A causal-comparative model for the examination of the relationship of middle school level instructional scheduling and social studies achievement

Social studies at the middle-level represented a marginalized discipline in South Carolina. Although it was integrated into the state's accountability testing agenda and weighted equally with English, math, and science content in state school and district report card rating calculations, differences exist in the amount of time allocated for social studies content instruction compared to other tested subjects. This study employed a causal-comparative research model (i.e., MANOVA; ANCOVA) to explore the relationship between time allocation and scheduling for social studies and student achievement in middle-level social studies. Specifically, seventh-grade Palmetto Assessment of State Standards (PASS) data were collected from 117 schools in 58 districts over the 2008-2009 academic year. The study identified and documented evidence of the impact of time allocation and scheduling of social studies. Subgroup (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, and subsidized meal status) performance aggregate data as well as school principal data were analyzed and revealed relationships among scheduling configurations and school commitment to middle-level social studies instruction in South Carolina public schools. Findings revealed no statistically significant relationships between time allocation and schedule configuration and student achievement but found that principals' perceptions about and commitment to social studies instruction were associated with the time and scheduling configurations they chose to implement. The amount of time allocated to learn and how it is scheduled may have a role in explaining variation in student performance among and within different time and scheduling models inviting a reexamination of middle-level practices with regard to how instructional time is allocated and scheduled for social studies instruction in high-stakes tested states.