Research & Resources - Resources by Topic (Page 4)
Staff Development
Fitzgerald, Ron. Brain-Compatible Teaching in a
Block Schedule. ERIC. School Administrator v53 n8 p20-21,24 Sep 1996.
Block Scheduling requires additional teaching strategies; i.e.,
establish relevance, hook students with short video sequences, dramatic
skits, and simulations; schedule at least two learning activities per
session, and capitalize on pulsed learning sequences, cooperative
teaming, alternative learning options, and student variations.
Hackmann, Donald G.; and Schmitt, Donna M.
Strategies for Teaching in a Block of Time Schedule. NASSP Bulletin, v81
n588 p1-9 Apr 1997.
Offers suggestions for developing creative instructional approaches
in time-blocked classes. Teachers should continuously engage students in
active learning, include group activities to encourage student
participation, incorporate activities addressing multiple intelligences,
use creative thinking activities, move outside the classroom, employ
authentic assessment methods, and share resources and ideas with
colleagues.
Miller, Theresa Coleman, Ed.D. (2000); Teacher
Perceptions of the Adoption and Implementation of the Block Schedule for
High Schools.
This paper was presented to the faculty at the University of North
Carolina.
This study examined teacher perceptions about advantages and
disadvantages of using a block schedule. Qualitative research was
collected from in-depth interviews of nine participating teachers.
Some of the positive effects include: encouraging varied teaching
strategies, innovative educational programs, additional laboratory
experiences, teachers working with fewer students per day, additional
planning time, higher achievement rates, and larger enrollments in
honors and advanced classes. Disadvantages of the block schedule include
fewer total hours in a course, and the difficulty of adapting some
courses to the block schedule.
Mullins, Rita S., Ed.D. (1997). The Relationship of
Experience, Education, and Tennessee Career Ladder Status to Teachers’
Perceptions of Staff Development Needs in Block Scheduled Programs.
This paper was presented to the faculty of East Tennessee State
University.
The purpose of this study was to determine if teachers’ perceptions
of staff development needs differed when teaching experience, education,
and Tennessee Career Ladder status were considered. 143 classroom
teachers from 18 high schools in eight county school systems completed a
survey containing 50 response items for a return rate of 79%.
One-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey multiple comparison
tests were used. Findings indicated that teaching experience was not a
major determinant of perceptions about staff development needs for block
scheduling. As teaching experience increased, so did participation in
planning staff development.
Pinski, Mary K. Ed.D. (2001); Perceptions on Leadership: A Case Study
of the Transition from Traditional to Block Scheduling in a
Comprehensive High School. This paper was presented to the faculty in
the Department of Leadership in Education and Sport Organizations at
Northern Illinois University.
The purpose of this descriptive instrumental case study was to
examine the leadership practices used by administrators who implemented
an alternate schedule at a comprehensive suburban high school. The
researcher used document analysis to create a historical perspective of
the change process, and a survey to question the leadership practices
used.
The findings indicated that effective leaders utilize a needs
assessment to identify the needs of the school system. They empower
their staff to provide leadership, and they provide regular
opportunities for feedback and communication. Effective leaders involve
people in meaningful staff development before, during, and after
significant change initiatives.
Sherk, Chris B., Ed.D. (1999). Relationship of Staff Development to
the Implementation of Intensive Scheduling at Selected Pennsylvania High
Schools. This paper was presented to the faculty of the School of Human
Service Professions at Widener University.
The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship of staff
development to the implementation of intensive scheduling at selected
Pennsylvania high schools. Participants were teachers and administrators
from 41 public high schools who have used intensive scheduling for three
or more years.
Prinicpals, Teacher association representatives, and department
chairpersons completed a Likert type questionnaire. The respondents
reported that they received adequate staff development and inservice
education prior to the implementation of block scheduling. They reported
that some types of staff development were more beneficial than other
types. There was a significant difference in perception of staff
development effectiveness between teachers and principals.
Wyatt, Linda D. More Time, More Training. ERIC.
School Administrator v53 n8 p16-18 Sep 1996.
Describes staff development components for veteran and beginning
teachers planning to teach in blocked classes. Teachers need training
and practice in information-sharing methods, learning-theory
applications, assessment strategies, student mastery, curriculum mapping
and integration, classroom organization, and lesson development. Block
scheduling requires fundamental instructional changes to succeed.
