Abstract
This paper offers a personal and practice-based reflection on block and intensive modes of teaching within Foundation education, viewed through the lens of lived neurodiversity experience, belonging, and pedagogical ethics. Drawing on my experience as a dyslexic educator with hyperacusis, and as a programme lead overseeing a Foundation curriculum that combines block and concurrent module delivery, the paper explores how different temporal structures shape student engagement, confidence, and approaches to learning.
Rather than presenting formal empirical findings, the paper situates lived experience and sustained professional observation in dialogue with scholarship on surface and deep learning, student belonging, inclusive design, and relationship-rich education. Particular attention is given to how block teaching can reduce cognitive overload, support continuity of relationships, and create conditions for depth, reflection, and community-building—benefits that appear especially significant for students with histories of educational disruption or marginalisation.
By contrasting student experiences across sequential and concurrent teaching structures, the paper argues that block teaching operates not simply as a timetabling model but as an ethical pedagogical choice that communicates institutional values about time, care, and learning. The paper contributes to ongoing debates about block and intensive delivery by foregrounding the affective and relational dimensions of curriculum design and by positioning structural change, rather than learner deficit, as a key site for inclusive educational practice.
Rather than presenting formal empirical findings, the paper situates lived experience and sustained professional observation in dialogue with scholarship on surface and deep learning, student belonging, inclusive design, and relationship-rich education. Particular attention is given to how block teaching can reduce cognitive overload, support continuity of relationships, and create conditions for depth, reflection, and community-building—benefits that appear especially significant for students with histories of educational disruption or marginalisation.
By contrasting student experiences across sequential and concurrent teaching structures, the paper argues that block teaching operates not simply as a timetabling model but as an ethical pedagogical choice that communicates institutional values about time, care, and learning. The paper contributes to ongoing debates about block and intensive delivery by foregrounding the affective and relational dimensions of curriculum design and by positioning structural change, rather than learner deficit, as a key site for inclusive educational practice.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Journal of Block and Intensive Learning and Teaching |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 29 May 2026 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 4 Quality Education
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver