Workin' 9 To 5: How School Schedules Make Life Harder For Working Parents
Workin' 9 To 5: How School Schedules Make Life Harder For Working Parents
Workin' 9 To 5: How School Schedules Make Life Harder For Working Parents
SPENCER GREEN
Workin 9 to 5
How School Schedules Make Life Harder for Working Parents
By Catherine Brown, Ulrich Boser, and Perpetual Baffour
October 2016
W W W.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG
Workin 9 to 5
How School Schedules Make Life Harder
for Working Parents
By Catherine Brown, Ulrich Boser, and Perpetual Baffour
October 2016
Contents
But in many ways, schools have not updated their policies to adapt to this changed
world, and this means that large numbers of working parents must split their time
between being a committed parent and being a committed working professional.
This report, then, aims to answer three questions:
How misaligned are school and work schedules?
What can schools do to support parents as they try to meet their obligations to
their employers and to their children?
How can schools and districts pay for this effort? Theres a short answer to this
last query because 9-to-5 school reform is less expensive than most people
believeand does not require teachers to work more for less pay.
To examine these questions, the Center for American Progress analyzed the
calendars, schedules, and policies of the largest school districts in the country,
which serve almost 6 million students.6 CAP researchers also examined data
from the National Center for Education Statistics. The resulting analysis reveals
the multitude of ways that U.S. public schools make life unnecessarily harder for
working parents.
Research findings include:
Throughout the school year, schools are closed for 29 days, more than two
workweeks longer than the average private-sector worker has in paid vacation and
holidays. While the average private-sector worker with paid leave has 16 days off
in paid holidays and vacation,7 the largest school districts shut their doors for an
average of 29 days each school year.8 This 29-day figure excludes summer recess
but includes days off during the school year for staff training, special programs,
and seasonal breaks, as well as major federal and state holidays such as Memorial
Day and Patriots Day in Massachusetts.9
The New York City and Los Angeles school districts have more days off than
most33 and 34, respectively.10 As a consequence, even if full-time workers
devoted all of their paid vacation time and holidays to cover school closings, they
would still need to find an alternative way to care for their children on at least 13
days throughout the school year. Notably, the reasons for some closings have little
to do with a schools core mission. Some districts will close on the opening day of
hunting season, for instance.11
This analysis understates the scope of the problem. First, many working parents do
not have paid leave.12 Part-time workers, for instance, make up 19 percent of the
U.S. workforce13 and are far less likely than full-time workers to receive paid leave.
In fact, only about one-third of these workers receive paid vacation time.14 Whats
more, 21 percent of workers are contract workers or under temporary hiresuch
as agency temps, on-call workers, and independent contractorsand have limited
if any access to paid leave.15 Overall, 39 percent of all workers, and 80 percent of
low-wage workers, lack access to paid vacation time.16 Forty-three percent of all
workers also lack access to paid sick leave.17
If families pay out of pocket for child care to cover the excess school closure days
and hours, it would cost an average of $6,600 per year, or 9 percent of an average
familys income. Even families who have paid leave are forced to find other ways
to take care of their children when school is closed once they have exceeded their
leave benefits. If parents were to pay child care workers their average hourly rate in
the United States$10.7218for every excess day and hour that schools are closed
while they are at work, they would owe $6,600 annually. That amounts to 9 percent
of $70,000, the median income for family households with school-age children.19
Low-income workers obviously would pay a higher percentage of their income.
Families in the lowest income quintile, for instance, earn just $29,000, and for them,
paying $6,600 for child care is simply out of reach.20
The typical school day does not reflect normal work hours, and most schools close
two hours or more before the end of the typical workday. The median school day
ends at 2:50 p.m., and virtually every district in the country is closed by 3:30
p.m.21 Some districts, such as Palm Beach County in Florida, end the school day
as early as 2:05 p.m. in their elementary schools.22 Most districts also hold half
days on the first or last day of student attendance, and many schools close as early
as 1:00 p.m. once per week. Meanwhile, 70 percent of parents report working
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.23
Key school events such as parent-teacher conferences are usually scheduled during
the day. Districts typically conduct parent-teacher conferences during morning
and afternoon hours, when most parents are at work.24 Most districts also close
for a full day or several hours early for parent-teacher conferences, even if these
meetings last less than 10 minutes per family.25 The Dallas Independent School
District in Texas, for instance, closes school at least twice per year for parentteacher conferences. In Cobb County, Georgia, elementary and middle school
students receive an entire week of early dismissals due to these conferences.
Misaligned school schedules cost the U.S. economy $55 billion in lost productivity
annually. School schedules create more than just inconveniencesand additional
costsfor working parents. They also drive down economic productivity. First,
they result in lower levels of full-time employment among women with elementaryschool-age children. According to CAPs analysis, the gap in full-time employment
rates between mothers of elementary-school-age children and mothers of middleand high-school-age children suggests that more than 1 million fewer mothers of
elementary-school-age children are working full time, forfeiting an annual median
wage of $35,000. This lost productivity costs the economy about $35 billion every
year. The authors have dubbed this issue the Stay-at-Home problem.
Second, the economy loses productivity due to school closings. When school is
closed, many parents have to take time off from work in order to care for their
children. To quantify this type of productivity loss, CAP estimated the number
of lost hours due to school closings and multiplied it by the average hourly wage
of women with elementary-school-age children in the United States. The authors
limited the pool of affected workers to households where all residing parents are
employed. The result: lost productivity of $20 billion due to school closings. The
authors call this issue the I Dont Know How She Does It problem.
When the authors added these two different analyses together, the figures
summed to $55 billion in lost productivity each year due to misaligned schedules.
Fewer than half of elementary schools and fewer than one-third of lowincome schools offer before- and after-school care, and when offered it is often
unaffordable. One of the most basic ways that school districts can try to address
the gap between school and work schedules is through before- and after-school
programs. But only around 45 percent of all public elementary schools actually
offer before- and after-school care, according to CAPs analysis of federal data.26
In several states, in fact, only 15 percent of public schools offer before- and afterschool care. In Utah, the figure is as low as 3 percent.27
Low-income schools are actually less likely to offer after-school programs than
other schools. Nationally, only 31 percent of Title I schools offer such programs,
for instance, compared with 40 percent of schools not eligible for Title I funding.28
Even worse, of the districts that do offer after-school care, few ensure that they are
free, discounted, or progressively priced. In this reports survey of the nations largest districts, fewer than one-third make after-school care cheaper or completely
free for low-income families.29
The misalignment of school and work schedules has a disparate impact on black,
Latino, and low-income working parents. While the misalignment between school
and work schedules affects all working parents, this issue disproportionately
affects lower-income families. Lower-income workers are more likely to have
unpredictable or inflexible work schedules, which makes it difficult for them to
arrange child care immediately when needed.30 These parents are also less likely
to have paid time off.31 Just 53 percent of hourly workers have paid vacation days,
compared with 71 percent of salaried workers.32
Lack of paid leave hits many people of color particularly acutely, since they are far
more likely to hold hourly shift jobs that are less flexible.33 Many workers of color
also earn less than their peers, which means that they are less financially able to
cover any sudden cost of additional child care. Among full-time working women,
for instance, African Americans earn only 81 cents on every $1 whites make and
67 cents on every $1 Asians earn. Hispanic women or Latinas earn 75 percent as
much as whites and 62 percent as much as Asians.34
Most low-income schools and districts currently receive funding that can be used to
improve school schedules, with the costs of a 9-to-5 school day within the bounds
of current allotments of federal funding. While most schools will need increased
fundingand flexibilityto expand school schedules, the authors found several
federal funding sources that currently support efforts to redesign the school day,
reform the calendar year, rethink professional development, or improve access to
quality after-school programs. For instance, as part of the Every Student Succeeds
Act, or ESSA, schools receiving grants under Title I, Part A could use these funds
to lengthen the school day. More than 56,000 public schools currently receive
grants through Title I, Part A,35 but few schools are using these funds to improve
school schedules. ESSA also contains other funding streams for longer school days,
including through the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program, Student
Support and Academic Enrichment Grants, and the newly authorized Promise
Neighborhoods and Full-Service Community Schools programs under Title IV.
As part of their research, the authors also found that the cost for a 9-to-5 school
day is somewhere around $4 to $5 per student per hour, though often much
higher, depending on staffing and other factors.36 So if a school has around 500
studentswhich is the average size of an elementary schoolthen the costs
would be around $2,000 to $2,500 per additional hour.37 This is about the size
of Title I grants for many schools, and it means that schools could pay for the
reforms using federal dollars.
Health policies and weather-related closures foist additional, unexpected days off
onto working parents. Every child gets sick unexpectedly. On average, students
miss around three days of school due to illness38 per year, and 15 percent of
students report missing more than a week of class.39 But some districts have a takeno-prisoners approach when a child falls ill at school. In Duval County, Florida,
for instance, parents are expected to pick up their child from school within 60
minutes of when they are notified.40
Many schools also forbid students from attending school if they are found with
nits, which are the eggs that form lice. Yet many organizations have argued that
nits are not contagious enough to require a student to go home.41
Inclement weather is another source of unexpected school closings. While student
safety should always be of top priority, school districts should ensure that their
decisions on weather-related closings and delays are aligned with major employers
in the area and local government offices, which often is not the case.
While these findings may seem obvious to anyone who has attended school or
parented a school-age child, they have been accepted as the normal way that
schools do business by parents, voters, and society. The typical school day and
year comes nowhere close to aligning with the work schedules of most parents.
These shortened, rigid, and unpredictable school schedules not only affect
parents day-to-day workloads, but they also reduce valuable learning time in the
classroom, which negatively affects student achievement.42
To improve the lives of working families and boost student outcomes, CAP
recommends policy changes at the federal, state, and local levels to align school
and work schedules. These policy solutions should extend the length of the school
day, reduce the number of school closures, reform the calendar year, and rethink
engagement strategies.
Districts and schools should take the following steps, among others:
Offer family-centered schools. Districts should introduce a new school model
of choice called family-centered schools into their portfolios. These schools
would organize themselves explicitly to support working families by limiting
the days when school is closed to only major national holidays; offering an 8:30
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. daily schedule; reinventing parent-teacher communication
to eliminate parent-teacher conferences at school during the day and allow for
more calls, texts, and other one-off, technology-enabled solutions; adopting
more parent-friendly health policies; and more.
Districts should prioritize providing access to these schools to low-income families and where there is great need. In low-income schools, the district can cover
the additional costs through Title I, Part A under the Schoolwide Program.
Background
The modern-day school calendar is operating under the needs of the 19th century,
a time when most children lived on farms and industrialization was only beginning to emerge. In the early 1800s, no standard school schedule existed, and the
rules governing a school calendar year were tied to the economic needs of the
local community.
