The Scheduling Impact of Student’s Academic Performance of Learning Mathematics

(A Literature Review)

Group Members:
Andojar, Rachele M.
Sode, Jorge III D.
Neypes, Aldrin N.
Miriquillo, Jenna Mea S.
Toñada, Jovelyn B.
Federicos, Stephanie Blasé S.
Genson, John Rhea
Villar, Mia Fatima S.
Laudiza, Marivic B.
Ymas, Riza G.

This research shows the block scheduling is for student's performance. For instance, Rettig, in
the Issues of High School Scheduling, states that many schools have change scheduling to
improve school management and to allow students to reach higher level of thinking.

Barker, D., Joireman, J., Clay, J., & Abbott, M. (2006). Stated that the block scheduling allows
for minimal distractions since there are fewer passing times during any given day. At the same
time, there are projects and papers that state eight period day will have the excellent output. They
designed a study regarding what the best schedule for high school students in Washington State
was. They wanted to find a relationship between high school schedules in Washington and the
academic achievement as measured by the Washington Assessment of Student Learning. The
results that they found that the students who belong in the block scheduling which is longer
period will give best performance (Baker et al.). The researchers found that the less period of
block scheduling will give lower performance. The conclusion of this study was that the
variables were limited so that means there may be a number of additional influences affected in
this study (Baker). They concluded that school districts should take into consideration all of the
stakeholders when determining whether to change their current schedule.
Biesinger, K. D., Crippen, K. J., & Muis, K. R. (2008) Payne & Jordan (1996), Wronkovich,
(1998) states that the block scheduling has emerged as a trend in American secondary schools.
Although the potential for block scheduling is to increase students achievement and self-efficacy
continues to fuel discussion around this trend, the lack of a clear empirical consensus with regard
to these outcomes has left educators questioning the true merits of this intervention (Zepeda &
Mayer, 2006). Indeed, the most common weaknesses reported within scholarly research on block
scheduling include the omission of key contextual information, changes in teacher behaviors, and
a lack of clarity with regard to students’ positive views of the intervention. This regards to block
scheduling and describes a robust mixed-method investigation into the effects of an alternating
block schedule model on student self-efficacy, attitude, and instructional practices within the
context of mathematics. In addition to quantitative measures of student attitudes and beliefs, a
series of qualitative methods, including classroom observations and group interviews, were
included to address some of the shortcomings noted from previous research.

Kramer, S. L. (1996), Sigurdson (1982), Rettig (1995), et. al states that the block scheduling is
not a new phenomenon. It has been widely used in British Columbia, Ontario, and Alberta since
the 1970s. In the United States, block schedules have become increasingly popular throughout
the 1990s, and currently they are spreading to high schools in many regions. Block schedules are
most often of two kinds: alternating day-typically eight courses meeting 80 to 90 minutes every
other day for the entire school year-typically four courses meeting 80 to 90 minutes daily for
about ninety days. In addition to these two most common types, other forms of block scheduling
have been tried. The most important are interdisciplinary block schedules and quarter plans,
which are more intensive extension of year-typically schedules, in which students usually take
two academic courses at a time, with each course meeting about 150 to 180 minutes daily for one
quarter of the school year.

O’Brien (2013) stated in that students performances like, to those who participates and to those
students who got low scores in class. The following literature review demonstrates and supports
data collected on student academic performance in a seven period day versus a modified block
schedule. She discussed what research stated about reorganizing school schedules. She
elaborated that increasing instructional time has effective result in raising student's achievement.
She said that having longer time during block scheduling only give a difference if it is used
wisely and appropriately. The term she used to enhance this topic is was “student’s time on
task”. O’Brien writes that researchers have found that younger students benefits more from
whole day learning than those attending half day. She explained that there are mixed
achievement results with the 4x4 block schedule and students often scored lower compared to
those in traditional 7 periods and other block configurations. O’Brien elaborated that block
schedules can be used to extend extra time to those students who are struggling in learning math
or English. A block schedule will make it easier for teachers to adjust teaching to accommodate
students’ needs (O’Brien).