Some articles about professional development online:
Hurley, J. Casey The 4x4 Block Scheduling Model:
What do Students Have to Say about it? ERIC. NASSP Bulletin v 82 n593
p64-72 Dec 1997.
This western North Carolina study explored how 31 teachers and 35
students viewed the 4x4 block. Students overwhelmingly favored it. They
reported that advantages included getting better grades, participating
in school-sponsored clubs during the school day, having less homework,
and graduating a half year early. Disadvantages included class length,
uneven schedules, course sequencing, and makeup work.
Let’s ask the Students…Kentucky, Tennessee,
Virginia, and West Virginia Students Talk about Schools and Change.
Appalachia Educational Lab., Charleston, WV. 1997. 13 p. EDRS Price -
MF01/PC01 Plug Postage.
Studies indicate that information provided by students may contribute
to successful implementation of educational innovations, but educators
seldom seek out student perspectives. In April and May 1997, over 160
high school students participated in 16 focus groups in Kentucky,
Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. They said that schools help them
learn by hiring good teachers, keeping class sizes small, providing
computers, changing to block scheduling, and offering opportunities for
real-life activities, computer access and literacy, and by giving them a
voice in school policy decisions. (SAS)
Pisapia, John and Westfall, Amy-Lynn. Alternative
High School Scheduling. A View from the Student’s Desk. Research Report.
Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium, Richmond, VA. 1997. 79 p.;
For related reports, see UD 031 866 and 868. EDRS
Price - MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.
In 1995 the Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium (MERC),
Richmond (Virginia) commissioned a study of alternative high school
scheduling modules to determine the effects of different schedules on
teaching strategies, teacher and student satisfaction, and student and
school performance. This report presents the results of an analysis of
the survey administered to 2,430 students in 4 inner city, 5 suburban,
and 4 rural schools in 1995. Six types of scheduling, two traditional
and four variations of block schedules, were studied. Students in every
day semester long block schedules reported significantly more
satisfaction with the number of courses available to them than students
in everyday short block schedules and alternating long block schedules.
Students in everyday long block schedules also reported that their
teachers used significantly more group instruction than students in the
other block schedules, and observation suggested that use of group
instruction increases as the number of minutes in class increase.
Clauser, David, Ed.D.(2001). Block Scheduling: A
Comparative Study of Learning Activities and Strategies in Selected New
Jersey Public High Schools.
This report was presented to the faculty of Seton Hall University.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether the implementation
of block scheduling results in a higher frequency and greater variety of
learning activities and strategies. Students and teachers in three New
Jersey high schools ( rural, suburban, and urban) participated in a
survey on student and teacher perceptions of observed learning
activities and strategies used in block scheduled classrooms. The use of
the Masconomet High School Student Questionnaire, the Wyoming Student
Survey of Instructional Strategies, and the Wyoming Teacher Survey of
Instructional Strategies served as pilot studies of the survey
instrument.
Although the results of this study are limited by its narrow scope,
the results seem to support the view that block scheduling is a catalyst
for shifting the instructional focus from a lecture dominated
teacher-centered passive learning classroom to an environment that more
actively engages students. The researcher was confident that the
teachers scored .43 to 2.47 points higher than the students regarding
the frequency and variety of learning activities and strategies used in
the classrooms. However, the difference between the students and
teachers is not the same across the different factor groups.
Jenkins, Elaine DeMars, Ed.D. (2000). A Comparative
Study of Teaching Strategies Reported by North Carolina High School
Teachers in Block and Traditional Schedule Schools.
This paper was presented to the faculty of The University of North
Carolina at Charlotte.
This study, conducted in cooperation with the North Carolina
Department of Public Instruction, sought information on teaching
strategies from teachers in block scheduled schools, which have operated
on a block schedule for at least four years, and teachers from
traditionally scheduled high schools. Teachers were asked to respond to
three areas related to eleven instructional strategies: level of use,
appropriateness of the selected strategies for their classrooms, and
level of training.
