West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » West Seattle Schools

(40 posts)

Year Round Education

Started 2 years ago by SpeakLoud
Latest reply from hopey

SpeakLoud
Member Profile

This is one of my favorite subjects that I rarely get to hear about but would love to know from my 'neighbors' what you think about 'year round' education. For example the school year would be September to August with seasonal breaks throughout the year-2 weeks at spring 2 weeks at winter 2 weeks at summer 2 weeks at fall. And the other 'holiday' days???

Posted 2 years ago #
Irukandji
Member Profile

I'd LOVE year-round school 9:30-5:30 four days per week, shorter holiday breaks and an allotted number of 'vacation' days so families could choose to vacate at will so long as educational standards are met.

Good effing luck, eh?

Posted 2 years ago #
hopey
Member Profile

Doesn't work for parents sharing custody in different jurisdictions, different school districts, or, as is my situation, different states.

Posted 2 years ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

What about it exactly wouldn't work in your situation Hopey? Just trying to understand all the different points and reasons.

Posted 2 years ago #
Oliver
Member Profile

I am all for a year-round school system. We outgrew the agricultural need for summers off long ago. Now, we would be much better off if schools were designed to consider the needs of families with parents who have to work outside the home.
The start/end times and various breaks simply don't work well for most families. Sure, we make it work through a patch-work of alternatives,but it sure would be nice to not have to scrape together child care, camps, and other activities for the summer when they could be in school and learning.

Sadly, I don't see it happening anytime soon.

Posted 2 years ago #
HMC Rich
Member Profile

Oliver is correct about the agricultural need around here. It's a different story in the rural areas but last time I checked, Seattle isn't very rural.

I would be interested in the breakdown of families sending their children to public schools. I wonder how many single parents compared to two parent families there are. Someone has to look after the kids after school and if a parent or parents are working what makes more sense for them?

Also, what are the test differences between year round schools vs fall through spring sessions? Do teachers make more for year round education or the current setup?

Let me know if you know.

Posted 2 years ago #
JanS
Member Profile

are there any school districts in the nation who have this kind of year round set-up? I'd be real interested in seeing how it's working, if so. I actually like Irukandji's idea. Things need to change at some point in public education, as the model we have now doesn't seem to always work, as our world has changed...and our kids are falling behind. Yes, they graduate with knowledge, but many can't put a decent resume together. They're so used to texting shortcuts, etc. that it carries over into real life, and that simply doesn't work. And the longer days would allow more sleep for the kids, would allow schools to have on a regular basis what is now considered extra-curricular...I see a lot of good ideas in that model. And, no, my child is grown, almost 29..so it wouldn't affect me or her, but it's an interesting idea, none-the-less.

Posted 2 years ago #
hopey
Member Profile

Hypothetical situation:
Child lives with Dad in Seattle. Seattle adopts year-round schooling. Mom lives in another state which does not have year-round schooling. The parents have a court order regarding visitation which requires that the child travels to spend every summer (8-10 weeks) with Mom in the other state which does not have year-round schooling.

What happens? Do the parents then become obligated to bear the cost of 8-10 weeks of private tutoring while the child is with Mom, so the child can keep up with their peers in Seattle? Even if Mom's area also has year-round schooling, is that child really going to integrate into another school in another state just for the summer? Or would the State argue that the Mom loses her right to summer visitation time because the child MUST be in school? Does the Dad have to give the Mom every single school vacation to make up for the fact that the child spends summers in Seattle for school, effectively meaning that the only way Dad gets a family vacation is by making the child miss school?

I can't see a reasonable solution to the hypothetical situation that does not place an undue burden on one or both parents' visitation time with the child.

Posted 2 years ago #
bertha
Member Profile

I too am very interested in year round education. I found this link http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin137.shtml that gives a summary and pros & cons. It says about 3000 schools in the US are in some kind of year round schedule. Interestingly it seems our current calendar is not agriculturally based but rather weather based. School was not held during the summer because of the heat (which makes total sense when you think about it) and one school district even reverted back to a traditional schedule because classrooms were simply too hot during the summer. There are many different calendar scenarios: in school 45 days, then 15 days off or 60 days, 20 days. Seems the district can do any kind of schedule as long as children are in school for the amount of days legally required by the state. If you Google year round schools a ton of stuff comes up. As usual, it isn't an easy good vs bad deal. Could be a good change, could be a bad change.

Hopey, any change to a school schedule would probably require a modification to the parenting plan. My guess would be visiting the out-of-state parent more frequently, for shorter periods. Not saying I agree or disagree but the courts try to accomodate the child's schedule first then the parents & I would guess the education schedule would be the court's first priority.