While there is some disagreement in the literature on the exact origins of the
school calendar, recent research suggests that rural and urban schools operated on
different calendars. In rural areas, children attended school in two brief terms
summer and wintersince these seasons were nonharvesting periods and children were not needed in the fields.56 In urban areas, students received year-round
calendars with a short break during the summer.
During the late 19th century, some stakeholders pushed for a standardization
of the school system. Specifically, they aimed to end the significant variation of
school schedules across different towns and cities. While urban school systems
agreed to shorten their calendar years, rural areas agreed to lengthen them, laying
the foundation of the current 180-day school year.57
In both urban and rural areas, however, children were expected to leave school in
the early afternoon so they could work in order to help support their families.58
After-school programs did not emerge until the turn of the 20th century, when
there was a corresponding rise in state laws restricting child labor and mandating
formal school enrollment.59 As a consequence, many school-age children were left
unsupervised after school, which gave way to a rising concern about the potential
dangers for unsupervised children, so-called latchkey kids.60
Over the next few decades, from the early 1920s to the 1950s, more sophisticated
after-school programs arose. However, local community organizations of varying
types primarily staffed these programs and did not provide any formal system of
services. Starting in the 1960s, a number of organizations placed greater emphasis
on serving low-income students. By the 1990s, school-based after-school programs focused more on providing academic assistance and enrichment, particularly for underachieving and low-income students.61
Although after-school programs have grown much more sophisticated over time,
several challenges remain. For one, many programs are simply unaffordable for
working families. On average, parents spend about $114 per week on after-school
care, which translates to $4,674 annually.62 And among low-income parents, 56
percent report the high cost of after-school programs as the reason for not enrolling their children in such programs.63
In addition to cost, there is the issue of access. Demand exceeds participation in
many after-school programs: Parents of nearly 20 million children report that they
would enroll their child in an after-school program if one were available.64 Moreover,
due to lack of funding and other reasons, program quality remains an issue.65
For most families, vacation time too is limited. The average American worker
receives just 6 paid holidays and 10 paid vacation days, for a total of 16 paid days
off per year.74
Findings
Throughout the school year, schools are closed for 29 days, more than two workweeks
longer than the average private-sector worker has in paid vacation and holidays.
CAPs research shows that the largest districts shut their doors for an average of
29 days each school year.88 Some large school districts are closed even longer.
For example, in the New York City district, schools are closed for 33 days each
school year. Some districts, such as Los Angeles, are closed for more than 34
days during the school year. Note that these figures exclude weekends and
summer vacation.
This analysis is conservative because it does not address summer vacation, which
in most districts ranges from 49 days to 60 days off.91 When CAP researchers
include summer vacation days in the analysis, they find that schools are closed for
as many as 67 more days than the typical American worker receives in paid vacation time. In short, working families often have to look for alternative means of
child care for large swaths of the year.
Whats more, many workers do not get paid time off. For instance, nearly onequarter of all part-time workers, or about 7 million workers, have school-age
children, and they too must find a way to care for their children during days when
school is closed.93 Nine percent of full-time workers also have no access to paid
vacation time.94 And 21 percent of workers are contract or temp workers with very
limited access to paid leave.95
If the sheer number of days of school closures were not problematic enough, the
reasons for some school closings are questionable at best. For example, most
school districts in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, close their schools on the
opening day of deer hunting season.96 A victory parade for the Royals, winners of
the 2015 World Series, was the reason that the schools in Kansas City, Missouri,
closed for the day.97 Similarly, the Philadelphia schools closed for Pope Francis
2015 visit to the cityin all, the schools were shut down for four entire days.98
This was not standard across all cities hosting the papal visit, however. When Pope
Francis visited New York City, for instance, public schools remained open.99
In other cases, schools select numerous and consecutive days off at predictably
inconvenient times for working parents. One charter school in Washington, D.C.,
that serves a mostly low-income student population closes for the entire week
of Thanksgiving, as well as the Monday following the holiday. Other District of
Columbia charter schools extend their winter and spring breaks to the Monday
following the break, opening on the following Tuesday.100
Consider one of the common reasons for school closingsprofessional development. In Charlotte, North Carolina, students miss about eight full school days
for staff development.101 The Miami-Dade school district in Florida holds seven
full-day closures throughout the year for this reason. Some districts also regularly
dismiss students earlysome schools as early as 1:00 p.m.in order to provide
additional staff development time. For instance, elementary school students in
Los Angeles receive 26 shortened school days due to the districts banked time
for professional development.102
Closing time
Districts are closed far more often than the typical workplace. CAP collected the
data below directly from the largest school districts. The table displays the number
of closings and early dismissals students received during the 2015-16 school year.
The table is ranked by district size.
The total count of student nonattendance days includes national and religious
holidays, such as Thanksgiving, Christmas, Memorial Day, and Martin Luther
King Jr. Day. The authors recognize the historical and cultural significance of these
holidays and do not mean to suggest that schools should remain open on these
dates. Many of these holidays may also be non-workdays for students parents.
However, as the table below illustrates, districts have different approaches to student holidays, both federal and local.
TABLE 1
Closing time
School closings and early dismissals for students
State
Number of student
nonattendance days
Number of early
releases
New York
33
California
32
26*
Chicago
Illinois
29
Not applicable
Miami-Dade County
Florida
31
Clark County
Nevada
27
Not applicable
Broward County
Florida
22
Houston Independent
Texas
23
Hillsborough County
Florida
28
37*
Orange County
Florida
28
Fairfax County
Virginia
28
Florida
29
5*
Gwinnett County
Georgia
28
10
Texas
28
North Carolina
29
Maryland
26
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
27
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
North Carolina
29
California
27
35*
Florida
30
16
Maryland
33
Texas
26
Not applicable
Shelby County
Tennessee
30
Cobb County
Georgia
34
Maryland
28
School district
Dallas
Wake County
Montgomery County
Baltimore County
*Early releases are regularly scheduled dismissals at the elementary school grade level.
Sources: Authors analysis of collected data from the largest U.S. public school districts, personal communication with district office staff, and
materials from the National Council on Teacher Quality. See appendix for full sources list.
If families pay out of pocket for child care to cover the excess school closure days
and hours, it would cost an average of $6,600 per year, or 9 percent of an average
familys income.
When CAP researchers estimated the cost of child care due to misaligned
school and work schedules, they arrived at a cost of $6,600 per year, on average. Since the median income for family households with school-age children is
around $70,000 per year, the estimated out-of-pocket costs are about 9 percent
of a typical familys income.103 But families in the lowest income quintile earn
just $29,000, and for them, paying $6,600 for child care is simply out of reach.
In fact, these out-of-pocket costs would assume more than one-fifth, or nearly
23 percent, of their households income.104
must find alternative ways to care for their children every business day. Those
child care options include relying on everything from after-school programs to
paid child care, family members, neighbors, or friends.110
Parents also get short shrift in the morning. Most districts start the day at 8:00
a.m., according to CAPs analysis of a federal survey.111 This finding indicates that
parents typically have to get their children up and out the door earlier to meet
their job demands. Moreover, this early start to the day for students is earlier than
cognitive science suggests is ideal for teenagers.112
But the above averages do not reveal the many districts that have even earlier
opening and closing times. For example, the districts of Gwinnett County in
Georgia and Duval County in Florida see students starting school as early as
7:00 a.m.113 In other districts, such as Montgomery and Baltimore counties in
Maryland, schools end the day as early as 2:10 p.m. And in many districts, schools
routinely close even earlier once per weekas early as 1:00 p.m.in order to
allot teachers additional time for professional development. These findings also
overlook the millions of parents who send their child to half-day kindergarten,
which lasts for only a few hours per day.114
The clear misalignment of school and work schedules hurts working families.
Parents have to figure out alternative means of child care in the late afternoon.
Whats more, after-school programs are often managed separately from the general
school day, as discussed below, which means that there is no systemic approach to
support working parents.
TABLE 2
State
New York
8:00 8:20
2:20 4:00
California
8:00
3:00
Chicago
Illinois
7:30 9:00
2:30 4:00
Miami-Dade County
Florida
8:35 9:10
3:05 3:50
Clark County
Nevada
7:05 8:20
2:11 3:20
Broward County
Florida
7:15 9:45
2:15 4:30
Houston Independent
Texas
7:30 8:20
3:00 4:00
Hillsborough County
Florida
7:35 9:15
2:50 4:15
Orange County
Florida
9:30
2:50
Fairfax County
Virginia
7:30
2:15
Florida
8:45 9:15
3:45 4:15
Gwinnett County
Georgia
9:20
4:00
Dallas
Wake County
Montgomery County
Texas
8:35
3:35
North Carolina
7:30 8:15
2:20 3:15
Maryland
8:15
3:00
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
7:50 8:30
3:00 3:20
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
North Carolina
8:15 9:15
3:00 4:15
California
7:15 9:00
2:10 3:45
Florida
9:30
4:15
Maryland
7:45 9:30
2:25 4:10
Texas
7:30 8:10
2:30 3:10
Shelby County
Tennessee
7:15 8:15
2:15 3:15
Cobb County
Georgia
9:15
4:15
Maryland
7:10 9:00
2:25 3:55
Baltimore County
Sources: Authors analysis of collected data from the largest U.S. public school districts, personal communication with district office staff, and
materials from the National Council on Teacher Quality. See appendix for full sources list.
Last day of
school**
New York
September 9
June 28
180
49
California
August 18
June 10
180
47
Chicago
Illinois
September 8
June 21
178
57
Miami-Dade County
Florida
August 24
June 9
180
54
Clark County
Nevada
August 24
June 1
180
57
Broward County
Florida
August 24
June 9
180
54
Houston Independent
Texas
August 24
May 25
175
65
Hillsborough County
Florida
August 25
June 10
181
54
Orange County
Florida
August 24
June 9
180
55
Fairfax County
Virginia
September 8
June 23
180
55
Florida
August 17
June 2
180
54
Gwinnett County
Georgia
August 10
May 25
180
55
School district
Dallas
Number of
Length of summer break,
instructional days
by weekdays***
Texas
August 24
June 2
175
59
North Carolina
August 24
June 9
180
54
Maryland
August 31
June 17
184
53
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
September 8
June 22
180
52
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
North Carolina
August 24
June 9
180
54
California
September 8
June 21
180
57
Wake County
Montgomery County
Florida
August 24
June 10
180
53
Maryland
August 25
June 14
180
53
Texas
August 24
June 1
176
60
Tennessee
August 10
May 27
180
53
Georgia
August 31
May 25
180
50
Maryland
August 24
June 17
190
48
*The date listed refers to the first instructional day that all grade-level students are in attendance. This does not include staggered start dates for certain grade levels.
