Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know that it’ll pass just yet, but they’re shifting the Overton window by getting people to at least consider it. Maybe another 1-2 years of acclimating to the idea and they could launch it for the 2030 school year. As a teacher, I see the benefits - right now, as Shernoff says, we have an ad hoc nearly-year round schedule without the benefit of the consistent chunks of time off between quarters. It’s just a hodge podge of inconvenient scattered days off that extend our school calendar interminably, disrupt consistent learning, and create childcare gaps for parents of younger kids. Each year we start earlier and stay in school later - it’s so maddening.

This is exactly how they have been building toward year-round school. Make the calendar increasingly inconvenient because of the start and end times, all the 3 and 4-day weeks for work days, end of quarter days, the day after Halloween, election day, religious holidays, etc. until people are so fed up that they will support year-round school because at least there will be more consistency and five-day weeks. I looked at multiple LCPS calendars for reference, and depending on the year, the year-round calendar provides between 3-5 more weeks of five-days-a-week in school than the current calendars. For 26-27, most months of the school year, the kids have TWO five-days weeks a month. How does that calendar work for anyone -- teachers, students, families?

The thing that really gets me, though, is that the proposed year-round school calendar goes back to federal holidays only. All the religious holidays that have been added to be "inclusive because we have a diverse community" turn out to be not that important after all? That makes me feel like they were added just to drive people towards the year-round school option.

Good point. If they can remove the religious holidays to have year round school, they can remove them and just have a normal calendar with a nice long summer, too.

I think this is where they will land. And they will act like it’s this amazing mental breakthrough, when it’s actually just what the calendar was way back before all the random holidays.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know that it’ll pass just yet, but they’re shifting the Overton window by getting people to at least consider it. Maybe another 1-2 years of acclimating to the idea and they could launch it for the 2030 school year. As a teacher, I see the benefits - right now, as Shernoff says, we have an ad hoc nearly-year round schedule without the benefit of the consistent chunks of time off between quarters. It’s just a hodge podge of inconvenient scattered days off that extend our school calendar interminably, disrupt consistent learning, and create childcare gaps for parents of younger kids. Each year we start earlier and stay in school later - it’s so maddening.

This is exactly how they have been building toward year-round school. Make the calendar increasingly inconvenient because of the start and end times, all the 3 and 4-day weeks for work days, end of quarter days, the day after Halloween, election day, religious holidays, etc. until people are so fed up that they will support year-round school because at least there will be more consistency and five-day weeks. I looked at multiple LCPS calendars for reference, and depending on the year, the year-round calendar provides between 3-5 more weeks of five-days-a-week in school than the current calendars. For 26-27, most months of the school year, the kids have TWO five-days weeks a month. How does that calendar work for anyone -- teachers, students, families?

The thing that really gets me, though, is that the proposed year-round school calendar goes back to federal holidays only. All the religious holidays that have been added to be "inclusive because we have a diverse community" turn out to be not that important after all? That makes me feel like they were added just to drive people towards the year-round school option.

Good point. If they can remove the religious holidays to have year round school, they can remove them and just have a normal calendar with a nice long summer, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m in LCPS and every one has been talking about this. Everyone is in favor! I haven’t met anyone who disliked it.

My favorite parts-
-3 weeks off in fall, 3 weeks in Christmas, 3 weeks in spring.
-5 weeks of summer.

We’re a wealthy county and people love to take international vacations. Many people also have relatives overseas and this would give time to visit them. Cheaper plane tickets and less crowds at tourist places! 5 weeks is still a really long time for summer.

You must have little kids. I have HS kids and everyone I know hates it. We are all in favor of the new option 7 that starts after Labor Day, Ends June 8 and gets rid of all the extra holidays.

It's interesting because any APS calendar discussion is largely HS parents saying how much they love the random days off so their kid can study ( I suspect it's a couple of people who don't like fighting to get their kid out the door)

Yes. It’s the parents of juniors and seniors who miss a ton of days anyway. They like it because they don’t feel like a bum when their kid is yet again home from school and they just “can’t” make them go. Most parents want fewer random days off and more consistent 5 day weeks and chunky breaks.

Even as an adult if you gave me the option of 5 random federal holidays off or an entire 5 day week off, I'd choose the 5 day week off. I would choose that for my kids too because we don't have local family and we welcome any chance we can get to travel to them or on vacation. Do high school parents realize that those are the options? Random days versus an entire week (or two) off after each quarter.

I really just don’t think they have the support for year round. At best support is 50/50 for/against and that’s not enough for a major change like this. And the support is mostly just the parents of young kids who somehow think this will be better daycare for them, even though it’s the same number of school days as it ever was. Parents of MS/HS do not want this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know that it’ll pass just yet, but they’re shifting the Overton window by getting people to at least consider it. Maybe another 1-2 years of acclimating to the idea and they could launch it for the 2030 school year. As a teacher, I see the benefits - right now, as Shernoff says, we have an ad hoc nearly-year round schedule without the benefit of the consistent chunks of time off between quarters. It’s just a hodge podge of inconvenient scattered days off that extend our school calendar interminably, disrupt consistent learning, and create childcare gaps for parents of younger kids. Each year we start earlier and stay in school later - it’s so maddening.