Posted 2 years ago #
maplesyrup
Member Profile

If the evidence were to indicate year round schooling provides a better education, that would trump whatever childcare issue is out there.

Posted 2 years ago #
swimcat
Member Profile

I love the idea of year-round school. I doubt it would ever happen here though.

Posted 2 years ago #
hopey
Member Profile

It's not a "childcare" issue. It is a right of a parent to have residential custody time with their child. That's not "childcare". That's parenting.

Four two-week visits is not the same as eight consecutive weeks of residential time. Plus it quadruples the travel costs. Airfare aint cheap. And all that travel would be hard on the child.

Unfortunately, for many shared custody parents making a dramatic visitation scheduling change caused by a switch to year-round schooling would mean more money spent on lawyers. Not everyone can resolve scheduling conflicts without court assistance.

The only point I am trying to make is that for people with shared custody situations, the idea of year-round school raises a whole host of issues that traditional 2-natural-parent households may not have considered.

Posted 2 years ago #
maplesyrup
Member Profile

Not trying to be rude.

All I'm saying is that the decision should be made according to which system does the better job educating kids.

And cost-effectiveness should be the secondary factor.

If both systems are equal on those levels then, sure, you can introduce other factors.

Posted 2 years ago #
hopey
Member Profile

maplesyrup, with all due respect, I don't think you have ever been involved in a high-conflict custody case, especially not one where the parents live on opposite sides of the country.

How child custody decisions ideally should be made is vastly different from how they are actually made in the courtroom. Cost matters when it means a child can no longer spend any time with one parent because that parent can't afford the plane fare. Believe it or not, parenting (visitation) time trumps anything having to do with school. But this is not worth arguing point by point in what is supposed to be a discussion of year-round schooling.

Many divorced parents can work out such issues themselves, and more power to 'em. But that is not the case with everyone... and that is the only point I was trying to make in response to the question SpeakLoud directed to me.

Year-round schooling affects shared custody parents differently. That's all.

Posted 2 years ago #
flowerpetal
Member Profile

Here are some challenges to be addressed when considering year round schools:
*Costs for maintainance/repairs of bldg.s/busses
*Loss of time for teachers' continuing ed req.s
*Teachers cannot supplement income w/ summer jobs
*Teacher burnout (they have a tough job!)
*Summer vacations/plans (like Hopey said)
*High school students would lose out on summer jobs, college courses,
*Say bye-bye to summer camps, church camps, scholastic camps, athletic camps
*Transfer problems for kids moving in/out of the district from a traditional district

There are conflicting research findings on this topic. Many seem to point to the higher dosage equals more learning. But when you look at other countries where children exceed what our children are learning; and doing that in the same amount of time, you likely will question if this is the right answer.

Posted 2 years ago #
maplesyrup
Member Profile

hopey, sounds like you're in a difficult position. And no I haven't been in that spot nor would I ever want to be.

My initial comment was a knee-jerk reaction (not just to your post by the way) to what I see as a tendency to overlook what should be the goal behind changing to a different system, which imo should be improving the education offered.

For another example, take a look at the link that bertha posted. One of the "pros" is that it gives people time to take vacations when there are fewer crowds and lower prices. Really? That's nice and all but it seems kind of out of the scope of what we should be aiming for.

Anyway I'd be most interested in seeing some more measurable effects of changing to a year round system.

Posted 2 years ago #
Semele
Member Profile

Obviously there are some on here who have never been in such a situation and really have no right to beat on someone who is. I am not in that situation but grew up in it. My father had custody of my brother and I while we spent summers with our mom. We went to year round school for elementary and thankfully she lived in the same area for that time.

Once we moved to junior high/high school we went to traditional and as my mom had moved out of state the summers were the only time we got to see her. Had it been year round we may have seen her a lot less due to financial constraints or what have you and had my parents go through even more stressful mediation.

Having gone to both types of schools I didn't notice anything better about either, I still had a decent education, but truth be told I HATED going year round, but then again, most people don't care about what the kids think.

Sorry, but some of the responses were kind of upsetting so I had to pipe in.

Posted 2 years ago #
maplesyrup
Member Profile

"beat on"?

Seriously?

Posted 2 years ago #
Semele
Member Profile

jesus christ, jumped on better? It sure did come across as Hopey was being attacked bringing up a valid argument. I just wanted to add to the other side. This is one of the reasons I rarely post on here anymore, people are constantly given a hard time for voicing an opinion especially if it is a dissenting one.

