Michigan Votes Forum

Legislators MIGHT appreciate it:)

I have no idea what research says. It's a big step if research doesn't support or the difference/increase is minimal. Can we afford air conditioners? Aren't we in a budget crisis?

Here are a few. 1. A Statewide Evaluation of Academic Achievement in Year Round Schools by Bradley J. McMillen. Journal of Educational Research vol 95, #2, p. 67-74, Nov-Dec 2001 Looked at 2 years of data from North Carolina schools. Grades 3-8 in year round and traditional schools. Found no difference in achievement as a whole and, in subgroups where there was a difference, it was not of practical significance. 2. Review of Research on Student Learning in Year Round Education by Carolyn Calvin Kneese. Journal of Research and Development in Education, vol 29, #2, p. 60-72, Winter 1996. Reviewed 15 studies to compare achievement over a period of 1-4+ years. Overall, the research says that any positive effect is very small. 3. The Pros and Cons of Year Round Education at the Elementary Public School Level by Linda Rodgers. Review of the literature. The majority of research indicates that year round calendar (1) does not conculusively improve achievement (2) offers some savings in building maitenance costs but higher cooling costs and higher personnel costs. Ok, now that we've looked at achievement, let's talk about some other issues that the proponents of year round education will need to address. 1. Air conditioning -- Not all schools have air conditioning. In my district, the high school and middle school are but the elementary schools are not. My classroom gets upward of 85 degrees by the beginning of June. Imagine how hot it would be in July and August. Has anyone looked at the costs associated with installing air conditioning throughout the state? Also think of the kids that are outside for gym class during July and August. Can anyone say heatstroke? 2. Bussing -- The costs associated with transportation will go up if you need to run the busses all summer. Also, the summer is when our district usually overhauls the busses for routine, end of year maintenance so that there is no impact on transportation needs if a bus or two needs to be out of service for a while. 3. Maintenance -- During the summer, our custodians do the end of year maintenance on the building such as shampooing carpets (which requires everything to be removed from the room -- sort of difficult when your room is still set up for kids), painting (impossible when your bulletin boards and other displays are still up), vermin control (Do you want your kids in the building when they're putting down poison for the mice?), retiling, roof repair, etc. They need a bit of time to do these things. When do you expect them to have time to do all of this? 4. Food -- More days in school equals more money spent on feeding the kids breakfast and lunch.

Start with the positive: University of North Carolina @Chapel Hill: -more frequent breaks for teachers--less burnout -ability to deal with overcrowding without building (multiple, 4-track system) -review and reteaching eliminated Cons: -Sports schedules (if the school is multi-track and someone coaches in the district where the coaching schedule is different from the teacher's teaching schedule) -Vacations for teachers do not match the vacations of the teacher's own children (again, year round multi track issues--remember, multitracking is designed for districts that experience such a huge influx of students, there literally isn't enough space--not an issue here in Michigan--we are dealing with the opposite). There is not conclusive evidence that one system over another improves student achievement. However, this type of study would be longitudinal and very costly--we won't know much about this system (conclusively) for a long time.

of why school choice is needed. Kolb introduces a bill to investigate year-round schools and it generates a large number of comments for and against the idea of year-round schools. If we didn't have a one-size-fits-all education system, those who want year-round schools could send your kids to them and those who don't want them wouldn't have to. Education so politicized that even the mention of studying an issue generates conflict.

Apparently you missed the line about looking into whether or not this should be mandated for all public schools. That's not choice. This should be something that is left up to local control. If a school district wants to move to year round school, as was the case in Holly, then that district should have the choice to do so. However, if the district does not want year round school, it should not be forced into it. It also concerns me that there is a push to mandate something that has not been proven to be of value. Every study that I could find states that any gain in student achievement has been miniscule at best (not of statistical significance). There are also huge costs to consider.

send one to this Representative ASAP! Let's see it. SHOW ME THE DATA!

Not that I'm in favor of it, but I'd be interested to see what studies suggest.

Not a change that would bring about significant increase in scores. This is not a big bang for the buck legislative deal.

