Expanded Learning Time or Money?

The Center for American Progress recently held a panel pushing for the implementation of and lauding the benefits of expanded learning time (ELT) programs in schools nationwide. Most programs involve either lengthening the actual school day or increasing the number of days in a school year; to date, mostly charter schools and some elementary and middle schools have been able to integrate a functional ELT program into their curriculum.

Proponents assert that the added time helps teachers expand and further expound on core classes like reading and math, though the added time is most often used to add “hands-on enrichment activities” and programs on values. As Gretchen Bueter, panelist and Principal of Grove Patterson Elementary School in Toledo, Ohio, stated, “enrichment is important because that’s what fulfills the children.” Bueter’s elementary-through-middle school successfully implemented an ELT program about eight years ago.

Critics of the ELT movement assert that instead of expanding the time children spend in school the curriculum should be focused on the core ‘R’s—reading, writing, and arithmetic. The ELT program also comes with some significant strings attached—Elena Rocha, education consultant and author of the newly released CAP report “Expanding Learning Time in Action,” noted that “teacher burnout is a legitimate concern.” Also demanding attention are the changes in time for the bus drivers, additional salary for the supporting faculty, and the effects of the time change on members of the general community.

Marguerite Roza, a Research Associate Professor at the Center on Reinventing Public Education at the University of Washington, noted in her newly released CAP report that the financial aspects of implementing an ELT program typically resulted in 6-16% additional spending or an increase between $280-$720 per pupil. Though, she asserted, that “compared to a lot of reforms” a 16% increase in spending for a 30% increase in time was “sort of a good deal.” To cover the increased costs, she recommended loosening strict caps on class sizes and reducing elective offerings, among other measures.

To date, none of the panelists could offer any statistics to prove the ELT programs were improving students’ learning or test scores. Bueter’s school had a state rating as “Effective” for the last 3-5 years. The highest state rating possible in Ohio is “Excellent.” Bueter asserted that the “program has not been implemented long enough” to tell any comprehensive results. Carmel Martin, the General Counsel and Chief Education Advisor for Senator Edward M. Kennedy, noted that “not a lot of longitudinal studies” had been undertaken to date to prove the effectiveness of the program.

Martin stated that “just adding time” was not the total objective. Instead, “it’s about maximizing the time we do have.” She also asserted that ELT isn’t the “silver bullet” hoped for by politicians and educators alike, but merely a piece of a large puzzle comprising the fragmented U.S. education system.

Rachel Paulk is an intern at the American Journalism Center, a training program run by Accuracy in Media and Accuracy in Academia.