How Is A Student’s LEARNING Affected By Their School Schedule



Running Head: TRADITIONAL VS. BLOCK SCHEDULE

How Is A Student’s LEARNING Affected By Their School Schedule?

Konstantine Papadakis

California State University, at Northridge

ABSTRACT

Today, many high school students, across the United States, are in classrooms for longer periods of time due to “Block Scheduling”. This may have an impact on the level of learning that takes place. This paper describes a study that was performed on physics students, at South Pasadena High School, and the question addressed was, what affect or impact does this greater amount of time in the classroom have on how well a student learns? Two groups of students were studied each having a different schedule. Each group was comprised of 15 students. Group 1 had a type A traditional schedule where students met every day for 50 minutes at a time. Group 2 had a type B block schedule where students met every other day for 100 minutes at a time. These students were asked how much they liked or disliked the schedule that they had and why. Their responses to surveys questions, essay questions, and interviews, revealed some interesting results. Additionally, the results of the test scores from these two groups were examined. The results of these test scores, showed no statistical difference in the performance of the students in the two types of schedules. However, the students in the non-block class (traditional class) preferred the traditional type A schedule, two to one (10 students favored it, while 5 students did not). In contrast, only about half of the 15 students (7 of 15) preferred a traditional type A schedule. Described in the findings will be additional data regarding why students prefer the schedule they selected, and some implications from this data.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

How Is A Student’s LEARNING Affected By Their School Schedule?

How students learn, is based on many factors. In this study, I have focused my research on one big theme of how a student’s schedule can influence how a student learns in the classroom. More specifically, how can the amount of time a student is in class, and the frequency of coming to class, affect their LEARNING?

Across the United States in recent years, education has seen an increase in the modification of traditional school schedules. This modification has taken the form of moving from a traditional 7 periods per day, where students meet their teacher every day for 50 to 60 minutes, to some form of a block schedule, where students see their teacher every other day but for a longer period of 100 minutes or so (Gainey & Brucato 1999). Whenever some kind of educational change is implemented, there usually is some problem that educators are trying to “fix”. So, we can ask, “What is it that educators have been trying to fix, by making this change?” A good follow-up question is, “Has this change seen any improvements in the field of education?” In the book by Gainey & Brucato (Questions & Answers about Block Scheduling) the authors offer an answer to the first question stated above. They state that present-day technology is changing so quickly, that many youths today are becoming more skilled at using this technology than most adults. Consequently helping these youths to be prepared for the work force they will soon enter will require changing the educational strategies of the past. Block scheduling can provide one way to bring this change about and shift schools from being teacher centered to student centered. The authors also remind us that this change will not be an easy one to make. Therefore, looking at the results from schools that have made this change is one way to assess the value of block scheduling. One way to make this assessment is to look to educational psychologists and find out what they are saying about the value of block schedule. Another way is to find out directly from students, what they think about the value of block scheduling on their own learning. I have chosen to do the latter and find out directly from the students that I teach, how they view the value of block scheduling on their learning.

Background Information

At the beginning of my teaching career, at South Pasadena High School in 1984, I began teaching in a traditional style schedule of 7 periods a day for a duration of 50 minutes for each period. I grew accustomed to this schedule and felt like it was working well for me and for my students. However, in the year 1999, my school (South Pasadena High School) began studying the feasibility a changing to a modified odd/even block schedule. A committee was created comprised of teachers, educators, parents and students, to study schools in Southern California, which had already adopted this kind of schedule. Articles describing the pros and cons of block scheduling from schools across the country were also examined. I was one of the teachers on this committee. This group took several trips to these block schools, and asked the teachers and students at these schools what they thought about block scheduling. After discussing all of the information that was obtained, the committee finally decided to make the switch to a block schedule in 2001. From 2001 until the present, I have continued to teach at South Pasadena High School, in a modified block schedule. This modified odd/even block schedule means that students attend seven classes, but go to the odd numbered classes on one day (periods 1, 3 & 5) and then on the next day go to the even numbered classes (periods 2, 4 & 6). Each of these classes meets for 100 minutes at a time. The modification that was mentioned above, takes the form of also having a period 7, non-block class, which meets every day for only 50 minutes. When a teacher teaches in a block schedule, the teacher will only see their students every other day. One benefit to teachers, who teach in this type of schedule, is that if they are teaching two different subjects, e.g., chemistry and physics, they may have only one preparation (e.g. chemistry) on one day and then the other preparation (e.g. physics) on the next day. Also instead of teaching 5 classes every day, this teacher would teach only 2 or 3 classes each day. At South Pasadena High School, some teachers are given a period 7 class to teach, as their fifth class. During the 2006-2007 school year, and the 2007-2008 school year, I was assigned a schedule that included teaching an honors-physics class during period 7. As a result of having this schedule, I decided to study the students that I have in these two different schedules and find out if there are any differences between the learning with these two types of students.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact that a schedule can have on a student’s learning. I have compared two groups of my students who are in one or the other of these two types of schedules. The specific research questions are:

1. Which type of schedule did students prefer?

2. Which type of schedule was better for your learning?

3. What impact did “schedule” have on the focus or attention span of students?

4. Was there sufficient time in class to understand and comprehend the concepts presented?

5. How were laboratory experiments impacted?

6. How did their schedule impact their relationship with their teacher?

7. How was their performance on tests impacted?

Importance of the Study

There are many factors that are important to how a student learns. These factors include the following; how the teacher teaches the student, the curriculum the teacher uses, the environment of the student, and the home-life of the student. However, students are rarely asked what they think about how the type of schedule impacts their learning. In particular, the importance of this study is to find out from the student, if they feel whether they can learn best when they are in class for a period of time of 100 minutes or whether they think they can learn better if they are in class for only 50 minutes each class period. This study may have value to several different groups. It can be valuable to the teacher, first and foremost, because if a teacher can learn how the time of teaching and learning that goes on in a class, impacts a student, the teacher may be able to make modifications within the framework of the school schedule, that incorporate these ideas. Secondly, administrators who are responsible for creating the type of schedule that is used at a particular school, can also find out what is important to students, and then they can possibly use this information to help them make decisions regarding school schedules. Specifically, whether science classes should be taught within a traditional schedule. Thirdly, parents may find the results interesting, as they can use the information to help them make decisions about whether to send their children to a school, which uses a traditional schedule or a block schedule. In this particular study, only science students (honors physics students) are being studied. However, it might be interesting in the future to continue this study with non-science students and see how the type of schedule they have impacts their learning? Another potential study in the future might be to interview teachers who teach in a block schedule and those who teach in a traditional schedule, and see what differences exist between these two groups in terms of their attitude and their teaching methods.

Definition of Terms

❑ Triangulation: Looking at something from more than one perspective. Ensures that you are seeing all sides of a situation, and provides greater depth and dimension, thereby enhancing accuracy and credibility of data. (Johnson, 2008, p.102)

The two groups being studied in this action research study will be referred to as the Traditional Group and the Block Group.