**The date listed refers to the last day of student attendance on districts calendars. This does not include staggered end dates for certain grade levels.
***The length of summer recess applies to the number of vacation days before the first instructional day in the 2015-16 school year.
Sources: Authors analysis using collected data from the largest U.S. public school districts, personal communication with district office staff, and materials from the National Council on Teacher Quality.
See appendix for full sources list.
Whats more, when it comes to summer recess in some districts, not all students
start classes or end them on the same day. Certain school districts, such as New
York City and Philadelphia, follow a staggered school start and end schedule.
More specifically, prekindergarten and kindergarten students start and end the
school year on different dates than other grade levels.115 These staggered dates are
also often early release days for younger students. While these staggered starts are
intended to help younger students adjust to the new school environment,116 they
also may create more confusion and inconvenience for working parents. Many
children have already experienced preschool or pre-K by the time they enter kindergarten, begging the question of whether the staggered start is necessary.
It does not have to be this way. Child care centers, for instance, often offer much
more expansive schedules. Many centers open early and stay open as late as 7:00
p.m., provide full meals and snacks for children, and use staggered shift schedules for staff to ensure that the hours are not unmanageable for workers. Child
care centers are also less likely to close for staff development. In short, they are
designed to meet the needs of working parents, unlike most public schools.117
Key school events such as parent-teacher conferences are usually scheduled during
the day.
Many large, urban districts close schools for either a full day or have early dismissals for parent-teacher conferences.118 While these meetings are vital opportunities
for parents to learn from and share with their childs teacherand some working
parents have to take off from work for several hours or a full day in order to attend
many of these face-to-face conferences last only 10 minutes for each individual family.119 For instance, the Dallas Independent School District closes its schools at least
twice annually for parent-teacher conferences. Chicago Public Schools holds two
full-day closings as well. Gwinnett County, Georgia, dismisses its elementary and
middle school students early twice per year to allow for parent-teacher conferences.
In Cobb County, Georgia, elementary and middle school students receive an entire
week of early dismissals to accommodate these conferences.
In other cases, some districts hold no official policy on parent-teacher conferences and defer control to individual schools.120 However, these districts do
not provide explicit guidance on scheduling practices, and they typically do
not discourage school closings for conference purposes. In other words, even if
districts do not require closures for parent-teacher conferences, schools may still
shut down for this purpose.
Most districts also conduct parent-teacher conferences during the hours most
parents are at work. According to the 2014 American Time Use Survey, about 70
percent of parents report working between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.121 Although
many parents also work night shifts and odd hours, the practice of daytime conferences forces parents to either take time away from their jobs to go to the school,
which is not always nearby, or not attend at all.
To be clear, many schools and districts do hold some parent-teacher conferences during the evening. But the evening slots are limited and not standard
policy among the districts that CAP researchers surveyed. For instance, in Shelby
County, Tennessee, teachers are supposed to arrange parent-teacher conferences
between the hours of 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. But these limited hours do not provide parents much flexibility in selecting a meeting time that does not fall within
their normal work schedule.
Even more frustrating for working parents, most schools do not provide meaningful accommodations to support parent participation in parent-teacher conferences and other engagement opportunities. Nationally, only 40 percent of schools
help parents attend school events by offering transportation or child care.122 In
Kentucky, this figure drops to 30 percent, and in other states, such as Montana, the
percentage of schools that offer such services is as low as 19 percent.123
This challenge is especially hard for working parents of children who require
an Individualized Education Program, or IEP, under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, or who require accommodations under
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.124 In accordance with regulations under
these laws, parents are expected to attend multiple IEP or 504 team meetings
each year. While IDEA requires schools to schedule these meetings at a convenient time for parents, schools may still limit the days and times they are willing
to hold meetings. A disproportionate number of children with disabilities come
from low-income backgrounds, making these constraints particularly harmful
for economically disadvantaged families. Low-income parents have less flexibility to participate in these meetings, since it may increase the risk of losing their
place of employment.125
Some organizations, however, have taken positive steps to help ensure family
engagement. The Washington, D.C.-based Flamboyan Foundation, for instance,
works with educators to encourage more targeted approaches to family engagement.126 The Flamboyan Foundation helped pioneer the practice of parentteacher home visits in the District of Columbia. As part of the practice, teachers
visit students parents in the family home and seek to create meaningful relationships with them.127
Misaligned school and work schedules cost the U.S. economy $55 billion in lost
productivity annually.
Poorly aligned school and work schedules do more than just create daily inconveniences for working parents. They also affect parents productivity.
There are multiple ways to calculate lost productivity due to misaligned school
and work schedules. An analysis could focus, for instance, on workers who have
entered less demanding occupations in order to attend to their childrens needs.
For this report, though, the authors focused on two specific drivers of lost productivity. One is what the authors have called the Stay-at-Home problem. The second
is the I Dont Know How She Does It problem.
The authors examined both areas of lost productivity and will look at them in turn.
First, the authors studied the Stay-at-Home issue, defined as the proportion of workers, largely women, who are working full time at lower rates than others. Specifically,
the analysis looked at the difference between full-time employment rates of women
with elementary-school-age children and those with secondary-school-age children.
Researchers did not find a difference in the rate of women working part time who
have elementary vs. secondary school children. So for the purposes of this calculation, CAP researchers assumed that the entire gap in full-time employment rates
between mothers of elementary-school-age children and mothers of secondaryschool-age children could be attributed to their caregiving responsibilities.
CAP researchers found that mothers whose youngest child was in elementary
school had significantly lower full-time employment rates than mothers whose
youngest child was in middle school or high school53 percent and 60 percent,
respectively. According to CAPs analysis, the gap in full-time employment rates
between mothers of elementary-school-age children and mothers of middle- and
high-school-age children suggests that more than 1 million fewer mothers of
elementary-school-age children are working full time, forfeiting an annual median
And finally, there are many other instances throughout a school year when parents
are expected to leave work to participate in a school activity: field trips, faculty celebrations, recitals, science fairs, and more.129 These activities are largely voluntary
and none are accounted for in the analysis, yet many parents leave work to attend.
In the end, the authors found that lost productivity costs were around $20 billion
annually for the I Dont Know How She Does It issue.
The authors then added this figure to the estimated $35 billion in lost productivity
due to the Stay-at-Home issue. This results in a total of about $55 billion in lost
productivity.
This $55 billion figure is comparable to what the nations economy loses due to
workplace-related injuries and illnesses, according to the U.S. Department of
Labor.130 Lost productivity due to misaligned school and work schedules also
would assume a sizable percentage of total federal spending on public education,
which isapproximately $600 billion.131
Fewer than half of elementary schools and fewer than one-third of low-income
schools offer before- and after-school care, and when offered it is often unaffordable.
While the authors believe that redesigned school schedules are the best solution for schools looking to implement 9-to-5 reforms, there are alternatives.
Specifically, some schools might use after-school programs to address the gap
between school and work schedules.
Still, only about 45 percent of all public elementary schools actually offer beforeand after-school programs at their school, according to CAPs analysis of federal
data.132 Across the United States, parents of nearly 20 million children are unable
to enroll their child in an after-school program because one is not available to
them.133 In several states, in fact, only 15 percent of public schools offer schoolbased care. In Utah, this figure is as low as 3 percent.134
Of the schools that do manage after-school programs, few ensure that the costs
are progressively priced, and in this reports survey of the nations largest districts,
only seven districts, including Fairfax County in Virginia, made after-school
programs affordable or completely free for low-income families.135 The CypressFairbanks Independent School District in Texas, for example, offers school-based
care with fees based on a familys eligibility for free and reduced-price lunch. The
districts standard cost for before- and after-school programs is $288 per month,
but parents who qualify for free lunch can pay a discounted fee of $188 per
month, and those who qualify for reduced lunch can pay $218 per month. Even
with these discounts, however, these monthly costs still add up to around $2,250
to $2,600 per year.
In sum, only one-third of the largest districts provide affordable care despite the fact
that the costs of after-school programs are clearly out of reach for most low-income
families. In many states, for instance, these costs are more than $10,000 per year.136
Whats more, even the districts that provide after-school programs do not
always make them easy to access, and for the most part, the programs are
disconnected from the school system. In Montgomery County, Maryland, for
instance, the countys parks and recreation department runs many of the afterschool programs.137 The case is similar in Clark County, Nevada, where it is
the countys parks and recreation department that runs most of the programs.
In Chicago, the district makes systemic information on after-school programs
available only via a Freedom of Information Act requestclearly, not a very
parent-friendly approach.138
This hodgepodge of after-school policies presents numerous problems. For one,
the lack of transparency, such as in Chicago, makes it difficult for parents to determine which schools have the best after-school programs. It also makes it harder for
school systems to ensure that after-school programs are supporting students either
sociallyproviding more time for play, for exampleor academicallyproviding more time for learning.
The misalignment of school and work schedules has a disparate impact on black,
Latino, and low-income working parents.
While unpredictable work schedules affect all workers, they disproportionately
affect lower-income workers. For instance, 16 percent of hourly workers have
unstable work schedules due to irregular, on-call, split, or rotating shift times,
compared with 12 percent of salaried workers.139 Blacks and Latinos also are more
likely to work in hourly jobs that are less flexible than the salaried positions typically held by higher-earning workers.140
Most low-income schools and districts currently receive funding that can be used
to offer a 9-to-5 school day, with costs for a 9-to-5 school day within the bounds of
current allotments of federal funding.
The Every Student Succeeds Act includes new changes and funding streams
to support efforts in redesigning the school day, reforming the calendar year,
rethinking professional development, or improving access to quality afterschool programs.
For instance, Title I, Part A currently provides more than $14 billion in funding to
schools and districts with high numbers and concentrations of low-income students,
and even districts with low concentrations of poverty get around at least $1,000
per low-income student, on average.141 Funds from Title I, Part A can be used for
targeted assistance purposes on Title I students alone or as part of a comprehensive
schoolwide reform to raise achievement among the lowest-performing students.142
Title I, Part A funds carry a fair amount of flexibility, and school districts can use
the funds for any activity that supports the needs of students in the school.143
In this regard, high-poverty schools can use funds from Title I, Part A to pay for
9-to-5 schools as part of a larger effort to boost achievement. Some schools participating in expanded learning time, or ELT, programs have already taken advantage
of this provision. States are also now required to set at least 7 percent of their Title
I funding aside for the School Improvement program.
