Year Round Education
Imagine a child, on a hot summer day... no
baseball, no swimming, no picnics or
amusement park rides. Instead of
spending time doing all of the things kids like
to during summer vacations,
this child, is attending school. Year round
education (YRE) has been around
since 1904, with 3,000 schools and 2 million
students currently using the
program (National Association). Students in year
round schools go to school
the same 180 days that traditional schools attend. In
YRE, the summer
vacation is eliminated, replacing it with shorter, more frequent
breaks.
There is a number of ways the year round school can operate,
including:
90/30, 45/15, and 60/20. The most popular of these calendars
is the 45/15, where
the year is divided into 4 nine week terms, separated by
4 three week vacations
(National Association). YRE has been a debated issue
in education almost since
it began. Supporters of YRE say this schedule
improves the learning process. The
biggest debate, however, comes from the
parents and teachers who believe there
are no proven studies that YRE helps
the learning process at all. So, is year
round schooling a good choice for
the education of your children? YRE will not
only hurt the education system,
but it will create chaos for the lives of the
students attending and their
families. Supporters of YRE believe year round
schools are more cost
effective than traditional schools. With population in
some districts rising
rapidly, YRE is said to reduce overcrowding of schools and
classrooms. In
many cases, school calendars are changed in response to
population growth. By
running schools all year, districts can pack in more
students and postpone
building new schools (Endless Summer). Supporters of YRE
say that by
staggering vacations and schedules, schools can increase capacity
by
25-50 percent (Should Kids go). Supporters argue that the costs for
the
transition form a traditional calendar to year round schools are modest
compared
to the construction costs of new schools (Inger, Morton). However,
those against
YRE feel that expenses will only be reduced temporarily.
According to a "Year
Round Education Study" conducted by the Lewisville,
Texas Independent School
District, "Findings of a year-long study
concluded that there is no financial
benefit to operating a Single Track
System. The system would cause a modest
increase in operational expenses
without providing any instructional benefits"
(Time to Learn). In Iowa, the
Carroll School Board found that the costs of the
district moving to a year
round education system could range from $16,786 to
$32,412. Taylor Elementary
School, in Cedar Rapids, spends more money according
to the classroom
teachers that any other elementary school. Schools in Davenport
reported that
the switch to YRE will cost an additional $36,000 in salaries,
$3000 per year
for equipment, and supplies, and $22,300 as a one time expense
for teacher
training. Plus, the move to YRE would also cost the district an
extra $92,626
to fully air condition the school building. In Des Moines, Moulten
schools
spend about $80,000 annually for year round schooling. If YRE
were
implemented, Indianola school districts would spend an additional $3,655
for
middle school and $5,000 for elementary school to pay for the
additional
secretarial, administrative, and custodial time during the summer
(Time to
Learn). Costs will not only be incurred with the schools, but
also with the
state and with taxpayers. Cost savings for one of these groups
may create cost
increases for the other (Naylor, Charlie). Contrary to what
supporters of YRE
claim, there are definitely extra costs to implementing and
maintaining a year
round education system. Supporters of YRE say that year
round schools would
promote continuous learning. The belief is that students
forget a lot of what
they learn while on long summer vacations. This is seen
more in slower learning
students and for those who know English as their
second language. It is also
thought that because students retain more when
the learning process is
interrupted for only short periods of time, teachers
in year round schools need
to spend less time reviewing pre-vacation material
(Inger, Morton). Although
this seems true, opponents believe that there is
research that needs to be
addressed. Mary Lee Smith and Gene V. Glass have
done extensive research in year
round schools since 1974. In a study
conducted by Smith and Glass, in a school
district in Colorado, the learning
loss in the students was evaluated. They
found that although teachers in year
round schools spent less time reviewing
pre-vacation material than teachers
in traditional schools did, the actual
achievement differences were
insignificant on tests designed specifically to
measure district objectives
(Glass, Gene V). According to Don Patterson, a
member of the Albuquerque, New
Mexico School Board that tried and rejected year
round schooling, "Short term
memory loss is very acute. Studies show that the
only discernible summer loss
occurs in the first two to three weeks. So, by
introducing all these multiple
breaks, all you’re doing is maximizing
forgetting." It has also been proven
that forgetting and relearning are part
of the learning process. Gaps in
student’s learning begin with loss of context
retention in the subject area,
which begins within 24-48 hours, unless the new
information is reinforced or
applied immediately. After a month without
reinforcement, about 80% of what a
student has learned is recently lost.
Research indicates what we retain
depends on student motivation and
teacher-effectiveness and isn’t limited to
a time factor (Time to Learn). It
is quite obvious that YRE does not improve
the learning process, as those who
support YRE claim. Supporters of the year
round school system believe there are
many benefits in the program for
students and teachers. Advocates of YRE say
families have greater flexibility
in planning vacations that often cost less.