Hopey, I understand what you are going through from being a kid in that situation. Good luck to you in your situation.

Posted 2 years ago #
hopey
Member Profile

Semele, I'd send you a PM if I could, but thanks. :) It is rare to find someone who understands what our family is going through, and how hard it is on all of us, including my stepson.

Posted 2 years ago #
flowerpetal
Member Profile

Semele, Hopey, I understand as best I can, your circumstances. I have not been divorced nor were my parents. I think you demonstrate very well one of the challenges to year round schools.

The fabric of our lives does not support year round schools. Perhaps if we had always had that; we would view it differently. But now we have centuries of 9-10 months of school for our children coupled with no clear indicators that year round is beneficial. I don't see it happenig.

Posted 2 years ago #
shihtzu
Member Profile

Booo to year round school. Summer is fun!

Posted 2 years ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

you say that now on the first day of summer!!! Check back in on the last one.

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

hopey..

i wonder if divorced parents would be more likely to choose to live near their children if they realized that moving would require them to either fund more than one trip or lessen the time spent with them... or would move to be closer to their children if the custodial parent had to move?

at one time divorce agreements included a requirement that the custodial parent live in the state where the divorce was granted unless they received court approval to move... to secure the "rights" of both parents.

It is sad that adults don't realize that when they have children they make a contract for life.. to parent those children.

They don't have to stay together to do it.. but they sure do have to cooperate for the best interests of the child. When they don't, it affects the kids for life...

Sadly, i know that both from the perspective of a child who experienced it and a parent who earned her wisdom too late to undo the harm she caused.

***

year round education tempered with regular breaks seems like a good idea to me... it would eliminate the amount of time so many students spend in review of material they learned last year.. and would make it easier for families to plan for time off together.

we would have to pay our teachers for a full year so they wouldn't have to supplement their incomes with second jobs... but there is no reason to assume that teachers would suffer more burnout from year round school than they do now... and it would be easy to gear continuing ed credits to standardized time off... some schools already do so with on-line classes.

I would love to see both year round school and nationally standardized education...

Posted 2 years ago #
FullTilt
Member Profile

Some school districts are doing year round schooling with large chunks of vacation-for example they get all of October and Feb off instead of July and August. Switching to several short breaks would not be the same-teachers spend the majority of those short breaks grading, planning and catching up on work-only by having a definitive end and beginning do we get a true break. We still spend a large portion of summer in training, planning and prep for the next school year, but it is also the only time we really get off.

And JoB, as for national standards, please, please be careful what you wish for. I totally understand the desire to make sure everyone is up to par-a main reason I went into teaching is because in college I realized how vastly inequitable high schools across the country are. But in the struggle to standardize you loose the creativity and personalization that actually makes a difference. The research backs up that one of the biggest factors in student success is having a personal connection with at least one adult at school. We get that connection by altering classes to meet the needs of students, thereby demonstrating to them that we care about them and whether or not they are learning, not just cranking out lessons and grades. So be careful. We saw in Bellevue some of the garbage that school districts come up with to try and standardize. Good intentions, bad execution.

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

full tilt...

i agree that there is a lot of bad execution... i am not advocating teaching to standardized tests but giving every child an equal education with equal resources...

i know.. easier said than done.

Posted 2 years ago #
rockhills
Member Profile

I lived (and worked) in a district several years ago that was on the year-round system. Their model was three months on, one month off, so that families had a one-month vacation, three times a year. Days were reserved for professional development/planning just prior to each trimester. There were three rotating 'tracks' so that one track was always off. There was also a 'traditional' track, which all of the high schools and a percentage of the younger students followed. I'm assuming that was done to accommodate sports, internships, and college calendars.

Everyone had the traditional major breaks (winter holidays, spring break)off.

The model had a lot of benefits, including a reduction in the need for classroom space. Another benefit was the ability to vacation outside of peak seasons/rates. The theory was that there would be less regression following shorter breaks. I have no idea whether the data actually supported that or not.

The problem arose when siblings within a family were on different tracks--a child care and vacation scheduling nightmare. Families could request a track, and the district would try to keep siblings on the same track, but it was not always possible.

I never heard about visitation issues--it seems to me that competent lawyers and judges would take that into account when negotiating.

I'm not advocating for or against, particularly; just wanted to let people know my experience of the pros and cons.

