In defense of our schedule

By Ashley Peng, 2026

Published 12/4/24

It has not been a secret through the grapevine of Cheshire High School that school administrators are looking to adjust the schedule for the upcoming school year. This is not without good cause, but when in conjunction with the slew of other changes that administrators are attempting to implement, the change in the schedule is rendered exhausting and overkill. 

The current four-period schedule at its heart is the most realistic and adaptable schedule of the options that have been circling around. An eighty-five minute class allows teachers to teach a lesson then have enough time to allow students to apply their learning through practice and application. This class length also extends itself to Cheshire’s vision of developing self-directed learners. There’s no doubt that eighty-five minutes is a long time, but we allow students to learn independently and in a manner that suits them if we give them the chance to choose when to take a break or to adapt the time period to their educational needs. 

Beyond the walls of CHS, most students will find that college classes are much longer as well, ranging from just an hour up to three hours. If students are not prepared to remain in class for extended periods of time, then the adjustment to higher education or the workplace will be made much more difficult. If this becomes the case, then will Cheshire High School really have done its job of preparing students for the future? Students also have the chance to complete homework over a two day period, which is similarly much more reminiscent of the course load that most college students will have. 

This commitment to changing the schedule comes at the same time that administrators are implementing a new pass system and cracking down on cell phone usage, decisions that are motivated by the idea of Generation-Z being the “Anxious Generation.” If we apply our current circumstances to the somewhat distasteful but also somewhat apt analogy of a science experiment, then the schedule would be the constant. Common scientific knowledge would dictate that when conducting an experiment, the constant should remain (predictably) constant. If we are choosing to push school policies that are meant to stimulate engagement and maintain our attention spans, then we should commit to the longer class period to allow those benefits to be reaped. 

The newer schedule, which is predicted to have more classes per day and subsequently shorter class periods, also forces us to address logistical errors and obstacles that we have avoided with the current schedule. If students are being asked to carry more school supplies, are we prepared to encourage locker usage once again? If we ask students to use their lockers, then will the passing period be sufficiently long enough to accommodate these stops? Any possible new schedule opens up Pandora’s boxes concerning student activity, all in regards to behavior that was more or less avoided with the four-block schedule.

Just as with the criticism geared towards the new online pass system, the majority should not be forced to adjust to the needs of the minority. A personalized education is a right for every student who goes to school, but the student body as a whole should not be beholden to the few. The current block schedule is preferable and works best for most of the students here at Cheshire High School. Our time here in high school is meant to be a stepping stone to what we will achieve in the future and the schedule that we have now is the best option for encouraging the growth of our students, both socially and academically.