Class Schedule and Learning Achievement Through Constructivist Physical Education

Background/Purpose: Time and socio-economic status (SES) are among the greatest constraints to students' learning. With instructional time for core subjects increased, PE class time is shortened, and its schedule becomes more fragmented. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence generated by class schedule and schools’ socio-economic status on students' learning in an externally funded curriculum. Physical educators received 18 hrs of training to teach the curriculum. We hypothesized that schools with longer and more frequent schedules and higher SES would achieve better learning results than schools representing lower SES with classes taught less frequently and in shorter periods.

Method: The basic design of this study is multi-level. 8th grade students (n= 1551) in 11 randomly selected schools completed a carefully sequenced unit of 20 physically active lessons on cardiorespiratory health and standardized pre- and post-knowledge tests with nine items. Students’ learning achievement was calculated as the gain score. The schedule of their PE class was measured by the length and frequency. The schools’ SES was assessed through the percentage of student participation in free-and-reduced-meal (FARM) program.

Analysis/Results: Due to the hierarchical data structure of this study, we used Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) for analysis. First, an ANOVA with random effects model was used to examine the variability of means of students' learning achievement across schools. Second, the length and frequency of classes were used as predictors of schools' learning achievement through a means-as-outcomes model. We also examined the relationship between the percentages of students enrolled in the FARM program and the average learning achievement.

Results show that the average learning achievement differed across schools. The grand mean of learning achievement is 1.32 (SD= .18), with 7% learning achievement associated with differences between schools. However, there was no statistically significant relationship between schools’ PE schedule, the frequency (y01=0.18, t = 0.25, p>0.05) and length of PE classes (y02= -.04, t = - 1.0 , p>0.05), and mean learning achievement. Additionally, no relationship was found between students’ learning achievement and the percentage of students in the FARM program (y01=0.94, t=0.860, p>0.05).

Conclusions: Within the currently available PE time, students learned knowledge in the new curriculum regardless of their class schedule and social economic status of schools. We speculate that the new curriculum model based on carefully structured constructivist, physically active lessons was successful in moderating the effects of instructional time and frequency. Future research needs to investigate factors that contribute to learning differences across schools.