Across the Bellingham schools, students and staff know the mysterious figure lurking in the fall of 2026 as the schedule change. This marks the time when the seven-period high school schedule will go into effect, subtracting a class period from the current balance of eight, first implemented almost a decade ago in the beginning of the 2017-18 school year. Students and teachers alike have expressed feelings of confusion and frustration on the shift. This article explores the factors leading up to it and resulting from it, aiming to inspire more clarity.
The recent decision by the school district to shorten the schedule stems from the underfunded nature of public schools in Washington State, the specifics of which are addressed in Greg Baker, the district’s superintendent’s January 16th update: “Because the state underfunds districts across the state, including ours,” he writes, “and the governor’s budget proposal does not include additional funds for public education, we need to look for cost-savings.” Furthermore, according to a November 4 release, Dr. Baker states that “unlike other cost saving decisions that can happen later in the school year, the high school schedule must be decided soon because of the constraints of student registration timing.”
With the release of meeting notes documenting the road to the final decision we can dip into the thought processes of district and staff representatives. On September 23 of last year, the inaugural meeting took place on the basis of discussing schedule options for the 2026-27 school year with the hope of finding a compromise of cost saving and teacher and student needs over the course of 6 meetings. Various models were suggested to combat eight periods, including a trimester rotation, where students would take five classes at a time with a final total of 15 credits; a straight 6-period schedule; a 3.5/7 that featured two block days with ‘half periods’; and, of course, the 7-period schedule. According to the presentation of Kathryn Weilage, Chief Financial Officer, at the original meeting, “All alternative schedules would require a reduction in full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing, translating to teachers taking on a higher teaching load.” Ms. Weilage goes onto explain that this will mean changes in teaching and prep time, class size, CTE course offerings, and funding options.
Additionally, through the sequence of meetings, issues concerning graduation requirements and total instructional hours (or “seat time”) were discussed. From what I can gather from the meeting notes, the Program of Basic Education requires all school districts to comply with 1 of 2 options regulating instructional time; either a blanket 1,027 hours for grades 1-12 or a total of 1,080 hours for grades 9-12 and 1,000 for elementary and middle school. A key factor in the decision between schedule models was compliance with at least one of these options, and the undeniable fact was that most only fit the blanket schedule. On the other hand, the topic of graduation requirements soldiered on. Across the district, high school students must have a minimum of 30 credits to graduate, with 32 opportunities to attain them. With an alternative schedule, this number will undoubtedly have to be adjusted, but policy demands it be above 24. Members of the committee predicted a reduction of elective programs, such as arts and CTE, to accommodate.
In the end, as we know, the ad hoc committee recommended the 7-period schedules to the superintendent. According to the ten-page proposal, released on January 19, the decision was supported for various factors including significant cost savings and benefits over the other schedule models. With approximate calculation, it was determined that the 7-period model would reduce current spending by $2.62 million but will require the elimination of around 18 teachers and other staff members.
The change has sparked controversial feelings for both students and staff. For the students, it means one fewer opportunity to take a class that interests them, in addition to a more complicated-to-navigate schedule. For staff, the switch involves inconsistent schedules, complicating planning periods and their abilities to offer support for students. The change has sparked rumors and speculation about subjects and teachers cut, but the general consensus is that there will be an additional letter day added to the current alternating A,B schedule. The ‘C’ day includes all 7 periods, which, allowing for a lunch period, comes out to classes being 48 minutes long. On A-days, which will always fall on Tuesdays, the 4-period schedule will continue with all odd classes (periods 1, 3, 5, & 7). On B-days, it is the opposite, with the remaining even classes running. However, there are only 3 even classes, so each Thursday there will be an early release at 1:15, the same time as the 4 middle schools and over an hour earlier than our bi-monthly 2:00 early release.
The general consensus among students is positive toward the development of a weekly early release day, but negative about what it means for their courseload and graduation requirements. Anonymous responses, largely freshman, align with the conclusion made by one particularly vocal student who announced that it “sucks big time”. Freshman Lila Munson gives more insight into these proclamations: “I’m doing running start and every class I want to take at the high school level I need to take sophomore year,” she says, “and the schedule change is complicating that. I certainly don’t like it… [it] will be a workload on students and teachers.” When asked why she preferred the current 8-period schedule, Lila shares the simplicity of work outside of school to it allows. “It’s mostly it’s for homework purposes that really works out for me. If a teacher assigns something to be finished before the next class period you have two days. With the new schedule we will have to do it in one night. Not to be a Karen,” she jokes, “but it’s pretty inconsiderate.”
Another freshman, Linus van Pelt, shares similar thoughts, with a few additions. “The more they switch up the day, more kids will be unable to focus,” they say in response to how the schedule change will create difficulties in the fall. “In my opinion, it’s not nearly enough. The overall standard of learning will be lowered.” Linus, an avid participant in theatre, hopes that the budget changes will result in greater funding for the arts. “I hope that this will make more money available for extracurricular activities- but I don’t know how likely this is considering how they usually use the money.” Their final statement alludes to the common exclusion of the arts. In the end, Linus shares a sentiment that resounds with students through the district. “They need to listen to students. Not pretend to listen, or do it just to please us, but really listen. However, I think if teachers rally, students will too. The result will depend a lot on how this is handled and embraced.”
On the opposite side, teachers must scramble through 48-minute classes, unpredictable planning periods, larger class sizes and more. Janae Hodge, current Spanish 2 and AP Spanish teacher at Bellingham High, offers insight into the difficulties that may be the result of the schedule change. “I think [using hall passes] will be different with only five minutes of passing time and shorter classes,” she shares. “I think it will all feel rushed.” Ms. Hodge goes on to explain the future difficulty of planning schoolwork and quizzes with classes being four times a week. She foresees the possibility of the majority of quizzes being scheduled on Fridays, overwhelming students who are already juggling seven class periods in a day. “I understand why we need to save money, but I’m not happy about losing a class.” But, as many of us know, the general uncertainty around change was no match for Senora Hodge’s optimism: “It will be nice for the students who have trouble juggling 8 classes,” she hopes. “If we meet as a staff, we can work out the kinks.”
Another member of staff, Molly Hayes, gives her take. “I’m concerned about the reduction of electives for students, and I think the C days are concerning,” she says. “I’m worried about the transition time for students and staff.” When asked for positives, Ms. Hayes was able to come up with a few. “The early release alignment will be good for families, especially those with elementary aged kids. In the some ways it will be nice, like seeing students more and creating more consistent contact.” She believes this will also be valuable when it comes to reduced class and planning time; “A lot will depend on the amount of prep classes a teacher has compared to their subjects. I don’t foresee as much instructional time, but in the case that this leads to more homework students will have support from the constant connection of seeing teachers more often.” Ms. Hayes finishes with a sentiment we can all strive for and admire. “I recognize the budget needs to be decreased, and I acknowledge that challenge. It’s tricky- money is what it is. I do want to see better state funding for education, but I know everyone’s best intentions are there.”
It’s a proven fact that humans dislike change. It upsets our routine and forces us to find a new definition of normalcy. But, sometimes, it is exactly what we need to remind ourselves of our resilience. In the wise words of Ms. Hayes, “When the time comes, everyone will rise to the occasion. Educators are good at that. Students are too.”
