May 11, 2004 | Volume 2 | Number 10
The Effects of Block Scheduling on Teacher Perceptions and Student Performance

The Effects of Block Scheduling on Teacher Perceptions and Student Performance

The Question

How does block scheduling of courses affect student outcomes and the learning environment in schools?

The Context

Block scheduling of courses, the reorganization of schools around longer classes (usually 90–120 minutes), has received a great amount of policy and research attention over the past decade, particularly as a high school or middle school reform strategy. Block-scheduling designs were created to support longer and more in-depth study of subjects, minimize class-to-class transitions and administrative duties, increase instructional flexibility, and allow greater variety in course taking. For example, in what is known as the 4 x 4 model—the block scheduling design highlighted in this study—students take four separate 90-minute classes each day for a semester, earning one year of credit for each course (and thus up to eight credits per year), while teachers teach four classes and have one preparation period each day.

Although much of the research on block scheduling has been positive, two studies in Canada have shown either no effect or a negative effect on student achievement, as has a study out of North Carolina. One interesting issue raised in these studies is the timing of the end-of-year assessments. Because students in block schedules cover material in larger blocks, if the end-of-year assessment occurs a significant period before the actual end of the year, these students will have had less opportunity to learn—that is, will have less instruction in—the subject than their traditionally scheduled peers, possibly resulting in lower test scores. This may be particularly important as states align their assessment systems with No Child Left Behind requirements.

The Details

Lois-Lynn Stoyko Deuel conducted the study highlighted in this issue of ResearchBrief (see below for full citation). The data source for the study consisted of 22 of the 23 high schools in Broward County Public Schools (Florida), including academic data on 49,829 students. Ten schools in the study used a semester block- scheduling model and 12 used a more traditional seven-period day. (One school, despite being on block scheduling, was intentionally excluded from the study because it used a trimester model.) Ten teachers and three counselors randomly selected from each block-schedule school were asked to complete a survey designed to evaluate their perceptions regarding the success of block scheduling; response rates were 72 percent and 100 percent, respectively. In addition, principals at each block-schedule school were contacted for an open-ended telephone survey, but only 50 percent chose to participate. Standardized student achievement data were collected in the 1994–95 and 1996–97 school years and analyzed for change over time.

Demographically, the populations in the two school groups were similar, as was the average school size. Student data were analyzed using attendance, internal suspension rates, and external suspension rates, as well as behavioral feedback from the teacher and counselor surveys. While there was no significant difference on the attendance and suspension data, approximately one-third of teachers reported improvement in student promptness, attendance, and conduct, and more than half claimed that schools were generally cleaner. Principals reported a reduction in behavior problems, due in large part to fewer class changes. Counselors stated that students were better able to enroll in both required and elective courses, as well as repeat failed courses. More than half of the counselors reported that the general school environment improved as well. Students in block-schedule schools earned higher grades and had a lower rate of course failure; however, there was no significant difference between block-schedule and traditional schools in performance on standardized academic measures.

Teachers reported that their practices changed as block scheduling was implemented, allowing use of a wider array of teaching strategies and learning activities, as well as more personalized instruction. Forty percent of the teachers reported less stress at school, one-third reported increased common planning time, and 80 percent noted that they preferred the block schedule to their previous schedule.

Principals cited changing administrative procedures, accountability systems, and schedules as barriers to implementation, as well as building schoolwide support for change. Fewer than half of the teachers responding to the survey felt that they received sufficient preparation for teaching in a block-schedule format.

The Bottom Line

Block scheduling may result in stronger relationships between students and teachers, as well as improved school environments and achievement as measured by student grades. Teaching practice does appear to change to allow more personalized instruction.

Who's Affected?

This study is pertinent for students, teachers, and administrators in high schools using or exploring the use of block schedules.

Caveats

Despite positive feedback from surveys and interviews administered to teachers, counselors, and principals, as well as higher grades for students in block-schedule schools, there was no significant difference between student outcomes as measured by standardized tests and districtwide behavior data. Although survey data indicated improved instructional opportunities, the data were self-reported and not independently verified through observations or other measures. Block scheduling reorganizes the way students and teachers go through the academic day; however, without significant professional development or training it does not necessarily change the way in which teachers teach, nor does it necessarily affect the content presented to students. Because this study examined schools in only one county and on only one type of block schedule, it should be viewed as adding to the larger body of research on block schedules rather than as a definitive study.

The Study

Deuel, L.-L. S. (1999, October/November). Block scheduling in large, urban high schools: Effects on academic achievement, student behavior, and staff perceptions. The High School Journal, 83(1), 14–25. Available via Proquest (subscription required).

Other Resources

Block Scheduling, Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement

The Effects of Full and Alternative Day Block Scheduling on Language Arts and Science Achievement in a Junior High School, Education Policy Analysis Archives

The British Columbia Assessment of Mathematics and Science, British Columbia Ministry of Education

Block Scheduling, ERIC Digest, Number 104