After studies like PISA it became obvious, that schools and teaching in Germany have to be improved, especially for children from underprivileged homes (cp. OECD 2004, Pfeifer 2006). One initiative out of those results was the intensified development of "all-day schools" in Germany. "All day schools" - that means teaching beyond the lunch break as it is common in other European countries. The idea is to teach children the whole day, not only between 8am and 1pm, as it is common in Germany. In advancement of other teaching time models this contribution presents the results of a new teaching time model for all-day schools which is unique in Germany (cp. Holtappels 2002; Burk 1998; Purkey & Smith 1983). It requires the teachers' presence in school for the whole day but it also provides "special spaces" between their lessons which allow them e.g. to relax or to cooperate with their colleagues. The IFS at the University of Dortmund, Germany, which is in charge of studies like PIRLS- and TIMSS-Germany, did the accompanying research for this so called "Presence teaching time-model" in three German all-day primary schools.Some of the main research questions did concern the possibilities of improving the teacher's workload, their job satisfaction, their cooperative behaviour and the working atmosphere. Furthermore main research questions pointed at the effects on the pupils' level, for instance on their learning strategies and on their sense of well-being. On a third school-/organizational-level the research questions pointed at elements that foster the introduction of the new teaching time model on an organizational level. By using a longitudinal research design and a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods it was possible to make empirical data-based statements concerning the change of the learning culture. Qualitative data were collected by half-standardised interviews with principals, teachers and social workers. Quantitative data were collected by pupil- and principal-questionnaires and a two-week lasting working time collection of all teachers. The qualitative and the quantitative data were raised in two surveys with a distance of two school years. Furthermore the quantitative data of the Germany-wide StEG-study 2005 were used to compare the model schools with ordinary all-day schools that don't work with the "Presence teaching time-model". The all-day schools for the comparison were selected via matching by using the social-index (cp. Bos et. al. 2006, pp. 149 et seqq). The results of this study indicate the success of the "Presence teaching time-model". As one out of a lot positive results the working time of the teachers could be reduced between the first and the second survey and the teachers' job satisfaction could be increased as well. Also the results on the pupils' level, for instance the improvement of their learning strategies and their sense of well-being indicate positive effects. Through the results on the pupils' level it became also obvious that pupils with a certain social background seem to benefit more from this model. Bos et.al. (Ed.) (2006). Jahrbuch der Schulentwicklung, Band 14, Daten Beispiele, Perspektiven, Weinheim, Munich: Juventa. Burk, K., Ronte-Rasch, B., Thurn, B. u.a. (1998) Grundschule mit festen Öffnungszeiten. Weinheim, Basel. Holtappels, H.G. (1997): Grundschule bis mittags. Innovationsstudie über Zeitgestaltung und Lernkultur. Weinheim, Munich. OECD. Learning for Tomorrow's world (2004). First Results from PISA 2003. OECD. Pfeifer, M. (2006). Bildung auf Finnisch. Anspruch - Wirklichkeit - Ideal - nach PISA. Munich: P. Kirchheim. Purkey, S.C., & Smith, M.S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. Elementary School Journal, 83(4), 426-452.European Educational Research Journal (EERJ), Jahrbuch Ganztagsschule 2008 (national Journal Germany)