First Class

Deborah Chrisman

October 17, 1997

Paper #2

Block Scheduling: The Controversies

Imagine that you are a high school principal. You are being asked to make a very important decision that will affect everyone in your school. The surrounding school districts have switched to block scheduling, and the school board is pressuring y ou to do the same. You have heard many positive aspects about the schedule from the other principals as well as some negative aspects. You are not sure what the best schedule for your school should be. This same situation is happening all over the coun try today. Schools are deciding to go for block or stay with what they have. Block scheduling comes with many controversies that arise for a number of reasons.

One of the major controversies surrounds advanced placement classes, also known as A.P. classes. These are college level classes that can be taken in high school by juniors and seniors. A test is given in May for each class that tests the student s' knowledge from the course, and if the student does well enough, he or she can earn college credit for the course. Because of the extensive study that must be done for these classes, the block schedule causes pluses and minuses for them. The schedule can allow students the time in classes to go in depth with what they are studying, and they have more time to ask questions so that they can fully understand the difficult concepts that they are learning. On the other hand, one article states that schedu ling conflicts can arise when taking more than one course. The article also sees problems arising when scheduling the course in general. If the course is taken in the fall, the students would have a long period of time between the class and the test. I f the course is taken in the spring, it is possible that not enough material will be covered in time for the test ("Foreign Language..."). Some schools are trying to fix the problem by making the class year-long or offering a prep class in the fall with the actual course in the spring ("Foreign Language..."). This does not solve the problem, though. An article states that the A.P. Language test focuses on communication skills that need a long period of development. The A.P. Literat ure test requires extensive reading of many famous works, and it takes a long time to rea d them ("Foreign Language..."). Another article says that it is important for all A.P. classes to have the access to great amounts of knowledge to do well (Kramer 761).

Foreign languages are also affected by block scheduling. The schedule allows for a variety of learning activities to teach the language such as games and practice speaking in different situations. It also gives students more time to practice and understand the language under a teacher's supervision. While there are many more opportunities for advanced courses and more time to work with the language, there are other problems states one article. It says that the development of language proficien cy will be hurt because it should occur over a long period of time. It also mentions that the availability and sequencing of these classes will be affected and suggests proper staff development and time to adjust to a block schedule ("Foreign Langua ge..."). Unfortunately, what the article says does not always work for every high school because each high school has a different language program that they use which they need to adapt to one schedule.

Block scheduling heavily affects English classes. According to one author, achievement in English tends to be the same or worse. She says that reading literature becomes complicated because of having to read so fast, causing the students to have less understanding of what they are reading. She mentions that teachers can have more time to study the students' writing (Reid). Although this is nice, the teachers could spend too much time on certain subjects, putting them behind in other areas. On the good side, teachers can conduct discussions and debates about the literature topics with more ease because of more class time.

Math is also heavily affected by block. Math does offer some advantages in block scheduling, but has disadvantages to go with it. One author believes that more in-depth concepts can be taught such as problem solving and many ideas in high math co urses through many different activities. He says it challenges the students to work with a higher level of thinking as well as taking more math classes (Kramer 758-68). Many problems arise in putting math in block. Kramer says that math teachers have a hard time adjusting to teaching block because they have to cover the same amount of material in a double length class. Lecturing does not work well, he says, because students become unfocused easily. He believes that students will have more homework to do, making absences very difficult. He also mentions that students can forget more over breaks and the summer. Time in class could be wasted as well, because teachers do not do as much teaching. Instead, some give students busy work to do. Overall, b lock has a bad effect on math.

