Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

What is the effect of block scheduling on academic achievement? : A systematic review. Technical report

By Kelly Dickson, Karen Bird, Mark Newman and Naira Kalra
Publisher: EPPI-centre, Social Science Research Unit, Insitute of Education, University of London
Year: 2010
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.ioe.ac.uk.oai2:3672

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1996). 4 X 4 block schedule evaluation.
  2. (1997). 4-block scheduling: a case study of data analysis of one high school after two years.
  3. (1999). 6.1 Studies included in map and synthesis In-depth review
  4. (1998). 6.2 Other references used in the text of the technical report Callan R
  5. (2002). A
  6. (2002). A case study on the perspectives of an optional
  7. (1986). A comparative study of the learning styles of Southeast Asian and American Caucasian college students of two Seventhday Adventist campuses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
  8. (2006). A condensed Key Stage 3: designing a flexible curriculum
  9. (2004). A condensed Key Stage 3: designing a flexible curriculum.
  10. (1992). A longitudinal research study of the effects of preschool attendance and kindergarten schedule: kindergarten through grade four.
  11. (2004). A matter of timing: time use, freedom and influence in school from a pupil perspective.
  12. (2003). A quantitative look at student attitudes/perceptions about block scheduling. Paper presented at:
  13. (1997). A study of the block scheduling movement in six high schools in the Upper Cumberland Region of Tennessee. Revision of paper presented at:
  14. (1991). A study of the longitudinal effects of all-day kindergarten attendance on achievement.
  15. (2001). Academic performance differences between students in block and traditionally scheduled high schools 1993-2000. Paper presented at:
  16. (2001). Academic performance differences between students in block and traditionally scheduled high schools 1993-2000. Paper presented at: The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
  17. (2003). Ahl A
  18. (1994). Alternative approaches to organizing the school day and year: a national commission examines new structures for improving student learning.
  19. (1997). Alternative high school scheduling: a view from the student’s desk.
  20. (1983). An analysis of the relationships among academic achievement in mathematics and reading, assigned instructional schedules, and the learning style time preferences of third, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
  21. (2002). An evaluation of the block schedule in two high schools. Paper presented at: Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association,
  22. (1997). Appendix 3.1: Details of studies included in the in-depth review Appendix 3.1: Details of studies included in the in-depth review 79 Study Study aim Evidence statements Lapkin et al.
  23. (1996). Are multi-track year round schools effective? Wake County Public Schools, NC: Evaluation and Research Department.
  24. (2001). Attention, scholastic achievement and timing of lessons.
  25. (2002). Block schedule and traditional schedule achievement: a comparison.
  26. (2008). Block scheduled versus traditional biology teaching: an educational experiment using the water lily.
  27. (1997). Block scheduling for language study in middle grades: a summary of the Carleton case study.
  28. (1999). Block scheduling in Texas public high schools.
  29. (1997). Block scheduling the high school: the effects on achievement, behavior, and student-teacher relationships.
  30. (1995). Block scheduling: a means to improve school climate.
  31. (1998). Block scheduling: does it make a difference? A high school case study. Paper presented at:
  32. (2005). Block-scheduled high schools: impact on achievement in English and language arts.
  33. (2004). Blocking student performance in high school?
  34. (2007). Breaking from tradition: unfulfilled promises of block scheduling in science.
  35. (2010). Chapter 6 References 47 DCSF (2008b) Guidance for local authorities on setting education performance targets: Part 2: Target setting with schools. http://www.standards. dfes.gov.uk/ts/docs/part2guidance08.doc (accessed 25
  36. (1996). Children’s attitudes to recess and the changes taking place in Australian primary schools.
  37. (2010). City Board of Education (2000) Analyses of performance of extended-time and nonextended time
  38. (2004). Classroom organization and student behavior in kindergarten.
  39. (2001). Clauretie TM
  40. (1997). Core curriculum, 1996-97: research report on an educational program.
  41. (2002). Core keywording strategy: data collection for a register of educational research. Version 0.9.7. London: EPPI-Centre,
  42. (1990). Cost-Effects analysis of year-round education programs. Paper presented at:
  43. (1996). Cozart A
  44. (2002). Description of success: a four-teacher instructional model. Sam houston State University.
  45. (2002). Designing and timetabling the primary curriculum: a practical guide for Key Stages 1 and 2.
  46. (2001). Differences in student outcomes between block, semester, and trimester schedules. Salt Lake City, UT:
  47. (2001). Differences in student outcomes between block, semester, and trimester schedules. Salt Lake City:
  48. (2006). Does the weekly lesson program affect the language learning?
