Schools continually talk about their schedules. The typical targets are the sense of constant rush, the recognition that incremental annual changes have fragmented the schedule, a desire for more effective teaching time, and an interest in collaboration. It can be a frustrating conversation. It is easy to identify issues that need attention, but difficult to persuade faculty to adopt potential schedule changes. Everyone knows change is necessary, but few want to risk jumping from the frying pan into the fire! ISM has previously stated, “The skill of the School Head will be sorely tested as he/she moves faculty culture from a place of semidependency (“just tell me what to do”) to a place of organic vibrancy that bubbles up creative, critical, and innovative ways to maintain a freshness that continues to enable the school’s mission to be practiced in a hyperchange environment.” Scheduling is a change mechanism, whether moving to a six- or seven-day cycle, rotating classes, lengthening periods, and so on. Typically, this mechanism is intentional in three ways, including: