Visit the National Academies Press online and register for

Educating the Student Body
TAbLE 5-2 Changes in Time Allocation in Elementary Schools Since 
2001-2002 
Subject
Percentage 
of All 
Districts That 
Increased 
Time
Percentage 
of All 
Districts That 
Decreased 
Time
Average 
Increase
(minutes/week)
Average 
Decrease 
(minutes/week)
English language arts
58
141
Mathematics
45
89
Social studies
36
76
Science
28
75
Art and music
16
57
Recess
20
50
Physical education
9
40
Lunch
5
SOURCE: Center on Education Policy, 2007, District Survey, item 19 (revised Tables IT-2A, 
IT-16, and IT-17). 
or academic outcomes (CDC, 2010). On the contrary, positive academic-
related outcomes (e.g., improved on-task classroom behavior, cognitive 
development, academic performance) have been associated with physical 
education and physical activity (see Chapter 4). 
The Center on Education Policy (2007) conducted an analysis of 2006-
2007 survey data from 349 school districts on the amount of time devoted 
to specific subjects to determine the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act. 
Shifts in instructional time toward English language arts and mathematics 
and away from other subjects were relatively large in a majority of school 
districts that made these types of changes. Sixty-two percent of districts 
reported increasing time in elementary schools in English language arts and/
or mathematics since 2001-2002. A higher proportion of urban districts 
(76 percent) than rural districts (54 percent) reported such increases.
Districts that increased instructional time for English language arts and/
or mathematics did so by 43 percent on average. Districts that also reduced 
instructional time in other subjects reported total reductions of 32 percent, 
on average. Eight of 10 districts that reported increasing time for English 
language arts did so by at least 75 minutes per week, and more than half 
(54 percent) did so by 150 minutes or more per week. Among districts that 
reported adding time for mathematics, 63 percent added at least 75 minutes 
per week, and 19 percent added 150 minutes or more per week.
Most districts that increased time for English language arts or math-
ematics also reported substantial cuts in time for other subjects or periods, 
including social studies, science, art and music, physical education, recess, 

---

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Educating the Student Body: Taking Physical Activity and Physical Education to School
Approaches to Physical Education in Schools
 
239
and lunch. Among the districts that reported both increasing time for English 
language arts or mathematics and reducing time in other subjects, 72 percent 
indicated that they reduced the time for one or more of these other subjects 
by a total of at least 75 minutes per week. For example, more than half 
(53 percent) of these districts cut instructional time by at least 75 minutes 
per week in social studies, and the same percentage (53 percent) cut time by 
at least 75 minutes per week in science (Center on Education Policy, 2007).
Districts that reported an increase in instructional time for elementary 
school English language arts spent an average of 378 minutes per week on 
this subject before No Child Left Behind was enacted. After the act became
law, they spent 520 minutes per week. The average increase for English 
language arts was 141 minutes per week, or a 47 percent increase over the 
level prior to the act (Center on Education Policy, 2007; see district survey 
items 18 and 19 in Table IT-18A). Table 5-3 shows the specific amounts of 
time cut from various subjects in districts that reported decreases.
Districts with at least one school identified as “in need of improve-
ment” under the act were far more likely than districts not in need of 
improvement to decrease time in certain subjects so as to devote more 
time to English language arts and mathematics (78 versus 57 percent). 
For example, 51 percent of districts with a school in need of improve-
ment reported decreased time in social studies, compared with 31 percent 
of districts with no school in need of improvement (Center on Education 
Policy, 2007).