The Tyranny of the Clock

We often hear the word institutionalised but rarely do we think it applies to us. But what if it does, what if we’ve been institutionalised by the clock? The clock is at the very heart of our education system. It underpins everything we do, dictating the culture and structure of our schools and the way we deliver education to young people. 

We’ve built a system around time— 39 weeks of the year, five hour teaching periods, divided equally across the day—and we expect every student to fit neatly into this framework. We have chronological progression assuming that all young people follow a similar maturation cycle. We divide subjects into learning blocks or units and allocate guided learning hours to each. But in our rush to measure out learning in precise increments, have we lost sight of what really matters? The actual needs of the children in front of us. And, the best, most effective way for teachers to do the job they love and have trained to do.

Since the advent of the National Curriculum in the 1980s the notion of time has been accentuated but the focus on time has increased exponentially with the introduction of a knowledge rich curriculum which has, at its core, things to be learnt chronologically. This coupled to heavy repercussions for not meeting such points is what we call, ‘The Tyranny of The Clock’.

It’s baked into the very fabric of our education system. Subjects are given a certain amount of time based on their perceived value, as determined by politicians, universities, and other external forces. We then build our curriculum around these time blocks, aiming to deliver all the required content within the allotted hours. But this focus on completion over comprehension is where we start to see the cracks.

Does the system recognise being driven by the clock? Are we conscious of how much impact it has? Or, is it merely a case of it has always been thus? 

The most striking example for me was at the retirement party for an older colleague. His wife made the comment “perhaps now he will stop doing things in hourly blocks”. I asked what she meant. She said, if we go on holiday he will sit on the beach for an hour; he will then get up and do something else and return in one hour, you could set your watch by him.” He of course was completely unaware that he did this. 

How institutionalised are those who work in education? This has likely started from when we were children. From the moment a child enters primary school, they are placed on a conveyor belt of sorts, expected to hit specific milestones at predetermined times. We say that by this age, they should know X, and by that age, they should be able to do Y. And if they don’t? We start pointing fingers. Schools are judged by these arbitrary timelines, and teachers feel the pressure to move students along, whether they’re ready or not.

This tyranny is most clearly felt in the pressure it places on students to achieve specific grades or outcomes by certain ages. In primary school, for instance, children are expected to reach certain milestones by a particular time. If they don’t, it’s seen as a failure of the school, not a reflection of the individual child’s development. We push them forward, regardless of whether they’re ready, and by the time they reach secondary school, this pattern has only intensified. 

In secondary education, the pressure mounts further where students are expected to accumulate and build upon what they’ve learned year after year, culminating in high-stakes exams like GCSEs. But here’s the problem: we’re so focused on finishing the syllabus on time that we forget to bring everyone along. We push to cover every topic, but in the rush, many students are left behind. Even those who manage to keep pace often do so by reducing education to a series of boxes to tick, rather than a journey of discovery. The whole process becomes formulaic, with young people asking, “Is this going to be on the exam?”—and if not, why bother learning it? This narrowing of focus diminishes the richness of education, making it more about meeting deadlines than truly understanding the material.

Our current system treats education like an assembly line, where students are the products being processed through the system. Just like in a piece work in a factory, where the number of bolts you fit or seats you install determines your output, schools measure success by how much content they can cram into students before they’re shuffled along to the next stage. But this isn’t in the best interests of young people. It’s about meeting deadlines, not meeting needs. How do we know this? Look at the evidence: 

• The Mental Health waiting list for young people was 403,000 as of May 23.
• Elective home education pre pandemic 54,646 learners. Summer term 2023 97,600 learners, an increase of 78%.
• 263,904 suspensions in 2022/23 up from 201,090 in 2021/22 an increase of 32%.
• Permanent exclusions 3,039 up from 2,179 an increase of 39%. IIPR estimates this as an additional cost to society of £370,000 over a lifetime that equates to £1.93 billion for 5,218 individuals.
• A total of 1.6 million children 25% of the school population were persistently absent from school in 2022 up 85% on the previous year and 116.8% on pre pandemic years.

Yet the movement in output i.e. examinations has shifted relatively little.

‍

‍

This assembly line mentality is a direct consequence of the time pressures embedded within our education system. From the earliest stages, students are expected to hit specific milestones at certain times. These arbitrary timelines are enforced through high-stakes exams, which serve as checkpoints to measure whether students are on track according to the predetermined schedule. The pressure to meet these deadlines creates a system where the focus shifts from fostering genuine understanding to simply ensuring that students can perform on cue.

As a result, education becomes less about individual growth and more about ticking boxes. The system is designed to move students along in a uniform manner, regardless of whether they’re ready. This approach prioritises efficiency and standardisation over personalised learning, treating students as homogeneous units on a conveyor belt rather than as individuals with unique needs and potentials.

This time-driven approach also feeds into the pressure to mass-produce education as cheaply as possible—particularly in the state sector—in the service of ranking students efficiently and sorting them into neat categories. The system’s competitive nature inherently manufactures failure for a significant portion of our young people. In order to identify the “brightest and best,” the system is set up to leave others behind. The failure of some students is not seen as a flaw but as a necessary outcome, a way to maintain the hierarchy that the exams are designed to enforce.

Over time, this approach has conditioned young people to view education as nothing more than a series of hurdles to jump, with success narrowly defined by exam results. The rich, complex process of learning is reduced to a race against the clock, where the ultimate goal is not to understand or explore but merely to survive the next test. This not only diminishes the value of education but also leaves many students disengaged, disillusioned, and ill-prepared for the challenges beyond the school gates.