This is exactly how they have been building toward year-round school. Make the calendar increasingly inconvenient because of the start and end times, all the 3 and 4-day weeks for work days, end of quarter days, the day after Halloween, election day, religious holidays, etc. until people are so fed up that they will support year-round school because at least there will be more consistency and five-day weeks. I looked at multiple LCPS calendars for reference, and depending on the year, the year-round calendar provides between 3-5 more weeks of five-days-a-week in school than the current calendars. For 26-27, most months of the school year, the kids have TWO five-days weeks a month. How does that calendar work for anyone -- teachers, students, families?

The thing that really gets me, though, is that the proposed year-round school calendar goes back to federal holidays only. All the religious holidays that have been added to be "inclusive because we have a diverse community" turn out to be not that important after all? That makes me feel like they were added just to drive people towards the year-round school option.

Maybe but they were also added by the previous school board around 2020 and times have changed and it’s a new school board now that doesn’t share the same priorities and ideology. There have also been 3 superintendents in that time (Williams, Ziegler, Spence) so the likelihood this was a decade long plan by multiple superintendents and school boards isn’t as likely as attitudes around education are constantly changing and this is the next big change we’ll make. And then in 10-15 years, probably undo it again.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know that it’ll pass just yet, but they’re shifting the Overton window by getting people to at least consider it. Maybe another 1-2 years of acclimating to the idea and they could launch it for the 2030 school year. As a teacher, I see the benefits - right now, as Shernoff says, we have an ad hoc nearly-year round schedule without the benefit of the consistent chunks of time off between quarters. It’s just a hodge podge of inconvenient scattered days off that extend our school calendar interminably, disrupt consistent learning, and create childcare gaps for parents of younger kids. Each year we start earlier and stay in school later - it’s so maddening.

This is exactly how they have been building toward year-round school. Make the calendar increasingly inconvenient because of the start and end times, all the 3 and 4-day weeks for work days, end of quarter days, the day after Halloween, election day, religious holidays, etc. until people are so fed up that they will support year-round school because at least there will be more consistency and five-day weeks. I looked at multiple LCPS calendars for reference, and depending on the year, the year-round calendar provides between 3-5 more weeks of five-days-a-week in school than the current calendars. For 26-27, most months of the school year, the kids have TWO five-days weeks a month. How does that calendar work for anyone -- teachers, students, families?

The thing that really gets me, though, is that the proposed year-round school calendar goes back to federal holidays only. All the religious holidays that have been added to be "inclusive because we have a diverse community" turn out to be not that important after all? That makes me feel like they were added just to drive people towards the year-round school option.

I would definitely support shortening the summer - ours is still nearly 10 weeks long I think. 7-8 weeks is still long enough, and could then include a true week long fall break and a longer, two week Spring Break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're discussing the potential LCPS calendar change on the FCPS page, too. Here is a link to how they do the year-round calendar in Australia. It's opposite from us, but gives a good idea of 2 week breaks and a 6 week summer. Seems perfect to me! (I'm a HS teacher with MS- and HS-aged kids.)

https://education.qld.gov.au/about/Documents/school-calendar.pdf

That calendar has 195 school days. Where is the extra money coming from? Otherwise you have three more weeks of vacation that have to go somewhere…

Sure... so we would get another 1/2 week or week of summer vacation, another week at the semester end, and days off for Labor Day, Memorial Day, Thanksgiving break, etc...

Which eliminates the supposed benefits of year round school: five day school weeks. Now you've got the same bad calendar as FCPS has in 2026 you’re just calling it “year round school”

Personally, I don't think having 2 4-day weeks and 3 days off at Thanksgiving makes the calendar "bad." You think it does?

Once again, moving in the wrong direction. Not surprised as LCPS just gets worse with each passing year. People cry about children’s mental health. Schools offer “unified mental health” bandaids but don’t address that they are a MAJOR part of the problem. Time and time again, there are choices that COULD be made for better learning outcomes AND better holistic outcomes, and each time they say, nah…but hold my beer.

Not that I think year-round school will pass. But yet another example of the clown show. This admin and school board needs to go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're discussing the potential LCPS calendar change on the FCPS page, too. Here is a link to how they do the year-round calendar in Australia. It's opposite from us, but gives a good idea of 2 week breaks and a 6 week summer. Seems perfect to me! (I'm a HS teacher with MS- and HS-aged kids.)

https://education.qld.gov.au/about/Documents/school-calendar.pdf

That calendar has 195 school days. Where is the extra money coming from? Otherwise you have three more weeks of vacation that have to go somewhere…

Sure... so we would get another 1/2 week or week of summer vacation, another week at the semester end, and days off for Labor Day, Memorial Day, Thanksgiving break, etc...

