Block Scheduling and Student Achievement
A Tremendous amount of research has been done on scheduling and the relationship on student achievement. Although the results are somewhat mixed, there appears to be very little correlation between block scheduling and student achievement. Through research, the case can be made for block scheduling, if student achievement is not the only desired effect. Unlike conventional scheduling, block scheduling can affect student achievement, but just as importantly, “blocking” has positive effects on discipline referrals and the attitudes of both teachers and students.
Why choose Block Scheduling?
According to research by J. Allen Queen, traditional high schools schedules have remained the same for most of the twentieth century. “In 1959, J. Lloyd Trump proposed eliminating the traditional high school schedule and instituting classes of varying lengths in accordance with the instructional needs of students” (Queen, 2000). Many reasons have been given for the elimination of traditional scheduling. In an article by Michael Rettig and Robert Canady, several reasons were given. Graduation credits were increased to as many as twenty-four Carnegie units, which left many schools with little room for fine arts or vocational classes (Rettig & Canady, 1999). Shorter classes also caused problems in hands-on classes, such as science and physical education. Changing classes multiple times created an atmosphere of chaos, along with increasing discipline problems (Rettig & Canady). In 1990, Michael Fullan stated that the traditional high school schedule was adopted by schools, regardless of effectiveness (Queen, 2000). A report by the National Education Commission in 1994, indicated that traditional ways of organizing schools only added to problems of discipline and inadequate student achievement (Rettig & Canady). In fact this report referred to students as “prisoners of time” (United States Department of Education [USDE], 1994). The era of lock scheduling had begun. By 1994, a survey of high schools across the United States revealed that 40% of schools were using some type of block scheduling (Queen, 2000).
Reasons Why the Block Schedule is Favored
Many reasons were given as to why school personnel and students prefer the block. Among these reasons was the idea of fewer courses per semester. Fewer classes equates to fewer assignments to make-up if a student is absent. Some classes require more time. Increased time works well in laboratory classes and fine arts or vocational classes. Many research efforts support this claim. In one such study, J. Allen Queen, found that block schedules work better for laboratory classes.
Educational debates are a widespread in today’s society. Currently, one of the largest debates in education is the debate of whether schools should stay with the traditional school calendar or change to a year-round calendar. The main focus of the debate is centered around the idea that using the year-round calendar will provide kids with a more consistent learning schedule, which in turn creates better grades within the school and cuts back on summer learning loss. Year-round calendar and traditional calendar are far different. Traditional school calendar provides ten weeks of summer break and year-round calendar provides a shorter summer break but more frequent breaks throughout the year. The frequent breaks provide families the opportunity to choose what school year would be the best fit for their family and also helps keep children motivated in school. With the information given many believe the year-round calendar will provide a better education by preventing summer learning loss, create a better calendar to fit certain lifestyles, and promote more motivation in school.
Our table is dismissed. I head back to gym with a full stomach, something that shouldn’t happen. Third block is the lunch block and the eighth grade special block. This shouldn’t happen and as principle the first change that would be in immediate effect would amend the schedule to be specials during first, second, and fourth block. This will cause improvements in health with gym being at least an hour away from lunch for the eighth grade; dietary habits considering people eat as minimal food as possible to preserve their stomach, and enthusiasm because students will see any change to the current schedule as a robust change. In addition, I would change the current format of the schedule. Extend math and English to 3 hour classes, but on an
Having block scheduling is one of the main concerns of the Aldine Independent School District. Block scheduling is when students have half of their classes one day and the other half the next. There has been some complaints about how block scheduling decreases students’ focus, but there has also been many compliments about how it improves students’ education. Michael D. Rettig, President of School Scheduling Associates, states that more schools are considering block scheduling and more than thirty percent of schools in the country already have it [bandwagon]. The Aldine Independent School District has made the reasons remarkably clear as to why they have switched to block scheduling and they are: better test scores, better grades, and improvement of teacher-student interaction.
we make in life affect us in many ways. The next possible interpretation of that quote is
For as long as any American can remember, education has been a top priority of the majority of the population. The more schooling a child receives, the brighter their future becomes. Everyone wants their child to be successful in and out of the classroom, and the government has been working to make sure of this in schools nationwide. Over the years, a series of programs have been implemented to better the education of elementary and secondary students, including the No Child Left Behind Act, establishing guidelines and requirements that public schools are expected to follow and accomplish in order to provide a quality education to all of their students. But are these plans, policies, and promises working? Are the goals and objections being reached by each school as expected? Although some may argue that the No Child Left Behind Act has some positive aspects, overall, it is not working because some teachers have studied the outline of standardized tests, reworking their curriculums to teach students what they need to know in order to reach the required standards and students’ learning abilities, socioeconomic status’, and native languages are generalized into a single curriculum.
The current debates surrounding the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 are both positive and negative. Many politicians and people that previously supported the Act are now standing against it. In the beginning many supported the new Act because everyone was aware that a change needed to happen in the education system and the proposal of No Child Left Behind seemed like the answer we were looking for. As the No Child Left Behind requirements began to be felt in the school systems across America and the assessments results started coming in, everyone took a step back and really began to look at the new law. The results were not what everyone expected, what was once considered an answer was now becoming the problem.
