[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]
Few issues in a community generate the fractiousness that changes in school calendars can, yet many districts nationwide are scheduling earlier start times for school. The traditional September start date may become a mere memory. In 1988, just over half the nation's schools opened before September 1; in 2000, three-quarters did-a 50 percent increase (Market Data Retrieval, 2001).
A year ago, Rudolph W. Guiliani, then mayor of New York City, proposed Saturday classes, and New York's governor suggested longer school days. In California, Governor Gray Davis has recommended adding thirty instructional days for middle-school students to address academic deficiencies (Wilgoren, January 10, 2001).
A move toward year-round schooling propels some of this change, but socioeconomic conditions and demands for higher school standards play significant roles as well. As of this writing, newly passed federal legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, calls for more testing and accountability than many states presently require. In this high-stakes environment, addressing time in some form-more of it, rearranging how it's scheduled, or making better use of what's already there-has become part of the school-reform agenda.
This Digest discusses the rationale for changing school calendars, describes what some districts are doing, and advises school leaders and board members on the issues that typically arise when a calendar is changed.
As part of the push to reform schools, states have legislated so-called high-stakes testing and mandated increased instructional hours. To complete state examinations by December's winter break, some school districts are starting classes earlier. Others have added days to accommodate a state-mandated expansion of hours, while others modify the calendar for localized reasons (Keller 2001). Some of these calendars add days, usually as remedial intercessions between breaks. Summer sessions also play an increasing role.
For these and other reasons, more schools across the country are altering their instructional schedules. Some are trying later start times to address adolescents' physiological needs (for more sleep). Several rural districts are adopting four-day weeks. Other schools are experimenting with trimesters. Extended learning schedules for students with academic deficiencies are now available in many districts. And two million children attend year-round schools (Chaika 1999).
In 2002, Pinellas County schools in the Tampa Bay, Florida, area will open August 7 to allow time for the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test; the district also hopes the change will help it compete for teachers by offering an early paycheck (Fields 2000). At the Jefferson School District in Kentucky, school officials moved the start date to mid-August so that the school year ends before Memorial Day in late May (personal communication with Robert Rodosky, 2001). Parental choice led to an early start date in Colorado Springs, Colorado, where fewer than 1 percent wished to begin after Labor Day (personal communication with Mary Thurman, 2001).
Most schools in Indiana open around August 15. In the Benton Community School Corporation of that state, the Board of School Trustees mandated that the first semester, when state tests are administered, end prior to the winter break. Since school ends earlier in the spring, students get first crack at summer jobs (personal communication with Glenn Krueger, 2001). Most West Virginia calendars add vacation time around Thanksgiving for the hunting season; New Orleans schools acknowledge Mardi Gras; and Aroostaook County high schools in Maine give a three-week break for the potato harvest (Chaika).
In Massachusetts, the Academic Support Services Program provides districts with state funds to offer extended learning time for students needing help on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System test. The Individual Tutoring in Reading Program provides one-on-one help for fourth-graders.
Minnesota's After-School Enrichment Program funds community organizations that provide after-school programs for students needing academic help, particularly those from low-income neighborhoods or those who are involved in the juvenile justice system. California's After-School Learning and Safe Neighborhoods Partnership Program is similar.
The Illinois Summer Bridges Program is actually a year-long extended-learning program targeting third- and sixth-grade students. In Texas districts with 35 percent of K-8 students from economically disadvantaged families, the Optional Extended Year initiative may extend the day, week, or year by as much as thirty days (Brown 2000).
Researchers and educators have long known that the traditional school calendar doesn't correlate with children's learning patterns. The long summer break is a hardship, and it interferes with retention of material, particularly for younger children and for students whose families cannot afford summer enrichment activities. In 1999, more than half the nation's large urban districts offered summer programs tailored for remedial work (White 1999).
Kentucky, for example, has an extended learning initiative-Extended School Services (ESS)-that requires schools to identify students who are having difficulty. An intervention rather than a remedial program, the initiative works as an extension of the school year, with instruction correlated to state guidelines and school curricula (Brown).