❑ The Traditional Group (Group A) will be comprised of students who are taking honors physics in a period 7 class, which meets every day of the week, Monday through Friday, for a time period of 50 minutes each day. This class meets from 2:10 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. (See Figure 1)

Figure 1

Traditional Group A (which meets every day for 50 minutes per day)

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

| | | | | | |

|Week 1 |Honors |Honors Physics |Honors Physics |Honors Physics |Honors Physics |

| |Physics | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Week 2 |Honors |Honors Physics |Honors Physics |Honors Physics |Honors Physics |

| |Physics | | | | |

The darker shaded areas represent the 10 classes that 7th period students have in a two

week period combining for a total class time of 50 minutes x 10 days or 500 minutes.

Day

❑ The Block Group (Group B) will be comprised of students who are taking honors physics in a block class, which meets every other day of the week, for a time period of 100 minutes each day. (See Figure 2)

Figure 2

Block Group B (which meets every other day for 100 minutes)

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

| | | | | | |

| |Honors | |Honors | |Honors |

|Week 1 |Physics | |Physics | |Physics |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Honors | |Honors | |

|Week 2 | |Physics | |Physics | |

The darker shaded areas represents the 5 classes block students will have in a two-

week period, combining for a total class time of 100 minutes x 5 days or

Day

500 minutes. In week 1, students attend their honors physics class three days of the week, while the next week, they attend for only two days.

Essay Responses from Students that will be reported in the Findings section,

will be categorized using the following key:

|Code |Category |

|A1, A2, etc. |Students, from the traditional period 7 class, or group A. |

|B1, B2, etc. |Students, from the block classes, or group B. |

|C1, C2, etc. |Students who transferred from a block class to a period 7 class. |

|D1, D2, etc. |Students who transferred from a period 7 class to a block class. |

Table 1

❑

❑

❑

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

It is estimated that about 50% of American secondary schools are on some form of block scheduling (Wild, 1998). For example, in the state of Virginia, 168 out of 294 high schools were using some form of block scheduling (Short & Thayer, 1998-1999). The focus of this action research is to examine how block scheduling affects students and their attitudes about learning. Kristen Dexter and Robert Tai (2006) studied the performance of college students and also determined which type of high school scheduling plan these students had in high school (those who had block scheduling in high school and those who did not). Their findings suggested that block-scheduling plans (in high school) did not appear to provide an advantage to students in terms of their college preparation in science. However, Bateson (1990) studied secondary science students across all of Canada and found that

the students in traditional schedules out performed the block schedule students. This is why the question I am asking, will be very interesting. Either the schedule does make a difference or it does not. If it does, then either block scheduling is better or the traditional scheduling is better. I see in my own classes, that block scheduling provides more class time for performing experiments. On the flip side, if a teacher does not take advantage of this extra time by performing more experiments, then the advantage of the extra time is lost, and sitting in a 100-minute lecture may be very harmful to a student. It is generally assumed that making modifications to a schedule, will bring about positive changes for the students. If high school students, who are learning in block schedules, are not seeing positive outcomes when they go to college, compared to other students who were learning in traditional schedules, then this new shift towards block scheduling should be re-assessed. However, in another study, Veal (2000) found many positive effects from students in a block schedule. Obviously, there is still not a conclusive determination for the benefits or lack of benefits for block schedules in high schools. This is why I chose my question for my action research. I wanted to collect data from my own students and find out directly from them, how they view learning in a block schedule.

One of the aspects that I am studying in this research is to find out if there is a difference in attitude for students who are in the block schedule versus the students who are in the traditional schedule. Patrick Barmby and Neil Defty of Durham University in the United Kingdom studied 9,827 secondary students in England, in 2004 and looked at the perceptions that these students had toward the sciences and how much they liked or disliked the subjects of biology, chemistry and physics. They also included in their study, if their was a correlation between what grade the students expected that they would receive for a particular science class and how much they liked or disliked the subject. They found that physics was perceived as the least popular science, particularly among female students and that the students who disliked a science the most, also expected to receive the lowest grades in that subject. The grades that students expected were lowest for physics, again particularly for the female students. These results led the authors to conclude that in order to make an impact on the gender imbalance in physics, they first needed to address the issue that physics is perceived as difficult my female students. Of course, we must remember that the students who were studied were in England and this does not necessarily carry over to similar attitudes for students in the United States. However, for me this article does have some implications to my own study. For example, in the data that I collected, I decided not to compare males versus females, so consequently, I had approximately and equal number of males and females in my study.

Another factor in how much students are engaged in these two different schedules is the extent to which they have good problem solving habits and skills. In a study by DiLisi et al., 2006, they examined the importance of establishing problem-solving habits in introductory science courses. What they found was that when students were introduced to various techniques for solving physics problems, the students did not consistently use these techniques during their problem solving activities. In particular, the technique of using dimensional analysis to help in finding the solution to a physics problem, became used less frequently when the complexity of the physics problems increased. “Even students in the treatment group commented on the lack of apparent benefit to dimensional analysis and saw little advantage or usefulness for developing this habit” (p. 46). DiLisi believed that the reason for this was simply due to the increased time pressure on the students who did not feel they had enough time to use the technique as well as solve the problem. The connection of this paper to my research is that these results all stem from the attitude of the students. “The question of whether or not we could produce change in students’ attitudes through our behavioral modification method did not produce encouraging results.” (p. 46). So, the attitude that my students have to their learning, whether it is in the block schedule or in the traditional schedule, can be greatly influenced by the comfort level they have in using problem solving techniques for their homework. This means that one set of questions that students should be asked in their surveys should relate to the confidence level they have in using problem solving techniques. The reason this has implications to my study is that student who are learning in a block schedule, have more time to practice these problem solving techniques.

Is there a connection between the traditional teaching schedule and traditional teaching methods? Conceptual Understanding Procedures (CUP) are a part of a teaching method that McKittrick discussed in their research paper entitled Improving understanding in physics: An effective teaching procedure (1999). In this technique, students use an exercise that first asks them to think about a problem alone. Then they discuss the problem in teams of three, and finally they discuss the responses from the various groups of three, as a whole class. The technique has shown that students gain a better understanding of the underlying physics concepts, and not just finding a solution to a problem using an equation. The question here is whether or not a technique such as this could be used in both a block schedule class as well as in a traditional class? If the answer is no, because of the limited time, then this means that from the point of view from the teacher, a traditional schedule is more limited in the number of novel teaching techniques that can be attempted. This in turn means that it is more likely that students in a traditional schedule are more likely to be less engaged than students in a block schedule. This could be developed into a question asked of the students; “Would being exposed to alternate teaching methods be likely to increase your level of engagement with the material?”

