THE EFFECT OF YEAR-ROUND SCHOOLING ON ADMINISTRATORS.
by LOUIS WILDMAN , STACY ARAMBULA , DIANE BRYSON , TY BRYSON , KAREN CAMPBELL , TIM DOMINGUEZ , REBECCA S. FLORES , SANDY JACKSON , TONI KILLBERG , GILBERT LARA , JOAN L. LETLOW , THOMAS A. PITTS , DIANE P. SHOOP , KATHRYN C. WATERMAN , MATTHEW R. WATKINS We began this study after hearing many anecdotal comments about exhaustion and burn-out among year-round multi-track administrators. For example, one administrator related that she had been a year-round elementary principal for three and a half years prior to moving to the district office. Now, her highest concern with the year-round program is with administrator burnout. When she was a year-round principal, her longest vacation was just two weeks. Another administrator spoke about his experience, serving as a year-round middle school principal where he had formerly taught on a year-round schedule. After the first two years in a year-round setting he said, | |
... my head was spinning. I never, ever, had a break. In fact, in the eight
years I was in a year-round schedule, a week-and-a-half off was the most
time I ever took. There is virtually no clown-time. As one track leaves for
a break, a new track comes in.
Two other administrators shared similar stories:
My experience was, in the five years I was doing it, there was never time
when I could get a vacation. There was only a two week period when all the
kids are gone--but that is when administrators need to plan. Year-round is
never ending. You must live a no-break lifestyle ... stress is
internalized. Most administrators are professional enough not to let it
show, but it is felt inside. I think there is a tendency for administrators
to be less enthusiastic about routine things. I hear and witness the
frustration more at that level.
| | Several administrators noted that when one school year runs into the next, they find themselves going through the motions without that opportunity for self-assessment and planning for the future of the educational program. One administrator stated that he did not use a single vacation day the first two years that he was on a year-round schedule. When he was threatened with divorce, he took a week off but said that "vacations are not the same anymore." For he and his family, vacations are not necessarily something that they plan and look forward to as much as they have become a matter of survival. Similar concerns have been voiced in the professional literature. Quinlan et al. (1987) stated that a year-round program "exacts a brutal toll on administrators." Goldman (1990) called the experience "a merry-go-round with no starting or ending." Rodgers (1993) found that principals have a full month for vacation but often only take a few clays here and there due to school being open year round. These concerns were confirmed in an exploratory survey we conducted of twenty-two administrators in one year-round school district. About a fifth take less than ten vacation days per year; another fifth take vacation days in one- or two-day increments throughout the year. In sum, while we had no doubts about the ability of administrators to manage year-round schools for a few years, we were worried about the long-term personal consequences. We were also worried about the effect of multi-track year-round education on schools and communities. When one group of teachers and students is always "off-track," every school event must be scheduled more than once in order to accommodate those not present. As one year-round principal put it, "We've got some serious communications problems. It's kind of difficult to keep a cohesive staff when you've got a chunk of folks not there." On the other hand, when all children attended school during the nine month calendar--which has come to be known as "the school year"--if a neighbor or policeman saw a child playing out on the street in October, that community member would often urge the child to get to school. Now, with the different tracks of year-round schooling, community members don't know whether a child should be in school or not. While year-round schools can issue students ID cards, showing when they should be in school, supporters of the traditional school year feel there is a loss in community support when the public sees students out on the streets throughout the year. School Calendars Still by far the greatest number of schools operate a traditional nine-month schedule, beginning in September and ending around the beginning of June. When pressed for additional space, some schools have gone to a "split schedule," in which the nine-month school year remains the same, but some students start at an early hour and some students start later. Single track year-round calendars include variations on the following patterns: 1. The 45/15 plan. The year is divided into four equal groups, with 45 school days followed by 15 days of vacation. 2. The 60/20 plan. The year is divided into three equal groups, with 60 school days followed by 20 days of vacation. 3. The Orchard plan. Pioneered at the Orchard Elementary School in Orem, Utah, in this plan school is in session for 11 months each year. Students are placed on one of five rotation tracks and attend school for 60 days followed by 15 days of vacation. All students and staff are on vacation in July, and receive two weeks off for winter break and one week for spring break. Teachers work an extended year, and students from each of the five tracks are assigned to each teacher. Students rotate on and off track, but the teachers remain. Hence, in any class at any time, only four-fifths of the students are present. Multiple track year-round calendars combine multiple versions of single track year-round calendars. For example, a school could have four groups of students, each on a different 45/15 plan, or a school could have four groups of students, each on a different 60/20 plan. Why schools adopt year-round calendars There appear to be three major reasons for altering the school year. The most frequently cited reason is to house additional students; a second is to improve student achievement; and a third is to save money. Single-track year-round programs do not accommodate additional students, or save significant funds. In fact, depending upon the climate, they may be more expensive because of additional heating or cooling costs. However, multiple-track