Opinions were compared for cooperative learning, small
groups/structured pairs, discovery learning, direct instruction/lecture,
simulation/games/role-playing, peer coaching/peer tutoring, audiovisual
experiences, technology, projects, Socratic seminars, and
integrated/thematic teaching. Descriptive statistics and t-tests
illustrated few differences between responses of teachers currently
teaching under the two scheduling patterns.
Staunton, Jim, and Adams, Teresa. What Do Teachers
in California Have to Say about Block Scheduling? ERIC. NASSP Bulletin,
v81 n593 p81-84 Dec 1997.
This survey had a 70% return rate and indicated that teachers enjoyed
having less up-front lecturing, more one-on-one interactions with
students, and a less hectic schedule, but had concerns about
interruptions and continuity/student-consistency issues.
Pisapia, John and Westfall, Amy Lynn. Alternative
High School Scheduling: A View from the Teacher's Desk. Research report
for the Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium, Richmond, VA 1997.
This report presents the results of a survey of teachers in 12
schools. Teachers in everyday short block schedules use significantly
more whole-class instruction than in either everyday semester and
alternating long block schedules. Teachers in alternating and everyday
semester- long block block schedules use more team approach than
teachers in everyday short block schedules. Seven appendixes contain
additional findings.
Staunton, Jim. A Study of Teacher Beliefs on the
Efficacy of Block Scheduling. ERIC. NASSP Bulletin, v81 n593 p73-80 Dec
1997.
Teachers at four block-scheduled high schools were asked whether the
change yielded differences in instructional practices, assessment
techniques, social interaction, curriculum and school management.
Responses to an anonymous Likert scale indicated that block scheduling
allows teachers to vary their instructional practice, experiment with
new assessments, reduce their hectic pace, and cover less material in
greater detail.
Types of Block Scheduling
Boarman, Gerald L. and Kirkpatrick, Barbara S. The
Hybrid Schedule: Scheduling to the Curriculum. NASSP Bulletin; v79 n571
p42-52 May 1995.
A series of experiments with single and double mod scheduling at a
large suburban Maryland high school has led to a highly flexible
schedule that meets teachers' and students' needs. The schedule allows
courses to be offered in the most suitable format, creates more time for
students and teachers, streamlines hallway traffic, and fosters a team
spirit.Canady, R. L. & Rettig, M.D. (1993). Unlocking the Lockstep High
School Schedule. Phi Delta Kappan,75(3), 310-314. The traditional
seven-period high school schedule is undergoing intense scrutiny. New
schedules are reducing class preparation time; permitting students to
move ahead, attend alternating full-day vocational and academic
programs, and perform community service during regular school hours; and
allowing teachers more productive instructional modes. This article
describes a 75-75-30 plan and an alternate-day Block Schedule.
Canady, R.L. and Reina, Joanne M. Parallel Block
Scheduling, An Alternative Structure. Principal; v72 n3 p26-29 Jan 1993.
A major organizational change is necessary to promote more equitable
and effective instructional grouping schemes in schools. A palatable
restructuring alternative that combines effective grouping with the
flexibility to meet each school's needs is parallel block scheduling.
This system capitalizes on teachers' strengths.
Carroll, Joseph M. Organizing Time to Support
Learning. School Administrator, v51 n3 p26-28, 30-33 Mar 1994.
This article argues that the Copernican Plan can help almost every U.
S. high school decrease its average class size, increase its course
offerings, substantially reduce teaching load, provide students with
regularly-scheduled seminars, establish a productive learning
environment, and substantially increase mastery within present funding
levels.
Dougherty, Barbara. Policy Briefing: Block
Scheduling in Secondary Schools. ERIC. Pacific Resources for Education
and Learning, Briefing Paper, Honolulu, HI, 1998.
Presents the various scheduling models and their advantages and
disadvantages. Offers suggestions for implementing block scheduling.
Edwards, Clarence M., Jr. Virginia's 4x4 High
Schools: High School, College, and More. NASSP Bulletin; v79 n571 p23-41
May 1995.
Virginia's high schools are restructuring the state school system.
Using the 4x4 schedule, four high schools are offering all students up
to a year of post-secondary study beyond the high school program.
Post-secondary scholarships will make this world-class education
available to all well-disciplined students who attend regularly and
learn well in a timely fashion.