Some subjects, like science are more conducive to the block schedule since it provides more time for laboratory investigations, but may not be more conducive to subjects such as foreign language or mathematics where students may need daily exposure to the topics in that course. Other articles examine the perceptions of students taking science, and this can help to shed light on what attitudes my own students may have regarding science classes. Attitude may have a definite link to performance In the studies by Stader, (2001) a comparison was made between small high schools with block scheduling and high schools with traditional schedules, in Missouri. The teachers and the administrators were surveyed and the findings indicated that both groups were supportive of block scheduling and that they thought block scheduling improves school climate, and improves student achievement in some academic disciplines. This seems, at least in some ways, to contradict the findings found by Dexter and Tai. It seems though that the Dexter article focused more on performance while the Stader articles focused more on attitude.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Participants

The participants in this study were honors physics students at South Pasadena High School in South Pasadena, California. The students ranged in grade level from 9th graders to 12th graders, and included both male and female students.

Figure 3

[pic]

Figure 4

[pic]

As seen in figures 3 and 4 above, the distribution of male versus female students (7 male students and 8 female students) was approximately equal in the two groups of students

who were studied.

Figure 5

[pic]

Figure 6

[pic]

You can see from figures 5 and 6 above, that there is a somewhat balanced distribution of grade levels from 9th grade to 12th grade for the two groups studied.

Group A was comprised of 15 honors physics students who met during a traditional period 7 class which met from 2:10 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. every day. The class contained 16 students, and one of them chose not to be a participant in the study.

Group B was comprised of 15 honors physics students who came from the two different block classes (period 2 and period 6). Each class had about 35 students for a total of 70 students. After I obtained the performance level STAR achievement scores from the various STAR achievement tests for all of these 70 students (and for the 15 students in Group A), I then selected 15 students from this group of 70 who matched as closely as possible, in terms of their performance level scores, with the performance level scores from the 15 students from the period 7 traditional group of students. The STAR achievement test is a California State mandated test that is based on the California State Science Standards, and it contains 60 multiple-choice questions that cover the topics from the entire year of physics or for whatever class is being tested. These tests ranged from English, Life Science, U.S. History, World History, Algebra I, Algebra II, Geometry, Biology, and Chemistry. Students receive a score based on a five-point scale, as shown in the table below.

|Performance Level Description |Performance Level Score |

|Far Below Basic |Score of 1 |

|Below Basic |Score of 2 |

|Basic |Score of 3 |

|Proficient |Score of 4 |

|Advanced |Score of 5 |

Table 2

The results of the scores for the two groups of students

are shown in the two graphs below.

Figure 7

[pic]

These 15 students from group A took a total of 55 tests in the spring of 2007 (Figure 7). Not one of the 15 students received a score of 1 or 2. Out of the 55 tests taken, 51 of them (or 93%) were a score of 4 or 5.

Figure 8

[pic]

The 15 block students from group B took a total of 57 tests in the spring of 2007 (Figure 8). Out of the 57 tests, 46 of them (or 81%) were a score of 4 or 5. Not one of the 15 students received a score of 1 or 2. These two graphs show that the students in the two groups were fairly evenly matched.

Materials

These two groups of honors physics students came from three different classes, which are periods 2, 6 and 7. All of these students were taking the same kind of honors physics class, which was a one-year, laboratory based, and University of California approved, class. The students in this type of class generally have very good mathematics skills, although this is not true for all of the students. These students who were studied, were in the class for one year. Doing laboratory investigations on a regular basis of approximately one experiment every two weeks is standard for the entire year. There are sometimes activities that the students do on a more frequent basis, where data may not be collected, but they are simply performing some task and making observations.

In order to have triangulation in an action research study, a minimum of three modes of data collection is needed. For this research paper, I used four different types of data collection, which was collected primarily from two different groups of students. Additional survey and essay data was also collected from the block students who were not paired up with the traditional schedule group A students. An additional set of data from essays was also collected from the students who took honors physics in the year previous to the students who were examined in this study.

The four types of data collection were

1. Student Surveys,

2. Student Essay Questions,

3. Student Interviews with the teacher, and

4. Data from student test scores from 8 tests, ranging over the entire year. The first four tests were from the first semester and the second four tests were from the second semester. The total number of tests from all of the students was 240 tests.

The four types are shown in diagram 1 below:

Diagram 1

A sample questionnaire of the student survey and student essay questions is shown in the appendix.

Procedures

The length of the study was done over a two-year period. In year one, data was obtained from essay questions given only to the period 7 honors physics class, asking them to respond to how the traditional schedule affected their learning, compared to having physics in a block schedule. In year two, the two groups of traditional and block students were identified. This was a different group of students from the students in year one. All of the students in year two, were given a consent form, which described my study and asked them to get a written approval from one of their parents, for the students participation in the study. Only two students (out of 95 students) did not get approval from their parent, and consequently these two students were not included in any surveys or data collection. Of the 15 students who were selected from the two block classes, 8 of them came from the period 2 class and 7 of them came from the period 6 class.

Of the 15 students who were in the period 7 class, three of them were in the block classes during the first semester and then transferred to the period 7 at the beginning of the second semester. Of the 15 students from the block class, three of them had been in the period 7 class, during the first semester and then transferred to one of the block classes at the beginning of the second semester. This all means that there are three students in each of the two groups studied, who had experience in both types of honors physics classes, (a traditional period 7 class and a block class), and will have an interesting story to tell from their surveys and interviews.

Figure 9

[pic]

When the students were interviewed by me, they either came after school, in the afternoon, and we had a one on one interview for about 10 to 15 minutes, or when this was not feasible, the students were interviewed during class time in the back of the room, when the rest of the class was working on something else.

One of my concerns was that I limit, as much as possible, my variables. For example, in order to compare students being taught physics in a block schedule, with students being taught physics in a traditional schedule, I limited the differences between the students in these two samples, by keeping similar numbers in both groups for the various categories. For example, I tried to have an equal number of males and females, and an even distribution of grade levels for the two groups. I also selected students from the block group whose STAR achievement scores were similar to the scores from the students in the other group. I also had an equal distribution of students from a morning block class and from the afternoon block class.

Another consideration is that all of the period 7 students have had block classes, but not all of the block students have had period 7 classes. This could have an influence on their opinions about which schedule is best for their learning, which is why I asked all of the block students how many times they have had a period 7 class. This information will be shown in the data.

Analysis

One of the important pieces of collecting data is to have triangulation. Triangulation involves obtaining different kinds of data from at least three different sources, so that the question can be studied from more than one perspective. If one type of data substantiates a certain point of view, then having other types of data can help to substantiate that point of view. My data collection techniques involved four types of data collection, instead of just three, so that I could ensure that whatever conclusions I reached, they would be reliable. My data collection also included a t-test, to determine whether or not differences between two sets of test scores data, was statistically significant. The t-test was used on the 240 test scores from the two groups of students. When looking at the raw data from the test scores in the appendix, you will notice that there are some test scores that are missing and that the two groups, had a different number of students in the second semester than in the first semester. This is because during the first semester there were a total of 18 students, and three of these 18 students later transferred at the end of the semester from the period 7 class, to a block class. Also in the block group of students, there are 17 students, with some test scores missing. This is due to the fact that 3 if these 17 students were not in the block class during the first semester, but were in the period 7 class and then later transferred to a block class at the end of the first semester. Also, there is one student in the period 7 class, with no scores in the first semester because this student took physics during the previous year and then only transferred into my class during the second semester. Another student shows no scores in the period 7 class, during the second semester because this student had to withdraw from school for a time, and then the student returned in time to fill out the survey and be interviewed.

