Block Scheduling

UNION UNIVERSITY THE IMPACT OF BLOCK SCHEDULING VERSUS TRADITIONAL SCHEDULING ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT A REVIEW OF LITERATURE SUBITTED TO DR. BENNY TUCKER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF EDU 675 CAPSTONE RESEARCH SEMINAR BY LELA BINGHAM MAY 9, 2012 Chapter 1 Gate As administrators and educators suppress scrutinyed ways to use signal further productively, deep varys suppress been occurring in proud train registers. Amid the quotationure of counsel rectify, one of the attributes of the oral counselal adjustification that has been a standsubject-matter for adjustificationic vary has been the use of signal (Trenta & Newman, 2002). In Nichols’ (2005) scrutiny, it’s exalted that one of the most weighty solicitudes freeed in A Nation at Risk ment was kindred to how potently adjustroom adjustify signal was nature economized in America’s trains. Evans, Tokarczyk, Rice & McCray (2002) implied that this ment presented abundant recommendations for train rectify initiatives, including restructuring for further potent use of train signal and growthd ardor on kernel academic topics. According to Lawrence and McPherson (2000), administrators and educators in America suppress been criticized in-reference-to the indigent use of train signal gone the 1980’s (p. 178). Maltese, Dexter, Tai, and Sadler (2007) organize that closely 66. 7% of proud train furrows from the adreasonable of 2004 enrolled in seed-plots or universities, the moment of proud train as a instrument to stipulate learners for a prosperous seed-plot habit is inevitcogent (p. 1). According to Zepeda and Mayers (2006), “as the recitalability bar rises, trains hold to ascertain avenues for increasing learner amiable-fortune, and train leaders suppress examined new distinguishledge rules, emerging technologies, and alternate scheduling patterns to rearrange the distinguishledge and perceiveledge wayes” (p. 137). Nichols (2005) says that in apology to A Nation at Risk ment, abundant solicitudeed educators and society leaders at all smooths argued that trains should growth the elongation of the train day and the train year and coincidently recompel the oral daily register. Trenta & Newman (2002) wrote that signalliness some experiments suppress standpointed on pursueing ways to add signal to the academic year and the academic day, other experiments suppress standpointed on maximizing the signal already in the register (p. 54). As trains pursue to enumerate the most potent distinguishledge strategies to growth learner amiable-fortune, Zepeda and Mayers (2001) says one chiefly fascinating liberty has been arrest scheduling. This scheduling is in property in closely 30 percent of the nation’s induced trains. What is arrest-scheduling? “Block-scheduling is a rule of scheduling the six-hour train day into “blocks” of adreasonable signal. Sometimes referred to as Extended-Period Schedules, arrest scheduling is involveed by advocates owing it suppresss learners in adreasonable for longer limits of signal, reduces the whole learners exhaust transitioning unarranged adjustes, and affords learners and educators further opportunities to get to perceive each other (www. counsel. com). ” Rettig (2005) implied that the most spirithither symbol of adreasonable register used in America’s induced trains is the oral register, whereby adjustes usually involve daily and learners involve six, seven, or prospect adjustes per day (Two Leading…, para. 1). According to Queen (2000), there are inevitcogent steps and they halt obligatory for trains examining the possibility of profiting to a arrest scheduling (p. 221). Gruber and Onwuegbuzie (2001) mented that an growth in arrest scheduling in the late decade has been attributed to occurrenceors such as the input from the profession society usurpation for “fundahypernatural vary” in counsel (p. 33). Although arrest-scheduling has been sift-canvassed for a few decades, it has behove a topic of considerable contend. There is a plethora of occurrenceors to collision learner’s amiable-fortune but this scrutiny conciliate standsubject-matter on adjustroom scheduling. The mediuming of this meditate is to stipulate an duty of the interdependence delay train scheduling and learner’s amiable-fortune. For the mediumings of this paper, I elucidate learner amiable-fortune as any fixed issue(s) occurring to the learner owing of the trailing way. Chapter 2 Scholarship Revisal According to Kienholz, Segal and Yellin (2003) varys in approaches to distinguishledge and perceiveledge are spirithither in trains as we endeavor to rearrange the counsel that we are providing our learners, as courteous as succor them to arrest prouder smooths of luck. In the late decade or so, arrest scheduling has behove one of the most approved scheduling choices to the oral register anteriorly held by abundant purlieuss. Arrest scheduling is not new on the arrest. It can be traced end to the corporeal 1960s when J. Lloyd Trump of the Oregon province of Counsel urged that the train register be reexamined to meditate longer adreasonable limits as a way of fit adjustify (Kienholz et al. , 2003, p. 62). When forthcoming the arrest register, Rikard & Bannville (2005) repopular that trains involve enlightenedr limits of signal, frequently 90 minutes instead of 50 to 55 minutes, to each adreasonable limit. Block scheduling has been configured in incongruous arrangeats, including the 4 x 4 and AB arrangeats. Underneath the AB arrangeat, learners involve adjustes for closely 95 minutes on alternate days, signalliness on the 4 x 4 arrangeat learners involve the identical disgusting arrested adjustes each day for 90 adjustifyly days unintermittently per year (p. 26). As a issue, learners suppress fewer adjustes per day or signal, and educators and learners should be cogent to standsubject-matter further deeply on the esthetic. While tranquil proportionately new in the universe of counsel, arrest scheduling has been the origin for considertalented contend balance whether it growths learner amiable-fortune or not. Timeliness the aim is to stipulate educators and learners delay enlightenedr, perpetual limits of signal delay which to dive deeper into adreasonable earning and criterion. The arrest has the practicable to growth learner perceiveledge but medepend delay potent exercitation of signal. This conciliate succor repartee the topics environing the collision lock scheduling has on luck (Rikard & Banville, 2005, p. 33). The deep theorys of the einquiry for this paper present distinguishledge on twain sides of this reasoning, and sift-canvass the arrest register delay relative to learners, parents and educators cognizances, advantages and aidlessnesss and decisively, learner amiable-fortune (Rikard & Banville, 2005). Students, Parents and Teachers Perceptions As Rikard and Banville (2005) theorys were “consistent delay anterior scrutiny theorys, educator cognizances implied their declining strain smooths, a refuse in learner travel and inertness, and declining learner bearing problems succeedingcited changing to arrest scheduling from a oral arrangeat. Sixty six percent of educator perceived that learners erudite further in arrested versus oral adjustes but they had no munimented indication of that omission (p. 26)”. Jones (2000) scrutiny from a proud train in Southern Georgia had a one-week criterion limit in which learners and educators shared in arrest register. In the week succeedingcited to the criterion limit, a aggravatelook was issued to learners by government to enumerate the sumive power of the program. Students were not required to share in the aggravatelook. If a learner chose to do so, at-last, they would halt nameless. At the signal the aggravatelook was administered, 1,205 learners (586 males and 609 womanlys) elected to share in the aggravatelook. This recitaled for 57% of learners that were enrolled in the proud train at the signal of the meditate. Jones’ meditate interposed manifold topics on the aggravatelook, delay the ultimate addressing whether or not arrest scheduling was an acceptcogent choice to oral scheduling. The layer by which learners reparteeed ranged from 1-5 delay 1 nature most tallycogent and 5 strongly varying. The medium skernel was 2. 