Content uploaded by Dawson R. Hancock
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dawson R. Hancock on Oct 16, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
The Effect of Block Scheduling on Middle School Students' Mathematics Achievement
Abstract and Figures
To address the nation's ongoing interest in student achievement, some researchers have focused on the effect of block scheduling—a model in which students take fewer classes for longer periods of time. Although block scheduling has demon strated its viability in high schools, little research has explored its effect at the mid dle level. Because the middle level years are often marked by a decline in student achievement, particularly during the transitional year when students move from elementary school to sixth grade, the current study was conducted. Results revealed significant increases in the mathematics achievement scores of sixth-grade stu dents' enrolled in five middle level schools that transitioned from traditional to block schedules. Characteristics of block scheduling that may have accounted for these outcomes and recommendations for future research are discussed.
Figures - uploaded by Dawson R. Hancock
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Dawson R. Hancock
Content may be subject to copyright.
... However, few studies have considered the effects of block class scheduling at the primary (i.e., elementary) school level (but see [21]), especially among adolescent students in the fifth to eighth grades. These students undergo a critical developmental and transitional phase, responding to their physical changes, and social, self-confidence and cognitive challenges [22,23], often exhibiting a decline in student achievement [21,24]. ...
... However, few studies have considered the effects of block class scheduling at the primary (i.e., elementary) school level (but see [21]), especially among adolescent students in the fifth to eighth grades. These students undergo a critical developmental and transitional phase, responding to their physical changes, and social, self-confidence and cognitive challenges [22,23], often exhibiting a decline in student achievement [21,24]. Therefore, it is needed to investigate the effect of block scheduling at the (upper) primary school level, taking into account the prior findings on the effects of student age, performance categories and prior knowledge on exam success [8]. ...
The objective of this study was to investigate whether the class scheduling of Nature and Biology classes in blocks results in better learning success for primary school students, and whether this depends on the average student success rate (i.e., student performance categories), age, or prior knowledge. For this study, we have assumed that block scheduling results in better success rates for older lower-performing primary-school students. The research included 773 fifth- to eighth-grade students from 14 Croatian primary schools. The students fell into two groups: one group attending 45-min Nature and Biology lessons twice a week (single-scheduled classes), and another group attending a 90-min lesson once a week (block-scheduled class). To assess the level of student learning success, all students underwent both an initial and final written exam in Nature and/or Biology, specific to each grade. The rmANOVA proved that there was a significant interaction among class scheduling, performance categories, and the initial and final written exam scores of fifth- and seventh-grade students. Such a correlation was not found among the sixth- and eighth-grade students. Our findings further indicate that students achieve better results in block-scheduled classes at the end of primary school education, and that block class scheduling does not necessarily result in improved student achievement, particularly in lower-performing students.
... While most studies on extended instructional days are done at the elementary level, the majority of research on the effectiveness of longer classes and scheduling changes has been done at the middle and high school level. There appears to be some support that more efficient uses of time, block scheduling, particularly in mathematics has positive achievement effects on students in middle and high schools (Deuel, 1999;Lewis et.al, 2005;Mattox, Hancock and Queen, 2005). ...
Learning takes time, but providing time does not in itself ensure that learning will take place (Carroll, 1963; Stallings & Kaskowitz, 1974; Anderson, 1981; Aronson, Zimmer & Carlos, 1999; Berliner, 1990; Kidder et. al., 1975). We need to examine more closely how students are using time and which conditions maximize student engagement. As schools continue to struggle with meeting state and national standards using traditional educational pedagogies and structures, whole school reforms are often implemented to improve student learning and success. While several studies have attempted to begin this exploration, few, if any, actually ask students about their experiences, perspectives, and attitudes in reformed schools. Yet, student voice is increasingly identified as an essential component of school reform by implementation researchers, constructivists, and critical theorists. This study explores 8th graders’ perspectives toward learning in a school which implemented Expanded Learning Time (ELT) Reform, adding 30% more time to the school day, compared with a comparison group of 8th graders in the same school district with a traditional school day. A dominant sequential, or exploratory mixed methods approach, using principal interviews (N=2), student focus groups (N=4), and Time for Learning student survey (N=226), based primarily on scales from the School Success Profile (SSP) (Bowen & Richman, 2008) were utilized to explore students’ perspectives on time and learning. Results from the focus groups indicate that students in both schools reported teacher support and peer to peer collaboration opportunities are important. Focus group results also indicate that students in both schools report students’ opinions and perspectives are not valued. Students in the ELT school reported more academic relevancy or real world application of the curriculum. Students report wanting more activities and electives which take time, but do not actually want to be in school longer. Multiple Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) results confirmed that students in the ELT school had significantly different perspectives than students in the comparison school. Specifically, students in the ELT school scored significantly higher on the Student Engagement scale of the SSP than students in the comparison school.
