saving on school energy costs

[bj]

Lengthening the school day Mon thru Thurs and not running the school buses, a/c and heating on Fridays would save aBIG wad if money. But then parents would have to arrange child care for that Friday! Schools could set up childcare on Fridays much like they do in summers without heating EVERY room or the whole facility. How about that?

[momto3]

In answer to the block schedule "dilemma." There isn't one. Several school systems that return late August, after Labor Day operate on a block system but test after Christmas. It only extends about two weeks into the new year. Teachers then can review the materials with students who've had a two week break from school (not sent home to study) and are fresh and ready to test. Test results show that the difference between students tested prior to winter break and those after is negligible with those tested after winter break actually scoring slightly higher on the tests.

It is not enough of a change, nor does it negatively effect the students (in fact, I've spoken to administrators who say its been positive to test after Christmas, Webb does it) to not make the change based on block scheduling. It just means that people are unwilling to adjust to a change in order to save hundreds of thousands of dollars. That doesn't make any sense to me.

[Abl]

From the perspective of a high school teacher, moving exams after Christmas would mean eliminating precious time used to prepare for the new semester.

I'd like to see some data that shows that the changes really do save as much money as you suggest. Can you provide links to the research you referred to previously? Is there a published study? Who conducted the research?

[momto3]

Abi,

there is so much research, many published studies that have peer review. I would encourage you to link to savetennesseesummers.org. We do not have links to research that is only to support our beliefs. The research and savings numbers are backed up by real data. We are not a group pushing just because we want longer summer vacations.

Webb School's head master said they would never move to testing to before Christmas because of their strong belief in its benefits. I've talked to the Pitt County, NC superintendent who said the move to later start dates did not negatively effect them when they began testing after Christmas and they are on block scheduling.

When I have time I will try and get some links to the university studies we cite as proof that later start dates are a benefit to students and that the "learning loss" is not the real problem so many take on say so. And also the published monetary savings of the states of TX (in the millions) and Tulsa, OK.
Although, my link record on this site is really bad. I will try! But savetennesseesummers.org will give you a good start!

[Abl]

I have looked at the save tennessee summers website, but I typically don't base my opinions on sites that have an agenda. You keep mentioning this abundance of research, but you never cite anything in particular.

While the impact of testing may not have a significant effect on the students, have you considered the effects it might have on the teachers? Research shows that the most important factor in education is the quality and preparedness of the teachers.

[momto3]

What research shows that the most important factor in education is the quality and preparedness of the teachers? I believe it takes quality and prepared teachers but you also need engaged students and involved parents in order for a child to have a successful education. It's a combination, not just one ingredient, but if you can site research that shows otherwise, I would be interested in reading it.

But having said that, why are the teachers that test students after winter break doing as well as those who test before? Obviously, teachers who use winter break for test preparation don't need it in order for their students perform well on exams, unless, they aren't as qualified and prepared as they need to be.

Finally, if the research you site is accurate, then it shouldn't matter when the tests are administered. Teachers give students tests throughout the year without a couple of weeks off from school to prepare. If they are qualified and prepared to teach the don't need 2 weeks of non instructional days to prepare to give an exam.

Here's three sites to review that have research that supports that year round is not better than traditional, and the last one is about why testing after winter break is better for students. Frankly, I would think if it's better for students, teachers would want to make the adjustment even if they do use their vacation time to prep for exams.

Arizona State University study: glass.ed.asu.edu/gene/papers/yrs.html

Ohio State University study:
researchnews.osu.edu/archive/yearrnd.htm

Why exams after winter break are better:
www.window.state.tx.us/schoolstart2004/taskforce/report/appl.pdf

[momto3]

below is the text from an article regarding the savings in Tulsa, OK

Tulsa World
Oklahoma
November 17, 2002




Late opening of schools saved money
The district's July-September utility costs are down by about $500,000.

By Andrea Eger
World Staff Writer

Tulsa Public Schools saved nearly $500,000 by delaying the start of school until after Labor Day, the districts latest utility bills show.

Electricity costs were down $465,000 and gas was down $4,300 during the July to September period compared with the same time period in previous years, said Executive Director of Bond Projects Bob La Bass.

Budget slashing prompted the district to push back the start of the 2002-03 academic year from Aug. 19 to Sept. 3.

At the time, district administrators said they hoped the move would net the district $200,000 in utility cost savings.

"This is very good. I think the idea worked," La Bass said.

Further analysis of the utility cost data will be conducted to include comparisons of this year's late-August temperatures with normal temperatures for the period, he said.

If the summer was milder than normal, even more savings could be possible by keeping schools closed in late August, La Bass said.

Tulsa Public Schools has also mandated utility conservation in facilities district-wide, which could also save money.

At Park Elementary School, Principal Cindi Hemm said the mandated 78-degree indoor temperature during air-conditioned months and 68-degree temperature duing heated months has been livable.

"The children all know what we're doing. On cold days we're all wearing our sweaters, but nobody has complained because everyone understands how tight the budget is," Hemm said.

Utility cost savings in August at Park alone amounted to about $2,000, she said.

"We were able to conserve so much because of the delay for the school start. We shut down all the lights and air conditioning," Hemm said. "I would be surprised if other districts . . . don't try this next year because it worked so well here.


###

[Abl]

I have to take issue with the document you have provided to support testing after winter break. The document states that the spacing effect is well studied, but a quick search on several educational databases returned ZERO hits using the term "spacing effect." In reading through the references provided at the end of the summary it became apparent that many of the articles were derived from psychological studies, not educational studies. While there are similarities between psychology and education, you cannot necessarily generalize from one field to the other. Many of the studies appeared to focus on motor skill performance or early language aquisition - neither of which should be generalized to the testing procedures used in high schools.