85, which slendered further internal learners in obligation of the vary. However, it was arrest ample to the median that it could not be meditateed a forcible ample discord to enumerate the sumive power of the criterion limit (Jones, 2000). Veal and Flinders (2001) executed a meditate that was persuadeed in a proud train delay three contiguous register symbols. Teachers, parents and learners cognizances were express to enumerate the collision of scheduling vary on educators and their adjustroom criterions. The exercitation of Likert layer aggravatelooks, interviews, adjustrooms observations, and quotation occurrences were used to arrange a draw of how and why educators adjusted to the vary in register (p. 21). Chi-square and ANOVA analyses comparing arrest, impure, and oral educators organize forcible discords in disgusting areas: 1) varys in distinguishledge rules, 2) opportunities for cogitation, 3) interdependence delay learners, and 4) smooths of carefulness. According to apologys from all aggravatelooks, interviews, and observational occurrences, adjustifyal rules for most of the educators delay arrest adjustes varyd (Veal & Flinders, p. 6). A meditate by Adams and Salvaterra (1998) interposed 67 educators in disgusting arrest registerd proud trains in Pennsylvania to see how the educators perceived the arrest register, and whether or not they varyd their adjustifyal criterions to mention that register. Some educators felt unfounded for the register vary, and were worried environing nature cogent to cbalance all of the earning that they were conversant to screening. For some, they tranquil felt that “the quotationcomignoring drives the curriculum; a balanceing of urgency to cbalance the comignoring persists” (Method singularity, para. 2). The educators that felt they had not common ample trailing for the arrest register demonstrationed some opaspect to modification from oral register of earning or holdd to use activities that did not fit courteous beneathneathneath the new register (Results and Discussion singularity, para. 8). Adams and Salvaterra organize that signalliness some educators felt that the arrest register was a majestic fit and looked for ways to use it to its fullest, one deep theory was that “Teachers in all disgusting trains identified a want for staff fruit, chiefly in pedagogical techniques such as cooperative and integrated perceiveledge” (The Role of Staff Development, para. ). Zepeda and Mayers (2001) administered a meditate of 31 principal-year educators in the Midwest, all distinguishledge on the 4 x 4 arrest register. Each of these educators compositioned at a racially uninfallible train of 1,200 to 2,000 learners and had furrowd delayin three months of organizeation to trodden. Zepeda and Mayers persuadeed interviews delay these educators at the organizeation, intermediate, and end of year to get their cognizances of the arrest register. Medepend the educators were interviewed, so administrative and learner feedend was not interposed. These new educators organize that they were “having difficulties in adjusting their adjustify to the wide arrest limits, manifold adjustifys throughout the limit, and open out of esthetics and/or activities precedently the end of the limit (Analysis of the Facts singularity, para. 2). These educators did not conceive that they possessed the repertoire of activities wanted to prosperously push out a adreasonable on the arrest register, and they as-courteous freeed solicitude environing learner coercion and their insufficiency to suppress activities open smoothly (Adjusting Classify singularity, para. 5). Later in this meditate, educators as-courteous freeed handleings of nature unfounded to assess learners potently on the arrest register (Zepeda & Mayers, 2001). Veldman (2002) looks at the distinguishledge from Coopersville Proud Train (CHS) as they transitioned from a oral, 7-limit a day register to a feature symbol of arrest register (A/B Block). On one day, learners would involve 4 adjustes, signalliness on the forthcoming day, 3 adjustes delay meditate biexception imbedded therein. After disgusting years of nature on the A/B Arrest register, the train adjustification organize that there were distinct scheduling solicitudes that wanted to be addressed. In apology to the solicitudes, the train adjustification scrutinyed and aggravatelooked and composed a new arrange of scheduling that entidepend the best aspects of twain oral and arrest registers per Veldman (2002). The new register, perceiven as the A/B/C Register undisputed for further adjustifyal signal during the prolongation of the train year. As opposed to A/B Arrest Scheduling, which affords 90 days of adjustroom adjustify, the A/B/C Register allows for 30 attached adjustifyal days. In provision for the instrumentation of the new register, Coopersville Proud Train (CHS) stipulated administrative fruit to douceur that possessed adjustifyal techniques and distinguishledge strategies and standpointed on perceiveledge styles. CHS attributed considertalented of the luck of the program to an aggravateflow of message unarranged all stakeholders. Although Nursing essay beaks were not availcogent at the signal of the meditate, Veldman says that the new register was proving to be a luck delay educators and learners identical. According to Jenkins, Queen and Algozzine (2002), it can be argued that owing of the attached adjustifyal signal common on a arrest register, educators suppress further of an turn to economize an adreasonable of adjustifyal strategies and techniques in the adjustroom. In adjustify to enumerate if this was gentleman, a meditate was persuadeed to prosecute of educators the symbols of adjustifyal strategies used in their adjustrooms. Teachers from twain arrest and oral registers were aggravatelooked and apologys were paralleld (p. 196). Jenkins et al. theorys as-courteous orthodox that there were no genuine homogeneousities in the theorys of educators on twain arrest and oral registers in respects to distinguishledge strategies. According to the aggravatelook apologys, educators from twain sides of the spectrum deeptain the identical symbols and varieties of distinguishledge strategies, unobservant of the register in which curriculum is nature taught. Another meditate persuadeed by Payne (1996) compromised a topicnaire for douceur and learners whose train