Wednesday, February 6, 2002
|
Wednesday, February 6, 2002 |
|
Year-round school an idea deserving of more debate I was both excited and disappointed to read the article about year-round school ("Longer school year ahead?") in The Citizen Jan 30. Excited because community participation in topics regarding education reform is crucial for the success of our children in school. Disappointed because The Citizen failed to seize the unique opportunity of being a neutral and informed source on such an important educational issue. The very title of the article misrepresented the concept of year-round school (YRS), which in fact does not lengthen the number of days that children attend school, but rather redistributes days in a way that is believed to improve retention of subject matter. I was further disturbed to find Ms. Jean Zhuño's op-ed piece representing the negative viewpoint on the YRS issue without a corresponding piece that presented the proponent's viewpoint. In all fairness to everyone involved in our children's educational process, we should investigate new ideas for education in a thorough and impartial manner. Moreover, we should report our findings in a manner that allows the reader to form his or her own opinion. Last year, I wrote [a] report for the Indiana Youth Institute. Although much of my research was particular to the state of Indiana, I included nationwide findings that place YRS in historical context. Without this general background, how can the citizens of Fayetteville make an informed decision for their children's welfare? Carmen Patrick Peachtree City carmenpatrick@prodigy.net
[Editor's note: The report mentioned above may be found in the longer version of this letter on our web site, www.thecitizennews.com] "YEAR-ROUND SCHOOL: SAVING THE NATION AT RISK?" In the last two decades, much concerning the American school calendar has been researched, written, and discussed. Beginning in 1983 with the U.S. Department of Education's dismal assessment of the American educational system, "Our Nation at Risk," the U.S. has been engaged in debate regarding education reform. Continuing this national debate, organizations such as the National Association for Year-Round Education (NAYRE), the National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE) and the National Education Commission on Time and Learning (NECTL) have championed year-round school calendars as a first step to improving American K-12 education. All of these groups recognize that the advent of the Information Age means that children today must learn perhaps more than twice the amount of information as their parents did, and they must do this with the same (often less) amount of time. In criticizing the traditional school calendar as an "unacknowledged design flaw in American Education," the NECTL has gone so far as to proclaim, "Our schools and the people involved with them -- students, teachers, administrators, parents, and staff -- are prisoners of time, captives of the school clock and calendar (Prisoners of Time, 1994)." DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN "YEAR-ROUND" AND "EXTENDED-YEAR" In 1983, the National Commission on Excellence in Education recommended " ... more effective use of the existing school day, a longer school day, or a lengthened school year." In expanding these solutions, the NCEE advocated any combination of the following tools: giving students more homework, a seven-hour school day, a school year extended to between 200-220 days, and a strict attendance policy (The Nation at Risk). The distinction between a "year-round" calendar versus an "extended-year" calendar is often accidentally blurred. Year-round calendars do not increase the number of days that children attend school. Instead, year-round schools (YRS) redistribute vacation days. Typically schools are in session for 45 days and off 15 days with the total number of school days per year remaining the traditional 180. The common-sense argument for such a calendar change is that students retain more learned material, which leads to less teaching time spent reviewing information and more time spent on new material. In contrast, extended-year calendars increase the number of school days to as much as 240 days per year (Ballinger, 1988; Year Round School Symposium, 2001). WEIGHING THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF YRS Advocates of YRS see a number of benefits to such a calendar change, the biggest being that students forget less during three short breaks than they do over the traditional long summer vacation. Other benefits to YRS include less stress and burnout for kids and teachers, a better schedule fit for most families' lifestyles (especially concerning finding childcare over school breaks), remedial instruction provided throughout the school year during inter-sessions, and finally, declines in discipline problems, absenteeism, truancy, and vandalism. Surmountable disadvantages to YRS include the struggles of parents with kids on two different YRS schedules, and the disruption of organized recreational programs typically available only in the summer. Other disadvantages are the decrease in teachers attending college summer courses, and the increase in work for administrators, custodians, and secretaries. The largest obstacles to year-round schools remain lack of funds or flexibility to compensate teachers for summer work, and the long-standing tradition of a nine-month school year (Cooper et al, 1996; Frazier, 2001; Frazier 1999; Gandara and Fish, 1994; Year Round School Symposium, 2001). HOW YRS BECAME A STIGMATIZED CONCEPT - THE RELIEF OF OVERCROWDED SCHOOLS Implementation of YRS has been riddled with problems of racial segregation and educational inequality. There are two types of year-round schools: single-track and multitrack. Single-track year-round schools deal with one population