No one would expect a new teacher to walk into a classroom and instinctively know how to manage student behavior or design effective assessments. We are taught those skills because everyone recognizes they’re part of becoming an effective educator.
But when it comes to one of the most important parts of a teacher’s workday—their planning period—we largely expect teachers to manage on their own. The problem is, almost no one ever teaches them how.
When school leaders consider how planning periods affect teacher retention, the policy solution is almost always the same: Give teachers more time.
I agree that schools have a responsibility to protect teachers’ planning time. But more time by itself won’t solve the problem of teacher burnout and turnover.
Today’s planning periods are not just a time to design tomorrow’s lesson. Since the increase of teacher-accountability standards in the 1990s, planning periods have come to include responding to parent emails, analyzing student data, preparing interventions, completing paperwork, attending meetings, and solving the countless problems that surface throughout the day.
Early in my career, like many new teachers, I entered my planning periods with a lot of work but no real structure for completing it. I spent the time putting out fires and trying to meet the pressure of deadlines. I often reached the end of the period with the most important work still waiting, which meant it followed me home. No one had taught me to think of my planning period as time that could be protected and intentionally designed.
It was burnout that drove me to look for solutions that lived within my day. Once I began giving that time a clear purpose and repeatable structure, I completed more work during the school day and carried less of it home.
I’ve seen my incredibly capable colleagues struggle with the same challenge. For years, I assumed that was a time-management problem, but now, I think I’ve been diagnosing the wrong problem.
Hoping to understand more about how planning periods affect teacher well-being, I sent out a survey to several teacher groups on social media earlier this year. I heard back from more than 400 educators around the country, and their responses echoed what I’d experienced myself. Teachers described planning periods consumed by meetings, paperwork, interruptions, and responsibilities that extended far beyond planning instruction. When asked what support they needed, the teachers surveyed ranked “help creating structure for planning periods” second, behind only administrative support. Those responses point to a larger issue.
Planning periods have long been treated as empty space on the master schedule, resulting in a missed opportunity to recognize the effective use of that time as professional practice and to help teachers develop the knowledge and skills it requires.
I believe that gap deserves a name: planning-period literacy.
Planning-period literacy is the knowledge and skills teachers need to use one of the most valuable parts of their workday intentionally instead of reactively. Giving that idea a name isn’t about creating another initiative but recognizing a professional competency we’ve overlooked for far too long.
Developing planning-period literacy can start with helping teachers identify what routinely consumes their time, determine which responsibilities belong in the planning period, and decide what they intend to accomplish before the period begins. Teachers can also learn how to build repeatable routines for planning, grading, communication, and other responsibilities. The structure should remain flexible enough to reflect different roles, workloads, and length of planning time.
So, who should own this work? Teacher-preparation programs should introduce these skills before teachers enter the classroom. School and district leaders, who control master schedules, should set the priorities and establish the structure, just as they do with professional learning communities. Teachers can then adapt and strengthen them within the realities of their work.
Imagine if new teachers were given proactive guidance on how to approach a planning period with intention instead of simply handed a block of unstructured time. Imagine if instructional coaches discussed planning workflows alongside instructional strategies. Imagine if school leaders viewed effective planning periods not as a personal habit but as a professional skill that could be developed, coached, and strengthened over time.
Those changes wouldn’t eliminate every challenge teachers face. Planning-period literacy cannot compensate for unreasonable workloads or planning time that is not protected, but it can help teachers use their time more effectively.
If we expect educators to use one of the most important parts of their workday well, then we have a responsibility to teach them how.
