I want to see a debate on which is better.


What happened?
Our normal class takes place for about 6 hours (single subject) per week. The students in my class were saying it was too cold in there (AC was at 26 degrees) to focus on studying so they asked the prof if they could end class early. He ended up keeping us for 1 extra hour.

Some were debating that long class = more work done but others say that short class = more focused on lessons. They kept yapping to each other when the teach was not in the room. And of course I was playing snake on my phone.

One dude came up with an idea saying, "we should ask around other students and get their opinion." I thought it was a fun idea so here we are now.

State your opinions. I'm going to tally your names below.

i like multiple classes better, because there we can focus more on the lessons that are taught.

I mean, after awhile you can get used to the one and only class you have, but compiling information would probably be hell later icl. That's just me though.

I'd much rather have multiple classes to shift up my day and gather information elsewhere.

I think longer classes are better, the time is better spent, think that there is a period of the teacher setting everything up and then wrapping everything up that doensn't scale with how long the class is, so the more times they have to do that the more time you lose

wouldn't more focus (from shorter classes) lead to more and better work? more engagement with the subject means you'd retain memory of it better and be inclined to put in more effort, and repeated studying spread out over time rather than one long session is more effective at committing knowledge to the brain long-term

i know some of them do probably just have shit attention spans and/or aren't engaged with the class regardless of length and there's only so much you can do for that, but people (especially students who haven't [fully] developed dicipline but it can happen with anyone) regardless can and will take up however much time they're given to do what they're expected to do (and if they're given too much time and begin to lose interest/focus they will start slacking/chatting/playing games/etc.). imo it's better to restrict the time you give them so there's less chance of losing focus + more pressure/reason to engage with the task/s right away

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

wouldn't more focus (from shorter classes) lead to more and better work? more engagement with the subject means you'd retain memory of it better and be inclined to put in more effort, and repeated studying spread out over time rather than one long session is more effective at committing knowledge to the brain long-term

That's exactly what I was thinking... W statement

Wimpy Cursed wrote: 3pr5g

but compiling information would probably be hell later icl. That's just me though.

Depends on the person... There's one dude who comes to class, learns, and literally revise and finish studying it by the next day. Inhumane behaviour

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

wouldn't more focus (from shorter classes) lead to more and better work? more engagement with the subject means you'd retain memory of it better and be inclined to put in more effort, and repeated studying spread out over time rather than one long session is more effective at committing knowledge to the brain long-term

i know some of them do probably just have shit attention spans and/or aren't engaged with the class regardless of length and there's only so much you can do for that, but people (especially students who haven't [fully] developed dicipline but it can happen with anyone) regardless can and will take up however much time they're given to do what they're expected to do (and if they're given too much time and begin to lose interest/focus they will start slacking/chatting/playing games/etc.). imo it's better to restrict the time you give them so there's less chance of losing focus + more pressure/reason to engage with the task/s right away

I think in a vacuum, maybe, but you having shorter classes don't mean you have less class in general, just means more subjects per day, and I think that if you're burned out, it doesn't matter if you swith subjects or not, in fact, switching may be more stressful having to change your mindset or whatever

also, again, longer classes are better in higher education where you maybe don't need to attend to every subject, because if I don't go a subject and it turns out that's like a gap of 2 hours in between classes, what the fuck am I doing in that time

the only real argument I can see in favour of shorter classes would be sending more homework but idk how I feel about that

I Prefer Short Classes

1 wrote: 3886w

I think in a vacuum, maybe, but you having shorter classes don't mean you have less class in general, just means more subjects per day, and I think that if you're burned out, it doesn't matter if you swith subjects or not, in fact, switching may be more stressful having to change your mindset or whatever

long classes with zero breaks wouldn't help with this either. all you're doing is leaving someone to sit around in a classroom with not enough energy/motivation to do what's expected of them, but unable to leave. that time would be wasted, not being used for anything practical (or, if used, in an inefficient manner) while not letting that person properly unwind or even rest on their own because they're still in an environment where they're expected to work. having to numb yourself and/or push through it miserable wouldn't make you feel better. at least if the classes are different but split throughout the day there's still break periods. plus, you can become burned out with a specific subject. i've experienced it myself

but splitting up classes and having it be same-subject aren't mutually exclusive. though depending on the amount of subjects it's impossible to structure to have another class of the same subject on another day without swapping subjects within the same day (i took like 10 seconds to go over it and any more than 2 subjects would prevent this [assuming hours spent in must total 6 for each], even if you used all weekdays). that's where self-study and homework would have to come in to compensate if you made it a strict rule to not vary subjects within a day

