Title: Block Scheduling: Students' Perceptions of Readiness for College Math, Science, and Foreign Language.
Abstract: Introduction The adequate preparation of students for college is one concern of teachers who are contemplating implementation of intensive time scheduling in semester block model. Math, science, and foreign language teachers appear most anxious about retention issue, a concern based primarily on sequential nature of three disciplines and probability of a time gap between courses. This study examined college students' perceptions of their preparation in math, science, and foreign languages after two to four years of studying in a 4x4 block-scheduled school. Theoretically, in 4x4 model, pressure of multiple courses is removed, leaving time to concentrate on and engage in fewer courses each semester. Although there are a variety of ways to alter time for instruction, most schools have adopted one of two models prevalent throughout United States: 4x4 semester block or A - B year-long, alternating day schedule. In latter, students take traditional 7 or 8 subjects but classes are held every other day for 84 to 90 minutes. Background Block scheduling, a restructuring of class time in junior and senior high schools allowing for large blocks of instructional time, is built on belief that more class time for student engagement in learning process enhances academic achievement and subsequent retention of knowledge and (Adams & Salvaterra, 1997a). The emphasis, however, is on student engagement rather than on class time. The longer class period, 90 minutes as opposed to 42 minutes, is vehicle for intensive and extended engagement in class projects. Therefore, goal of block scheduling is to provide mechanism for student engagement in class activities for an extended time period allowing for in-depth learning. As with any educational change, educators and parents have questioned impact of block scheduling on learning. Do students learn more information, retain content knowledge and skills, and succeed in college? Since early 90s, studies of impact of block scheduling on schools have focused on such outcomes as grade improvement on local level, student satisfaction, and teacher job satisfaction (Canady and Rettig, 1995; Carroll, 1994; O'Neil, 1995). Although most teachers agree with research reports, Salvaterra and Adams (1996) showed that not all teachers have desire to move away from more teacher-directed pedagogical approaches such as lectures. Nevertheless, for most school districts desired goal for education has been higher test scores rather than enhanced student learning. The focus on SAT scores and monetary rewards connected to better scores indicate that good teaching and learning are measured by scores on standardized tests. At present no strong published reports are available to indicate that SAT or ACT scores increased as a direct result of block scheduling. While no studies showing positive or negative impact of block scheduling on standardized tests are available, there are three studies that provide valuable insights when considering block scheduling. Wronkovich, Hess, and Robinson (1997) found that students in a traditional math (year-long classes) of one Ohio school outscored their peers in a neighboring block-scheduled school district. The researchers state that the traditional year-long study of mathematics was found to be preferable for students in this study as it related to their ability to perform on a test of college-level math skills (p.35). However, they qualify their findings stating that level of prior preparation in regular high school math classes may have affected differences. In another study, Voelkl (1995) found that most significant factor affecting student achievement is class participation. Although Voelkl did not study block scheduling, her sample of 13,121 eighth graders tested hypothesis that student perceptions of school warmth (sense of safety and comfort) contributed to greater student involvement in class activities and that this engagement directly and significantly correlated with improved student achievement. …
Publication Year: 1999
Publication Date: 1999-07-01
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 13
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot