School calendar still being debated

Close to 20 members of Parents for a Traditional Calendar turned out Monday night, March 10, to hear a presentation to the Fallbrook Union High School District school board by Mary Bosch, primary spokesperson for their group, and assistant district superintendent Jim Yahr.

Six individuals also spoke on behalf of the parents’ group.

Yahr represented the district’s calendar committee, which consists of two each, administrators, classified employees, parents, students and teachers.

At issue is alignment of the high school calendar with the calendars of the Fallbrook and Bonsall public elementary school districts.

This school year, high school students began school August 20, while the elementary schools started later, creating hardships on several levels, says Bosch and her colleagues.

If no alignment occurs for the new school year, FUHS would convene classes on August 18, while the elementary schools would start on August 25.

Misalignment of the 2007-2008 calendars has been an issue all year for Bosch and other parents, whose concerns for the wellbeing of their children became the catalyst for organizing.

Because of the early start, students were required to take finals before Christmas, rather than after returning from winter break as in past years.

Parents told school officials their children were distracted by holiday preparations and because of studying for finals were unable to enjoy the holidays.

Further, they said the early start date eroded summer vacation plans and created a hardship for families whose teens take care of younger siblings during the summer before elementary school starts.

An early-start calendar also creates an imbalance in the semesters; to be exact, 15 days less in the first semester, leaving no room for emergencies such as when Fallbrook was evacuated due to the Rice Canyon Fire in the fall.

Even without a dire situation like the fire, fewer days in one semester than in another create a hardship for both teachers and students, said Bosch.

By returning to a calendar aligned with the elementary districts, Yahr said, the first semester would consist of 92 days, with 89 days in the second semester.

The effects of cramming for finals prior to a holiday and an uneven distribution of instructional days worry principal Rod King.

“The biggest concern is student achievement <and> the imbalance in the semesters is critical to my department chairs,” he said.

Then, with a nod to the assembled parents who groaned after he commented the teachers would get the job done regardless, he said, “I certainly don’t want to alienate parents.”

Whether student test scores are better prior to or following winter break is unknown, said Yahr, who explained, “There is no compelling data on student achievement for either calendar. I don’t know if there will ever be a study that says [scores improve] due to the calendar.”

The calendar committee’s objective was to determine the impact of certain factors on an early start versus the return to a traditional calendar: student performance, balanced semesters, testing schedules, elementary school alignment, attendance, intervention and support programs such as athletics and energy costs.

By judging each factor as positive, negative or neutral, the committee determined student performance and balanced semesters were most important.

Yahr then surveyed the teachers and classified personnel to determine which start date they preferred, and while it appeared some personnel did not vote, the results favored a start date of August 25, Yahr said.

After much discussion by the board, interim superintendent Dr. Robert French was asked for his recommendation.

August 25, he replied, which means the return to a traditional calendar and one that coincides with the elementary schools.

Although board president Bill O’Connor asked twice if the board was prepared to vote on the issue, the majority declined, saying more time was needed to consider it.

The vote is likely to be slated for the board’s April 14 meeting.