Music can be hurt very badly in block scheduling, but it can also be helped. Block gives ensembles longer periods of time to perfect their music for performances. It also allows for more types of ensembles to be created during the time that the m usic classes meet. While teachers can add music theory and other lessons to their classes, they find more problems developing. Blocher finds many decreases in enrollment, especially in the higher grades. He says that students have problems playing for longer periods of time. He also mentions that it is very difficult when there is only one music teacher or traveling teachers (38-39 78). Students could be forced to choose between chorus and band; a hard decision for possible college music majors. Bec ause of scheduling, the class may only be offered for one semester, causing problems for competing groups because compeitions are held throughout the entire year. Also, some ensembles may need to be dissolved if there is no time to schedule them. Music teachers are strongly against block scheduling because it hurts their program very badly in many cases. It hurts even more when they have a strong, widely recognized program.

Block scheduling causes controversies for students. It takes them a long time to adjust to a new schedule because the classes move much quicker than they think, tending to frustrate students quite a bit while giving them a twist to their old sched ule. Canady and Rettig have found that transfer students fall behind because they are placed into a schedule that they are not ready for. They say that attendance must be higher than with a regular schedule. Some things they see that would have to be c hanged are athletic eligibility as well as disciplinary actions. They see it fit to do something about graduation requirements because students will finish earlier (101-107). This causes problems because each school will have very different graduation r equirements. Although students have new ways to learn, less tests and quizzes, and more time to develop good teacher/student relations, they also run into more extensive homework, a faster pace, and teachers that may use boring teaching methods ("Fo reign Language..."). Another major problem that arises is with seniors and getting into college. Because the class schedule is different, the seniors may not have all of their major classes taken by the time they need to send in applications. They will not have the grades that colleges need to see. Shortt and Thayer believe that block hurts seniors' schedules in that they would lose the chance they normally have to do extra independent projects as well as work study programs (57). Students also find good in the schedule. They have the opportunity to take a variety of different classes which have less students in them, and they have more opportunities for different types of learning styles in their classes as well.

Teachers have various types of problems and advantages with block. According to Canady and Rettrig, they have either too much or not enough planning time during the day. They may not have the right amount of preparation time for classes. The pai r also sees problems with contracts and teaching times (107-108). While they may have less students per semester, a more manageable schedule with more planning time, improved discipline, and less administrative jobs, they end up with less class time over all, difficulty placing and teaching transfer students, and a harder time dealing with absences ("Foreign Language..."). Many teacher have a hard time adjusint to teaching block because they have been teaching a regular schedule for so many yea rs. This can make the classes harder for the students to follow, due to the lack of understanding on the teacher's part of how to teach block. However, teachers have found that they can vary their teaching style to help the students learn in the schedul e. They are able to have a closer relationship with their students creating a better classroom atmosphere as well.

There are many controversial issues surrounding instruction. Canady and Rettig find long periods of time between sequential courses and a lower rate of retention of facts. They see the actual class time being shorter than before. They agree that more time is needed for reviewing in language classes, and music classes must have a schedule made to fit the school. The pair believes that special education teachers and their students get shuffled around a lot because their classes do not really fit the block schedule. They see co-op program, A.P. classes, and students taking college classes being affected (86-101). Other instructional issues that arise are students having to make a new kind of schedule that will work for them and having to deal wi th new kinds of work to do in classes. This is also good for them because they can take more classes that are geared for their learning interests. In addition, many classes that never involved group work and projects may now include these activities. T he format of instruction in the classroom must be revised to teach the students effectively. This kind of instruction can also help students learn better because they are applying what they are learning through a variety of activities.

There are a few other controversies that come about because of block scheduling. Shortt and Thayer have found that student and teacher stress levels can rise because of the new balance of schedules. They see cost becoming a major factor because s chools may need to buy many new supplies and equipment in addition to hiring more staff. The schools would also need to pay for things such as staff development (53-62). According to one article, large classes, course scheduling and availability, and pr oficiency levels that are achieved tend to be big hassles for the block schedule ("Foreign Languages...").

Because block scheduling is such a new idea, many people have found controversies arising from various areas of the program. Some controversies have found permanent solutions while others have come across a variety of possible solutions. Other pr oblems have yet to see a solution of any kind in sight. As block scheduling becomes more routine in the high schools of our country, the problems in the program will find ways to resolve themselves.

