Extended Learning Opportunities for Students A Summary of ...

Extended Learning Opportunities for Students
A Summary of Research and Recommendations for Next Steps
Deborah S. Delisle
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Ohio Department of Education
Important Notation: Upon review of available research and literature, it is impossible to arrive
at one response to the complex question regarding the length of the Ohio school year or day or
the overall effectiveness of learning opportunities provided through an extended school calendar.
Detailed in this report are several promising practices for consideration. Until further conclusive
research is available, the Ohio Department of Education cannot make a specific recommendation
as to the most appropriate length of the school year or day.
Although not required by HB1 as a component of this report, the topic of calamity days is
addressed in this document. Given the significant interest in this area, ODE felt it important to
place the issue into the larger conversation of time (see page 11).
Introduction
The following report is submitted in response to the call by Ohio House Bill 1 (HB1) to examine
the issue of extending the school year in Ohio. As the 21 st century continues to evolve, it is
imperative that the most effective learning opportunities be made available for all of Ohio’s 1.8
million K-12 public school students. A myriad of stakeholders fueled by media and research
continuously calls on the nation’s education system to reexamine its practices, including the
issue of time, to ensure that all of our students are equipped with the necessary skills to be
successful in a highly competitive global society.
The length of the school day and school year is one that routinely surfaces when education
transformation is discussed. This topic is one that also receives much attention when academic
achievement is compared across the international community. The issue of extending the school
day and school year remains divisive with respect to academic achievement and non
achievement outcomes, functionality of school facilities to operate in an extended academic
calendar, social mores with respect to familial obligations, and the ever present concern about
changing the status quo.
During visits to school districts across the state over the past two years, I have found significant
inconsistencies in opportunities and expectations not only among neighboring districts, but also
across various typologies (i.e. rural, urban, and suburban). It is imperative for Ohio to do much
more to ensure that all of its 1.8 million students have access to a high quality education as well
as a strong system of support framed by high expectations.

Report
A comprehensive review of research on the extension of the school year and day was conducted
in 2010 citing 15 studies between 1985 and 2009 (Patall, Cooper, & Allen, 2010). This review,
along with other papers, and additional research conducted by REL Midwest at Learning Point
Associates, provides the foundation for the research, conclusions, and suggestions. As stated
earlier, this report is presented in response to a requirement in HB1 (2009).
According to REL, research on extended learning time is limited by the types of questions being
addressed by researchers and the methodology being used to answer these questions.
Although extended learning time is not a new practice, researchers have yet to examine
the long-term effects of extended learning time (Patall et al., 2010).
There are promising findings in research conducted across the country in identifying a
correlation between the extended school year and student achievement. The largest
challenge is creating a clear distinction between the effect of extended learning time and
the schools simultaneously implementing other strategies specifically geared to
improving student achievement (Patall et al., 2010).
The existing research on extended learning time does not examine its effect on
nonachievement factors.
Conclusion: The reviewed research produced no rigorous evidence about the effects of
extended learning time for all students especially when designed to be the same
for all students.
Extended Learning Time Defined
The definition of extended learning time can encompass a multitude of programs and options.
For the purposes of this report, we examined extended learning time options formally
incorporated into the school day or school year; for example, if a school moves from a 6.5-hour
school day to an 8-hour school day or adds 20 school days to the school year. This report does
not review opportunities for extended learning time such as supplemental programs offered
before or after school. In addition, it does not include research focused on year-round school
programs because those programs generally do not add days to the calendar but are merely a
redistribution of the existing number of school days. (REL Midwest 2010)
Extended School Day
One of the more common means of extending learning time into a school is to lengthen the
school day. Schools may, however, use the time offered by a lengthened school day in different
ways: lengthening each class period, offering an additional class period, or offering learning time
outside the traditional classroom.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 2

