Author(s): |
N/A |
Source: |
Education Partnerships, Inc. |
|
Pub Date: |
2012-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Reports - Evaluative |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Educational Strategies; Teaching Methods; Block Scheduling; Trimester System; School Schedules; Educational Environment; High Schools; Time Factors (Learning); Learner Engagement; Time Management; Program Evaluation
Abstract:
Why do a trimester schedule? With the advent of block scheduling, many high schools conducted research on utilizing that plan in a trimester format. There appeared to be three issues that most schools faced: (1) How to provide substantive instructional time that was not fragmented?; (2) How does the school climate contribute positively to students' learning?; and (3) How to provide the appropriate amount of instructional time so that each student can learn in the best ways for him/her? "Breaking Ranks" suggested that: (1) curriculum should offer essential knowledge that makes connections to real life; (2) instructional strategies should actively engage students in their learning; (3) the environment should be receptive to the learners and educators; (4) time and space be reexamined and utilized to best meet the needs of the students; and (5) all stakeholders should be accountable for assessment of the instructional program. (Contains 11 online resources.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
 Show
 Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
 ERIC
Full Text (60K)
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2011-12-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations; Tests/Questionnaires |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Suburban Schools; High Schools; Block Scheduling; School Schedules; Discipline; Achievement Tests; Program Effectiveness; Academic Achievement; Attendance Patterns; Student Behavior; Comparative Analysis; Reading Tests; Mathematics Tests; Scores; Referral; Standardized Tests; Student Attitudes; Teacher Attitudes; Administrator Attitudes
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to determine the impact block scheduling has on (a) student academic achievement, discipline, and attendance, and (b) administrator, teacher, and student perceptions. The study compared 2005-2010 data from a high school utilizing the A/B block schedule and a high school under a traditional schedule, in one suburban school district. The study used mixed methods. The quantitative data described, analyzed, and interpreted reading and math FCAT [Florida Comprehensive Achievement Test] scores, attendance rates, and discipline referrals from 2005-2010. A total of seven repeated ANOVAs were conducted to analyze the difference between the two schedule designs with respect to two achievement indicators; reading and math FCAT scores. The qualitative data offered a voice to administrators, teachers, and students, and was gathered through individual face-to-face, email, or phone interviews. The quantitative findings for the study yielded the following conclusions: (1) students experienced higher FCAT reading scores on the A/B block schedule than the traditional schedule; (2) students experienced higher FCAT math scores under the traditional schedule than the A/B block schedule; (3) attendance rates decreased for students under the A/B block schedule and increased for students under the traditional schedule; and (4) discipline referrals decreased at a higher rate for students under the traditional schedule than students under the A/B block schedule. The administrator, teacher, and student perceptions contributed to the following qualitative findings for the study: (1) block scheduling fosters extended learning sessions when properly planned; (2) with fewer transitions discipline issues decreased; (3) attendance was not affected by the block schedule; (4) block schedule allows for the implementation of various instructional strategies; and (5) transitioning from a traditional to a block schedule was thought to be difficult at first, but attainable, and would alleviate any feelings of being rushed. Four appendixes present: (1) Florida High School Report Card; (2) Interview Questions; (3) Participant Consent Form; and (4) Parental Permission Form. (Contains 22 tables.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
ERIC
Full Text (1052K)
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2010-09-13 |
Pub Type(s): |
Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Resource Allocation; Block Scheduling; School Schedules; School Districts; Cost Effectiveness; Goal Orientation; Flexible Scheduling; Teaching Load; Costs; Values
Abstract:
Driven by stable or declining financial resources many school districts are considering the costs and benefits of a seven-period day. While there is limited evidence that any particular scheduling model has a greater impact on student learning than any other, it is clear that the school schedule is a tool that can significantly impact teacher instruction. It is also clear that the schedule and the allocation of resources (time, personnel) reflect a school community's values and priorities. It is important, therefore, to have a full and thorough discussion about school and district goals and priorities prior to adjusting the schedule. (Contains 14 online resources and 4 print resources.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
ERIC
Full Text (122K)
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2012-04-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Cost Effectiveness; Evidence; Educational Change; Elementary Secondary Education; School Restructuring; Middle Schools; Educational Improvement; Student Improvement; School Organization; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); Educational Administration; Organizational Change; School Schedules; Educational Policy
Abstract:
