Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:00:19.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Block or traditional? An analysis of student choice of teaching format

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Suzan Burton
Affiliation:
Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW, Australia
Paul L Nesbit
Affiliation:
Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW, Australia

Abstract

Block (or intensive) teaching is used by many management schools, but the factors that drive students to choose (or avoid) block subjects are not well understood. This paper reviews the research findings on intensive teaching and analyses the factors which predict student choice between different teaching formats, based on an analysis of qualitative and quantitative survey data. If studying one subject at a time, a majority of students appear to prefer a less intensive format. However the results show that three factors influence students' likelihood to choose the block format: their experience with the format, their perception of their ability in a particular subject and their concurrent subject load. There are also subject specific differences in student preferences. Implications for block scheduling and for actions to address perceived disadvantages of the block method are addressed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (2004) Laying the Foundations: the AVCC submission to the Review of the Indexation of University Funding http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/documents/publications/policy/submissions/IndexationSubmission.pdf. Accessed 19 Dec 07.Google Scholar
Bandura, A (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Caskey, SR (1994) Learning outcomes in intensive courses. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 42: 2327.Google Scholar
Clark, E and Clark, P (2000) Taking the Educational Show on the Road: The promises and pitfalls of intensive teaching in off-shore post graduate coursework programs. International Education 4(1).Google Scholar
Daniel, EL (2000) A review of time-shortened courses across disciplines. College Student Journal, 34: 298308.Google Scholar
Davies, WM (2006) Intensive teaching formats: A review, Issues in Educational Research, 16: 120..Google Scholar
Finger, G and Penney, A (2001) Investigating Modes of Subject Delivery in Teacher Education: A review of modes of delivery at the School of Education and Professional Studies Gold Coast Campus Griffith University. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Fremantle, Western Australia. [verified 17 July 2007] http://www.aare.edu.au/01pap/fin01159.htmGoogle Scholar
Gose, B (1995) One-course-at-a-time ‘block plan’ re-examined by college that adopted it 25 years ago. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 41: A28.Google Scholar
Grant, DB (2001) Using block courses for teaching logistics. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 31: 574584.Google Scholar
Henebry, K (1997) The impact of class schedule on student performance in a financial management course. Journal of Education for Business, 73: 114120.Google Scholar
Jonas, PM, Weimer, D and Herzer, K (2001) Comparison of traditional and nontraditional (adult education) undergraduate business programs. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28: 161168.Google Scholar
Kasworm, Carol (2001), Adult Learner Experiences of an Accelerated Degree Program. Paper presented at the Adult Education Research Conference, Michigan State University. Available at http://eric.ed.gov/ Accessed 19 Dec 07.Google Scholar
Kolbe, RH and Burnett, MS (1991) Content-analysis research: an examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research, 18: 243250.Google Scholar
Krippendorff, K (1980) Content Analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Petrowsky, MC (1996) The Two Week Summer Macroeconomics Course: success or failure?: Glendale Community Coll (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED396779).Google Scholar
Rizvi, F (2004) Offshore Australian Higher Education http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/News37/text004.htm. Accessed 19 Dec 07Google Scholar
Scott, P and Conrad, C (1991) A Critique of Intensive Courses and An Agenda for Research, Madison WI, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Scott, PA (1994) A Comparative Study of Students' learning Experiences in Intensive and Semester-Length Courses and of the Attributes of High-Quality Intensive and Semester Course Learning Experiences. Paper presented at the Meeting of North American Association of Summer Sessions. Eric Document Reproduction Service no. ED 370 498.Google Scholar
Smith, JP (1988) Effects of Intensive College Sources on Student Cognitive Achievement Academic Standards, Student Attitudes and Faculty Attitudes. University of Southern California, Dissertation Abstracts International, 49, 746.Google Scholar
Van Scyoc, LJ and Gleason, J (1993) Traditional or intensive course lengths? A comparison of outcomes in economics learning. Journal of Economic Education 24: 1522.Google Scholar
Wayland, JP, Chandler, EW and Wayland, RF (2000) Summer Scheduling on a Traditional Campus: Expectations, reality and implications. http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/swma/2000/48.pdfGoogle Scholar