Research suggests that the most common extended-school-day program takes the form of
lengthening existing class periods—most often in the core subjects of mathematics and English
language arts (Patall et al., 2010). Such programs are designed to offer students additional
instructional time in the classes they would be normally completing during a traditional school
day (Adelman, Haslam & Pringle, 1996). Existing research on this type of extended learning
time found that longer school days predicted higher achievement test scores (Wheeler, 1987).
The study evaluating a school in which the school day was lengthened by adding a class period
to the school day had varying results (Bishop, Worner, & Weber, 1988). The average grade point
average (GPA) of students increased in some subjects but decreased in others. The researchers
speculated that adding additional subject material may have added to the students’ breadth of
knowledge but also may have made it difficult to maintain their GPA in existing subjects
(Bishop, Worner, & Weber, 1988). These studies also indicated inconsistent results based on
other activities pursued by students (i.e. work, sports, clubs etc.).
Conclusion: Increasing the time students spend on a specific subject in one day seems to have
a positive impact on student achievement. As with all modifications to schedules,
the quality of instruction and the rigor of the learning activities must be defined
in order to achieve results.
Extended School Year
There is some promising evidence on the extension of the school year by increasing the number
of required days for instruction. In Patall et al.’s (2010) review of the existing literature, studies
focusing on extended-school-year programs consistently found that students enrolled in
extended-year programs made achievement gains on standardized tests in various subjects,
including mathematics and reading, and did not exhibit lower scores in any areas. However, the
research examined in Patall et al.’s (2010) literature review, which was focused on extended-year
programs, often did not meet standards of rigor. For example, the studies often failed to control
for the fact that students at the extended-year schools generally started with lower achievement
scores than students at traditional-year schools (Patall et al., 2010).
While more research is needed in this area, it is important to note that extending the school year
for children who are struggling seems to prevent additional and more costly intervention
programs in future years for children. The extension of the school year for struggling students
does not have a significant number of research studies as this strategy has an uneven track record
in terms of duration. Too often these programs fall prey to economic conditions just as research
and measuring student progress are initiated.
Conclusion: The possibilities inherent in extending a school year seem to favor students who
struggle or who are not entering Kindergarten as prepared as their age mates.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 3

International Comparison of School Days
Due to the continuous comparison of the United States to other countries in terms of student
achievement, this report examined the length of school in international education environments.
While the United States differs from other countries in days of instruction, it does not necessarily
differ in the hours of formal instruction. In reviewing the structures of schools in other countries,
the time and use of the instruction day remains paramount. In a 1991 study, 12 out of 16 other
countries had school years longer than the United States, but only France reported a longer
school day (U.S. Department of Education). Furthermore in the same report, U.S. schools had
more formal instructional hours per year than 11 out of 16 countries because of the relatively
long school day for U.S. students. What is different in the amount of time students in other
countries spend outside of formal instruction on their studies (i.e. mentoring sessions, peer-topeer
tutoring, study circles etc.).
Prevost (2007) reported on the international controversy of student achievement comparisons:
―The perception that the United States is losing ground to foreign competitors because their
students spend more time in school has been around for years. It is also flawed, in that culture
and curriculums vary so much from country to country that instructional time alone can’t account
for higher or lower achievement. Sure, Japan, which prides itself on a lengthy school schedule,
outperforms the United States on international tests, but Italy, which also logs more instructional
hours annually, ranks below the United States internationally.‖
The National Education Commission on Time and Learning (1994/ 2005) compared the length of
the school day and year to other nations: Out of 20 nations, the U.S. average school year of 180
days was one of the shortest, and Japan was one of the longest with 223 days. Japanese and
Chinese students spent 7-8 hours a day in school, but spent more time in recess, lunch and other
activities (Khankeo van der Graaf 2008).
What is, perhaps, most difficult to glean from the research on the length of the school year is the
impact on student achievement from such factors as family engagement, expectations of students
embedded within the country’s culture, what students are doing (i.e. studying, working, or
engaging in recreation) outside of the school day, and other variables.
Conclusion: It is difficult to ascertain the depth of contribution an extended school year has
on student achievement. The combination of the number of school days or hours
and the quality of programs and instruction offered are interwoven.
The Success of Extended Time Depends Upon its Use
Undoubtedly, the use of time and the quality of learning opportunities associated with an
extended school day or year are of utmost concern. In essence, quality matters and it matters
significantly.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 4

In a comparison of third grade students in an extended year school to that of third grade students
in a conventional school, it was noted that there is a definitive importance for educators to
develop technological advances that link students’ learning to academic performance to compete
in the 21st century economy (Khankeo van der Graaf 2008). ―Developing this interconnection
can expand students’ cognitive capabilities and allow engagement in collaborative inquiry.
Technological advances can help teachers to differentiate in specific content areas that support
individual learning styles and to utilize extended learning time more effectively and efficiently.‖
What is apparent through the research on extended learning time is that quality and a change in
instructional design must be central to this framework. For example, if students are not being
challenged or are not succeeding in a traditional day or year, merely expanding time will not
impact students if they are offered the same type of instruction and learning experiences. There
needs to be significant thought given to the design and desired goals of an extended learning
initiative.
Conclusion: The positive impacts of extending learning time are dependent upon the rationale
for the extension and the quality of experiences provided.
Opportunities for Underperforming Students
The most promising findings on the increase in instructional time are those that focus on students
who struggle and/or students who attend underperforming classrooms and schools. ―The
evidence suggests that extended school time is particularly beneficial for students who are most
at risk of failing or underperforming. Consistent across several studies examining the
relationship between extended school time and achievement is the finding that extended school
time appeared to be effective with at-risk students or that more time benefitted minority, low-
SES, or low-achievement students the most. This finding is consistent with research showing that
disadvantaged students are the most susceptible to summer learning loss compared to their more
advantaged counterparts because of differences in opportunities to practice and learn outside of
school‖ (Cooper et al., 1996).
Extra time is particularly useful for English language learner students, who not only need extra
time to learn mathematics, science, social studies, and all other subject-area curricula, but also
need time to practice and master the English language.
Research indicates that extending a school day or year should not be done merely for the
appearance that education is demanding more from its students. There seems to be a direct
connection between the rationale for the extension and student achievement. As indicated above,
several studies point to the importance of extending learning opportunities for specific groups of
students. When they are targeted for focused intervention or support, extending time is a valuable
practice. Such personalization of education is closely aligned with current research on
meaningful interactions between students and teachers and the importance of using data to make
programmatic decisions. What is most critical in this deliberation is the quality of opportunities
provided as well as the system of support that students receive.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 5

Conclusion: Data should drive decisions about extended learning opportunities. Such
programs must have definitive goals that are aligned with students’ needs and
there must be a monitoring and accountability system in place to measure the
effectiveness of the program and students’ response.
Examples of Extended-Learning-Time Programs
Two examples of extended-learning-time programs are the Massachusetts 2020 program and the
Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP). Attributes of these programs include the following:
Simultaneously incorporate extended school days and extended school years.
Simultaneously incorporate other strategies to improve student achievement, such as
enhancing professional development for teachers and promoting a positive school culture
(Farbman & Kaplan, 2005).
Experienced significant gains in student achievement (Farbman & Kaplan, 2005; Ross,
McDonald, Alberg, & McSparrin-Gallagher, 2007).
Simultaneous implementation makes it difficult for research to determine a relationship
between any particular strategy and the achievement results (Patall et al., 2010). Chicago
Public Schools recently announced a pilot program, the Additional Learning
Opportunities initiative, which will add 90 minutes of online reading and mathematics
learning time to the school day at five elementary schools (Chicago Public Schools,
2010). Because the program is new, there is no existing research on the effectiveness of
this method of extending learning time.
Sample of Extended Learning Programs
Some districts and individual schools which have already implemented longer years or extended
school days include the following:
Massachusetts experimented with a longer school day with 10 schools as a pilot project
(Kocian, 2009). The Expanded Learning Time Initiative was developed by a group
known as Massachusetts 2020 and was prompted by analyses that suggest that the state’s
top-performing urban high schools had longer school days. The 3-year-old program
shows some benefits, including higher test scores. However, funding problems
threaten its continuation (Kocian, 2009).
Miami-Dade County, Florida, administrators implemented a 3-year program in 39
underperforming public schools that included an extended school day and a longer school
year. However, a final evaluation of the program released in May 2009 suggested the
program produced mixed academic results (Durando, 2009).
Louisiana’s recovery school district superintendent, Paul Vallas, recently added 40 days
of instruction to the school calendar after Hurricane Katrina (Durando, 2009). Long term
effects have yet to be analyzed.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 6

The Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP), a group of charter schools serving students in
5th through 8th grades, extends both the school day and year. At KIPP schools, the
school day typically begins at 7:30 a.m. and ends at 5 p.m. In addition, half-day classes
are held on Saturdays, and students attend a summer session of two to four weeks. Gaston
(North Carolina) College Preparatory (GCP) school provides one successful example of a
KIPP school. GCP serves primarily minority and disadvantaged students and was
recognized as the sixth highest performing school in the state during the 2002–2003
school year (C. Brown et al., 2005).
One public charter school, Robert Treat Academy, in Newark, New Jersey, operates 205
to 210 days a year. This school attained the highest test scores among New Jersey urban
public schools in 2008 (Durando, 2009).
What is apparent in each of these examples is the need to examine what happens in addition to
the longer day or year to impact student achievement. The duration of the day or year cannot be
isolated to demonstrate it as a single contributor to higher achievement.
Nonachievement Gains
Although not a direct focus of any of the research cited in this brief, many of the studies noted
that extended learning time programs seemed to produce a positive effect on nonachievement
gains; for example, extended-learning-time programs may affect students’ attitudes or attendance
rates (Patall et al., 2010). Although the existing research does not provide sufficient rigorous
evidence, the effect of extended learning time on nonachievement gains should be considered.
This is definitely an area of worthwhile consideration given that academic achievement is not the
only issue of importance when summarizing the impact of a student’s education.
Conclusions and Recommendations
This report identifies shortcomings in the research about extended learning time. The
overarching theme to the cited research is not about the time associated with a student’s school
day, but the use of time, the rigor of the curriculum, the quality of programs and opportunities,
and the value and effective use placed on the current learning time. Duplication of a promising
practice from one site to another may not yield the anticipated results. In fact, what may prove
successful in one school may result in an adverse effect on students in another learning
environment or context.
According to Patall et al., 2010, ―the research evidence would suggest that extending school time
can be an effective means to support student learning, particularly for students who are most at
risk of school failure and when considerations are made for how that time is used. However, the
research on extended school time leaves much to be desired. The research designs are weak for
making strong causal inferences, and outcomes other than academic achievement have yet to be
the focus of study.‖
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 7

The strengths of the effect of extending school time as well as the long-term and cumulative
effects have yet to be determined. Likewise, the optimal amount of additional time that balances
costs and benefits needs to be further investigated. Certainly the amount of in-school time
available is just one of several factors that influences student learning. However, it would seem
that alongside other well-designed initiatives to support student learning and development,
extending school time may be a powerful tool.
―The content and instructional strategies used in school are paramount to the success or failure of
extending school time. If additional time is not used properly and school is experienced as
boring or as punishment rather than as an enriching learning environment, it could lead to even
undesirable student outcomes, such as student fatigue or low motivation.‖ (Patall et al., 2010)
The missing link to all of these studies is consistency in the comparisons which ultimately makes
any concrete edict impossible. According to REL, ―…it is important that future studies
systematically assess the impact of extended year and extended day for students with various
characteristics in well-controlled designs in which causal implications can be drawn.‖
The Ohio Department of Education’s review of the research on the topic of extended school
time, whether in hours per day or in days per year, indicates that more work needs to be done
prior to enacting a general rule for all schools to follow. These recommended next steps include,
but are not limited to, the following:
Further analyze and review promising practices that incorporate modifications to the
school day and/or year and are designed for specific student groups, such as those living
in poverty and for whom English is not their native language. By focusing on the needs
of specific groups of students, Ohio will be poised to personalize instruction, define
policies in accordance with students’ needs and ensure strategic uses of limited resources.
Identify funding sources that may support extended or additional learning time and/or
opportunities. For example, explore the feasibility of utilizing Title I funds to provide
programs for entering Kindergartners whose Kindergarten screening assessments indicate
deficiencies in school readiness.
Deepen understanding of the ways in which high performing countries design education
systems (including use of time) to support students and engage them in rigorous work.
Analyze the potential policies that might benefit Ohio’s education system.
Develop a definition of rigor and relevance that can be applied in Ohio to identify and
determine proven practices that benefit students.
Identify successful schools in the country that have modified their school calendar and/or
day and ascertain the various opportunities inherent within the learning time that may
contribute to enhanced student learning.
Study schools that have transitioned to a year-round model (not changing required days
but limiting the amount of time between transitions from one grade level to the next) for
the purposes of eliminating lost learning that occurs during long breaks from school.
Seek incentives (monetary and otherwise) for schools to rethink and enact the school
calendar.
Design a menu of options for schools to consider as they rethink school calendars.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 8