i get where you got the "shorter classes/less class" thing from cause i phrased it shit (or maybe i thought about it weirdly before but i couldn't tell you now). well i know i was at least thinking in a broader sense about restricting time and deadlines and stuff, not exclusively in education and not exclusively in the sense that the overall time spent working would be reduced. i more meant making the most out of the time in the class, and it was more a point against the idea longer classes = more work done that op mentioned anyways. that loads of time could actually be counterproductive

i'm not proposing anything extreme like giving loads of work with very little time to complete any one thing, nor a 100% strict "you have to move on to the next thing if you haven't finished this" (though avoiding that would require taking into people who haven't finished yet/don't want to move on and may forget instructions, which i'd figure would be pretty simple to do)

...breaking up a lesson could be an issue for people who have issues with being disrupted (is that your issue with it?). there's probably some way to cut a compromise with that (like being transparent about what'll happen in the lesson or something so they're more prepared)

2 wrote: 1l5435

also, again, longer classes are better in higher education where you maybe don't need to attend to every subject, because if I don't go a subject and it turns out that's like a gap of 2 hours in between classes, what the fuck am I doing in that time

...why is your choice not to go the school's problem here in the first place? and then there's the reason why a gap that long would be there (lunch break, or even just a break period in general). maybe you don't feel *you* benefit from it but that doesn't mean other people don't

i've been in higher education, i am presently in university. there was little point in leaving campus while i was in college (just because there wasn't anything nearby that wouldn't require around 40mins of travel time total and those gaps tended to be 1-2hrs), but there were still things i could do in those periods in-between. i had a phone, there was a library with computers, even if i couldn't access computers i could still access homework or even just watch videos/play games/read wikipedia articles or whatever/etc. on my phone. same still applies now, but it's easier to find other things

though longer classes wouldn't change this if you aren't going to them in the first place. unless you mean this referring to keeping them the same subject, which is again not mutually exclusive with having (long) breaks (even if it's "standard" for how timetables are set up to vary throughout the day, i've had two classes for the same subject in a single day in the past)

3 wrote: 574y3p

the only real argument I can see in favour of shorter classes would be sending more homework but idk how I feel about that

likewise, i can see the argument where you'd just have shorter breaks throughout the class - like maybe 20 minutes at most (excluding lunch breaks) though i can't say how long would be best - which would be way better than a whole uninterrupted 6 hours, especially if you were allowed to leave the classroom for it. though what this means is that you'd be there for longer and unable to engage with any other subject for very long without missing out on another. which may not be great for some people

i think homework is best used as a supplement to a course, being a way to help students put together what they've learnt and maybe as a means to encourage and direct self-study (since a course realistically can't tell you absolutely everything you need to know). i think having strict deadlines with punishments for failing to turn things in isn't so great, especially when the task given is highly straining for someone. like in college i could easily finish maths homework over the course of lunch/study periods if i so chose. something that takes many hours or even days to do, especially if you're only being given maybe a week to do it, is too much and just going to lead to burnout

I mean, I the concept of a break, I just mean like long classes with breaks, not having breaks is inhuman, I feel you're kinda twisting my words on there. I'm saying that I prefeer one subject for a long period of time rather than a lot of subjects with less time each, not that the break time should be reduced or even removed.

I also think you didn't understand my second point, yes, I also study or use my phone when on those hours, they're not completely wasted, but you know, not having class but being forced to stay around the campus because you later on need to go to class that fun. I'm not skipping class beause I have gaps, I'm just saying I wish those gaps didn't exist and I could just miss the day or whatever

edit: tho I will say, I don't think having a whole day of one subject is realistic at all, you got schedules to fit between grades and a lot of subjects where the total runtime is not divisible for 6 or even reach 6, I just think classes should be as long as they could withing what is possible and reasonable, you also then have exams, the longer the class last the better it is for exams. aAlso having less subjects per day can also mean less exams per day.

op's post implies one long class, not entirely sure about breaks but it seemed like that was the case. ...actually i have no fucking clue where i got the assumption you thought that from in my second post because i didn't communicate that idea initially anywhere either. i see we generally agree on that then. i wasn't trying to twist your words, i legitimately was just being stupid there. my bad and i'm gonna figure out what was up with that actually, i've already got a pretty good guess...