Parents that support YRE feel
that the shorter, more frequent vacations allowed
students to remain focused
and enthusiastic (Prisoners of Time). Angie
Maniscalco, a 5th grade
student at Fairmount Elementary in St. Louis, says,
"Kids should go to
school nine weeks and be off three because, kids get bored
in the summer.
They get sick of swimming every single day going skating or
basically doing
anything. I go to school for nine weeks, then get off three"
(Should
Schools). Supporters also believe parents who are working outside the
home
can take advantage of year-round care for their children. Teachers
that
support the idea of YRE feel that the more frequent breaks reduce
burnout, and
that the frequent breaks during the school year enable teachers
to visit and
learn from other programs and other teachers (Prisoners of
Time). Those against
YRE have different views about what year-round
schooling will do for the
students and the teachers. In year round schools,
middle, elementary and high
school students often have different schedules.
While vacationing in the
off-season may work well, when children are on
different schedules, vacations
can be more of a problem. YRE can certainly
disrupt family life. With different
ages of students, vacations are difficult
to schedule. For example, children on
non-traditional schedules may miss out
on Boy Scout Camp, because their summer
vacation falls in the month of August
and the activity is programmed for July.
School activities can suffer as
well. One study found that band, chorus, drama,
and student government were
particularly hit hard (Never Ending School). While
there may be some benefits
to YRE, it is obvious that there are many situations
where the year round
calendar will cause confusion in the lives of those
involved. Perhaps the
most debated issue in YRE is that of the achievement
scores. Supporters of
YRE claim that student performance in year round schools
is much greater.
They believe that year round schools will yield higher
achievement scores
that traditional schools. Many advocates for YRE claim there
are studies by
the National Association for Year Round Education that report
that year round
schools have a very positive impact on student grades. Although
supporters
boast high achievement scores on tests, and higher student grades,
those
against YRE disagree (Year Round Education: Is). Critics of YRE say there
is
no evidence for higher academic gains under YRE as compared to
traditional
schools. Studies and test scores repeatedly show little
improvement by students
in year round schools. When test scores do increase,
many educators hesitate to
attribute increases to the new calendar (Time to
Learn). Many of these studies,
have been conducted by the National
Association for Year Round Education (NAYRE),
a highly biased organization,
whose consultants earn significant amounts of
income by promotion YRE. Robert
Rosenfield, a systems analyst from Potomac,
Maryland, was so concerned at
what he considered to be misrepresented data by
the NAYRE that he analyzed a
substantial number of YRE evaluations in a 1994
paper. He concluded, "Each
study presented in the NAYRE review has either been
incompletely
characterized, or otherwise contradicted by other studies within
the same
state or district. Nothing in the NAYRE review demonstrates any
academic
achievement gain by changing to a year-round calendar." In a 1993
Resnik
study of Oakland Unified School District, California,
concluded,
"Students at year-round schools show on average a lower
academic achievement
level than those at other schools, and their achievement
has decreased for the
period, while it increased for schools in the regular
calendar." Overall, as
you can see, there is little difference in student
achievement between
year-round and traditional calendars (Year Round
Education: Is). As evidence has
shown, year round education will not improve
the education of our children. YRE
will cost more money for schools. YRE will
not promote continuous learning. YRE
won’t create benefits for students and
teachers, but will create chaos in the
lives of the people around them.
Achievement scores in schools with YRE will not
increase, but in fact, in
some cases, get worse. A few spoken views on YRE say
it best. Sheila Duty
Gibson says, "Many students show that year-round schools
do not improve
education. Changing the days students attend school does not
address what
many believe are the real problems in education such as a lack of
parental
involvement, teacher development, effective teaching methods and
curriculum."
An anonymous editorial in a North Carolina newspaper says,
"It’s time to
face the truth. The year-round schedule is a personal
preference, not the
answer to our educational problems. Year-round school
doesn’t work for
everyone." Executive Editor of Elizabethton Star in
Tennessee, said it
well when he said, "Summertime offers our youngsters an
extended time to
experience life in such a way that will never again be
afforded. If we are
going to do anything with respect to school scheduling, we
should extend the
summer vacation to Labor Day" (Time to
Learn).
Bibliography
Burgoyne, Becky. "Backgrounder: The Never
Ending School: Year Round
Education. 12 March 2000.
getdoc.cgi?id="159181061x127y55130"
edumark s www.elibrary.com
"Endless Summer? Not for Children in
Year-Round School; Education: Prompted by
overcrowding or by belief in its
effectiveness, more and more school districts
are shifting to a 12-month
calendar, The." Electric Library. 15 March 2000.
Glass, Gene V. 7 March
2000.
Inger, Morton. "Year Round Education: A Strategy for Overcrowded
Schools."
12 March 2000.
The National Association for Year-Round
Education page. 12 March 2000.
Naylor, Charlie "Year Round Education:Is
it worth the Hassle?" 7 March 2000.
Prisoners of Time page. 7 March
2000.
"Should kids go to school year round?" Electric Library. 15 March
2000.
"Should School Be Held Year Round?" Electric Library. 15 March
2000.