This House would introduce year round schooling.

Studies show that students in year-round schooling tend to get perform better on many assessment metrics than those who do not[1]. Schools operating a year-round calendar do not have to cram so much course content into a 9 month schedule, but can space out learning better. This allows teaching to proceed at a more logical pace, helping students learn better. Furthermore, by giving students frequent short breaks (instead of two or three long ones), pupils are refreshed and ready to learn when school resumes.

[1] Palmer, Elisabeth A. and Bemis, Amy E., “Year-Round Education”, University of Minnesota College of Education, 24th October 2000. http://www.cehd.umn.edu/carei/reports/docs/year-round.pdf

In actual fact, the evidence on year-round schooling is inconclusive, with other studies suggesting that there is no educational benefit from holding classes year-round[1].

Indeed, you could argue that some students prefer to concentrate the bulk of their learning into a shorter time frame and leave time for a long summer break to take their minds off school for a while.

[1] Ohio State University, “ Year-round Schools Don't Boost Learning, Study Finds”. Science Daily, August 14th 2007. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070811151449.htm

During long summer holidays, students completely put aside learning and forget all about their studies for up to three months. In this time, they inevitably forget quite a lot of what they have learned. Teachers then have to spend the first weeks of the new academic year bringing them back up to speed. By eliminating the long summer break and replacing it with year-round learning punctuated by shorter vacation times, this problem would be much reduced.[1]

[1] Davey, Martin, “The Case For Year-Round Schooling”, Toronto Star, July 14^th 2008. http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/459031

Students are going to forget information whether they are out of school for three weeks or ten. Therefore, teachers will be performing four beginning of the year reviews instead of just one. In addition, students often switch off mentally at the end of term in anticipation of the vacations, which will mean more teaching time wasted. Even if students end up learning more during summer months, they are likely to end up no better educated at the end of the year.

The structure of the school year is often one of the few fixed points in young people’s lives. For many children, particularly those from poorer families, long summer holidays don’t mean summer camps and foreign holidays, but day after day sitting in front of the TV or hanging around in their neighbourhood. All the evidence suggests that boredom is a major factor behind social problems like drug use, youth crime and antisocial behaviour.[1]

Year-round schooling would not get rid of problems like these, of course, but it might help to reduce the level of such behaviour by giving young people something to do.

[1] “Youths bored in school holidays”, BBC News, 11^th July 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/6288962.stm

Year-round schooling does nothing to help the issue of boredom. Many “problem children” are more bored in school than outside it; others are often absent from school altogether. There is no hard evidence that social problems such as crime and drug use go up significantly during breaks in the school year.

For many parents, particularly those with more than one child, summer vacations can be a stressful and difficult time. Without the structure provided by school attendance, children become bored easily and parents struggle to cope.

This is especially true for mothers who may be bringing up children without a father present, or those who wish to continue or resume their careers after the first few years of motherhood; trying to combine a full-time job with the rigours of motherhood is hard but trying to do so during a three month school holiday is almost impossible. Year-round schooling makes such a work-life balance easier for young parents and allows women to return to the workplace on their own terms.[1]

[1] Schulte, Brigid, “The Case For Year-Round School”, Washington Post, June 7^th 2009. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/05/AR2009060501971.html

Again, there is nothing intrinsic to year-round schooling that makes it easier for families with several children. A single mother who struggles with young children will not be any better off having to take care of their children every six weeks instead of six months.

Year-round schooling is unlikely to be applied in exactly the same way in different schools, and different classes or groups of students may well be on different timetables – thus, parents may find themselves having to take care of children almost year-round rather than having time off, as at present.

Evidence suggests that children from lower-income families tend to “fall behind” further during long summer vacations. These children are less likely to read books, pursue additional studies or take part in useful extracurricular activities compared to their peers from wealthier families.[1] This has a knock-on effect on their academic achievement, and once they have fallen behind it is very difficult for them to catch up. (This is the logic behind government-funded programs such as Head Start in the US or Sure Start in the UK)[2]

Year-round schooling would remove this important driver of inequality, give students a level playing field on which to learn, and help create a more meritocratic society.