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

From Surveys:

The big question that was asked in this research study was: How Is A Student’s LEARNING Affected By Their School Schedule? Specifically I investigated:

1. Which type of schedule did students prefer?

2. Which type of schedule was better for your learning?

3. What impact did “schedule” have on the focus or attention span of students?

4. Was there sufficient time in class to understand and comprehend the concepts presented?

5. How were laboratory experiments impacted?

6. How did their schedule impact their relationship with their teacher?

7. How was their performance on tests impacted?

When students in the two groups were specifically asked about question #1, which type of schedule did they prefer, here is what they said.

The students in Group A (Figure 10) preferred their traditional schedule in a two to one ratio (10 students preferred a traditional schedule while 5 students did not).

Figure 10

[pic]

The students in Group B (Figure 11) had a more even distribution of those who preferred the traditional schedule (7 students) versus those who preferred the block schedule (8 students).

Figure 11

[pic]

The second question stated on the previous page, may seem similar to the first question, but it really is a different question. A student may feel a certain type of schedule is better for their learning, while at the same time, they might prefer the other type of schedule, for various reasons. Referring to Figure 12, here is what students said when asked about which type of schedule they believed is better for their learning. An equal number of students from each group (11 or 73%) believed that the type of schedule they had, was better for their learning. A smaller number (4 or 27%), but an equal number for both groups, believed that the type of schedule they had, was not better for their learning.

Figure 12

[pic]

When students were asked how their schedule impacted their being able to focus and keep their attention during the entire duration of the period (Figure 13), here is what they said. A larger number, 60%, (but equal number of students from each group), believed that they could stay focused and keep their attention during the entire period (in either schedule). A smaller number of students, 40%, but equal for the two groups, believed it was not easy to stay focused and keep their attention during the entire period (in either schedule). Figure 13

[pic]

When students were asked if there was sufficient time in class to understand and comprehend the concepts presented, here is what they said (Figure 14). Almost an equal number from each group (about 90%) believed that there was enough time in class to understand the concepts. A tiny percentage from each group (about 10%) believed that there was not enough time in their particular schedule, to understand the concepts presented in class.

Figure 14

[pic]

The next question that was asked was whether students felt that there was sufficient time in class, to complete laboratory experiments. Here is what they said (Figure 15). About 30% (or 5 out of 15) 7th period students agreed that there is sufficient time in a period 7 class to complete laboratory experiments. Almost 70% of this same group felt that there is not sufficient time in period 7 to complete laboratory experiments. For the block students, just over 70% of these students felt that there is sufficient time in their block class to complete laboratory experiments. About 30% of this group felt that there is not sufficient time in a block class to complete laboratory experiments. The results were just about reversed for the two groups.

Figure 15

[pic]

When students were asked how they believe the amount in time impacts developing a good rapport and relationship with their teacher, here is what they said (Figure 16). Almost 70% of the students in 7th period felt that coming to class every day makes it easier to develop a good rapport and relationship with their teacher. About 30% of these same 15 students felt the daily contact does not help to develop a good rapport and relationship with their teacher. The result for the block group was just the opposite. That is to say that only 30% of the 15 students in the block schedule felt that coming to class every other day, makes it easier to develop a good rapport and relationship with their block teacher.

Figure 16

The final piece of data is taken from the remaining 51 block students who were not selected for Group B, but who nonetheless, filled out the survey and essay questionnaire. They were also asked whether they preferred having physics in their block class that meets every other day for 100 minutes, versus being in the traditional 7th period physics class that meets every day. Their response (Figure 17 below) favored being in the block schedule for physics in about a 2 to 1 ratio, of 71% favoring it to only 29% not favoring the block schedule.

Figure 17

[pic]

Results From Test Scores

The final question that was addressed was what impact did the type of schedule have on their performance on tests. Each of the 30 students from group A and from group B, took 8 physics exams during the 2007-2008 school year. Four of these tests were taken in the fall semester and four of the tests were taken in the spring semester. The results from these 240 tests showed no statistical difference between the two groups studied. The raw data scores can be found in the appendix. You will notice in this set of raw test scores that the sample size for the period 7 group, changed from 15 students to 18 students and that there are some scores that are missing. The reasons are explained in the methodology section. Here is the statistical analysis of the test scores from the two groups.

|Statistical Analysis |Test #1A |Test #2A |Test #3A |Test #4A |Test #1B |Test #2B |Test #3B |Test #4B |

|Mean Group A |22.3 |38.7 |36.4 |58.5 |18.5 |26.9 |28.6 |36.1 |

|Standard Deviation Group A |4.73 |4.03 |5.77 |8.90 |1.65 |5.48 |4.43 |5.30 |

|Mean for Group B |22.6 |38.9 |37.7 |61.1 |18.4 |28.1 |26.6 |36.9 |

|Standard Deviation Group B |3.23 |4.32 |6.71 |8.60 |1.84 |5.04 |3.34 |5.54 |

|p-value of the t-test between groups A & B |0.42 |0.43 |0.55 |0.22 |0.41 |0.27 |0.08 |0.34 |

Table 3

The sample size for each group was 120 test score samples. In order to state a statistical significance between the two sets of scores, where one can say that the difference is not just due to chance, there must be a p-value of 5% (0.05) or less. As can be seen from the data above, only one test came close to this value (Test #3B) and even this value was still larger than 0.05 needed.

Essay Responses:

The essay responses from students will be separated into different categories, labeled as shown in the table below.

|Code |Category |

|A1, A2, etc. |Students, from the traditional period 7 class, or group A. |

|B1, B2, etc. |Students, from the block classes, or group B. |

|C1, C2, etc. |Students who transferred from a block class to a period 7 class. |

|D1, D2, etc. |Students who transferred from a period 7 class to a block class. |

|E1, E2, etc. |Comments from 7th period students from 2006-2007 |

Table 4

Why period 7 students preferred to come to class every day?

A1 “Having it every day helps me to remember the material better because I am constantly reminded of it.”

A2 “It is easier to remember the previous day’s lesson.”

A3 “ I tune out during long periods of time, (in a block class) so coming everyday is better for me.”

Why block students also would prefer to come to class every day?

B1 “ It’s easier to forget things when you have class every other day. Besides, it would be a better learning experience for me if I could experience physics every day.”

B2 “I would prefer a 50 minute class because I cannot stay focused in a 100 minute class. It’s too long and I forget things easily because I don’t see it every day.”

