A sunrise start had me arriving in Harrogate for 9am blurry eyed for ASCL’s Principles of Timetabling Day 1. Our hosts Jan Procter (AHT, Oakwood High School) and Roger Woollen (Timetable consultant and former DHT) we welcoming and approaching. In reflection of the day (and evening), they gave many of the delegates one-to-one support, advice and guidance – plus a good dose of reassurance too.
The day was structured, purposeful and hands on. Not at the PC, not with timetabling software, but with pencils, squared paper and magnetic boards. The outcome, the processes of timetabling were carefully explained and trialled.
For those of you, who according to the scheduling strategy, are about to publish your school’s timetables, its probably to late. For those of you who are thinking about timetabling in the future, day 1 certainly was worthwhile and delivered at a steady and supportive pace.
Key themes
As the timetabler, you are a school leader.
Keep it simple. If your timetable is not currently simply, simplify it.
Do the fixed items first. Then the most difficult items first. Your linear groups*, last.
Once you become a timetabler, you are constantly thinking about how to solve problems.
Matrix timetables
A teacher can not be teaching more one group, or in more than one place on a timetable. Another way of thinking about timetabling is that
Timetabling, the art of not splitting groups.
See complications / restrictions for what they are – a problem that needs a solution. What purpose does the complication serve?
A timetable is always going to be a compromise.
- Common issues – PT staff – split classes / contract negotiations. Staff maybe employed as 0.6 FTE, however, the Curriculum dictates where that 0.6 occurs. Possible solutions, job share with 0.6 as a minimum, 2 x 0.5, with 0.1 given as a liaisons. Be clear in your staff policy / handbook, what PT means
- Qualities of the skills set required at particular time are not available in the staff body
- The impact / removal of school specialisms
- Insufficient resource to maintain teacher-pupil consistency
- Flexibility of Curriculum (eg external providers / collaborative events) vs the delivery of the curriculum / timetable
- Development of one part of the Curriculum – that impacts on the delivery of another
- Staff that teach more than one subject
- Uneven year groups – leads to management of staffing / blocking
- National Curriculum changes, eg Maths gaining time and a move from 3 options / to 2 options
- The impact / removal of school specialisms
- Availability of specialist rooms / spaces eg IT suites / PE changing rooms / impact on lunchtimes
- Previous promises – committing to the promises / or the term of a qualifications
One big problem is often easier to solve as opposed to many small problems.
Before you starting
First task – understand your school timetable, unearth all the considerations, complications, decisions.
Time (one/two week, pupils (least / more able, SEN eg Impaired hearing unit), subjects, teachers, rooms, facilities (walk the school), resources, MONEY.
The average teacher cost is £40k. 20 periods per week. One period per week £2000.
How is surplus staffing being used?
The understanding gained from the constructing the timetable is invaluable.
It’s all grey. It the justification. Explore the implications. Plan and resolve. Communicate effectively. Avoid short-term fixes.
The answer to any new curriculum ideas is – I will take that ideas away with me and investigate the implications and impact.
The starting point
Cohorts, bands, blocks and spreads.
Keep your codes simple. Communicate your codes. This may be more important if you have timetables / timetabling between more than one centre. You may find codes will impact in other systems in the school (eg assessment / reports).
Most software requires teacher codes – nevertheless, all staff need to be identified as a teacher (HTLA). From my own experience, remember that those codes may work across multiple school areas eg assessment.
The subscript use of numbers, often represents the number of periods.
A groups of subjects/subscripts represents a cluster of periods where pupils are together.
How are you planning to divide the curriculum models?
There may even been different curriculum models for pupils within the year cohort.
Design technology – code of best practice – 20 pupils with one, competent, qualified teacher.
How do we deal with a shortage of resources? (No answer here I am afraid).
Models – which subjects do you partner?
Working the plan
Planning the Timetable starts in Term 2
Know your staff – deep understanding of the subjects you teach
Secure the teacher loads
Maximum loads 22/25 10% PPA on teaching load
Who makes the decision on who teachers which class? This should be a conversation between you and the Curriculum Leaders.
Feasibility Testing
- The importance of Linear Spread comes into play here. (Remember the more you mix up your teams, the wide the spread becomes.)
- Present your Curriculum Leaders with the ability to build their timetabling knowledge/understanding. Engage with your Curriculum Leaders, encourage them to model and test the linear spread of their suggestions
- Within larger subjects teams “consistent teams” and “consistent teams, within consistent teams” provides greater flexibility
- Inconsistent teams increases the linear spread and reduces the number of options available to the timtetabler.
- Options are the point of least flexibility as they draw staff to specific skills
- Distrbuted your lessons across the week. Do not forget that PM Wednesday is followed by Thursday AM
- Combing Chart – It is only staff that clash. Subjects can appear anywhere in the timetable
If you are planning to address a mismatch – only negotiate with a curriculum staff with ready made solutions. If you are trying to resolve timetable issues, do not it in isolation. Work with the curriculum staff.
Critical path analysis
- Review last years plan
- Curriculum Plan – Oct
- Staff deployment analysis – Oct
- Department analysis – Nov
- Options plan December – Dec
- PT staff agreements / External agencies fixed – Jan
- Schematic plans / dummy runs with combing charts – Feb/March
- Final staff – April
- Final planning, scheduling, consultation and legwork – May/June
- Checking – May
- Rooming – June
- Publication Dates – First Draft – July 1st
- Final Draft – July 12th
Jan and Roger where very knowledgeable, practical in their advice and considerate. The session has finished and we are still here discussing two week timetables. Going the extra mile.
What was really good to hear was their care and consideration for the candidates – a word from the wise and worldly, keep to a schedule and maintain the work life balance.
[qr_code_display]