Four Day School Week

[mhsjax]

Where do you get "10 hours"? Say kids normally go to school from 8-3. They are there for 7 hours. Of that 7 hours, say 1 hour of that is lunch/recess (for the younger kids) and lunch-hall passing time for the older kids, so 6 hours of instruction time. Add that 6 hours on to those 4 days and that is 1.5 hours more each day, so 8 1/2 hours/day "in school". That is pretty much the typical work day for someone with a 1/2 hour lunch. I would bet after the first week of school most kids won't even notice the extra time--kids adapt to things pretty quickly.

Because when they were talking about it here they did mention a 10 hour day. Ir never came to pass, it was shot down almost immediately. If you like it fine, around here no one did.

 

[mhsjax]

Just to add, as a previous poster brought up...the school day would not be 10 hours. Not sure where people are getting that from. In the county I teach in, with about 80 elementary schools, our school day is 6 hours & 40 minutes long. If we were to add the 5th day, that would add another 75 minutes a day...making the school day 7 hours and 55 minutes long...

so about an 8 hour school day.

8 hour school day is too long. Sorry but kids have lives after school. This is only my opinion and thankfully most everyone else's where I live. Now, if they want to take away homework on those days, I may change my mind, but no way would I endorse an extra hour with the same amount of homework.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I do not believe this is in the children's best interests at all.

This is adults trying to work the system and it totally ticks me off.

 

[golfgal]

I do not believe this is in the children's best interests at all.

This is adults trying to work the system and it totally ticks me off.

Yet it is the adults that vote for funding for the schools and if these schools are having funding issues like it sounds, it isn't the kids-or even the schools, that have a whole lot of say in this

I love how people are more worried about the stuff after school then being IN school--that is really just sad.

 

[DrCavin]

I would rather have an all year school schedule.

 

[MrsPete]

No, it would greatly increase my childcare costs, should I even be able to find quality childcare. Maybe it wouldn't for you.

Well, my kids are 13 and 17, so I'm out of that age bracket, but I explained how I saw it.

Regardless, I'm assuming that most 8-5 parents are currently paying for after-school care. That money would go to pay for the new no-school-day care. How does that NOT equate to about the same cost for the majority?

My school did a 4-day week for the 2010-2011 school year. I am a bus driver and my hours were reduced by 20% so I am no longer eligible for fully paid insurance.

Yes, bus drivers, cafeteria staff, etc. would lose big on this plan. Teacher hours would have to be extended to match the student's hours . . . but busses'd only need to run 4 days and meals'd only need to be prepared 4 days.

Another concern: Kids on free/reduced lunches. They'd miss a meal day.

If the teachers are working on those days, it doesn't reduce the costs, does it??? I see teachers responding to this post from THEIR perspective, and parents responding from THEIR perspective. Does anyone have any information on how this works out for the kids, and the amount they're able to learn? Some how I think our kids are going to be short changed.

I'm both a teacher and a parent, so I see it from both sides.

Teachers wouldn't be working 5 days -- lots of people are missing that detail. If the school day extends, teachers will be working the same number of hours, but they'll do it in 4 days instead of 5. As an employee, I'd like that.

Definitely the kids would be shortchanged on this plan.

I do not believe this is in the children's best interests at all.

This is adults trying to work the system and it totally ticks me off.

No, it's not about working the system: It's about lack of money. Money simply isn't there. Something has to give. Is this the best choice? I don't know. I don't think it's the worst idea I've heard, but I don't really like it.

 

[mhsjax]

Yet it is the adults that vote for funding for the schools and if these schools are having funding issues like it sounds, it isn't the kids-or even the schools, that have a whole lot of say in this

I love how people are more worried about the stuff after school then being IN school--that is really just sad.

Yet your kids are in band and golf correct? What if something the school system did interfered with that? And correct me if I am wrong, but colleges want we rounded kids, not book worms. My kids are in advanced classes, they come home , do their homework, and then they have their outside activities and yep, darn right, I don't want anything to mess that up, why would I.

What about parents that work, how do they afford daycare outside the school, daycares, most of them, don't accept part time, they want full time. If the school system is try8ing to save money, then opening up the school and running it on a Friday for daycare isn't helping. This is why they close down most of the schools here in the summer and all teachers and admin go to 1 or 2 schools to work out of.