To be clear, there was some confusion about how Title I, Part A funds could be
used, at least until recently. But in 2015, the Department of Education clarified use
of Title I, Part A. The guidance now states: In general, after-school tutoring and
extended-day activities to allow for extended time on tasks are allowable as long as
they are meeting an identified need to improve student academic achievement.144
In addition, many states and districts receive additional resources that can be used
to support a 9-to-5 school day. These funding sources include: the 21st Century
Community Learning Centers program;145 Promise Neighborhoods;146 and the
Full-Service Community Schools Program (see complete list in Table 7 below),147
all of which exist under Title IV of ESSA and support schools and communities
by providing wraparound services, after-school activities, volunteers, and longer
school days.
At the same time, the authors also found that the cost for a 9-to-5 school day is
somewhere around $4 to $5 per student per hour, though often much higher,
depending on staffing and other factors.148 So if a school has around 500 studentswhich is the average size of an elementary schoolthen the costs would
be around $2,000 to $2,500 per additional hour.149
This estimate comes from the ELT literature. Most recently, the National Center
on Time & Learning profiled five ELT schools that were markedly diverse in terms
of size, school demographics, and cost structures. Overall, the study estimated
the costs of implementing ELT to be between $2.20 and $5.23 per pupil per hour
in districts that added between 132 and 540 hours to their school year.150
In an ELT redesign model that pays a schools teachers to work during the
extended hours, the average cost was around $3 per student per hour. If the school
decided to hire extra staff, such as tutors or coordinators, to supplement teaching
personnel, costs would rise to about $4 per student per hour.151
Massachusetts also funded a study in 2011 to look at the issue of ELT costs. The
state caps funding for schoolwide ELT programs at $1,300 per pupil, or about
$4.33 per pupil per hour, and the researchers found that this amount was sufficient
for 80 percent of schools that rolled out ELT initiatives.152
A follow-up to the Massachusetts study, conducted by one of the same researchers, found similar ranges using a more sophisticated costing-out technique that
included marginal costs and adjustments for cost of living. In that analysis of five
schools, costs varied widely, from $981or around $3 per student per hourto
$4,865, or around $17 per student per hour.153 Note that the researchers considered the $4,865 figure to be an outlier; most of the schools clustered around
$2,000 per student, or $6 per student per hour.
Finally, CAP released a report in 2008 that attempted to quantify the costs of ELT
implementation.154 However, the reported figures are pretty conservative and
potentially outdated. Providing proportionately higher salaries to existing teachers
would cost $2 per pupil per hour, according to the study. A flat stipend approach
would cost anywhere from $1.50 to $1.90 per pupil per hour, and hiring new certified teaching staff would cost $3.33 per pupil per hour.
In short, many schools could use their federal dollars to cover the costs of a 9-to-5
school day.
TABLE 4
Access to paid
sick leave
Access to paid
personal leave
Access to paid
family leave
Lowest 25 percent
48%
31%
16%
5%
49
Second-lowest 25 percent
84%
66%
39%
10%
47
Second-highest 25 percent
89%
73%
47%
14%
57
Highest 25 percent
92%
84%
58%
23%
54
Income percentile*
*Surveyed occupations are classified into wage categories based on the average wage for the occupation, which may include workers with earnings both above and below the threshold. The categories were formed using percentile estimates generated by wage data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment Statistics website for May 2015.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 32. Leave benefits: Access, private industry workers, National Compensation Survey, March 2015, available at http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/benefits/2015/
ownership/private/table32a.pdf (last accessed May 2016).
Black and Latino workers are also less likely to have been with their current
employers for more than four years, and tenure in a job translates into more paid
time off. Fifty-seven percent of Hispanics and 54 percent of African Americans
have been in their current job for four years or fewer, compared with 49 percent of
white workers.155 These workers of color are therefore less likely to be able to take
paid time off for school-related reasons.
While schools that serve predominantly low-income students, black students,
and Latino students are more likely to provide services to support parental
involvement, given the additional barriers these parents face to attend these
events, more could and should be done. Only 46 percent of low-income schools
and 50 percent of majority-minority schools assist working parents in attending
school events, such as parent-teacher conferences, with additional services such
as child care and transportation.156
This fact helps explain why disadvantaged families struggle to attend school-based
events or events held during school hours. According to CAPs analysis of federal
data, only 47 percent of low-income schools reported a high level of attendance at
parent-teacher conferences, compared with 58 percent of nonpoor schools reporting high participation.157 In fact, at nearly 28 percent of all low-income public
schools, fewer than half of students parents attended parent-teacher conferences.
TABLE 5
$25,000 to $29,999
16 percent19 percent
40th percentile
$50,000 to $54,999
8 percent9 percent
60th percentile
$80,000 to $84,999
5 percent6 percent
80th percentile
$125,000 to $129,999
4 percent
90th percentile
$195,000 to $199,999
2 percent
Income percentile
Note: CAP researchers also relied on estimates of annual afterschool costs from the Afterschool Alliance. The average weekly cost is $114 per
child per program, which translates to $4,674 each school year.
Sources: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, 2015 Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement (U.S. Department of Commerce,
2015), available at https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032015/faminc/finc01_1.xls; Afterschool Alliance, America After 3PM:
Afterschool Programs in Demand (2014), available at http://afterschoolalliance.org/documents/AA3PM-2014/AA3PM_National_Report.pdf.
TABLE 6
All races
$66,632
7%
White
$70,373
7%
Asian
$83,049
6%
Black
$43,364
11%
Hispanic
$45,114
10%
Note: CAP researchers also relied on estimates of annual afterschool costs from the Afterschool Alliance. The average weekly cost is $114 per
child per program, which translates to $4,674 each school year.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2015 Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement (U.S. Department of Commerce,
2015), available at https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032015/faminc/finc01_1.xls; Afterschool Alliance, America After 3PM:
Afterschool Programs in Demand (2014), available at http://afterschoolalliance.org/documents/AA3PM-2014/AA3PM_National_Report.pdf.
Research has shown the importance of after-school programs and extracurricular activities for social mobility among low-income youth.165 However, the
families in these communities have less moneyand lower accessto affordable, high-quality care.
Health policies and weather-related closures foist additional, unexpected days off
onto working parents.
Every child gets sick unexpectedly, sometimes for multiple days at a time. On average, students miss approximately three days of school each year due to illness,166
and 15 percent of students report missing more than a week of class.167 But dis-
tricts often have a take-no-prisoners approach when it comes to students falling ill.
Once a child is considered too sick to be at school, many parents have no choice
but to act quickly. In Duval County, Florida, parents are expected to pick up their
sick child from school within 60 minutes of being notified.168
Public schools in Washington, D.C., also have a strict policy prohibiting school
nurses from administering over-the-counter medicine in cases of injury-related
painfor example, a child experiencing discomfort from a recent surgery or
medical procedure, such as a broken bone in a cast.169 Instead, schools require a
physicians signature before they allow a registered nurse to administer Advil or
even Tylenol. Without this completed form, parents must either designate another
individual to administer the medication on their behalf or be forced to leave their
workplace, arrive at the school, and administer the medicine themselves.170
Lice policies are another example of rule rigidity. The so-called no-nit policy
implemented in many schools forbids any student from attending school if they
are found with nits, which are the eggs that form lice. Yet many prominent organizations have released statements that lice and nits are not contagious enough to
require a student to go home.171
There are undoubtedly good reasons for these sorts of policies. Sick children
attending school can lead to the spread of an illness. At the same time, however,
schools should use common sense, and their policies should be more inclusive of
working parents. Moreover, nearly 40 percent of working parents do not have paid
parental leave or paid sick days that would allow them to take care of their children
when they get sick.172
Inclement weather conditions are another source of unexpected school closings.
While student safety should always be of top priority, district officials should
ensure their weather-related closing decisions are aligned with other major
employers and government agencies in the area. It is not uncommon for schools
to shut down during a storm, while parents are still expected to go to work. After
the historic 2016 blizzard in Washington, D.C., for instance, schools were still
closed the day after the storm ended, but many employers expected their staff to
return to work.173
Add to this issue the fact that many families depend on the meals offered by
schools to augment the nutrition of their children. More than 15 million children
in the United States live in a food-insecure household.174 In other words, one out
of every five children does not have consistent, adequate access to meals at home.
Many parents, particularly low-income parents, rely on schools to provide their
children with breakfast, lunches, or snacks throughout the regular school week.
As noted earlier in this report, public schools are closed for nearly 30 percent of
weekdays each year, and as a consequence, many families may experience food
insecurity for days or even weeks at a time.175 Not only do school closings intensify the food insecurity of many working families, but they may also aggravate
instances of child hunger.
In other words, even if schools wanted to change their opening times to better fit
working families, many would find it hard to do so.
For the most part, states play the biggest policy role when it comes to this issue. As
the unit of government ultimately responsible for education, states typically set a
minimum number of instructional hours and days that students are required to be
in school. Many of these laws have been left unchanged for decades and reflect an
antiquated culture.177
In states that require kindergarten, for example, states typically require only a few
hours of kindergarten each day.178 This is bad policy, particularly since most education experts believe that most children benefit from full-day kindergarten.179 At
the same time, a short school day places additional burdens on families, who often
have to arrange care both before and after the kindergarten program.180
States also set the minimum length of the school year, which is typically 180
days.181 In some states, however, policies on instructional time have not been
updated in decades or do not reflect recent changes in family structure or
todays workplace norms. And other states have simply set low expectations. For
example, Minnesota set no minimum for instructional time until 2009, and its
current 165-day requirement is significantly lower than the traditional 180 days
mandated in other states.182
In some instances, states also seem to establish scheduling policies based on
special interests. For instance, some states prohibit public schools from starting the school year before Labor Day or ending it after Memorial Day because it
ensures that students and their families spend more time and money boosting the
states tourism industry.183 Indeed, state tourism groups have successfully lobbied
in some areas for a longer summer break in order to generate more revenue for
the theme park industry. For example, Kings Dominion, a local amusement park
in Virginia, donated more than $200,000 in campaign funding to political candidates and political action committees, in hopes that a 1986 state law would remain
intact. Known as the Kings Dominion Law, the statute prohibits school districts
from setting the first day of school before Labor Day.184
Fiscal drivers
When it comes to school schedules, money again plays an important role, as the
length of the school day is a key driver of education costs. Schooling is a peopleintensive activity, and more than 80 percent of school budgets are wrapped up in
costs associated with staff.185
As a result, changes in state budgets can have a significant impact on school
schedules. Today, hundreds of school districtsparticularly those located in rural
communitiesnow operate on a four-day school week simply to meet budget
constraints.186 Moreover, many school districts have actually shortened the school
day or year to save money but in the process have made things tougher on parents.