... Yurniwati & Hanum (2017) menyatakan kemampuan observasi, diskusi dan pengetahuan akuisisi meningkat dengan pembelajaran penemuan terbimbing. Selanjutnya (Mattox, Hancock, & Queen 2005) menyatakan bahwa peningkatan yang signifikan dalam prestasi matematika siswa kelas 6 di lima sekolah yang mengalami transisi dari sistem tradisional menjadi sistem penjadwalan. Johandi, Hairida, & Rasmawan (2017) menyatakan bahwa besar pengaruh penerapan pembelajaran block system terhadap peningkatan prestasi belajar siswa sebesar 28,23%. ...
This study aims to determine the effectiveness of block scheduling with guided discovery learning on students’ mathematical problem solving. This research was conducted on class XI students at MAN 2 Deli Serdang, North Sumatra. This type of research is Mixed Method Research research with data triangulation methods, namely tests, observations and, interviews. The subjects of this study consisted of 4 people. The instruments used in this study were tests and interviews. Problem-solving abilities were obtained by tests of mathematical problem-solving abilities followed by interviews that were guided by the results of previous tests. The results showed that block scheduling with guided discovery was effective in terms of mathematical problem-solving abilities.
... Also, after controlling for poverty level, there were only slight differences in the test results for White, Black, Hispanic, and Mixed students -with two exceptions: the mean test score for White students using an A/B 80-90 minute instructional time configuration dropped 16.05 points (from 650.48 to 634.43), and the mean test score for Black students using a 80-90 minute block configuration rose 11.76 points (from 598.79 to 610.55). (Cobb et al., 1999;Evans et al., 2002;Hess et al., 1999;Mattox et al., 2005;Payne & Jordan, 1996;Queen et al., 1996) as well as studies that either conclude there are no significant differences in student performance with regard to the scheduling configuration used at the school (Duel, 1999;Lare et al., 2002;Snyder, 1997;Veal & Schreiber, 1999) or traditionally scheduled students outperform blockscheduled students (Arnold, 2002;Gruber & Onwuegbuzie, 2007;Knight et al., 1999;Lawrence & McPherson, 2000;Pisapia & Westfall, 1997 (Gainey & Brucato, 1999;Lewis, Cobb et al., 2003). This finding is consistent with studies suggesting longer and more frequent instructional periods fail to adequately support average attention spans and do not insure a greater retention of general knowledge in core areas (Gould, 2003;Gullatt, 2006). ...
This study compared the academic performance of students on the 2019 South Carolina Palmetto Assessment of State Standards (SCPASS) by the instructional time configuration used and explored the relationship among the variables of gender, race/ethnicity and poverty on this performance. Results of 25280 seventh-grade student social studies test scores from 112 middle schools, as well as information regarding each school’s instructional time configuration, were analyzed. While controlling for poverty, students in schools using instructional time configurations with the least amount of social studies class time per week had the highest performance levels. Additionally, White students scored significantly higher on the test than Mixed students, Mixed students scored significantly higher on the test than Hispanic students, and Hispanic students scored significantly higher on the test than Black students regardless of the instructional time configuration used.
... Results indicated, while controlling for students' poverty level, there was no statistically significant effect for schedule configuration associated with PASS mean social studies achievement. Therefore, the present study confirms the findings of numerous previous studies that also conclude there are no significant differences in student performance with regard to the scheduling configuration used at the school (Bateson, 1990;Cobb, Abate, & Baker, 1999;Duel, 1999;Lare, Jablonski, & Salvaterra, 2002;Lockwood, 1995;Snyder, 1997;Veal & Schreiber, 1999;Wild, 1998) and refutes findings of previous studies that either conclude block-scheduled students perform better on standardized tests than traditionally scheduled students (Evans, Tokarczyk, Rice, & McCray, 2002;Hess, Wronkovich, & Robinson, 1999;Mattox, Hancock, & Queen, 2005, Payne & Jordan, 1996Queen, Algozzine, & Eaddy, 1996) or traditionally scheduled students outperform block-scheduled students (Arnold, 2002;Gruber & Onwuegbuzie, 2001;Knight, DeLeon, & Smith, 1999;Lawrence & McPherson, 2000;Pisapia & Westfall, 1997). ...