We are turning out some pretty smart kids here going to top notch colleges and becoming very successful. I don't think worrying about what happens after school is a problem. At least where I live.

 

[golfgal]

Yet your kids are in band and golf correct? What if something the school system did interfered with that? And correct me if I am wrong, but colleges want we rounded kids, not book worms. My kids are in advanced classes, they come home , do their homework, and then they have their outside activities and yep, darn right, I don't want anything to mess that up, why would I.

What about parents that work, how do they afford daycare outside the school, daycares, most of them, don't accept part time, they want full time. If the school system is try8ing to save money, then opening up the school and running it on a Friday for daycare isn't helping. This is why they close down most of the schools here in the summer and all teachers and admin go to 1 or 2 schools to work out of.

We are turning out some pretty smart kids here going to top notch colleges and becoming very successful. I don't think worrying about what happens after school is a problem. At least where I live.

Yes, our kids are involved in a lot of activities but school still comes first--and is CLEARLY expressed from their coaches, etc. too. DS16 is missing a golf tournament today so he can stay in school to do the final review for his AP US History test tomorrow--all of the sophomores on the team are doing the same so they are bringing freshman to this tournament. The freshman are not going to score well but who cares, the kids that need to be in school are in school and the freshman get some tournament experience. DS16 missed school last Friday to play in a tournament where some junior and seniors missed so THEY could get ready for AP tests.

The AVERAGE GPA for the boys varsity team is a 3.75, the average GPA for the Girls Varsity is a 3.89--these are top students. Between the two teams 4 of the top 10 in the graduating class are in golf (ALL of the top 10 are in band). They work it all out just fine. They amazingly find enough time to do their activities, get their homework done and have time for other things. Adding another hour and a half to their school day would cut down on some hanging out with friends time during the week but big deal. Also, with having one day a week off scheduled, they would miss LESS school during golf season because they could schedule their 18 hole tournaments those days. It would actually work out BETTER and the kids would have MORE time after school because they would be home by 6:30 every day vs getting home at 9:00 on tournament days-and they still are able to get homework done on those days.

Last year's golf grads are attending Notre Dame, Stanford, IT at the U of M, UW Madison and MIT--all sluff schools I guess.

I gave examples of how the towns in our state are dealing with day care already. Besides, people will figure out a way to deal with changes as necessary. I also think that the money normally spend on after school care that would go away with a longer school day would just transfer to the full day out of school and really have a zero net difference for families.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Definitely the kids would be shortchanged on this plan. No, it's not about working the system: It's about lack of money. Money simply isn't there. Something has to give. Is this the best choice? I don't know. I don't think it's the worst idea I've heard, but I don't really like it.

I disagree, if this is all about the kids how come I never hear child advocates saying its in their best interests? All I hear are the employees & employee unions holding signs and bellyaching.

I'm not a fan of layoffs but if something has to go then it can't be the kids. EVERYTHING that can be done to ensure the kids get what they need must be done, an entire generation of children is on the line here. We can't throw a generation of children's futures away, THEY can't be the ones shortchanged. If teachers are unaffordable let go of the high-wage earners and hire more fresh out of school but whatever has to be done, don't mess with the kids. What I am saying may be unpopular but all I care about is the children, and I can live with being disliked for that.

 

[golfgal]

I disagree, if this is all about the kids how come I never hear child advocates saying its in their best interests? All I hear are the employees & employee unions holding signs and bellyaching.

I'm not a fan of layoffs but if something has to go then it can't be the kids. EVERYTHING that can be done to ensure the kids get what they need must be done, an entire generation of children is on the line here. We can't throw a generation of children's futures away, THEY can't be the ones shortchanged. If teachers are unaffordable let go of the high-wage earners and hire more fresh out of school but whatever has to be done, don't mess with the kids. What I am saying may be unpopular but all I care about is the children, and I can live with being disliked for that.

I don't believe for a minute that anyone believes that this is in the best interest of the kids but schools have to work with what they are given. Do you REALLY think it is in the best interst to let go all of the experienced teachers . That is a just a bad idea all the way around-most of those experienced teachers not only have the experience teaching kids, working with parents, etc. they are also mentors and role models for the new teachers. Where are the new teachers going to get advice and assistance??? How about people in these districts just pony up the extra $200/year in their property taxes so schools don't have to resort to these measures

 

[horseshowmom]

That's where I think our high school may be the odd one out. DS, in high school, earns 1 credit for Algebra class. The class is 50 minutes long and is for 60 days. (We have trimesters.) Compare that to his English class. It's 2 periods long, 100 minutes, 60 days and he still earns just the 1 credit.

