St. Louis Park administrators defend yearlong transition to block schedule amid budget shortfall and teacher concerns

St. Louis Park district administrators told a school board study session that the district will move high schools to a block schedule after a one-year transition year using a 5.5-out-of-7 teacher-day model, citing projected state funding shortfalls and the need for in-contract professional development.

The shift, administrators said, is aimed at increasing instructional time for students while creating embedded professional development so teachers can learn block-specific course design without being paid for out-of-contract summer work. "We won't be receiving any additional funds. We are actually preparing for less wage of support because of the projected deficit," said Dr. Hynes, a district administrator, during the meeting. "Moving to the block is the priority, but we have to, we gotta take the trip."

The case for the change combined fiscal and instructional arguments. Administrators reported the district's reserve at 8.27% and warned that several state-level funding buckets are under pressure; they said the district must analyze current spending and reduce costs now to prepare for a projected future deficit. Administrators also repeated teacher-led research that, they said, favors block schedules because longer class periods can support labs, deeper instruction, fewer daily transitions and improved supports for students with individualized education programs (IEPs) and multilingual learners.

Teachers and principals who spoke at the session pushed back on several practical details. Staff asked how the district will preserve prep time, how additional sections will be assigned, and how the district will prevent new teachers from being overloaded with multiple preps. Administrators said secondary teachers will not lose contractually guaranteed prep time; rather, some supervisory duties will be converted into planning time during the transition year. "We're not actually having a reduction in actual prep time for teachers with the transition to the 5 and a half out of 7," a secondary administrator said.

Administrators acknowledged a heavy implementation lift. They said every IEP will need to be reviewed and rewritten where necessary to reflect minute and service changes under a block schedule and that course registration guides, graduation requirement checks, and course designs will need deep revision. "You have to rewrite every IEP," an administrator said. "It’s a heavy lift." Special-education staff present said they and their teams are prepared to take on the work and emphasized that federally required services must continue.

Parents and teachers raised questions about non-academic impacts, including time for letters of recommendation, after-school activities and physical education. Elementary principals described a proposal to move to fewer but longer 50-minute specialist classes (for example, PE) so specialists see smaller groups and students receive more individualized instruction. Administrators said classroom teachers will also embed movement and sensory breaks and that kindergarten students will not be expected to sit for long continuous periods.

The session also included concerns about online courses and their effect on student learning and district budgets. An administrator requested data from the business office on how many students take online classes, why they enroll, and how much those courses cost the district. The transcript recorded a review of the "statute regarding online classes" and a statutory requirement that districts monitor online providers for state standards compliance.

The board discussed holding a public listening session focused on federal and state policy developments — including recent U.S. Department of Education guidance — and what those developments mean for local policies such as racial equity work and nondiscrimination protections. Administrators and board members said they want a focused listening session so the board can hear concerns without getting overwhelmed by unfocused questions.

The district emphasized it plans to use the transition year to recalibrate spending, refine schedules, provide on-demand professional development for staff and partner with community organizations where appropriate. Board members and administrators did not adopt any formal motions during the study session; participants were directed to principals and cabinet staff for follow-up information on outstanding questions.

The board scheduled a listening session that administrators said will run from 5 to 6:30 p.m.; board members Sarah, Virginia and Celia were identified as attendees. No formal vote on the schedule change or related budget items occurred during the meeting.