In an article called
Obama Proposes Longer School Days, Extended School Year, President Obama says that the idea of lengthening the school day or year is not very popular, but may be necessary to keep us competitive in the world today. He says that our current schedule, which was created when the U.S. was made of farmers who needed children helping harvest at home, is not suited to the world we live in now. He states that our current schedule puts us at a "competitive disadvantage" with other industrialized nations.
President Obama advocates for extending the school year to 200 days per year, as opposed to the current average of 180 days. This would put the United States at the same amount of time per year as countries like Scotland, the Netherlands, and Thailand. (Topping the list of international comparisons are Japan and South Korea, who attend 243 and 220 days of school per year respectively.) President Obama's ideas imply that the increase in the amount of days of school will increase student achievement in the United States. Is this true? It seems logical that more time in school would mean more learning, but many say that they extra time is only meaningful if it is academic time, and I would agree with that. There is an argument against the lengthening of the school year or day because of the funding it would require, which would strain an already underfunded system.
Another article called
Finding Time for Success outlines different models being piloted around the country. In Pittsburgh, "accelerated learning academies" are adding 45 minutes to each school day and 10 days to each school year to give students more learning opportunities without an overwhelming change to the year. In the Washington D.C. area, there are schools that are offering optional one month programs to low income students during the summer. This model shows flexibility and allows parents to choose if the extended school year is right for their family. Also in D.C. is a charter school which operates from 8a.m. to 4p.m. everyday. The students there are at school for a typical adult work week of 40 hours. In Fairfax County, VA, students in low income elementary schools are adding 2 hours to each school week by eliminating an existing shortened day in the week used for teacher planning. Other schools are trimming down the summer vacation and adding voluntary summer sessions. These summer sessions are "well-attended". This is another model that allows for some parental choice. What is worrisome is that there are surely students who need the extra time in school that opt out of it. Is a voluntary system fair to them, or would making the extra time mandatory be more fair in giving everyone the same benefits of extra reading, math, and opportunities for what is typically cut out of the school day?
How much does all this cost? New Mexico recently added 25 days to the years of 29 schools in low income areas at a cost of $7.1 million. Implemented statewide, this program would have a cost of $17 million per day. A program in Massachusetts added longer school days on to 18 schools at a cost of $13 million. This program's data has shown greater gains in achievement test scores than in traditional schools. Many argue though, that there is not enough research to indicate that adding time to the year or day produces gains for everyone. In addition, some maintain that the cost does not balance with the amount of achievement seen.
In addition to the expense, other arguments with extension of the school day or year are that it conflicts with teachers unions, it causes conflicts with sports and other extracurricular activities, and that there should be curricular changes and teacher training with the extension of the year. Then there are issues of how long to add on to the day or year. In one study, the school day was lengthened to 9 hours four days a week with one short day per week. By mid year with this schedule, teachers were "worn down". (Duh!!! Can you imagine teaching for nine hours?) The next year, that school changed to an 8 hour 15 minute day, which worked better for all. Still, there are obvious issues that need to be worked out, as this system may not be reasonable for all.
Also opposing lengthening the day or year are those that contend that we do not need to lengthen the amount of time in school, but shore up the amount of time on task in the regular day. They suggest that the most important element that needs to change in the school day is the amount of time spent on management issues, transition times, etc. in the school day. Supporting this is the fact that both Taiwan and the Philippines spend the same amount of time in school, but Taiwan's student achievement scores are much higher than those of the Philippines, suggesting that time is not the only factor influencing student learning. Some say that the issue of adding time on to the day or year simply deflects attention from the real issue of the quality of instructional time.
Personally, I think we can come to a compromise in all of this. As a teacher, I see how much pressure there is to cram curriculum into the existing day. I see what gets cut out of the schedule. But I also see that a lengthy addition to the day would impact younger students, students who had long travels to school or other transportation issues, extracurricular activities, and other extenuating circumstances. I think the idea of adding a small amount of time to each day could be a great idea, if used correctly. Adding up to 45 minutes each day allows teachers to make sure that students had extra time on productive learning tasks. This will really only be effective if schools are also looking to eliminate wasted time throughout the day as well. I do not feel that 45 minutes is an excessive amount of time to add to the day. Students would still be able to engage in after school activities without returning home from them too late.
In addition, lengthening the school year by 10 days may be a compromise we can live with. In terms of my current year, we get out of school on June 12 this year. Adding 10 days to the schedule takes us to June 26. Students and teachers would still have all of July and August off. (We begin school again after Labor Day.) I believe that it is important to have a concentrated block of time off in the summer for students. Many of my students have family in Mexico or other countries and take the summer to visit people they do not see the rest of the year. I think that this experience is too important to take away. In addition, many families take time in the summer to vacation or engage in other activities together. All of this is important. I do not think adding 2 weeks on to the year takes an excessive amount of time away from these activities.
In terms of where this leaves us internationally, 190 days is comparable to Finland and 2 days shy of England. Not bad company. If the 190 days was also combined with an increase of up to 45 minutes per day, the total amount of accumulated hours gained over a year would be 140. This would equal approximately 20 days added on to the schedule. All told, we would be adding enough time to equal 210 days of school. Internationally, this puts us just above where President Obama wants us. (Please understand that the math is all the rough calculations of an English major!) An important piece I want to stress here is that schools need to be held accountable for using this time to increase on task time. I also think it is important for all schools to address scheduling within the school to try to eliminate as much "wasted" time throughout the day as possible. This would truly help us make the best use of the time the students have in school. Just sitting in the building for longer amounts of time each day will not produce any positive results.
This leaves us with the financing issue. Yes, it would be an intensive and large investment. Some argue that it will be too much. Can you really put a price on the possible benefits of this? School financing is up for a big change anyway. I think that minor additions to both the school day and year can be reasonable worked into any new financing plan that we come up with. If our country is to progress, we have to invest in its future. It is about as trite and cheesy a saying as you can think of, but that doesn't make it untrue.