WESTPHALIA — What began earlier this fall as a conversation about moving Fatima High School from an eight-period day to a seven-period schedule has expanded into a broader examination of instructional time, transportation logistics, and the district’s ability to meet state calendar requirements.

District administrators first introduced the concept in October, outlining how a seven-period day could allow for longer class periods, fewer daily transitions, and a schedule more consistent with neighboring districts, as well as Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) recommendations. That initial discussion focused largely on academic structure, graduation requirements, and how reducing daily class load could benefit both students and teachers.

In December, the school board revisited the issue, this time digging into the practical mechanics of how such a change would affect start times, dismissal, transportation, and the total number of instructional hours and calendar days required by the state.

Superintendent John Kitchens told board members the seven-period structure has been “on our radar from last year” and was inherited as an issue already developing at the high school level. While the October presentation emphasized academic alignment and workload balance, Kitchens said the current phase of discussion is focused on how to make the schedule work within DESE’s instructional time rules.

He presented multiple scheduling models showing how small increases in class length could add meaningful instructional time over the course of a year.

“So, option A, 50-minute classes, 172 days, 14 additional hours of instruction,” Kitchens said. “Five extra minutes comes out to roughly 14 hours of ... additional instruction in each class.”

Another model would use 48-minute class periods, starting the high school day at 8 a.m. and dismissing at approximately 2:30 p.m., resulting in about eight hours and 42 minutes of additional instructional time per class over the year.

Kitchens emphasized that even modest adjustments add up. He noted that increasing each class period by just three minutes over 174 days would give students roughly three additional hours of instruction per class compared to the current schedule.

While students would gain instructional minutes per class, Kitchens acknowledged the shift would change how teachers’ instructional time is distributed. Teachers would move from teaching eight shorter classes to seven longer ones, reducing the total number of instructional hours delivered across the year.

“Teachers are going from 1,139 hours of instruction time per year in all eight classes to 1,066 hours of instruction time narrowed down to those seven courses,” Kitchens said.

He told board members he has already begun sharing draft explanations with teachers and parents and described teachers as actively engaged in the process.

“I love our teachers — they’re very jump-in,” Kitchens said, adding that staff have offered extensive feedback and alternative models.

The scheduling options under discussion involve adjusting high school start times to either 7:50 a.m. or 8 a.m., with dismissal times around 2:30 or 2:31 p.m. Kitchens said those times are closely tied to athletics and extracurricular scheduling.

Several board members pushed back strongly on the idea of shortening the school day, expressing concern that reducing daily hours — even if offset by additional calendar days — could be perceived negatively by parents and the community. Board members questioned why the district could not return to a previous model rather than restructure the day, with some recalling earlier schedules as “weird” but workable. Others pressed for clarity on how much time would actually be lost or gained under each option and voiced frustration that the changes appeared to trade longer days for more days rather than clearly increasing instructional value. The discussion reflected unease about whether shortening the day was the right solution, even if it helped meet DESE requirements or improve flexibility around snow days.

Board President Suzanne Massman and others raised concerns about how schedule changes could affect parochial schools, particularly St. Joseph School, which shares transportation considerations.

“It would affect St. Joe, mostly,” Kitchens said, noting he had already informed administrators there that changes are under consideration.

Kitchens stressed that any changes being discussed would not involve extended high school lunch periods, but could add time to elementary lunch.

Transportation logistics became a significant part of the December discussion, particularly how dismissal times affect traffic flow and student safety during winter months.

Kitchens outlined a plan to stagger elementary and high school dismissal to reduce congestion and address concerns raised by city officials.

He estimated it takes five to seven minutes for students to clear parking lots in winter weather and said a staggered dismissal would allow high school students to exit before buses depart.

A central driver behind the scheduling discussion is the district’s narrow margin for meeting DESE calendar requirements and qualifying for financial incentives tied to instructional days.

“We’re at the bare minimum with 169 (days),” Kitchens said. “If the state doesn’t forgive a snow day and we hit 168 calendar days, we miss out on a financial bonus.”

By shortening the daily schedule slightly and increasing the total number of school days to 172 or 174, the district could build in more flexibility and reduce the likelihood of having to add days at the end of the school year.

“If we go beyond our AMI days and we go beyond our built-in snow days, we don’t have any wiggle room,” Kitchens said. “We just have to add another day at the end of the school year.”

He added that a shorter instructional day would also allow the district to qualify for an additional AMI day, increasing the total from five to six.

Kitchens reiterated that no decisions have been made and that the December presentation was intended to continue the conversation rather than conclude it.

Administrators plan to continue gathering input from teachers and parents and to further refine scheduling models before bringing a formal recommendation to the board.