combined into a three-week, full-day block, during which the students were able to immerse themselves in the various craft activities for one week each, every day. This led to a very intensive experience of the work processes, but also to impressive results that were very satisfying for the students.

At my current school, the block-schedule approach has been expanded to include almost all subjects since the start of high school. There are different block structures: two “main instructional blocks” for all cognitive subjects in the morning; the artistic and craft subjects in the midday block from Monday through Wednesday; and music, theater, and eurythmy alternating on Thursdays and Fridays for several weeks at a time; followed by afternoon blocks lasting several weeks with math and German practice sessions. Particularly popular among the students are cross-class learning groups, such as those formed for a large three-week project involving theater, dance, and music.

The goal of this reorganization was to counteract fragmentation, intensify learning processes, promote concentration, and improve the classroom as a learning space for students. The result is clearly positive. At the same time, there has been a noticeable reduction in the workload for subject teachers.

Suddenly, there’s time

I’ve experienced what it means to be a subject teacher—in my case, English—teaching three subject periods per week in six or seven different classes or learning groups. I’m familiar with the jumps between grade levels—from eleventh to fourth and then back to tenth grade. And I clearly remember that, while preparing, I would repeatedly find myself focusing on individual classes, while others had to be set aside for a while. It was simply impossible for me to actively keep so many learning groups—equivalent to 140 to 200 students, depending on group size—in mind at the same time. Especially in the early years, this repeatedly led to feeling overwhelmed and stressed.

What a relief the block periods are! I teach two, at most three, upper-level classes at the same time and can really dive into the topics. The number of students I’m in contact with simultaneously has decreased significantly, while the daily double periods give our relationships more time to develop. Overall, this allows me to engage with individual students more intensively and purposefully.

But what matters most to me is the effect on the lessons themselves. Suddenly, there’s a sense of time! Time to use a few creative exercises or a game to help students transition to another language. Time to explore a longer text or a scene from a play. Time for the students to immerse themselves deeply in the task through group work. And even time to share initial findings with the whole class.

In my second subject, biology, I had already come to know and appreciate all these benefits, and I had never understood why what applies to the learning process in the traditional block-based subjects—and is highly praised there as the Waldorf approach—should not apply to so-called subject-specific classes. Now I can also work phenomenologically in English class—with enough time for the various phases of the learning process and time for creative processes and independent work. The intensity of the learning processes this enables is striking and more than makes up for the periods when students have no language instruction between blocks. Furthermore, there are no longer any canceled classes due to field trips, projects, or internships, as these have already been scheduled in advance.

Spaces for Play and Resonance

And for the students, too, a noticeable slowdown is evident. They have three subjects from the language, science, and social studies spectrum, as well as one arts, crafts, or music subject each day. Only physical education continues to be taught in weekly double periods. This has created spaces for experimentation and environments that invite immersion. The block schedule has become more flexible, thereby offering opportunities to lighten the workload—for example, for teachers who, for various reasons, prefer to start teaching at 10 a.m. or later. Mixed-grade groups and elective courses are also possible. What pleases me most is that we’ve been able to implement this principle all the way through the upper school, including grades 12 and 13. After all, it is particularly important here that students do not merely study defensively for exams, but that we design and structure learning spaces in such a way that young people have transformative learning experiences and are able to learn in a sustainable and expansive manner until the end of their time at the Waldorf School—across all subjects.