One ostensibly contrarian study of an experimental intercession calendar in Texas suggests a shorter school year may be appropriate for students of average and above-average achievement. Added to a traditional calendar of 170 days was a one-week intercession between grading periods for students who were struggling. Overall effects were favorable, and economically disadvantaged students' scores improved on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills tests (Byrd 2001).
The summer break provides another opportunity for instructional innovation. Summer sessions are most effective when they augment the regular school year, commence close to the start of the new term, and are taught by regular classroom teachers who can assess their students prior to the beginning of the regular year and plan accordingly. Well-structured summer programs show positive results for both remedial and accelerated students (Cooper, July 18, 2000).
Local issues notwithstanding, several common challenges recur: (1) Funding for teacher salaries, supplies, and building maintenance; (2) transportation, child-care concerns, parental involvement, and other factors affecting attendance; (3) scheduling facilities; and (4) ensuring students' safety (CAREI 1999).
Administrators who have experience with calendar changes note various concerns: school attendance boundaries, bus routes, and general community life. Echoing the research, they say it's important to involve the entire community-parents, teachers, students, even private schools-in the discussion, and it's helpful if calendars are published three years in advance (personal communications with school district administrators Linda DeClue, Todd Stogner, and Glenn Krueger 2001).
Consideration of teachers' opinions may be particularly crucial. While they may oppose calendar changes initially, they tend to prefer the new schedules over time. Older teachers can innovate in ways they might not be able to otherwise, while younger ones appreciate the flexibility the new approach affords their personal lives (Gndara 2000).
Changing the school calendar used to be an uncommon practice, but today modified and extended calendars are rapidly becoming the norm in schools across the country. In the cacophony of ideas for school reform, calendar innovation is a variable school boards and district executives can uniquely tailor to meet local needs as they seek ways to raise student achievement.
Byrd, Jimmy K. "Student Achievement: Is Equality Really Necessary?" Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, Washington, April 10-14, 2001. 24 pages. ED 452 273.
Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement (CAREI). "Alternative Calendars: Extended Learning and Year Round Schools, St. Paul Public Schools Extended Learning Programs: Evaluation Report." Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, College of Education and Human Development, 1999. http://education.umn.edu/CAREI/Reports/calendars/printable/default.h tml
Chaika, Gloria. "Alternative School Calendars: Smart Idea or Senseless Experiment?" Education World, 1999.
Cooper, Harris. "Is the School Calendar Outdated?" Paper presented at the conference, "Summer Learning and the Achievement Gap: First National Conference," Johns Hopkins University Center for Social Organization of Schools, Baltimore, MD (July 18, 2000).
Cooper, Harris. "Harris Cooper on Merits of Year Round Schools." Interactive community chat on www.cnn.com (September 7, 2000).
Education Commission of the States. ECS StateNotes, Scheduling/ School Calendar, updated August 2000. www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/14/28/1428.htm
Fields, Monique. "School Year Will Start Early in 2002." St. Petersburg Times(December 17, 2000). www.sptimes.com
Gandara, Patricia. "The Dimensions of Time." An online interview with NEAToday Online (March 2000). http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0003/gandara.html
Keller, Bess. "August Openings Pub Schools on Hot Seat." Education Week 20, 43 (August 8, 2001): 1, 25. www.edweek.org
Market Data Retrieval, a subsidiary of Dun and Bradstreet, in Shelton, CT, www.schooldata.com
Rakoff, Todd D. "Schooltime." Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada, April 19-23, 1999. 26 pages. ED 433 603.
White, Kerry. "Quietly, the School Calendar Evolves." Education Week 19, 9 (October 27, 1999): 1, 12. www.edweek.org.
Wilgoren, Jodi. "Calls for Change in the Scheduling of the School Day." New York Times (January 10, 2001).
-----
A Product of the ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, College of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-5207.
This publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract No. ED-99-C0-0011. The ideas and opinions expressed in this Digest do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI, ED, or the Clearinghouse. This Digest is in the public domain and may be freely reproduced. The text of this Digest may be viewed electronically at http://eric.uoregon.edu EA 031562.
###