1 / 9

Block Schedules vs. Traditional Schedules And Their Effects On Science Achievement, Inquiry Skills and Attitudes Regardi

Block Schedules vs. Traditional Schedules And Their Effects On Science Achievement, Inquiry Skills and Attitudes Regarding Science. Debbie Murphy Evaluating Research Fall 2004. Introduction. Our job as educators is to teach students how to learn.

axl
Download Presentation

Block Schedules vs. Traditional Schedules And Their Effects On Science Achievement, Inquiry Skills and Attitudes Regardi

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Block Schedules vs. Traditional SchedulesAnd Their Effects On Science Achievement, Inquiry Skills and Attitudes Regarding Science Debbie Murphy Evaluating Research Fall 2004

  2. Introduction • Our job as educators is to teach students how to learn. • We need to provide students with opportunities to use their cognitive processes. • Does the block schedule offer students greater opportunities than the traditional schedule?

  3. History of the Block Schedule • 1994 National Commission on Time and Learning proposed that the school day needed to move its focus from scheduling of time to learning. • The report recommended implementing block schedules to give teachers more time to engage students in activity based learning opportunities.

  4. Benefits of the Block Schedule • Relieves the fast-paced, pressurized atmosphere • Provides opportunities for in-depth learning (inquiry, research, cooperative learning, etc.) • Reduces daily administrative tasks • Offers teachers and students innovative ways to interact and accomplish their objectives

  5. Current Research on Achievement Test Scores • Despite the popularity of the block schedule, research findings are mixed in regard to achievement test comparisons. • The problem with standardized tests is that they focus more on content than processes.

  6. There’s More To Science Than Achievement Tests! • According to the National Science Education Standards, inquiry is central to science learning. • Highly effective teaching strategies require higher level thinking skills such as inquiry, cooperative learning, exploration, analysis and synthesis. • A 90 minutes class schedule gives teachers time to provide opportunities for in-depth learning.

  7. Why Would Schools Abandon the Block? • Budgetary concerns • Poor preparation and ongoing training for teaching in the block • Lack of variety - for a block schedule to be successful, teachers must use a wide variety of instructional strategies • Poor utilization of the block time

  8. Research Plans • Compare the amount of inquiry activities in block and traditional schedules • Compare the attitudes of students toward science in block and traditional schedules • Compare test scores in block and traditional schedules • Determine if lack of ongoing training in instructional strategies was a factor in the abandonment of the block schedule

  9. References • Arnold, D.E. (2002). Block schedule and traditional schedule achievement: A comparison. NASSP Bulletin, 86(630), 42-53. • Bottge, B.J., Gugerty, J.J., Serlin, R., & Moon, K. (2003). Block and traditional schedules: Effects on students with and without disabilities in high school. NAASP Bulletin, 87(636), 2-14. • Canady, R., & Rettig, M. (1995). Block scheduling: A catalyst for change in high schools. Gardiner, New York: Eye on Education. • DiBiase, W.J., & Queen, J.A. (1999). Middle school social studies on the block. The Clearing House, 72(6), 377-384. • Evans, W., Tokarczyk, J., Rice, S., & McCray, A. (2002). Block scheduling: An evaluation of outcomes and impact. The Clearing House, 75(6), 319-323. • Eisner, E. (1985). The educational imagination. New York: Macmillan • Jenkins, E., Queen, A., & Algozzine, B. (2002). To block or not to block: That’s not the question. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 196-202. • Lawrence, W.W., & MacPherson, D.D. (2000). A comparative study of block scheduling and traditional scheduling on academic achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(3), 178-182. • National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Pursuing excellence: Comparisons of international eighth-grade mathematics and science achievement from a U.S. perspective, 1995 and 1999. (NCES Publication No. 2001- 028). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. • National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. • National Commission on Time and Learning (1994). Prisoners of time. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. • Rettig, M.D., & Canady, R.L. (2003). Block scheduling’s missteps, successes and variables. School Administrator, 60(9), 26-31. • Shortt, T.L., & Thayer, Y.V. (1999). Block scheduling can enhance school climate. Educational Leadership, 56(4), 76-81. • Veal, W.R. (1999). What could define block scheduling as a fad? American Secondary Education, 27(4), 3-12. • Veal, W.R., & Schreiber, J. (1999, September 19). Block scheduling effects on a state mandated test of basic skills. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 7(29). Retrieved October 11, 2004, from http://epaa.asu/epaa/v7n29.html • Viadero, D. (2001). Despite its popularity, block scheduling’s effect on learning remains unproven. Education Week, 21(5), 38-40.

More Related