Proposals for school reform often focus on large and sometimes controversial systemic changes, such as charter schools, accountability standards, and changes to the way teachers are hired, fired, and compensated. Although these reforms may offer great opportunity to improve student outcomes, they may also be costly, face substantial implementation challenges, or lack definitive supporting evidence. At the same time, school boards may overlook relatively simple changes in the way schools are organized and managed that could impact student achievement in positive ways. In a new paper for The Hamilton Project, the authors present evidence on several organizational changes that could provide significant "bang for the buck" in student achievement. While simple, these changes have the potential to improve K-12 student performance substantially. To illustrate the value of making decisions about school organization based on evidence on student achievement, the authors explore three organizational changes: (1) starting schools later for middle school and high school students; (2) using K-8 schools rather than junior high or middle schools or taking other steps to minimize the disruptive transitions; and (3) assigning teachers to the same grades and subjects from year to year. The authors' proposals are not meant to transform public education radically. It may be surprising, however, that the magnitudes of the benefits of these organizational achievements relative to their costs rival the cost effectiveness of other far more sweeping reforms. The purpose of the proposal is to point out that all these small decisions about the organization of schools and school days impact student achievement, and that these types of choices need to be carefully scrutinized by school districts.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
 Help |
 Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2010-09-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Middle Schools; Urban Schools; School Effectiveness; School Administration; Educational Environment; School Culture; Block Scheduling; School Security; Discipline; Educational Change
Abstract:
In 2003, Dr. Freddie Thomas Middle School in Rochester, New York, was in serious trouble. In 2000, it had been labeled a "school under registration review" by the New York State Education Department and was under a directive to make significant progress or face serious consequences. Three years later in 2003, only 3% of eighth-grade students were meeting state standards in mathematics and only 9% in English language arts. The school climate was no better. There was little sense of order, and 911 calls were an everyday occurrence. The middle school had opened in 1995 with much fanfare. It was one of the new schools built with such hope in an area of extreme poverty in Rochester. After only a few years of this hopeful opening, however, the school was threatened to be closed. Within the first five years, three different principals were appointed to Thomas. The frequent changes in leadership did not allow for a consistent instructional vision or clear procedures for keeping order in the building. After only two years, three-fourths of the staff had to be replaced because of transfers out of the school and increasing enrollment. Many of the new hires were inexperienced first-year teachers. Within that environment of stress and disorder, there was confusion about roles and responsibilities and an inability to see beyond the immediate difficulties. Most painful was the lack of hope on students' faces as they entered each day. The few students who arrived on time coped by beginning each day with their heads down and hoodies up, making no eye contact with anyone. Today, Thomas is ranked in the top third of high schools in Rochester. Student achievement in mathematics and English language arts has risen substantially. Currently, no students have scored at the lowest level in these core areas. Thomas made adequate yearly progress in English language arts this year and, just as significant, has seen a considerable decrease in student suspensions during the last six years. This article describes how a focused and purposeful emphasis on connecting people, instructional practice, and a strong sense of community in three distinct areas--systems, culture, and instruction--turned a school without hope into an education dream.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2011-09-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
School Restructuring; Elementary Secondary Education; Academic Achievement; Educational Change; Educational Improvement; Student Improvement; School Organization; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); Administrator Effectiveness; Educational Administration; Change Strategies; Cost Effectiveness; Organizational Change; School Schedules; Educational Policy
Abstract:
Education reform proposals are often based on high-profile or dramatic policy changes, many of which are expensive, politically controversial, or both. In this paper, we argue that the debates over these "flashy" policies have obscured a potentially important direction for raising student performance--namely, reforms to the management or organization of schools. By making sure the "trains run on time" and focusing on the day-to-day decisions involved in managing the instructional process, school and district administrators may be able to substantially increase student learning at modest cost. In this paper, we describe three organizational reforms that recent evidence suggests have the potential to increase K-12 student performance at modest costs: (1) Starting school later in the day for middle and high school students; (2) Shifting from a system with separate elementary and middle schools to one with schools that serve students in kindergarten through grade eight; (3) Managing teacher assignments with an eye toward maximizing student achievement (e.g. allowing teachers to gain experience by teaching the same grade level for multiple years or having teachers specializing in the subject where they appear most effective). We conservatively estimate that the ratio of benefits to costs is 9 to 1 for later school start times and 40 to 1 for middle school reform. A precise benefit-cost calculation is not feasible for the set of teacher assignment reforms we describe, but we argue that the cost of such proposals is likely to be quite small relative to the benefits for students. While we recognize that these specific reforms may not be appropriate or feasible for every district, we encourage school, district, and state education leaders to make the management, organization, and operation of schools a more prominent part of the conversation on how to raise student achievement. (Contains 3 figures and 13 endnotes.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
Publisher's website
|
|
