Ann Arbor schools postpone balanced calendar switch for Mitchell and Scarlett until 2013-14
Note: This story has been updated with information from a letter sent to staff and parents Friday
The balanced calendar piece of the Mitchell and Scarlett/University of Michigan Partnership will be postponed until the 2013-14 school year, district officials confirmed Friday.
The partnership is still on track to begin in the 2011-12 school year and was approved by the Ann Arbor school board in December.
District spokesperson Liz Margolis said the committee forming the partnership decided the best idea would be to let parents have some experience with the program before moving to the new calendar, which would shorten the summer vacation and add weeklong breaks during other times of the year.
“We realized there are still many parents unsettled about the calendar issues and the best thing to do is move forward with (the rest of) the plan,” she said.
A change to the school calendar would not take place until the 2013-2014 school year, Margolis said.
The balanced calendar portion of the program has been by far the most hotly debated aspect of the partnership, which will pair teacher interns from the U-M School of Education with teachers at Mitchell Elementary School and Scarlett Middle School to help create new teaching strategies.
The balanced calendar was originally dropped from the 2011-12 school year plans in December.
A committee has been working on a proposed calendar that would see school at Mitchell and Scarlett begin in early August and end in late June. Breaks would be set for one or two weeks at the end of September; the full week of Thanksgiving; during winter and spring breaks at other AAPS schools, along with an additional week; and six weeks in summer.
The partnership will still offer inter-sessions that will allow for additional learning opportunities during school breaks, Margolis said. The inter-sessions are optional activities planned and taught by teachers from the buildings with participation from U-M interns and faculty. Possible inter-session activities include writing camps and science camps.
The decision to postpone the balanced calendar portion of the partnership comes after a survey about the proposed program concluded earlier this month. The program's planners were not totally reliant on the results of the survey, Margolis said.
A total of 360 people took the survey, according to a letter sent to parents and staff members Friday.
According to the letter, most Mitchell and Scarlett respondents to the survey said they would stay at the schools if a balanced calendar was implemented. However, respondents from the feeder schools of Allen, Pittsfield and Carpenter elementary schools said they would not want to stay due to family scheduling conflicts.
Respondents from Allen, Pittsfield and Carpenter also said they would not want to participate in pilot inter-session programs as they are offered in 2011-12.
The letter stated it is still the desire of the committee to see the balanced calendar take effect in the future.
Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley said in a recent memo to interim superintendent Robert Allen and the Ann Arbor school board that the decision was disappointing but in the best interest of the district.
"It is with some measure of disappointment that we arrive at this recommendation but all involved feel it is the most responsible position to take at this time," she said.
The committee forming the partnership is looking into opportunities for families in the district to either opt in or out of the program, she added. However, Margolis said, officials would like families going into the partnership to give it a shot.
“Really, what we want to do is put the program in place and have parents and students experience it as much as possible to have a good feel for what this type of program would look like,” she said. “Within two years, a decision could be made by families to move into it or not.”
Kyle Feldscher covers K-12 education for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at kylefeldscher@annarbor.com or you can follow him on Twitter.
Comments
Jojobubbajr.
Mon, Apr 18, 2011 : 2:44 p.m.
Here is my reply to ms Margolis. It sums up my feelings on the topic: Ms. Margolis, I'm glad to see that those responsible have come to their senses in regards to the balanced calendar aspect of this proposal. I believe there would be much less opposition to it if it were being considered for district wide implementation. I am appalled that anyone in the field of education cannot see the many flaws of only partially implementing such a plan within a school district. There are many positive aspects to the balanced calendar as you are all aware. I, for one, would like to see it in place for all of AAPS. Perhaps the next survey should be sent to ALL the parents within the AAPS district to gauge the interest of a balanced calendar by the community as a whole. I'm quite disappointed that so much time and money has been wasted in attempting to implement such an absurd idea. Please mind you that this has absolutely no impact on my children academically as they are all in Tappan and Pioneer as of next year. I am simply a concerned taxpayer and lifelong resident of A2 who has witnessed too many times the inefficiencies and wastefulness of the AAPS administration over the years.
CincoDeMayo
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
Sorry about the spelling errors. My "smart" phone was making some executive decisions. But, very appropo in this forum eh?