of school kids who are on the same schedule year-round. Such YRS schools, when implemented, are most often found in wealthy, predominately white school districts. Ironically, single-track year-round schools have proven most beneficial for disadvantaged kids such as those kids learning English as a second language, and kids requiring remedial attention. Multitrack year-round schools have several groups of students (up to four different groups) who attend the same school, but on a staggered calendar. In this way, administrators relieve overcrowding because only as much as two-thirds of an entire school's population may be in-session at one time. Historically, multitrack year-round school has been an agent of cost-effectiveness in the management of overcrowding rather than of academic excellence. Sadly, this type of YRS is most popular among poor school districts with predominately minority populations (Orellana and Thorne, 1998; Year Round School Symposium, 2001; Kneese and Knight, 1995). This stigma on year-round schooling has shifted educators' focus to extended-year schooling, which is implemented solely for improving academic achievement. Due to cost constraints, only 135 schools nationwide operated on an extended-year calendar in '98-'99. In contrast, nearly 600 school districts in 40 states operated at least one year-round school in 1998 (Frazier, 1999). WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS "The assumption that year-round schooling improves achievement rests on the hypothesis that a more continual learning environment better supports student learning (5)." (Frazier, 1999) Limited empirical testing of this hypothesis, poorly designed studies that lack control groups or an established baseline, and difficulty accumulating statistically relevant data samples over the long term, have led to inconclusive analyses of the impact of year-round schooling on academic achievement. However, several studies have indirectly shown that year-round school would be an optimal educational setting, especially for children who need remedial help. Such studies show that children with the lowest reading and math test scores before summer begins lose the most over the summer compared to children that had average to high test scores. In addition, much research shows that students from all income levels and racial groups demonstrate a slower rate of academic growth during the summer than during the winter. This rate varies along income levels. Low-income children lose academic ground during the summer, middle-income children neither gain nor lose academic ground, while high-income children consistently gain academic ground. It is important to note that although these trends hold, all income groups suffer from the summer layoff as a critical period for achievement loss (Frazier, 1999; Cooper et al, 1996; Kneese and Knight 1995; Year Round School Symposium, 2001). Oddly enough, air-conditioning assumes a central role in the YRS debate. Additional summer school days will result in stiflingly hot classrooms for school buildings lacking air-conditioning. Concern over student discomfort disrupting learning during summer days is often mentioned as a con to YRS. Attacks from YRS proponents usually charge that school boards that do not garner the support of their community about YRS because they do a poor job of informing the community about the differences between single and multitrack YRS (Wilham "Year-round," 1997; Year Round School Symposium, 2001). The nationwide trend in YRS implementation has been that adamant opposition to YRS ceases after the change has been made at one school and kids' achievement is not harmed. Once a school changes, several more follow in rapid succession with increasingly more community support (Thompson, 2001; Year Round School Symposium, 2001). The most consistently mentioned parental worry regarding YRS is the loss of summer activities such as summer swim teams, little leagues, and camps. Although these worries top the list when parents consider YRS, educators often fail to see cause for concern. Dr. Julie Frazier of Purdue University's Child Development and Family Studies Department feels that youth workers will adjust to the calendar quite well and that summer camps can take place in the longer summer break allotted in most year-round school calendars. She adds that the amusement park industry is most strongly opposed to YRS because temporary high school summer labor is desperately needed during the season (2001). Prominent YRS researcher Carolyn Shields spoke at the Southern Illinois University Year-Round School Symposium in April of 2001. When asked about the impact of YRS on youth workers, Shields gave an example of a Boys and Girls Club that programmed around the calendar because the change had occurred in a widespread fashion at several schools in a district (2001). None of the most prominent researchers, speakers, or advocates of YRS address the potential problems that YRS might cause for youth organizations, namely, difficulty finding college and high school kids to lead programs during nontraditional vacation times. On the other hand, these researchers do outline schedules that make breaks line up well with traditional vacations such as Thanksgiving and Christmas, and arrange the schedule so YRS kids get spring break in sync with any neighboring schools operating on a traditional calendar (Frazier, 2001; Thompson, 2001; Year Round School Symposium, 2001). Despite a lack of solid empirical evidence proving their efficacy, year-round schools have enjoyed widespread popularity. "Educators' claims that YRS promotes continual learning, reduces memory loss by shortening summer vacation, and uses school facilities more efficiently have led to roughly a sixfold increase during the past 10 years in the number of districts implementing YRS (Frazier, 1999)."
|
||