[1] Johnson, Alex, “Year-round school gains ground around U.S.”, MSNBC.com, 27th October 2010. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39748458/ns/us_news-life/t/year-round-school-gains-ground-around-us/#.TmN8Kl1DiuI

[2] “Early Head Start Benefits Children and Families”, US Department of Health and Human Services, April 2006. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/reports/dissemination/research_briefs/research_brief_overall.pdf

It is certainly true that children from disadvantaged families do not do as well as their luckier peers, but it is not clear why changing the pattern of school attendance will change this. The overall proportion of the year spent away from school will not change, so there is no reason to believe that year-round schooling will benefit students whose homes and families do not provide a positive learning environment[1].

[1] Newland, Christopher, “Letter to Auburn School Board”, 20th October 1998. http://www.auburn.edu/~enebasa/html/atrisk_.pp.html

A nation’s most important resource is its human capital, and in the modern world it is vital to have a skilled, educated workforce in order to remain competitive. Many nations have already adopted year-round schooling. By following their example, we will be giving our young people an important advantage in the employment market and thereby improving the country’s economic prospects.[1]

[1] US National Educational Commission on Time and Learning, “Report: Prisoners of Time”, April 1994. http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/PrisonersOfTime/Lessons.html

This argument is based on the assumption that year-round schooling delivers academic benefits to students. However, as we will see in Opposition argument 6, there is very little evidence for this. Without concrete evidence that this massive change will deliver real improvements in national educational performance, it will merely divert attention from more pressing problems in our school systems.

Year-round schooling often goes hand in hand with multi-tracking, where different groups of students at the same school are on different schedules. This has the advantage of allowing school rooms, facilities and other resources to be used more efficiently, thus providing a better education without putting even more strain on government budgets.[1]

[1] “Year Round Education Program Guide”, California Department of Education, 25th July 2011. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/yr/guide.asp

Year-round schooling will probably mean increased administrative costs, as well as ensuring that overheads such as catering, heating and security have to be paid year-round rather than for just part of the year, as at present.[1]

Education funding in many countries has been under pressure for many years, and most schools have explored all sorts of ways of maximising the effective use of their resources and facilities. The best solution to strains on resources is to make more money available to schools, not to stretch them ever thinner.

[1] Richmond, Emily. “Year Round School Could Face Calendar Shift”, Las Vegas Sun, 16th March 2010. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/mar/16/year-round-schools-could-face-academic-calendar-sh/

Studies show that students in year-round schooling tend to get perform better on many assessment metrics than those who do not[1]. Schools operating a year-round calendar do not have to cram so much course content into a 9 month schedule, but can space out learning better. This allows teaching to proceed at a more logical pace, helping students learn better. Furthermore, by giving students frequent short breaks (instead of two or three long ones), pupils are refreshed and ready to learn when school resumes.

[1] Palmer, Elisabeth A. and Bemis, Amy E., “Year-Round Education”, University of Minnesota College of Education, 24th October 2000. http://www.cehd.umn.edu/carei/reports/docs/year-round.pdf

In actual fact, the evidence on year-round schooling is inconclusive, with other studies suggesting that there is no educational benefit from holding classes year-round[1].

Indeed, you could argue that some students prefer to concentrate the bulk of their learning into a shorter time frame and leave time for a long summer break to take their minds off school for a while.

[1] Ohio State University, “ Year-round Schools Don't Boost Learning, Study Finds”. Science Daily, August 14th 2007. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070811151449.htm

During long summer holidays, students completely put aside learning and forget all about their studies for up to three months. In this time, they inevitably forget quite a lot of what they have learned. Teachers then have to spend the first weeks of the new academic year bringing them back up to speed. By eliminating the long summer break and replacing it with year-round learning punctuated by shorter vacation times, this problem would be much reduced.[1]

[1] Davey, Martin, “The Case For Year-Round Schooling”, Toronto Star, July 14^th 2008. http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/459031

Students are going to forget information whether they are out of school for three weeks or ten. Therefore, teachers will be performing four beginning of the year reviews instead of just one. In addition, students often switch off mentally at the end of term in anticipation of the vacations, which will mean more teaching time wasted. Even if students end up learning more during summer months, they are likely to end up no better educated at the end of the year.

