Improving Academic Achievement Tiered Instruction RTI vs. Block Scheduling

¶ … block and the response to intervention (RTI) tiered approaches to education. Block education can best be defined as a method of manipulating the time available for teaching in the daily curriculum in a high school environment in a comprehensive and efficient manner in order to most effectively teach students. The RTI tiered approach is an approach that is systematic in its design, and allows for students to move at their own respective pace while still demanding results in a structured manner. The RTI approach in education takes place as a way of intervening in a student's progress (or lack thereof) before the overall effect of the non-progression leads to severe educational handicaps. The block education is used in a more physical educational setting and is used to allow a more flexible approach to education.

This literature review seeks to determine how effective the RTI educational approach is compared to the block approach as well as providing a background concerning each approach. Both methods will necessarily include instructional methods of education (at least in this report) in order to clarify the respective efficiencies or lack thereof.

This study will dedicate most of its focus to how high schools currently approach the teaching of students, both from the viewpoint of the physical structure of the course schedule to the instructional methods being used in that structure. This is important because, as one study states "in recent years the transition from school to working life has acquired a new dimension for education policy and research…education at all levels are becoming empirically evident" (Scheeberger, 1999, p. 612).

During the last decade numerous high schools and school districts have moved away from the traditional educational approach to classroom teaching and into the block scheduling approach. A number of studies have shown the effectiveness of that move. At the same time, many districts have been experimenting with the Response to Intervention approach to address certain situations that have the potential to develop into long-term problems.

One recent report found that "RTI is effective for identifying children at risk for learning disabilities and for providing specialized interventions, either to ameliorate or to prevent the occurrence of learning disabilities" (RTI Action, 2011) while another study determined that "classified students will receive high-quality, effective instruction" (Dunn, 2010, p. 22). Block teaching, on the other hand, does not seek to intervene in individual cases, but allows more flexibility for the vast majority of the students, teachers and administrators who have access to that capability. What many studies have found concerning block scheduling is that teachers are less stressed, there is a decline in student absenteeism and tardiness, and there is a reduction in the number of problems with student behavior after changing to block scheduling from the traditional format (Rikard, Banville, 2005).

Comparing block scheduling to the RTI approach is not really comparing apples to apples. It is conceivable that school systems that implement block scheduling can at the same time implement the RTI approach within that scheduling. Both approaches are seeking to improve student learning and teacher effectiveness, and both are doing so from two different formats, but that does not mean that they are not compatible.

The reasoning behind each approach is to present a method that will facilitate student's growth; however, the block approach is geared more towards the overall student body, while the RTI is geared to specific individuals. The fact that there has been a "significant increase in students being identified for special education in later grades (e.g. A 38% increase from 1991 -- 2001" (Lyons, Fletcher, Shaywitz, Torgensen, Wood, 2001) begs for the intervention methodology displayed by the RTi approach. The RTI approach allows the instructor to intervene with specific students when it is deemed necessary to do so in order to assist the student in addressing potential shortfalls in the learning process. Marston et al. found that 'by providing intervention programming based on student need and by monitoring student's progress, the number of students identified for characteristics of having a learning disability remained constant: (Marsten, Muyskens, Lau, Canter, 2003). What is interesting about the RTi model is that, according toi Bollman et al., it actually helped to lower the rate of special education placement from 4.5% to 2.5% over a ten-year period (Bollman, Silbergitt, Gibbons, 2007). Another advantage that RTi offers school districts is the fact that such a structured approach allows for the efficient monitoring of student's progress. Literature shows that "students' progress with the content of the instructional program can be monitored over time and yield data complementary to traditional psychometric approaches" (Thurman, McGrawth, 2008) while an additional study showed that RTI can help school districts address student's learning challenges through research-based classroom instruction and practices and student-focused intervention programming (Dunn, 2010).

