The Block: A catalyst for ongoing innovation

IF 2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
L. Konjarski, John Weldon, S. Ashley, Traci C. Freeman, Jai A. P. Shanata, Meghan Yamanishi, Erin Lotz, C. Gilde, A. Ganzel
{"title":"The Block: A catalyst for ongoing innovation","authors":"L. Konjarski, John Weldon, S. Ashley, Traci C. Freeman, Jai A. P. Shanata, Meghan Yamanishi, Erin Lotz, C. Gilde, A. Ganzel","doi":"10.53761/1.20.4.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper will contribute to our understanding of the Block, its pedagogical rationale and value, and explain why, apart from pandemic conditions, these might constitute a compelling alternative to traditional academic calendars. Current research highlights the need for further research on the nature of the Block, driven by an increased global focus on student outcomes and retention in Higher Education. This paper offers five case studies from institutions that have adopted a version of the Block at some time over the last 50 years. The authors seek to define the features that comprise block courses whereas the nature and functionality distinguish blocks from other intensive formats. A survey of the limited literature on this topic was based on theoretical underpinnings offered by one-course-at-a-time delivery, scholarship of teaching and learning on compressed education, and experiential learning. Using the research question, “Other than scheduling alternatives, what does the block offer HE institutions?”, this project uses research that is qualitative in nature drawing on a controlled comparison of case studies which enables a cross-institutional evaluation. The case studies explain why each institution adopted the Block, how these schedules work, and discusses the challenges and affordances of teaching in this intensive format. First findings of this cross-institutional exploration suggest that blocks are unique in their delivery, often experiential in nature, and effective in their outcomes. The various versions of the Block described within, provide ongoing transformative models of teaching philosophy, curriculum, student success, and more.","PeriodicalId":45764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.4.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This paper will contribute to our understanding of the Block, its pedagogical rationale and value, and explain why, apart from pandemic conditions, these might constitute a compelling alternative to traditional academic calendars. Current research highlights the need for further research on the nature of the Block, driven by an increased global focus on student outcomes and retention in Higher Education. This paper offers five case studies from institutions that have adopted a version of the Block at some time over the last 50 years. The authors seek to define the features that comprise block courses whereas the nature and functionality distinguish blocks from other intensive formats. A survey of the limited literature on this topic was based on theoretical underpinnings offered by one-course-at-a-time delivery, scholarship of teaching and learning on compressed education, and experiential learning. Using the research question, “Other than scheduling alternatives, what does the block offer HE institutions?”, this project uses research that is qualitative in nature drawing on a controlled comparison of case studies which enables a cross-institutional evaluation. The case studies explain why each institution adopted the Block, how these schedules work, and discusses the challenges and affordances of teaching in this intensive format. First findings of this cross-institutional exploration suggest that blocks are unique in their delivery, often experiential in nature, and effective in their outcomes. The various versions of the Block described within, provide ongoing transformative models of teaching philosophy, curriculum, student success, and more.
Block:持续创新的催化剂
本文将有助于我们理解Block,它的教学原理和价值,并解释为什么除了大流行的情况外,这些可能构成传统学术日历的一个令人信服的替代方案。目前的研究表明,由于全球越来越关注学生的成绩和高等教育的留校率,有必要进一步研究这一群体的性质。本文提供了五个案例研究,这些机构在过去50年的某个时间采用了Block的某个版本。作者试图定义组成块课程的特征,而块的性质和功能将块与其他密集格式区分开来。对这一主题的有限文献的调查是基于一次一课交付、压缩教育的教与学奖学金和体验式学习所提供的理论基础。使用研究问题,“除了安排替代方案,区块链还能为高等教育机构提供什么?”,该项目采用定性研究,通过对案例研究进行对照比较,从而进行跨机构评估。案例研究解释了为什么每个机构采用Block,这些时间表是如何工作的,并讨论了这种密集形式教学的挑战和优势。这一跨机构探索的初步发现表明,街区在提供方式上是独特的,通常是经验性的,在结果上是有效的。书中描述的Block的不同版本,提供了教学理念、课程、学生成功等方面的持续变革模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice
Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice aims to add significantly to the body of knowledge describing effective and innovative teaching and learning practice in higher education.The Journal is a forum for educational practitioners across a wide range of disciplines. Its purpose is to facilitate the communication of teaching and learning outcomes in a scholarly way, bridging the gap between journals covering purely academic research and articles and opinions published without peer review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信