Which eliminates the supposed benefits of year round school: five day school weeks. Now you've got the same bad calendar as FCPS has in 2026 you’re just calling it “year round school”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're discussing the potential LCPS calendar change on the FCPS page, too. Here is a link to how they do the year-round calendar in Australia. It's opposite from us, but gives a good idea of 2 week breaks and a 6 week summer. Seems perfect to me! (I'm a HS teacher with MS- and HS-aged kids.)

https://education.qld.gov.au/about/Documents/school-calendar.pdf

That calendar has 195 school days. Where is the extra money coming from? Otherwise you have three more weeks of vacation that have to go somewhere…

Sure... so we would get another 1/2 week or week of summer vacation, another week at the semester end, and days off for Labor Day, Memorial Day, Thanksgiving break, etc...

Anonymous wrote:They're discussing the potential LCPS calendar change on the FCPS page, too. Here is a link to how they do the year-round calendar in Australia. It's opposite from us, but gives a good idea of 2 week breaks and a 6 week summer. Seems perfect to me! (I'm a HS teacher with MS- and HS-aged kids.)

https://education.qld.gov.au/about/Documents/school-calendar.pdf

That calendar has 195 school days. Where is the extra money coming from? Otherwise you have three more weeks of vacation that have to go somewhere…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will childcare providers be able to pivot to offer school age care? Will they be able to hire staff who are willing to work only during the school breaks? What about the children who rely on the schools for meals? How will they be fed during breaks?

Yes. Childcare will easily pivot

Do you really think so? If you need enough employees for 40 kids for 6 weeks at a time and then you need enough employees for 80 kids for 2 weeks, are the employees going to be willing to work for short stints with weeks long gaps in between? Most childcare centers employ just enough staff to meet minimum ratio standards. Are they going to pay the workers who come in for the school age kids for weeks they aren't needed? No. Are those employees going to be able to find other jobs that allow them to work 6 weeks on, 2 weeks off?

How do you envision this working? I'm genuinely curious. I know it must work in the places where year round school exists. I just don't understand how.

The local TKD places and Childtime/etc care places will easily cover the school days off... they already cover the random holidays for their clients. Places like the NZone in Chantilly will open up for drop in care, just like they do on snow days and random off days. Their economic structure is based on the school calendar. Whatever that calendar may be!

High school students will be around to babysit, if that's what parents prefer.

In other places with year round school, the local counties often offer inter-session camps through their park authorities. I would assume in our rich area, that service would grow as well.

Questions about school-age care and the businesses that provide it are one of the things I'm hearing most about (my kids are in LCPS elementary and middle). The private organizations you mention will probably adapt OK, although the TKD my kids go to after school seems to struggle with staffing, but I guess that's standard high turnover in childcare. Still, the impact on jobs tied to the traditional school year is a concern I've heard a lot. And I wonder if those businesses would raise prices; their costs are often eye-watering as it is.

Loudoun Parks and Rec really would have to be part of this for year-round school to work, IMO. Their summer camps are extremely popular and hard to get into, ostensibly because parents are highly reliant on them (and they're much more affordable than the aforementioned private orgs).

The other super common complaint is about problems created when the school systems' calendars aren't in sync. Even if most LCPS teachers don't live in other counties, as a PP suggested, a whole lot of LCPS parents work in different counties and trying to reconcile the two is a mess. Whatever year it was when LCPS and FCPS had different spring breaks, tons of teachers took PTO or called out and it was a crazy scramble trying to cover that. These random days off here and there are one thing (though not painless for all by any stretch), but weeks+ would be a nightmare to coordinate for LCPS parents who work in Fairfax County, DC, or somewhere else. A week vacation may be feasible for some or many, but three or five weeks? I guess it's probably doable with enough advance planning and eventually it becomes the new norm, but it's a BIG hurdle to clear.

I have a friend who teaches in North Carolina and her school system has been year-round since she's been there. She loves it, and it's a place people are flocking to so they must be at least OK with it. Personally I would be fine with year-round school; it would just be a matter of negotiating some kind of agreement with my work. But I've always had to be the parent with the flexible job because the other parent, who makes a lot more money, has zero flexibility. I don't know how that part will work since I'm sure we will be separated, at minimum, by the time this actually happens. All problems for tomorrow, I suppose, especially that last one. But obviously, we need to be thinking and talking about these things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re also sending out another calendar survey about a year round schedule that opens today. It is clear they are moving toward this, it’s just a matter of when. Maybe 28-29, maybe another year or two after that to really hammer out the details and get the community used to the idea. But it’s clearly coming. They’re not bringing it up this much for no reason.

+1

Unless it is to make whatever else they are proposing more appealing (not to me, I'd love year round school)

Anonymous wrote:They’re also sending out another calendar survey about a year round schedule that opens today. It is clear they are moving toward this, it’s just a matter of when. Maybe 28-29, maybe another year or two after that to really hammer out the details and get the community used to the idea. But it’s clearly coming. They’re not bringing it up this much for no reason.

+1