Alternative Schedules

For years, the American education system has been plagued by persistent achievement gaps - statistically significant differences in the average academic performance of students in various demographic groups. Despite education reform efforts that are meant to narrow such gaps, these gaps endure, much to the frustration of policymakers, practitioners, and researchers alike. Thus, in an effort to address these achievement gaps, many schools are experimenting with a wide variety of alternative schedules to ensure students have sufficient time to learn.

Block Scheduling
 
Block scheduling typically involves the reorganization of core content areas into longer class periods (usually 90-120 minutes). Block scheduling plans are designed to support longer and more in-depth study of content, minimize class-to-class transitions and administrative duties, increase instructional flexibility, and allow for targeted time for instructional support. However, the research on the effectiveness of block schedules in meeting these goals is inconsistent. While block scheduling reorganizes the way students and teachers spend their time, without significant professional development geared towards maximizing this additional time, the value of these modifications is uncertain. The following key sources suggest that equal attention should be given to the quality, as well as the quantity, of this additional time.
 

Key Sources 

This study analyzes both the quantity and quality of time spent in 14 schools across the country, including expanded-time, block scheduling, multi-age grouping, and residential schools.  
 
Deuel, L. S. (1999). Block scheduling in large, urban high schools: Effects on academic achievement, student behavior, and staff perceptions. The High School Journal 83 (1) 14-25. 
Compares high schools with block schedules to those with more traditional schedules in Broward County, FL. The author finds a significant difference in both the grades that students received and in perceptions of overall school environment, both in favor of block schedules.
 
Lewis, C. (2005). The effects of block scheduling on high school academic achievement. NASSP Bulletin 89 (645).
Analyzes student achievement on standardized tests between district schools on a traditional schedule and those on modified block schedules. The author finds a strong positive effect on reading scores for a 4x4 block schedule. 
 
Mattox, K., Hancock, D., Queen, J.A. (2005). The effect of block scheduling on middle school students’ mathematics achievement. NASSP Bulletin 89 (642): 3-13.
Examines the math scores of five middle schools before and after switching to block scheduling. Finds that scores are significantly higher in a block scheduling model. 
 
Four-Day School Week 
 
In recent years, substantial state budget shortfalls have forced school districts to consider a variety of options for reducing expenditures while maximizing the efficiency of available resources. One option that has begun to gain traction is the four-day school week. Currently over 120 school districts in 21 states are implementing a four-day school week. Most often, these districts are small (fewer than 1,000 students) and located in rural areas. Budgetary concerns are the primary reason for considering a four-day school week, but educators are rightfully apprehensive about the effect of less learning time on student achievement, and request statistically controlled studies on the schedule's impact. Unfortunately, our review of the research found only a few evaluations, none of which included a control for variables, making it impossible to know if apparent changes in achievement are a result of the schedule change or other factors. Other reviewers note a similar lack of evidence: "It is important to note that while there is considerable anecdotal information about the potential benefits of four-day school weeks, there is limited systematic research on the impacts of this reform" (Donis-Keller & Silvernail, 2009). 
 

Key Sources

In analyzing both the potential benefits and drawbacks of converting several Indiana public schools to a four-day week, this brief includes a short review of existing research. 
 
In this study of instructional practices at Southern Regional Education Board (SREB), the author discusses the origins of the 180-day calendar, current instructional requirements in SREB states, opening and closing dates, and recent changes in school calendar flexibility — including the four-day school week and year-round calendar. 
 
Provides a review of existing research and highlights three prominent four-day school week models. The authors caution that there is little systematic research on the impacts of these reforms. 
 
Donis-Keller, C. (2010). The 4-day school week. Alexandria, VA: Educational Research Service.
Presents a historical context for the four-day school week, while also documenting the current state of this trend throughout the U.S. 
 
Explores several unconventional school schedules (e.g. block scheduling, 4-day school weeks, and year-round education) at seven schools in the northwestern United States. Despite many reported advantages at the district-level, the author finds inconclusive evidence of the effectiveness of these schedule modifications.
 
Griffith, M. (2011). What Savings are Produced by Moving to a Four-Day Week? Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Investigates the perception that reducing a school week by one day, or 20 percent, will also reduce school expenditures by that same amount. Using national finance data supported by information from individual four-day districts, the author finds that the average district could produce a maximum savings of 5.4% with most districts only experiencing savings between 0.4% and 2.5%.
 
 
For more information please contact: [email protected]