Um…extending the day? What about sports games, art classes, goofing off in the park, and that little thing called homework? Or like…a free afternoon here and there?

But are the 7-ish hours of the school day enough for all that learning to get itself learnt?

According to EDM—and no, not the electronic dance music extravaganza, which would probably lean the opposite way—a few more hours are seriously in order. So let's hear what they have to say.

The Extended Day Movement

Yes, that EDM.

Back in 2009, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan told Richard Stengal of Time Magazine, "I think the school day is too short, the school week is too short and the school year is too short….You look at all the creative schools that are getting dramatically better results. The common denominator of all of them is they're spending more time" (source).

Needless to say, both Duncan and his boss, President Obama, were on board with extending the school day and even the school year.

No electronic dance music to be heard here.

And they're not alone. It's an idea that's been catching on in recent years, as evidenced by a joint report issued by the National Center on Time and Learning and the Education Commission of the States. According to the report, "twice as many schools today have a longer school day or year than just two years ago and, for the first [time], more of them are traditional public schools than charter schools" (source).

So how did it happen?

Back in December of 2012, five states (Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and Tennessee) vowed to add 300 instructional hours to their annual calendars beginning in the 2013-14 school year. Considering the average seven-hour day, that's like adding another 42 days. But these states weren't talking about making extensive changes to their school calendars. Instead, the majority of the time would come from adding about 100 minutes of instructional time to each day, bringing the typical just-under-7-hour school day up to a full 8-hour+ adventure.

And just as they'd pledged, during the 2013-14 school year, those states started piloting their extended-day programs, with plans to involve 40 schools representing over 20,000 students by the beginning of the 2014-15 school year.

But Why?

Good question.

The purported aim of these pilot programs is to "boost student achievement and make U.S. schools more competitive on a global level" (source).

And it's worth noting that all five states are focusing their initial efforts on schools that are considered "high-poverty" or that serve low-income communities. This is likely due to the fact that various studies on the effect of increasing instructional time in schools have found that the students who benefit most from such initiatives—and in some cases, the only students that benefit at all—are those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. By extending the school day for these students, the program has the added aim of closing the performance gap between high-income and low-income students.

But the big reason cited by most proponents of adding instructional time to the day is that first bit: the idea that more instructional time will improve student performance and bring the U.S. up to par with countries whose students are currently performing better on tests. Yes, regardless of their socioeconomic background.

So…How's It Going?

So far, the results of the pilot programs have been somewhat mixed.

In many Boston schools, where school days were first extended through Extended Learning Time grants back in 2006, a Boston Globe review found that the "longer day has failed to dramatically boost academic achievement or did so only temporarily" (source)

Due to the inconsistent and lackluster results, officials decided "to scrap the extra minutes at some schools and the state to pull funding or pursue receiverships at others" (source). But that doesn't mean they're done experimenting with the idea.

And that's because some Massachusetts schools have done well with the extended time. Orchard Gardens K-8 and Trotter Elementary schools were both able to shed their "underperforming" labels in 2013, and higher test scores have been reported at two formerly "low-achieving" schools in the area as well.

In February of 2015 the Boston Teachers' Union approved a plan to add 40 minutes of instructional time in 60 schools over the next three years. They say: 

We believe this school day extension will help our students by offering well-planned, school-based instruction that promotes teaching and learning while allowing for increased participation in a variety of under-served subject areas, such as art, music, drama and foreign language. (Source)

Skip on over to Connecticut, and you'll find similar stories. The Brennan-Rogers school in New Haven instituted an extended day in 2010 without giving adequate notice to its students, many of whom found out their school day had been extended on their first day back in the fall.

Oops.

Needless to say, the program faltered, then failed, and finally was scrapped.

In Meriden, Connecticut, however, where "the Casimir Pulaski Elementary School started to increase its school day in the 2013-14 school year," the news has been nothing but sunny. According to Superintendent Mark Benigni, "attendance rates and performance on test scores all improved (source).

During the 2014-15 year, the amount of added instructional time was increased to 100 minutes per day, and a second elementary school was added to the pilot program. Similar programs have been implemented in the other three states as well, but as these programs are still relatively new, long-term results have yet to be studied.

So sure, we can't give you a final answer now, but you're at least intrigued, eh?

Waiter, There's a Flaw in My Argument

You didn't really think we'd leave it as simple as "it depends," did you?

Folks opposed to extending the school day love to point out a flaw in one of the original arguments for lengthening instructional time, as presented by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. In 2009, Duncan told a congressional hearing that American students were falling behind because students in other countries were "going to school 25 to 30 percent longer than we are. Our students, I think, are at a competitive disadvantage. I think we're doing them a disservice" (source).

The real disservice, though, was perpetrated by Mr. Duncan's fact-checker. It has since been determined by more than one astute fact-checker that students in India and China, the two countries Duncan cited, are not actually spending more time in school than American students.

Furthermore, the Center for Public Education issued a report in 2013 showing that "students in high-performing countries like South Korea, Finland and Japan actually spend less time in school than most U.S. students" (source).

Well, what are we supposed to do with it?

So is it really the instructional time that matters?

Yes. And no.

According to Liz Riggs, who wrote an article titled "Kids Who Spend All Day in School" for The Atlantic, the teachers she spoke with "said extended school days can work, but only if the extra time is used effectively. If the hours at school seem wasted, students, families, and teachers don't get invested."

What's your take?