Making the NCLB Act effective is quite a chore for the federal and state legislation. The positive influences for the act are quite controversial. Accountability standards are set and measured on a yearly basis by each individual state. The educator’s qualifications and standards are also state and federally mandated. Reading, math and writing are the key academic subjects that are measured. The goal is to close the gap among race, socioeconomic groups, and disabled students. The schools tend to focus on these areas, while they direct the education toward the test taking success rather than the child’s needs. Parents are given a whole academic achievement picture when receiving the test scores.
Most educators and parents would desire an educational system where all students receive a balanced education that will afford all students the ability to compete in our ever changing society. This desire is great among students who live in economically challenged environments and those who attend poor schools. These students are at most risk of receiving a a proper education. This is partly due to lack of funding, and the inability for those poor schools to afford highly qualified teachers. Much controversy stems from this issue, poor schools not being able to afford highly trained teachers, students not having access to improved curriculums and extraordinary dropout rates. In an effort to combat these issues, the Bush administration implemented an act that purported to help schools to receive necessary funding for qualified teachers and to close the racial and ethnic gaps, known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA). However, the NCLBA failed to deliver on its promises and left already struggling schools and children in disarray attempting to reach government mandates rather than ensuring a balanced education for every student.
Rushton talks about the funding for the No Child Left Behind is being held back if the students don’t do well on the standardized tests. So if the students don’t do well on the testing the teachers are being affected in the way of how much they are getting paid, also affects the school districts funding. This is encouraging the teachers not to teach the way they should, but they are teaching in the way of let’s just make the students do well on the standardized tests. In this article Rushton talks about how the brain of the student learns. Rushton talks about how the pre-frontal lobe is responsible for the thinking skills, creativity, and also making judgments. For the students that are taking the standardized test they may not have this area all the way developed, and that could be one of the major reasons that the teachers are not make the criteria of the test scores. If that is happening should the teachers really be counted responsible for what the student is not learning? Teachers need to create the environment where the students can grow at their own independent rate. “Effective teachers support brain development by encouraging children to make discoveries in well-planned environments that support student autonomy” (Rushton 89). The NCLB provides the funding for the school districts that make the grades on the standardized test but the schools that don’t make the grade has a disadvantage because then the NCLB doesn’t give the funding to the schools. “Research has shown that the teachers employed at low-preforming schools often are less qualified teachers while the students may have less extensive academic preparation” (Rushton 91). The connection in this resource is that it may not be the teacher’s fault...
After a long summer, the time has finally come for Sam and his classmates to return to school. Sam dreads going back to school, because he knows that the first weeks of school mean long, boring reviews. Despite the fact that Sam and his friends do not like to study topics they have already learned, they need to review because most students forget what they learned over the three-month break period. Many students can relate to Sam, wasting two weeks or more at the beginning of the school year. Parents, teachers, and students across the United States believe a better option exists that will waste less time. Many suggest the idea of a year-round school schedule. Almost all schools should adopt a year-round schedule because of the many advantages including higher academic
In 1965, the Commissioner of Education Francis Keppel designed an act that was part of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, which had made available large amounts of resources for children that were less fortunate and educationally challenged. The Elementary and Secondary School Act (ESEA) passed through Congress and signed into law on April 9, 1965. With this act being signed, the Head Start program began. This program allotted funding to low-income areas with a concentration in preschool age children in order to properly prepare these children for grammar school beginning in the first grade (Schugurensky, 2001).
Block scheduling only adds to the already high level of stress these students will face. In today’s world, under diverse economic conditions, it normal seeing families move with children already in high school. If a family is new to the area with a child in tenth grade, there is a good chance that the student is transferring into a school where block scheduling is a new experience for them. Under block scheduling a student would be taking four subjects at a time and covering the material at twice the speed of classes in a normal 6-8 class day. If a student does not adjust immediately to this change he/she could fall behind in all of their classes. A student moving in one or two months after the academic year has begun will be close to two months behind from the rest of his or her class. Students in this situation will find the need to hired a tutor. For others this could mean having to take non-sequential classes for the rest of semester. In this case students are often in classes repeating material they had taken at other schools before they transferred until it gets to a point where they catch up. Many families have chosen to go with a private school for the duration of the year until the start of the new year. Parents could then enroll them into a district that does block scheduling. This will always be an unexpected expense for families, not to
Initiated in 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 intended to prevent the academic failures of educational institutions and individual students, as well as bridge achievement gaps between students. This act supports the basic standards of education reform across America; desiring to improve the learning outcomes of America’s youth. No Child Left Behind has left many to criticize the outcomes of the Act itself. Questions have risen concerning the effectiveness of NCLB, as well as the implications to America’s youth.
The “no child left behind policy” The “no child left behind policy” was implemented in 2001. Aiming at improving the performance of basic reading and maths skills of the students, the policy required elementary and secondary schools to take yearly tests, and the schools need to pass the tests in order to show their capability of teaching the students. The policy received positive results. For example, the scores of reading and maths had greatly improved after the implementation of the “no child left policy”. Many supporters of the policy claim that it could help to increase the accountability of the schools and teachers, and students and parents had the chance to choose the schools with better performance. However, the policy also
The No Child Left Behind Act, a federal social program that tries to encourages after school programs should be eliminated and the extra funds given to schools to decide where it goes.