c
- Mountain Of Evidence
- The Case Against Year Round Education In Georgia
Public education in Georgia has moved steadily toward non-traditional school calendars in recent
years, a trend that has shown no benefits to student learning, and which has hurt the economic
health of the state.
It wasn't always this way. Just five years ago, Georgia schools followed a more traditional calendar,
which holds that school year should begin the day after Labor Day and end in May, with enough time
in between for a two week winter break, a week of spring break, a few days for Thanksgiving and
other traditional holidays.
Yet In 2002, more than nine out of 10 Georgia students were in the classroom on or by August 12,
with 16 school districts starting student instruction before August 5, and seven starting in July.
These changes don't reflect the addition of actual instructional days to the school calendar; school
administrators and calendar committees just rearranged the schedule so the school year would
start earlier.
Now, Georgia is considering year-round education, an experiment that has proven so unpopular
and ineffective that in other states that tried it, schools have switched back to a more traditional
calendar. Data from the national group that advocates for year-round education shows that fewer
and fewer schools are trying this form of school calendar.
- Test questions
How did we get here? What prompted school officials to make such dramatic changes in the
school calendar, and to consider as drastic a change as year-round education?
The common reason cited by educators in other states for shifting the school year back has been
the call to better prepare students for high-stakes standardized testing. Throughout the 1990s,
led by states like Texas, Florida and Massachusetts, lawmakers across the nation passed laws
mandating that state education agencies implement accountability systems for public schools, a
sort of report card on school districts and their campuses.
These report cards usually relied heavily on student performance on standardized tests. Schools
where enough students didn't pass the exam were deemed ineffective and told to shape up. At the
same time, schools that boasted high passing rates were held up as prime examples, as places
that provide a quality education.
School administrators looking for every advantage started urging their school boards to start school
earlier and earlier. The standardized tests were held on the same dates, so students in all schools
took the test at the same time. By starting earlier, school administrators believed they could give
teachers a head start on preparing students for the test.
Now, these kinds of tests are a fact of life for every public school in the United States. Federal
legislation signed into law in 2002 has made high stakes standardized testing mandatory
throughout the nation. The test itself is not the same in every state. In Georgia, students in
elementary and middle schools will take the Criterion-Referenced Competency Tests, while
high school students take the Georgia High School Graduation Test.
The problem with the idea that an earlier start date equals better test scores is this -- it
doesn't work. Studies of standardized test scores in state after state show no correlation
between school start dates and top-performing and low-ranking schools.
- Losing ground
For seven years Georgia only had one school, College Park Elementary, operating under a year-round
calendar configuration. By 2002, more than 50 schools in Georgia had adopted the "balanced" or year-
round calendar.
During this noticeable shift in calendars, the average composite score of Georgia students on the
American College Test dropped from 20.3 in 1994 to 19.8 in 2002. The National ACT composite score
remained the same at 20.8. The ACT is one of the nation's most widely used college entrance exams.
More Georgia schools are considering the year-round option even as the rest of the nation moves
away from it. The 2001-02 school year was the first time in at least 15 years that the overall number
of school districts following a year-round school calendar dropped. Statistics on the Web site of the
National Association for Year-Round Education (www.nayre.org) showed 92 fewer school systems
were on a year-round schedule -- 559 districts in the 2001-02 school year versus 651 in 2000-01.
In the 1999-2000 school year, the number of districts on year-round education was at an all-time high,
according to material culled from NAYRE reference directories. But the calendar had no staying power.
In the five years leading up to and including the 1999-2000 school year, almost as many school
systems dropped the often-controversial calendar experiment as had adopted it -- two out of every
five schools.
There were 576 school districts on a year-round calendar in 1999-2000. But 406 school districts that
had been trying out year-round education dropped the program between 1995 and 2000. That
translates to 41 percent of the total number of school systems that were on year-round education
between 1995 and 2000, an average of 81 districts a year.
Data on how many total school districts dropped year-round schooling in 2000-01 and 2001-02 is
not available, although the NAYRE Web site shows that at least 92 districts switched back to traditional
calendars this past school year.
For the first time since NAYRE started tracking year-round education in the 1986-87 school year,
the movement has clearly lost ground.
The movement never had much popular support. There are more than 1,000 school districts in
Texas alone, yet in all of the United States, a little more than half that number were experimenting with
the concept heading into the 21st century -- nearly 100 years after year-round education began.
The promise of year-round education has been that it will translate into better learning. But under
almost all year-round calendars, students don't receive any more days of instruction. The calendar
doesn't make teachers do a better job, or give schools more money to improve their resources.
Taking into account heating and cooling bills from increased use of school facilities and higher
transportation costs, year-round education often costs more.