Posted 2 years ago #
beachdrivegirl
Member Profile

"I totally understand the desire to make sure everyone is up to par-a main reason I went into teaching is because in college I realized how vastly inequitable high schools across the country are. But in the struggle to standardize you loose the creativity and personalization that actually makes a difference. The research backs up that one of the biggest factors in student success is having a personal connection with at least one adult at school. We get that connection by altering classes to meet the needs of students, thereby demonstrating to them that we care about them and whether or not they are learning, not just cranking out lessons and grades. So be careful. We saw in Bellevue some of the garbage that school districts come up with to try and standardize. Good intentions, bad execution. " -Full Tilt.

I think that is most of the most accurate assesments I have heard about our school system. Although, I am not a teacher myself, I am surronded by an amazing family all very involved in the public educaiton system. In my immediate family alone i am surronded by 100+ years of educational experience.

Posted 2 years ago #
maplesyrup
Member Profile

As I said earlier, the most important factor to me would be whether year-round schooling provides a better education. Looks like the evidence toward that is inconclusive so far.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070811151449.htm

http://www.edweek.org/rc/issues/year-round-schooling/

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

maplesyrup...

thanks for the links.. they intrigued me so i searched further.

i was very frustrated by the lack of current information.. although what i could find relying on the standardized tests our kids have been taking.. would indicate that there might be more evidence of improvement than the dated studies would indicate...

from:
http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin137.shtml

"It's a more flexible, relaxed, and effective way to educate kids," added Smotherman. "One major new study shows that 54 of 64 school variables -- attendance, grades, discipline, test scores, and so on -- are better with a year-round calendar than with traditional calendars. Overall, year-round education offers schools an exciting, almost cost-free opportunity to improve quality time between teachers and students."

you have to scroll down.. the article is at the bottom of the page...

In an article dated Apr 22, 2009 about the Chicago school system, they idnicate that test results there show improvement in year round schools..

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/apr/22/local/chi-cps-yearroundapr22

This 2008 article also indicates test scores increase in year round schooling...

http://www.publicschoolreview.com/articles/41

I looked for the research cited in one of your articles to examine protocol.. but was unable to find it. perhaps it hasn't been published yet. i wondered if he examined one track year round schools or multitrack year round schools... there seems to be some consensus that one track schools do better...

i also looked for the research cited in the education world article.. all i could find were quotations citing the research.

i did find this though.. and if you are willing to slog through it there are quite a few research citations including web addresses to the research..

http://www.indiana.edu/~reading/ieo/bibs/extschyr.html

interesting subject... but i am done reading now:)

Posted 2 years ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

The research referenced in the ScienceDaily link is a conference paper. It was published in the American Sociological Association's collected papers from the 2007 meeting. (The paper itself is 59 pages long, so you'll forgive me if I don't take the time to read it right now, but you can read it yourself here. (Note that link leads to a PDF.)

A lot of the sources cited in maplesyrup's second link are academic journals, which means you'd need to visit an academic library to access them.

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

datamuse..

it takes a long time to read that paper.. and in the end i found it pretty confusing...

In the first place.. it tracks only kindergarten and 1st grade.

in the second place.. it doesn't use raw data but extrapolates what a child's core would have been based on an average learning rate based on an average of increase... and then further muddies the water with other extrapolations which supposedly cancel the incompatibilities in the data.

it tracked only reading and math and threw out reading because a much higher proportion of students in year round schools couldn't read.. or speak english when they entered school.. but assumed a lack of language competence wouldn't affect math scores... or the ability of the students to increase their math scores..

and i didn't see where it distinguished between single track and multitrack year round schools.

in addition, it is obvious from the comments section of the paper and the number of totally irrelevant observations that the researcher was biased against year round schools to begin with.

this paper may be a statistician's dream.. but even i could make the argument for why it is not an accurate analysis of school performance.

thanks for supplying the link... i love looking at the source... you learn so much that way.

Posted 2 years ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

Interesting that even the research that is about education is incomplete and not 'real' data or evidence. Regardless of the 'research' what it comes down to for me is common sense. A year round schedule as I see it is not the same amount of days but more-that would be the point. But if you want to use research there is lots to say that full day kindergarten is dramatically more effective than half day.
>>Hough and Bryde (1996) looked at student achievement data for 511 children enrolled in half-day and all-day kindergarten programs in 25 classrooms. Children in the all-day programs scored higher on the achievement test than those in half-day programs on every item tested. <<
http://www.education.com/reference/article/Ref_Recent_Research_All/

Perhaps testing could be our next topic???

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

SpeakLoud...

it's a real catch 22, isn't it.