Based on what I've learned (on the ground--in a state that is growing out of contro), states are using this concept to save money--instead of building schools, they are running more than one track with one track on "vacation" at any given time. It is helping these states cope with huge influxes of students--they can't build schools fast enough. I understand that his is a difficult concept for us to understand--we have no money for education for various reasons, and we are bleeding students and families at an alarming rate.

about the year-'round school concept being a way to handle growing student populations most "economically." The Michigan school district in which I live did exactly that during the 1970s. Enrollment was up, and local voters repeatedly refused to approve a building bond proposal. The "solution" was year-'round school on a "45-15" schedule -- each child would go to school 45 days and then take a 15-day break. This produced a situation in which only 2/3 of the students were in school at any given time, while 1/3 were on recess. Some parents and teachers liked the schedule. Others did not. One of the prime objections was that families with several school age children were not always able to get the kids on the same rotation, which complicated planning for family vacation time. The rotations also complicated the school sports program (which was a lot simpler then than it is now). Our district scrapped the 45-15 all-year program after a year or so, in favor a conventional schedule and housing students in portable classrooms. In tough economic times, when we also are demanding more and more of our schools, academically, all options for structuring and scheduling the school year should be on the table for objective study, evaluation and discussion. That's what it appears HB 6617 is proposing.

How many districts have this HUGE growth spurts.

some louisiana schools implemented a "platooning" plan. one "platoon" went to school from 6:00am to 12:30, the other went from 12:30 to 7:00pm. this handled a severe overcrowding situation which i don't believe that michigan is suffering from.

Right?

I've posted the bibliographic information on a couple of studies upthread. The full studies are far too long to post completely on this site.

All the numbers I have seen indicate that the numbers are down everywhere--with the exception of a few places like Kalamazoo (modest gains). Another topic.

The new Michigan high school graduation requirements passed into law this year are bound to place some stress on academic class scheduling. Schools are trying to stay ahead of this by looking at their options. It only makes sense that school year structuring should be examined at the state level, as well.

There is no good reason to go to year round school and certainly no reason to mandate it for all public schools. Let's examine a couple commonly held beliefs about YR school. 1. YR helps with overcrowding -- True but not an issue in Michigan. There is not a problem with too many students here. Overall, districts in Michigan are losing students. 2. Kids lose lots of knowledge over the summer and YR will help them retain it -- False. Research does not support either claim. Kids who truly have the knowledge down solidly retain that knowledge over time. Kids who do not have the knowledge solidly in the first place don't tend to retain it over any length of time whether that time frame is a summer or a week. 3. YR will boost student achievement -- False. Research does not support this one either. Studies have shown that any boost in achievement is microscopic at best. YR school is just the latest band-aid approach to school reform. It's much easier to look at these band-aid methods than to take a long, hard look at what every member of the educational system (students, parents, teachers, administrators and legislators) could be doing better.

Can dyslexic students get what they need in the public schools? Absolutely! I work with learning disabled (dyslexia, dysgraphia, dyscalculia) students every day and, forgive me for tooting my own horn, I'm damn good at it. I've had many students who worked with me for 2-3 years and then were at grade level -- a couple who ended up above grade level. The power is not in the place -- the power is having motivated students, motivated and knowledgable staff who are willing to do what it takes to help the students gain the skills they need to be successful. If your child's district is operating more as a special ed warehouse than as an education entity, then get involved and vocal with that district. Make them back up what they are doing for your child with data driven, research supported reasons for doing it. If they can't, go up the food chain.

We might also look at some other "radical" ideas such as middle colleges and career pathways. Are we meeting the needs of our students? That should be the question at the center of all debates.

lol

You can currently take them skiing when they are on break in December or February.

Don't hold your breath on that one. When has one of these committees ever consisted of the people who will be most affected by the legislation?

No year round without air I would think.

Kind of messy.

Something to think about.

ynlveg qrvgco xykhtrusn zywbt lpykcvgxt qydm uvidqmf

Can't afford air condtioners lol

looking for in government.

I agree with School year round. I think it is a great idea! They would get breaks in between. When children get the summer off what is that really teaching them? That when you do become an adult you should get the summer off.It's good to keep their brain working. What would they be doing at home? Playing video games, watching tv? That is not real world. We are suppose to give our children the tools they need to succeed. If we don't we fail them. And they may not like it, but in the long run they win. I do think that when they get to go on a vacation or time off they would be more appreciative,then just expecting it. Let's not teach our kids to be lazy. Let's give them more education. Then with that good education; they will have a better opportunity to get a good job or have a career.

Where are they going to get that in the "public school system"? The schools aren't doing your kid any favors, just like socialism, they bring all the kids down to the lowest common denominator.

and take your meds

I'm still trying to get over the fact that my school wasn't air conditioned.

a public school teacher that is afraid of losing your 3 month vacation.