‍

Making Learning Personal - Breaking Free of the Clock

To truly escape the tyranny of the clock, we need to fundamentally rethink how we structure our schools. The traditional timetable, with its rigid division into five or six periods a day, each lasting 50 minutes or an hour, is increasingly outdated. This time-bound approach fragments the learning experience, reducing education to a series of disconnected lessons that students must hurriedly absorb before the bell rings and they’re shuffled off to the next subject. But learning doesn’t happen in neatly defined blocks; it’s a continuous, evolving process that doesn’t fit into the strictures of a one-size-fits-all timetable.

We need to create a school culture that values the individual and focuses on the development of the whole person, not just their academic outcomes. This means recognising that students don’t all learn at the same pace or in the same way. The current system, with its rigid lesson structures, forces teachers to move the whole class forward at a uniform pace, regardless of whether each student is ready. This approach prioritises the timetable over the learner, often leaving students behind or pushing them ahead before they’re fully prepared.

To address this, we might consider loosening the timetable, allowing for more flexibility in how time is used within the school day. Instead of strictly segmented periods, we could create longer blocks of time that allow for deep, immersive learning. These extended periods would give students the space to engage with material more fully, explore topics in greater depth, and truly understand the concepts before moving on. This would also enable teachers to adapt their teaching to the needs of the students in real time, rather than being forced to adhere to a predetermined schedule.

But the changes shouldn’t stop at simply adjusting the timetable. We also need to break down the barriers between subjects and focus more on the application of knowledge, rather than just its acquisition. The traditional approach of siloing subjects into separate periods fails to reflect the interconnected nature of knowledge in the real world. For example, history, literature, and geography often intersect in meaningful ways, yet our current system forces students to compartmentalise these subjects into distinct lessons, missing out on the richness that comes from interdisciplinary learning.

By creating a more integrated curriculum, we can help students see the connections between different areas of knowledge and understand how they apply to real-world problems. This approach encourages critical thinking and problem-solving skills, as students are no longer just learning to pass exams but are engaging with knowledge in a way that is relevant and meaningful to them.

These structural changes would also open the door to alternative classroom models, where learning is not confined to a single room or a single teacher. For instance, project-based learning environments could replace traditional lessons, where students work on long-term projects that draw on multiple subjects and require them to apply their knowledge in practical ways. This not only makes learning more engaging but also more relevant to the challenges they’ll face outside of school.

In this new model, the goal should always be to create an environment where the student is at the centre, and their learning journey is the priority. By moving away from the rigid, time-bound structures of the traditional school day, we can create a more flexible, responsive education system that truly meets the needs of every learner. This is no mean feat, and if we’re going to achieve it, we’ll need to leverage technology in new ways—not just to repeat or replace what we already do, but to support fundamentally different modes of classroom operation.

If we’re to escape this tyranny, we also need to rethink not just the structure of time in education, but also how we use technology to enhance and extend the capabilities of both teachers and students. Think of technology as a powerful tool, amplifying the reach and effectiveness of educators. In a traditional classroom, a teacher is limited by time and the sheer number of students they have to teach. But with technology, these limitations start to fade.

Technology can act as an extension of the teacher's abilities, allowing them to reach every student, regardless of where they are in their learning journey. Through digital platforms, direct instruction can be made available online, giving students access to lessons anytime, anywhere. This means that instead of relying solely on the teacher’s presence in the classroom, students can revisit material as often as they need to until they fully understand it. The classroom then transforms from a place where teachers must deliver content to a space for deeper engagement, where the teacher can spend more time supporting individual students and less time giving lectures that will not be grasped equally by all students.

We call this “democratising the learning moment.” The process of learning is democratic even if the outcomes are not and this is where we need to place our focus. Too often our sights are focused on the outcome. 

Traditionally, learning has been something that happens within the confines of a classroom, during set hours of the day. But with technology, we can transcend these boundaries. Learning no longer has to happen at a specific time and place. A student can learn at home, in the library, or even on the bus ride home, and it can be fully integrated with what they do “in the classroom.” The learning moment is no longer restricted to the classroom; it can happen anywhere and at any time.

This democratization is crucial when we consider the diverse needs of students. In any given classroom, there will be students who are ready to move ahead, students who need more time to grasp the basics, and everything in between. Technology enables us to create alternative classroom structures that cater to these varying needs. For instance, in a flipped classroom model, students can learn new content at their own pace through video lessons or interactive modules at home. Then, when they come to school, the classroom becomes a space for discussion, collaboration, and one-on-one sessions with the teacher, who can focus on guiding students through their individual learning paths.

In this model, teacher time is used more efficiently. Instead of spending the entire class period lecturing to students who may not all be ready to absorb the material, teachers can focus on guiding students through their individual learning journeys. This allows for more personalised support, where the teacher can address specific gaps in understanding, provide targeted feedback, and challenge students who are ready to advance to the next level.

The use of technology also opens the door to more personalised learning experiences without overwhelming the capacity of teachers and educators. Adaptive learning platforms, for instance, can tailor content to the individual needs of each student, offering challenges that are appropriate for their current level of understanding. This ensures that no student is left behind simply because the class has moved on to the next topic. Students are empowered to take control of their own learning, progressing at a pace that suits them and diving deeper into subjects that interest them.

Moreover, technology facilitates collaborative learning experiences that extend beyond the classroom. Students can engage in online discussions, work on group projects with peers from different schools or even countries, and access a wealth of resources that were previously out of reach. This not only enhances their learning but also prepares them for the kind of global, interconnected world they will enter after school.

This transformation won’t happen overnight, and it requires a bold reimagining of our educational practices. But by leveraging technology in innovative ways, not merely to replicate old methods but to create entirely new learning environments, we can build an education system that truly serves every student. The tyranny of the clock has ruled our classrooms for too long—it's time to break free and embrace a future where learning is as flexible, dynamic, and individual as the students themselves.

‍