CincoDeMayo
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 12:40 p.m.
Upon first reading about this program, I have to say I shared some of Basic Bob's sentiments. It certainly sounded experimental. The proposal is for a "laboratory" school afterall. Would you want your child used as a guinea pig?? I would't want mine used that way, and, was glad I was no longer in the Mitchell / Scarlet area. But, since I myself actually did have a lower income and was unable to finance any special camps or extra-curriculars for my children, I would've lived that aspect of the program. And, yes, with the cost of daycare, I would've enjoyed the "free daycare" this option gave me. I wouldn't't have been able move, so I would"ve looked at these positives. However, I would've done it wondering at what cost? Any perks I would've enjoyed would not have been guilt free. It may have helped if the board would've presented this proposal differently. Nobody wants their kid used as a guinea pig. And, it is true that the SE corner of Ann Armor historically, in many areas, has to work much harder than the rest of the city to keep from being dumped on. (Coming from a lifelong Arborite who has lived in many parts of the city.) Why not try it at Burns Park (or better yet, Angell, where even more University kids are) and Tapping. Then bring it to Scarlet and its feeder schools
Basic Bob
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 6:19 a.m.
@Lisa, Not all families who attend Scarlett Middle School are as you describe. We have doctors, professors, entrepreneurs, engineers, corporate officers, and even a few teachers. Our children go to sports and music camps, summer reading programs, museums and zoos all summer long. Our children go the same high schools and attend nationally known universities. As a Scarlett parent, we are tired of Ann Arbor's stereotype that we are all poor, lazy, uneducated, nonwhite, and living in public housing ghettos. We want the administration to quit making decisions for "our good", that they are unwilling to make district-wide. The district's own survey demonstrates that if this schedule is implemented in this school only, there will be a line of hundreds of parents who want out of Scarlett for practical reasons, even if it means leaving the district. As I asked earlier, if this is such a good program, why not start it at Burns Park and Tappan? Certainly their children would benefit from an improved educational experience. The answer is simply that the administration believes that they can perform their experiments on Southeast Ann Arbor children and no one "who counts" will care.
Beth
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 9:05 p.m.
Well said!!!!!
Dr. I. Emsayin
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 2 a.m.
I hear there may be teacher layoffs beginning in the fall which would influence which teachers will be teaching in which schools just as school is getting started. Perhaps by the 2013-14 school year the shuffling will have settled down. I do not know when teachers are up for a new contract, they just signed one last year in the spring that promised no layoffs for two years, but evidently two years was compressed into one year by counting last school year and this school year as the two years. I guess there is a lot of fuzzy language in that contract that is impacting movement of teachers for the fall.
Beth
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 8:53 p.m.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that parents should have a say in all district decisions. That would indeed be ridiculous. But some proposals, like the balanced calendar, are not driven by state mandates or financial necessity. There is research to support this, but there is also research saying it might not help. It would cause significant hardships for many people. In cases like this, it is vital to survey the community and see what families want. And by community, I do mean just parents, in this case. All AAPS-area residents pay school taxes and elect school board members, and should have a say in financial decisions that will affect them. For people without children in school, however, this balanced calendar proposal won't change anything - their taxes won't go up, their daily life will be unaffected. They are certainly entitled to voice their opinions, but I don't think that they should have an equal vote in this matter. It is the parents who will face the ramifications of any changes to the calendar, and it is the parents who will decide whether or not to keep their children in AAPS schools. Today's reality is that families don't have to attend their neighborhood school. There are many other options out there - charter schools, private schools, other AA schools with open enrollment, and other neighboring districts that acceot School of Choice students. If families don't like what their neighborhood school is doing, they will go elsewhere and take the state funding for their child to another school. If Ann Arbor wants to keep current families and attract new families, they need to be responsive to what parents want. It's a big change from how schools used to be, but the reality is that the schools now need to market themselves to potential "customers".
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:04 p.m.