3000 hours in Algebra = a credit
6000 hours in English = a credit
I've questioned the discrepancy and I've never gotten a clear answer except for that's the way it's done here (his high school).

Anyhow, sorry I hijacked the OPs post.

I don't know why they're doing that, but it doesn't work that way in my state.

There is a town close to my home town that has had 4 day school weeks for about 20 years and people there would fight you if anyone ever tried to force them to go back to a 5 day week.

When they switched, absenteeism for students and teachers dropped dramatically, as appointments can all be made on Friday. Because class periods were extended, teachers have been able to really get creative and get kids to think and work and get mastery of subjects before moving on to the next class. Test scores shot up when they made the switch and have stayed high.

As for day care, the churches got together and offer a day long "activity" day on Fridays for a nominal fee (about what it costs them to feed the kids lunch, and even that is waived if the parents can't afford it). The kids play in the church gym or hang out and watch TV or play games or do art activities.

It works extremely well for this little town.

ETA: It also saves them a TON of money. They only have run the buses 4 days a week, only have to heat and cool the school 4 days a week etc.

That's very interesting. Sounds like it worked great in that case.

If the teachers are working on those days, it doesn't reduce the costs, does it??? I see teachers responding to this post from THEIR perspective, and parents responding from THEIR perspective. Does anyone have any information on how this works out for the kids, and the amount they're able to learn? Some how I think our kids are going to be short changed.

The post I quoted above this one shared some information.

ETA: This is interesting too. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/04/national/main6548010.shtml And this - http://www.krtv.com/news/boulder-school-reports-success-with-4-day-week/ And this - http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20070611/ai_n19291920/

I would not expect to work on the off day, as we would be working extra long hours the other 4 days. It's not like we would get a salary increase, and in the poor states considering this, teachers don't have a great salary as is. Of course, we do work at home now, so that would be up to the teacher. Otherwise, planning time would still be built in to get a little of it done. There would still need to be teacher workdays as well, as that is the time we do required inservice, which is part of the days we are contracted to work.

I don't think Mondays would be an "off" day in this case. The longer hours on the other days would be the same number that would normally be spent in classtime. The in-service time is separate. Those Mondays would just be counted in as the in-service days without causing students to actually miss a school day. Now, in reality, students don't "miss" a day anyway because school must be in session a certain number of days, but I can see where including those particular Mondays would be an efficient use of time.

 

[MUFFYCAT]

I think that's the worst idea I've heard of to cut back expenses. They could trim the fat by getting rid of so many adminstrative jobs.

What are the parents suppose to do that work five days a week???
My kids are high school and college age but if they did that in my district I'd be fuming!

 

[mhsjax]

Yes, our kids are involved in a lot of activities but school still comes first--and is CLEARLY expressed from their coaches, etc. too. DS16 is missing a golf tournament today so he can stay in school to do the final review for his AP US History test tomorrow--all of the sophomores on the team are doing the same so they are bringing freshman to this tournament. The freshman are not going to score well but who cares, the kids that need to be in school are in school and the freshman get some tournament experience. DS16 missed school last Friday to play in a tournament where some junior and seniors missed so THEY could get ready for AP tests.

The AVERAGE GPA for the boys varsity team is a 3.75, the average GPA for the Girls Varsity is a 3.89--these are top students. Between the two teams 4 of the top 10 in the graduating class are in golf (ALL of the top 10 are in band). They work it all out just fine. They amazingly find enough time to do their activities, get their homework done and have time for other things. Adding another hour and a half to their school day would cut down on some hanging out with friends time during the week but big deal. Also, with having one day a week off scheduled, they would miss LESS school during golf season because they could schedule their 18 hole tournaments those days. It would actually work out BETTER and the kids would have MORE time after school because they would be home by 6:30 every day vs getting home at 9:00 on tournament days-and they still are able to get homework done on those days.

