Is the School Calendar Dated?: Summer Learning Loss and the Achievement Gap

I read this interesting article in the Teachers College Record, but the original is really long so I'm summarizing it here. I wonder if the U.S. school calendar will ever change...one thing the author didn't mention is the COST to educate our children longer...seems like that will be the real decider. Any thoughts? -- LG
(And P.S. this is just ME musing on this topic...not an official Board item! I just thought it was interesting in a conceptual way.)

From Teachers College Record, by Harris Cooper — September 15, 2008

In the 19th century, if children lived in agricultural areas, summertime meant helping tend crops or livestock around the farm. If they lived in urban areas, it was not unusual to attend school for at least two of summer’s three months (Richmond, 1977).

According to the Association of California School Administrators (1988) family mobility at the turn of the century led to implementation of the current 9-month calendar. In the early 20th century, many children held jobs during the summer. Passage of the first child labor law in 1916 meant that school-aged children had little to do during their vacation from school. Community leaders organized summer recreational activities, and educators came to see summer as an opportunity to increase students’ interest in lifelong learning.

Today, promoting lifelong learning may not be the only rationale for offering educational experiences during summertime. When school is not in session, students may forget what they have just learned. Many educators argue that children learn best when instruction is continuous. The long summer vacation disrupts the rhythm of instruction and requires time be spent reviewing old material when students return to school.

Research evidence bears out these concerns. A meta-analysis of summer loss studies (Cooper, Nye, Charlton, Lindsay, & Greathouse, 1996) confirmed that, on average, achievement test scores declined between spring and fall.

Calls for change in the school calendar do not stop with concerns about the summer break’s impact on student learning. The American family has undergone dramatic changes in the last half-century, and the living arrangements of children are very different from those that prevailed when the current school calendar was adopted (Farley, 1996). It is much more common today for both parents to work outside the home or for families to be headed by a single parent. These changes bring increasing demands for services for children when school is not in session. Advocates for children living in families that lack the resources to provide educational and recreational activities lead the call for quality summer programs.

Adding Days to the School Year

Research in schools and school districts that have added days to the school year reveals mixed results (Axelrod, 1996, Karweit, 1985). Generally, the research supports the notion that adding just a few days to the school calendar will have little impact on student learning. Some research suggests that as many as 25 to 35 extra days would be needed to produce a noticeable change in student achievement. This change in the number of days would necessitate a corresponding change in curricula and teaching strategies.

Modified Calendars

Another meta-analysis focused on stud­ies of school districts that modified their calendars but did not increase the length of their school year (Cooper, Charlton, Valentine, & Muhlenbruck, 2000). These schools might have students attending for nine weeks followed by three weeks off, and this pattern would be repeated four times a year. Remedial and enrichment programs might be available during intercessions. The evidence revealed ambiguous results. The effect favored modified calendars, but the size of the impact was quite small.

Summer School

Summer school is the most traditional remedy for summer learning loss and for helping students who are behind academically. A study integrating the results of 93 evaluations of summer school (Cooper et al., 2000) revealed that summer programs focusing on remedial, accelerated, or enriched learning had a positive impact on the knowledge and skills of participants.


Summer Homework

Many educators are now resorting to “summer homework” as a means to combat summer learning loss. The impact of teachers’ assigning academic tasks meant to be carried out over the summer break is still a “data-free zone,” but controversy over its use will probably kick start some research efforts. Proponents argue that it helps prevent summer learning loss while opponents contend that children need the “down time” afforded by summer to pursue other interests and just be kids (The Edutopia Poll, 2008).

Based on the research mentioned above and other research on homework during the school year (Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006), it is assumed that summer homework does have some positive effect on achievement by cutting down on review needed when the new school year starts. But, unless it is moderate in amount and handled properly by students and parents (e.g., it is monitored so that small amounts are done throughout the summer rather than crammed into the last days before school starts up) it is also a family stressor.

Looking to the Future

Change in the school calendar is inevitable. However, these changes will not occur because educators and researchers will convince the American public that more or rearranged time in school will improve academic achievement or close the achievement gap. After all, this was not the impetus behind the traditional calendar. Instead, changes in American families will dictate changes in school calendars. For most parents, summer may be hazy but it is not lazy, and finding appropriate activities for children when school is out is a real dilemma. Eventually, the shift in family economics evident in the late 20th and early 21st centuries will overcome the resistance to change in the school calendar, but the process may be long.