was on an “alternating day” arrest register. This register undisputed for learners to involve a registerd set of adjustes, on a arrest register, one day delay a incongruous set of adjustes on the forthcoming day. The issues of the topicnaire demonstrationed that douceur felt that further adjustifyal signal undisputed for further esthetic to be presented in the adjustroom. They were not pressed to get a infallible whole of esthetic and/or standards presented in diminutiveer increments in the day. Payne concluded that twain douceur and learners were pleased delay the register and felt that it was a luck. In a meditate of learners delay incongruous academic profiles, Marchant and Paulson (2001) standpointed on the learner cognizances of their alternating, A/B arrest register. Marchant and Paulson gave topicnaires to 2191 proud train learners in an emend adreasonable Midwest rural proud train. They wanted to perceive what the learners cognizances of the arrest were in relative to areas such as bearing, learner-educator interdependences, luck, and their subsistence for the arrest register. Students were docile up into clusters profiting to whether they were proud or low-achieving in train, and hether they were felicitous, displeased, or indivergent environing their luck. Marchant and Paulson theory intimate that those who were felicitous and already prosperous, responded further fixedly in all categories on the topicnaire, signalliness ncorporeal the contrary was gentleman for the inferior-achieving learners, “In feature, learners who were medium or proud arrestrs, were pleased delay their amiable-fortune, and respects train is weighty had the proudest smooths of train functioning and the proudest subsistence for arrest scheduling” (Discussion singularity, para. ), signalliness, in dissimilarity, “Students who were the balanceest arrestrs had the balanceest subsistence for arrest scheduling, defeat educator relatives, and defeat cognizances of learner bearing” (Discussion singularity, para. 1). According to Shortt and Thayer (1998/1999), a aggravatelook was persuadeed by the Virginia Province of Education, medepend 1 percent of the responding educators and 5 percent of the responding administrators implied that arrest scheduling had a disclaiming collision on standardized Nursing essay beaks. Shortt and Thayer repopular that the occurrences they serene implied that educators, administrators, and learners were fixed internal arrest scheduling. Rikard and Banville (2005) interviewed fifteen visible counsel educators at their train predicaments from prospect proud trains located in a southeastern train purlieus in the United States (pg. 26). Consistent delay anterior scrutiny theorys, educator cognizances implied their declining strain smooths, a refuse in learner travel and inertness, and declining learner bearing problems succeedingcited changing to arrest scheduling from a oral arrangeat. Sixty six percent of educators perceived that learners erudite further in arrested versus oral adjustes but they had no munimented indication of that omission per Rikard and Banville (pg. 6). In Persin’s (2002) scrutiny, he scrutinyed learner collocations internal web-assisted adjustify or exercitation of computer animations and graphics versus quotation-recognized or hypernatural copys. The learners responded to topics delay repartee libertys ranging from (1) strongly tally to (4) strongly vary. “The tend-aparticipant’s balanceall collocation internal internet-assisted adjustify was 1. 93, which is subordinately prouder than an “agree” apology gone “strongly tally” is rated at 1. 00. Also, collocations recognized on gender were computed delay womanly learners having a subordinately further fixed collocation internal internet-assisted nstruction than males, although the discord in gender clump collocations was not meditateed forcible at alpha = . 05 (Persin, 2002, p. 65)”. Jenkins, Queen and Algozzine’s (2002) scrutiny, “To arrest or not to arrest: That’s not the Question, was to parallel educators’ theorys environing their provision for using manifold adjustifyal criterions as courteous as their use of those criterions and the expediency of employing them as tend-akeep-apart-incomplete of arrest and oral distinguishledge registers. Teachers inaugurated in arrest-scheduled proud trains aggravatelooks were paralleld delay those of their comrades distinguishledge in oral register adjustes. Jenkins et al. meditate interposed 2,000 educators (N = 2,167) North Carolina proud train educators shared in this scrutiny; 1,031 taught in arrest-register programs and the haltder taught on the oral register for at diminutiveest three years. Comparisons were made unarranged their theorys on adjustifyal criterions, expediency of those rules, and their smooth of trailing in those rules (p. 98). Responses to the smooth of use of manifold adjustifyal rules demonstrationed very homogeneous repartees, ate that for comrade coaching/comrade tutoring, “teachers on the arrest register mented a prouder use of this missivecy than id their comrades distinguishledge delay a oral register” (p. 198). When reparteeing topics environing the expediency of adjustifyal rules, anew, repartees were very homogeneous. However, “teachers on the arrest register mented a prouder expediency of” (p. 98) using schemes than educators on the oral register. In signals of trailing for using incongruous adjustifyal criterions, there were no forcible discords in the repartees (Jenkins, et al. 2002) A meditate involving learner cognizance of the arrest register was persuadeed by Slate and Jones (2000). This meditate used 1205 southern Georgia proud train learners and asked them what they penetration of the arrest register succeedingcited a one week criterion limit. Although this was a scanty gate to the register, this meditate stipulated occurrences for those meditateing profiting a train to the arrest register from learners who had veritably had a discernment of the register, instead of solely having it explained to them. Competition was on a deliberate premise, and occurrences could medepend be fascinated from those who chose to share, making the exemplification hither symbolical. One aidlessness exalted by the learners was that they had “difficulty paying consideration through the longer adreasonable limits” (Overall Results singularity, para. 1). The meditate had a fixed consequence, as abundant further learners mented advantages than mented aidlessnesss (Overall Results singularity, para. 2). However, some thrilling distinguishledge was that signalliness “Students mented that the arrest register had weighty advantages, chiefly growth signal for meditate, and proportionately few aidlessnesss, they mented that arrest scheduling was medepend a subordinately acceptcogent choice to oral scheduling. Some freeed a scorn determination for oral scheduling (Slate & Jones, 2000, Discussion singularity, para. 1). Santos and Rettig addressed subject-matter counsel educators’ cognizances of arrest scheduling which interposed the A/B arrest and the 4/4 semester sketch. They interviewed 18 subject-matter counsel educators unimpeded as province chairs in Virginia proud trains. Nine of these educators were serving in alternate-day (A/B) trains and nine in 4/4 trains. These trains had operated on this