Theme Time: 4 Places To Dig Deep To Find More Time For Teach

Theme Time4 Places To Dig Deepto Find More Time For Teacher Collabor

The idea of teachers working together to improve teaching and learning seems so sensible that few would argue against it. However, many schools struggle to provide regular and sufficient opportunities for teacher collaboration. Some limitations stem from union contracts and resource constraints, but fundamentally, schools often find it difficult to innovate with the use of existing resources such as time and personnel. Principals who can re-envision schedules—by adjusting time slots or fluid class sizes—can reallocate resources to support new models of professional learning.

At Garfield Elementary School in Livonia, Michigan, teachers have successfully organized themselves into teams and dedicated time for collaborative work over the past eight years. This practice is rooted in research showing that collaboration enhances student achievement and professional growth (Darling-Hammond, 1998; Little, 1999). A key element is utilizing the school day for collaboration, allowing teachers to observe peer teaching, analyze assessments, and co-plan lessons while students are present, thus integrating practice-based learning directly into the workday.

For effective collaboration, teachers at Garfield determined that 60 to 90 minutes of uninterrupted time works well—long enough to accomplish substantive tasks yet manageable in terms of attention span. This time must be in addition to their regular preparation periods. As William Green, the principal, explains, collaboration is not simply planning; it involves engaging in targeted, consistent activities with colleagues, often with students involved in ongoing activities such as peer observations or modeling. These collaborative sessions are fundamental to professional learning communities (DuFour & Eaker, 1998), which emphasize collective effort over isolated work, ultimately leading to improved instruction and student outcomes (Hawley & Miles, 1997).

Despite the benefits, scheduling remains a challenge. Teachers' time can be fragmented by class transitions, administrative tasks, and resource limitations. To overcome this, schools can adopt creative scheduling strategies—such as adjusting class timings, leveraging special teachers’ schedules, and reorganizing student groupings. For example, combining multiple classes into larger groups for art or physical education can free up teacher time for collaboration without exceeding class size limits. Reconfiguring student groups across subjects, like pairing classes for music or P.E., enables teams to spend more quality time together while maintaining requirements for instructional time.

Financial resources, like Title I funds, can support these initiatives by hiring part-time teachers or auxiliary staff. Garfield used Title I funds to hire additional literacy support teachers, allowing regular classroom teachers to access collaborative planning time and targeted support for students. Reallocating personnel and resources, therefore, is crucial to establishing a sustainable collaborative culture. Additionally, the use of surplus special periods or combining classes for special subjects can further maximize teacher collaboration time.

In terms of student grouping, rethinking how students are managed can also create more instructional time. For example, reducing the number of smaller classes into fewer larger groups for specialized subjects can free up teachers to collaborate more effectively. Such arrangements may require change resistance from teacher or specialist staff but are justified by the potential for enhanced teaching quality across the school.

Ultimately, schools need to think outside traditional scheduling constraints. Reallocating and creatively organizing staff, resources, and student groupings can generate the necessary time for teachers to collaborate meaningfully. The success of these strategies depends heavily on the deliberate and strategic use of the allocated time—maximizing its impact on instructional practices and student learning outcomes.

References

• Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teacher learning that supports student learning. Educational Leadership, 55(5), 6-11.
• DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
• Hawley, K., & Miles, K. (1997). Rethinking the allocation of teaching resources: Some lessons from high-performing schools. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
• Little, J. W. (1999). Organizing schools for teacher learning. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as a learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• National Staff Development Council. (2001). Standards for staff development. Oxford, OH: Author.
• Choy, S., Chen, X., & Bugarin, R. (2006). Teacher professional development in the United States: Findings from a national survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
• Ball, D., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as a learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Sykes, G. (2010). Rethinking the organization of schools to increase teacher collaboration. American Educational Research Journal, 47(2), 367–399.
• Geier, R., et al. (2008). Studying the impact of collaborative professional development on teacher practices and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(3), 264–278.
• Vangrieken, K., et al. (2017). Teacher communities as a framework for professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 120–130.