year-round programs do accommodate additional students and save significant amounts. They accommodate more students because the facility is utilized for a greater portion of the day and/or the year. With the Orchard plan, cost savings in reduced benefit costs also result from the hiring of fewer teachers per student. However, the largest cost savings result from reduction in school construction. One local school, built to house 320 students, last year housed 820 and this year has 920 students. That school utilizes a four-track 60/20 year-round plan. According to a four-year study by the Oxnard School District, "when the year-round schools were loaded at 120 percent of their traditional-year capacity, the per-pupil cost averaged 5.5 percent less than operating the same school on a traditional calendar." (Sadowski, 1993) The effect on student achievement appears mixed, though a slight advantage seems on the side of the year-round schools. Alcorn (1992) reports 17 out of 27 comparisons between year-round and traditional calendars favoring year-round schedules. Campbell (1994) found no educational achievement differences, and Gandara and Fish (1994) found no significant differences in math and reading achievement, except at one year-round school. Merino (1983) found no significant differences in achievement in six comparisons, and lower scores at year-round schools in three comparisons. The Chula Vista Elementary School District (1991) found CAP and SAT test scores favoring the traditional calendar schools. Within the California State University--Bakersfield service region, Pat Merritt, Assistant Superintendent of Tehachapi Unified School District indicated that Tehachapi has been year-round since 1988-89, and that there has been no significant change in students' standardized test scores. The Bakersfield City School District did commission an outside consultant to do a study comparing the achievement of students in their only year-round school, McKinley Elementary, with that of students in comparable traditional schools. The study indicated no difference in standardized test scores between the students in the year-round program and the traditional program. The San Diego Unified School District conducted its own study in 1991 to measure the academic success of its year-round educational programs. San Diego implemented year-round schools in 1972 to alleviate overcrowded classrooms. It began as a multi-track program in six elementary schools. In 1973, the option was extended to other San Diego schools to start single-track year-round programs. By 1979, there were 29 schools using a single-track year-round plan aimed at improving instructional programs. From 1982 to 1990, San Diego reviewed its standardized test scores to measure the success of this year-round program. A total of twenty-seven comparisons were made between year-round and traditional schools at three grades--3, 5, and 6, in three subjects--reading, language, and math, and at three time intervals. In seventeen of the twenty-seven comparisons, year-round school students did significantly better; in nine of the comparisons there was no significant difference between year-round and traditional schools; and in one instance the traditional school outperformed the year-round schools. In 1996, Carolyn Kneese reviewed 15 year-round vs. traditional calendar studies which met minimal research design criteria. She concluded that year-round education has an overall positive, but very small effect on academic achievement. Where there has been a reported achievement gain for year-round schools, it is often attributed to a large "learning loss" during the summer. On the other hand, some year-round administrators report how disturbing "starting school" three or more times a year is to the learning environment in year-round single or multiple-track plans. They say it is "like starting in September," several times a year; continuity is interrupted too frequently. We are not persuaded that student achievement utilizing some variation of a year-round calendar is significantly better than the traditional calendar for students with active, balanced summer schedules. Many of us look back upon summer family travel, summer camps, and summer play and reading as the most enjoyable and educational part of our childhood. On the other hand, a growing number of students without these advantages may indeed show little or no academic growth over the summer if they simply roam the streets all day without supervision. This observation is confirmed by a study carried out by the Research Division of the University of the State of New York Board of Regents (Morse, 1992), which found that shorter vacation breaks are better for disadvantaged students who can not count on the home environment to reinforce learning. Hence we reach a point where we find strong arguments on both sides of this issue. The arguments Proponents of the traditional school year say that under year-round multi-track schedules administrators find it very difficult to take a vacation while school is in session. They feel a deep personal commitment to the schools they lead. On the other hand, proponents of multi-track year-round schooling see that attitude as an unwillingness to give up control. They say that administrators must learn to share responsibility and take vacations, just like physicians must learn to do so, even though they feel a deep continual commitment to their patients. These two perspectives are clearly seen in the views of the following two administrators: One is a district level director of special education and the other is a principal. The former favors the traditional school year, but works under a year-round plan. He feels that he is losing contact with his family. He mentioned that while there are no written rules at the district office saying that administrators can't take more than a few days off, it is frowned on by the board and superintendent. He feels this puts a big burden on administrators because they must choose between their family and their job. Further, he says an extended vacation during a year-round schedule results in the piling up of work that must be completed when he comes back from vacation. Summer time off allowed him to have an extended vacation, with minimal work pileup. On the other hand the principal, a supporter of year-round education, said she made a point of taking