The Wichita district’s 2007-08 school year will start the same day as it did last year, Aug. 15. But the school board’s vote Monday to begin enrollment on July 27 effectively will abbreviate summer for some staff and parents. The district’s move away from its late-August-to-late-May calendar still makes sense, especially because it better aligns with suburban districts’ and colleges’ schedules. An earlier start also was one of the promises of the 2000 bond issue. But we can’t help but begin to wonder: Is Wichita inching toward year-round school?
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Phantom on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Phantom on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- gster on Open thread 11/24
14 Comments
If Wichita does go for year-around school, granted with nice breaks inbetween, such as a longer winter break and spring break, but if they do go year around, it will recieve an increadible amount of attention and will cause a substantial business and economic boost to our community.
People and companies will find it very progressive and will attract them to move and do business here for the purpose of children recieving year-around school.
We should have went for it a long time ago, but there are forces that oppose it. Unions and a few parents who think summers off is a national past-time.
School summer vacation is a hold over from the late 19th and early 20th century when most of the kids were needed to help on the farm. The economy has changed from an agrarian base, and that need is no longer as prevalent.
Yes, there are family farms and kids that work on them, but it is not a majority of people anymore. The idea of expensive schools sitting vacant 3 months a year due to an old tradition is a waste of resources.
I agree Joe – it would be a progressive move. With more and more to learn I think our kids need more contact days. Also, the current “9-month/3-month” system makes BOTH the school time and the break time too long. By August a lot of kids are ‘burned out’ on summer just as by May they are ‘burned out’ on school.
The trickiest part I think will be families trying to coordinate vacation time. I can see us juggling three adults and three kids schedules to try to come up with two weeks all together. But. just as we do it with multiple jobs we can do it here.
I think it’d be easier to coordinate vacation times, instead of just having one long summer to do, they can choose from a couple.
I think going year round is an excellent idea, long past it’s time. The kids can catch up and take a breather which will make them more apt to do better.
and it is seriously just getting old that all schools seem to start earlier and earlier and earlier…
I feel that “year round” school is a concept long past due. There could still be breaks, say three of them, each for a month, if folks feel that nine months is all the school time needed (with which I disagree); the benefits from this is less “back up to speed time” after each break, as opposed to what now happens after the summer; and, potentially, the ability to cover more material during the days taught.
Some costs: increased utilities, as the need for air conditioning during the summer months when schools (most of them) are otherwise closed; as I understand teacher’s compensation, there would need to be more money allocated to salaries, as teachers are being compensated on the basis of a nine month (approx.) year. Continuing ed for teachers would need to be considered; they would no longer have the ’summer’ to take courses, etc.
Year round school is a GREAT idea.
IF your a businessman.
Get those kids used to no time off! Then when they get in the work force they won’t demand any.
Americans already work too much. It is GOOD to have down time. Summer break should continue to foster this.
Year round school is a GREAT idea.
IF your a businessman.
Get those kids used to no time off! Then when they get in the work force they won’t demand any.
Americans already work too much. It is GOOD to have down time. Summer break should continue to foster this.
Hmmmm….I’m in agreement with JR.
I’m going to check my temperature. I must have a fever. :)
If school was year round, we could also bring back or continue important parts of school & the development of children, ie recess, pe, art & music. Also not all parents can take vacation time during summer.
I agree with VT (as I often do). Year round school is an idea long overdue in trying out. Three trimesters, with a 2 week break between each, plus the usual occasional holidays. Makes better use of our capital investment in buildings, less “catch-up” time in the fall, the ability to teach more (and there is more and more to learn), etc, etc. Lots to like here. Students could also have more options for classes, and in some cases, could even have the option to take a trimester off (say, for that big family vacation – something I have done with my parents and kids, and something I look forward to with the grandkids).
Teacher salaries will have to be increased commensurately. And since teachers must take college hours to keep their certificates current, I’d propose a period of paid sabbatical, perhaps a fall or spring semester, every say 4-5 years or so, for that purpose.
It would cost more. But it would add to the pay and professionalism of teaching, and assist in attracting and keeping quality teachers, which is ultimately the only school reform which makes any real difference.
Year-round compulsory schooling isn’t necessarily a great idea, unless it is well thoughtout, which I would argue, for 8th-12th grade should follow the modern university model of operating year-round, but using summer sessions for specialized purposes, ranging from remediation to enrichment.
For example, schools can teach intensive courses in the arts, languages, mathematics and sciences, which could be taken by all ranges of students. Here, students would take only 1 or 2 courses. This would maintain the longstanding “catch-up” (remedial) coures, but also provide a broad array of regular and accelerated courses.
You could have a 4-hour-class 6-week course in painting, or 6-hour classes in foreign languages, and that’s all a student would take. You could have humanities-inclined students take one or two full-year-equivalent math and science courses of 4 hours duration over 8 weeks, then they could focus on their preferred subjects during the regular school year.
This BTW, could also improve the regular-year math and science classes student compositions, distilling the student pool to math-and-science-interested students, which would improve the quality of these classes for the students and their teachers.
This model would also be compatible with older students’ taking courses elsewhere, e.g. community colleges and WSU, and for our top students, courses at “Ivy League” universities, where gifited kids get to meet and collaborate with their academic peers from across America, and even around the world.
A compulsory on-campus-attendance year-round scheme would preclude many suberb off-campus summer enrichment and acceleration opportunities. This would disadvantage a large number of Wichita students.
It might be reasonable to establish year-round on-campus compulsory schooling up to 7th grade, and then switch to the university 1 or 2 course-enrollment model for 8th-11th grade summer education.
This could have diverse benefits, including enabling older students to work during the summer, gaining “real world” skills and money for college or family needs, as they do now. “Real world” productive work is worthy of alternative credit.
Moreover, high school students who are making adequate college-readiness progress during the 9-month year should be allowed to pursue whatever interests they desire during the summer.
Calendar expansion, in any form, will require expenditure expansion, which will translate into higher taxes. Building operations costs will increase. Teachers will have to be fairly compensated for increased work. If year-round education is done well, the increased expenditures should be a worthwhile human-capital investment.
All good points, heart.
Teachers won’t work more, they’ll work more evenly. They already get paid for 12 months.
And teachers already take off for conferences for continuing ed during the year.
Nurses don’t get 3 months in the summer to do their continuing ed, often the hospitals hold their own continuing ed and is paid for by the place they work for. Just like teachers.
I don’t think asking older kids to do it while allowing the younger kids to maintain off during the summer isa good idea, for 1, vacation time, for 2, high school kids often provide babysitting for the younger kids, so they all need to be off at the same time.
I could go for immersion like college classes, where you take one class for a period of time. However I can see that leading to much fatigue in kids who haven’t matured enough to maintain attention to something they’re not all that interested in.
All I’m saying, 3 months, then a 1 month break would be a great way to keep kids interested in their studies, time to catch up on missed work, remedial programs at the time they’re needed rather than all summer- instead of waiting a year to decide a kid needs extra help, it could be evaluated on a three month basis.
No, P-mom, teachers do NOT get paid for 12 months. I taught fore 12 years; the contract is for a 9 month period. The district would space that pay out over 12 months (I was effectively loaning the district my money, without interest, to do so), but the contract was for NINE months, not 12.
Going to 12 month schools would require a commensurate pay increase. As it should.