<p>I am in the process of trying to schedule my fall semester of freshman year. I was wondering if there are some classes which are better to take that have a shorter length, but more frequency (example: 1:05 pm - 1:55 pm MWF) and which classes are better to take that are longer, but less frequent (example: 1:35 pm - 2:55 pm TR).</p>
<p>I would assume that English classes would be better as longer, but less frequent so it would promote more discussions. Am I right?</p>
<p>i always try to stack MWF so that my classes are shorter; it's easier to pay attention that way. i'd say most importantly don't schedule huge lectures for TR because you'll fall asleep. if the class is smaller and more discussion-based, you won't have as hard a time.</p>
<p>You're correct in associating longer classes with better discussions. My history seminars are two hours, once a week, and that lets us read a book or two a week, then really dig into it during our class meeting. In general though, I like shorter classes--you can still have a fairly substantial discussion during over fifty minutes, with a good professor.</p>
<p>I also prefer MWF because the classes are shorter. I took both ENGL 1101 and 1102 under a MWF schedule, and I don't feel that the shorter class time inhibited any discussion.</p>
<p>However, it's nice to have no/very few friday classes. Next semester all my classes are 2 days a week at 1.5 hours each meeting. Three MW and Two TR. Free Fridays!!!!!!! (except for a potential accounting discussion section :()</p>
<p>What I'm going to try my very best to do is go to class and then immediately right after go study for an hour or two on that subject. I want to kind of do a 9-5 deal of just school work.</p>
<p>I don't think that the time spent in class daily really matters, because it all pretty much evens out in the end. To me, it is about if I want to see that professor 2 or 3 times a week.</p>
<p>With a skill class -- math, etc. -- you should try to have meetings as many days a week as possible, so that you're drilling frequently and getting feedback frequently and so that you have a chance to ask any questions you have. Not that it isn't possible to do those classes in one three-hour session a week, but it's harder.</p>
<p>I agree that what tends to make the most sense is:
Discussion-based classes (philosophy, english, etc.): fewer, longer meetings.
Math, language, other memorization skills classes: many shorter meetings.</p>
<p>Basically put the courses with the most interesting lectures on tues/thurs. This will probably be stuff like english/philosophy since there are actual discussions and not just being taught boring material.</p>
<p>nontraditional,
That was my feeling as well. And because I want to study right after class, I would also be studying more for that class as well.</p>
<p>Great! So it sounds like I have the right idea to have my liberal arts type classes (and history??) classes with fewer, longer meetings and math, language, and science classes with more frequent shorter meetings!</p>
<p>For me it depended on how much prep there was to do for a class. It was a lot easier for me to read 100-150 pages for each English class when it only met twice a week (especially since I had between a whole weekend plus two days between every other class meeting) than it would have been to read the 80ish pages that I would've had to read for each class if it'd met three times a week. Even though the end result would be the same number of pages (roughly), it was easier to fit it in when it was only twice a week.</p>
<p>I definitely agree that classes that often require using the knowledge from the previous class session are better on MWF. Languages, for me, were particularly important to have at least three times a week.</p>