regularly scheduled vacations: "My life is too short to be tied to work. I insist on spending time with my family when they are out to visit." We started this study with anecdotal evidence that year-round education was related to excessive levels of administrative stress. However we found that D. Ann French conducted a study in 1989, in which she examined the burnout of California public elementary school principals working under either a traditional calendar or a year round plan. Two assessment instruments (the Maslach Burnout Inventory and the Principal's Stressful Activities List) were mailed to a stratified random sample of 200 principals (110 from year-round schools and 100 from the traditional calendar schools) out of a total 3,728 California elementary school principals listed in the 1988 California Public School Directory. She did not find significant differences in terms of reported levels of burnout among either year-round or traditional calendar elementary principals. On the other hand, we interviewed a superintendent in a year-round district who said that "The first thing I did when I became superintendent was to assign my principals to a 225-day calendar. And I wouldn't allow any carry over days of vacation. My policy was either use it or lose it." The message, he said, was ... "take your vacation." Evidently, two of his three principals always take all of their vacation days. "One of the principals doesn't," he said, "and he sometimes looks like he's on his last leg." This superintendent made his point by relating a story: Five years ago he was invited to speak to a group of administrators in a district considering multi-tracking. His daughter and son-in-law happened to live nearby and were expecting their first child. He had the privilege of being in the room when his first grandchild was born. "When I was there," he said, "I watched my daughter go through labor, give birth and go through all of the other things you go through in having a baby. Two shifts of nurses and doctors took care of my daughter without skipping a beat. That hospital was an organization that ran 365 days a year, 24-hours-a-day. And it hummed," he said. "Systems can [run] continuously," he said, "but people can't. Everyone has to have access away from the system." He believes that if a hospital can run year-round, then public education can do it. "I have a hard time buying into the notion that there is more stress in year-round education than in traditional," he said. "When you look at the private-sector executive who has to work in a 365-day schedule and he's adjusting fine, I have to ask, how is it that the private sector can do it, and we can't?" Proponents of the traditional schedule often argue for the summer break in order for maintenance workers to have sufficient time to make major repairs. Indeed, several administrators we interviewed thought that since the implementation of year-round schedules--"the level of maintenance has been lowered." Proponents of year-round schools counter that shorter breaks throughout the year (on single-track schedules) permit seasonal cleaning and permit maintenance workers to make major repairs closer to when they are needed, than waiting for summer. Further, they ask why school maintenance workers can only do repairs during the day? They suggest that much work can be done at night, perhaps hiring private contractors to do the work more inexpensively. Proponents of year-round schools point out that while summer has traditionally been a time for older students to find jobs, many of these part-time summer jobs have been in agriculture. Now it may be easier for year-round students to find part-time jobs at various times throughout the year, when there is less competition for the same part-time jobs. After all, grocery stores and fast food establishments stay open all year. Proponents of the traditional school year counter by questioning how likely it is that a student will get a job for just 15 or 20 days. They say these periods are just too short to interest an employer in hiring a student (and particularly a teacher). They make the same argument with respect to intersession remedial instruction. Intersessions are just not long enough for either significant remediation or enrichment, particularly if the student also takes some vacation. Proponents of year-round education argue that shorter intersession periods will improve student retention of learning by decreasing summer learning loss, saying, "Year-round education is founded on the belief that students learn best and retain information longer in a continual education program" (Carroll, 1995). Opponents claim either that there is no difference in student retention or that student retention is actually harmed by the more frequent breaks in school time. According to Patterson (1995), "most people, including children, have a far greater problem with short-term learning loss, occurring within the first two to three weeks. The year-round schedule, with its many breaks of two to four weeks, only maximizes forgetting and requires far more time spent on reacclimating students." As one teacher put it, "Teachers lose one or two days of instruction each time they go off track since they have to get grades ready, often have to pack up their rooms while another teacher is moving in, and the kids are in a `no learning' mode." After describing a similar same scenario, a teacher who supports a year-round plan attempted to reassure us by saying that "most have adjusted to this chaotic way of teaching!" Proponents of the traditional schedule point to difficulties in establishing a sense of community within the school when a different third or a fourth of the staff and student body is always gone. The scheduling of athletics, band, choir and other all-school electives is difficult because some students are always off-track. But a proponent of a year-round schedule told us that "scheduling athletics was not the problem we thought it might be, because the students that wanted to play just came back to the school site and participated." Further, some year-round schools have seen their athletes choose the track that allows them to be off during their season of sport, so that they can concentrate on it during their season, not hampered by school and assignments. Supporters of multi-track year-round schedules point to the large savings due primarily to