Educating Minnesota

Bear in mind that the school calendar has changed over the years; in 1890, the average length of the school year in the United States was 135 days. It’s also worth remembering that Minnesota, long one of the nation’s leading education innovators, was poised to increase the school year to 190 days as recently as 1989—only to retreat in the face of pressure from the resort industry eager to preserve the traditional summer vacation (and maintain a steady supply of youthful labor) and the teachers’ unions fearing the extra funding would not be sustained. Sadly, the push for more instruction days has since been diverted into debates about cheaper and unproved reforms—such as publicly funded vouchers for students to attend private schools—that waste precious time and energy. (Yet another attempt to lengthen the year went nowhere this legislative session.)

Economist Lester Thurow once said, “The standard American response to proposals for a longer school year is to argue that Americans should learn to more efficiently use the current 180 days before they worry about adding more days. Such a response is to get the whole problem backwards. Instead of starting with what is easy to do—work longer and harder—Americans start with what is very difficult to do—work smarter. The argument is also a form of implicit American arrogance. Americans think that they can learn in 180 days what the rest of the world takes 220 to 240 days to learn.” 

Minnesotans didn’t act on the problem fifteen years ago. Now we can’t afford not to. Let’s be clear. Teachers must be paid for their extra service, which would increase dramatically to 230 days per year (including thirty nonteaching days for professional development), according to the school administrators’ proposal. In addition to returning instruction time stolen by increased student testing and other mandates, the additional compensation would make teachers’ salaries more competitive with those of private-sector professionals, which, over time, would surely mean that stronger candidates would be attracted to the field. The state would not have to pay more for teacher benefits, because they are already calculated on an annual basis.

Only the legislature can provide the additional funds required to expand the school year. Also, capital investment in air-conditioning and other building adjustments may be required. But there are other options—such as project-based learning off campus or online—that can help meet such challenges. We aren’t suggesting any particular instructional solution. We are insisting that more learning time is essential if we are to improve public education results.

Cost: $800 million annually for the extra teaching time, when fully phased in over five years, according to the school administrators. That includes lengthening the teacher year to 230 days.

2. Lengthen the School Day
The current school day assumes that a parent is at home when the child returns in the early afternoon and is greeted with milk and cookies on the kitchen table so the little scholar can do her homework. But, like summers of baling hay, such a scenario is ancient history in most households. Today, 70 percent of Minnesota women (the highest percentage in the nation) work outside the home. Instead of baking cookies, Mom is making money, and both parents—if both parents are present in the household—are wondering where to park the child before and after school. Wherever it is, parents usually pay a hefty price for it.