Schools are not the only organizations with a host of constituents demanding varied needs be met, but they offer a great case study. I have broken these steps into two distinct parts: Theoretical and Building. Both are essential to success over 180 days.
t is easy to skip steps, especially the theoretical. This groundwork is essential for the building portion to work. Otherwise, you’ve got a “Blind Men and the Elephant” scenario. Check out Part One here.
Part Two: Building: The mistake here is to see this as blocks needing to be stacked. It’s true, in a sense, but when that mental shift happens the schedule produced becomes a series of pounding square pegs into round holes; lots of edges feel the rub. At the same time, the water metaphor no longer works because a rigid line is needed in order to truly understand what works and what only seems to work (but, in the details, things are lost).
5. Schedule Everything: The big things become clear, and often have minor compromises; nothing is harder to roll with than additional surprises. Often, these surprises are more disruptive than the larger issues. For example, the one grade level at our school had 4.5 hours a day with students, or 22.5 hours in a week. Band and Chorus was scheduled for three 40 minute blocks, or 2 hours, for 2/3 of our students (the remaining 1/3 were left for the teachers to plan for). That left 20.5 hours of instruction for all kids. Seems reasonable, except instrument lessons pull an additional 4 hours, and those are small clumps of kids that come-and-go at odd, rotating times–very disruptive. When you craft the schedule, and put in 6 plus hours of music, it paints a very different picture.
But the time culprits are many: Guidance, mentors, Tier II, Special Ed….. Each needs to pencil in a projected time. The guidance counselor, for example, knows a bunch of his caseload. If a special 3-4th grade block was identified based on expected need and time outside of non-negotiable times, that service would have a solid place to start and flexibility moving into September.
6. Populate the Schedule: Without a dry run, the schedule is an estimate. That leads to grey areas, but grey areas add up to black over the course of the process. While you might not have placement, you do know how many kids get pulled for X, Y and Z and can make reasonable assumptions about where they go. For several years, one grade level had two sections of World Language–one French and one Spanish. Then, the population bumped up. It was a surprise that there needed to be three WL classes, not two as there had been. That meant one Spanish and two French, which drove the UA groups, that had been driven by the homerooms–see, dominoes. With each grade picturing their day–if not walking through it–many of the unexpected bits come into play. Account for every kid and location.
7. Dry Run the Schedule: Even if each grade level imagines the day instead of physically walking through it, that’s something. Did you take into account transition time? The time it takes to put on snowsuits and take them off is substantial, especially if UA proceeds and follows recess. For example, one grade’s schedule has kids go from UA to recess, which works well, but when they need their Chromebooks for UA after recess they go to the room, undress, get Chromebooks and walk to UA–five to ten minutes lost in a 40 minutes class. Run the schedule in winter and warmer months, or whatever demands change in your locale.
8. All Teachers Sign Off: Every year, groups are asked to look and report back on if it works. Every year, most people do. But some don’t. A few yeas ago, no lunch was scheduled for UA in the frenzy of crafting something that works; adjusting for it made the schedule a kludge, but since it was June everyone just went with it. These things were not caught until after the schedule was set. Everyone was mad at the group all year for the compromises. Pet Peeve: There is often a member of the staff that claims to be helpless, and the nurturing environment of a school bends over backwards to accommodate, even as that person is rigid in their not being proactive or bending in retrospect. Ugh. At least with a signature, there is no buck-passing and everyone is forced to take some ownership of their part in the process.
9. First Schedule Wins (Bad): We like to believe the process is open and cooperative, but in reality the first schedule that works for 3/4 of the school rules. Even with compelling arguments against it, little more than tweaks occur. For that reason, the first few rules above are essential. They need to be concrete as possible, and drive planning.
One way to counter this is to present multiple, diverse schedules. Presented with three very different ways of doing something, people will see the possibilities, even when the schedule just doesn’t work. By then going and adapting the best of several, you not only get more good ideas, but everyone sees how what was chosen is not the first presented, but the best of otherwise flawed plans. It is otherwise easy to find fault without being tasked with a solution.
Every group needs to feel empowered. There are a few ways to do this. For example, allow each group to have the power to veto at each step, but once a step is adopted they lose that power. So, if 90 minutes of literacy is a non-negotiable and adopted, the schedule bends to that even if means other desires are compromised when the final schedule comes out. Each group should also have the power to create an alternative schedule. Whatever, but something needs to happen to counter the “First Schedule Wins” problem.