Anonymous wrote:A billion percent (I am a teacher in a Title I school). We waste so much time getting kids back into routines and making up for massive learning loss over the summer. If this was offered in my district, I would transfer schools to teach on that schedule.

Parent of kids in Title I all the way through. Agree, but I would prefer the increased days to come along with a modified school year calendar. With all the holidays and teacher work days and early release days, the school year is way too choppy and disruptive. a modified year round calendar helps restore some rhythm while still providing breaks throughout the year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who didn’t read the link, it was not a district wide change, it was a pilot at two schools, one of which was 97% free and reduced lunch. It’s clearly targeting a specific student population.

It was so successful, they are expanding it. It makes sense to target those who need more help first but imagine how successful smart kids could be with extra days in school. I don't get parents who say 11 weeks of summer just aren't enough.

Richmond Public Schools have more than 66% free and reduced lunch, three times the rate of Arlington and Loudoun. It’s targeting low income students who lose the most in a long summer.

There are APS elementary schools with more than 66% of the kids on free and reduced lunch though. It would make sense to institute this program for those schools. Isn't part of the justification for segregating the schools that it's easier to provide services? I know transportation is the biggest piece of it, but I also thought they had high-needs schools to focus resources there (even though they don't necessarily advertise that fact).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thnk we should have year round school. That would counter learning loss that happens annually over summer break. It would also make it so people could actually travel at times other than the summer.

FCPS tried this in 3 schools around 20 years ago.

More than 3 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2001/jul/24/20010724-024418-1187r/

It ended in 2010 due to budget cuts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thnk we should have year round school. That would counter learning loss that happens annually over summer break. It would also make it so people could actually travel at times other than the summer.

FCPS tried this in 3 schools around 20 years ago.

APS did it at one school then ended it.

Where are you gonna get the money from? Let’s start by using the time we have better. Start earlier and end after APs and SOLs.

Anonymous wrote:I thnk we should have year round school. That would counter learning loss that happens annually over summer break. It would also make it so people could actually travel at times other than the summer.

FCPS tried this in 3 schools around 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who didn’t read the link, it was not a district wide change, it was a pilot at two schools, one of which was 97% free and reduced lunch. It’s clearly targeting a specific student population.

It was so successful, they are expanding it. It makes sense to target those who need more help first but imagine how successful smart kids could be with extra days in school. I don't get parents who say 11 weeks of summer just aren't enough.

Richmond Public Schools have more than 66% free and reduced lunch, three times the rate of Arlington and Loudoun. It’s targeting low income students who lose the most in a long summer.

WIthout a doubt yes! Summer learning loss is real. COVID loss is real. American students being globally dropping in education standing is real. To say we shouldn't change or having concern on vacations is short sighted. Year round please!

Anonymous wrote:For those who didn’t read the link, it was not a district wide change, it was a pilot at two schools, one of which was 97% free and reduced lunch. It’s clearly targeting a specific student population.

It was so successful, they are expanding it. It makes sense to target those who need more help first but imagine how successful smart kids could be with extra days in school. I don't get parents who say 11 weeks of summer just aren't enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it’s not the Covid loss. It’s the screens.

Of course there is Covid learning loss. Kids have learning loss over short summer breaks. Virtual school went on for 18 months.

It’s both. COVID hurt. But the screens are worse.

+1 adding in changing parental and school norms (fewer boundaries and consequences)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it’s not the Covid loss. It’s the screens.

Of course there is Covid learning loss. Kids have learning loss over short summer breaks. Virtual school went on for 18 months.

It’s both. COVID hurt. But the screens are worse.

Anonymous wrote:No, it’s not the Covid loss. It’s the screens.

Of course there is Covid learning loss. Kids have learning loss over short summer breaks. Virtual school went on for 18 months.

No, it’s not the Covid loss. It’s the screens.

Anonymous wrote:Should be an opt in program for kids who need it. Not all children need this and there's barely any summer break anymore as it is with all the random teacher work days.

The students who opt in to that sort of thing are rarely the ones who need it unfortunately

For those who didn’t read the link, it was not a district wide change, it was a pilot at two schools, one of which was 97% free and reduced lunch. It’s clearly targeting a specific student population.

Should be an opt in program for kids who need it. Not all children need this and there's barely any summer break anymore as it is with all the random teacher work days.