Geary County talks 60-minute schedule for Karnes alternative program, teachers push back on lost planning time

Negotiators for Geary County Schools and teacher representatives debated a proposal to change the Karnes Building alternative program to 60-minute class periods that would shift and reduce teacher planning time as part of ongoing contract talks. The two sides paused negotiations and agreed to form a committee to collect data and revisit a counterproposal in July.

The discussion centered on a district proposal to move Karnes to a 60-minute-period schedule and the bargaining unit’s objection that the change would cut planning time during the student contact day. "We're asking you to give 30 minutes back to kids because it's best for kids," said Speaker 3, Participant, arguing the shorter class length would yield more frequent instruction better suited to alternative students. Administration representatives countered that increasing planning time during the student contact day would reduce the amount of time students spend with a qualified, trained educator.

Why it matters: teachers said the proposed shift would reduce the number of minutes they have to prepare and collaborate and could force administrators to split plan time into multiple short intervals during the school day; district staff said the schedule change is intended to increase certified staff contact with students and reduce class sizes at Karnes. The teachers proposed a one-year sunset on any schedule change and sought a committee to measure outcomes such as instructional minutes with certified teachers and graduation rates.

Key details: the bargaining discussion included these numeric details raised by participants: the proposed classroom periods would be 60 minutes; some staff currently have 80–90 minutes of planning time; statewide averages cited in the meeting were about 50–57 minutes per day; the bargaining side said cutting planning time would amount to a loss described in the meeting as 3,440 planned minutes (about 57.3 hours or roughly 9.5 six-hour workdays). Administration described how a 60-minute schedule would require plan-time splits such that some periods would be divided into 20-minute planning intervals for groups of teachers — one scenario described four teachers covering three sections and three teachers covering two sections at different times of the day.

Discussion and proposals: teachers urged including Karnes staff in any implementation and recommended collecting a range of data to evaluate success, including how many additional instructional minutes with a qualified educator students would gain and whether graduation rates improved. "We would need to put a committee together of the alternative school teachers and determine what data we are going to collect," said Speaker 1, Participant. District staff proposed keeping the existing schedule while forming a joint teachers-and-administration committee to define and collect the data, calling that a compromise.

Next steps: both sides agreed to pause immediate action and schedule follow-up negotiation sessions in July, when the district indicated it would bring a counterproposal. Possible meeting dates discussed included July 7, 9 and 10. The parties did not adopt any contract language during the meeting; the proposal to change Karnes’ schedule remained under negotiation.

Context and constraints: participants repeatedly emphasized that any schedule change could affect class offerings and the number of sections available to students. Administration noted that reducing planning time without adding staff might not increase student contact time or reduce class size and that some schedule changes earlier were not consistent with the negotiated agreement. Teachers asked that any trial be limited (a one-year sunset was suggested) and that practitioners in the alternative setting be meaningfully involved in evaluation.

Ending: negotiators agreed to reconvene in July with a joint committee charged with defining the data and measures for evaluating a schedule change; no formal vote or contract amendment was recorded at the meeting.