"I don't understand why some commenters seem so opposed to the idea of actually letting parents have a say in school district decisions." An interesting point of view. As a parent whose three children no longer are in school, I cannot imagine a how it is possible to run a school system in an efficient and effective manner if everything that happens has to be approved by the parents. Moreover, given what I saw of parents in far too many instances, doing so would be akin to turning the asylum over to the inmates. Finally, the schools serve the community as a whole. The community pays the bills for the schools, not just the parents. The school board is elected by and represents the interests of the entire community, not just the parents. Their interests should not be privileged above those of others. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 3:49 p.m.
No, my post indicates my belief that the vast majority of parents cannot step back from their children and honestly and objectively evaluate what is in the child's best interest in many areas. One only need go to a basketball game, or a soccer game, or a hockey game, or a little league game for ten year olds and watch parent behavior and note their values to see this. And we won't even get into the clothing parents allow their children to wear or how they permit them to behave. Good Night and Good Luck
Basic Bob
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 3 p.m.
@Ed, your comments indicate that you subscribe to the theory that "some animals are more equal than others." That's not a very progressive value.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 1:41 p.m.
". . . and your reference to the parents as inmates." This is just self-righteous hand-wringing combined with (likely purposeful) mis-reading of what I wrote. But there's a track record of that, so it is no surprise. Good Night and Good Luck
Basic Bob
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 6:34 a.m.
"Their interests should not be privileged above those of others." I agree, however you infer that the subjects of the experiment have undue privilege. This could not be further from the truth. This area is unrepresented in the community, and that makes it politically palatable for the school board. This is apparent from the school board's indifference to the parent surveys at Allen, Pittsfield, and Carpenter schools; and your reference to the parents as inmates.
CincoDeMayo
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:57 p.m.
I am respectful of the potential scheduling difficulties when you have children in different schools, however I will just say that at one point I had four children in four different schools (including a pre-school, an elementary school, a middle school and a high school). We don't take vacations so there was no conflict there. Some car pooling helped. But, overall it was doable. And gave some times I could spend one on one with each of them. It was not doable to commit my time significantly to any of the schools, though. That being said, I am a big believer of a good, long summer break. I feel like there are so many things to learn in life outside of school. And, also, that time to unwind, to "de-stress" from the myriad pressures of school life is critical. For any child, but especially those that the confines of the classroom and school culture can be so tough on, having this extra long break can be a life saver. In the affluence of Ann Arbor, it is more like a population of kids is getting ahead, rather than others falling behind, so I appreciate those interim workshops for Mitchell Scarlett kids. It may give them access to some education that others are getting through various summer camps. However, again, academics isn't everything. Sometimes I wonder if our kids are being allowed a balanced life.
Beth
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:52 p.m.
@ERMG - I am a teacher, and I don't support the balanced calendar. Not a one of my friends who are teachers does, either. I have heard that this plan is not supported by all the Scarlett staff; I don't know about the Mitchell staff. Intersessions could be easily incorporated into the traditional breaks and summer vacation, to give the benefits of a longer school year to those that want it. Many parents seem to favor this plan solely because it equates to more free day care for them - a board member said point blank at the December meeting on this topic that she would favor this calendar because she can't stand having her child home. If AAPS wants to experiment with this calendar, why can't they run a magnet school that families could choose to opt into? The key to student achievement, as many other commenters have noted, is parent involvement. If parents have to choose to attend a school, they will be more invested in it - just look at the amazing parent involvement at AA Open. There are many studies on "year-round" calendars that show many different results - you can find one to support just about any viewpoint. I'm curious to know, @ERMG - do you have children? If you do, do they reside in the Scarlett attendance area? @skigrl50 poses a great question about how the partnership proposes to increase parent involvement. If the calendar changes but the level of parent support at home and involvement in school stays the same, this is just a big waste of time and money. I don't understand why some commenters seem so opposed to the idea of actually letting parents have a say in school district decisions. Big school changes will not succeed without parent support - therefore the district needs to know if that support is there before they make the changes. The majority of AAPS parents are well educated, reasoning adults who are capable of looking at the data and making an informed decision about what they feel is best for their children.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:03 p.m.