also i couldn't understand point two because you were missing a ton of in-between logic of what you said, like you seemed to think it would be obvious to me, which it wasn't. i tried to compensate. idk how it is for you or anyone you know, but i'm completely able to come in and out of campus and pretty fine with managing outside of that. i'm taking it we have way different experiences/knowledge here

also i wasn't saying you're skipping because of gaps, it just didn't seem all that relevant to class length. unless you're entirely unable to travel to/from campus as you need (like having to go along with a very limited bus schedule or something), which in that case fair enough. public transport in the uk in my experience has been fine for that

i'd say if a class is so long that students are struggling to focus and are getting bored, it's definitely going on too long (or alternatively isn't giving enough for the students to do for its length). don't know how well a whole day of the same subject would go, regardless of break length or whatever (other obligations and all like you said). people can get burned out over single subjects, i've experienced it before, but thinking about it it could go either way (day exclusively/majority subject wouldn't be great if you went but at least it could be skipped; at the same time it might be harder to get back into if you have to do a bunch in one day rather than split throughout the week)

also the thing about dividing class time wasn't entirely a point against or for anything i was just testing to see how possible it would be to avoid switching subjects in a day within that timeframe and figured i'd mention, specifically for fewer subjects like you might see in higher education (i've had 3 with each the same amount of time). just context

obviously it would vary much more, i won't deny that here and i didn't disagree with that before. i think the point about switching subjects possibly not helping with burnout is perfectly valid, though yeah it wouldn't be possible to avoid in a lot of cases. maybe possible to work around though

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

i'd say if a class is so long that students are struggling to focus and are getting bored, it's definitely going on too long (or alternatively isn't giving enough for the students to do for its length). don't know how well a whole day of the same subject would go, regardless of break length or whatever (other obligations and all like you said). people can get burned out over single subjects, i've experienced it before, but thinking about it it could go either way (day exclusively/majority subject wouldn't be great if you went but at least it could be skipped; at the same time it might be harder to get back into if you have to do a bunch in one day rather than split throughout the week)

This is exactly the point we're trying to prove the teach. We're half asleep in the final hours of the class but he just keeps going because he has to "Cover the syllabus." I understand it's important to cover it but with this current pacing, we're already much farther ahead than we should be. He's rushing for no reason.

Patatitta wrote: m6d2i

also, again, longer classes are better in higher education where you maybe don't need to attend to every subject.

I can agree with this too though
For example: I've referenced a cambridge syllabus book and the students have written down all the content they should accomplish in each month. For classes like this I do agree with a longer session since there's a LOT to cover. But I can assure you that we don't have a syllabus that condensed.

From personal experience, my opinion would be to have shorter classes in the start. When an exam comes up/if we're behind schedule, do a longer class to cover all of the things we couldn't cover/for revision. (Longer classes is an "if" situation.)

I can agree to most of what synthwavequid said... But I also understand where patatitta's coming from to a certain degree.

I like shorter lessons. I grew up with that and I can't see myself withstanding hours of the same subject.

6 hours on a single subject?!??!

Doom Mood wrote: 392424

6 hours on a single subject?!??!

Yes lol

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

Doom Mood wrote: 392424

6 hours on a single subject?!??!

Yes lol

where names

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

i'd say if a class is so long that students are struggling to focus and are getting bored, it's definitely going on too long (or alternatively isn't giving enough for the students to do for its length). don't know how well a whole day of the same subject would go, regardless of break length or whatever (other obligations and all like you said). people can get burned out over single subjects, i've experienced it before, but thinking about it it could go either way (day exclusively/majority subject wouldn't be great if you went but at least it could be skipped; at the same time it might be harder to get back into if you have to do a bunch in one day rather than split throughout the week)

This is exactly the point we're trying to prove the teach. We're half asleep in the final hours of the class but he just keeps going because he has to "Cover the syllabus." I understand it's important to cover it but with this current pacing, we're already much farther ahead than we should be. He's rushing for no reason.

that seems strange to me unless he's rushing specifically to give more time for revision later on (or there's some outside/extrinsic factor, maybe out of his control)... but it doesn't really seem like it'd do anything but cause stress/exhaustion, which that stands to burn out students from the subject

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

i'd say if a class is so long that students are struggling to focus and are getting bored, it's definitely going on too long (or alternatively isn't giving enough for the students to do for its length). don't know how well a whole day of the same subject would go, regardless of break length or whatever (other obligations and all like you said). people can get burned out over single subjects, i've experienced it before, but thinking about it it could go either way (day exclusively/majority subject wouldn't be great if you went but at least it could be skipped; at the same time it might be harder to get back into if you have to do a bunch in one day rather than split throughout the week)

