How should schools tackle extended learning time?

Last week, in an article on the Washington Post's education blog, Class Struggle, columnist Jay Mathews attempted to reconcile two competing perspectives on extended learning time: advocating for afterschool programs vs. extending school hours. These two ideas are tied up in the wider debate on education reform in the United States and must compete for funding, staff, and public support. 

The whole article is definitely worth reading--especially the comments, where Afterschool Alliance Executive Director Jodi Grant jumps in and interacts with Jay, classroom teachers, parents, and advocates on both sides of the issue. 


Certainly, students spending more time learning during the day--whether in a classroom or outside of it--has been shown to improve learning overall using test scores (see the article and comments for more specifics). But longer classroom hours and the increased learning effectiveness also correlate with better teaching skills and strategies overall--and it would be hard to argue that simply increasing school hours leads to better teachers. Rather, it would seem that teachers who are good at what they do tend to work at schools with longer hours overall.

And I would venture a guess that many of us know of teachers from our own educational experience who put in the extra effort outside of school hours to ensure that their students were truly learning--through informal chats, extra tutoring time, or running an afterschool program. The key to effective learning seems to be making learning engaging, through creative curriculum and good teaching--something that happens in informal educational settings, which take place in out-of-school time. 


There's no doubt that extending learning time is essential to increasing learning effectiveness. Mounds of data--both international and domestic--help to support that case. And it's likely that education reform in the US will include increasing learning time during the school year and summer. It's up to advocates for out-of-school time to develop successful programs with meaningful learning outcomes and to influence the tone of the extended learning time debate.

Analysis of Extended Day Policy Efforts

In the December 2008 Phi Delta Kappan, Larry Cuban offers an interesting analysis of the efforts to lengthen or alter the school day and year. He goes through the history of reform efforts. He even dispels the myth that our long summer break is a remnant of an agrarian economy; it is actually a result of middle-class parents wanting time to go on vacation or send kids to camp.

One of the major problems is the assumption that schools are just designed to prepare workers:

"By blaming schools, contemporary civic and business elites have reduced the multiple goals Americans expect of their public schools to a single one: prepare youths to work in a globally competitive economy. This has been a mistake because Americans historically have expected more from their public schools."

Cuban points out that there are many reasons that citizens support public education, including preparing responsible citizens, promoting common cultural values, dispel societal inequities, etc. So, building an entire reform effort around the needs of the business community does not actually work.

Instead, Cuban recommends improving the quality and focus on "academic learning time," "improving the quality of the time that teachers and students spend with one another in and out of classrooms":

"If policy makers could open their ears and eyes to student and teacher perceptions of time, they would learn that the secular Holy Grail is decreasing interruption of instruction, encouraging richer intellectual and personal connections between teachers and students, and increasing classroom time for ambitious teaching and active, engaged learning."

My only addition to Cuban's recommendation is that we should consider that not all learning time happens in a classroom in the presence of a teacher. There is a reason that middle-class parents demanded camp opportunities, and a reason that kids who go to camp don't fall as far behind academically as those who do not. It is not because those camps are focused on academic learning with classroom teachers. It is because high quality, focused learning time is more effective if it is balanced by a culture of out-of-school learning experiences.

More Time for Learning (Another View)

I expressed my thoughts on extended learning days last week. Now, Karen Pittman, who is wiser than I, offers her thoughts.

Link to Forum for Youth Investment

No Time for Science

A new study from the Lawrence Hall of Science* paints a grim picture of science learning in SF Bay Area classrooms. There just is not enough time. 80% of teachers report spending less than an hour per week on science, and 16% say they teach no science at all. One principal in the SF Chronicle article points out that each day has only 5 hours for instruction, so it is no surprise that some subjects get the short end. And the subjects that are not tested are the first to go, which is why NSTA has started a campaign to "Make Science Count".

As a teacher of children who were way behind, I made similar decisions to focus on math and reading. After all, these are the "gateway" subjects - without them, you cannot advance. It was only after I left teaching that I realized that by limiting exposure to science, social studies, arts, etc., we were opening the gateway with a path to nowhere. I find this concept best expressed as Engagement, Capacity, and Continuity, a paper arguing that all three of these pieces are needed for student success.

