As leaders, we inherit much from our predecessors. One of the most basic yet influential structures in a school day is the organization of time. For educators laboring against achievement gaps, it's a day-to-day struggle to soak up every spare minute in a schedule for student learning. But not everything ingrained in the daily routine is time well spent, and unexamined school schedules can mask pernicious leaks in your finite reservoir of instructional time.
Sinking Performance
In the spring of 2010, I was selected as principal of South Tama Middle School, a "persistently lowest-achieving school" according to Iowa's implementation of No Child Left Behind. As a new principal, I reviewed many of the policies and procedures that carried over from former leadership. One of these was a schedule that required every student at South Tama Middle to end every day with a mandatory study hall period. As I met with staff, I inquired about the purpose of this time. The response was frequently described as time for homework and an opportunity for students to visit teachers to ask for homework assistance. To my surprise, teachers commonly shared with me they dreaded this part of the school day—it was often unstructured and many students didn't need the time for homework. As a rookie principal, I knew I shouldn't rock the boat right away. However, it was clear that this part of the day would eventually need to be used for something else: student interventions. As a "persistently lowest-achieving school," our students needed additional instruction time for closing the learning gap, period.
As staff and I began to learn together over the next months, we had many conversations about how we could better use this time to close the achievement gap. I eventually asked the question, "Can we use this time to provide instruction on prerequisite skills that some students are missing?" Although some teachers saw value in extra time for homework, the majority of them approved of transforming study hall into time for interventions. Our core leadership team bought in to this approach, so we decided to make the move. I allayed the few voices of dissent with direct conversations about the benefits of shifting valuable time to address student needs.
Plugging the Gaps
We used student data to determine how to divide students based on their needs. We used a universal screener assessment for both math and reading (NWEA's MAP assessments), and targeted students who didn't meet proficiency requirements for intervention. We then discussed what types of interventions were needed. We chose among curricula already available in the district and purchased a bit more. Our budget was tight, so we made do with what we had. For example, in reading, students who struggled with comprehension were taught with Comprehension Strategies Instruction (CSI). Students who needed help developing fluency worked with Six Minute Solution curricula. And for students who struggled with phonics or multi-syllabic words, we used Corrective Reading. Over the next couple of years, we updated and refined our interventions and continue to do so today.
For students who weren't struggling, we sought learning extensions that drew on faculty or local expertise and also sparked student interest. As a faculty, we collaboratively plan what these extensions might be, and over the year, students rotate between a couple choices. For example, students learned about nutrition—including how to buy and prepare healthy snacks—and financial literacy in a family and consumer science course. One of our science teachers taught a unit on conservation, featuring resources and expertise from engineers at our local electrical company. Our teacher working in our talented and gifted program used this time to work with his students on extending learning and providing new learning opportunities in physics, math, reading, and problem-solving activities. Everyone stepped up. We even had a social studies teacher who volunteered to take an intervention group for students who struggled with vocabulary.
Students stayed in their intervention groups until they were able to meet grade-level expectations on the universal screener. We gave the test at mid-year and again at the end of the year. Students who met proficiency requirements switched between extension units or courses on a quarterly basis.
Staying Thirsty
Examining our schedule led our school to question the value of daily study hall. For many students, it wasn't much more than a social hour. Reclaiming this time has allowed my teachers to refine their instruction and use research-based intervention curriculum to support students. There have been challenges along this journey. For example, we've had to refine our approach to reading interventions, from a general focus on basic comprehension strategies, to multiple, research-based supports, including fluency and vocabulary. Staff have taken leadership in this change and really made this time their own, and because of that, we have experienced some wonderful victories. In January 2014, we were removed from the list of persistently lowest-achieving schools. As we soak up our success and the hard work it took to get there, we remain thirsty for more ways to support students. Every minute counts. Wring out whatever nonessential time you have and repurpose it to help students.