Last year's golf grads are attending Notre Dame, Stanford, IT at the U of M, UW Madison and MIT--all sluff schools I guess.

I gave examples of how the towns in our state are dealing with day care already. Besides, people will figure out a way to deal with changes as necessary. I also think that the money normally spend on after school care that would go away with a longer school day would just transfer to the full day out of school and really have a zero net difference for families.

Ok, this is not an argument about who has better schools. I never said or implied that any school you listed was a sluff school or just an ordinary school. I was responding to your comment about how many parent are only worried about what happens after school. We are just as concerned about education as you are, but around here extra activites are how we roll, as it is nest year DS won't even get home until 7 or 8 at night after football practice. Then he has to finish his homework. He will be a freshman and will be taking his first actual AP class along with several honors classes. Adding an extra hour INHO would just be too much. Sure they get an extra day off, but having kids so tired the next day that they can't concentrate on the material being taught isn't the answer.

It is really very ironic really, the school scream about healthy eating and go so far as to ban outside treats for elementary yet serve the nastiest junk to these kids everyday for lunch. The want them to get out and exercise yet they want to extend the day and then have the kids go home and do homework. They say kids don't get enough sleep, yet to add extra time to school and then outside activites and then homework will cause less sleep. This is all money driven and really they don't care about the kids and they will handle it.

Look at all the ADHD kids, teachers can't keep them settled now, how are they going to deal with an extra hour.

I don't know what the solution is, but 4 day school weeks are not it for most of us.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I don't believe for a minute that anyone believes that this is in the best interest of the kids but schools have to work with what they are given. Do you REALLY think it is in the best interst to let go all of the experienced teachers . That is a just a bad idea all the way around-most of those experienced teachers not only have the experience teaching kids, working with parents, etc. they are also mentors and role models for the new teachers. Where are the new teachers going to get advice and assistance??? How about people in these districts just pony up the extra $200/year in their property taxes so schools don't have to resort to these measures

I hear you. I didn't mean all high wage earners should go but time on the job doesn't necessarily mean better at their job. There is no way to say four 23 year olds coming out of school and willing to work for $30,000/year can't do as well as one teacher who has been around a long time and doesn't know how to use computers making $150,000 year. The administrators should know who is doing a good job & who isn't. I say keep the ones that are and replace those who aren't and find some equilibrium.I don't think anyone, myself included, is an advocate of getting rid of good solid educators. If they are worth it then pay them & keep them, but time in doesn't mean valuable.... that whole notion has got to go.

With regard to paying more in taxes, some people don't have the $200. I don't think the municipalities or even the IRS is being honest about how much they will never see in tax money because people just don't have it to pay. You think now is bad, just wait until they can't play the shell game any longer.

This mess, all of it, is a grown up mess and grown ups need to clean it up. Its not for the children to deal with on any level.

 

[golfgal]

I hear you. I didn't mean all high wage earners should go but time on the job doesn't necessarily mean better at their job. There is no way to say four 23 year olds coming out of school and willing to work for $30,000/year can't do as well as one teacher who has been around a long time and doesn't know how to use computers making $150,000 year. The administrators should know who is doing a good job & who isn't. I say keep the ones that are and replace those who aren't and find some equilibrium.I don't think anyone, myself included, is an advocate of getting rid of good solid educators. If they are worth it then pay them & keep them, but time in doesn't mean valuable.... that whole notion has got to go.

With regard to paying more in taxes, some people don't have the $200. I don't think the municipalities or even the IRS is being honest about how much they will never see in tax money because people just don't have it to pay. You think now is bad, just wait until they can't play the shell game any longer.

This mess, all of it, is a grown up mess and grown ups need to clean it up. Its not for the children to deal with on any level.

Our district offered early retirement to teachers as a money saving effort, but they are not cutting ALL of the experienced teachers--it actually helped create 70 jobs in our district while maintaining many experienced teachers to help the new ones. Also, not everyone would pay $200/year-even working that number out is $3.80/week-MOST people could easily find $3.80/week in their budget. I spend that in the vending machine at work last week because they were there .

I also think most experienced teachers you are talking about would be HIGHLY offended that you think so little of their skills--

 

[scrapquitler]

I think that's the worst idea I've heard of to cut back expenses. They could trim the fat by getting rid of so many adminstrative jobs.