Papadakis (2007) compared two groups of students each of which had a different physics
schedule – one group in a 50-minute class meeting every day and the other group meet every
other day for 100 minutes. In addition to the test scores of both groups, she also conducted
surveys of the students, had them answer essay questions, and interviewed them. The needs that
for teachers is to be fully aware of the learning of the students . She also said that teachers should
have break periods in the block classes to help student attention spans. She discussed the
limitations of her study being the experiment and it only being 30 students was somewhat small.
She believed that a larger sample size would provide more information. Rettig discussed in the
“Trends and Issues in High School Scheduling” on school time issues and how that block
scheduling should be given. Rettig elaborated on the factors influencing achievement are school,
teacher, and the student. He defined the opportunity to learn as the extent to which the school
ensures that the specified curriculum is being followed and that the curriculum includes content
on assessment of student's achievement. Rettig also defined time as the amount of time the
schools dedicate to instruction. He continued explaining the criteria for comparison of schedules
and explaining what different schedules are out there as well as the advantages to each. He
discussed some of the mistakes that school make when a new block schedule is implemented.
Some of these examples include flawed decision making process, poor preparation for teachers,
unclear goals, budget concerns, and a lack of formal evaluation. He concluded there are many
options available for schools to take and administration needs to take everything, it includes the
staff, students, cost, and community into consideration when determining where to go with their
schedule. This is another article that summarizes how using the management’s opinion to help
determine what is best for the school. School administrators can create surveys about the schools
schedule and how it affects the community.

Schultz (2011) researched on the block schedule versus the traditional schedule in high school
classrooms. She found that this research suggests, that there are positives and negatives in both
schedules, without a majority of conclusive evidence to support one schedule over the other. Her
research found that most research focuses on quantitative data to demonstrate the success of the
schedule. Her project examined the personal views, and resulting perceptions of educational
success of the block schedule through survey responses from students and teaching staff at two
Wisconsin schools located near Madison. The results shows that the majority of the participants
in her surveys were in favor of the block schedule. She analyzed the data on the benefits and
negatives in regard to the block schedule. She found similar topics and ideas were mentioned in
the categories of the questions asked. She concluded that research and data collection at the
specific school would need to be done to take further action. This is another quality article that
shows data taken from surveys on how the opinions make a difference on student achievement.

Wanat, R. (2007) states that the effects of advantages and disadvantages of block scheduling
indicated as by participants included "ability to try new teaching strategies, more time to work on
specific activities without lose of knowledge, fewer teacher preparations, construction of new
elective course offerings, and fewer courses for students to handle. The disadvantages according
to participants were: too many absences, students becoming bored and inability to remain
focused, some curriculum lose due to concentrating, difficulty of putting transfer students in the
schedule, class sizes too large, too much wasted time, students do not understand their term of
one grade was equal to quarter grade, wasted time during transfer from class to class, and no
study rooms for remedial classes. Suggestions for qualifying the current block schedule included:
increasing staff, adding electives in all areas, building in more one on-one time for students in
trouble of failing, and going to a tri-semester schedule.

References

Barker, D., Joireman, J., Clay, J., & Abbott, M. (2006). Schedule matters: The relationship
 between high school schedules and student academic performance. Washington School

Research Center, Report #9, 26. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from

http://www.spu.edu/orgs/research/WSRC-HS-Scheduling-Research-Report_FINAL-10-

03-06.pd

Biesinger, K. D., Crippen, K. J., & Muis, K. R. (2008). The impact of block scheduling on
student motivation and classroom practice in mathematics. Nassp Bulletin, 92(3), 191-
208.

Kramer, S. L. (1996), Sigurdson (1982), Rettig (1995), et. al Block scheduling and high school
mathematics instruction. The
Mathematics Teacher, 89(9), 758.

O'Brien, E. M. (n.d.). Key lessons: What research says about reorganizing school schedules.
Education.com. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/Ref_Key_lessons_What/

Papadakis, K. (2007). How Is A Student’s LEARNING Affected By Their School Schedule?

Retrieved November 11, 2013 from
http://www.csun.edu/~kp797909/646/coursework/files/Action%20Research%20Paper.d
oc

Rettig, M. D. (n.d.). Trends and Issues in High School Scheduling. Viginia Department of
Education. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from
http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/virginia_tiered_system_supports/training/cohort/2013
/feb/day_2/high/trends_issues_high_school_scheduling.pdf.

Schultz, J. (2011). The Block Schedule: Personal Perceptions and Feelings of Success. Retrieved
November 11, 2013, from http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/53448

Wanat, R. (2007). An Analysis of the Effectiveness of Block Scheduling at Adams-Friendship

High School. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from
http://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/5067346.pdf