Additionally, when I searched further into the documents related to the one you provided I came across a survey that indicated that an overwhelming percentage of the teachers and parents in this school district felt that testing prior to the winter break was a major priority. It appears that a "save our summers" type group was also involved in bringing these issues to the school board and apparently the school board caved without regard to the wishes of the majority of parents and teachers. Squeaky wheels strike again.

In regards to the whole year-round school issue. For every article you provide saying it's no good, I can find another singing its praises. The key to the year-round schooling debate lies in the factors motivating the switch to year-round school. Districts that make the switch due to over-crowding typically expect no educational gains and consequently, no academic gains typically occur. Schools, however, that move to a year-round schedule to improve academics almost always see tremendous academic gains. Additionally, the teachers, parents and students in these schools are overwhelmingly happy with the change.

Studies that look at the success of year-round schools often fail to distinguish one motivator from the other. It becomes difficult, therefore, to make a blanket statement about the effectiveness of year-round schools because the research has not be designed to take into account the reasons why the schedule was adopted.

[momto3]

Abi, your right that you can find people (but statistically a smaller group than those that support traditional school calendars; 71% of Tennesseans surveyed prefer a late August or after Labor Day start) who sing the praises of year round school. And I believe those people love it because it works with their lifestyles and is agreeable to them. That's just fine by me.

The research articles point out why year round was begun, to alleviate over crowding, and that when implemented for such reasons there is no evidence that students do academically better. And if students do thrive under a year round system, it isn't because it's a year round system. It's because the students, parents and teachers embraced the concept! Calendars DO NOT teach children, TEACHERS, parents and the students themselves are responsible for their successes! A choice between traditional and year round is simply a choice of preference NOT academic gain.

I don't want year round school for personal reasons, I don't believe it would be beneficial to my children or family. Your personal choice is yours. There's just no reason to argue it, a calendar is just a calendar it's not a powerful teaching tool.

Be careful that any research "proving" the academic benefits of year round school weren't funded by NAYRE. It's important to know whose paying for the "studies" because there are many that are biased to come out with a particular result.

However, year round does cost more money, that's not disputed. So with this school budget it's not likely to be a hot topic anytime soon.

As far as "spacing effect", yes, it's a psychological term. It's been studied since around the 1800's. It explains how the human brain learns, the biophysical process it goes through in order to learn and retain material.

I happen to think that the way the human brain works and how to best educate students are closely associated. Isn't that what we want our kids to do, learn and retain the information presented to them at school? Isn't that what we do when we test them?

[granma2]

Webb is not on block scheduling. Apples and oranges. You can't make that comparison.

[momto3]

granma2, Webb may not be on block scheduling but I don't believe that block scheduling is what matters in terms of whether schools test before or after winter break, it's a choice.

We operate on a semester schedule. And just because you operate on a semester schedule you do not need to test prior to winter break. It simply considered a convenience to finish the semester prior to the break not a necessity.

Even Donna Wright is quoted as saying that over 12 years ago "We didn't end the first semester until the second week of January,...."This was where final exams would take place after essentially two weeks off for winter holidays. We would go into the first week of June to end the school year." (Quote from West Side Shopper article dated August 2007).

It was a choice for the administration and school board to approve calendars that moved away from late August/after Labor Day starts to an early August start dates. Why they made that choice is a mystery to me.

The question is why? There's no academic evidence to support the change. And beyond the loss of summer opportunities to families, children, teenagers and teachers alike, there is now the added loss of money (which always existed but is more acutely felt now with the budget crunch) that is desperately needed in the schools.

So what is the problem with the board discussing this option to save money? It's the way it used to be done, even operating under semester scheduling.

Those of us who grew up on semester schedules remember testing two weeks after returning to school from winter break (and we didn't spend our entire break studying, at least, I didn't). Many school systems locally and across the nation test after winter break. It does not adversely effect the students nor the teachers. That's not to say there won't be an adjustment period, but just because it's a change doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

If we move the start date back to September 2 it simply means that exams will fall after winter break, not before, that's all. It's not a huge stumbling block.

One other thought, we could still save lots of money in energy costs (although not as much as a Labor Day start), and still test prior to winter break and still start later. If we remove fall break and a few of the "long" weekends, school could start around August 18-21st and there would still be the same amount of instructional days prior to testing. So there is room for compromise, the administration (Professional Advisory Committee who develops the calendar) and the school board just need to be willing to put "it on the table."

[Abl]

momto3,

The research studies that I am referring to were not sponsored by NAYRE, some were even studies that studied the studies (for example, researchers who spent LOTS of time looking at the other studies and judging the quality of the study and/or results).

I agree that it is not the calendar that teaches the children (I am a teacher, so I am well aware of how and where teaching occurs). My point is only that schools which DESIRE to be successful on a YR calendar do so quite well. Keeping that in mind, continuing to refer to "studies" that seem to support traditional calendars over YR calendars in the realm of academic achievement is misrepresenting the facts to suit your own bias. If you prefer a tradtional calendar, then say you prefer it because it suits your lifestyle better. Don't try to puff up your opinion with references to documents that have little true relevance to the issue.

As far as the "spacing effect" goes, it's one thing to say that 4 year olds learn verbs better when they are reinforced every 30 days, but quite another to extend that to high schoolers taking high stakes exams. I'm just asking that we use some discrimination when looking at these references. I can find a statistic to back up just about anything I want to say, but that is not in the best interest of students.

[Abl]

Also, if the "spacing effect" is real and applicable to all subjects, ages and situations (as you suggest), then a year-round calendar would make more sense. Giving students a break between grading periods should increase test scores, right?