Consider requirement of lengthened school day and/or year for schools whose students
are consistently underperforming (i.e. schools in specific academic categories as defined
by the state report card).
Identify practices proven to enhance achievement that do not require changes in calendar
(i.e. looping practices-having the same teacher for the same class of students for more
than one year).
Additional Information
Potential positive and negative effects of extended school time
Potential positive effects for students
o Increased learning and enhanced academic achievement
o More time for learning
o Deeper coverage of curriculum
o More time on task
o More opportunities for experiential learning
o Deepened adult–student relationships
o Provision of safe and secure learning environments
o Align with families’ work schedules
o Limited time in child care
o Diminishing effects of ―summer slump‖
Potential negative effects for students
o Wasted time (allocated time does not necessarily translate to enhanced
instruction)
o Increased fatigue, boredom and decreased effort
o No differentiation in instruction
o Increased absenteeism and drop-out rates
o Less time for informal learning, extracurricular activities, student employment,
and free time
Potential positive effects for educators, instruction, and teaching
o More time for instruction—less hurried pace for covering material
o Ability to impact students more consistently
o Ability to personalize education
o Deepen relationships with students
o More opportunities to engage with families
o Increased time to collaborate with colleagues
Potential negative effects for educators, instruction, and teaching
o Greater number of work hours and less time off
o Teacher and administrator burnout
o Required professional development to redesign lessons and retool instruction
Potential positive effects for parents
o Lower child care costs
o Easier scheduling and transportation for working parents
o Increased opportunities to interact with school programs and staff
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 9

o Less need for supplemental activities for students to cover time out of school
o Children retaining information longer due to diminishment of ―summer slump‖
Potential negative effects for parents
o Child care needs of working parents still may not be met
o May interfere with family summer vacations and other family time
Potential positive effects for society
o Levels the playing field for disadvantaged children
o Increased learning opportunities for low-income children
o Decreased cost because of reduced need for retention, remediation, and other
social programs
o Increased future productivity
o Increased earnings
o Reduced crime
Potential negative effects for society
o Cost (salaries, facilities, maintenance)
o Takes resources from more effective interventions (e.g., addressing instructional
quality)
International Comparison Table
Number of School Days in Industrialized Nations
Country
Number of School Days
South Korea 225
Japan 223
Chinese Taipei 221
Italy 210
Czech Republic 197
Russian Federation 195
Netherlands 191
England 190
Canada 188
Singapore 180
United States 180
Hong Kong 176
Belgium 175
International average 193
(cited in Khankeo van der Graaf 2008); not identified: number of hours per school day
(list extracted as cited in Patall et al., 2010)
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 10

Calamity Days
As children, we may recall with delight the unexpected cancellation of school due to snow or
other unanticipated issues. As educators, we recognize that such interruptions reduce the number
of learning opportunities available to our students. When examining whether or not to ―make
up‖ calamity days, there are several significant factors to consider including the following:
Our students are facing an increasingly complex global society and are challenged to gain
the necessary knowledge and skills to be successful upon graduation from high school.
Whether they choose to continue their learning in a formal setting or enter the workforce,
their K-12 education will have a profound impact upon their chances for success. Ohio
requires that students be enrolled in K-12 schools for 180 days per year. Any reduction
to this amount raises questions about inconsistent learning patterns, what occurs during
the time when children are not present in school, and maintaining fidelity to instructional
programs and services.
Because teachers are under contract for the entirety of a school year, including the
allotment of calamity days in a school calendar, there are associated costs to this loss of
services to students. On calamity days, teachers are paid whether or not they are in
attendance in their district. On average, school districts annually expend $56,992 per
teacher for salary alone. The total salary and benefits for one teacher is $70,670 when
factoring in the estimated 24% benefits (contained within School Funding Advisory
Council report).
With each teacher being compensated for used calamity days, these dollars are expended
regardless of whether or not school is in session. Questions have been raised as to the
economic impact of lost services to students when calamity days are not made up. This is
difficult to quantify in dollars as every district operates in different ways. However, for
purposes of conversation the following information may be useful:
o For three calamity days not made up, assuming the district schedules the
minimum 180 days per year, there would be a minimum aggregate of $1,178 per
teacher being spent for instruction or services not being provided to students.
The practice of paying teachers for calamity days when school is not in attendance may,
in fact, cause disparate treatment of school personnel. For example, many staff members
other than teachers (i.e. food service, transportation, etc.) are not paid for calamity days.
This situation is dependent upon the local collective bargaining agreements.
There are many states impacted by weather patterns that cause disruptions to daily
activities. In most of the states we reviewed (i.e. New England and frontier states),
calamity days are made up. These states require school calendars to add an additional
number of calamity days to the end of their calendars (generally average five). The
actual end of the school year is then determined by the number of calamity days that are
taken. For example, if five calamity days are added to the calendar and only three are
used, schools end their year two days earlier than the calendar indicates.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 11

