Time and Organization Tools
to Improve Student Learning

     Principals work in one of the most complex and challenging environments imaginable. They are expected to provide a quality educational experience for each of their students in an era of high accountability, to balance the competing demands of parent and community groups with the needs of students, and to be knowledgeable experts about curriculum and instruction while at the same time managing the day-to-day functions of their school.

     Over the past decade much has been learned about the importance of providing a rich and engaging instructional program. We have also learned that the richest and most engaging programs are those that build and sustain nurturing and caring relationships between students and between students and school personnel.

     Small learning communities have been established in many high schools across the nation. While each model varies in size and emphasis, each is guided by a shared belief in the importance of creating personalized learning environments where teachers and students can establish and maintain long-term relationships and where students can thrive in a safe and nurturing educational environment (DuFour & Eaker, 1998).

     Small learning communities help create a more personalized school environment. But they fail to achieve their full potential, to improve teaching and learning, unless other school structures, like the schedule, are also modified.

     High schools have developed a variety of scheduling models. Each is designed to provide teachers, or teams of teachers, with a longer instructional block. The block creates the opportunity for a greater variety of instructional activities.

The Importance of a Shared Vision

     Principals who have changed their school’s structure learned several important lessons. The most important lesson was that organizational patterns must be guided by clearly articulated goals. Schedules must balance local needs such as curricular requirements, human and fiscal resources, and the characteristics of students. A quality schedule emerges only when teachers and administrators work together in its design and the design is guided by a shared vision.

     Without clear goals the school schedule is merely a plan for organizing teachers and students. When guided by goals, the schedule becomes a powerful tool to positively impact teaching and learning.

     The experience of a school in northern Ohio illustrates the importance of goals. For several years the faculty sought a way to “change the schedule.” They discussed options, visited other schools, and debated the merits of alternative designs. Never did they talk about what they wanted to accomplish with a new schedule.

     During the past year the staff returned to the question of a new schedule. This time, however, they spent several weeks discussing why they wanted to change, what they wanted to achieve, and why the change would benefit students. Two critical goals emerged from the discussion---longer instructional blocks for each class, and common planning time for teachers in each of their small houses. Guided by these clear goals, a faculty group quickly narrowed the options, and developed several alternatives from which the staff selected a “new” schedule.

     In one of the seminal books on school reform, Successful Schools for Young Adolescents, Joan Lipsitz (1984) described the programs of four successful secondary schools. Her analysis found that each school used a different organizational model. In each case, the school’s schedule evolved over time, modified slightly from year to year, but driven by the school’s philosophy.

    While the schedule varied, each school’s commitment to aligning their organizational model with the needs of students was a defining characteristic. The single most important factor in selecting a scheduling model is its potential to positively impact the learning of students.

    Scheduling Options

     One of the primary reasons given for changing a high school schedule is to provide flexibility for teachers. Recent research shows that when teachers, either individually or as a group, have longer instructional blocks, they modify their instructional practice. Most often this means more engaging, hands-on activities, opportunity for deeper discussion of key concepts, and sufficient time for students to make meaning of their learning. 

     Four primary ways to provide increased flexibility in the schedule have been identified (Williamson, 1998). They include the block schedule, the alternating schedule, the rotating schedule and the dropped schedule.

     A block schedule creates longer instructional periods, called blocks, while an alternating schedule varies the schedule from day to day or semester to semester. The most common rotating model literally rotates the placement of classes from day to day, so that classes meet at different times. Finally, a dropped schedule drops one class, or a class period, occasionally, to allow other activities. For example, in one school, two class periods each week were dropped so that student clubs could meet during the school day. The dropped classes varied from week to week so that a single class was not consistently impacted.

   While each of these alternatives has benefits, the model most frequently found in high schools is a version of the block schedule.

Benefits of a Block Schedule

     A block schedule, regardless of model, provides longer instructional time for each subject than a traditional fixed period schedule. When a high school in Michigan moved to a block model, they increased the time for each class from 45 minutes to 90 minutes daily. At the same time, they reduced the number of classes offered each day to 4. This increased time allowed teachers to vary the format of their classes. A science teacher described how, on days when there was a lab, students sat up the lab, conducted the lab and then discussed what they observed and learned. The ability to link the discussion to the lab activity was not possible in a shorter fixed period format.

   When teachers have long instructional blocks they have greater control over the selection of instructional strategies. They are no longer compelled to select approaches that fit within the fixed period. Controlling the time variable for instructional practice releases the energy and creativity in teachers that is too often restricted when their instruction must match the fixed class period. Longer instructional blocks also provide teachers with greater options for both small and large group instruction.

   In addition to the instructional benefits, schools that implement longer instructional blocks frequently see a positive impact on school climate. There are often fewer class changes, resulting in fewer disciplinary referrals. A longer instructional block, particularly when there are fewer classes each day, also reduces stress for both students and teachers.