I argued yesterday against extending the regular instructional day. However, we do need a paradigm shift that provides time for engagement in science and other potential future careers. Eliminating testing is just hiding the evidence. Instead, we need to face testing as a reality and find ways to reach students with all the instruction they need, plus the ideas that make that instruction worthwhile. They are awake for 14-18 hours a day - I think we can find the time!

Link to Article | Link to Study
(*Disclaimer: I work on the same team at the Lawrence Hall of Science as those who conducted the research.)

More Time for Learning?

As an advocate of incorporating science in after-school, I might be expected to support the concept of longer school days that allow for more subjects to be taught. S. Paul Reville's article in Ed Week calls for this, and Massachusetts has taken the lead in piloting extended days. Now this topic is gaining ground as part of the revision of No Child Left Behind. I agree that there must be more time for "learning," but there are a few reasons that we must be careful about just adding more time for school.

Enrichment vs Academics: Spending time learning hard facts is important. Students need to be proficient in math, reading, and writing, and there are core facts in science, social studies, and other subjects that need to be absorbed as well. But how many hours per day should a 10-year-old spend on this? What about exploring topics that don't have hard answers, like what exists on other planets, or what the heck is this stuff?

Teacher Time: More time on academics presumably means more time committed by teachers. Is it really fair to expect teachers to add hours to their teaching day and time to prepare more lessons? And this doesn't even account for the higher demand of keeping kids engaged longer, when they are tired and just want to play. Enrichment time can be led by para-professionals, part-time staff, or volunteers, because it involves the child exploring, without the pressure of academic content or timetables.

Much of the pressure for longer school days comes from the success of charter schools with extended days. However, I can speak from personal experience - when I worked in such a program, we converted the extra hours into enrichment time, with art, drama, Odyssey of the Mind, etc. This was a better use of the time than extra instruction ever could have been (for teachers and students).

I support Mr. Reville's call for more learning time, but let's make sure that the law does not restrict the funding to academics. Programs like 21st Century Community Learning Centers are successful because they trust community-based organizations to support the schools in providing enrichment. Let's keep that success moving in the right direction!

Link to EdWeek article (may require registration)

Less Time for Science (and Other Subjects)

A recent report confirms what most of us already know, the accountability provisions in No Child Left Behind have led schools to decrease the amount of time they spend on non-tested subjects. The Center on Education Policy found that elementary schools decreased time spent on science an average of 75 minutes per week. That time is being reallocated to math and literacy, the core subjects that are assessed by states.

An article by Jay Mathews in the Washington Post presents both sides of this issue rather effectively. It seems to come down to:
1) If you can't read or do math, you won't be able to handle the other subjects.
VERSUS
2) If you only learn reading and math out of context, then you can't handle the richer vocabulary, higher-order concepts, etc.

With the new test in science arriving, schools are going to have to make more hard choices. The CEP report clearly shows that schools are unlikely to extend the day - only 9% have done so, and then only an average of 18 minutes. This leaves a few options:
- Integrate science and other subjects into literacy and math, and vice versa. Learning should be done in context whenever possible.
- Utilize after-school and out-of-school time programs to build student interest in science, art, music, and other subjects to improve their all-around engagement in school.
- Obtain a national supply of Hermione Granger's time-turners so students can take several classes at the same time!

Unless someone has a lead on the third option, I suggest we really get to work on the first two. Accountability and assessment are important, and reading and math are critically important. So, if we want our youth to find engagement in subjects that are critical to being productive adults, we are going to need more time and better ways to include those subjects in the learning day.

Exended Days in Massachusetts

There is an article on CNN this week about the Massachusetts project to extend the school day. There seem to be two different approaches to extending learning time for students - a longer school day or increased investment in community-based after-school. It seems likely that the solution is somewhere in between, depending on the needs of the community, funds available, and many other factors. Either way, I hope students get to explore new and exciting ideas in the extra time that is available and that test preparation does not dominate.

P.S. I am going to try and blog more regularly starting... NOW!