The structure of the school year is often one of the few fixed points in young people’s lives. For many children, particularly those from poorer families, long summer holidays don’t mean summer camps and foreign holidays, but day after day sitting in front of the TV or hanging around in their neighbourhood. All the evidence suggests that boredom is a major factor behind social problems like drug use, youth crime and antisocial behaviour.[1]

Year-round schooling would not get rid of problems like these, of course, but it might help to reduce the level of such behaviour by giving young people something to do.

[1] “Youths bored in school holidays”, BBC News, 11^th July 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/6288962.stm

Year-round schooling does nothing to help the issue of boredom. Many “problem children” are more bored in school than outside it; others are often absent from school altogether. There is no hard evidence that social problems such as crime and drug use go up significantly during breaks in the school year.

For many parents, particularly those with more than one child, summer vacations can be a stressful and difficult time. Without the structure provided by school attendance, children become bored easily and parents struggle to cope.

This is especially true for mothers who may be bringing up children without a father present, or those who wish to continue or resume their careers after the first few years of motherhood; trying to combine a full-time job with the rigours of motherhood is hard but trying to do so during a three month school holiday is almost impossible. Year-round schooling makes such a work-life balance easier for young parents and allows women to return to the workplace on their own terms.[1]

[1] Schulte, Brigid, “The Case For Year-Round School”, Washington Post, June 7^th 2009. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/05/AR2009060501971.html

Again, there is nothing intrinsic to year-round schooling that makes it easier for families with several children. A single mother who struggles with young children will not be any better off having to take care of their children every six weeks instead of six months.

Year-round schooling is unlikely to be applied in exactly the same way in different schools, and different classes or groups of students may well be on different timetables – thus, parents may find themselves having to take care of children almost year-round rather than having time off, as at present.

Evidence suggests that children from lower-income families tend to “fall behind” further during long summer vacations. These children are less likely to read books, pursue additional studies or take part in useful extracurricular activities compared to their peers from wealthier families.[1] This has a knock-on effect on their academic achievement, and once they have fallen behind it is very difficult for them to catch up. (This is the logic behind government-funded programs such as Head Start in the US or Sure Start in the UK)[2]

Year-round schooling would remove this important driver of inequality, give students a level playing field on which to learn, and help create a more meritocratic society.

[1] Johnson, Alex, “Year-round school gains ground around U.S.”, MSNBC.com, 27th October 2010. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39748458/ns/us_news-life/t/year-round-school-gains-ground-around-us/#.TmN8Kl1DiuI

[2] “Early Head Start Benefits Children and Families”, US Department of Health and Human Services, April 2006. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/reports/dissemination/research_briefs/research_brief_overall.pdf

It is certainly true that children from disadvantaged families do not do as well as their luckier peers, but it is not clear why changing the pattern of school attendance will change this. The overall proportion of the year spent away from school will not change, so there is no reason to believe that year-round schooling will benefit students whose homes and families do not provide a positive learning environment[1].

[1] Newland, Christopher, “Letter to Auburn School Board”, 20th October 1998. http://www.auburn.edu/~enebasa/html/atrisk_.pp.html

A nation’s most important resource is its human capital, and in the modern world it is vital to have a skilled, educated workforce in order to remain competitive. Many nations have already adopted year-round schooling. By following their example, we will be giving our young people an important advantage in the employment market and thereby improving the country’s economic prospects.[1]

[1] US National Educational Commission on Time and Learning, “Report: Prisoners of Time”, April 1994. http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/PrisonersOfTime/Lessons.html

This argument is based on the assumption that year-round schooling delivers academic benefits to students. However, as we will see in Opposition argument 6, there is very little evidence for this. Without concrete evidence that this massive change will deliver real improvements in national educational performance, it will merely divert attention from more pressing problems in our school systems.