... Results of an ANOVA comparing instructional time configuration by student social studies accountability test results, and an ANCOVA using the Poverty Index to control for student poverty level, found a significant difference between instructional time configuration and student social studies accountability test results: Students in schools using a 61-79 minute block all year schedule configuration earned significantly higher student social studies accountability test results than students in schools using a traditional 45-60 minute allyear schedule configuration or the sample's two other frequently used types of block scheduling configurations. This finding supports previous research concluding that students in block schedules perform better on standardized tests than traditionally scheduled students (Arnold, 2002;Cobb et al., 1999;Evans et al., 2002;Gullatt, 2006;Hess et al., 1999;Mattox et al., 2005, Payne & Jordan, 1996Queen et al., 1996;Rice et al., 2002) and refutes findings of previous studies that either conclude there are no significant differences in student test performance with regard to the scheduling configuration used at the school (Duel, 1999;Lare et al., 2002;Snyder, 1997;Veal & Schreiber, 1999) or traditionally scheduled students outperform blockscheduled students on standardized tests (Brake, 2000;Gruber & Onwuegbuzie, 2001;Knight et al., 1999;Lawrence & McPherson, 2000;Pisapia & Westfall, 1997). ...
This study investigated the relationship among the variables instructional time configuration, gender, race/ethnicity, and poverty to predict the academic performance of seventh-grade students on a state-mandated social studies accountability test. Results of 24,919 seventh-grade student social studies test scores from 117 middle schools, as well as a survey given to principals of the same 117 middle schools, were analyzed. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis showed that when controlling for poverty, the variables instructional time configuration and race/ethnicity were significant, explaining 11% of the variation in student social studies accountability test results; a small effect. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) were also used to illuminate the relationship of these variables on accountability test performance.
... Linking scheduling formats to student achievement is very complex as so many factors interact with student learning, including teacher content knowledge and pedagogy [66,74]. Additionally, few studies exist on the ways in which scheduling formats are developmentally responsive to the academic learning needs of young adolescents (e.g., [69,75,76]). ...
Abstract: The middle school concept, aimed at creating a more developmentally responsive learning environment for young adolescents, gained a stronghold in the later part of the 20th century. Proponents of this concept have continually argued for the holistic implementation of all of its six key characteristics if its benefits are to be realized. These characteristics include, (a) a challenging, integrative, and exploratory curriculum, (b) varied teaching and learning approaches, (c) assessment and evaluation that promote learning, (d) flexible organizational structures (i.e., including the physical space, scheduling, and grouping of students and teachers), (e) programs and policies that foster health, wellness and safety, and (f) comprehensive guidance and support services [1]. Recently, authors [2] identified key middle school organizational structures of people, place, and time as being interconnected and integral to effective middle school practices. Author [3] also demonstrated the interconnected nature of these key characteristics and how organizational structures of people affected the successful implementation of other characteristics. Thus, how these organizational structures can and are being implemented has implications for our understanding of the effectiveness of other middle school practices. In this paper, researchers from both the United States and Australia examine and compare literature published between 2000-2018 addressing ways middle school/middle years organizational structures have been reported and categorized by structures of people, place, and time in these two countries. Pertinent literature related to organizational structures of middle schools in the United States and to middle years education in Australia were examined. Findings from studies and evaluations from each country are reported to provide an international perspective on the organizational structures of middle schools/middle years education across the two countries. Overall, since 2000, the body of knowledge about middle schools/middle years organizational structures are surprisingly limited in comparison to their perceived importance in the field. This lack of research is concerning in the midst of educational reform in both countries, resulting in questions about the impact of school organizational structures on young adolescent development and learning.