"I don't understand why some commenters seem so opposed to the idea of actually letting parents have a say in school district decisions." An interesting point of view. As a parent whose three children no longer are in school, I cannot imagine a how it is possible to run a school system in an efficient and effective manner if everything that happens has to be approved by the parents. Moreover, given what I saw of parents in far too many instances, doing so would be akin to turning the asylum over to the inmates. Finally, the schools serve the community as a whole. The community pays the bills for the schools, not just the parents. The school board is elected by and represents the interests of the entire community, not just the parents. Their interests should not be privileged above those of others. Good Night and Good Luck
aaparent
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 4:19 p.m.
This was the news post from the A2 Schools public relations newspaper. Does AnnArbor.com share ownership of this? The story is pretty similar to Kyle's <a href="http://news.a2schools.org/?p=4820" rel='nofollow'>http://news.a2schools.org/?p=4820</a> School publication: Plans continue for partnership with U-M School of Education From AAPSNews Service The Ann Arbor Public Schools is moving ahead with plans for a K-8 partnership between Mitchell Elementary, Scarlett Middle School and the University of Michigan School of Education this fall, but will wait and reconsider a balanced calendar for the 2013-14 school year. Kyle's Story: The balanced calendar piece of the Mitchell and Scarlett/University of Michigan Partnership will be postponed until the 2013-14 school year, district officials confirmed Friday. The partnership is still on track to begin in the 2011-12 school year and was approved by the Ann Arbor school board in December. School Publication Version: The committee forming the partnership is looking into opportunities for families in the district to either opt in or out of the program, she added. However, Margolis said, officials would like families going into the partnership to give it a shot. Kyle's article -- maybe it is just a typo to forget to put this same paragraph in quotes: The committee forming the partnership is looking into opportunities for families in the district to either opt in or out of the program, she added. However, Margolis said, officials would like families going into the partnership to give it a shot.
Jeff Gaynor
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:47 p.m.
This discussion provides an opportunity to examine a balanced schedule for all K-12 schools, well beyond Ann Arbor. Germany is on this schedule, as are, likely, many other countries. Six weeks seems long enough for summer activities and vacations. Having two weeks at the end of September is a wonderful time for vacations, and other opportunities will open up to fill the breaks. Yes, it is a change, so will be resisted, but as a parent, and as a teacher, this change makes sense. Germany staggers their six week summer break over a 10 week period by region. This allows for a full summer tourist season, while also serving to lessen vacation traffic. The latter may not be as advantageous to our spacious country, but this calendar does not need to shorten the tourism season, and extends opportunity during the other longer breaks. The more frequent one and two week breaks also tend to keep teaching, and learning, fresh.
skigrl50
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:07 p.m.
I am glad to see that they are holding off on the balanced calendar. There are too many unanswered questions that haven't been addressed. First, many students that live in the apartment complexes move in and out over Labor Day weekend. With a balanced calendar these students, will automatically be nearly a month behind in school. Second, neither Mitchell nor Scarlett are air conditioned buildings. They can be very hot and miserable in early September, let alone during the dog days of August. There has been no mention of adding air conditioning. But the offices of these buildings are air conditioned, interesting... Another thing that I haven't seen addressed is how is this plan going to get parents involved in the education of their children? Isn't that one of the first steps in getting children to be successful in school? Fortunately, my children are already through school. But I would have definitely opted out since they were in a different feeder school than Mitchell and I would not have wanted to be on 2 different school schedules.
jcj
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 12:15 a.m.
ERMG By your reasoning we should not even bother electing school board members! We should just have the "specialist" make the decisions and when they are ready to retire or move on those same "specialist" should appoint more "specialist" to take their place! Just think of the money we could save on elections in addition to being sure everything would work since the "specialist" would be making all the decisions without input from "non-specialists' BRILLIANT!
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:59 p.m.
Indeed, jcj. Good Night and Good Luck
jcj
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 7:05 p.m.
I guess it is our duty as "constituents" to continue to question the actions of our elected officials. Just as it is the duty of the elected officials to at least consider what they truly believe is right. Irrespective of whether all their constituents always agree.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 6:58 p.m.
Indeed, it is a conundrum. If our elected representatives did exactly and only what we wanted them to do, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 never would have become law. As James Madison makes clear in Federalist #10, pure democracy is to be avoided for its tyranny. One of the purposes of representative democracy is precisely to tamp down democratic fervor and to allow the people's representatives to make coolly considered decisions removed from the heat of democracy. Many, many of our elected representatives ought read Federalist #10. It is brilliant. Good Night and Good Luck
jcj
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:24 p.m.
