The classic 180 day school year has been established since the early 1900s. Prior to this period, children who worked on farms in rural areas usually went to school during off-farming season in the cold, winter months. Then they would stop during the summer months to help their families on their farms. Because of this, the school year was shortened to accommodate these children. Currently many schools are considering, or already have, switching back to the longer school year with periodic breaks. Year-round schools should not be required for students, as their is little data to support benefits from this and to show educational improvement without the long summer. Proving that year-round schools is beneficial to the students is incredibly
…show more content…
Jose Aguero says that, “...more days in the poorest areas had no effect at all--even though the poorest students, whose families lack the resources to provide them with out-of-school enrichment, should have the most to gain from more time at school.” (Crawford) To sum up this quote, a school with more poverty is expected to improve on test scores, but the test scores were found to have not been raised. Ohio State University found that in math and reading over a span of a year, students who attended year round school improved about the same amount on test scores as students who went to the 180 day year, and year round students, on average, only raised test scores by less than 1% (Hippel). The claim that year round school will help test scores is not a valid argument. Many schools have switched or have considered switching to the year round schedule, but the evidence shows that it won’t help students to benefit. There is also little evidence to show the benefits of year round. Year round school costs much more than the normal year does, not only for the school but for families as well, and the absent summer break will negatively impact students and their family in many different ways. For these reasons schools should not require a year round
Jose Aguero says that, “...more days in the poorest areas had no effect at all--even though the poorest students, whose families lack the resources to provide them with out-of-school enrichment, should have the most to gain from more time at school.” (Crawford) To sum up this quote, a school with more poverty is expected to improve on test scores, but the test scores were found to have not been raised. Ohio State University found that in math and reading over a span of a year, students who attended year round school improved about the same amount on test scores as students who went to the 180 day year, and year round students, on average, only raised test scores by less than 1% (Hippel). The claim that year round school will help test scores is not a valid argument. Many schools have switched or have considered switching to the year round schedule, but the evidence shows that it won’t help students to benefit. There is also little evidence to show the benefits of year round. Year round school costs much more than the normal year does, not only for the school but for families as well, and the absent summer break will negatively impact students and their family in many different ways. For these reasons schools should not require a year round