scheduling unarranged 1 and 3 years. (What environing Subject-matter counsel…section, para 2). The arrest scheduling was separated balance the oral registers in which the province chairs had compositioned. All nine 4/4 province heads freeed a determination and six of nine province chairs unimpeded in the A/B sketch preferred this discrepancy of arrest scheduling balance the uncombined-limit registers (Santos & Rettig, 1999, Subject-matter Educators Speak Out singularity, para. 1) . Advantages and Disadvantages Despite its advantages, as Bryant & Bryant (2000) mentioned, arrest scheduling halts medepend another signal-government machine unhither adjustroom distinguishledge/understanding interactions as-courteous vary. Arrest scheduling does stipulate further signal delay few learners per adjustroom. It requires incongruous adjustifyal approaches and allows educators to use manifold strategies in a uncombined limit (p. 9) Weller & McLeskey (2000) writes that educators tallyd that delayin the quotationure of a arrest register, team distinguishledge aids majesticly in including learners delay proud impression disabilities in open counsel adjustrooms, and ends in involveing the counselal wants of all learners (p. 213). Maltese, Dexter, Tai, and Sadler (2007) thoughtful how oral and arrest registers stipulated learners for truth in seed-plot adjustes. Referencing the numerical occurrences in the arrange of learner beaks, and suming indispensable occurrences and theorys through learner aggravatelooks, their meditate concluded that there were topic-matters to be made for twain registers, but that neither was ascertainn to be conceiveably further prosperous than the other in signals of the learners’ smooth of provision. Advantages and aidlessnesss are sift-canvassed in scrutiny persuadeed by Kenney (2003), as she looks at the resolutions of some trains to forfeit the arrest register in grace of unconsiderable to the oral register. She quotes R. B. Cobb, a zealot at Colorado Say University, as speech that the arrest register is “a grassroots move. It seems to delineationt its momentum recognized on the logic of it and a penetration fawn by society and counselal leaders hat it reasonable looks apascertain it ought to do emend” (para. 7). This declaration relates twain to the reasons for trains suppressing and leaving the arrest register in this stipulation. Schools permanent delay the arrest register made that penetration fawn and felt that the register fit their wants emend, and they repopular advantages in the arrest register. A learner can perfect 32 credits balance the way of a disgusting-year proud train amiable-fortune. This allows disgusting further than is practicable delay the seven-limit day” (para. 9). These trains as-courteous felt that learners were hither sserviceable on the arrest register “”what the arrest does is compose a sphere in which the kids handle a lot hither strain…not worrying environing sequable incongruous adjustes, sequable incongruous sets of rules, and the possibility of distinct incongruous Nursing essays a day” (para. 7). However, Kenney as-courteous sift-canvasses aidlessnesss to the arrest register, and reasons that trains and purlieuss suppress moved far from this register. While extra signal can be very wholesome in adjust, some administrators handle that “abundant educators used the attached minutes as assiduous signal” (Quick Abandonment singularity, para. 3). Additionally, there can be staffing issues in diminutiveer trains, “when you go to the arrest, you suppress to involve further educators, that’s what it boils down to” (A Money Resolution singularity, para. 3), and then there is the occurrence that at this topic-matter, there is no indisputable Nursing essay that the arrest register is the further prosperous of the two registers, “I’ve never genuinely seen any disentangled, expedient indication that ascertaind arrest scheduling was upper to the oral register. There was a open handleing it was emend but no one could ascertain it” (Kenney, 2003, A Money Decision, para. 5). Santos and Rettig (1999) says “The speedy ramify of this newfangledness brings delay it twain benefits and solicitudes delay profit to programming for learners delay disabilities. Despite the whole of distinguishledge availcogent on arrest scheduling, shabby scrutiny exists on the benefits and drawbacks for subject-matter counsel (What environing subject-matter counsel and arrest scheduling singularity, para. 1)”. One feature meditate standpointed on this correct issue: Is any one register emend for learners delay disabilities? The meditate standpointed on a aggregate of 620 learners (160 learners delay disabilities and 460 learners delayout disabilities) from trains on oral registers and trains on arrest registers. The trains compromised had to suppress been on a feature register for a restriction of 4 years. During the principal year of the meditate, there were 8 oral registerd trains and 8 arrest registerd trains (4 enlightened trains, 2 medium-sized trains, and 2 diminutive trains). At the end of the meditate, a aggregate of 12 trains shared in the meditate. All trains compromised were 9-12 gait proud trains delay homogeneous involveance and precedency rates. All oral registerd trains had the identical whole of signal in a train day and the identical learner/educator kinsman. The identical applies for the trains on arrest scheduling (Santos & Rettig, 1999). Santos and Rettig aggravatelooked 281 educators in-reference-to the remuneration of the register on which they taught. Say mandated duty Nursing essay beaks in balbutiation, diction, math, truth, and sumive studies, GPA’s, ACT Nursing essay beaks were revisaled from all trains to end in determining a discord in amiable-fortune of learners on arrest and oral registers. After revisaling Nursing essay beaks and archives, it was organize that there was no discord unarranged learners delay disabilities and learners delayout disabilities unarranged either arrest nor oral registers. According to the meditate, this may be due to the occurrence that educators on twain register symbols were proudly pleased delay the register on which their train was recognized. It was as-courteous discovered that distinguishledge strategies were very homogeneous and there was very shabby, if any, discord unarranged distinguishledge strategies. This distinguishledge demonstrationed that what compositions for one learner, may not comaspect for another, and that it may be practicable for the proud achieving learners to be prosperous in any environment. Timeliness this may not be a unfair aidlessness for the arrest register, the occurrence that it does not fixedly penetrate the low achieving learner population is celebrity to be meditateed when looking at the potentness of the register, or when there is the possibility of making the vary to the arrest register (Santos & Rettig, 1999, Recommendations singularity, para. ) Learner Good-fortune According to Queen (2000), the instrumentation of arrest scheduling was not indoctrinated to profit learner amiable-fortune straightway. However, in abundant studies persuadeed nationally, the standsubject-matter has been on how arrest scheduling governd the academic amiable-fortune in learners (p. 218). Shortt and Thayer (1998/1999) concluded that the Nursing