Some districts in Michigan, for instance, have reduced the minimum number of
instructional days from 180 days to 170 days or fewer.187
Likewise, an important fiscal issue is transportation, which is another large cost
area for schools and districts. Time is money, and this is particularly true of
transportation costs, says a 2015 Montgomery County Public Schools analysis of
bell time options.188 Indeed, some school districts cite transportation costs as the
reason for the variation in schedules across grade levels.189 Specifically, districts
will use buses in wavesthat is to say, first transporting students to high schools
and then using the same buses to take students to middle schools and next to
elementary schoolsin order to minimize costs.
In 2014, for instance, the Montgomery County school board considered pushing
back its school start times. But the proposal to push the high school start time
later to 8:15 a.m., while retaining a four-tier bus schedule, would have cost the
district $21 million per year.190
In this context, many districts find it difficult to make school schedules more
accommodating of parents because such reforms are expensive. For instance, it
costs one low-income school in Charleston, South Carolina, more than $300,000
per year to extend the school daya cost that the school largely covers through
external donations and grants.191
Teacher preferences
The shorter school year and day is also a crucial benefit to teachers working in
schools. For instance, the longer summer break allows many educators to participate in professional development and other school-related activities, which
prepare them for the upcoming school year.192 Others prefer to take a second job
during the summer to supplement their income.
Moreover, many teachers are themselves parents. By some estimates, more than
half of teachers either have children or plan on having them someday,193 and they
often take jobs in education in order to attend to the needs of their own children.
It is therefore no surprise that in most collective bargaining agreements among
teachers, the length of the workday is a mandatory subject of negotiation. And
in the midst of recent education budget crises, many teachers unions push for
shorter school weeks to reduce the overall number of teacher layoffs and pay
cuts. In 2009, for example, the Hawaii State Teachers Association agreed to a
163-day school year and a 4-day workweek in order to ensure that each teacher
kept his or her job.194
It is possible, though, to restructure teacher schedules and lengthen the school
day without requiring individual teachers to work longer hours without additional
compensation. However, doing so would require a culture shift and creative thinking on the part of district and school leaders.
adequate child care. It also helps explain why low-income parents are less likely
to attend school activities such as back-to-school nights, parent-teacher conferences, and parent education workshops, since these activities require parents to
take time off.198
Because many low-income families live from paycheck to paycheck, they often
have difficulty covering any sudden additional household costs.199 Indeed, in
most cases, they cannot afford after-school programming. In fact, 60 percent of
low-income parents report not enrolling their children in after-school programs
because of the expense.200
Financial insecurity has only grown worse for low-income families in recent
decades. For example, the earnings gap between low-income families and wealthier households has grown by almost 10 percent in recent years, according to one
recent study.201
Theres another cruel irony here: While low-income schools have the most to gain
in terms of extending school schedules, they often have the least amount of money
to cover these costs. In most areas, low-income schools typically receive less
money to work with than schools in more affluent districts.202
Low-wage workers disproportionately work jobs with odd hours and unpredictable shifts. African Americans, workers with less formal education, and
working single mothers are also more likely to have nonstandard and erratic
work schedules.203 Schools should better address the needs of these families.
If schools and districts determine that parents in their community are more
adversely affected by nonstandard schedules or low levels of employment, they
should respond accordingly.
One school in Forsyth County, North Carolina, for example, is rethinking parent
engagement through what it terms a parental involvement mobile unit. The bus,
completely equipped with high-tech computers, meets families where they are
and provides services that are traditionally based in a school building. Community
volunteers operate the bus before school, after school, and on weekends, offering
parent meetings, GED classes, and even child care.204
Schools and districts may also consider providing additional supports for parents
who may work late-night shifts and are unable to be home when their child returns
from school. Other potential solutions include providing school-based adult
literacy and GED programs, computer lab centers, and a social services center to
help eligible families apply for public benefits.
Recent reforms
Over the past decade, some schools have tried to do more to support working parents. They have pursued a variety of strategies, from outreach programs to a more
holistic approach to community engagement.
These reforms not only reduce stress among working parents, but they also
provide substantial benefits for students. On average, public school students in
the United States spend less than seven hours per day in the classroom. However,
growing research shows that longer school days can improve student performance; the extended hours increase learning time in the classroom. In fact, one
study found that adding 300 instructional hours to the school year is a stronger
predictor of achievement than other notable reforms.212 The American Institutes
for Research also found that providing additional time for students to learn core
academic subjects during the expanded hours improved students math and reading literacy, and students participating in enrichment activities during these hours
increased their social-emotional learning skills.213
Massachusetts has long been a leader in this area of education reform. The state
has the only statewide, publicly funded initiative on ELT, with almost two dozen
schools enrolled in the program.222 In sum, there are 140 schools in Massachusetts
that are implementing longer schedules using federal, state, and local funds.
Recent research on ELT programs in Massachusetts and elsewhere show that staff
buy-in is critical for these programs to work, and they must be implemented effectively in order to minimize teacher turnover.223
Salary increases. For districts with some flexibility in their budgets, one approach
to consider is salary increases for existing staff. In Elizabeth, New Jersey, for
instance, the school district expanded its school year by 20 days and extended the
school day by 90 minutes through a model focused on additional teacher pay.235
The district increased the base pay among its instructional staff to reflect the
additional hours worked and provided stipends for the facilitation of after-school
programming.
This expanded day model came with an annual cost of $4 million among the districts 20 schools, or approximately $3.18 per student per hour. The school district
covers these costs by blending funding streams from state and local sources as well
as Title I and Title III funds.
Flat stipends. Another cost-effective approach is stipends. This pay structure
keeps teachers onsite during the expanded hours but for a fraction of the price
because annual stipends do not have to provide a rate of compensation that is
proportional to the hours worked.236
For instance, McGlone Elementary School in Denver, Colorado, provides teachers with an annual stipend of $5,000 for the additional 300 hours worked. For
the district, this stipend is considerably less expensive than a proportionate salary
increase, and by some estimates, its about half of the expected amount of a base
pay increase.237
Community partnerships. Schools can also form partnerships with local pro-
viders, which can provide additional staff at minimal cost. For instance, in community schoolswhere schools become the hub of a community by partnering
with local organizationsthe community partners staff supplements the existing
school personnel.
ELT schools in Meriden, Connecticut, for instance, have leveraged their partnership with the local YMCA to bring on additional staff at minimal cost.238 The
school also integrates YMCA services into the regular school day and aligns the
programming with the schools learning objectives.239
Partnerships with national volunteer organizationssuch as AmeriCorpsis
another creative solution to the cost issue. Citizen Schools, for instance, recruits
AmeriCorps volunteers to support middle schools in the implementation of ELT
programs. In this model, AmeriCorps teaching fellows supplement the schools
instructional staff by either providing assistance to teachers in classroom instruction or by leading their own enrichment activities. Citizen Schools currently
serves more than 5,000 students in 32 middle schools and added more than 240
AmeriCorps members to existing school personnel in the 2015-16 school year.240
AmeriCorps members do not just serve Citizen Schools, however. AmeriCorps
VISTA, in particular, recruits more than 8,000 volunteers annually to help support
nonprofits, city and county agencies, public school districts, and communitybased organizations.241 Many of these organizations provide academic interventions, enrichment activities, and additional services to low-income schools during
before- and after-school hours. Local nonprofits seeking to implement 9-to-5
schools can partner with AmeriCorps VISTA and enlist their volunteers to help
build capacity.
Staggered schedules. In this model, districts simply reallocate the time spent by
teachers. In other words, teachers work at varying shift times, but their total work
hours do not increase.
At the ELT schools in Meriden, Connecticut, for example, one half of the instructional team arrives to school at an earlier shift time and leaves about 90 minutes before the end of the school day, and the other half arrives later but works
throughout the rest of the school day. The overall length of the workday remains
unchanged among these instructors. However, the school does bear an opportunity cost due to the fewer number of teachers available at the start and end of the
school day.242 The Goldie Maple Academy, which we feature in this report, takes a
similar approach.
One notable benefit to staggered schedules is that they do not conflict with union
agreements on the length of the teacher workday. For instance, Boston Arts
Academy in Boston, Massachusetts, staggers teacher schedules in order to meet
contracted workday requirements.243 The school follows a split schedule where
academic instructors work an early shift and nonacademic instructors work a later
shift.244 To accommodate the shortage of teachers during the early and late school
hours, the school designates the first period for academic instruction and the last
period for nonacademic instructionor put differently, when these instructors
would be onsite.
TABLE 7
Fiscal year
2017
Distribution
process
Title I, Part A
$14 billion
Not publicly
available
Formula grants
Increase instructional
time by extending the
length of the school day
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. in Title I schools.
Not publicly
available
Formula grants
Not publicly
available
Serve schools implementing comprehensive support and improvement activities or targeted support
and improvement activities.
$2.25 billion
Formula grants to
states and subgrants
to local educational
agencies
Bill language
Districts or
schools could
Funding source
Fiscal year
2017
Distribution
process
Bill language
Districts or
schools could
$100 million
Competitive grants to
institutions of higher
education or national
nonprofit organizations
$500 million
Formula grants
Fund additional
time for activities
identified as wellrounded, including in
science, technology,
engineering, and
math; performing arts;
American history; civics;
and other enrichment
activities.
$1 billion
Discretionary and
competitive subgrants
to local educational
agencies
Increase instructional
time by extending the
length of the school
day from 9:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.
$180 million
Competitive grants
to state education agencies; local
educational agencies;
consortia of state
education agencies
and local educational
agencies; nonprofit
organizations; or
in partnership with
business, educational
service agencies, or
institutions of higher
education
Fiscal year
2017
Distribution
process
$2 million
Competitive grants
to local educational
agencies; nonprofit
organizations; or
in partnership with
business, educational
service agencies, or
institutions of higher
education
$1 million
Competitive grants
to local educational
agencies; nonprofit
organizations; or
in partnership with
business, educational
service agencies, or
institutions of higher
education
Funding source
Bill language
Districts or
schools could
Sources: Every Student Succeeds Act, H. Rept. 114-354, 114 Cong. 1 sess. (2015), available at http://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/every_student_succeeds_act_-_conference_report.pdf; U.S.
Department of Education, Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Summary and Background Information (2016), available at http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget17/summary/17summary.pdf.
Recommendations
School systems should provide better options for working parents and be more
aligned with their needs. This reform needs to be more than an add-on program;
it needs to be a clear change in mindset. In many ways, the debate over school
schedules is often set up as school vs. no school. But thats shortsighted, and for
many schools, a more logical day would have kids participate in several extracurricular opportunities throughout the day, whether they are through sports clubs;
performing arts groups; science, technology, engineering, and math education;
adult mentorships; or simply unrestricted play.
