Johnson: Is a 4-day school week right for your schools? Lots to consider.

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of commentary online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

During the past two decades, there have been a couple of waves of interest — in the early- and mid- 2000s — in shifting schools from a five-day to a four-day week schedule.

Now, perhaps in part because of the expiration of federal Elementary and Secondary Emergency Relief dollars, it’s a strategy that has picked up momentum again. The reduced school week is approached as a way to save money and to improve student attendance and staff retention. According to the Associated Press, in 2019 about 650 districts nationally used the schedule. Now, that number has grown to 900.

In Minnesota, seven outstate, smaller districts operate on a four-day week; recently several other districts including Chatfield, St. Charles, Byron and Lewiston-Altura have considered the possibility. The latest state district to adopt the schedule this school year was Carlton public schools, near Cloquet, which heavily marketed the change in hopes of increasing enrollment.

Yet as school leaders consider a shorter week, they understand that they must carefully evaluate whether such a schedule is viable for their students, families and staff. Areas to be considered include collective bargaining scheduling agreements with staff, family day care needs, meals for students and transportation issues.

And the potential impact on student achievement should always remain top of mind. A 2021 RAND Corporation report, for example, found student achievement on a reduced weekly schedule either remained flat or improved at a slower rate than schools with five-day schedules.

Carlton Superintendent Donita Stepan told the Minnesota Star Tribune that declining enrollment, failure to consolidate with another district and staff retention motivated her district’s change. A survey of their community found that 78% of parents and 99% of teachers supported the shorter week.

Stepan said that things like flexible schedules must be tried because in too many cases the status quo isn’t working for students, families and staff. She added that the early results have been encouraging. Students are using the extra day constructively — either to work, seek help with homework or to participate in extracurricular school activities. And while 40 students left the district through open enrollment this fall, another 45 transferred in, primarily because of the flexible schedule.

Deb Henton, the former superintendent in North Branch, said that district adopted a four-day week back in 2010 and remained on that schedule for four years. The change was largely motivated by finances as voters there had rejected excess levy requests seven times. In 2014, the district reverted back to a five-day week because it had promised students and families that they would return to that schedule when they received more funding from the state.

Now director of the Minnesota Association of School Administrators, Henton said the longer day and shorter week calendar worked well in North Branch, allowing the district to save between $250,00 and $400,000 per year.

Those savings resulted in part from the need to hire fewer substitute teachers and lower energy costs. Attendance for both students and staff improved because both could make health care and other appointments using the extra day off. In addition, some students and parents report using the schedule to create enhanced family time. And while student academic performance remained about the same, Henton reported that some older students used the extra day to work more hours at part-time jobs.

Should district leaders consider the calendar change, however, they must carefully consider the pros and cons of a shift, while listening closely to their school communities. As Henton noted, “There are some benefits on a four-day-a-week program, but we live in a five-day-week world.”