Middle Level Teachers' Perceptions of the Impact of Block Scheduling on Instruction and Learning

AbstractMiddle level teachers who implemented a 4 X 4 semester block schedule were interviewed to determine their perceptions of the effects on instructional strategies and curricular decision making. Ten teachers from two middle level schools in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States were interviewed. Respondents report the use of more active instructional strategies. The majority of respondents believe that the amount of curricula studied must be altered to adjust to this alternative scheduling format. Teachers believe that young adolescents’ learning is positively influenced by block scheduling. The 4 X 4 semester block schedule was not found to promote the development of interdisciplinary studies or teacher teaming.

[1]  R. N. Caine,et al.  Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain , 1991 .

[2]  H. Gardner,et al.  Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences , 1983 .

[3]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[4]  Jeri J. Goldman.  Flexible Modular Scheduling , 1983 .

[5]  J. Valentine.  A national survey of middle level leaders and schools , 1993 .

[6]  Fred Nolan.  Ability Grouping Plus Heterogeneous Grouping: Win-Win Schedules , 1998 .

[7]  Robert Lynn Canady,et al.  Block Scheduling: A Catalyst for Change in High Schools , 1995 .

[8]  John H. Lounsbury,et al.  Inside Grade Eight: From Apathy to Excitement , 1990 .

[9]  R. Linn,et al.  Qualitative methods in research on teaching , 1985 .

[10]  Samuel Forest.  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development , 1955 .

[11]  Carol Ann Tomlinson,et al.  The Differentiated Classroom: Responding the Needs of All Learners , 1999 .

[12]  Eric Jensen,et al.  Teaching with the Brain in Mind , 1998 .

[14]  James A. Beane,et al.  A middle school curriculum: From rhetoric to reality , 1990 .

[15]  J. O'neil,et al.  Finding Time to Learn. , 1995 .

[16]  T. Sizer.  Horace's School: Redesigning the American High School , 1992 .

[17]  D. C. Adams,et al.  Departing from Tradition: Two Schools' Stories. , 1995 .

[18]  Allen H. Seed,et al.  Free at Last: Making the Most of the Flexible Block Schedule. , 1998 .

[19]  H. Jacobs.  Interdisciplinary curriculum : design and implementation , 1989 .

[20]  Leopold E. Klopfer,et al.  Toward the thinking curriculum: current cognitive research : 1989 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development , 1989 .

[21]  M. D'Arcangelo.  The Brains Behind the Brain. , 1998 .

[22]  David F. Brown,et al.  Self-Reported Classroom Impact of Teachers' Theories about Learning and Obstacles to Implementation. , 1995 .

[23]  Thomas S. Dickinson,et al.  We Gain More Than We Give: Teaming in Middle Schools. , 1997 .

[24]  Jerry W. Valentine,et al.  Designing an Effective Middle Level Schedule. , 1998 .

[25]  T. Cicchelli,et al.  Teaching Exceptional Children and Youth in the Regular Classroom , 1986 .

[26]  Joseph M. Carroll.  The Copernican Plan Evaluated: The Evolution of a Revolution , 1994 .

[27]  T. Shortt,et al.  Block Scheduling Can Enhance School Climate. , 1999 .

[28]  Donald G. Hackmann,et al.  Breaking Away from Tradition: The Farmington High School Restructuring Experience , 1998 .

[29]  J. Mayer,et al.  Emotional Intelligence: What the Research Says. , 2000 .

[30]  Peter W. Airasian,et al.  LINKING TESTING AND INSTRUCTION: POLICY ISSUES , 1983 .

[31]  Dana A. Derouen.  Maybe It's Not the Children: Eliminating Some Middle School Problems through Block Support and Team Scheduling. , 1998 .