Testing has led to teaching for test results because it is linked to federal funding...

however, without standardized testing we have no way to adequately compare educational standards from school to school..

and tieing testing to funds is what caused schools to spend the money necessary to test and comply :(

compound that with the results of standardized testing being only one of the outcome measures of the success of a school system and it becomes very difficult to compare one system with another.

i agree that we are in need of more school days if we expect to keep up with the educational excellence in the rest of the world and maintain our competitive edge...

and year round schooling with regular breaks makes the most sense for delivering extra school days...

although multi-track year round schooling might give us the most use of our buildings.. it also poses the greatest obstacle to maintenance of those facilities... and the most disruption of family life when all family members are not on the same track with the same time off.

I am in favor of year round schooling with regular breaks to allow teachers time for catching up and education and vacation and to allow children time for unstructured activity and vacations with their parents... and for at risk students to get timely opportunities for supplemental education.

nationally standardized school breaks would also facilitate family gatherings for those whose extended families often don't live in the same district.. or state.. or on the same coast:)

just as nationally standardized testing that is not tied to school funding could lead to more widespread educational excellence, a renewed respect for high school diplomas and thus reduced need and costs for secondary education and a work force that has the basic competency required to continually re-educate itself as the market adapts.

If we are going to pay for education, we should get the best education for our children that out money can buy.. and we are a long way from accomplishing that.

Posted 2 years ago #
datamuse
Member Profile

One man's common sense is another man's madness...which is why we have research. I think one reason the research has yet to reach definitive consensus is that there are too many variables: school systems, teachers, and students vary widely. (I once had a summer job analyzing standardized test scores. This was a test administered within a single state. Even there, the variety across a single district was pretty astounding.)

SpeakLoud, there is no research cited in that article that is more recent than 2000. That's practically antique. The article itself isn't dated so maybe it's from 2001 or something. Anyway, I'm not sure you can conclude from an article on half-day versus full-day for five-year-olds that year-round for K through 12 is definitely the best way to go. Maybe it is--I'm not a teacher and don't have kids, so I have no horse in this race--but I'd want more recent and more pertinent evidence.

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

datamuse..

the paper that everyone is quoting compared half day kindergarten programs in a year round schools that were most likely multi-track (the less successful form of year round schooling) with the progress of children enrolled in full day traditional year kindergarten programs...

although that factor was supposedly "accounted for" .. along with several others.. including widely disparate socioeconomic classes in the school systems studied...

that factor alone would definately affect the outcome of research comparing the two school systems.

I am left wondering why the researcher in Ohio chose year-round school programs that were mostly west coast when the Chicago school system offered a more comparable demographic to the traditional system schools he chose...

the biggest problem with letting the research speak on this subject is that there doesn't seem to be much current research at all... in spite of the existence of ample testing data due to mandated standardized testing... and what is available seems to start with a biased premise...

they set out to prove a point instead of explore the evidence...

of course.. most research does that to some extent... which leads to the fatal flaw in depending entirely upon research conclusions without reading both the protocols and the data.

makes for good headlines tho ;-)

Posted 2 years ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

Let face it friends-you can't make everyone happy! There will always be someone who dosn;t agree, or thinks it's too good to be true or that it just dosn't work for. Can we say the current system is really working for anyone? (don;t answer that-I know it's working for someone!) Yet it is familiar-it's what we know and there is safety in that. No matter what we do-and we MUST DO SOMETHING-it's going to piss someone off. The trick then is how do you piss off the least amount of people :)

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB
Member Profile

Speakloud...

I think pissing off the least amount of people with the most influence is what got us where we are...

Something clearly needs to change since the USA is no longer anywhere near the top of the charts when it comes to education... and it is going to take a well educated work force to meet coming challenges.

Posted 2 years ago #
beachdrivegirl
Member Profile

Teachers get the cut, but sports stay, this is what our education system is about:

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/south_bay&id=6884949

Posted 2 years ago #
hopey
Member Profile

Oh come on.

"Sports are surviving with the help of an $800,000 insurance settlement, fundraisers, and a $200 per student athlete donation."

It seems safe to assume there is something about the insurance settlement which prevents that money from being applied to teacher's salaries rather than sports programs.

Where is the insurance settlement money to pay for teachers? Where are the fundraisers and donations to pay for teachers? Right. There aren't any. Therefore there isn't sufficient funding for the teachers, but there is funding for sports.

It's an odd situation, I agree, but let's apply a little critical thinking instead of just jumping to conclusions. I don't think that particular school board in that particular situation could have made a different choice.

Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^