B3 “I would be able to retain more information and be able to use it everyday in class. In a block schedule, I tend to remember it on the day for class and forget about it the next. Last year, I had Spanish during period 7 and it really helped me to exercise what I learned the day before. I notice that I am able to recall information if done on a daily basis.”

Why period 7 students would prefer to be in a block schedule?

A4 “I am more used to it.”

A5 “In a traditional class, there is no break from homework and there is a greater amount of pressure, on a daily basis.”

A6 “Block would be better for me because I would not need to worry about class every day.”

Why block students preferred being in a block schedule?

B4 “ With a block schedule, you have more time to work on a subject in class. With this schedule, on the day you don’t have physics, you can go to the teacher to ask for help. With coming to class every other day, one could expect something new. There would be a surprise in store for you, while in everyday classes, not much can be expected”

B5 “I feel that we are able to go more in depth during a 100 minute period. I feel that we are a lot less pressured as far as daily homework goes and I like the depth we cover with more time.

What did students who transferred from a block class, into period 7 class, say?

C1 (prefers 7th period) “I don’t forget the lesson the next day. There is lighter homework spread out between two days and I pay attention better. I also like 7th period because it is a smaller class.”

C2 (prefers block) “I can concentrate on the material for a longer time. I would not have to worry about the subject every day. We rarely have enough time to go over homework or questions about the homework. We study different topics every day and we don’t stay on one subject for 2 consecutive days, whereas in a block class, we would focus on one topic each day. That would help me a lot.”

C3 “I think it’s a matter of getting used to block scheduling or period 7 to determine whether I like one over the other. Having transferred from a block period to a period 7, I noticed big differences between the different classmates. What makes a class enjoyable lies on the teacher and the students and not so much on the scheduling itself. Though block scheduling does allow homework to be finished more easily, period 7 builds a closer connection between the students and the teacher.”

What did students who transferred from period 7 into a block class, say?

D1 (prefers 7th period) ”I prefer having physics every day for 50 minutes because it helps me learn the concepts much more efficiently. It is very beneficial, especially for students who have a difficult time focusing, because you are reviewing the material on a daily basis, and students will be more engaged due to the shorter period of time. Coming every day refreshes everything I learn on the homework assignments and reinforces my skills by practicing with my peers and validates my answers by asking questions. Seeing teachers every other day makes it less likely to develop a good rapport/relationship with the teacher.”

D2 (prefers 7th period) ”I preferred 50 minutes everyday because the lectures come together seamlessly. Remembering yesterday is easier than remembering the day before yesterday. More student participation in demonstrations would help improve my attention and focus during a 100-minute class. The more stimulated a person’s mind is, the easier it is to pay attention. Everyday classes provide for a better student-teacher relationship, and so overall, I believe that the 50-minute everyday class is the better of the two.”

D3 (prefers block) “I like the block schedule better because it allowed me to learn the concepts better without having to stop midway. Also, I have more time to focus on my homework and to study. When I had 7th period I did not enjoy the experiments as much because we usually had to stop at the time when I was just beginning to understand the experiment. Also with the block schedule I have more opportunities and time to ask questions, so I understand better. However, I think that 7th period is better for developing a good rapport with your teacher because you see the teacher everyday and it “grows” your relationship with the teacher.

Interview Responses:

The questions that were asked of students during the interviewing, included the same questions that they responded to during the essay responses. However, three additional questions were added. They were also asked to comment on negative aspects and the positive aspects of learning in a block schedule or in a 7th period class, regardless of which schedule they had. The third question they were asked, was, “How many of the academic block teachers, that you have as your teachers, lecture for too much time during the 100 minute period, in your opinion?” Here is what they said (Figure 18 below). The thirty students had a combined number of 143 block teachers. Many of these of course would be the same teachers for these students. The number of these 143 block teachers, that the students believed lectured for too much time during the period, was 40. That is just under 30%.

Figure 18

[pic]

The responses, from the other interview questions, were very similar to and corroborated the responses that students gave during the survey questions and the essay questions.

Essay responses from 2006-2007:

During the 2006-2007 academic school year, my 16 honors physics students who were in the 7th period class, wrote down (full page) responses to the following question; “What is the difference in attitude you have between being in a block class, versus being in a 7th period class that meets everyday?” This group of students was not compared to any other group of block physics students. However, I asked them to respond to the question above, so that additional data could be obtained that would shed light on what students feel about learning in a 7th period class. First, here is the breakdown of what these 16 students preferred when comparing a 7th period class to a block class (Figure 18). A majority of these students (10 out of 16 students or 63%) preferred the 7th period physics to a block physics class. Only a small number, (3 out of 16 students or 19%) would have preferred to be in a block physics class. The remaining students (3 out of 16 students or 19%) stated that it made no difference to them, and that the time factor was not the most important factor for affecting their attitude towards physics, but it was other factors. These results are shown in Figure 19 below.

Figure 19

[pic]

Some of the essay responses that these 7th period students (from 2006-2007) wrote in May 2007, are listed below:

E1 (prefers block) “I prefer block classes because we have more time to go in depth on a subject and still have time for questions.”

E2 (prefers 7th period) “Block classes tend to cause boredom in students, but 7th period usually counters such effects.”

E3 (prefers 7th period) “Meeting everyday bonds the relationship between each other, including the teacher, and helps all of us to enjoy learning (especially physics!).”

E4 (prefers 7th period) “The repetition is very helpful and helps to keep the information fresh in my mind.”

E5 (prefers 7th period) “ If one has a shorter attention span, it is easier to grasp the information given.”

E6 (prefers 7th period) “Labs are better in 7th period because when we stretch it out over two days, you can go home and study it if you don’t get the first half of the lab, but in a block period, there wouldn’t be any time to think about it.”

E7 (prefers 7th period) “Personally, my liking of my teachers plays an important role in my attitude towards a class. When I frequently see my teacher, every day, my enthusiasm and efforts in the class are affected. When I like my teachers more, I enjoy the subject more and I feel more comfortable in voicing my opinions and questions.”

E8 “My attitude depends more on the subject as opposed to the amount of time in class.”

E9 “High school science students should experience the challenge of various settings (and schedules) to gain experience for working later in the real world.”

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

Overview of the Study

The big question I asked was: “How Is A Student’s LEARNING Affected By Their School Schedule? In order to answer this big picture question, I asked more specific and smaller questions, whose results combined to provide an answer to the big question. These smaller questions were:

1. Which type of schedule did students prefer?

2. Which type of schedule was better for a student’s learning?

3. What impact did “schedule” have on the focus or attention span of students?

4. Was there sufficient time in class to understand and comprehend the concepts presented?

5. How were laboratory experiments impacted?

6. How did their schedule impact their relationship with their teacher?

7. How were their performances on tests impacted by their schedule?

Here is how I obtained my results. I asked my physics students about 30 multiple choice or essay questions from a questionnaire. I also interviewed each of the students in a one-on-one interview, recording what they told me. I also examined their tests scores from September 2007 through March of 2008.