Since RTI is considered as a tiered approach to education it might make sense to define how a tiered approach is used throughout the educational and business environments throughout the world. A tiered approach is normally taken when a set number of standards of increasing difficulty is used to achieve an educational objective. This approach works well when a defined goal and objective is set and progress can be monitored in a physical manner. An example would be reading skills that start at a certain level and progress throughout the educational process (ie; first grade level, second grade reading level, etc.). RTI intervenes in this tiered approach method when regression or non-progression is noted.

The tiered approach is also employed in the business sector, and additionally organizations use it to certify their members expertise. The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) is a good example of an organization that has implemented the tiered approach to educating its members. The organization "utilizes a tiered approach to education and training, allowing adult learners to complete all courses within a track that will lead to certification or to take select courses to meet specific continuing education needs" (Miller, 2007, p. 19). That utilization portrays the strength of RTI and the tiered approach.

In a tiered approach scenario a certification, classification, level or achievement is set and paradigms are initiated that spells out the exact method for achieving what the learner must achieve to meet the overall objective. Such a methodology can also be used in block scheduling, but block scheduling does not necessarily mean that the RTI or a tiered approach will be used, only that it can be used.

Another example of the effectiveness of the tiered approach is the fact that some colleges use it exclusively to enhance their student's education. "A concerted incorporation of ethics strategically targeted to each level of undergraduate education will improve the preparation of prospective research scientists, enhance K-12 teacher training, increase the scientific and ethical literacy of the general public, and improve the awareness of health professionals regarding ethics in medicine" (Zaikowski & Garrett, 2004, p. 943). According to this particular study ethics that are strategically targeted (or tiered) to each level of undergraduate education will be of benefit to the overall improvement of the ethical scenarios of teachers, professionals and students. Yet, one must wonder if such a tiered approach would also be as beneficial if used in the high school level, and specifically whether RTI would work on the high school level.

A lot of the literature concerning RTI states that it is effective for early childhood intervention and that it is especially helpful when students who have not yet exhibited the specific symptoms of a learning disability are targeted. According to Vygotsky "development can be classified into two levels; one is the real level of development on which children can solve problems independently, the other is the potential level of development, on which children can solve problems under the guidance of adult people or in cooperation with peers with higher capability" (Wang, 2009, p. 100).

Perhaps then it's not whether the students have a block schedule or whether they experience education through RTI, but rather if they are helped along by teachers with a good instructional deign model to use in either scenario.

There is one thing that the literature continues to provide and that is the thought that Instructional design for intervention purposes is very complementary to the RTI method of teaching. One 2007 study determined that there are "two factors within the control of the school that can make a difference in the literacy experiences of the young adolescents who attend them…how we use instructional time and the consistency with which we implement literacy-based instructional strategies" (Fisher, Frey, 2007, p. 206). The first factor; instructional time, can be addressed by a block schedule. The block schedule allows for more consistent use of time because there is a long enough timeframe during which the instructor or teacher can interact with the student as compared to the standard scheduling system. RTi does not need a long-term time frame to implement its teaching methods; using the tiered approach, it would only seek to ascertain that the student had fulfilled the requirements to move to the next level or task, not ascertaining how long it took or during which class schedule it happened.

Some of the advantages to the block scheduling aspect, at least on the high school level, include the fact that there is a positive and significant relationship and a positive trend in the four academic subject areas as studies, however, that was offset by the lack of significant relationship between years in block scheduling and ACT scores (Trenta, Newman, 2002). Using the block schedule, according to Trenta and Newman, did not relate in a significant manner to average attendance (by grade) nor did it seem to have any significance regarding tardiness, but that overall block scheduling seemed to be perceived by students and teachers as a much more positive factor in their school day.

One of the main problems presented by current literature is that the RTI seems to be geared more towards early intervention than block scheduling is, and in fact, RTI may be much more effective in the early grade school years as compared to the high school years that are the focus of this study.

