The achievement gap in our nation's schools has become a point of frustration for many teachers and school leaders. Those who seek to stop school reform efforts lament that it is more about poverty than anything else. There are claims that we can't fix schools without fixing underlying social issues. Many believe that teachers, particularly in our most challenged districts, are underpaid, undervalued, and blamed for things completely out of their control. Those who support school reform efforts sometimes make assertions that teachers are appropriately compensated and that there are things that can make a difference in our schools. Meanwhile, spending on education continues to increase with no real results. Is there one thing we can do that would make a difference?

How about providing an 11% increase in pay to classroom teachers? In exchange for this increase in salary, teachers would need to work 20 more school days so that all students could receive 200 days of instruction per year. If you do the math, you can see this is a fair exchange. Eliminating the "summer slide" may be the silver bullet so many are searching for. Take a look at this video that shows the impact of 10 long weeks of summer vacation every year . Teachers have known the impact of long summers on their poorest students for decades. While most agree that kids need some time off, just to be kids, our current practice of about 10 weeks is excessive. Talk to most children after about 6 weeks they will tell you they are anxious to get back to school. One school district in Arizona took the bold step of increasing school days to 200 a few years ago. Their results have been amazing. The Balsz School District has recorded huge gains in test scores, thanks to adding just a little more time in the calendar. It is astonishing that more districts are not attempting this. While Balsz was able to take advantage of extra funding to provide teachers with a 9% raise for the extended year, most districts do not have this option. School boards and state level officials point to a lack of funding as the reason the school calendar remains as it has been for about 100 years. 

What if we were to increase class sizes slightly in order to get the money to increase the school year? The debate about class size rages on. There is not clear consensus about how large or small a class should be. Malcolm Gladwell in David and Goliath makes the case for classes to be not too big and not too small. It seems the optimal size is somewhere between 18 and  29. I can tell you from experience that he's right. I have had classes as small as 4 and as large as 29. The large class of 29 was a mixed-grade elementary school class. It was manageable and I had excellent results. My classes smaller than 18 were very difficult to run. Students tend to behave better when they have the benefit of a larger group of colleagues. The teacher can group students in a variety of ways to maximize learning. 

According to the most recent census data (2009) available there are 55 million students enrolled in preK-12 and 7.2 million teachers. That means we have one teacher for every 7.6 students. Even when you factor in the needs of special education students, this should be a large enough work force. I visit many schools in my travels in a wide variety of districts. In the typical elementary school I see anywhere from 18 student to 28 students per class. The most common number is 22-24 students. In middle school and high school I see larger numbers in the required subjects such as English and math. A typical class size is 23-26 in middle and high schools. Higher level classes and specialized electives have the fewest students. In high schools with large dropout rates, freshman classes can swell to 30 students or more, while sophomore and older classes may have only 20-24 students. As you can see, the overall ratio of students to teachers is much lower than the class sizes we see in real schools. That is because a teacher typically teaches 63-75% of the school day. The other time is spent in prep, lunch, and non-teaching duties. Additionally, some teachers are assigned to do interventions with individual students or small groups. Other teachers may be assigned as coaches for less senior teachers. 

If we believe that teachers are underpaid and we know that students from disadvantaged backgrounds could benefit from a longer school year, we should consider increasing class size in order to redirect money for a longer school year. Let's start with elementary school since this is when learning to read is critical and students are most susceptible to the summer slide. Instead of 22-24 students per class, each teacher would be required to teach 25-28 students. Instead of teaching 180 days, she would teach 200 days. In exchange, that teacher would get an increase in salary of 11%. This would mean that we would decrease the overall number of teachers in the system in order to increase the rate of pay for the remaining teachers. In one school (Griffin) a large number of veteran teachers chose to retire rather than accept the longer teaching calendar. I suspect this would be the case in most places, so the need to lay off teachers would be minimal.

The achievement gap is unacceptable. We must begin trying things to reduce it. Increasing the school year is a proven strategy and increasing teacher pay would be an added benefit. This idea was recently cited as a one of Seven Ways to Improve K-12 Education. What is surprising to me is that teachers' organizations have not yet seized on this as a way to improve earnings and results for their teachers. 

There is an interesting discussion posted on the NY Times about the role of parents in educational quality. Entitled, Do Parents Care Enough About Schools, this forum points fingers toward or away from parents as the cause of our educational plight in the United States. This debate is certainly not new. During the past few years anti-reform groups have continually pointed to "poverty" as the cause for our educational ills. In my opinion, the word poverty has been used as a substitute for parents, who are the real targets of rhetoric of the anti-reform movement. Unfortunately this attack has resulted in many educators buying into the idea that they really can't make a difference if they are working with poor children. They are told over and over that total social transformation is required in order for these kids to succeed. This is utter nonsense. School have, and always will be, our best weapon against poverty in the United States. Those who get a good education can rise above adversity and make better lives for their children than they had themselves. Blaming poverty allows us to erroneously believe that we are not capable of helping kids realize their potential. How sad is that?

The place where this is most apparent is in reading. The latest research suggests that the MAJORITY of our nation's children have not reached reading proficiency by the end of third grade. About 66% of kids across the country, and up to 80% in urban settings, cannot read as well as needed to learn as they progress through school. To understand this as anything less than an absolute crisis is unfathomable, and certainly not the fault of parents. Yet, most people will tell you that their own child's school is just fine and that poverty is to blame for those other kids. What is most disturbing about this issue is that we really do know how to fix it. There is a wealth of research on reading and no shortage of materials and curriculum that ensure success. There are many places, both traditional public schools, charter schools, and private schools that have achieved 100% proficiency, or close to it-at all socioeconomic levels. Yet, these successes have never been scaled up to reach the masses. The lack of reading success of our children makes absolutely no sense, no matter how high the poverty rates are.

Another area that defies explanation is our traditional school calendar. This calendar, once based on our farming needs, has persisted into the 21st Century with no real signs of change on the horizon. We absolutely know that the achievement gap, currently attributed to poverty by many "experts," is really attributable to what is known as "summer slide." Kids with more affluent parents have wonderful learning experiences throughout the summer, while those living in poverty don't. What is needed for these kids is simply another month of learning each year. The Balsz, Arizona School District figured out the problem a few years ago and is now seeing tremendous success, simply by reducing summer from 10 weeks to 6. Despite record spending on education, we can't seem to find the money or the will to take this simple step that could make all the difference for our kids. 

So before we point fingers at anyone, let's really understand what is going on here. We DO know how to heal a great deal of what is ailing public education. We just don't have the courage to do it.