In the same way that districts offer magnet schools with a focus on arts, technology, or international education, they should add full-day, family-centered schools
to their portfolio of offerings. Charter schools could also pursue this type of
model, and many already have.250
More broadly, advocates for a better educational system should do more to engage
parents in the school schedule reform debate. In this regard, expanded learning
time reforms offer a helpful lesson. Visit the website of most advocates of ELT, and
people will find little mention of benefits to parents. From a reform perspective,
this approach does not make much immediate sense. Advocates of ELT should be
more intentional in marketing these policies as meaningful solutions to support
working families.
Furthermore, schools should also develop coherent full-day schedules that are
responsive to students developmental needs and biological rhythms: a mix of
physical activity and academic learning in the morning, rest or downtime in the
early afternoon, time to run in the midafternoon, and then additional academic
classes before pickup in the late afternoon.
By creating full-day schedules that are driven by students needs and staffed creatively, schools could ensure that all aspects of the day are aligned toward supporting students social, emotional, and physical development. The staff and faculty
administering the all-day schedule would be part of the same institution, and
there would be more continuity and communication among faculty members who
support students throughout the day. The academic learning would also be more
aligned toward the states learning standards. These redesigned schedules should
also allow teachers to have more time to collaborate with their peers and prepare
for their upcoming classes.
Over the years, some districts have also used Title I funds to help promote a
more comprehensive approach to school schedules. 252 In Evansville, Indiana, for
instance, the local school district has used Title I funds to help promote afterschool programs, as well as other initiatives to support parent engagement.253
However, as the authors found in their work, many states and districts are
simply not aware that the largest pot of federal funds can be used for extending
the school day. The department should clarify the use of these funds for these
initiatives and issue new guidance that makes these changes clear and concrete.
For instance, the Every Student Succeeds Act requires districts implementing
comprehensive schoolwide programs in Title I schools to first conduct a schoollevel needs assessment, and the Department of Education should issue guidance
on the assessment of need for improved school schedules.
At the same time, Congress should appropriate additional funds for the programs that support expanded learning time programs, community schools, and
after-school programming under ESSA, including:
The Title IV, Part A block grants to states to provide student support services
The 21st Century Community Learning Centers program, which traditionally
supports after-school programs for low-income students and now includes a
competitive subgrant program for ELT
Promise Neighborhoods, which is a competitive grant program run by the
Department of Education supporting a continuum of family and community
services, from preschool through high school, in high-poverty communities
Full-Service Community Schools, which supports the development of a
coordinated set of academic, social, and health services for children and
families in schools
Again, the department should issue guidance clarifying the use of these
funds for extending the school day as well as meeting the working needs of
parents. Under ESSA, the aforementioned programs already require districts
to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment. The 21st CCLC program, for
instance, stipulates that entities conduct evaluations that include the needs of
working families.254 The department can specify the purpose of these evaluations for strategic planning around innovative school schedules. The federal
government should also expand the definition of community school coordinatorstraditionally a role in the Full-Service Community School modeland
make it easier for schools and districts to fund such positions.255
States should also increase their dedicated amount of funding for school-based
health center initiatives. States should allow schools to use these funds for
medical personnel who could provide sick-child day care if a parent or guardian
is unable to stay home with their child. This flexibility would allow schools to
provide alternative arrangements for sick students at school, and parents who do
not have access to paid parental leave or paid sick leave will not run the risk of
losing their job if the school requires an immediate parent pickup.
Rethink requirements on instructional time. Current state guidelines on
instructional time are outdated. In some states, no requirements on the length
of the school day even exist.260 For instance, more than one-third of states do
not have a requirement on minimum instructional time in the units of hours or
minutes.261 More than a dozen states also have not set a minimum number of
hours to constitute a school day.262
States should increase the minimum number of hours that students are required
to be in school. If states raised the minimum length of a school day to eight
hours, for instance, this policy change would naturally lead to school schedules
that are more aligned with the typical workday. This change would also allow
more time for physical education, recess, enrichment, and electives.
States should also set appropriate restrictions on schoolwide and districtwide
closings. For instance, states should roll back laws that ban districts from starting or ending the school year before specific dates in the fall and spring. As a
standard, CAP believes that throughout the school year, districts should only
close for federal holidays and no more than two additional weeks in order to
align with the average workers paid vacation time. Days off beyond that should
be restricted to emergencies or covered with field trips and school-based care,
excluding summer break.
Districts and schools should take the following steps, among others:
Offer family-centered schools. Districts should introduce a new school model
of choice called family-centered schools into their portfolios. These schools
would organize themselves explicitly to support working families by limiting
the days when school is closed to only major national holidays; offering an 8:30
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. daily schedule; reinventing parent-teacher communication
to eliminate parent-teacher conferences at school during the day and allow for
more calls, texts, and other one-off, technology-enabled solutions; adopting
more parent-friendly health policies; and more.
Districts could solicit proposals for charter schools with this intentional
approach and/or could establish incentives for district-run schools to adopt this
model in the same way that districts encourage and establish magnet schools or
specialty schools focused on bilingualism, technology, Montessori, International
Baccalaureate, design and architecture, health professions, and other specialty
models. Districts should maintain a waiting list or find an alternative way to
assess and track demand in order to project the need for these types of schools.
Districts should prioritize providing access to these schools to low-income families and where there is great need. In low-income schools, the district can cover
the additional costs through Title I, Part A under the Schoolwide Program.
In mixed-income and higher-income communities, districts can offer 9-to-5
schools through some combination of public and private funding sources. School
administrators can prorate program fees by family income, but low-income
students would not have to pay additional fees; Title I, Part A would bear the
cost. Another alternative is a portfolio model. In this approach, schools would
offer a portfolio model of approved providers, such as Urban Adventure Squad
and other local after-care programs. These providers would pick up students from
school or use school facilities. Parents would bear all additional costs.
Districts should consult parents in the planning and implementation of their
family-centered school schedules. Parent consultation and a family needs
assessment are paramount to ensuring that new schedules both align with the
standard workday and satisfy the needs of local parents. District administrators
should also make sure that their outreach is inclusive of households with different income levels and family structures.
Conduct a comprehensive parent needs assessment. A comprehensive parent
needs assessment should occur well before the implementation of 9-to-5 schools.
Without in-depth knowledge of the challenges parents face, school districts may
create well-meaning programs that do not meet the needs of parents. School districts should conduct a thorough needs assessment that surveys working parents
and determines which expanded scheduling policies best serve them. Districts
should prioritize the needs of low-income and struggling families on this issue.
location to care for children. School districts could also host AmeriCorps
members or other national service programs as a cost-effective approach to
gaining additional staff for the extended hours. National service volunteers can
fill supportive roles as mentors, tutors, and other personnel at a school. Staff
from other community-based organizations, faith-based organizations, libraries,
museums, parks and recreation departments, and local employers, as well as college and older high school students, might serve as staff as well.
Leverage community resources and partner with community-based entities. Schools should work with community providers in operating before- and
after-school programs on school grounds rather than at facilities located outside
the school building. Schools need to break down barriers and make it easier for
outside organizations to use the school facilities. In addition, more effective and
seamless communication between schools and after-school programs can help
align after-school programming with the school day. Such measures would provide
better accommodations for low-income families. Under ESSA, Title I-eligible
schools may use Title I funds for these purposes.266 They could also solicit volunteers from the community to teach occasional or afternoon courses, or they
could establish mentorship programs to allow students to learn from adults in the
community. Ideally, schools should fully manage the operations of an expanded,
family-centered school. However, if there are funding and capacity constraints,
schools should leverage services from external organizations but still serve as a
point of contact and coordination between parents and community providers.
Redefine how professional development is delivered. Districts should stop
the practice of full-day school closures for professional development. Instead,
they should utilize high-quality professional development strategies that can be
embedded throughout the school day, including teacher collaboration and planning time, individualized coaching, classroom observations, evaluations from
outside experts, and trainings on data analysis. Districts can also run citywide
leadership development events during nonschool hours. They can also explore
the use of online platforms, such as Knowledge Delivery Systems,267 for professional development and professional learning among educators, which would
reduce the need for full-day closures for these purposes.
Better accommodate disadvantaged families and support more parental
involvement. Schools should also better respond to the needs of low-income,
single-parent, or otherwise disadvantaged family households. For instance,
many parents and guardians have inflexible work schedules, and districts should
play their part in implementing family-friendly school policies that are flexible
and negotiable, not a mandate.
Schools should make every effort to accommodate parents work schedules
when scheduling parent-teacher conferences, student work expos, or similar
events. For instance, schools can host parent-teacher conferences in the mornings, evenings, or on weekends. Schools could also provide alternative parent
outreach options such as virtual conferences or regular emails and phone calls.
Teacher home visits are another strong alternative to school-based conferences.
As mentioned earlier, many low-income parents find it difficult to attend parentteacher conferences due to the inconvenience in traveling from the workplace to
the school, and their employers may not even offer such flexibility.
Some high-poverty schools, such as Hobgood Elementary School in
Murfreesboro, Tennessee, have looked to teacher home visits as a solution.268 To
encourage participation, schools may offer additional compensation to teachers who visit students and families in their home. These visits both encourage
parental involvement and allow teachers to learn more about their students and
different family backgrounds.269
In addition, many working parents and guardians, including most low-wage
and part-time workers, have no paid leave at all and must work even on federal
holidays, which limits their ability to supervise their child when they are not in
school. Districts can use Title I funds to hire site resource coordinators to manage school-based before- and after-school care, and these coordinators can also
assist families with arranging care during school closings. Schools should also
leverage partnerships with community food banks, emergency food pantries,
and other local nonprofits to ensure that students can still access meals on days
schools are closed, in order to decrease incidences of food insecurity.270
In addition, districts should reform absence policies related to student sickness
and only focus on the illnesses that pose serious harm to students health or
significantly detract from a students ability to learn. Nits, tiredness, and coughing are not reasons to send a child home from school.
Local officials should convene school administrators and ask them to work
together to devise a unified school schedule. Alternatively, charter and independent schools should align their calendars with the largest public school system
in the area. While charter schools should retain their autonomy on instructional
time, administrators should ensure that their policies do not create additional
inconveniences for working parents.
Also, school administrators should take their cues on local emergencies and
weather-related closings from local government agencies and major employers,
barring reasonable exceptions.