savings in construction costs and the greater utilization of school facilities. Traditional schedule proponents counter that preserving the concept of a school community is more valuable than the confusion inherent in multi-track plans: the roving and rotating of constantly changing room assignments, the difficulties scheduling all-school activities, off-track students coming onto the campus while school is in session, the problems students encounter when their families move to another school district on a different schedule, and the disruption of family vacations and life-style. Furthermore, they say, the coming and going of multi-track schedules more closely resembles a marketplace than the notion of the "common school." So where do these many valid arguments on both sides of this debate lead us? An Ideal Proposal We have come to see this debate in terms of a larger frame of reference. We are very concerned about maintaining support for public education. Public charter schools, and certainly private schools, do not provide every citizen with a shared educational experience. They further divide us at a time when there is a growing partitioning between the rich (with their gated communities) and the poor. A democracy requires an educated citizenry in which, for example, Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and Anglos all come to know one another. If this does not occur in the "common" public schools, where will it happen? Nevertheless, a large proportion of the population favors providing parents choice with vouchers. We believe a compromise between this portion of the population and those that favor maintaining the public schools is possible. Here is our compromise proposal: Maintain the traditional 9-month public school calendar. If additional students must be housed beyond the capacity of existing schools, extend the school day so that there are early morning and late afternoon tracks to the extent needed. This will allow the continued scheduling of athletic and musical groups, much as at present. Then, during the summer, provide parents with vouchers so that they can choose from among many accredited summer activities, including traditional and college summer school, summer music camps, summer foreign language immersion camps, summer athletic camps, summer math and science camps, summer apprenticeships, summer study abroad, scouting-type activities, etc. Utilize school facilities to hold these educational opportunities. Students in low socio-economic groups, at-risk students and students from non-English speaking homes tend to benefit in particular from year-round schooling. This would give them that opportunity. This plan would give all parents "choice." It would lengthen the school year for those who recognize that the 180-day calendar is probably too short. It would provide teachers potential additional income. It would maintain the "common" school. A Final Word of Advice We began this study, concerned about the impact multi-track year-round education has upon administrators. While we were only able to locate one study (French, 1992) which attempted to empirically measure burnout and stress among administrators on year-round vs. traditional schedules, we did accumulate much additional anecdotal testimony which, in contrast with the French study, suggested that this is a serious problem. Hence we recommend further empirical study and urge year-round administrators to methodically take vacations even though their commendable commitment and dedication tempts them to stay on the job. We interviewed too many year-round principals, intellectually aware of the need to spend quality time taking care of themselves, but who found it hard to actually leave school because they felt guilty leaving while school was in session. References Agron, J. (1993). Stretching the school calendar: Year-round school. American School and University. 66, 30-33. Alcorn, R. D. (1992). Test scores: Can year-round schools raise them? Thrust for Educational Leadership. 21(6). Andersen, A. (1993). Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District financial analysis of year-round education. Arthur Andersen & Co. Ballinger, C. (1995). Prisoners no more. Educational Leadership. November, 28-31. Ballinger, C.; Kirschenbaum, N. and Poimbeauf, R.P. (1987). The year round school: Where learning never stops. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappan Educational Foundation. Campbell, W.D. (1994). Year round schooling for academically at-risk students: Outcomes and perceptions of participants in an elementary program. ERS Spectrum. 12(3). Carroll, M. A. (1995). Should year-round schools be the norm? Experience shows everyone benefits. American Teacher, 80(10), 6. Chula Vista Elementary School District report of year round school achievement gains (1991). March. French, D. A. (1992). California administrator burnout and year-round schools. San Diego, Ca.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 347660. Gandara, P. and Fish, J. (1994). Year round schooling as an avenue to major structural reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 16(1), 69-85. Goldman, J. (1990), Life's a non-stop carousel for year-round principals. School Administrator, 74(4), 25-28. Kneese, Carolyn C. (1996). Review of research on student learning year-round education. Journal of Research and Development in Education. 29(2), 60-71. Merino, B. J. (1983). The impact of year round schooling. Urban Education. 18, 198-316. Morse, S. (1992). The value of remembering. Thrust for Educational Leadership. 21(4), 35-37. O'Neal, S. et al. (1991). Year-round education: The second year, 1990-1991. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Albuquerque Public Schools. Patterson, D. P. (1995). Should year-round schools be the norm? If you don't need more space, forget it. American Teacher, 80(10), 6. Quinlan, C.; George, C. and Emmett, T. (1987). Year-round education: Year-round opportunities. Los Angeles, CA.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 285272. Rogers, L. (1993). The pros and cons of year-round education at the elementary public school level. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 370160. Sadowski, R. (1993). All year long. Thrust for Educational Leadership. 22, 44-47. Educational Administration Program California State University, Bakersfield Bakersfield, California 93311 |
|