This is exactly the point we're trying to prove the teach. We're half asleep in the final hours of the class but he just keeps going because he has to "Cover the syllabus." I understand it's important to cover it but with this current pacing, we're already much farther ahead than we should be. He's rushing for no reason.

that seems strange to me unless he's rushing specifically to give more time for revision later on (or there's some outside/extrinsic factor, maybe out of his control)... but it doesn't really seem like it'd do anything but cause stress/exhaustion, which that stands to burn out students from the subject

1. He gives us a revision paper after each lesson so no it's probably not cuz of revision.
2. Maybe an outside factor/institute problem but usually normal institutes are way more laid back than schools. Not too sure so maybe it's cuz of this.

BluePyTheDeer_ wrote: 5n2kd

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

Doom Mood wrote: 392424

6 hours on a single subject?!??!

Yes lol

where names

What names?

multiple i think

i say multiple. i wouldn’t be able to stand staying in the same class for that long

[-Omni-] wrote: 4w4c4

i say multiple. i wouldn’t be able to stand staying in the same class for that long

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

i'd say if a class is so long that students are struggling to focus and are getting bored, it's definitely going on too long (or alternatively isn't giving enough for the students to do for its length). don't know how well a whole day of the same subject would go, regardless of break length or whatever (other obligations and all like you said). people can get burned out over single subjects, i've experienced it before, but thinking about it it could go either way (day exclusively/majority subject wouldn't be great if you went but at least it could be skipped; at the same time it might be harder to get back into if you have to do a bunch in one day rather than split throughout the week)

This is exactly the point we're trying to prove the teach. We're half asleep in the final hours of the class but he just keeps going because he has to "Cover the syllabus." I understand it's important to cover it but with this current pacing, we're already much farther ahead than we should be. He's rushing for no reason.

that seems strange to me unless he's rushing specifically to give more time for revision later on (or there's some outside/extrinsic factor, maybe out of his control)... but it doesn't really seem like it'd do anything but cause stress/exhaustion, which that stands to burn out students from the subject

1. He gives us a revision paper after each lesson so no it's probably not cuz of revision.
2. Maybe an outside factor/institute problem but usually normal institutes are way more laid back than schools. Not too sure so maybe it's cuz of this.

tbf he might be trying to maximise possible revision time and giving out papers is part of that so it's not *necessarily* that unlikely even if it's unecessary from what i'm gathering

but aside from that... other than a matter of outside/institutional factors (inclu. like workplace pressures or w/e that aren't exactly "forced") then it might just be personal mindset. "i have all this time so i may as well get through as much as possible" or something like that

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

synthwavesquid wrote: 333y57

i'd say if a class is so long that students are struggling to focus and are getting bored, it's definitely going on too long (or alternatively isn't giving enough for the students to do for its length). don't know how well a whole day of the same subject would go, regardless of break length or whatever (other obligations and all like you said). people can get burned out over single subjects, i've experienced it before, but thinking about it it could go either way (day exclusively/majority subject wouldn't be great if you went but at least it could be skipped; at the same time it might be harder to get back into if you have to do a bunch in one day rather than split throughout the week)

This is exactly the point we're trying to prove the teach. We're half asleep in the final hours of the class but he just keeps going because he has to "Cover the syllabus." I understand it's important to cover it but with this current pacing, we're already much farther ahead than we should be. He's rushing for no reason.

that seems strange to me unless he's rushing specifically to give more time for revision later on (or there's some outside/extrinsic factor, maybe out of his control)... but it doesn't really seem like it'd do anything but cause stress/exhaustion, which that stands to burn out students from the subject

1. He gives us a revision paper after each lesson so no it's probably not cuz of revision.
2. Maybe an outside factor/institute problem but usually normal institutes are way more laid back than schools. Not too sure so maybe it's cuz of this.

BluePyTheDeer_ wrote: 5n2kd

CLICKMACHINE wrote: 2n1et

Doom Mood wrote: 392424

6 hours on a single subject?!??!

Yes lol

where names

What names?

The leaderboard. False advertising.

I only have one course that lasts more than 6 hours and frankly, it really depends on how that class is spread over the week and if it's something students will find interesting (not philosophy for example). I also prefer to spend more time on my studies in a productive environment than home or somewhere else that is not school so

1 big class