Conclusion
Schools should be responsive to the needs of both children and parents in their
communities. A true, family-centered school is intentional about providing
extended-day programs that keep children safe, offer opportunities to grow and
thrive, and support working families. Ideally, all schools should be open beyond
traditional school hours. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
School policies must evolve with the changing demographics of the nation and
actively respond to the daily challenges and frustrations experienced by many
working parents. Schools were created for the community, and it is the schools
responsibility to be aware of what does and does not work for students and their
families. Expanded school schedules provide children with enriching opportunities to succeed while also recognizing the needs of the modern American family.
the Center. Prior to joining the Center, she served as an Emerson Fellow at the
Institute for Educational Leadership. Baffour earned her bachelors degree in philosophy, politics, and economics from the University of Pennsylvania.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge those who offered valuable contributions and
assistance in the development of this report. Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach
and Lauren Bauer of the Brookings Institution conducted the lost productivity
analysis for women leaving the workplace, and both were generous with their time
and provided enormously helpful feedback. Shilpa Phadke and Sarah Jane Glynn
of CAPs Womens Initiative; Melissa Boteach of CAPs Poverty to Prosperity
Program; Andy Green and Kate Bahn of CAPs Economic Policy team; Danyelle
Solomon of Progress 2050; Katie Hamm of CAPs Early Childhood Policy team;
and consultant Meg Benner all contributed helpful feedback. Former CAP
Policy Analyst Chelsea Straus, former CAP Policy Analyst Max Marchitello, and
former CAP intern Melissa Masengale helped collect and fact-check the data.
Michael Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute; Tim Daly of EdNavigator;
Jodi Grant of the Afterschool Alliance, Cynthia Miller-Idriss of American
University, Michele McLaughlin of the Knowledge Alliance; Catherine Holahan
of EducationCounsel; and Jennifer Davis of the National Center on Time &
Learning all reviewed the report and strengthened our recommendations. Julie
Kashen of the Make It Work Campaign; Elana Mintz of the Urban Adventure
Squad; and Amanda Ripley, author, helped us better understand the problem.
Appendix 1: Methodology
For this project, CAP researchers conducted a number of different analyses. First,
the researchers conducted a survey of the largest school districts in the country, as
defined by the National Center for Education Statistics. CAP researchers looked
specifically at a number of policies, including instructional time and daily bell
schedules, for each district. For a full list of indicators and sources, please see
Appendix 2.
In some cities, CAP researchers gathered the data on district policies from district
websites. In other areas, they called or emailed repeatedly to gain the information. The researchers conducted the survey during summer and fall 2015. As part
of this project, CAP researchers also analyzed data from the Schools and Staffing
Survey, a federal and nationally representative study of schools. For that analysis,
the researchers relied on data from the 2011-12 school year.
Out-of-pocket costs
To calculate out-of-pocket costs due to misaligned school schedules, CAP
researchers first estimated the number of daysconverted into hoursand
after-school hours that schools are closed when typical workplaces are open.
Researchers relied on 2015-16 school year data collected from the largest school
districts about closings due to holidays, recess breaks, and staff development days,
finding an average of 29 school closings for the year.
Researchers also relied on a 2013 Center for Economic and Policy Research
report that found the number of paid holidays and vacation days for a full-time,
private-sector worker with access to paid leave to be 16. Since CAPs analysis
excludes summer recess from these calculations, researchers prorated the number of paid leave days over the school year. The difference between the number
of school closings and a workers available paid leave days would be the excess
number of days off.
Lost productivity
The authors estimated two forms of lost productivity due to misaligned school
and work schedules. First, CAP researchers partnered with economists Diane
Schanzenbach and Lauren Bauer at The Hamilton Project at the Brookings
Institution to analyze the proportion of women who have elementary-schoolage children and work full time. They compared that figure with the proportion
of women who have secondary-school-age children and work full time. Because
researchers did not find a difference in part-time employment rates, for the
purposes of this calculation, CAP researchers assumed that the entire gap in
full-time employment rates between mothers of elementary-school-age children and mothers of secondary-school-age children could be attributed to their
caregiving responsibilities.
The researchers assumed that if school schedules were aligned with the typical
workday9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.there would be higher full-time employment
rates among mothers whose youngest child was in elementary school, equivalent
to that of mothers whose youngest child was in secondary school. The present gap
in full-time employment rates between mothers of elementary-school-age children and mothers of secondary-school-age children53 percent and 60 percent,
respectivelyresults in productivity loss.
To create these estimates, the researchers relied on the 2015 Current Population
Survey, which collects data on labor force participation, full-time employment,
wages, and population estimates for working-age mothers. CAP researchers estimated the increase in the workforce if mothers of elementary-school-age children
were to work full time at the same rate as mothers of middle- and high-school-age
children. CAP researchers then multiplied this difference, just more than 1 million
women, by the median annual wage of full-time working women with elementaryschool-age children to estimate the productivity loss.
Secondly, CAP researchers estimated lost productivity due to school closings,
or what the authors call the I Dont Know How She Does It problem. Again,
researchers relied on the number of days that schools are closed throughout the
school year, 29, and the average number of paid holiday and vacation days each
year, 16, and prorated the number of paid leave days over the school year. The
authors excluded from the analysis households with a nonworking adult, focusing
solely on households where all residing adults are employed.
Researchers then estimated the number of working families that are likely to be
affected by the misalignment between school and work schedules. To reach this
estimate, researchers first subtracted the proportion of children who are cared for
by grandparents, siblings or other relatives, or nonrelatives who live in the familys
home. They relied on Lynda Laughlins 2013 report for the Bureau of the Census,
Whos Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements. The authors used the data
on percentage of children whose child care was provided by grandparents, siblings, and other relatives for school-age children with working mothers. In 2014,
there were 13 million households in the United States with school-age children
and employed parents.
Finally, the researchers multiplied the number of misaligned hours by the
median hourly wage for women with elementary-school-age children, as
determined by the 2015 Current Population Survey March Annual Social and
Economic Supplement.
Appendix 2: Sources
For this project, CAP researchers did a survey of the largest school districts, as
defined by the National Center for Education Statistics. CAP researchers looked
specifically at the following policies:
Number of instructional days in the school year
Number of instructional hours in the school year
Number of student nonattendance days throughout the school year, categorized
by holidays and in-service staff attendance days
Whether the schools have an early dismissal one day per week
Prevalence of half days and/or staggered school starts at the beginning and end
of semesters and the school year
State legislative requirements on instructional time
School start and end times
Whether the district offers school-based before- and after-school care
Cost of district-provided care at schools
Timing of parent-teacher conferencesthat is to say, do they occur during the
school day?
The authors reviewed these policies with information and materials from the following school districts.
New York City Department of Education, New York:
New York City Department of Education, 2015-16 School Year Calendar
(2015), available at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A3D17228-63C24178-89FC-0BE130C616BE/0/201516SchoolYearCalendar_Revised83115.pdf.
New York City Department of Education, Parent Teacher Conferences 201516, available at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/075BB1B9-2F2F-4E9ABA7F-734628FC791D/0/201516ParentTeacherConferencesMemofinal.pdf (last
accessed May 2016).
Broward County Public Schools, Department of Pupil Transportation: 20152016 Opening & Closing School Times (Regular Term) (2015), available
at http://browardschools.com/SiteMedia/Docs/web/PIO/2015-2016_
Opening_-_Closing_School_Times_%28Regular-Term%29.pdf.
Broward County Public Schools Department of Before and After School Child
Care, Program Hours, available at http://sbbc-bascc.com/html/program_
hours.php (last accessed May 2016).
Houston Independent School District, Texas:
Houston Independent School District, HISD 2015-2016 Academic Calendar,
available at http://www.houstonisd.org/cms/lib2/TX01001591/Centricity/
Domain/2129/2015-16-Calendar.pdf (last accessed May 2016).
Hillsborough County Public Schools, Proposed Bell Schedule: 2015-2016, available at https://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/assets/pdf/BellSchedules.pdf (last accessed
May 2016).
Hillsborough County Public Schools, After School Programs Fee-Based
Funding, available at http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/doc/list/host-before-and-afterschool-summer-care-programs/about/101-522/ (last accessed May 2016).
Legacy Preparatory Academy, Calendar, available at http://www.legacyprep.org/calendarWeekView.aspx?schools=0&schoolid=0&types=&viewD
ate=3/14/2016 (last accessed June 2016).
Pepin Academies, School Calendar, available at http://pepinacademies.com/
calendar/ (last accessed June 2016).
Winthrop Charter School, 2015-2016 School Calendar (2015), available at
http://www.winthropcharter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/WIN1.pdf.
Winthrop Charter School, School and Office Hours, available at http://www.
winthropcharter.org/about-winthrop-charter-school/school-and-office-hours/
(last accessed May 2016).
Orange County Public Schools, 2015-16 School Opening and Closing Times,
available at https://www.ocps.net/op/tran/Documents/RO105%20Bells%20
Times%20Actual.pdf (last accessed May 2016).
Orange County Public Schools, Before and Afterschool Programs, available at
https://www.ocps.net/cs/services/options/schoolchoice/Pages/SchoolCare.
aspx (last accessed May 2016).
Fairfax County Public Schools, Virginia:
Fairfax County Public Schools, Standard Calendar for School Year 2015-2016,
accessed May 2016.
Gwinnett County Public Schools, 2015-16 School Starting and Ending Times,
available at https://publish.gwinnett.k12.ga.us/gcps/wcm/connect/5a117e424a78-42cf-9b83-e2b68ad2598b/2015-16-School-Start-and-End-Times-FINAL7-15-REV.pdf?MOD=AJPERES (last accessed May 2016).
Dallas Independent School District, Texas:
Dallas Independent School District, 2015-16 Student Calendar, available at http://www.dallasisd.org/cms/lib/TX01001475/Centricity/
Domain/48/2015-2016_student_calendar02_final02.pdf (last accessed May
2016).
Dallas Independent School District, Important Dates for the 2015-16 School
Year, available at https://thehub.dallasisd.org/2015/08/05/important-dates-for2015-16-school-year/ (last accessed May 2016).
Wake County Public School System, North Carolina:
Wake County Public School System, 2015-16 Traditional Calendar,
available at http://www.wcpss.net/cms/lib/NC01911451/Centricity/
Domain/19/15-16%20TRAD%20v3.pdf (last accessed May 2016).
San Diego Unified School District, Transportation Service Bell Times 20152016 (2015), available at https://www.sandiegounified.org/sites/default/files_
link/district/files/transportation/parent%20documents/BELL%20TIMES%20
2015-16%20SIMPLIFIED.pdf.
Duval County Public Schools, Florida:
Duval County Public Schools, 2015-2016 District Calendar, available at http://
www.duvalschools.org/cms/lib07/FL01903657/Centricity/Domain/4172/
DistrictCalendar2015-2016.pdf (last accessed May 2016).
