It's Still About Time
We have devoted a number of articles to the concept of TIME and learning. Both The Teacher Leader and I learned through practice that, of all the ways to improve student achievement—time, setting (class size), methods, curriculum--time may be the most critical. Schools often don’t or can’t control the curriculum. Class size has to be really small to make a difference, and, in tight budget times, is probably unrealistic. Improving teaching methods takes years and is a never-ending process. However, increasing learning time holds the greatest promise for immediate improvements in student performance
Researchers at the Johns Hopkins National Summer Learning Association believe that two-thirds of the achievement gap can be directly attributed to summer learning loss. While schools are being shut down, reconstituted, and principals and teachers fired for low student achievement, we continue to ignore the research because summer learning is not glamorous and it is not a “silver bullet.”
In “The Case Against Summer Vacation,” Time Magazine’s August 2 issue jumps on the bandwagon. Here are some highlights from the article:
- Part of the problem is one of perception. “We associate the school year with oppression and the summer months with liberty.”
- “American students are competing with children around the globe who may be spending four weeks longer in school each year, larking through summer is a luxury we can't afford.”
- “Deprived of healthy stimulation, millions of low-income kids lose a significant amount of what they learn during the school year. Call it "summer learning loss," as the academics do, or "the summer slide," but by any name summer is among the most pernicious — if least acknowledged — causes of achievement gaps in America's schools.”
- Children with access to high-quality experiences can exercise their minds and bodies at sleep-away camp, on family vacations, in museums and libraries and enrichment classes. Meanwhile, children without resources languish on street corners or in front of glowing screens. By the time the bell rings on a new school year, the poorer kids have fallen weeks, if not months, behind. And even well-off American students may be falling behind their peers around the world.”
- “Researchers at Johns Hopkins University concluded that while students made similar progress during the school year, regardless of economic status, the better-off kids held steady or continued to advance during the summer — while disadvantaged students fell back. By the end of grammar school, low-income students had fallen nearly three grade levels behind. By ninth grade, roughly two-thirds of the learning gap separating income groups could be blamed on summer learning loss.”
- Across the country, there is a “growing movement to stop the summer slide by coordinating, expanding, and improving summer enrichment programs — especially for low-income children.”
Let me say this one more time, if you hold learning time constant, you are effectively ensuring that a significant portion of your students, mostly poor and disadvantaged, will fail. By failing to provide adequate learning time, you have built failure into your system.
Sumer learning must become a normal part of schooling, not “The Grinch That Stole Summer Vacation."
It’s About Time!
Learn more about this blog and "head blogger" Mel Riddile...


Comments
First, I have always been amazed that if their were 10 piano students, no one would expect all of them to be proficient if all were given the same amount of practice time. The same would be true of 10 people trying to play football (or any sport). However, people expect 25 or 30 students to all be proficient in the same subject given the same amount of time.
Second, my theory about missed class time is that it takes 50% additional time to get back to where the students left off. So, after 10 weeks of summer vacation, it will take 5 weeks to get student back to where they were at the end of the last school year. Similarly, the 10 days of school that most of Virginia missed because of the snow last year were more like 15 days lost because it took students 5 days to recover.
Therefore, the ideal situation with extended breaks would be the 9/3 schedule with 9 weeks of instruction followed by 3 weeks of break. In this situation, during the 3 weeks, there could be offered a 1 or 2 week session so struggling students wouldn't lose time when returning to school. This would reduce the time lost recovering from breaks down from 5 weeks (actually close to 6/7 considering winter and spring breaks) down to one or two. This way, out of 36 weeks, 34 or 35 would be devoted to the material from the current class as opposed to 30 or 31 weeks which happen now. Given 3 or 4 (or 5) extra weeks of instruction per year, many struggling students would have a much better chance of success.
Actually an even better solution would be to give every student the time each needs to be successful in that particular class; whether this means that a particular student needs two years to finish a class (or two class periods in one year). Unfortunately, most schools do not wish to tell students (and parents) that all are different and just because one student takes longer than another to be proficient at a single subject doesn't make them a poorer student.
Only a very few schools are willing to do this; one exception being the school Dr. Riddile and Mr. Singer presided as principal and department chair. Because of this philosophy, this school excelled and was considered one of the top schools in the country while these two were there.
Posted by: William Horkan | July 31, 2010 07:13 PM