essay of any rectify experiment is a fixed vary in learner amiable-fortune, in this age of recitalability (p. 78). Effects on academics suppress been investigated principally by meditateing the forthcoming: gait topic-matter medium, respect flatten amiable-fortune, sumion of failures and dropout rates and learner’s exploit on standardized Nursing essays (p. 80). Gruber and Onwuegbuzie (2001) persuadeed a meditate of learner beaks on the Georgia Proud Train Precedency Nursing essay (GHSGT) at a train that made the transition from oral to arrest scheduling. Scores were fascinated from precedently the register vary in 1996-1997. The beaks were then paralleld to succeedingcited the register vary of 1999-2000. While the congruousity was hoped to be in grace of arrest register, the theorys of the meditate was “no forcible discord in GPA unarranged the two clumps”. Significantly prouder beaks were exalted for learners on the oral register in all disgusting kernel academic areas per Gruber and Onwuegbuzie. In 2005, Nichols persuadeed a meditate comparing the academic luck of learners in five proud trains in a enlightened refined area in English and Diction arts. Balance the way of this meditate, Nichols exalted that the arrest register did not suppress a conceivecogent collision on the amiable-fortune of learners in this earning area. The trains went into the arrest register transition delay conceivecogent GPA discords unarranged them, and in “the 1998-1999 train year (distinct years succeedingcited all trains converted to arrest arrangeats), an balanceall medium discord in GPAs unarranged the five trains halted” (p. 301). Similarly, GPA in the singular trains themselves did not dissent majesticly from year to year, and succeedingcited the register transition. “Student GPAs for River Proud Train and South Proud Train were judiciously inferior than for other proud trains in the purlieus and succeedingcited arrest intercharges, the learners openly deeptained the inferior amiable-fortune” (p. 02). Unfortunately, the identical was gentleman for prouder scoring learners, “Oak Proud Train and North Proud Train were judiciously two of the prouder achieving proud trains in the purlieus, and their intercharge to arrest scheduling appeared to suppress shabby or no collision on learner amiable-fortune in English or diction arts ways” (p. 303). The one conceivecogent area of vary that Nichols does conceive is that the reckon of learners avenue English and diction arts growthd in-movables succeedingcited these trains varyd to arrest register (p. 207). Lawrence and McPherson (2000) persuadeed a meditate comparing the oral and arrest scheduling beaks of learners in two proud trains in the identical purlieus on the North Carolina end of way Nursing essays in the kernel topics. The two trains used were separated owing they were some of the principal to strengthen the arrest scheduling copy. Facts were fascinated on the oral register from 1992 – 1994 and on the arrest register from 1994 – 1996. Timeliness indication was expected to be organize to subsistence the luck of the arrest register, this was not the circumstance. For each of the disgusting kernel topic Nursing essay, “the medium skernel for the oral register was consistently prouder than the medium beaks for the arrest register” (conjecture 4, para. 2), at-last, there was forcible subsistence for the arrest register when “using the learners’ decisive adjustroom gaits for congruousity (results, para. 4). The consequence could be recognized on abundant occurrenceors, such as Nursing essays nature further arrestly tied to curriculum, or the standardized Nursing essays screening further esthetic than learners are used to on adjustroom Nursing essays (Lawrence & McPherson, 2000). While looking at standardized Nursing essaying, the Seed-plot Board Office of Scrutiny and Fruit did a meditate in 1998 that paralleld slow arrival Nursing essay beaks of learners on twain the arrest and the oral register, and organize that learners on the oral register beakd emend. Lawrence and McPherson exalted that there were as-courteous discords in exploit unarranged learners that meditate the waycomaspect on the arrest register in the originate versus the sink semester, as they were further removed from the way at the signal of the Nursing essay, or had not yet perfectd the way when the Nursing essay was administered. Zepeda and Mayers (2006) occurrences graceed those learners on the oral register. These studies mark that scrutiny demonstrations that pros exists for twain symbols of registers and further occurrences wants to be gathered and criticised in adjustify to discover a indisputable repartee. The mediuming of this scheme was to sum occurrences from two incongruous train purlieuss unimpeded on the arrest register at the proud train smooth to conciliate identical cognizances and theorys of the arrest register from twain learners and staff. These cognizances and theorys standpointed on whether or not the arrest register is seen as a fixed adreasonable compel. Using a aggravatelook that was administered to twain 10th gait learners and staff at the tend-aparticipating trains, this occurrences was serene and criticised to compel congruousitys unarranged learner and staff cognizances, as courteous as noting any correlative unarranged fixed views and handleings of luck on the arrest register. “The dissection of this meditate was perfectd in three phases: (1) an abundant inquiry of the scrutiny solicitudeing arrest scheduling, (2) view of a matrix depicting the issues of the inquiry, and (3) dissection of the studies interposed in the matrix. p. 142)”. The end of this meditate was to sum and criticise twain expedient and indispensable occurrences in the arrange of apologys conciliateed through aggravatelook topicnaires. It was expected that the occurrences would slender in grace of the arrest register, and would demonstration trends or unfair areas in which educators and/or learners handle that the arrest register is succoring them to be prosperous, as courteous as reasons, rules, or activities that the aggravatelook tend-aparticipants handle are chiefly wholesome or potent delay profit to the arrest register (Zepeda & Mayers, 2006). As Kenny (2003) mentioned in her stipulation, Watauga Proud Train located in North Carolina is using a register that combines the oral and arrest register, and they suppress organize homogeneous advantages to the arrest adjustes. Watauga register includes twain oral and arrest elongation ways, and the reckon of adjustes that a learner has each signal depends upon how abundant arrests they prefer to admit. It is practicable for them to admit unarranged disgusting, all arrest, and prospect, all oral, adjustes at any fond signal. This register has been instrumented owing the train resolute that their “philosophical aspect was that neither all arrest nor all oral registers best benefit all learners, educators, and topics…we revisal learner exploit, educator theory, and availcogent scrutiny year-by-year to enumerate how to best present the feature way beneathneathneath revisal” (p. 49). Through this register, the train is demonstrationing that their fixed is the best profit of their learners and educators, and the perceiveledge way. As they hold to comaspect delay the arrest register, they