“Post-Pandemic” Schedules: Three Lessons from Research to Inform Your Schedule
In my work helping educators across the country approach scheduling strategically, there is one question I am asked more often than any other: “What is the best type of schedule?” The honest answer? They are asking the wrong question!
While there are many different types of schedules, there are common key components and practices associated with any effective schedule. In my work with hundreds of schools, I’ve seen many school and districts leaders overemphasize the schedule model and undervalue the different components of a schedule that truly make it effective. Certain schedule elements, such as ample time on core instruction and built-in extra-time for academic intervention, are important to include in any schedule—especially in “post-pandemic” schedules.
Research highlights three lessons school and district leaders should consider now as they plan schedules for next year and continue to address unfinished student learning:
No one type of schedule model or period length is best
Extra-time intervention for students who struggle is important in every schedule model
Teacher skill is more important than when instruction takes place during the school day
No One Type of Schedule Model or Period Length is Best
I recently partnered with a district that asked what type of schedule they should use for next year to help catch students up, and in response I showed the following data on the amount of time allotted per course across common schedule models over the course of a year:
There were two points I wanted to make clear to the team:
More time allotted per course does not necessary result in a better schedule. As the chart clearly shows, time allotted per course can vary significantly across schedule model types. The team asked whether the 6-period schedule is the “best” because it provides the most minutes per course over the school year. The short answer is a definitive no—there is not one universal “best” schedule model. Existing and extensive research has not identified a correlation between scheduling models and student achievement and in fact concludes that adequate teacher development (e.g. training sessions, coaching, group lesson planning, lesson study, etc.) focused on instructional strategies is the determining factor in whether or not students will perform better or worse under a new scheduling model—not the scheduling model itself.
Second, while the amount of time dedicated to a course is certainly a key variable to be aware of, the more important factor to consider is how well the time is used. For example, all else being equal, a highly effective teacher that teaches 50-minute periods in a 7-period schedule will do more for students over the course of the year than a less effective teacher that teaches 59-minute periods in a 6-period schedule.
Instead of looking for the perfect “off the shelf” schedule model, school and district leaders should instead focus on establishing a concrete vision for teaching and learning and a clear set of goals and priorities. Clarity of purpose and priorities can help the team evaluate whether they can achieve their stated goals by making adjustments to certain elements of the schedule instead of switching the entire schedule model. The school to which I showed the chart, for example, realized that instead of switching from an A/B block schedule (which they liked) to an 8-period schedule (which they thought would be beneficial because they could use the last period as an intervention “flex” block period), they could simply incorporate a set of content-specific intervention courses that ran for half of a block (known as “skinnies”) into the schedule. Doing so allowed them to achieve their priority of providing more academic intervention support to students without revamping their entire schedule.
Extra-time Intervention for Students Who Struggle is Important in Every Schedule Model
Even before the pandemic, research made clear that students with significant or persistent learning challenges need and benefit from multiple opportunities to learn new content and practice new skills; regular class time is simply not enough. With the widespread learning loss students have experienced because of the pandemic, extra-time intervention is more necessary than ever, and should be incorporated into the schedule in the form of intervention blocks or content-specific intervention courses, regardless of which type of schedule model you use.
At the elementary level, extra-time opportunities can take the form of either an intervention and enrichment block and/or an extended learning block for specific subjects like math or reading. At the secondary level, extra-time supports should include either content-specific intervention coursework, such as a math foundations course that is built into a student’s schedule in addition to grade-level core instruction, and/or the creation of a highly structured “flex” block period in which students can receive targeted academic support or access to an elective.
During extra-time intervention, a content-strong teacher should provide students with just-in-time academic supports based on identified needs that help address misconceptions or challenges with both current year and prior year content. Co-teaching or push-in support during core instruction is not a substitute for extra-time intervention from content-strong staff, as neither option provides students with actual extra-time to master content from prior years nor teachers with the time they need to address student skill gaps. Instruction provided during extra-time intervention should be direct instruction and targeted to a student’s specific skill needs and misunderstandings.
Teacher Skill is More Important than When Instruction Takes Place During the School Day
“We always make sure to schedule math in the morning,” said one elementary principal that we worked with. “The students are more awake and respond better to math instruction then,” they explained. The question of when the “optimal” time of day is to teach certain subjects is raised frequently in my work, especially at the elementary level and even more so now as schools are looking for every possible advantage to address the impacts of the pandemic.
Here is what research says: yes, not all times of the school day are created equal when it comes to student learning, and time-of-day of instruction can impact student achievement for some students, to an extent (notice all the qualifiers in that sentence!). But here is the more important point: compared to other factors such as the skill of the teacher, when a subject is taught during the school day is a much less important variable.
Research suggests that, among school-related factors, when it comes to student performance on reading and math tests, teachers are estimated to have two to three times the impact of any other school factor. In short, the effectiveness of teachers matters more to student achievement than any other aspect of schooling, scheduling included.
Takeaway
So, when you sit down to build your schedule for next year, worry less about finding the perfect model and when instruction happens during the day and more creating opportunities for extra-time intervention and ensuring your teachers are set up for success.
Letting these lessons help guide the scheduling process will help you design your best schedule that meets the needs of your students.