How many teaching hours should an IB DP timetable provide?

The IB recommends 240 teaching hours for each HL subject and 150 hours for each SL subject. TOK is designed around 100 hours across the two-year programme. Coordinators should convert these figures into clock hours using the school's actual period length and usable teaching weeks. Assemblies, holidays, mock examinations, study leave, and school events should be removed before calculating capacity. Delivered hours should then be monitored throughout both years rather than checked only when the timetable is first approved.

Can HL and SL students be taught in the same timetable block?

Yes, HL and SL students can be taught together when the subject structure, staffing, and class size make this educationally workable. The shared lessons should cover genuinely common content, while HL students receive protected additional teaching for HL material and greater depth. Coordinators must ensure that the arrangement still provides the recommended hours for both levels. SL students also need purposeful, supervised arrangements when HL-only teaching occurs. Combined classes should be reviewed with the relevant subject guide rather than adopted as a universal solution for every department.

Does CAS need a timetabled lesson every week?

The IB does not prescribe a universal weekly lesson total for CAS, so a weekly CAS class is not an explicit requirement. However, CAS must continue regularly for at least 18 months, and schools need systems for guidance, monitoring, reflection, interviews, and project support. Many schools therefore schedule an advisory period, recurring meeting, or combination of workshops and individual reviews. That scheduled support does not replace the student's actual CAS experiences. Coordinators should design enough contact time to identify inactivity early and help students complete meaningful experiences and the required CAS project.

Can an SL subject be completed in one year?

Current IB regulations permit limited one-year arrangements for SL subjects when circumstances require them. Up to two SL subjects may be taught in the first year and assessed as anticipated subjects, or one SL may be taught in each year under the permitted structure. This flexibility should not be treated as the normal design for every cohort because DP courses are intended as coherent learning experiences. Language ab initio and pilot subjects must be taught throughout the two years. Coordinators should verify the current regulations and session-specific assessment procedures before confirming any anticipated entry.

How should coordinators reduce clashes between student subject choices?

Begin with a student-by-subject demand matrix rather than copying the previous cohort's blocks. Identify subjects frequently selected together and place them on different lines, then fit low-enrolment and single-teacher courses around those anchors. Test the resulting model against every student, including levels, reserve choices, and university prerequisites. Where conflicts remain, options may include parallel classes, mixed HL and SL teaching, an IB-approved online course, or informed counselling toward a reserve subject. The final decision should protect valid academic pathways while remaining sustainable for staffing, rooms, supervision, and class size.

When should the two-year IB timetable be reviewed?

The master timetable should be tested before publication and formally reviewed at least once each term. Coordinators should compare planned teaching hours with hours actually delivered, especially after trips, mock examinations, and disrupted weeks. They should also examine subject changes, HL and SL movement, room pressure, teacher workload, and emerging assessment congestion. A review near the end of DP1 is particularly important because DP2 usually contains shorter teaching time and more submission activity. Changes should be documented clearly so that students, teachers, and families understand both the revised arrangement and its academic rationale.

Back to all posts

IB DP Timetabling: Build a Two-Year Schedule

IB Coordinators Program Management IB Study Guides

• 1 Oct 2026•11

IB DP Timetabling: Build a Two-Year Schedule

Join 650k+ students breezing through the IBReady to breeze through the IB?

IB DP Timetabling: Build a Two-Year Schedule | RevisionDojo

Back to all posts

IB DP Timetabling: Build a Two-Year Schedule

IB Coordinators Program Management IB Study Guides

• 1 Oct 2026•11

Effective IB DP timetabling begins with the full two-year programme, not an empty weekly grid. Coordinators must protect recommended subject hours, concurrency of learning, the DP core, assessment milestones, staffing, specialist rooms, and viable student combinations before converting those requirements into weekly blocks.

The most reliable model has three layers: a two-year curriculum map, a student-choice block structure, and a whole-cohort assessment calendar. Together, these prevent a timetable that looks balanced each week but creates lost teaching time, subject clashes, or severe coursework congestion in DP2.

Start with the official programme constraints

The Diploma Programme combines six subjects with theory of knowledge (TOK), the extended essay (EE), and creativity, activity, service (CAS). Students normally take three subjects at higher level and three at standard level, although four HL subjects are permitted.

The IB recommends 240 teaching hours for each HL subject and 150 teaching hours for each SL subject. Three HL and three SL courses therefore represent 1,170 recommended subject hours before TOK and scheduled core support are included.

TOK contains 100 hours across course content and assessment activity. CAS has no prescribed weekly lesson total, but it must begin near the start of the DP and continue regularly for at least 18 months. Schools consequently need sustained arrangements for CAS guidance, monitoring, reflection, interviews, and project support without treating CAS as an examined classroom subject.

The IB also expects concurrency of learning, meaning students generally study their subjects and core elements alongside one another. Current regulations require all HL subjects, the core, and at least one SL subject to extend across both years.

Up to two SL subjects may be completed as one-year courses when circumstances require it. This is an exception, not the preferred default, and language ab initio and pilot subjects must remain two-year courses. Coordinators should verify anticipated-subject arrangements against the regulations and assessment procedures for the relevant session.

Calculate usable teaching time first

Do not divide the recommended hours by the nominal number of school weeks. Holidays, assemblies, trips, mock examinations, reporting days, orientation, and study leave reduce the time genuinely available.

Calculate usable teaching weeks, then apply this formula:

Weekly hours required = recommended course hours ÷ usable teaching weeks

If the programme contains 70 usable weeks, an HL course needs approximately 3.43 clock hours per week, an SL course needs 2.14 hours, and TOK needs approximately 1.43 hours to reach 100 hours. A 50-minute period contributes only 0.83 clock hours, so lesson counts cannot be treated as hours.

A two-week cycle can accommodate fractional allocations more accurately than a single-week pattern. Hours should also be checked separately for each course because laboratory work, oral assessment, fieldwork, performances, and collaborative projects can create additional scheduling constraints.

Component	Official time expectation	Timetabling implication
HL subject	240 recommended hours	Allocate approximately 1.6 times the SL teaching time
SL subject	150 recommended hours	Protect contact time across the usable calendar
TOK	100 hours	Schedule across both years rather than compressing it into DP2
EE	No standard weekly allocation	Provide research instruction, supervision, and milestone time
CAS	Regular engagement for at least 18 months	Schedule guidance and reviews while preserving authentic experiences

Build blocks from student choices

A block model should reflect current student demand rather than historical habit. Collect provisional subject choices, levels, reserve choices, university intentions, and non-negotiable prerequisites before fixing timetable lines.

Create a student-by-subject matrix. Subjects selected together frequently should usually appear in different blocks. The RevisionDojo guide to choosing IB subjects can support pre-DP counselling, but each school must confirm its own availability, combination rules, prerequisites, and class-size thresholds.

A practical sequence is:

Validate requested combinations against Diploma requirements.
Identify high-demand and highly constrained subjects.
Separate subjects with strong co-selection patterns.
Fit low-enrolment and single-teacher courses around those anchors.
Test every student against the proposed blocks.
Record unresolved conflicts and their academic consequences.
Repeat subject-choice confirmation before finalizing staffing.

No structure can satisfy every imaginable combination. Possible responses include parallel classes, alternating a low-enrolment course between cohorts, approved online provision, consortium arrangements, combined SL and HL teaching, or counselling toward an academically suitable reserve choice.

Every solution must be checked for teacher workload, supervision, accessibility, room capacity, laboratory access, and staff continuity. A combination is not genuinely available simply because it fits into the grid.

Design HL, SL, and core time deliberately

The recommended HL-to-SL time ratio is 240:150, or 1.6:1. Giving both levels identical contact time generally underprovides for HL or consumes unnecessary timetable capacity at SL.

Schools may use separate classes, partially combined teaching, or common blocks with protected HL extension periods. Combined teaching works best when the subject guide contains substantial shared content. HL extension lessons should not rely on irregular after-school attendance, and SL students need supervised, purposeful arrangements when they are not in class.

TOK should remain a protected course across both years. Weekly teaching supports continuity, while occasional double periods can help with exhibitions, discussion, and essay planning. A model based entirely on collapsed days is easier to cancel and can weaken conceptual development.

CAS requires a different structure. Scheduled time may include orientation, safety guidance, project planning, reflection workshops, and interviews, but attendance does not itself prove CAS completion. Students still need meaningful experiences, evidence of learning outcomes, and at least one CAS project.

The EE also needs visible institutional time even though it is not normally timetabled as a subject. Useful provisions include research-method workshops, library sessions, supervisor meeting windows, and writing blocks. RevisionDojo's Extended Essay guides and IA guides can provide consistent structural support while teachers retain responsibility for official requirements and permitted feedback.

Coordinate assessment with the timetable

A weekly schedule controls access to lessons, but it does not control workload. Schools must also coordinate IAs, the EE, TOK tasks, mock examinations, oral assessments, performances, university applications, and CAS reviews.

Map major milestones before DP1 begins. Distinguish exploratory checkpoints, draft stages, feedback windows, final school deadlines, marking, internal standardization, and upload preparation. Schools set internal deadlines early enough to complete these processes before IB-facing requirements; the RevisionDojo guide to how IA deadlines operate helps explain this distinction.

Programme phase	Main scheduling priorities
Before DP1	Confirm choices, blocks, staffing, rooms, induction, and support
DP1	Establish routines, TOK, CAS, research skills, and staged coursework
DP1 to DP2 transition	Protect realistic research and consolidation time
DP2 term 1	Complete major EE, TOK, oral, performance, and IA milestones
DP2 term 2	Process coursework, conduct mocks, close gaps, and begin revision
Final phase	Protect examination preparation, wellbeing, and administration

Audit the timetable before publication

Test individual student schedules rather than inspecting only the master grid. Every student needs the correct six subjects and levels, access to the core, appropriate support, and a sustainable distribution of demanding lessons.

Check:

projected hours by subject, level, term, and year;
concurrency across the programme;
TOK continuity, CAS monitoring, and EE supervision;
clashes, excessive free periods, and accessibility needs;
teacher load, specialist rooms, and equipment;
assessment congestion for individual students;
resilience when staff or rooms become unavailable;
alignment with the correct examination session.

Consult the IB's published examination schedules when planning the final phase. Examination timetables do not replace early subject-combination checks, and official clash procedures must be followed rather than moving an examination informally.

Common structural mistakes include copying last year's blocks, counting nominal weeks, allocating identical HL and SL time, treating TOK as an add-on, leaving coursework until DP2, and allowing departments to set deadlines independently. A timetable operating at maximum room and staffing capacity may look efficient, but modest flexibility makes it more resilient.

Review delivery at least once each term. Compare planned and completed hours, missed lessons, level changes, coursework pressure, and staff feedback. The RevisionDojo coordinator guide explains how cohort-level evidence can support this review.

Conclusion

Successful IB DP timetabling aligns programme expectations with actual students, teaching weeks, staff, rooms, and assessment capacity. Calculate hours across two years, build blocks from verified choices, protect the core, coordinate deadlines, and audit individual pathways.

RevisionDojo can complement this structure through its IB resource hub, Questionbank, Study Notes, Mock Exams, coursework resources, and Jojo AI. These tools support the learning and assessment preparation that an effective timetable is designed to protect.

Sources and referenced URLs

Add as a preferred source on Google