Though the concept of a year-round school schedule seems like a new and innovative idea, the practice has been around in the United States since the early 1800s, when it was first implemented in urban areas like Chicago and New York. The concept, however, did not gain momentum until much later. It started to grow in popularity in the 1980s, according to the executive director of the National Association for Year-Round Education and superintendent of Holt Public Schools in Michigan, David Hornak. Today, roughly 4 percent (3 million) of K-12 students in the U.S. attend year-round schools. The idea of switching to a year-round schooling calendar, where students attend school in nine-week increments with three weeks of break in between, is intriguing, but is it really a good idea?
One of the main points that proponents of year-round schooling argue is how it solves the problem of the 'summer slide'. This is a researched and reported phenomenon where students lose ground in their learning over the long summer months. Often, teachers have to spend time at the beginning of the new school year reteaching concepts that were already covered in the previous grade, when they could be advancing with new material. This is especially apparent with the subjects of reading and math. Then, there is the matter of the achievement gap between low and high-income students. Studies have found that disadvantaged students lose about 27 percent more of their learning gains in the summer months than their peers. The 'summer slide' contributes greatly to the achievement gap between low and high-income students because the latter go to summer camps, visit museums, and continue their learning in some form over the summer. In contrast, low-income students tend to ignore their education over the break completely.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Nonetheless, a lot of studies, including a study by Ohio State University published in 2007, show no noticeable academic difference between students attending year-round school and those in traditional school. In support of this claim, Paul von Hippel, an educational inequality expert at the University of Texas, argues that no matter the school calendar or the household income, students end up doing about the same on standardized tests. Von Hippel is an opponent of year-round school schedules because he does not believe that they fix the problem of the imbalance between students who come from different backgrounds. “The differences you see between upper-middle class families and poor families aren't differences that go away if you rearrange the school calendar”, von Hippel says. “The summer provides a window into what those differences are like, but those differences exist every weekend. Whenever children are out of school, their environments are less equal”.
There is also a vast misconception about the year-round model that students spend more time learning, but it’s the same 180 days a year spent in the classroom. Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, states that rearranging the schedule is not going to fix the problem of inequality, rather making smarter use of the time spent in the classroom will do that. Schools need level playing fields, not cleverly designed calendars to bridge the achievement gap between low-income and high-income students, he argues.
Furthermore, some researchers argue that the difficulty of having to secure childcare every few weeks versus working out a more permanent solution during the summer is a reason that the year-round schedule would complicate things for parents who rely on school and childcare.
Another possible complication is how not having a normal summer break disrupts summer traditions like family reunions, vacations, summer camps, summer jobs, and more. Moreover, an interesting perspective that some researchers emphasize is how extracurricular activities such as sports would struggle with this new schedule. It would be a real challenge to build a team environment with only nine weeks in school and then a 3-week break. Also, games and competitions would still be going on during breaks because most schools throughout the country would not adopt the year-round schedule.
Cost is definitely an important aspect for schools to consider when debating whether or not to switch to a year-round model. Therefore, in this context, it should be noted that year-round schooling is exceedingly more expensive than traditional schooling because of teacher contracts and keeping the facilities open all year round.
Transitioning to a year-round school schedule is a major change for a district to make, so it is good to thoroughly debate all aspects before making the decision. The pivotal question to ask is whether making the switch would solve more problems than it creates, or vice versa. While some believe that switching to a year-round schooling system would fix many problems that plague schools today, I believe that rearranging the schedule is not the solution and that many of the same issues would still exist in a year-round model.
Stuck on your essay?