What are the parents suppose to do that work five days a week???
My kids are high school and college age but if they did that in my district I'd be fuming!

Well the purpose of the public schools is not to act as a free daycare.

I would imagine that if the four day school week became widespread, parents would find it easier to arrange childcare on that 5th day...programs at churches, YMCAs and stuff would start popping up all over the place, employers might start becoming more receptive to parents working a 4 day week or working that 5th day at home, SAHM could take in other kids one day a week for extra money, etc. I think the 4 day school week could be a great way for parents to be able to have more family time with their children. It could be the beginning of a new way of life for our families - more together time, more opportunities to do things in the community like visit museums, play at the park, volunteer, etc. It could be a fabulous opportunity to bring families closer together. And it could be a lot easier on parents to schedule things like dentist appointments, errand day, etc.

 

[horseshowmom]

I hear you. I didn't mean all high wage earners should go but time on the job doesn't necessarily mean better at their job. There is no way to say four 23 year olds coming out of school and willing to work for $30,000/year can't do as well as one teacher who has been around a long time and doesn't know how to use computers making $150,000 year. The administrators should know who is doing a good job & who isn't. I say keep the ones that are and replace those who aren't and find some equilibrium.I don't think anyone, myself included, is an advocate of getting rid of good solid educators. If they are worth it then pay them & keep them, but time in doesn't mean valuable.... that whole notion has got to go.

With regard to paying more in taxes, some people don't have the $200. I don't think the municipalities or even the IRS is being honest about how much they will never see in tax money because people just don't have it to pay. You think now is bad, just wait until they can't play the shell game any longer.

This mess, all of it, is a grown up mess and grown ups need to clean it up. Its not for the children to deal with on any level.

Starting salary in my state is about $30,000 annually. Just as a point of reference, I have 27 years of experience and a Master's degree, and I make under $50,000 a year.

 

[golfgal]

I think that's the worst idea I've heard of to cut back expenses. They could trim the fat by getting rid of so many adminstrative jobs.

What are the parents suppose to do that work five days a week???
My kids are high school and college age but if they did that in my district I'd be fuming!

Ok, so we have a large district. If we cut half of the administrators in our district that would save about $500,000--how do you propose to come up with the other $14.5 million our district is looking at cutting (which is really only about 5% of our budget)? Everyone screams "cut administration' without really thinking about how little of an impact that really makes-and even less so because you then have to hire additional staff to do their jobs.

 

[golfgal]

Ok, this is not an argument about who has better schools. I never said or implied that any school you listed was a sluff school or just an ordinary school. I was responding to your comment about how many parent are only worried about what happens after school. We are just as concerned about education as you are, but around here extra activites are how we roll, as it is nest year DS won't even get home until 7 or 8 at night after football practice. Then he has to finish his homework. He will be a freshman and will be taking his first actual AP class along with several honors classes. Adding an extra hour INHO would just be too much. Sure they get an extra day off, but having kids so tired the next day that they can't concentrate on the material being taught isn't the answer.

It is really very ironic really, the school scream about healthy eating and go so far as to ban outside treats for elementary yet serve the nastiest junk to these kids everyday for lunch. The want them to get out and exercise yet they want to extend the day and then have the kids go home and do homework. They say kids don't get enough sleep, yet to add extra time to school and then outside activites and then homework will cause less sleep. This is all money driven and really they don't care about the kids and they will handle it.

Look at all the ADHD kids, teachers can't keep them settled now, how are they going to deal with an extra hour.

I don't know what the solution is, but 4 day school weeks are not it for most of us.

Your kids have 5 HOURS of practice after school EVERY night??? I would be a little concerned about that vs going to a 4 day school week.

 

[mhsjax]

Your kids have 5 HOURS of practice after school EVERY night??? I would be a little concerned about that vs going to a 4 day school week.

No they get out of school about 4:00 and by the time they get home it is around 7:00. Maybe your school aren't that great if you think that equals 5 hours of practice.

I am not there yet, I only go by what my neighbor tells me and she has 2 HS students. They are fine and have all AP classes and are in NHS. So I don't think there is a problem with the way our school works. You don't have to agree with me, or even understand me. I don't care. OUr schools work and I hope they keep them that way. I know shocking isn't it, we aren't even in yor school system, yet we do not only survive but thrive.