Education: The erosion of instructional time
Education: The erosion of instructional time
by Everett Rice
by Everett Rice
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Every year, particularly during election time, you see many political candidates trying to characterize themselves as the “education” candidate. Whether they are posturing as a reformer or standing with the education establishment (e.g. the California Teacher Association), they stress their dedication to improving the education system and a commitment to delivering greater academic excellence. These candidates fight to promote their education credentials because they recognize the importance of this issue among the electorate and other interested groups.
Unfortunately, once elected, too many of these “education candidates” become more preoccupied with special interest agendas rather than actual student performance. While many elected politicians believe their efforts are improving California’s educational system, in fact the impact of their decisions is actually inhibiting effective learning and instruction. One example is the continual erosion of instructional time.
Over the past 30 years, multiple strategies have been considered and/or implemented to improve the state’s education system. Research has revealed one common correlation that is critical to improving student performance—irrespective of the reform mechanism—increased instructional time produces higher student achievement. As one researcher commented, “…it just stands to reason that more time for learning equals more being learned.”
In his 1998 briefing paper “Uncompetitive American Schools: Causes and Cures,” H.J Walberg articulated that it is not just more time in the physical classroom but, “maximizing the time during which students are actively and appropriately engaged in learning,” that leads to increased performance. Despite the fact that California students spend a minimum of 180 days in school, it is the amount of time that is dedicated to actual instruction and learning that becomes the tipping point.
Further research has revealed that there are four measurable types of time that occurs during the school day: (1) allocated school time, (2) allocated class time, (3) instructional time and (4) academic learning time.
Allocated school time relates to the amount of physical time actually spent at school. For most schools in California, that number equates to 180 days a year or 6.5 hours a day. However, this time includes hourlong lunch breaks, school assemblies, breaks between classes, public announcements and any other meetings or breaks that occur while the student is in school. Allocated class time relates to the hours required for students to physically be in the classroom. However, this time also includes non-instructional activity. The only two timeframes in which actual instruction occurs is during instructional time and academic learning time.
Instructional time is specifically devoted to formal instruction or teaching, although poor teaching quality and student inattention can hamper productivity here. Conversely, academic learning time is the time in which students are actually engaged in the learning process.
These time distinctions are essential in understanding why many of California students are failing, despite the efforts of their elected officials. Notwithstanding the well-established correlation between increased academic learning time and higher student academic achievement, elected officials continue to focus their policy efforts on non-academic, non-instructional education mandates. Often following the lead of the special interest groups, the Legislature continues to use the classroom to promote civic and social philosophies while chipping away at the already limited, but extremely vital learning time necessary for most students to excel academically.
This legislative year is no exception. The following measures are just a sampling of the proposals introduced that seek to erode the instructional and academic learning time of California students.
AB 156 (Jeffries) — The measure authorizes a local governing school board to offer one credit toward volunteer service.
AB 796 (Carter) — The measure allows students to be excused from school to participate in “civic engagement activities” (political) offered by a non-profit or governmental entity.
SB 520 (Pavley) — Authorizes the governing board of a school district to offer one credit toward the required number of credits required for graduation from high school for each 12 hours of volunteer service provided by a pupil, up to a maximum of 5 credits per pupil per semester, and for a maximum of 2 semesters.
SB 572 (Leno) — Requires the governor to proclaim May 22 of each year as Harvey Milk Day and designate the day to have special significance in public schools and educational institutions and encourage those entities to conduct commemorative exercises. Milk was a San Francisco Supervisor who became the first publicly elected homosexual in California. He was murdered in 1978.
These measures, like the countless number of bills passed by the Legislature and signed by California governors; continue to erode the instructional and academic learning time of students. Whether it is Harvey Milk Day, or already approved days (Conservation, Bird and Arbor Day, John Muir Day or California Poppy Day), or programs that encourage community actions, each means less time dedicated to academic learning time, which leads to decreased student performance.