Year-round schooling often goes hand in hand with multi-tracking, where different groups of students at the same school are on different schedules. This has the advantage of allowing school rooms, facilities and other resources to be used more efficiently, thus providing a better education without putting even more strain on government budgets.[1]

[1] “Year Round Education Program Guide”, California Department of Education, 25th July 2011. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/yr/guide.asp

Year-round schooling will probably mean increased administrative costs, as well as ensuring that overheads such as catering, heating and security have to be paid year-round rather than for just part of the year, as at present.[1]

Education funding in many countries has been under pressure for many years, and most schools have explored all sorts of ways of maximising the effective use of their resources and facilities. The best solution to strains on resources is to make more money available to schools, not to stretch them ever thinner.

[1] Richmond, Emily. “Year Round School Could Face Calendar Shift”, Las Vegas Sun, 16th March 2010. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/mar/16/year-round-schools-could-face-academic-calendar-sh/

Many children don’t enjoy school. Even those who do still look forward to summer holidays as a time when they can relax and stop worrying about work for a while. And for some students, school life is difficult in other ways – social awkwardness or bullying being a common problem. Taking away summer holidays would mean that students have to work hard year-round, and short small breaks don’t offer the chance to relax as a proper summer holiday does. For those who dislike school, year-round schooling would mean year-round stress and unhappiness.[1]

[1] “Academic Performance Top Cause Of Teen Stress”, Associated Press, 23rd August 2007. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20322801/ns/health-childrens_health/t/academic-performance-top-cause-teen-stress/#.TnCd9exDiuI

Year-round schooling doesn’t place extra burdens on students; the whole point is that it reduces the stress and strain of school life by allowing learning to take place at a gentler pace that is dictated more by the needs of students than the timetable. Holidays of two or three weeks are plenty of time to recharge the batteries for another few weeks of school. Children will be better off mentally and psychologically if year-round schooling is introduced.

Many schools are simply not set up for year-round use. In particular, most schools are not air-conditioned and often use older, poorly-ventilated buildings and classrooms. In many parts of the world, opening schools during summer would either involve expensive retrofitting and renovation, or sweltering hot classrooms with distracted children. There would also be increased overheads and costs associated with year-round catering, security, heating and administration.[1]

[1] Richmond, Emily. “Year Round School Could Face Calendar Shift”, Las Vegas Sun, 16^th March 2010. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/mar/16/year-round-schools-could-face-academic-calendar-sh/

Year-round schooling will increase costs in some areas but more than offset these with efficiency savings in other areas (see argument 7, above). It makes no sense for buildings to sit idle for a third of the year.

As for the argument about air-conditioning, this is only an issue in some countries round the world; in many others it would not be an issue.

A lot of extra-curricular activities take place during summer holidays. Summer camps, trips abroad - even debating competitions. Summer holidays are a sensible time to hold such activities, partly due to the weather but also because different regions or school boards often have different vacation schedules and summer is the only time when students are all likely to have free time. Year-round schooling would reduce the opportunities for such activities.

Some families use long holidays to arrange extra tuition in certain subjects, either as remedial education or to give their children an advantage[1]. Year-round schooling would make it harder for families who wish to exercise this choice, too.

[1] “Summer School”, US Education Commission of the States, 2011. http://www.ecs.org/html/IssueSection.asp?issueid=121&s=Overview

Year-round schooling would necessitate a change in the way extra-curricular activities are structured, not a reduction in such hobbies. Shorter breaks of two or three weeks are more than sufficient for most extra-curricular activities and by spreading them throughout the year, instead of ring-fencing them into a couple of summer months, their beneficial impact might well be greater.

If year-round schooling reduces the necessity to send students for extra tuition, as is common in some countries, then this should be considered a positive benefit of the change, not a problem. Families whose children are being educated year-round will have less reason to spend their hard-earned money on expensive and often unnecessary private classes.