Prince Georges County Public Schools, Bell Times for the 2015-16 School Year,
available at http://www1.pgcps.org/transportation/index.aspx?id=194524 (last
accessed May 2016).
Cobb County School District, 2015-16 School Start/End Times, available at http://www.cobbk12.org/generalinfo/calendars/2015-16/2015-16_
SchoolStartTimes.pdf (last accessed May 2016).
Baltimore County Public Schools, Maryland:
Baltimore County Public Schools, 2015-2016 School Year, available at https://
www.bcps.org/calendars/ (last accessed May 2016).
Baltimore County Public Schools, Opening and Closing Times: School Year
2015-2016 (2015), available at https://www.bcps.org/offices/transportation/
pdf/Bell-Times.pdf.
The authors supplemented this research with personal communication from staff
members from some of the largest school districts central offices:
Personal communication from Mark Zustovich, chief public information officer,
New York City Department of Youth & Community Development, November
16, 2015.
Personal communication from Ellen T. Morgan, public information officer,
Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Communications and Media
Relations, November 16, 2015.
Personal communication from Antonio Cotarelo, county engineer and deputy
director, Miami-Dade County Public Schools, November 10, 2015.
Personal communication from Wanda Robinson, parent engagement specialist,
Broward County Public Schools Office of Parent Engagement, March 21, 2016.
Personal communication from Jonnelle Hollins, manager, After School
Programs Department, Houston Independent School District, October 16,
2015.
Personal communication from Liz Authenreith, chief of staff, Houston
Independent School District, November 9, 2015.
Personal communication from Kathy Burstein, media relations specialist, The
School District of Palm Beach County, November 17, 2015.
Personal communication from Brian Edwards, chief communications officer,
Montgomery County Public Schools, November 3, 2015.
Personal communication from Mark Sherwood, assistant superintendent of
communications, Duval County Schools, November 6, 2015.
The authors also supplemented this research with resources from the National
Council on Teacher Quality. These documents are as follows:
National Council on Teacher Quality, District Policy: Houston Independent
School District, Texas, available at http://www.nctq.org/districtPolicy/contractDatabase/districtReport.do?id=32 (last accessed May 2016).
National Council on Teacher Quality, District Policy: Palm Beach County
School District, Florida, available at http://www.nctq.org/districtPolicy/contractDatabase/districtReport.do?id=9 (last accessed May 2016).
National Council on Teacher Quality, District Policy: Philadelphia School
District, Pennsylvania, available at http://www.nctq.org/districtPolicy/contractDatabase/districtReport.do?id=7 (last accessed May 2016).
National Council on Teacher Quality, District Policy: Cypress-Fairbanks
Independent School District, Texas, available at http://www.nctq.org/districtPolicy/contractDatabase/districtReport.do?id=40 (last accessed May 2016).
Endnotes
1 Renee Montagne, Obamas Attend Daughters ParentTeacher Meetings, Diversions: NPR, October 20, 2009,
available at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.
php?storyId=113958119.
2 Sarah Jane Glynn, Heather Boushey, and Peter
Berg, Who Gets Time Off? Predicting Access to
Paid Leave and Workplace Flexibility (Washington:
Center for American Progress, 2016), available at
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/report/2016/04/26/134824/who-gets-time-off/.
3 Ibid.
4 Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Labor in the 20th
Century (U.S. Department of Labor, 2003), available at
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/cwc/american-labor-inthe-20th-century.pdf.
5 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Latest Annual Data: Women
of Working Age, available at https://www.dol.gov/wb/
stats/latest_annual_data.htm (last accessed June 2016).
6 Based on authors summation of district enrollment
numbers for the largest school districts, excluding
Hawaii. See American School & University, 2014 AS&U
100: Largest school districts in the U.S. by enrollment, 2012-13, available at http://asumag.com/
research/2014-asu-100-largest-school-districts-usenrollment-2012-13 (last accessed May 2016).
7 Rebecca Ray, Milla Sanes, and John Schmitt, NoVacation Nation Revisited (Washington: Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2013), available at http://
cepr.net/documents/no-vacation-update-2014-04.pdf.
8 Based on authors analysis using data collected from
the largest public school districts, personal communication from district office staff, and materials from the
National Council on Teacher Quality. See Appendix 2 for
full source list.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 P.J. Reilly, PA deer season is steeped in tradition,
Lancaster Online, November 30, 2014, available at
http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/pa-deerseason-is-steeped-in-tradition/article_2e9d2b107827-11e4-8f92-3f3d8a41bda4.html.
12 Sarah Jane Glynn, Working Parents Lack of Access
to Paid Leave and Workplace Flexibility (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2012), available
at https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/
report/2012/11/20/45466/working-parents-lack-ofaccess-to-paid-leave-and-workplace-flexibility/.
13 Anne Morrison and Katherine Gallagher Robbins,
Part-Time Workers Are Paid Less, Have Less Access to
Benefitsand Two-Thirds Are Women (Washington:
National Womens Law Center, 2015), available at http://
nwlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/part-time_
workers_fact_sheet_8.21.1513.pdf.
14 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 6. Selected paid leave
benefits: Access, National Compensation Survey, available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ebs2.t06.htm
(last accessed May 2016).
106 Ibid.
107 Ibid.
108 National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and
Staffing Survey (SASS), Public School Principals Data File
2011-12.
109 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Charts from the American
Time Use Survey; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Percent of
employed persons who did selected activities on workdays
by hour of the day.
110 Lynda Laughlin, Whos Minding the Kids? Child Care
Arrangements: Spring 2011 (Washington: Bureau of
the Census, 2013), available at https://www.census.gov/
prod/2013pubs/p70-135.pdf.
111 National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and
Staffing Survey (SASS), Public School Principals Data File
2011-12.
157 Ibid.
144 Ibid.
145 U.S. Department of Education, 21st Century Community Learning Centers.
146 U.S. Department of Education, Promise Neighborhoods.
147 U.S. Department of Education, Full Service Community
Schools.
163 Ibid.
221 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Report on the Expanded Learning
Time Grant: Costs, Expenses, and Recommendations
for Sustainability (2015), available at http://www.doe.
mass.edu/research/reports/2015/03elt-sustainability.
docx.
222 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, School Redesign: MA Expanded Learning Time (ELT) Districts and Schools, available at http://
www.doe.mass.edu/redesign/elt/SchoolList.html (last
accessed May 2016); Kathleen Traphagen and Christine
Johnson-Staub, Expanded Time, Enriching Experiences (Washington: Center for American Progress,
2010), available at https://www.americanprogress.org/
issues/education/report/2010/02/17/7336/expandedtime-enriching-experiences/.
223 American Federation of Teachers, Its About Time:
Lessons from Expanded Learning Time in Meriden, Connecticut (2014), available at http://www.aft.org/sites/
default/files/if_itsabouttime.pdf.
224 Knowledge Is Power Program, Frequently Asked Questions, available at http://www.kipp.org/about-kipp/faq
(last accessed May 2016).
239 Ibid.
240 Citizen Schools, Growth Strategy, available at http://
www.citizenschools.org/about/growth-strategy/ (last
accessed September 2016).
241 Corporation for National & Community Service, AmeriCorps VISTA, available at http://www.nationalservice.
gov/programs/americorps/americorps-vista (last
accessed September 2016); Corporation for National &
Community Service, School Turnaround AmeriCorps,
available at http://www.nationalservice.gov/special-initiatives/task-force-expanding-national-service/schoolturnaround-americorps (last accessed September
2016).
242 American Federation of Teachers, Its About Time.
243 University of California-Berkeley College and Career
Academy Support Network, Expanded Learning Time/
Extended Learning Time in High Schools, available
at http://casn.berkeley.edu/resource_files/Expanded_Learning_Extended_Learning.pdf (last accessed
September 2016).
244 Ibid.
245 Generation Schools Network, Cost-Effective Strategies for Extending Learning Time and Expanding
Opportunity in K-12 Education (2014), available at
http://generationschools.org/assets/resourcefiles/pdfs/
GENE_ELT_ELO%20Cost-EffectiveSMALL%208.pdf.
246 Ibid.
228 David Raths, From Twitter to Edmodo: Schools Collaborate with Social Media, The Journal, February
5, 2013, available at https://thejournal.com/articles/2013/02/07/social-studies.aspx.
229 Singer, Privacy Concerns for ClassDojo and Other
Tracking Apps for Schoolchildren.
230 Stephen Sawchuk, More Districts Sending Teachers
Into Students Homes, Education Week, December
13, 2011, available at http://www.edweek.org/ew/
articles/2011/12/14/14visit_ep.h31.html.
231 Ibid.; Marla Toncray, Home visit guidelines adjusted for
teachers, The Ledger Independent, July 8, 2013, available
at http://www.maysville-online.com/news/local/homevisit-guidelines-adjusted-for-teachers/article_bfea9c7aeee4-5895-ab54-d65091398c67.html.
232 Mintz, interview with author.
233 Ibid.
234 National Center on Time and Learning, Financing
Expanded Learning Time in Schools.
235 Ibid.
236 Ibid.
237 Ibid.
238 American Federation of Teachers, Its About Time.
249 Roza and Hawley Miles, Taking Stock of the Fiscal Costs
of Expanded Learning Time.
250 Liz Riggs, Kids Who Spend All Day at School, The Atlantic, May 30, 2014, available at http://www.theatlantic.
com/education/archive/2014/05/extended-schooldays/371896/.
251 Email from Adam Honeysett to Chief State School
Officer, Letter from Senior Advisor Whalen re: Using
Federal Funds for Summer Learning, February 26, 2016,
available at https://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/
Topics/School-Improvement/Federal-Programs/Federal-Programs-Communications/Letter-from-SeniorAdvisor-Whalen-re-Using-Federal-Funds.pdf.aspx.
252 National Education Association, Closing the Gap
through Extended Learning Opportunities (2008),
available at http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/
mf_PB04_ExtendedLearning.pdf.
253 Martin J. Blank and others, Financing Community
Schools: Leveraging Resources to Support Student Success (Washington: Coalition for Community Schools,
2010), available at http://www.communityschools.org/
assets/1/AssetManager/finance-paper.pdf.
254 Every Student Succeeds Act.
255 Ibid.
Our Mission
Our Values
Our Approach
As progressives, we believe
America should be a land of
boundless opportunity, where
people can climb the ladder
of economic mobility. We
believe we owe it to future
generations to protect the
planet and promote peace
and shared global prosperity.
1333 H STREET, NW, 10TH FLOOR, WASHINGTON, DC 20005 TEL: 202-682-1611 FAX: 202-682-1867 WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG