More School? We Seem to be Ignoring the Obvious First Step…
The Associated Press made news this week by warming up an old (and undated) quote from President Obama:
Now, I know longer school days and school years are not wildly popular ideas. Not with Malia and Sasha, not in my family, and probably not in yours. But the challenges of a new century demand more time in the classroom.
The lengthy article quoted Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, saying that we are no longer an agrarian economy. The idea is that parents in Chicago (and even in rural Georgia) don’t need their kids to help harvest the corn these days. So why shouldn’t they be in school if they’re not in the fields?
The story quotes a couple of students who, predictably, are against the idea. It also cites statstics on class time in countries like Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong, and Taiwan – places that are evidently “beating us” on tests in core subject areas. The irony is that in those countries kids spend less time in school than we do – not more. They go more days, but fewer hours.
The article also talks about charter schools – and uses the example of a single charter school as evidence that longer school days and school years can result in better test scores. But the fact that charter schools generally receive mixed reviews makes news on a regular basis.
I think there’s pretty good research to support the idea that students do better in a “year round” school year, where the normal summer break gets divided up into two or three week vacations at then end of a nine week school term. The tradition school year with it’s large chunk of down time results in regression. Students lose skills and knowledge over the summer; year round school prevents that.
Longer school days and longer school years mean more money for teachers and probably more teachers. I’m skeptical that keeping primary school kids in class longer would have positive effects. I’d consider the issue, if there were research to look at. There might be, but I don’t know about it if there is.
The obvious first step would be to go to a year round school calendar. That wouldn’t require increased funding or staffing changes. Yet it’s a step no one is really talking about – despite the fact that the idea seems to be supported by research. That puzzles me…