music that some of its advantages are “hither homecomaspect each gloom owing of a lighter way load” (p. 48), that it can succor “at-risk learners owing they usually suppress two deep academic arrests each semester, allowing them to standsubject-matter further on academics owing they suppress fewer ways” (p. 48), as-courteous that “arrest ways are taught in a further hands-on-way” (p. 48). In a subject-matter evaluation of the Copernican sketch, Carflatten (1994) standpointed on the missive gaits that learners earned in their adjustes, and discovers subsistence for the arrest register looking at this end issue for learners in a way. The 2007 scrutiny movablesed by Hynes-Hunter and Avery, standpointed on the propertys of arrest scheduling on visible counsel although this subject-matter has been bygone. Disgusting proud trains and one intermediate train located in the Northeast, and one proud train and one intermediate train located on the West Coast United States, were selected to share in this meditate. When paralleld delay ateional visible counsel adjustes, learners in this meditate spent further signal in discontinuance and government, and hither signal receiving distinguishledge and in daily activities (p. 174). Arrest scheduling composes ample signal for learners to free visible aptitude and for educators to mete and muniment aptitude fruit. Also, this scheduling allows learners to exhaust extensive signal on kinsman fruit to veritably habit ameliorated visible kinsman per scrutinyers (p. 178). ” Hynes-Hunter and Avery (2007) relationd the scrutiny from Claxton and Bryant (1996) clarified that it is a possibility that the notional organize for visible counsel in the new arrest conciliate depend on the mark of the corporeal visible counsel program. The composers felt that if visible counsel was profited as a adreasonable which met no merittimeliness objectives, the transition to arrest may be a opportune signal to exclude it. But if it was seen as a life-supporting tend-akeep-apart-incomplete of the train program, it has a amiable accident of gorgeous an correspondent role delay other topics (p. 175). Recognized on the scrutiny from Ron Persin (2002), “There was a ceremonious growth in Physics Palm decisive exam beaks when a proud train physics educator instrumented a webpredicament for adjustify in a arrest register. The predicament was used to set free weekly exhortation musics, sketchs, and assignments signalliness as-courteous providing links to other sources of distinguishledge in physics. Further signal in adreasonable was availcogent for demonstrations, clump lab activities, and multimedia presentations. The scrutiny compromised comparing the decisive exam beaks in respects physics during three adjustifyly disgusting-year limits from 1991-2002. Adreasonable instrument demonstrationed that the exam beaks decreased when the train switched from the sequable limit-day to the 4 by 4 arrest, and then growthd when the arrest register was repaird delay Web-Assisted Classify (p. 1)”. In yet another meditate, two symbols of arrest registers (4x4 and A/B) and oral registers were paralleld and examined. Ninth gait mathematics and balbutiation standardized Nursing essay beaks were evaluated beneathneathneath each register, parallel delay the ACT, which was administered during the learners’ younger year of proud train. Scheduling symbols, gender, and ethnicity were observed to enumerate what, if any, govern they had on Nursing essay beaks. Participants compromised came from 7 younger proud and proud trains in Colorado Spring, Colorado. After the occurrences were revisaled, theorys of this meditate intimates that the 4x4 arrest register deeptained forcible gains in the areas of mathematics and balbutiation on the standardized Nursing essay administered in the 9th gait. ACT beaks as-courteous orthodox that learners on a 4x4 arrest register surignoring those on the A/B arrest and oral registers. Gender and ethnicity had no govern on the consequence of Nursing essay beaks. Owing of the theorys, this meditate subordinately ends the proposal of arrest scheduling (Lewis, 2005). When topics are asked or aggravatelooks are perfectd in-reference-to the use of technology in the curriculum, the balancewhelming deepity of indoctrinateors would say that they are utilizing availcogent technology. Recognized on the luck of this composer, it seems that Web-Assisted adjustify can be used to repair perceiveledge physics by learners in the arrest register. The ground of using technology potently to growth distinguishledge rules must be subdues and instrumented by all (p. 68). “Problems delay misapply use of adreasonable signal and its collision on learner amiable-fortune suppress halted unresolved (Queen, 2000, p. 218). Ten of his fifteen recommendations for the advenient that he respects are weighty to maximize the fixed collision of arrest scheduling are: “1. Teachers must free and supervene monthly, weekly, and daily pacing guides. 2. Teachers must subdue a restriction of five adjustifyal strategies to involve learners straightway in the perceiveledge way and should aim to subdue sequable or prospect. 3. Teachers should gait each hitheron by changing clumping patterns, varying presentations, and using incongruous adjustifyal activities integral 10 to 15 minutes. In most circumstances a educator should use a restriction of three adjustifyal strategies during any adreasonable limit. . Teachers should strengthen choice and popular duty criterions when evaluating learners. 5. Teachers must use the solid adreasonable limit for adjustify. Integral day. 6. Teachers should endeavor to be supposititious and yielding in assigning activities and should strengthen delayout assignments in to orderly adjustroom activities. 7. Teachers should warner singular learner’s tend-acompetition in diminutive and enlightened clumps. 8. Prosperous arrest educators should mentor, arrangeally or informally, organizeation educators and expert educators having difficulty delay adjustify in arrest scheduling. . Principals or staff fruit personnel must stipulate judicious and permanent staff fruit for all educators throughout the year on the subject-matters of curriculum and adjustifyal alignment, adjustifyal pacing and strategies, and signal government. 10. Principals must free a warnering team to confirm that all educators are using pacing guides and manifold adjustifyal strategies potently (Queen, 2000, p. 221). ” In entity, the luck is very relying on the administrative that instrument the scheduling. It is weighty that the principals, educators, learners, and parents afford the identical smooth of considerations and experiment to arrest scheduling as other scheduling libertys (Queen 2000, p. 222). Veal and Flinders (2001) discloses that in the say of Massachusetts, it is mandatory for a learner to ignoring (or skernel competent) on diction arts and mathematics factions of the MCAS during the originate semester of their sophofurther year in adjustify to furrow delay a proud train missive. In 2001, one Massachusetts train, North Balbutiation Proud Train converted to arrest scheduling. A meditate was persuadeed to enumerate if amiable-fortune, as it pertains to the MCAS, growthd succeedingcited the instrumentation of the new scheduling adjustification (Veal & Flinders, 2001). Participants of this meditate consisted of 762 learners who took the MCAS during their sophofurther year in proud train. The years in which occurrences were serene are as supervenes: 1998-1999 mathematics and diction arts beaks (one year antecedent to the intercharge to arrest scheduling); 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 mathematics and diction arts beaks (two years succeedingcited arrest scheduling was instrumented). Results demonstrationed that in 2001 meditate, learners on the oral register, 73. 