It might be more conducive, at least according to the current literature, to determine whether block scheduling can be addressed at the younger age groups in order to complement the RTI instructional methods being used. In a book published by Canady and Rettig, they wrote "High school teachers are under tremendous stress simply trying to deal with the large number of students passing through their classrooms each day. As a result, many teachers report they are unable to teach using more effective, active learning methods; in the interest of survival, instructional compromises are made" (Canady, Rettig, 1995, p. 5). According to Canady and Rettig using RTI may not make any difference at all at the high school level, they purport that effective use of the block scheduling at the high school level would be of more significance than any instructional design, including (by inference) RTI.

According to these two authors, exposing students to the entire curriculum leads to teacher dependence on lecturing, which of course is affects the overall class, not the individual students, the exact opposite of those who use RTI would hope for. However, the authors also explained in their book that an advantage of block scheduling was that teachers were more likely to have the opportunity to use a wide variety of instructional approaches. One of those approaches, of course, could be RTI.

Overall there are a number of aspects to block scheduling that are of a positive nature according to teachers and students who enjoy block scheduling.

One study showed results from block scheduling "were complementary and mutually supportive aspects of school reform" (Weller, 2000, p. 209) and another study showed that at the middle school level "if the principles of middle education (personalized learning environment, flexible time usage, a focus on coherent academic experiences) were truly realized these achievement declines would dimish" (Flowers, Mertens, Mulhill, 2003, p. 55).

Two of the three; flexible time usage and a focus on coherent academic experiences, are the objectives of block scheduling, while the third, personalized learning environment, is conducive to RTI instructional design. Could the three be successfully combined in the high school environment? Or would it be more likely that the RTI would only be successful in identifying those students with learning disabilities, but not be successful in possibly sidetracking the potential of those disabilities, since they are already firmly established by that time?

Some experts have asserted that block scheduling works better in some educational areas as compared to others, and it is certainly true that areas such as library media centers in secondary schools that use block scheduling seem to get more use than media centers that are still using traditional schedules and according to a 2005 study more classes are routinely scheduled into the library media center in block-scheduled secondary schools (Huffman, Thurman, Thomas, 2005, p. 4). The Huffman et al. study showed a number of positive aspects between library media center use and block scheduling that should be taken into account in a study such as this one. Library media centers are oftentimes much more accessible today so these aspects should not be surprising.

The aspects include; the students in block schedule schools spend more time in the library conducting research and team activities, library media centers in secondary schools that feature block scheduling often open earlier and close later allowing for additional use by students and faculty, library media center have more technology available, library media centers have more room and seating available for students and larger book and periodical collections, and schools that have block scheduling also have students that use the library media center for bigger and higher-quality educational projects than their counterparts that do not have block scheduling. Finally, library media staff in block scheduled schools are more likely to collaborate with the teachers in developing curriculum and studies than the library media staff in schools of traditional format (Huffman, et al., 2005). If those figures are correct, they make a strong case for switching to a block schedule, especially since the current high school educational environment focuses on research, writing and projects, all things that can be accomplished in the library media centers.

Another area that seems to flourish under block scheduling is the physical education department. The Rikard, Banville study is one such study. As stated above, physical education teachers in eight different high schools found that they were under less stressful conditions, experienced fewer student absenteeism and tardiness, and fewer student behavioral problems in p.e. classes once they switched to block scheduling. Sixty six percent of these physical education teachers also perceived that "students learned more in blocked vs. traditional classes" (Rikard, Banville, 2005).

Just because the physical education teachers perceived it does not necessarily make it true, but oftentimes perception is reality even though (in this case) they did not have any documented evidence that it was so.

However, many teachers over the last decade have had a new focus on collaboration which is the key to RTI. If physical education teachers are able to use blocked scheduling to teach in a more effective manner, then it is also possible that they could use RTI to help identify those students who may need the additional intervention that RTI offers them. Since RTI is a "three-tiered process designed to increase early intervention in an effort to decrease academic failure" (Mahdavi, Beebe-Frankenberger, 2009, p. 65) it is possible that it can be adapted for use at the high school level as well. There is not a plethora of literature available on whether it would such adaptation would work at the high school level, but it could be tried or at least experimented with to determine whether such use is effective or not.