Today, Carolina Journal Radio’s Donna Martinez talks with John Locke Foundation education policy analyst Terry Stoops about a proposal that seems to be gaining steam: to lengthen the school day and/or the school year in hopes of improving student performance. (Go to http://www.carolinajournal.com/cjradio/ to find a station near you or to learn about the weekly CJ Radio podcast.)
Martinez: I have to say, Terry, when you think about it, this idea of longer school day, longer school year, it sounds good. It sort of makes intuitive sense. Is it really a good idea?
Stoops: No, it’s not good idea. And it does make intuitive sense because there is a perception out there, since No Child Left Behind was passed, that students are getting less time for some of the subjects they need to learn, and so that we need to add time to the school day or the school year. And, as well, there are Asian countries that are outperforming the United States that have longer school days and school years. So, intuitively, it sounds like a good idea, but when you look at the research, there is no evidence that a longer school day or a longer school year really helps students achieve more.
Martinez: Well, tell us about that, because you have done some research, and it’s all in your Spotlight paper. It’s called “Better Instruction, Not More Time.” What did you find?
Stoops: Well, when you look at international comparisons of student achievement, you find that a number of the countries that are on top of the achievement ladder do not necessarily have longer school days or school years, and those at the bottom don’t necessarily have shorter days and shorter school years. The perfect example of that is Mexico. And Mexican students spend a lot of time in school — much more than many other nations out there — yet they are one of the lowest-performing school systems in the world. So we see that there is really no correlation between the school day length, or the school year, length and student performance.
Martinez: Terry, there are a number of countries whose kids do exceedingly well on a lot of tests, and we see these comparisons every year. We tend to see the stories that come out, and it ranks United States students with students from other countries. The U.S. tends to be down the list. What is it, then, that other countries are doing with their schooling system that makes their kids achieve more than here in the U.S.?
Stoops: Well, it’s a number of factors. In some cases, it’s parental involvement. In other cases, it’s school choice. And even in other cases, it is teacher quality. It’s hard to pinpoint one thing. But it’s good for us to get out of the way those misconceptions we have — beliefs like a longer school day and school year will help students achieve. If we can rule that out, we could look at other factors that may help students perform better here in the United States.
Martinez: In fact, Terry, it’s sort of interesting because I look at this as another one of these factors that I would call an “input,” and we’ve done this [focus on inputs] before in North Carolina. There is a big push underway to reduce class sizes in public schools. Gov. Mike Easley is a big supporter of that. And that is another one that, intuitively, kind of makes sense. But do you put lengthening the school day or school year in the same category as trying to reduce class sizes?
Stoops: Absolutely. These are things that make a lot of sense on the surface. It makes sense that if you give teachers more time, then they are better able to explain material or answer student questions. But when the teacher is not a good teacher, no matter how much time you give them, they are still not going to be a good teacher. So, just like lowering the class size, it’s the same idea. If you have a bad teacher in the classroom, no matter how small the class size is, they are still not going to be a good teacher.
Martinez: Is the teacher the number one factor in terms of a student’s achievement?
Stoops: There is a lot of disagreement about that, but in my mind, yes. Some research says that it’s parental involvement and socioeconomic status. But, from the research that I’ve seen, I really side with the research that said that the teacher is the most important factor.
Martinez: How serious is this issue of lengthening the school day or year here in North Carolina? Do we have major policy leaders who are talking about this?
Stoops: Absolutely. And it should be pointed out that no legislation has been proposed to do this, but State Board of Education Chair Howard Lee has talked about this being a priority for the state board — thinking about ways to lower the dropout rate, increase the graduation rate — and lengthening school day and year is something he is seriously considering. And, as well, there are major newspapers that are talking about this. The Charlotte Observer had an editorial that was proposing this not too long ago. So this is getting a lot of chatter and is, in my mind, going to be the next big reform pushed by the education establishment.
Martinez: And as we know, Terry, many times policies do go forward that are not supported by data and research, and you research and write about these issues all the time. If, for some reason, this one does move forward despite your research on it, would there also be additional costs, then, to this?
Stoops: Absolutely. In fact, I think some people could see this as a way to actually get more money from the state because it would require so much more. Massachusetts right now has a pilot program that lengthens the school day, and that program requires $1,300 additional per student so they can participate in this program. And, in a normal elementary school, an average elementary school in North Carolina, that would be an extra $650,000, approximately. And a five-school pilot program would be around $3.3 million. We are talking about some serious money if we were to contribute the same amount that Massachusetts is in their pilot program.
Martinez: You mentioned the phrase “pilot program.” That is one way that North Carolina tends to move forward on these new types of policies. Could we see, perhaps a pilot program coming down the pike on this one?
Stoops: Very likely we would see a pilot program. But, unfortunately, there are some, like the Learn and Earn program, that don’t even see a pilot program and get expanded…often times that pilot program means very little, except for as a place-setter for the budget.
Martinez: You mentioned the Learn and Earn program. In the recently passed state budget, there is more money for Learn and Earn, and you have written a number of times about this particular approach. You say it is not successful. Why not?
Stoops: Well, we don’t know if it’s successful. It’s certainly not anymore successful at reducing the dropout rate or raising the graduation rate or targeting low-income or low-performing students so that they would stay in school. We have no evidence that it is doing any of these things, and that is really the problem. If we are going to expand the program, if we are going to really take this program seriously, we need to apply some research to it and see if it is achieving its goals. And right now, from the research — the very small amount of research that’s been done — just looking at student participation rates in the program and their attendance rates, it doesn’t seem to be any more or better than any school is doing right now. So we have to really question whether we have enough data to continue this and expand this program.
Martinez: And Terry, we’ve mentioned the issue of the teacher being so critical to a student’s achievement. Are we making any progress at all on finding a way to measure an individual teacher’s impact on an individual student, or is that just impossible to do?
Stoops: We could do it using a value-added system, and there’s been a lot of talk, and there has been some money set aside to look at value-added. In other words, comparing what the student knows at the beginning of the year compared to what they know at the end of the year. And we are getting closer to that model, but there’s a lot of resistance to that model, especially from education unions and associations, who see this as targeting teachers and possibly as a way to fire or have teachers resign.