Works Cited

Blocher, Larry. "A Closer Look at Block Scheduling." Teaching Music. 4 (1997): 38-39, 78.

Canady, Robert Lynn, and Michael D. Rettig. Block Scheduling: A Catalyst for Change in High

Schools. Princeton: Eye on Education, 1995.

"Foreign Language on the Block." North Carolina State Dept. of Public Instruction. Raleigh.

1996. ERIC CD-ROM. ERIC 1992-6/97.

Kramer, Steven L. "Block Scheduling and High School Mathematics Instruction." Mathematics

Teacher. 89 (1996): 758-68.

Reid, Louann. "Perceived Effects of Block Scheduling on the Teaching of English." 1995.

ERIC CD-ROM. ERIC 1992-6/97.

Shortt, Thomas L, and Yvonne Thayer. "What Can We Expect to See in the Next Generation of

Block Scheduling?" NASSP Bulletin 79 (1995): 19-22.

Deborah Chrisman

November 14, 1997

Paper #3

Block Scheduling: An Experienced Student's Point of View

As I begin to make my course selections for the spring of 1998, I am reminded of the course selection process I went through going into my senior year of high school. The course choices were just about the same as they had always been, but with on e new option. This option was to take two of my classes, A.P. English and Psychology/Sociology, in a block setting. Most of my classmates did not really have any idea of what block was or how our classes would be run. Seventeen brave and bold "soo n to be seniors," myself being one of them, decided to try the new block option. We soon realized that we had scheduled ourselves for an adventure of a year, being part of a type of class that had never been used in our school before. We, meaning t he two teachers and the seventeen students, went into the class scared and excited to be part of something so new. Throughout the year, we found great advantages and disadvantages to our class, but decided at the end of the year that block was a great wa y of having classes. Through my experience, I have decided that block is a good form of scheduling for high schools to try, despite any problems that may arise.

Before going into detail of what I found to be good and bad about block scheduling, I need to explain the type of program I went through. My block course was very different from others that were being taught in my school as well as other schools. My class was an integrated block, meaning that both teachers knew what was being tuaght, and participated in both of the classes. Also, the way the class was split up into A.P. English and Psychology/Sociology was different, having Psychology during the first quarter, English during the second and third quarters, and Sociology during the fourth quarter. The class was held during the first two periods of the day while the rest of the school was running on a regular schedule, making the class period one hundred minutes long as opposed to fifty minutes. Another interesting and different part of my class was that we were doing work for both classes at the same time. Being that this was a new program, we spent a great deal of time doing surveys and taped discussions about our block program and how it was going, to be used as data later on.

My class as well as other researchers have found many advantages and a few disadvantages for the student in a block setting. Thomas Guskey and Edward Kifer, two men that have researched block scheduling from many angles, have found that studetns c an take more classes in the long run with more courses to choose from. They said that the students receive more individual attention from the teacher. My class found this to be true because we all became closer with our two block teachers than we did wi th the rest of our teachers that year. We felt that we could talk to them about any subject that we needed to, from a class problem or a personal problem. Guskey and Kifer found that the rate of class participation was high and frequently present in mos t block settings. My class also agrees with this, because it worked very well for us. Being that there were only seventeen of us, we were more comfortable speaking in front of each other, making our speeches for English a lot easier to do. One of my cl assmates, Amy Roberts, comments, "The class also became close and was not as asocial as one period classes can be, that led to better discussions and more disclosure." Guskey and Kifer agree that students have a greater range of class activitie s that they can participate in. My class did many different kinds of activities, making the class more fun and interesting while we were learning difficult ideas and concepts in English, Psychology, and Sociology. Two other advantages that were given by Guskey and Kifer are that students have less homework and more time for experiments and projects. My class did not always find this to be true because we had outside readings for English throughout the year to lighten our reading load during our actual English class. Amy Roberts said, "It lightened the work load of two rigorous subjects," and I know that thre rest of my class agrees that this is what happened in the long run. We had more time in class to discuss books, and speeches did not t ake as much time to get done as well. As for disadvantages, Guskey and Kifer said that students find that they can not get enough help with their course selection from their guidance counselors, their substitutes are not prepared to teach block, and A.P. classes are tampered with. My class could agree with some of these factors. We only had a few substitutes during the year, and we ended up either running the class ourselves or watching a video and reading during the class. We were fortunate that our A.P. English class was not hurt to severely. In fact, it was probably helped by being made block. The only problem, a two month gap of time between the end of the class and the A.P. test, was resolved by reviewing a few times before the test which we fo und to be helpful.