E Fallon, Karin. Intensive Education; Apr.1995; 67p.
This paper is a timely review of intensive education, or macro-block
scheduling. Intensive education is a change in the structure of
secondary school organization. It involves organizing the school's
schedule for efficiency and effectiveness so students study and teachers
teach one subject for 30 days. Students stay with one teacher 4 hours a
day, and teacher teach just one 4-hour academic class daily. Teacher and
students work with one small group intensively for 30 days, or 120
hours, the equivalent of a Carnegie unit. Lists a number of advantages
of intensive education supported by the literature.
Furman, Jan and McKenna, J. Bruce. Dover Review
2000: Implementation of a Block Schedule. ERS Spectrum, v13 112 p29-36
Spr 1995.
Describes an upstate New York high school's success at restructuring
its schedule according to a modified Copernican Plan. The Dover Review
2000 Block Schedule divides the school year into trimesters; each term
has two 1 20-minute periods and a shorter interest block. This approach
de-juvenilizes the high school and allows more focused, uninterrupted
learning time.
Gee, William D. The Copernican Plan and Year-Round
Education. Phi Delta Kappan v78 n10 p793-96 Jun 1997.
Combining the Copernican Plan and year-round schooling may make both
proposals more palatable to the general public. Since the plan leaves
facilities, teacher contracts, and current budgets virtually unchanged,
serious public resistance is unlikely. Suggests that principals should
first introduce Copernican scheduling and then use the plan's success to
initiate the "45/15 plan" (year-round rotation of 45 in-class days/15
vacation days).
Hackman, Donald G., and Waters, David L. Breaking
Away from Tradition: The Farmington High School Restructuring
Experience. ERIC. NASSP Bulletin v82 n596 p 83-92 Mar 1998.
This article reports the two-year experience of this Missouri high
school with block scheduling. Faculty is pleased with progress. Both
teacher and student surveys indicate a need for further improvements to
insure attention to individual needs. Teachers indicate a need for staff
development and common planning time.
Hottenstein, David S. Intensive Scheduling: Restructuring America's
Secondary Schools through Time Management. ERIC. Corwin Press, 1998.
This book covers some of the questions surrounding intensive
scheduling and gives some examples of successful applications of it.
Irmsher, Karen. Block Scheduling. ERIC Digest, #104.
This digest examines problems inherent in the traditional school
scheduling pattern. It offers block scheduling as an option and
describes variations thereof. Numerous suggestions for planning and
implementation are included.
Jones, Rebecca. Wake Up! Schedules! Executive
Educator; v17 n8 p14-18, Aug 1995.
Teachers who have tried block scheduling say they accomplish more in
each class session and use a variety of teaching strategies and learning
activities. A chart shows the common varieties of block scheduling.
Kruse, Carol A. The Master Schedule and Learning:
Improving the Quality of Education. NASSP Journal, May 1995.
The master schedule determines instructional time, use of space,
student grouping, and teacher role. Currently, secondary buildings are
used like factories, and teachers can spend an entire career in the same
classroom. Traditional, intensified, and flexible Block Scheduling
produces master schedules with greater flexibility, less isolation, and
more sensitivity to brain functioning.
Malloy, William. Essential Schools and Inclusion: A
Responsive Partnership. Educational-Forum; v60 n3 p228-36 Spr 1996.
The Coalition of Essential Schools focuses on responsible inclusion
and uses a variety of nontraditional methods: flexible scheduling,
heterogeneous grouping, the philosophy of student-as-worker, integrated
curriculum, coaching, self-directed learning, alternative assessments,
and interdisciplinary planning.
Reid, William M. Restructuring Secondary Schools
with Extended Time Blocks and Intensive Courses: the Experiences of
School Administrators in British Columbia. UMI Dissertation Services,
1-800-521-0600, ext. 3781.
Ryan, Francis J. Intensive Scheduling: When Less is
More. Momentum; v27 p62-65 Feb-Mar 1996.
Examines the potential benefits of intensive scheduling, an
alternative to traditional school day structuring that allows students
to take fewer classes but stay in them longer. Suggests that fewer and
longer classes accommodate more cooperative learning styles and enhance
student academic performance. Includes descriptions of several intensive
scheduling programs.
Previous
|