  49. (1997). Effects of alternating day block scheduling on student academic performance, attendance and discipline (Alternative day scheduling, intensive scheduling). Dissertation thesis.
  50. (2005). Effects of class size and length of day on kindergartners’ academic achievement: findings from early childhood. Longitudinal study. Early Education and Development
  51. (1999). Effects of matching and mismatching students’ time-of-day preferences.
  52. (1999). Effects on students of a 4 x 4 junior high school block scheduling program.
  53. (2006). EPPI-Reviewer 3.0: analysis and management of data for research synthesis. London: EPPI-Centre,
  54. (1995). Evaluation of a high School Block Schedule Restructuring Program. Paper presented at: Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
  55. (2001). Evaluation of an on-going block scheduling programme. Paper presented at:
  56. (1988). Extending the school day: an evaluation of a seven-period class schedule.
  57. (1999). Extending the school year into the summer.
  58. (2007). Family and contextual socioeconomic effects across seasons: when do they matter for the achievement growth of young children?
  59. (2005). From blueprint to reality: San Diego’s education reforms.
  60. (1991). Full day kindergarten program: 1988-1989, 1989-1990, 1990-1991: summative evaluation.
  61. (2004). Full-day and half-day kindergarten in the United States: findings from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, kindergarten class of
  62. (2008). Full-day kindergarten and student literacy growth: does a lengthened school day make a difference?
  63. (1995). Full-day kindergarten programme.
  64. (1998). Full-day kindergarten vs halfday kindergarten: the outcome of first grade reading achievement. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Ohio State Department of Education. What is the effect of block scheduling on academic achievement?42
  65. (1990). Full-day versus half-day kindergarten: an experimental study. Paper presented at:
  66. (2005). high school schedule changes and the effect of lost instructional time on achievement.
  67. (1989). how entering ability and instructional settings and not the length of the school day mediate kindergartners’ reading performance.
  68. (2003). Impacts of scheduling configurations on Mississippi biology subject area testing. Paper presented at:
  69. (1995). Implementation of block scheduling in a four-year high school: a literary review and a handbook for administrators, teachers and parents.
  70. (2010). Independent Commission on the Organisation of the School Year (2002) The rhythms of schooling: detailed recommendations for school terms and holidays in 2003-04 http://www.esinet.norfolk.gov. uk/cadmin/misheets/MI61_02att3.htm (accessed 25
  71. (2005). Influence of time-of-day on student performance on mathematical algorithms, Division of Education. Unpublished master’s thesis.
  72. (2006). Is a separate block of time for oral English language development in programs for English learners needed?
  73. (1996). Language arts instruction time.
  74. (1997). Let’s ask the students: Kentucky,
  75. (1996). Literature review on year round schooling (with an annotated bibliography).
  76. (1998). Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium Pittman RB, herzog MJR
  77. (1996). Michigan extended school year programs 1992-1995: an evaluation of a state grant initiative.
  78. (1999). Modified block scheduling: an assessment of teachers and students perception. Paper presented at:
  79. (1990). One administrator’s challenge: implementing a learning style program at the secondary level.
  80. (2000). Optional extended year program feedback,
  81. (1998). Optional extended year program feedback.
  82. (2008). OR Student-Centred-Curriculum.DE.))” for information added since 19880101 BEI (British Education Index) Via Dialog DataStar Search date: 12
  83. Paper presented at: Annual Meeting of the Midwest Educational Research Association,
  84. (1995). Perceived effects of block scheduling on the teaching of English. Fort Collins, CO:
  85. (1996). Physical education and the four-by-four schedule.
  86. (2004). Planning middle school schedules for improved attention and achievement.
  87. (1997). Positive effects of intersession tutoring in a year-round school. Paper presented at:
  88. (2007). Reconstructed task orientation and local time governance in compulsory schools: the Swedish case.
  89. Regional Education Board (1997b) Case study: North Laurel high School,
  90. Regional Education Board (1997c) Case study: Sussex Technical high School Georgetown,
  91. (1997). Relationships between the implementation of middle-level program concepts and students’ achievement.
  92. (2010). Report Series. http://www.act.org/ research/reports/pdf/ACT_RR2003-3.pdf (accessed 25
  93. (1990). Research on the learning style characteristics of selected racial and ethnic groups.
  94. (1992). Results of the year-round education parent, staff and student surveys.
  95. (2000). Retention of academic skills over the summer months in alternative and traditional calendar school.
  96. (2006). School readiness, full-day kindergarten, and student achievement: an empirical investigation,
  97. (2001). Second year analysis of a hybrid schedule high school. Education Policy Analysis Archives 9(46). http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v9n46/ (accessed 25
  98. (2001). Second year analysis of a hybrid schedule high school. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
  99. (1995). Semesterizing the high school schedule: the impact on student achievement in algebra and geometry.