3% of the 290 learners Nursing essayed ignoringed the mathematics and diction arts factions of the MCAS. In the years forthcoming the intercharge to arrest scheduling, 472 learners shared in the exam, delay 89. 19% of learners conciliateing a ignoringing beak. The consequence stipulates indication that there was a forcible growth in ignoringing gaits for the MCAS at North Balbutiation Proud School. Veal and Flinders respectd that the boarding of administrative fruit for educators antecedent to the indeclaration of arrest register may suppress contributed to the amelioratement of Nursing essay beaks. Implementation of the arrest scheduling adjustification can be a valuable vary for any train, this train organize it to be an potent vary (Veal & Flinders, 2001). The mediuming of Trenta and Newman’s (2002) meditate was to enumerate the collision arrest registers had on learners’ gait topic-matter mediums (GPA’s) in required English/diction arts ways. Facts were serene from five proud trains distinct years antecedent to the arrest register intercharge. Each train’s population various in learner socio-economic standing and ethnicity. The conjecture recognized was that GPAs in required English/diction arts adjustes would not be collisioned or profited by transition to arrest scheduling. The scrutinyer used learner GPAs and an ANOVA dissection of discord as rules of dissection for conciliateed occurrences. Resulting from the meditate, it was organize that the deepity of trains’ beaks growthd the principal year succeedingcited the intercharge to arrest register, but so-far reverted end to the pre-arrest medium in succeedingcited years. Medepend one train deeptained a fixed growth in GPAs succeedingcited the vary to arrest scheduling. Upon the ask of a mid-western train board, an evaluation was persuadeed on the purlieus’s proud train arrest scheduling program. The evaluators, Trent and Newman, were asked to persuade the evaluation recognized on “hard occurrences”, not theorys. Therefore, Trenta and Newman evaluation of the train consisted of theory the interdependence unarranged arrest scheduling and: * Learner gaits (recognized on math, English, truth, & sumive studies GPAs) * Ohio Proficiency Nursing essay (OPT) Scores * ACT Scores * Furniture Rate Trenta and Newman says that topics of the meditate consisted of a aggregate of 500 learners from the graduating adjustes of 1997, 2000, 2001, and 2002 (125 from each adjust) who involveed the train from their freshman year through precedency. Facts were serene from each learner’s duplicate for this meditate. Results of the meditate demonstrationed that there was a fixed interdependence unarranged learners’ gaits and arrest scheduling. The identical held gentleman for the OPT beaks. Although these consequences cannot be straightway attributed to arrest scheduling, Trenta and Newman (2002) respect that the scheduling vary governd the occurrences solicitudeing gaits and OPT beaks. ACT beaks; at-last, demonstrationed no forcible interdependence to arrest scheduling. In the circumstance of involveance, the occurrences fluctuated so considertalented so that the interdependence to arrest scheduling, or closing thereof, was informal. It was concluded that the indication for this feature proud train demonstrations that arrest scheduling had “an govern” on learners’ academic luck (Trent & Newman, 2002). Nichols (2005) respects that there is poor subsistence that intimates that arrest-scheduled trains may suppress a trodden fixed property on fit learner amiable-fortune. Several trains mented that percentages of earned “A” gaits growthd tremendously succeedingcited arrest instrumentation (p. 300). In 1994, a proud train located in the Western faction of the United States, converted from a oral 7-period/day register to a 4x4 arrest register. The fixed of this intercharge was to present further way libertys for the learners and to compose a hither-stressed and sinferior gaitd air for twain learners and educators. Five years succeedingcited instrumentation of arrest scheduling, the troddenor of trains sought for a rule by which the program could be evaluated. In 1998, Adam and Salvaterra, assessed, unarranged other things, whether or not arrest scheduling was cost-potent for this feature purlieus. Gone the concept of counsel and perceiveledge cannot be fiscally meted, the scrutinyers had to organize distinct rules of evaluation in determining the compute of arrest scheduling: sumion of indispensable and expedient occurrences; sumion of distinguishledge on the cognizance of arrest scheduling by educators and parents (in the arrange of aggravatelooks); and visits to the train in which observations were made and interviews persuadeed (parents, educators, administrators, standsubject-matter clumps). Survey instruments were criticised by the use of descriptive and chi statistics. Aftercited revisaling occurrences, it was enumerated that succeedingcited the instrumentation of arrest scheduling: * Furniture halted fixed (90% involveance rate) * A Respect Flatten growthd * B Respect Flatten halted the identical * D & F beaks subordinately decreased * Seed-plot avenue exams did not suppress any forcible varys * Overall academic amiable-fortune halted stcogent Although academic amiable-fortune various shabby, issues demonstrationed that in relation to the A and B respect flatten, learners executed emend beneathneathneath arrest scheduling. Other areas evaluated interposed the administrative fruit/trailing for arrest scheduling for douceur. Surveys demonstrationed that although there was shabby trailing was stipulated to educators, in-services possessed and aided educators in preparing to each beneathneathneath the arrest register. In arrest scheduling, educators are allotted a sketchning signal which is closely envelop that of a oral register. This signal was not nature warnered by government. Results from aggravatelooks and interviews demonstrationed that douceur and government could further potently economize this signal. However, issues as-courteous demonstrationed that educators use this signal to comaspect further arrestly delay learners in providing attached endance and as-courteous in preparing for the hitheron/unit that is nature taught. Would there be considertalented vary, if any, in the issues of learner amiable-fortune? Would it be merit the financial and counselal costs of instrumenting a new symbol of register? Teachers should as-courteous be serviceable on how to indoctrinate beneathneathneath a new scheduling symbol. By doing so, educators conciliate be equipped delay the inevitcogent machines by which they can extensively develop learners beneathneathneath a feature symbol of register (Jenkins, 2002). Chapter 3 Summary As I looked into the scrutiny, ments and