Fair enough. "The never-ending tension: does one owe their constituency their judgment or does one do what the constituency expects?" If one only uses their own judgment they could be accused of getting their position under false pretenses. If one only does what their constituents expect they will sooner or later go against what they believe is right. If one does not do what their constituents expect how can they claim to "represent" their constituents? There in is the conundrum!
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:43 p.m.
jcj: The latter, hence the lower case. republican government v. Republican Party. Good Night and Good Luck
jcj
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:29 p.m.
ERMG Just for clarity. When you say "republican government" Do you mean government control by Republicans or do you mean a government that is a republic?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:13 a.m.
@jcj, It is the nature of republican government. Hopefully we make informed decisions when we elect people to office. Hopefully they utilize good judgment. The never-ending tension: does one owe their constituency their judgment or does one do what the constituency expects? "A representative owes the People not only his industry, but his judgment, and he betrays them if he sacrifices it to their opinion." --Edmund Burke Good Night and Good Luck
jcj
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 2:02 a.m.
Can't say there is too much in your last post I disagree with. You make some good points. But ( there is always the"but") do we apply the same logic to City council, State government. National government? Or do we only apply that logic when we are of the same mind?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:21 a.m.
Hardly. The school board is elected by the people to exercise its judgment on complex issues where there are competing interests and concerns. When polls of parents are taken and those polls become the determinant of policy, the school board no longer serves any purpose and it might as well hang up its spurs. So, no. I'm not advocating replacing the school board with experts (though God forbid that people who actually know something about education have substantial input into decisions about education). I AM saying that, when a program gets rejected simply because parents don't support it, we gain some insight about just how difficult it will be to bring meaningful change to our schools. Almost everyone agrees our schools need changes. And, as this sad exercise demonstrates, parents and members of the community want it done only if it doesn't inconvenience them (and, as other discussions ion A2.com make abundantly clear, so long as it doesn't cost them any money, either). So, I guess, the teachers will just have to pull out their magic wands and make a miracle happen. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 11:10 p.m.
"I love that "the program's planners were not totally reliant on the results of the survey". The parents have spoken, and a majority do NOT want this. But apparently AAPS doesn't have to rely on actual data - they want to try this and they're going to push ahead with it even though it's so unpopular." Schools, apparently, are supposed to improve the way they educate children without inconveniencing parents. And, in the meantime, let make certain that only teachers shoulder the blame for lack of student success. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 11:32 p.m.
By "teachers shoulder all the blame" I mean that they are the ONLY group of people being publicly excoriated for test scores, as if they can magically force a child to learn or make a family provide an environment both conducive to and encouraging of learning. I'm glad parents don't think this will work and get to exercise a veto on the program. Education is just about the only professional field where non-specialists appear to think they know what they are talking about and get to exercise a veto. "Doctor, I just don't think chemotherapy is necessary for this tumor. I think it will just go away if we do nothing." "Counselor, I know a pre-nup is a good idea, but I LOVE my fiance, and we will never get divorced." And this exhibits exactly the no-win situation in which educators find themselves. If test scores don't improve it's their fault, but parents are unwilling to try something new that might solve the problem. Good Night and Good Luck
Beth
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 11:16 p.m.
For a change as major as this, they do need community support. And they don't have it. We all bought houses in AA expecting a certain kind of education for our children. This is a huge game-changer. I have no complaints with the education my children are currently receiving, and I have serious doubts that the balanced calendar is really going to do much for the achievement gap. I'm not sure what you're trying to say with "only teachers shoulder the blame" - the teachers are not responsible for this ridiculous proposal, and they're certainly already trying their best to help all students succeed.
Beth
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 11:05 p.m.