... Flexible variables, such as time, have been used to delineate learning environments from some time (Janosz et al. 1998), but further empirical research in this area is necessary. While the effects of adding more time have been studied in terms of adding time to the school day [see review by Patall et al. (2010)] or school year [see review by Cooper et al. (2003)], or even to classroom intervals (Mattox et al. 2005;Nichols 2005;Zepeda and Mayers 2006), methodologies have been limited and effect sizes have been negligible. Confounding issues of curriculum, instructional practices, assessment measures and district contexts have made researchers reluctant to generalise results (Joyner and Molina 2012). ...
A mixed methods research study was performed on 118 students taking biology in two urban high schools. A Student-Centered Adaptable Learning Environment (SCALE) was created to improve engagement from affective and cognitive perspectives using choice, creativity and technological allowances. Results demonstrated that fast and slow learners are generally separated by about 30 minutes in terms of inputting speeds, but can be as much as 65 minutes apart from one another. Given that traditional classrooms afford students only 45 minutes in which to learn, static time may have become a source of inequity in public schools. SCALE optimally allowed for the dynamic use of time in constrained periods, reducing, and even eliminating in the block setting, any negative relationships between speed of learning and resultant achievement gains. Especially benefitting from their ability to maneuver were the slowest learners, who showed the largest achievement improvements in either time interval amongst ability groupings. As learning speed may be the most critical contributing component of resultant educational outcomes, providing students the ability to use time dynamically should be considered as a feasible solution to helping teachers reestablish equity in mixed ability classrooms of public schools.
... Classroom Schedules, Mathematics, and Algebra I Studies of schedule types have examined a variety of factors: teacher satisfaction (Howard, 1997), the amount of time teachers use different strategies (Deuel, 1999), changes in students' selfefficacy (Biesinger, Crippen, & Muis, 2008), changes in GPA (Trenta & Newman, 2002), and changes in test scores (Ellis, 2004;Hancock, Mattox, & Queen, 2005;Lewis, Dugan, Winokur, & Cobb, 2005). Studies of scheduling have used an array of measures to compare traditional schedules with block or hybrid schedules. ...
Public education has options with regard to educational settings and structures. States and school districts may select varying lengths for the school year, lengths for the school day, and lengths for individual class periods. For example, one option regarding the length of individual class periods is the schedule type selected to teach mathematics Algebra I classes. In Utah, one measure of students’ achievement is scores on the State’s end-of-level criterion-referenced test (CRT) for Algebra I. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between student achievement as measured by Algebra I CRT scores, and the schedule type used to deliver Algebra I classes. The schedule types compared in this study were: traditional, trimester 3/3, trimester 2/3, and block A/B. The research questions focused on relationships between the schedule types and student scores on Utah’s CRT for Algebra I. Data were obtained from the Utah State Office of Education and included the scores for 50,000 students, from over 300 different schools, who took the identical Algebra I CRT at the end of the same school year. Data were also obtained from each school district to determine the schedule type of each participating student. A multinomial logistic regression analysis and a t-test analysis were conducted to determine relationships between Algebra I CRT scores and schedule types. The results indicated significant differences in student achievement based on the schedule type overall and for individual grade levels. Generally, the earlier the grade level the higher the CRT score. Within individual grade levels, there were statistically significant and non-significant differences. The schedule types that were generally related to higher Algebra I CRT scores were those where students spent more time in the mathematics classroom and where students’ mathematics classes met daily. The results suggest the value of daily time spent in the mathematics classroom and may assist educators when considering options for school structures in mathematics that foster student achievement.
The purpose of this quantitative study was to examine whether a difference existed in the percentage performance of students earning a pass/advanced score on the Standards of Learning (SOL) Test in math and reading in Virginia's Region IV for schools using an A/B block schedule and those using a traditional schedule. The research also examined if the percentage performance by race-Black, Hispanic, and White-differed on the math and reading SOL Test for Region IV in Virginia. Forty-three schools were included in the study-23 block and 20 traditional schools. The percentage performance in math and reading of each school and the percentage performance by race for each school were studied. Analyses of variance and t tests were used to examine differences. The t-test results do not show significant differences in the percentage performance of students earning pass/advanced scores in reading and math in block and traditional schools. Significant differences were shown in the percentage of Black and Hispanic students earning pass/advanced scores on the math and reading SOL Test for Region IV in Virginia. A larger percentage of Black and Hispanic students earned pass/advanced scores in the A/B block-scheduled schools than in the traditional schools.