- Flawed logic
Dr. Gene V. Glass, an acclaimed education researcher and an associate dean at Arizona State
University, sought solid academic studies and research to support the claims of superior learning
through year-round education. He found none, and issued a report in 2002 pointing out the flawed
logic behind the claims of year-round proponents.
One of the main selling points of year-round calendars is based upon a study that argues that shorter
breaks during the school year are better than a long, single study session. "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," he said.
Glass also points out that "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."
Glass continued to say, "there is no credible evidence that the year-round calendar causes improved
academic achievement."
Glass also put serious doubt into any current research supporting year-round education. He noted
that those studies "stem disproportionately from an advocacy organization that has grown up around
this issue: the National Association for Year-Round Education." He further pointed out that NAYRE
"avoids established peer-reviewed scholarly journals" and that studies critical of year-round education
tend to come from researchers working in universities.
- The economic impact
Like the rest of the nation, Georgia is feeling the reverberations from the shaky economy. Tourism is
the number two industry in Cobb County and Georgia, yet hotel occupancy rates in Atlanta are at a
dismal 57 percent. For the first time in many years, the state is operating at a deficit.
There is a wealth of evidence to support the statement that year-round calendars would have a
significant negative impact on the state's already precarious fiscal climate. It all comes down to the
lost time off in the summer for families.
Economic reports in several states discussed at length the economic repercussions of the early August
school start date and the shortened summer. It is logical to assume that a state with a high percentage
of schools on a year-round calendar would see similar, or worse, economic outcomes.
In Texas, the state's top elected fiscal watchdog, the Comptroller of Public Accounts, issued a report on
the economic impact of early August school start dates on the state, particularly on the tourism industry.
In her report, Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn wrote: "At least $332 million is lost from the
annual shriveling of visitor spending in these places (tourist-destinations). Although these are not
statewide economic impacts, in tourist destinations these shocks are real.Teenage employment
declines. Hotel rooms go unfilled; other businesses experience similar slumps. Electricity costs climb
for all school districts, whether in tourists destinations or not." The report estimated public schools
were spending $10 million more a year on utility bills thanks to an early August school start date.
The loss of tourism dollars isn't just about profits for the tourist industry and the jobs and communities
that they support. It's also about the health of the public education system, which relies on taxes paid
by businesses and homeowners alike.
In South Carolina, economist Stephen C. Morse, a professor at the University of South Carolina, found
that early school start dates were costing the tourism industry (the state's largest industry) millions in
lost economic activity and millions in lost state and local tax revenues. He cited lower hotel occupancy
rates, decreased sales taxes and decreased August employment in tourist areas as factors.
He estimated that restoring August as a traditional summer vacation month would bring an additional
$180 million in revenue to South Carolina businesses, more than $6 million in state tax revenue and
$2.34 million in local tax revenue. Morse said those figures came from conservative estimates
accounting for one additional vacation for as few as 4 out of 10 families with children in South Carolina,
plus additional out-of-state family vacations.
- Other consequences
Beyond the evidence, there are other negatives associated with year-round education. The schedule
would eliminate summer learning opportunities for teachers. Teachers are expected to stay abreast
of the latest trends in pedagogy and technology to be effective. The advanced degrees that teachers
may earn through summer college courses also translate into better pay in many school systems.
Year-round education schedules make it more difficult for teachers to earn those better-paying
positions.
The schedule would eliminate summer jobs for students. A study by the Education Policies Institute
found that students who work during their high school years make more money later in life versus
those who don't. After-school jobs get in the way of studies, extracurricular activities and don't provide
the same "real-world," eight-hour-a-day experiences as summer work. Summer employment teaches
responsibility, the importance of staying in school, and provides real-life applications to lessons
learned in the classroom.
Non-traditional school calendars, such as year-round education, often offer numerous one-day
holidays or mini-breaks throughout the school year. Finding childcare during these breaks is not
only difficult, but costly, resulting in many young children being left home alone. If a district provides a
multi-track, year-round calendar, siblings may not always share the same vacation schedule. This
creates havoc for parents trying to plan vacations, and minimizes quality family time. Nationally, it is
estimated we have about 750,000 migrant students. The non-traditional school year puts migrant
students farther behind, since their families usually don't return home from the harvest season until
September, October or even November.
- Conclusion
Ample evidence and anecdotes exist to discourage Georgia's foray into the year-round education
experiment. Should the state's schools move toward this calendar anyway, history suggests that
public opinion, the lack of academic results and the negative economic impact will force school
administrators to switch back to a more traditional calendar.
The hard lessons that would have to be learned in the meantime, however, can be avoided. The
proponents need only look at the research, talk to their peers in other states and think logically about
the consequences.