Summary of the Findings

Here is what I found. I begin with the last question. The variations in the test scores from both groups (Group A from the 7th period class, and Group B from the block classes) showed no statistical significant differences in the results of their physics test scores over the entire year. For 2 tests out of 8 tests given, traditional students performed better than the block students. For 5 tests out of the 8 tests, block students performed better. Though the block students outperformed traditional students on tests more of the time (63% of the time), the difference was on average, only 3 percentage points higher and these differences were not statistically significant.

I did find a significant difference in opinion between the two groups for only two of the remaining six questions that were asked of them. Also I found that the type of schedule a student had, did impact only a small number of students.

• Most of the 7th period students preferred their 7th period class, while only about an equal number of block students preferred their block schedule.

• Most of the 7th period students believed that their schedule was better for their learning, while an equal number in the block schedule believed that their schedule was better for their learning.

• An EQUAL number of students from each group believed that they could focus and pay attention in the type of schedule they were in.

• A large and again almost EQUAL number of students from each of the two groups believed that there was sufficient time in class for them to understand and comprehend the concepts presented in class.

• When students were asked whether they thought that there was sufficient time in class to complete laboratory experiments, there was a significant difference in their responses. Most of the 7th period students felt they did not had sufficient time, while most of the block students did feel they had sufficient time in class for experiments.

• There was again a significant difference in the responses from the two groups to the question of how the schedule impacts their developing rapport with their teacher. Most of the 7th period students believed that their schedule helped them to develop rapport with their teacher, while an EQUAL number of block students believed that their coming to class every other day, hindered developing rapport with their teacher.

Results from the essay responses and the interview responses:

• Many students in both groups believed that having class for 100 minutes in a block schedule, is too much time and it makes it easier to “tune out” and not pay attention.

• Both groups of students felt that it is easier to forget material, when meeting every other day.

•

• Most of the students in the traditional schedule often felt rushed, and that more time would be helpful, when it came to lectures, tests, and laboratory experiments.

• Most students agreed that daily interaction with the teacher helps them to remember concepts more easily and increases the rapport between them and the teacher.

Conclusions

What do these results mean? The most important thing that I found from this action research on my students was that there really were not any important differences for the students in how they learn in a block schedule versus how they learn in a traditional classroom. This surprised me because I did expect to find some significant differences more of the time. I was not able to say, before the study, which group I thought would be impacted more by their type of schedule.

The results of my findings also told me that MOST students are able to adapt to their environment (or type of schedule), and will learn, how to learn, in either type of schedule.

It also became evident that differences do exist among the students in the ways they learn best. Just as there are kinesthetic learners vs. auditory learners, etc., some students were better able to focus for longer periods of time in class, and were able to engage more deeply in a topic for a longer period of time, than some of the other students. The students who have a shorter attention span, simply cannot focus for an extended period of 100 minutes at a time and therefore would function better in a shorter 7th period type of schedule.

Recommendations

One recommendation is that teachers who teach specifically in a block academic class (which is the majority of teachers at my school) need to become more AWARE of the types of students they have. That is, how many of our students have short attention spans, etc. Maybe this can be done through a student questionnaire given to students at the beginning of the school year. The results of the questionnaire could be shared with the other teachers of these students. Having this information might help me to be able to modify my teaching style, when appropriate, to be more in line with the needs of my students.

The usefulness of the information that I learned, for my own classroom, is that I have realized the importance of introducing short and more frequent breaks in my block classes. It is sometimes difficult to observe when a student is tuning out, since they might be looking right at the teacher, but thinking of something else, instead of what is being discussed. Also, I have seen the value of mixing up the activities that go on in a block classroom, with a variety or types of activities. By activity I simply mean an item, such as lecturing, or working on problems, or seeing a demonstration, or having a student help with a demonstration, etc. I have also learned from the interviews with my students, especially the 7th period students, the importance of introducing a short break halfway through the 50-minute period. Even these students can lose their focus in this time frame, especially since it occurs at the end of a long day. This result surprised me because I thought students would be able to go non-stop for 50 minutes, since it is a shorter period, compared to the block classes.

Limitations of the Study

One limitation of this study was that the sample size of 30 students (two groups of 15 students) was somewhat small. A larger sample size would provide more reliable information. Though there were more block students available, the limiting factor was the number of 7th period students, since I matched block students with these students, on a one-to-one basis.

Another limitation was that the opinion of students in the traditional class, could have been influenced by the fact that their class was at the end of the day, when students are tired and anxious to go home. If a traditional 50-minute class were in the middle of the school day, its influence could have been better evaluated.

Another limitation was that the class size of period 7 was small (sixteen students) while the class sizes of the block classes was much larger (33-35). This could have an influence on their opinions about the various research questions.

Another limitation was that the sample of block students came from two different times of the day, whereas the traditional sample group was only at the end of the day. On the other hand, having block students from two different times of the day, (8 from the morning class and 7 from the afternoon class) may have helped to reinforce the credibility of their data. Seeing similar results in both time periods removed the possibility that the results were just influenced by the time of day.

Something that may have hindered seeing any statistical difference in the test results of the students was that there were 12 test scores missing from students who had transferred into the class at the beginning of the semester, from another teacher. I chose not to use these test scores since the tests from the other teacher, would not have been identical to the tests that I used. Another factor to consider, which I don’t believe is a limitation, is that the two groups studied both contained science (physics) students. This was of course important, so that another variable was not introduced. Further study of other groups of students, who are not science students, would be interesting and could provide reinforcement to which type of schedule is best for a student’s learning. It could also prove interesting to study other groups of science students of another teacher, or even keeping the teacher the same, but studying science students who are taking a different science, such as chemistry.

References:

Aguilera, R.V. (1996). Block scheduling: Changing the system. Curriculum Report,

25(5), 1-4.

Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple Intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Barmby, P., Defty, Neil. (2006). Secondary school pupils’ perceptions of physics.

Research in Science & Technology Education, 24(2), 199-215.

Bateson, D. (1990). Science achievement in semester and all-year courses. Journal of

research in science teaching. 27, 233-240.

Black, S. (1998). Learning on the block. American School Board Journal, 185(1), 32-34.

Cawelti, G. (1989). Designing high schools for the future. Educational Leadership,

47(1), 30-36.

Childers, G., & Ireland, R. (2005, November). Mixing BLOCK and Traditional

Scheduling. Education Digest, 71(3), 43-49.

Dexter, Kristen M., Tai, Robert H., Sadler, Philip M. (2006). Traditional and Block Scheduling for College Science Preparation: A Comparison of College Science Success of Students Who Report Different High School Scheduling Plans. The High School

Journal, 8 (4), 22-33.

DiLisi, G., Eulberg, J., Lanase, J., & Padovan, P. (2006, March). Establishing Problem-Solving Habits in Introductory Science Courses. Journal of College Science Teaching,

35(5), 42-47.