   Longer instructional blocks, especially when implemented as part of a teaming or small house model for ninth or tenth graders, provide additional benefits. They build a sense of connection between teachers. When the schedule is composed of fixed class periods teachers rarely talk about varying instructional time. But when a team is given a block of time it encourages conversation about how to flex the time and how to build connections between content areas.

 Lessons from Other Principals

    Principals, who are most successful at changing their school’s schedule and achieving the benefits of longer instructional blocks, are principals who work closely with their teachers. They value the suggestions of their staff and respect the varied points of view among their faculty. From their work several important lessons emerged.

   Start with Clearly Identified Goals – Rarely is a school successful in changing instruction when it simply changes the schedule to change the schedule. A change in the structure of the schedule must be accompanied by a through discussion of the benefits that a staff wants to achieve by making a change.

   When clear goals are identified at the outset, it not only builds support for the new model but also narrows the alternatives that might be selected. The discussion provides an opportunity to build consensus for the initiative and allows faculty that are less eager for change, to participate in the discussion.

   A discussion of goals is best accomplished when guided by a series of questions. Examples of questions that other principals have used to guide a similar discussion include:

• Do some subjects need more time than others?
• Do all subjects need to meet each day?
• How do we allocate time based on the needs of our   students?
• Why do we want to change the schedule?
• What do we want to achieve with a modified   schedule?

     Challenge Long-Standing Norms – Schedules evolve over time, often allowing faculty to become comfortable with the stability provided by a known structure. One tool used by several principals is to challenge long-standing assumptions and norms about the schedule.

    In western New York a principal found that almost his entire staff believed that their current schedule was necessary because of the state’s requirements for minutes of instruction in specific content areas. Even when shown a copy of the state’s requirements many staff continued to insist that the principal was incorrect and had faulty information. His perseverance in continuing to confront these long held beliefs ultimately led to a discussion about creating longer instructional blocks.

    A principal from Colorado found it necessary to conduct a short anonymous survey of his staff about their current schedule and alternatives. The survey was needed because when the issue was raised at staff meetings a few vocal teachers who opposed change always said, “Nobody wants to change what we have. Our current schedule works for everybody.” Others who supported a change were reluctant to confront these teachers.

    The results of the survey demonstrated support for modifying the schedule. The majority of teachers at the school was open to alternatives and wanted to make a change. Confronted by these data, the conversation among the faculty was transformed.

    Value Collaboration – Change is most successful when it is broadly supported among the faculty. Imposing a schedule and insisting on a different model may create resistance. A recent study at school reform found that distributed leadership characterized the most successful examples. Teachers, as well as administrators, shared responsibility for charting the course of instructional improvement, for articulating the benefits of a modified program, and for selecting strategies appropriate to their school (Murphy & Datnow, 2003).

    A principal in a southeastern Michigan described the importance of working with his staff.

In the beginning most teachers thought scheduling was easy. Just move a few classes they thought. Boy were they surprised. They learned how complex the process is, how every thing in the schedule is connected to everything else. By allowing them to realize the complexity of adjusting the schedule and all the factors that must be considered, we ended up with broader support. Teachers talked with other teachers and explained why our new model would work, and why we selected this option. It wouldn’t have been the same if I had done it alone.

    Besides building support, participation in planning serves as an important form of staff development. When teachers are involved in investigating scheduling options, learning about their benefits, and recommending a model, they are engaged in professional development. Participation builds capacity for successful implementation of the adopted model by connecting teachers with examples where other teachers have successfully utilized the model.

     Assure a Balanced Review – When launching an initiative to change the schedule it is important to assure that both advantages and disadvantages of each option are discussed. Because there are no perfect schedules, every option has benefits and costs. Open, honest discussion of each alternative builds support. One California principal said, “If I tried to ram it through and not have a balanced discussion, it would haunt me in the end. So, let’s talk about it openly and make a decision based on a both the advantages and disadvantages.”

 Concluding Thoughts

     The flexibility of longer instructional blocks is an important tool for improving the quality of teaching and learning. Blocks allow greater variety of instruction, provide for more hands-on activities, improve school climate, and build a heightened sense of connectedness among teachers, students, and curricular areas.

     While the benefits of the block are clear, it is also clear that schools are most successful in moving to the model when the decision is based on a clear set of goals, a thorough examination of the alternatives, discussion of both advantages and disadvantages of each alternative, and a shared commitment to improving the educational experience of all students.

References

DuFour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning      communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student      achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.

Lipsitz, J. (1984). Successful schools for young adolescents.      New York: Transaction Books.

Murphy, J. & Datnow, A. (2003). Leadership lessons from      comprehensive school reforms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Williamson, R. (1998). Scheduling schools: Tools for improved      student achievement. Reston, VA: National Association of      Secondary School Principals.    

by Ronald D. Williamson
Eastern Michigan University

See our Feature Article Archives for past articles!