For some children, the early adolescent years mark the beginning of a downward spiral in school-related behaviors and motivation that often lead to academic failure and school dropout. Although these declines are not so extreme for most adolescents, there is sufficient evidence of gradual decline in various indicators of academic motivation, self-per- ceptions, and school-related behaviors over the early adolescent years to make one ask why. Several investigators have proposed that these declines could result from the types of educational contexts to which many adolescents are exposed during the middle-grade years. This hy- pothesis is explored in this article. First, the results of analyses using the eighth-grade cohort from the National Educational Longitudinal Study comparing student outcomes in different types of middle-grade school settings are reported. Second, the results of several relevant studies assessing the impact of specific school environmental characteristics on the course of change in early adolescents' school-related motivation are reported. For some children, the early adolescent years mark the beginning of a downward spiral in school-related behaviors and motivation that often lead to academic failure and school dropout. For example, Sim- mons and Blyth (1987) found a marked decline in early adolescents' school grades as they move into junior high school. Furthermore, the magnitude of this decline was predictive of subsequent school failure and dropout. Similarly timed developmental declines have been doc-
Block scheduling, Copernican scheduling, macro scheduling, 4 x 4 scheduling, 3 x 3 scheduling-all these names have been applied to a form of restructuring of the school day. What effect does the block schedule have on student performance in math?
All those with a stake in education must work to improve a scheduling format that offers great potential for student success. Mr. Queen provides some guidelines. IN THE October 1997 Kappan, Kim Gaskey and I outlined the major steps for improving school climate through block scheduling, and these steps remain imperative for schools examining the possibility of moving to a block schedule. However, for schools that have been using some form of block scheduling, it is time to revisit the intention and direction of these alternative models. From my own observations and analyses, I believe that a number of principals and teachers have limited the effectiveness of block schedules. While I find a majority of educators using block schedules remain loyal to the basic tenets of the model, some principals have limited understanding of the science of scheduling and lack specific skills in evaluating effective teaching practices. Moreover, a growing percentage of teachers do not follow pacing guides. And those same teachers tend to use lecture and teacher-directed discussion extensively and to limit the 90-minute class to approximately 60 minutes of actual instruction. Such problems have been exacerbated both by poor monitoring of teachers who are failing to implement the block model and by a grave lack of training for teachers new to the field and the model. In order to make this reexamination of block scheduling most useful, I will look at why schools moved to block scheduling, analyze the benefits and pitfalls that educators have experienced, compare rates of student achievement, scrutinize the overuse of the lecture approach, and review effective instructional strategies. I will conclude with some specific recommendations to maximize the benefits of block scheduling in the future.
Teachers and administrators have overwhelmingly reported a desire to use the 4 × 4 block scheduling model. In survey after survey, success in the block is a direct result of paced, interactive teaching. It is imperative for first-year teachers to discover the strengths of strategies taught in an appropriately paced lesson.
While there are many problems associated with the 4 x 4 block scheduling model, the many arguments for considering a move to alternative scheduling appear to be winning favor. Lincoln County Schools in North Carolina are among the many districts that decided to move to a 4 x 4 design. What did they discover on the road they traveled?
There are many reasons for adopting a block schedule. Research indi cates that block scheduling may have important non-academic advan tages, including a calmer school atmosphere, better discipline, and improved student attitudes. Intensive block schedules may be particu larly helpful to at-risk students, reducing both failure and dropout rates. But how does it affect the teaching of mathematics?
To explore the nature of the achievement loss associated with school-to-school transitions from elementary school to middle school and to high school, the author compared 3 groups of 16 school districts in this ex post facto study. A statistically significant achievement loss associated with the transition from elementary school to middle school at 6th grade was found, as compared with K–8 schools that did not have a school-to-school transition at 6th grade. The transition loss in achievement was larger when students from multiple elementary schools were merged into a single middle school during the transition. The students from the middle schools and K–8 elementary schools experienced an achievement loss in the transition to high school at 9th grade. The achievement loss in the transition to high school was larger for middle school students than for K–8 elementary students. High school dropout rates were higher for districts with Grade 6–8 middle schools than for districts with K–8 elementary schools.
Teachers and administrators have overwhelmingly reported a desire to use the 4 x 4 block scheduling model. In survey after survey, success in the block is a direct result of paced, interactive teaching. It is imperative for first-year teachers to discover the strengths of strate gies taught in an appropriately paced lesson.