Block by block: Is a shorter, intensive block system the higher education of the future? A critical reflection based on recent literature

Abstract

Curriculum-related factors play a role in students' learning processes and study success (Jansen, 2004; Torenbeek, Jansen, & Suhre, 2013; Van den Berg & Hofman, 2005). Students adapt their study behaviour (the way and timing of studying, invested study me,...) to different factors, such as the way the academic year is organized (Crombag et al., 1985; Jansen, 2004; Van der Dri & Vos, 1987), the difficulty level of a specific subject (Masui et al., 2014) and the way specific subjects are taught (Peeters & Lievens, 2012). One way to adapt and improve the curriculum is to shorten the length of the teaching period. Traditionally, HE has used a semester system, where subjects are programmed in parallel over longer periods. Recently, however, innovative systems came into the spotlight where short, intensive course units are worked with, often offered sequentially (e.g., Belgium: Hasselt University’s quartile system, Doumen et al., 2023; Australië: VU Block Model at Victoria University, McClusky et al., 2019). However, rigorous research on the effect of shorter teaching periods on students' academic progress and satisfaction in HE is scarce. Scienfic research is needed to better understand its potential advantages and disadvantages, which starts with critically questioning this organizational method. In this paper, the following questions are evaluated based on a literature review: - Is a quartile system (or a similar approach like block teaching) an effective organizational technique in HE? - Are there potential negative effects? - Can a quartile system have positive effects for non-traditional or at-risk students? We hereby specifically evaluate its role for first-year, at-risk students.