Dillon, J., Osborne, J., Fairbrother, R. & Kurina, L. (2000) A study into the professional views and needs of science teachers in primary and secondary schools in England

(London, King’s College London).

Evans, W., Tokarczyk, J., Rice, S., & McCray, A. (2002, July). Block Scheduling.

Clearing House, 75(6), 319.

Gainey, Donald D., & Brucato, John M. (1999). Questions & Answers about Block

Scheduling: An Implementation Guide, Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education.

Gullatt, D. (2006, September). Block Scheduling: The Effects on Curriculum and Student Productivity. NASSP Bulletin, 90(3), 250-266.

Gunstone, R., McKittrick, B., & Mulhall, P., (1998). Structured cognitive discussions in

senior high school physics: Student and teacher perceptions.

Glynn, S.M. & Duit, R. (1995). Learning science in the schools: Research reforming

practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum.

Hackmann, D. (2004, May). Constructivism and Block Scheduling: Making the

Connection. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(9), 697-702.

Lewis, R. (1999). Block Scheduling: Changing the System.

Lewis, C., Dugan, J., Winokur, M., & Cobb, R. (2005, December). The Effects of Block

Scheduling on High School Academic Achievement. NASSP Bulletin, 89(645), 72-87.

McKittrick, B., Mulhall, P., & Gunstone, R. (1999). Improving Understanding in Physics:

An Effective Teaching Procedure. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(3), 27

Mills, D., McKittrick, B., Mulhall, P., & Feteris, S. (1999). CUP: Cooperative learning

that works. Physics Education, 34(1), 1-5.

Nielsen, H. & Thomsen, P. (1988) Physics in upper secondary schools in Denmark,

International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 189-202.

Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children’s

science. Auckland: Heinemann.

Osborne, J., Simon, S. & Collins, S. (2003) Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications, International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-

1079.

Pettus, Alvin M., & Blosser, Myron E. (2001). Teaching Science in the Block,

Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education.

Radcliffe, R., Jacobs, M., & Hulick, C. (2002). An Evaluation of Alternative School

Calendars in Rural Schools. Rural Educator, 24(2), 38.

Stader, D. (2001). Block Scheduling in Small High Schools: Perceptions from the Field.

Rural Educator, 22(3), 37.

Stader, D., & DeSpain, B. (1999). Block Scheduling in Missouri: A Study of

Administrator and Teacher Perceptions.

Trenta, L., & Newman, I. (2002, Fall). Effects Of A High School Block Scheduling Program On Students: A Four-Year Longitudinal Study Of The Effects Of Block

Scheduling On Student Outcome Variables. American Secondary Education, 31(1), 54.

Veal, W. (2000). Teaching and Student Achievement in Science: A comparison of three

different schedule types. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(3), 251-275.

Venturini, P. (2007, July1). The Contribution of the Theory of Relation to Knowledge to Understanding Students’ Engagement in Learning Physics. International Journal of

Science Education, 29(9), 1065.

Weinburgh (1995) Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: a meat-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991, Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

32(4), 387-398.

Williams, C., Stanisstreet, M., Spall, K., Boyes, E & Dickson, D. (2003) Why aren’t

secondary students interested in physics?, Physics Education, 38(4), 324-329.

Woolnough, B. (1994) Why students choose physics, or reject it, Physics Education, 29,

368-374.

Zepeda, S., & Mayers, R. (2006, Spring). An Analysis of Research on Block Scheduling. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 137-170.

Appendix

Table 5 Period 7 Student Test Scores

(The A tests are from the Fall Semester. The B tests are from the Spring Semester.)

|Student # |Test #1A |Test #2A |Test #3A |Test #4A |Test #1B |Test #2B |Test #3B |Test #4B |

|1 |25 |44 |44 |69 |20 |33 |31 |40 |

|2 |18 |36 |34 |ex |17 |21 |28 |25 |

| 3 * |----- |----- |----- |----- |18 |35 |32 |41 |

|4 |25 |39 |33 |57 |20 |28 |30 |41 |

| 5 * |26 |38 |42 |61 |20 |32 |31 |38 |

|6 |20 |38 |33 |43 |17 |20 |14 |28 |

|7 |26 |40 |39 |57 |21 |29 |31 |40 |

|8 |15 |32 |34 |56 |18 |31 |30 |35 |

| 9 * |28 |38 |34 |59 |21 |20 |29 |37 |

|10 |25 |40 |40 |55 |18 |29 |29 |37 |

|11 |24 |43 |35 |63 |16 |22 |29 |34 |

|12 |27 |43 |44 |71 |17 |31 |31 |43 |

|13 |21 |39 |35 |54 |19 |26 |27 |37 |

|14 |24 |41 |34 |ex |----- |----- |----- |----- |

|15 |14 |34 |23 |57 |17 |19 |29 |29 |

| 16# |26 |42 |46 |71 |---- |---- |---- |---- |

| 17# |22 |41 |38 |65 |---- |---- |---- |---- |

| 18# |13 |29 |30 |40 |---- |---- |---- |---- |

TEST 30 45 49 75 21 35 32 45

VALUES

Students marked with an asterisk (*) are students that transferred into the period 7 class from a block class, at the beginning of the spring semester.

Students marked with the number symbol (#), are students that transferred out of the period 7 into a block class at the beginning of the spring semester.

Table 6 Block Student Test Scores

|Student # |Test #1A |Test #2A |Test #3A |Test #4A |Test #1B |Test #2B |Test #3B |Test #4B |

|1 |22 |41 |39 |64 |21 |32 |23 |39 |

|2 |20 |37 |32 |56 |14 |28 |28 |32 |

|3 |21 |39 |36 |60 |19 |28 |23 |36 |

| 4* |------ |------ |------ |------ |19 |30 |31 |41 |

|5 |22 |36 |30 |63 |18 |23 |24 |32 |

|6 |26 |42 |48 |74 |20 |34 |31 |45 |

|7 |27 |39 |38 |61 |19 |29 |24 |37 |

|8 |18 |37 |46 |59 |19 |20 |26 |40 |

|9 |23 |42 |43 |68 |20 |31 |31 |39 |

|10 |27 |45 |45 |73 |20 |33 |29 |43 |

|11 |17 |28 |23 |50 |16 |17 |23 |23 |

| 12* |------ |------ |------ |------ |19 |34 |32 |34 |

|13 |23 |40 |36 |58 |15 |30 |23 |42 |

| 14* |------ |------ |------ |------ |19 |26 |24 |31 |

|15 |21 |36 |36 |55 |18 |27 |24 |35 |

|16 |22 |38 |34 |44 |18 |22 |28 |36 |

|17 |27 |45 |44 |71 |18 |33 |28 |43 |

| 18# |26 |38 |42 |61 |------ |------ |------ |------ |

TEST 30 45 49 75 21 35 32 45

VALUES

Students marked with an asterisk (*), are students that transferred into the block class, from the period 7 class at the beginning of the spring semester.