I love that "the program's planners were not totally reliant on the results of the survey". The parents have spoken, and a majority do NOT want this. But apparently AAPS doesn't have to rely on actual data - they want to try this and they're going to push ahead with it even though it's so unpopular. I'm also worried by this quote: "The committee forming the partnership is looking into opportunities for families in the district to either opt in or out of the program, she added. However, Margolis said, officials would like families going into the partnership to give it a shot. 'Really, what we want to do is put the program in place and have parents and students experience it as much as possible to have a good feel for what this type of program would look like," she said. "Within two years, a decision could be made by families to move into it or not.'" That makes me worry that they would institute the balanced calendar in fall 2013 WITHOUT any ways to opt-out, to force families to "give it a shot" for a few years - and if they do that, I doubt ways to opt-out would ever be introduced. Where is the money going to come from to pay for this? I keep hearing "grants", but where are the details? What happens when the grants run out? And what will AAPS do to make up the money lost when families flee to charter and private schools or to other districts to avoid the balanced calendar? I've gotten used to many school district decisions being out of touch with reality, but this continued ridiculousness has caused me to lose the last trust I had l left in AAPS. Ann Arbor.com, you have been printing many articles about the partnership, all of them seeming to endorse what AAPS is saying and doing. What about an objective look at the issue - an article that shows both sides of this?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 11 p.m.
That's too bad. Our current model for the school year calendar has been in place since the late-19th century and is keyed to a farm-based economy. This calendar put the school on something that approximates a year-round schedule, thereby (hopefully) encouraging year-round learning. It's time to try something new. This seems to have promise. I hope the AAPS reconsiders this delay. Good Night and Good Luck
Beth
Sun, Apr 17, 2011 : 9:10 p.m.
The parents at the other Scarlett feeder schools don't WANT to be on this schedule, as the parent surveys showed. Our kids would still be on a different schedule from the majority of AAPS schools, which would still make summer programs difficult. Huron would stay on a traditional calendar, so Scarlett-area families with kids at Huron would still face problems. Either ALL of the AAPS schools should adopt the balanced calendar, or it should be offered strictly as an opt-in magnet option.
ViSHa
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 1:52 p.m.
what would be the chances of just putting all schools on this calendar? agree with ghost that the calendar is out-dated due to agricultural reasons.
Lisa
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 11:40 a.m.
The problem isn't the calendar but that families in Allen, Pittsfield and Carpenter could have kids on two different schedules. Their children in elementary and high school would be on a traditional schedule but their middle school would be on a balanced calendar. That's just logistically difficult. Also, because only one elementary would be on the balanced calendar there won't be as many community programs available as there are during the summer. It seems to me that all of Scarlett's feeder schools should be on the balanced calendar if they are going to make this change.
aaparent
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 10:53 p.m.
Kyle- Maybe you are in the process of updating this story more, but could you talk to more people than just Liz Margolis so that readers could get a better understanding of this issue. Quoting a memo and the district's communications/P.R. rep is like re-writing a press release rather than doing a news story, but maybe you are trying to reach more people on a Friday and will add more information soon. Reading your story, I don't understand the first paragraph: "The balanced calendar piece of the Mitchell and Scarlett/University of Michigan Partnership will be postponed until the 2013-14 school year, district officials confirmed Friday." What is the "balanced calendar piece" ?
InterestedReader
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 3:46 p.m.
"A committee has been working on a proposed calendar that would see school at Mitchell and Scarlett begin in early August and end in late June. Breaks would be set for one or two weeks at the end of September; the full week of Thanksgiving; during winter and spring breaks at other AAPS schools, along with an additional week; and six weeks in summer. The partnership will still offer inter-sessions that will allow for additional learning opportunities during school breaks, Margolis said. The inter-sessions are optional activities planned and taught by teachers from the buildings with participation from U-M interns and faculty. Possible inter-session activities include writing camps and science camps."
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 11:01 p.m.
The article explains how the balanced calendar would work. Good Night and Good Luck
xmo
Fri, Apr 15, 2011 : 10:44 p.m.
Why are they doing the "balanced calendar" any ways? To save money?, A better education?, easier for teachers? I think that kids need time away from all of the "progressiveness" of schools and they need some real world experience.
Lisa
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 : 11:37 a.m.
The purpose of a balanced calendar is to address the summer slump that is often seen in children from lower income homes. Children from upper and middle income families tend to progress during the summer due to summer reading programs and other activities but children from lower income homes tend to lose ground. By reducing the amount of time off at any given time, a balanced calendar can be very effective at stopping the summer slump.