I thought that I read in the Sun that Annapolis High School was considering a longer school day or school year?

A few years back some of the Baltimore City schools were pulled into a "CEO's District". I was new to the district then, so I'm not clear on the criteria for being in that district. Those schools had a longer day (50 minutes, I think) and a slightly higher pay scale for its teachers.

I don't know if anyone ever formally assessed the relative success of the extended day, but when the CEO District was disbanded, the bell schedules returned to normal.

Some of the current charter schools have a 40-hour school week, so it's still done to some extent.

I'm not opposed to a year-round program but there are a few logistical questions that would need to be answered: Does this mean more than 180 days per school "year"? If so, how many, and is there a commensurate rise in teacher pay? When does a year's cycle begin or end? How does this affect the Facilities office, which will often use summer time for some major projects? How will this affect the school's HVAC and other utility bills (and therefore funding for student supplies)? These are just the ones from the top of my head.

None of these questions are insurmountable or impossible to answer, but they must be addressed.

All day - year round schools are long overdue and should be a priority. We have not changed the school day to meet the needs of the 21st century where both parents work. City youth are left with so much idle time because their parents do not have the resources to send them to after school programs or summer camps. Many are left at home to take care of their younger siblings. Not to mention it would give us the opportunity to infuse the arts, phys ed and intramural sports back into the school day - kids don't have access to these things because after academics there is no time for anything else, even combined lunchtime and recess is down to 30 minutes. The only obstacle I see is the lack of AC in the buildings.

Bluford Drew Jemison STEM in the city has an extended day program, students attend school from 7:30 until 6:00 mon thru thursday. friday is a regular day.

I think the fact that all of the school staff that now works about 9 mo/yr is going to move to 12 mo/yr, and should expect at least a 20% raise is a big obstical, in that you'd have to find funding for that. Also, teachers should expect to be able to take vacations if they are working all year, so you'd need extra staff to work when they take vacation. That would also have a significant cost impact. Another issue would be how would families now schedule vacations? Not a cost issue, but a logistical nightmare. What about kids that do have enrichment activities over the summer? Would it be ok to take off from school for an academic camp (like CTY)? What about a sports camp? Again, these are logistical issues, not cost, but they would have to be worked out.

All that said, I'm not objecting to year around school. It's just that the details and costs need to be worked out before we can say "of course we should move to year 'round schools."

YEAH!!! for MERIT PAY!!!

I think extending the school day or year is putting the cart before the horse. Are there any longitudinal studies on the effectiveness of all these tests on the success (social, financial, professional, etc. different types of success) of our children? I think all of these measurements are a cop out by parents, administrators and some teachers to hide the fact that we have no idea if we are preparing our kids for Life with a capital L.
Until we figure that out, or at least start the discussion, what does it matter how long our kids are in school?

I love having the summer free to spend time with my child. I would move first...

Merit pay, in theory, sounds like a wonderful idea. I like incentives.
But wait, I only see them for 90 minutes a day, and I don't teach Math or Language Arts. So, is my "merit" pay contingent on how well the Math teacher teaches so the kids do well on that portion of the MSA? Do art, drama, music, gym, etc. teachers get left out of the merit pay? What if its based on evaluations and my administration is vindictive?
I could go on all day...

And as for year-round school, it would take immense planning in order to be done effectively. My first thought goes to all the un-air conditioned schools. Then I think about the last few weeks before summer comes and wonder if the ENTIRE summer would be like that--laid back, hot, barely any work getting done, everyone antsy to go outside--and I think that being there during the summer would just be a waste of time.
Not that I don't think our kids need more time in school. I have 7th graders that can't write in cursive or do multiplication. But perhaps school during the summer could be more geared toward a summer camp mentality with hands-on activities and field trips (at least for younger kids? In high school, many students work during the summer). And as 'a parent' referenced earlier, students attending legitimate activities such as CTY or other camps could get excused absences. Just a thought...

BCPSS already has merit pay. It's called getting National Board Certification, which results in $40,000 spread over the next 10 years ($4,000 a year). Only a handful of teachers attempt it every year, and few get it. I'm completing part of it this year, and know several who have been successful, and it seems exactly what merit pay should involve - intense reflection and critical thinking about teaching practices.

I agree with Steph overall on the issue. I'd love the opportunity to make more money, but would be concerned about the way merit is determined. Test scores? No. I hope Obama doesn't believe this either, and I think the comment that he disdains "off the shelf testing" confirms this.

As for year-round school, I'm also in favor of this. It seems the kids forget way too much over their way too long summer break, and the school year itself is grueling. More breaks throughout the year, a short and compact 4-week summer vacation, and increase of school days to 200, the paired increase of salary by the fair 10-15%, a/c in the schools, and I'm all for it. I think more learning would occur and that it's better for both teachers and students.

New York has an interesting merit pay system where schools as a whole earn the "pay" in a lump sum on a predetermined schedule. The interesting part, though, is that a predetermined committee of voted upon teachers and the principal vote on how to use the funds. Can be anything from giving equal stipends to each teacher to reinvesting the funds in the school, for say a whiteboard for every classroom. It supposedly creates a very collegiate atmosphere where all teachers are supporting the school as a whole to succeed.

There are some interesting studies out there regarding all-day, year-round schools - here are just a few www.tcf.org (The Century Foundation) Idea Brief April 2004; www.ascd.org, Prisoners No More (and there are other articles) also John's Hopkins Center for Summer Learning has alot of good information. I just know (from teaching 7 years) in Baltimore most of our kids are not afforded the opportunity of a summer vacation, summer camp, or programs like CTY - not to mention summer learning loss and the amount of reteaching that happens in the fall.

@eva - I understand that many kids don't have summer activities, but don't make a policy that says if you want to have a summer vacation with your kids or send them to camp you'll need to move out of Baltimore City Schools. We don't need to find new ways to drive middle class families out of City Schools.

One of the great things about summer is that it gives children and families the chance to specialize learning based on the child's interests. Of course, this is if the family has the resources to do so. For many many children from lower income homes summer means reduced access to reading materials and healthy meals. As a city, we can do much much more to support children's learning during the summer by offering programs that emphasize hands on learning and exposure to new activities.

I'm a teacher and I don't believe merit pay is a good idea. I just don't see how it will be fair. I've taught for 15 years. I've had some classes who had high I.Q's and understood everything I taught. Other years, I've had students with lower I.Q's and no matter how hard I tried, they just didn't "get it".
You're also going to have teachers who are more competive, which might lead to cheating and not sharing ideas with fellow teachers.
I'm not certain, but aren't students with low I.Q's or learning disabilities not even allowed in Asian schools? Aren't we comparing "apples" to "oranges"?
Teachers already have so much pressure put on them and with very little pay. Keep adding more pressure and you're going to lose some very good educators.

@a: Once a teacher always a teacher and I believe in merit pay. It is a good idea to reward those who work hard and it can be implemented in a fair way. I HAVE seen merit pay create competition and selfishness but I've also seen it establish collaboration and deliberate goal setting (by teachers & students). Especially when the merit pay was linked to student academic growth (from year to year) rather than solely on one performance.

I don't know about Asian schools but I am happy to live in a country where every child is given the opportunity to gain an education. I think your comment was merely to illustrate the point that student potential is an additional factor in merit pay. If so, then I think any hardworking, committed, dedicated educator can point out to you the academic growth that their students make within a school year regardless of their inherent or potential abilities. I bet you do it all the time already. Wouldn't it be nice to be rewarded for that? So long as your priorities are on the child and you don't start seeing dollar signs on their faces, then I wager no one would turn down additional money for something they already do for free.