c
Summary of Findings in the January 2002 Report Published by the Education Policy Research Unit, Education Policy Studies Laboratory, College of Education, Arizona State University.
- All quotes are from Section 4 of the report:
- Time for School: Its Duration and Allocation
- by Dr. Gene V. Glass
"The original proposals to operate year-round schools (YRS) came from a consideration of the
economics of school construction rather than any consideration of learning gains." School districts
around the county have dropped year-round schooling due to the increased cost of the program
verses the traditional school calendar. (Time to Learn Note: Newspaper clips show many school
districts have dropped year-round education due to the increased cost of operation and the lack
of academic gains.)
Several studies have reached the conclusion that there is no significant difference in achievement
between students in year-round schools and students attending traditional calendar schools.
Proponents of year-round school often report that having small breaks during the year is better
academically. "These arguments often rely on data drawn from laboratory experiments where
subjects memorize nonsense syllables or perform other non-meaningful tasks. The relevance
of these studies to actual classroom practice is questionable."
Students normally receive the same number of days of instruction regardless of the calendar
configuration.
"The 45-15 plan (45 days of instruction followed by 15 days of vacation) is the most popular
year-round attendance plan because all students have a summer vacation."
"High schools do not favor the 45-15 schedule because it limits summer job opportunities."
Vacation learning loss is often said to be less in year-round systems and assumed to translate
into higher academic success. Not so. According to researchers Smith and Glass "although
teachers in year-round schools spent less time reviewing pre-vacation material than teachers
in schools on the traditional calendar, the actual achievement differences were insignificant
on tests designed specifically to measure district objectives."
"Changes in the calendar by which those 180 days are delivered are very unlikely to yield higher
levels of pupil achievement. In terms of pupil achievement, it matters not at all whether those
180 days are interrupted by one long recess or four short ones."
Most importantly to point out to school board members spouting the benefits of YRE, Dr. Glass
points out, "Not all studies have failed to find achievement advantages for the year-round calendar.
Those that do claim advantages, however, stem disproportionately from an advocacy organization
that has grown up around this issue: the National Association for Year-Round Education
(. NAYRE publishes its own research reports, and avoids established peer-reviewed scholarly
journals. 'Negative' studies have tended to come form researchers working in universities."