Block Scheduling and Inclusion in a High School

Abstract

This investigation used qualitative methods to examine the impact of the implementation of a block schedule on an inclusive high school program that had been working successfully for several years. Data were collected using a series of classroom observations and interviews with seven teachers of students with disabilities and seven general education teachers who worked as co-teachers in inclusive classrooms. A constant comparative method of data analysis (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) was used to identify themes related to the benefits and challenges of block scheduling and the inclusion of students labeled with high-incidence disabilities. Results showed that inclusion and block scheduling were complementary and mutually supportive aspects of school reform in this high school. Furthermore, although the teachers identified several challenges related to the implementation of block scheduling, none of these challenges were unique to students with disabilities. The implications of these findings for practice are discussed.

The Effects of Full and Alternative Day Block Scheduling on Language Arts and Science Achievement in a Junior High School

“…According to Payne and Jordan's (1996) study on the instructional impact of AB block scheduling, "teachers reported that they enjoyed having more time to give students individual assistance; opportunities to get to know the students personally; time for more creative and meaningful student work; and the ability to structure a full lesson" (p. 18). Thus, these advantages of an 85-minute block period led to a less stressful and more flexible classroom climate (Payne & Jordan, 1996;Weller & McLeskey, 2000). As a result, supportive teachers working under this type of block scheduling develop curricula focused on cooperative learning exercises to take advantage of the longer blocks of time (Weller & McLeskey, 2000).…”

“…Thus, these advantages of an 85-minute block period led to a less stressful and more flexible classroom climate (Payne & Jordan, 1996;Weller & McLeskey, 2000). As a result, supportive teachers working under this type of block scheduling develop curricula focused on cooperative learning exercises to take advantage of the longer blocks of time (Weller & McLeskey, 2000). Payne and Jordan (1996) also found that teachers were positive about the way classes were scheduled, staff development, and planning time afforded by an AB schedule.…”

“…Accordingly, block scheduling can be implemented in many different ways with numerous modifications, often called "hybrids" in current literature. Whether called an intensive block, 4 x 4 block, AB plan, or modified block-all types of block scheduling have the commonality of increasing the time available for instruction by extending classes beyond the traditional 50-minute class (Weller & McLeskey, 2000).…”

Hear my voice: Mainstream secondary students with learning difficulties speak out

“…If these students are seen in a holistic way, then their happiness or unhappiness at school must be of utmost importance to the school and its teachers, as this affects the quality of all relationships within the school community. This has implications on all levels but particularly on the organisational structure of secondary schools which delineates teachers by the subjects they teach and students by their results in a particular subject without reference to any other information (Weller & McLeskey, 2000).…”

Block Scheduling Effectiveness: A 10-Year Longitudinal Study of One Georgia School System’s Test Score Indicators

“…Teachers were able to get to know their students personally and had more time to give students individual attention (Payne & Jordan, 1996;Weller & McLeskey, 2000). In addition, because there were fewer class changes, there was more time available for academic instruction and fewer opportunities for discipline issues to arise (Evans et al, 2002;O'Neil, 1995;Zepeda & Mayers, 2006).…”