stipulations, it is disentangled that there are aidlessnesss and infalliblely advantages for the use of the arrest register. When one meditate ments inferior Nursing essay beaks on the arrest register in an area, it is practicable to discover another meditate delay adverse theorys. The deepity of the studies revisaled demonstrationed that there was no forcible discord in learner amiable-fortune recognized upon the symbol of scheduling. Studies where learners demonstrationed amelioratement in arrest scheduling, at-last, had distinct outer occurrenceors that may suppress collisioned learner amiable-fortune (i. e. xtensive scrutiny unarranged learners, educators, and parents antecedent to instrumenting a new symbol of register, educator in-service trailing as pertains to arrest scheduling, etc). One beneathneathlying subject throughout the scholarship was that the deepity of, if not all of the stakeholders, want to be on-board and coached antecedent to the instrumentation of a new or incongruous register. I converge delay Wronkovich, “the resolution whether or not to strengthen arrest scheduling should be recognized on the Nursing essay of popular scrutiny. Schools should organize measurcogent ends and set a signaltcogent for evaluating the consequences of arrest scheduling (para. )”. “Block registers can practicablely quiet the transition from the homeapascertain air of the elementary train to the provincealized environment of the proud train by reducing the want for fixed adreasonable varys and the reckon of adjustes learners suppress on any fond day, signalliness providing growthd earning emphases and signal on business. The arrested signal register as-courteous affords equable chaotic learners a fighting accident to suppress abreast of assignments and schemes (Mowen & Mowen, 2004, p. 50). ” I suppress organize that the scrutiny is tranquil inindisputable as to which register emend benefits the counselal wants of learners. Like delay any subject-matter, there are studies and scrutiny that grace reasonings on twain sides, indicating that further distinguishledge is definitely wanted. As Veldman (2002) emphasizes, when meditateing a vary in scheduling, a train must admit into recital the theorys and solicitudes of all stakeholders and scrutiny its libertys. References www. counsel. com Adams, D. C. & Salvaterra, M. E. (1998). Structural and Educator Changes: necessities for prosperous arrest scheduling. Proud Train Journal, 81, p. 98-106. Bryant, C. & Bryant R. (2000). Collective studies in the arrest register: A copy for potent hitheron cunning. The Collective Studies, 9-16. Canady, R. L. & Rettig, M. D. (2001). Arrest scheduling: The key to capacity perceiveledge signal. Principal, 80(3), 30-34. Carroll, J. M. (1994). The Copernican sketch evaluated: The extrication of a manner. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(2), 104-113. Childers, G. L. & Ireland R. W. (2005). Mixing arrest and oral scheduling. The Counsel Digest, 6, 43-49. Dexter, K. M. , Tai, R. H. & Sadler, P. M. (2006). Oral and arrest scheduling for seed-plot truth provision: A congruousity of seed-plot truth luck of learners who ment incongruous proud train scheduling sketchs. The Proud Train Journal, 89(4), 22-34. Evans, W. , Tokarczyk, J. , Rice, S. , & McCray, A. (2002). Arrest scheduling: An evaluation of consequences and collision. The Clearing House, 75(6), 319-323. Gruber, C. D. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). Property of arrest scheduling on academic amiable-fortune unarranged proud train learners. The Proud Train Journal, 84(4), 32-42. Hackmann, D. G. (2004). Constructivism and arrest scheduling: Making the intercourse. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(9), 697-702. Hynes-Hunter, J. M. & Avery, S. (2007). Arrest scheduling in induced visible counsel: East paralleld to West Coast Unite States of America. The Visible Educator, 64(4), 170-179. Jenkins, E. , Queen, A. , & Algozzine, B. (2002). To arrest or not to arrest: That’s not the topic. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 196-202. Kenney, L. C. (2003). End from the arrest—or not? Train Administrator, 60(9). Kienholz, K. , Segall, N. & Yellin, D. (2003). The arrest: Implications for induced educators. Kappa Delta Pi, 39(2), 62-65. Lawrence, W. W. & McPherson, D. D. (2000). A relatively meditate of arrest scheduling and oral scheduling on academic amiable-fortune. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(3), 178-182. Lewis, C. W. , Dugan, J. J. , Winokur, M. A. , & Cobb, R. B. (2005). The propertys of arrest scheduling on proud train academic amiable-fortune. NASSP Bulletin, 89(645), 72-87. Maltese, V. A. , Dexter, K. M. , Tai, R. H. , & Sadler, P. M. (2007). Breaking from tradition: Unfulfilled promises of arrest scheduling in truth. Truth Educator, 16(1), 1-7. Marchant, G. J. & Paulson, S. B. (2001). Differential train functioning in a arrest register: A congruousity of academic profiles. Proud Train Journal, 84(4), 12-20. Mowen, G. G. & Mowen, C. (2004). To arrest-register or not? Counsel Digest, 69(8), 50-53. Nichols, J. D. (2005). Block-scheduled proud trains: Collision on amiable-fortune in English and diction arts. The Journal of Counsel Research, 98(5), 299-309. Payne, D. A. & Jordan M. M. (1996). The evaluation of a proud train arrest register. Convergence of educator and learner occurrences. American Induced Education, 25(2), 16-19. Persin, R. (2002). Web-assisted adjustify in physics: An repairment to arrest scheduling. American Induced Counsel 30(3), 61-69. Queen, J. A. (2000). Arrest scheduling revisited. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(3), 214-222. Rettig, M. D. (1999). The propertys of arrest scheduling. American Association of Train Administrator. Rikard, G. L. & Banville, D. (2005). Proud train visible counsel educator cognizances of arrest scheduling. The Proud Train Journal, 26-34. Santos, K. E. & Rettig, M. D. (1999). Going on the arrest involveing the wants of learners delay disabilities in proud trains delay arrest scheduling. Understanding Peculiar Children, 31(3), 54-59. Shortt, T. L. & Thayer, Y. V. (1999). Block scheduling can repair train sphere. Educational Leadership, 56(4), 76-81. Slate, J. R. & Jones, C. H. (2000). Students' perspectives on arrest scheduling: Reactions forthcoming a scanty criterion limit. The Proud Train Journal, 83(3), 55-65. Trenta, L. ;amp; Newman, I. (2002). Property of a proud train arrest scheduling program on learners: A disgusting-year longitudinal meditate of the propertys of arrest scheduling on learner consequence variables. American Induced Education,31(1), 54-64. Veal, W. R. ;amp; Flinders, D. J. (2001). How arrest scheduling rectify propertys adjustroom criterion. High Train Journal, 84(4), 21-31. Veldman, R. (2002). The best of twain registers. Principal Leadership (High Train Ed. ), 3(3), 36-38. Weller, D. R. ;amp; McLeskey, J. (2000). Arrest scheduling and inclusion in a proud train. Remedial and Subject-matter Education, 21(4), 209-218. Zepeda, S. J. ;amp; Mayers, and R. S. (2001). New kids on the arrest register: Foundation educators countenance challenges. The Proud Train Journal, 84(4), 1-11. Zepeda, S. J. ;amp; Mayers, R. S. (2006). An dissection of scrutiny on arrest scheduling. Revisal of Educational Research, 76(1), 137-170.