This series shares what central office leaders need to know to build on the strengths of the traditional middle school model to rethink how schools can better support a new generation of young adolescents. Across seven articles, we share actionable, research-backed, system-level strategies school and district leaders can implement to strengthen core instruction, broaden opportunities for students, and use time and resources more strategically to boost learning and engagement over the long term.
Middle schools have a lot to fit into the school day. In addition to four core subjects, middle school schedules often now include advisory, flex blocks, homeroom, social-emotional learning blocks, exploratory courses, and transition time between classes. The available minutes disappear quickly.
In many middle schools, core instruction ends up getting squeezed. Students may receive less time in math and literacy than they did in elementary school—and less than they will again in high school. Core classes of 40 or 45 minutes are common, even as the content students are expected to master has become increasingly rigorous and complex.
At the same time, more districts are adopting high-quality instructional materials that are carefully sequenced and designed around expectations for how much instructional time teachers and students need. Commonly used middle school ELA curricula, for example, are generally designed around approximately an hour of daily instruction. Secondary math lessons may require 45 minutes for the core lesson alone, with additional time needed for practice, unfinished learning, assessment, or enrichment.
When schools adopt a rigorous curriculum but don't provide enough time to teach it well, teachers face an uphill battle from the start.
The Challenge of Too Little Time
Short core periods create three related challenges:
Not enough time during each period: Short periods make it difficult for core teachers to teach content with sufficient depth and give students time to engage meaningfully with what they are learning. Teachers can find themselves racing through lessons, cutting activities, or leaving too little time for students to practice and master new concepts. The challenge is particularly acute when a school is using a curriculum designed for more instructional time than the schedule provides.
Not enough time annually: A few minutes lost each day add up quickly. A student who receives 60 minutes of math instruction daily in fifth grade and only 45 minutes in sixth grade receives 45 fewer hours of math instruction over a 180-day school year. The amount of math that student is expected to learn hasn't decreased; the time available to learn it has.
A frantic school day: Fitting more periods into the same school day also means more transitions, sometimes as many as nine or ten. Beyond consuming instructional minutes, frequent transitions can create a hectic day for students and teachers and make it harder for students to settle into and engage in learning.
Raising middle school achievement doesn’t begin with a trendy schedule or a fancy new block rotation—it starts with protecting instructional time. For school and district leaders, making core instruction the non-negotiable center is the bedrock of designing middle school to better support a new generation of students.
How Much Core Instruction is Enough?
While research does not identify a precise annual number of instructional hours to maximize achievement, it consistently finds that greater access to high-quality core instruction improves learning, while not enough time can stunt great instruction.
In our work with middle schools, we recommend that districts aim to provide at least 150 hours of instruction annually in each core subject, the equivalent of approximately 50 minutes per day across a 180-day school year.
We see 150 hours as a practical floor: a reasonable minimum below which schools should look carefully at whether students and teachers have enough time to cover grade-level content well. It also reflects what we have seen in many of the most successful middle schools with which we have worked.
Of course, 150 hours alone will not lead to stronger student achievement. The quality of the curriculum and instruction matters enormously. But even excellent teachers using excellent materials will struggle when the schedule consistently shortchanges the time needed to teach them.
Finding the Time
When we share this recommendation with central office leaders, their first reaction is often, “How can our schools add more minutes? We’re out of time in the day, and we don’t have resources to spare.”
The good news is, for many schools, reaching 150 hours does not require extending the school day or adding staff. Instead, it requires taking a close look at how the existing school day is organized.
Strategies to protect time on core successfully implemented by schools we have worked with include:
Limiting the total number of periods per day in the schedule
Reducing unnecessary transition and other non-instructional time
Running longer core periods than non-core periods
Examining whether flex, homeroom, or other blocks are using time effectively
Every period does not need to be the same length. A school may decide that core classes need 50 or 55 minutes while some exploratory courses can operate successfully in shorter periods. The right approach will depend on the length of the school day, the programs a school wants to offer, and the needs of its students.
What leaders in the most successful middle schools are all doing well is weighing these tradeoffs thoughtfully. Adding another period may create room for another course or program, but if the length of the school day stays the same, those minutes have to come from somewhere. Before adding or preserving a block in the schedule, leaders should understand what it means for the amount of core instruction students receive across the year.
Don’t Forget About Planning Time
Another impactful lever district and school leaders can adjust is how common planning time gets used.
Middle schools have traditionally invested heavily in interdisciplinary team planning. That time can serve an important purpose, giving teachers who share students an opportunity to discuss student needs, behavior, classroom routines, and school culture.
Far fewer middle schools prioritize daily, content-specific planning time for teachers to collaborate with their core content peers and discuss curriculum, lesson plans, and ways to maximize the impact of Tier 1 instruction. These opportunities are increasingly important as districts adopt common high-quality instructional materials, common assessments, and more rigorous standards-aligned instruction. Research also suggests that collaboration focused on curriculum, instruction, student work, and assessment is associated with stronger teaching and student achievement.
Both forms of collaboration have value. District and school leaders should look at how planning time is currently used and consider whether teachers have enough opportunity to collaborate with colleagues who teach the same content. Where available planning time is limited, embedding frequent, content-specific collaboration should be a priority because of its direct connection to the quality of core instruction.
Raise Student Achievement by Making Core Instruction Core to the Schedule
Middle schools have many important priorities competing for limited time. The goal is to make sure core instruction doesn’t get squeezed in the process. Protecting sufficient instructional time—and giving teachers opportunities to plan with colleagues who teach the same content—creates stronger conditions for teachers to deliver rigorous curriculum well and for students to master what they are expected to learn.
Other posts in this series:
PART I - Why It’s Time to Rethink the Traditional Middle School Model
PART III - Shift #2: Make High-Quality Intervention a Non-Negotiable Part of the School Day
PART IV - Shift #3: Deepen Student Engagement Through Voice, Choice, and Meaningful Challenge
PART V - Shift #4: Boost Student Emotional Well-Being by Limiting Unstructured Time and Increasing Staff-Student Connections
PART VI - Shift #5: Operate Middle Schools More Cost-Effectively by Rethinking Teaming and Staffing
PART VII - Tools and Next Steps for Designing Middle Schools for a New Generation
About the Author
David James is a former teacher and middle school administrator who serves as an advisor to school and district leaders. He and his team have helped more than 100 middle schools across the nation better serve a new generation of students and educators. He is co-author of the book, It's Time for Strategic Scheduling: How to Design Smarter K-12 Schedules That Are Great for Students, Staff, and the Budget. He also leads the Secondary Scheduling Academy, an accelerated hands-on training program for school and district leadership teams to enhance capacity for strategic scheduling, build buy-in for changes, and design effective, best practice-aligned schedules that are better for students, teachers, and the budget.