Students marked with the number symbol (#), are students that transferred out of the block class into the period 7 class at the beginning of the spring semester.

This is the question/essay survey that was given to all of my physics students. Part of this papers’ data was collected using this survey.

Student Survey

Note to Student:

The purpose of these survey questions is to obtain some data and information from you, my students that will help me to answer my “Action Research Question” for my Masters Program in Science Education. I am interested in the perceptions and points of view of students who are either taking honors physics in a block period (of 100 minutes every other day) or taking honors physics in a traditional 50-minute period that meets every day. A few of you have transferred from the traditional period 7 class into a block class or vice versa. I am particularly interested in your views since you have been in both types of classes.

I am interested in finding out how the type of schedule you have (block or traditional) affects you in your physics class. Here is the Research Question I am addressing:

What differences are there for physics students, who are in a block schedule versus those who are in a traditional daily schedule, in terms of attitude and engagement, and comprehension and performance?

Remember that we are focusing just on the influence that the schedule has on your learning and how this impacts your homework and your level of engagement, etc.

The categories that I will address will be the following:

LECTURES HOMEWORK CLASS EXPERIMENTS ATTENTION SPAN STUDENT/TEACHER RAPPORT

Today’s Date _____________ Your Student I.D. number ___________

Your current grade level: 9th 10th 11th 12th

Is your current honors physics class a block period or during period 7?

Block Period Period 7

Did you transfer from a block class to a period 7 class or vice versa? __________

GENERAL QUESTIONS

___1. How many times have you had any academic class during period 7?

A) I have not yet had an academic class during period 7

B) This year’s Honors Physics is my first one.

C) This year is my second time.

D) This year is my third time.

E) This year is my fourth time.

___2. How much would you say that you like the subject of Physics?

A) Very much B) Somewhat C) Not very much D) Not at all

___3. What grade did you earn last semester in Honors Physics?

A) A B) B C) C D) D E) F

___4. If you had a choice between the following two choices, which would you prefer to

have for learning physics?

A) Having physics every day for 50 minutes, in a period 7 class.

B) Having physics in a block schedule meeting every other day for 100 minutes?

5. Explain your choice from the previous question. Why do you prefer the schedule

that you selected?

___6. Do you feel that the amount of time in class (50 minutes), is enough time for

you to understand and comprehend the concepts that are presented in class?

A) Yes, usually this is enough time

B) No, usually this is not enough time

C) Sometimes there is enough time, and other times there is not.

___7. Do you feel that it would be better for you to learn in a block schedule (longer

time in class) than in a 50 minute class that meets every day?

A) Yes, the 100-minute block schedule would be better for my comprehension

B) No, the 100-minute block schedule would not better for my comprehension

___ 8. Do you believe that the amount of time available in class (50 minutes) makes

NO difference to you in your comprehension and how well you learn? In other

words, you could learn equally well in either schedule.

A) It makes NO difference to me. Either schedule would work for me.

B) It does make a difference to me. The schedule impacts my learning.

___ 9. Do you feel that the amount of time available in class impacts your teacher and

how well he teaches his students? In other words, in your 50 minute class, is the

amount of time used efficiently by the teacher?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 10. Would you prefer to come to class every day (traditional schedule) or would you

prefer to come to class every other day (block schedule), if you had a choice?

A) Every Day B) Every other day

11. Explain why you chose the answer to the above question.

LECTURES

___12. Do you feel that the amount of lecturing you get in your physics class is. .

A) Just the right amount.

B) Not enough.

C) Too much lecturing.

___13. Do you feel that, in general, the number of topics or concepts that are presented

to you during the class period, is the right amount and manageable for you?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___14. Do you feel that there is sufficient time during class, for you to ask questions of

the teacher regarding the concepts that were introduced to you?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___15. At the end of class, do you feel that there was enough time for you to understand

the material or the concepts that were introduced?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___16. Being in a traditional honors physics class, do you feel that meeting for 50 minutes every day is the type of class that is best suited for you and your

learning?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

HOMEWORK

___17. Being in the daily period 7 class, when do you begin your assigned homework?

A) At home in the evening, on the same day that I had class.

B) The next day during my study hall period.

C) If I am given two days to complete the homework, I start it on the second

night.

___ 18. Do you feel that the amount of homework assigned to you is too much, not

enough or just the right amount of homework?

A) Too much homework.

B) Not enough homework.

C) Just the right amount of homework.

___ 19. How strongly do you feel that after doing the homework that is assigned, it

has helped you to understand the physics concepts you were taught?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 20. How would you rate the difficulty level of the homework that is assigned to you?

A) Very difficult

B) Somewhat difficult

C) Not very difficult

D) Very easy

CLASS EXPERIMENTS

___ 21. Do you feel that the class experiments and activities that you are able to do in

class, help you to understand the physics concepts better?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 22. Do you feel that the number of class experiments and activities you do in class, is

the right number?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 23. Would you prefer that more opportunities for class experiments and activities

were provided or would you prefer fewer opportunities be provided?

A) More Opportunities B) Fewer Opportunities C) Keeping it the same

___ 24. Do you feel that you usually have sufficient time to complete the class

experiments and that you are not being rushed?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

25. Comment on what you would change (if anything) regarding class experiments

and activities

ATTENTION SPAN

___ 26. In your traditional period 7 physics class, do you feel that it is easy for you to

keep your attention and focus during the class, for the entire 50 minutes?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

(Answer Either Question # 27 Or Question #28)

27. If you answered A) or B) to the above question, what would you say helps

you to keep your attention and focus, during the 50 minute class?

28. If you answered C) or D) to question # 26, what would you say would help

improve your attention and focus, during the 50 minute class?

STUDENT/TEACHER RAPPORT

___ 29. Do you feel that the amount of time that is available in class is conducive to

developing good rapport with your teacher?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 30. Do you feel that your teacher cares about your learning and how well you do?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 31. Do you feel that your teacher is concerned about you and your interests?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

___ 32. Do you feel that coming to class every day (period 7), makes it easier

for you to develop a good rapport and relationship with your teacher?

A) Strongly Agree C) Disagree

B) Agree D) Strongly Disagree

(Answer Either Question # 33 Or Question #34)

33. If you answered A) or B) to the above question, why do you think that meeting

every day for 50 minutes, makes it easier for you to develop a good rapport and

relationship with your teacher?

34. If you answered C) or D) to question #32, why do you think that meeting every day for 50 minutes, does NOT make it easier for you to develop a good rapport

and relationship with your teacher?

Thank you very much for taking the time to give thoughtful responses to these questions!

Do you have any other comments or remarks you would like to make, that may not have been addressed in these questions? If you have transferred from period 7 to a block period or vice versa, please comment on your view of the two different schedules.

-----------------------

[pic]

Interviews

Surveys

Essays

Questions

Test

Scores

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download