  100. (2004). Standard school year statement.
  101. (2007). Standard school year: implementation update http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/119198 Lynch PK
  102. (1999). Starting time and school life: reflections from educators and students. Phi Delta Kappan 80(5): 366-371. What is the effect of block scheduling on academic
  103. (1994). State Department of Public Instruction
  104. (1998). Student academic responding time as a function of classroom ecology and time of day.
  105. (2001). Student achievement: is equality really necessary? Paper presented at:
  106. (1989). Student satisfaction and achievement related to organizational structure: a study on semestering in junior high.
  107. (1999). Student segregation and achievement tracking in year-round schools. Paper presented at:
  108. (2000). Students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of block versus traditional scheduling.
  109. (1995). Studies in teaching:
  110. (1998). Teacher and student attitudes toward block scheduling in a rural school district.
  111. (1993). Teaching gifted and talented learners for learning style: an international perspective.
  112. (1999). The aim is to assess the effectiveness of a hybrid schedule which consists of three traditional and two block classes each day.
  113. (2007). The Children’s Plan: building brighter futures. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/childrensplan/ downloads/The_Childrens_Plan.pdf (accessed 25
  114. (1994). The Copernican Plan evaluated: the evolution of a revolution.
  115. (2008). The education system in
  116. (2002). The effect of block scheduling high school mathematics courses on student achievement and teachers’ use of time: implications for educational productivity.
  117. (2000). The effect of block scheduling on mathematics achievement in high and low SES secondary schools. Doctoral dissertation,
  118. (2000). The effect of block scheduling on mathematics achievement in high and low SES secondary schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
  119. (2005). The effect of block scheduling on middle school students’ mathematics achievement.
  120. (2000). The effectiveness of block scheduling.
  121. (1995). The effects of block scheduling on seventh grade mathematics students.
  122. (2003). The Effects of Full and Alternative Day Block Scheduling on Language Arts and Science Achievement in a Junior high School. Education Policy Analysis Archives 11(41) Lister RJ
  123. (2003). The Effects of Full and Alternative Day Block Scheduling on Language Arts and Science Achievement in a Junior high School. Education Policy Analysis Archives 11(41) Marchette F
  124. (1995). The effects of recess timing on children’s playground and classroom behaviors.
  125. (1995). The effects of time of day on student attention and achievement. Unpublished manuscript.
  126. (1992). The effects of year-round school calendar on gifted and talented students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Sam houston State University.
  127. (2002). The efficacy of an extended-day kindergarten program: a report for the St. James School Division
  128. (1996). The evaluation of a high school block schedule: convergence of teacher and student data.
  129. (1998). The extended school year program consolidated report: achievement test scores and survey findings.
  130. (1990). The impact of a sevenperiod school day on teachers and students. Paper presented at:
  131. (1996). The impact of half-day versus full-day kindergarten programs on student outcomes: a pilot project.
  132. (1998). The influence of extended-year schooling on growth of achievement and perceived competence in early elementary school.
  133. (2003). The relationship between schedule type and ACT assessment scores: a longitudinal study.
  134. (1996). The trimester: a competency based model of block scheduling.
  135. (1994). The uses of time for teaching and learning. Volume II: case studies.
  136. (1995). This meant that the maximum GPA for the class of 1999 has been deflated and is much less than that of the class of 1995 and is more in line with the mean GPA of
  137. (2008). Time and temporality as mediators of science learning.
  138. (2005). Time for a change: the promise of extended-time schools for promoting student achievement.
  139. (2007). Time to learn? The organizational structure of schools and student achievement.
  140. (1999). Using a modified block schedule to create a positive learning environment.
  141. (1999). What can we learn from the data? Toward a better understanding of the effects of multitrack year-round schooling.
  142. (1999). What could define block scheduling as a fad?
  143. (2003). What happens during the school day? Time diaries from a national sample of elementary school teachers.
  144. (2008). What is the effect of block scheduling on academic achievement?52 ERIC (Education Resources Information Centre) Via CSA Search date: 9
  145. (1994). What twenty years of educational studies reveal about year-round education. Chapel hill, NC: The University of North Carolina at Chapel hill.
  146. (2000). Year-round education in a reform environment: the impact on student achievement and cost-effectiveness analysis.
  147. (1992). Year-round education: program evaluation report. Orlando, FL: Orange County Public Schools.
  148. (1995). Year-round school: are there student differences? Paper presented at:

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.