Many advantages of block scheduling, along with some disadvantages, have been found for teachers by researchers and teachers. Guskey and Kifer believe that there is a better school atmosphere, more planning time, and more time for big projects. T hey have found that teachers like having less students at one time and having to deal with less textbooks. The two say that teachers find a better concentration and work ethic from students. The mid-year slump that is evident in many schools also starts to disappear with block scheduling according to Guskey and Kifer. Dr. Karen Kreider, the block Psychology/Sociology teacher that I had last year, comments very positively on block scheduling. She said that block is much easier to teach because there ar e less classes to worry about. She foundd that she could get a lot more work done than she would have gotten done in a regular class. Dr. Kreider loved the fact that she had better student/teacher relationships, enabling her to work with the students' s trengths and weaknesses. She agreed with Guskey and Kifer's belief of a better school atmosphere because she saw it happen in her class. She noticed that my classmates and I knew each other very well, making our class activities a lot more interesting a nd effective.

Guskey and Kifer have found that teachers also see some disadvantages to block. They saw that many curriculums and textbooks are not made to be used in a block setting. making a teacher's job more difficult. They found a greater need for differe nt kinds of equipment and supplies, for example AV materials and supplies for completing creative projects. This is due to that fact that teachers need to vary what they use in their lessons to make the classes more interesting in a longer period of time . Guskey and Kifer also agree that many teachers have trouble adjusting to the new way of teaching because they have been teaching the old way for such a long time. The only major disadvantage that Dr. Kreider found was that she did not have enough time in the semester to teach everything that she wanted. She had to cut a few chapters in psychology as well as some in sociology. It was especially difficult for her because she did not plan on having to do this.

A few other researchers have studied the subject of block and have found many positive aspects of the program. Jeffrey Sturgis found that teachers made a more effective use of the class time they had, smaller classes, and more teaching strategies to use. He also saw that more courses were offered while still having small teacher/student ratios (Irmsher "Block Scheduling"). Joseph Carroll said that he found that students were earning more course credits in the long run, and they had an equal or even better knowledge of the material they were learning. Carroll saw a lower dropout and suspension rate as well (Irmsher "Block Scheduling"). Karen Irmsher has found a more flexible classroom atmosphere where more work and interacti on is taking place. She also commented that the building has to have a good support of block for the program to work effectively ("Block Scheduling").

While I do agree with block scheduling as a whole, there is one aspect of it that I tend to have problems with, and that is how it affects a music program. In general, music does very well in a regular schedule and could be severely hurt in a bloc k atmosphere (Irmsher "Block Scheduling in High Schools"). There area few major obstacles that block gives music. Some schools' programs decrease in size because the students have a hard time scheduling it. Other schools can only have a band or chorus class during one of the two semestersd, possibly leaving the ensembles out of competitions and festivals that give the students a wonderful performing experience. When having the class for a longer period of time, it becomes more difficult to have effective rehearsals, because most students can not play for that amount of time at once. Karen Irmsher believes that some of these problems can be alleviated by having music before and after school or adding music theory to the content of the class ("Block Scheduling in High Schools"). While this may work for some schools, most schools would have problems using these ideas in their programs due to transportation problems and students that really do not want to be in the class. I believe that music can only be taught effectively in block after looking at and finding the best way to use it with the kind of program that a certain school may have.

