Archived: The Educational System in the United States: Case Study Findings

Table 3—Weekly teaching schedule of a secondary science teacher
Period
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
1
earth science
earth science
earth science
earth science
earth science
2
earth science
(prep time)
earth science
(prep time)
(prep time)
3
geology
geology
geology
geology
geology
4
geology
(prep time)
geology
(prep time)
(prep time)
5
lunch
lunch
lunch
lunch
lunch
6
geology
geology
geology
geology
geology
7
geology
study hall
geology
study hall
study hall
8
geology
geology
geology
geology
geology
9
geology
(prep time)
geology
(prep time)
(prep time)
NOTE: 
Two successive periods are lab sessions. This teacher had additional preparation time allotted because he was re-
sponsible for lab work in two subjects.

---

188
Uses of Time Outside the Classroom
Supervisory duties. 
In some cases, teachers performed supervisory duties as part
of their teaching load; in other cases, it was for additional pay; in still other cases,
teachers were relieved of such responsibilities. Some teachers described super-
visory duties that were assigned when there was a reduced academic load.
One middle school science and math teacher explained that because she had a
double period off—‘‘no elective this term’’—she had cafeteria duty all week. An
elementary teacher said that the previous year teachers could volunteer for lunch
duty for extra pay. However, this year parent ‘‘aides’’ had been hired to do this
work. Some teachers described ‘‘bus duty.’’ A fourth-grade teacher said that she
had bus duty four times a year. She felt this was ‘‘no big deal.’’ She met the chil-
dren at the bus about 8:00 a.m. and escorted them to the gym where they played
until 8:15. Then they were free to go to their classrooms. A middle school teacher
in a high-income district described ‘‘contract lunch duty’’ as ‘‘a stipend for people
who need the extra income.’’ She said she saw value in it when she did have
it—‘‘a no-brainer’’—but also ‘‘value in being in your room at that time, because
our kids are so overscheduled outside of school that lots of the make-up time is
during lunch.’’ Other teachers had ‘‘hall duty,’’ and, in one urban high school vis-
ited, teachers on hall duty were expected to ‘‘stand guard’’ for the period. They
were equipped with walkie-talkies, so that they could request help.
Interaction with other teachers. 
Both the isolation of the work and the number
of hours that U.S. teachers are scheduled to teach work against the informal
collegiality and mentoring that may exist among teachers in other countries. As
noted in America’s Teachers (USDE 1993a, p. 128):
The isolation of classroom work has been commented upon by a number of
researchers who study teachers and their work. Teachers have less contact
with their peers than do many other professionals. In fact, some classroom
teachers rarely communicate with other adults during the workday, and even
fewer teachers frequently consult with peers or supervisors concerning profes-
sional challenges.
The average teacher who teaches in a department is responsible for five periods
of instruction per day, allowing little time or opportunity for professional inter-
action. As Louis (1992, p. 150) concluded from results of a study of teachers’
work, ‘‘What mattered most to teachers was a resource—
time
—that was, either
by policy or by practice, within the discretion of the school. Time was important
because it was the backbone for staff development and collaborative work ef-
forts.’’ In a study of teachers’ work, Johnson noted that collegial interactions were
pushed to the margins of the workday, such as before and after school and while

---

189
supervising recess, leading to superficial exchanges. ‘‘Virtually never did schools
reserve adequate time to encourage teachers’ continuing collaboration or convey
the organizational message that time spent with colleagues was legitimate and
would likely improve teaching and schooling’’ (Johnson 1990, p. 149).
Interviews with Case Study teachers confirmed these research reports. Teachers
generally reported that they had little time to interact with other teachers during
the school day. Although there was a teachers’ lounge in each of the schools vis-
ited, none was crowded on the days visited. The ambiance of these spaces varied
considerably across schools. In Midtown Elementary, the lounge was used more
as a workroom/lunchroom than a lounge. It was filled with long tables and metal
chairs, a soda machine, cutting board, and laminating machine. Teachers used the
small adjoining kitchen to make individual cups of coffee. In Rockefeller Elemen-
tary, the lounge had plants in the window and flowering plants on the tables. A
pot of coffee was made, and fresh bread was set out on a table. The room con-
tained comfortable couches and chairs and a profusion of magazines. A telephone
and computer were also available, as was a photocopy machine in an adjoining
room. In both these schools, however, only a fraction of the teaching staff was
observed in the rooms briefly before school and during lunchtime.
In general, there was little time for the teachers in all of the schools to interact
with other adults for extended periods of time during the school day. Only the
middle school teachers, who met in teams, had scheduled time to plan and confer
with others on a regular basis. The middle schools generally espoused a ‘‘team’’
approach, and teachers at each were making efforts to meet on a somewhat more
regular basis. Even so, there was variability across sites. A teacher at East Middle
School stated that she met with her team ‘‘20 minutes at lunch’’ and for occa-
sional planning. By contrast, teachers at King Junior High in Metro City met every-
day. They explained that their eighth-grade team was new; two teachers had
taught seventh-graders the previous year, and two were new to the district. Thus,
they had met once a week throughout the summer ‘‘to get organized.’’ The team
is composed of five ‘‘subject matter’’ teachers (math, science, language arts, ‘‘the-
matic studies’’ or reading, and social studies) and a special education teacher.
They all teach the same 150 students.
At this school the schedule was organized to maximize teacher collaboration. As
the team leader explained, ‘‘We use the time; it doesn’t use us.’’ For example,
a teacher might teach three classes of 40 minutes each in the morning, have per-
sonal planning time and lunch, then teach two classes, have ‘‘team time,’’ and a
homeroom period for discussions and announcement (10 minutes). Since both the
seventh- and eighth-grade science teachers were new, there was enough flexibility
in the schedule for them to work together as well, and they reported using that
time to organize supplies and help each other with lessons. Teams could also

---

190
‘‘block the schedule’’ so that they could have all students together for special
events such as ‘‘mousetrap races,’’ a math/science project, a play, or film.
Many other teachers said they saw other teachers ‘‘in passing’’ or ‘‘in the hall.’’
When they did see others, they reported talking about things unrelated to school.
For example, one secondary school teacher commented that he and other teach-
ers had a ‘‘no shop’’ rule at lunch-meaning that it was taboo to talk about
school—related issues. Virtually all teachers said that they were expected to at-
tend regularly scheduled departmental or all-school meetings. A few teachers also
reported that teachers in their building had organized routine social time. For
example, teachers in two of the elementary schools tried to go out for lunch on
Fridays, but this was described as a mad dash to a local fast-food restaurant, rather
than a relaxing time away. A middle school teacher told of ‘‘Fat Friday’’ at her
school. Once a month people took turns bringing in doughnuts, which encour-
aged teachers to congregate for brief periods of time. About one-third of the
teachers interviewed reported seeing other teachers socially outside of school.