As the costs associated with education continue to be reviewed, taxpayers in communities
are increasingly scrutinizing these expenses. A conversation that has resonated across
Ohio during recent years is one that focuses on what it is that taxpayers receive as a result
of their investments (especially through levies) in their local schools. During the past
year, this conversation has deepened into the issue of calamity days. There are
stakeholders who have questioned their ―purchase‖ of 180 schools days although their
children are only guaranteed to receive 175 instructional days.
There is promise in the potential of harnessing technology to ensure that instruction is not
interrupted for unanticipated issues. ODE is working with two districts and one Joint
Vocational School District this year to pilot electronic lessons for students to access on
calamity days. This pilot has received national attention with other states seeking to
replicate it to also address the issue of interrupted learning. In the spring this pilot will be
potentially expanded to better assist districts to plan for unanticipated school closures.
Inherent in the local districts’ plans are allowances for students without access to
technology at home.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 12

References
Adelman, N. E., Haslam, M. B., Pringle, B. A., & Policy Studies Associates. (1996). The uses of
time for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office
of Educational Research and Improvement.
Bishop, J., Worner, W., & Weber, L. (1988). Extending the school day: An evaluation study of a
seven-period class schedule. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 14(3), 361–380.
Brown, C. G., Rocha, E., Sharkey, A., Hadley, E., Handley, C., & Kronley, R. A. (2005). Getting
smarter, becoming fairer: A progressive education agenda for a stronger nation.
Washington DC: Center for American Progress and Institute for America’s Future.
Chicago Public Schools. (2010, August 24). Mayor Daley, CPS officials announce pilot program
to add 90 minutes of online learning time to school day (Press release). Chicago: Author.
Retrieved September 24, 2010, from
http://www.cps.edu/News/Press_releases/Pages/08_24_2010_PR1.aspx
Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton, K., Lindsay, J., & Greathouse, S. (1996). The effects of
summer vacation on achievement test scores: A narrative and meta-analytic review.
Review of Educational Research, 6, 227–268. doi: 10.3102/00346543066003227
Durando, J. (2009, June 11). Kids reap benefits of long school year. USA Today
Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2009-06-09-charterschoolslonger_N.htm
Farbman, D., & Kaplan, C. (2005). Time for a change: The promise of extended-time schools for
promoting student achievement. Boston: Massachusetts 2020.
Garcia, A., & Nylen, L. (2010) Extended Learning Time. REL Midwest at Learning Point
Associates.
Khankeo van der Graaf, V. (2008). A Five Year Comparison Between an Extended Year School
and a Conventional Year School: Effects on Academic Achievement. ERIC Document:
#ED505912.
Kocian, L. (2009, August 9). Looking for lessons after a longer day. Boston Globe.
Retrieved from http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2009/08/09/year_of_
extended_school_day_draws_mixed_reaction/
National Education Commission on Time and Learning. (1994). Prisoners of time. United States
Department of Education. Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/Prisoners
OfTime/Prisoners.html
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 13

National Education Commission on Time and Learning. (2005). Prisoners of time (Rev.
ed.). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. (Original work published
1994) (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED489343)
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Allen, A. B. (2010). Extending the school day or school year: A
systematic review of research (1985–2009). Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 401–
436.
Prevost, L. (2007, April 29). Saved by the (later) bell [Electronic version]. The Boston Globe.
Retrieved July 12, 2007, from
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2007/04/29/saved_by_the_later_be
ll/
Rocha, E. (2007). Choosing more time for students: The what, why and how of expanded
learning. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. Retrieved on August 3, 2007,
from http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/08/extended_learning_report.html
Ross, S. M., McDonald, A. J., Alberg, M., & McSparrin-Gallagher, B. (2007). Achievement and
climate outcomes for the Knowledge is Power Program in an inner-city middle school.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12(2), 137–165.
United States Department of Education (1991). National Center for Education Statistics,
International Assessment of Educational Progress, Learning Science. Average Number of
Days Per School Year, By Country.
Wheeler, P. (1987). The relationship between grade six test scores and the length of the school
day. Educational Research Quarterly, 11(3), 10–17.
Extended Learning Opportunities Page 14