The integrated block pilot program that I participated had many advantages and disadvantages that were agreed upon by my class. It was definitely one of the best classes that I had through all of my years of high school. My Psychology class did o ne chapter every week with a few big chapters taking two weeks. We had many different kinds of projects throughout the course of that class as well. Our discussions became very intense because we had more time to get into some controversial topics; some of our discussions took the entire class period. The A.P. English part of the block was probably the most difficult but was very helpful as well. Because we had many outside reading books, we read them throughout the entire year and got tested on them as we read them. We did a few different kinds of speeches and presentations for the class which worked well in the block setting because the class was comfortable talking in front of each other. Our debates on books were very good because we had time to develop both sides of the debate and actually ahve the debate in the same class period. The Sociology part of the class worked very similarly to the Psychology part in that we did many discussions and projects. Our teacher, Dr. Kreider, learned from ou r experience with not having enough time for everything in the Psychology part, and she made sure that she covered all of the important concepts of Sociology. Overall, our tests were a little bit easier than in a regular schedule. We did not have as man y, making them a little longer tahn other tests that we were used to. One helpful thing was that our finals for all three parts of the class ended up being take home tests, allowing us to take as much time as we needed to answer the essays that made up t he tests. The class found two major disadvantages to the block experience, one of them being that absences were hard on us because we missed a lot of work. This is especially hard during senior year due to college visits and placement testing. Band mem bers also had problems with absences because of trips and honor band practices. The other problem was grading because the principals had not decided ahead of time how our grades would work. The first transcrips that colleges saw had no grade for A.P. En glish on them because we had not started the class yet. Also, the administration had trouble figuring out the grade weighting for English because of it being A.P. The principals and teachers never quite figured out the best way to do it. They even had to redo our final grades and G.P.A.'s after we had already received our diplomas because the grades were not averaged correctly. Overall, my class thoroughly enjoyed our block experience, and we agreed that we would miss having the small class when we go t to college.

Block scheduling can be a great new way of scheduling for high schools. It gives both students and teachers many advantages in the learning process. It also has a few problems that can arise, depending on what type of program it is and the way th e school works. Thsoe problems can be solved if enough effort is put forth to fix them, though. Many researchers agree and disagree with the effectiveness of block scheduling as well.

I feel that block scheduling is a great program for high schools to try. It is important for the school to try the program as a pilot first so that any problems can be worked out before it is implemented in the entire school. Spring-Ford was orig inally going to implement a full block in the 1997-1998 school year, but then decided to have a larger pilot program instead. Unfortunately, they canceled the program last May because they felt that it would not work, and they would not be able to implem ent a full block anytime in the near future. At the present time, the administration is starting to discuss a possible integrated block in next year's schedule because of the arguments that came from my class and teachers when they canceled the program. My class went through a trial program that ended up being one of the best things that had happened for us in high school, and we did not want to see our younger classmates lose the opportunity that we received. Block scheduling would just have to wait i n the wings until Spring-Ford is ready to try it again.

Works Cited

Guskey, Thomas R. and Edward Kifer. "Evaluation of a High School Block Schedule

Restructuring Program." 1995. ERIC-CD ROM. ERIC 1992-6/97.

Irmsher, Karen. "Block Scheduling. ERIC Digest, Number 104." ERIC Clearinghouse on

Educational Management. ERIC CD-ROM. ERIC 1992-6/97.

---. "Block Scheduling in High Schools." Oregon School Study Council. ERIC CD-ROM.

ERIC 1992-6/97.

Krieder, Dr. Karen. Telephone interview. 23 October 1997.

Roberts, Amy. E-mail to the author. 18 October 1997.