Essentially, an argument against year round schools is an argument opposing change, one that must show that for each true positive feature, there is an equal or greater negative feature, creating more reasons not to change than to change. For example: one reason to switch to year round is to accommodate more students and/or reduce class size by staggering who is and is not on break. However, this is balanced by the fact that this costs taxpayers tens of thousands more dollars in teacher’s salaries and maintenance costs (such as more lockers), as caused by more students.
Full year schools are numbered at three thousand eighty-one nationwide (in 2002-2003), compared to the roughly ninety-five thousand schools that are not year-round. This shows how little faith and trust is had towards this new, yet stale, initiative of inadequacy already, as schools continue to switch back from year round to traditional. One of the three most common ways in which students experience this deficiency is the forty-five-fifteen plan, in which seven weeks (forty in-school days) of school occurs, followed by three weeks (fifteen days) of vacation. The second is the sixty-twenty plan; twelve weeks of school followed by four weeks of vacation. The third organization of days is the ninety-thirty plan, effectively splitting summer in twain. Some elaboration, however, is required: each of these schemes has only one hundred eighty days, equivalent to the number days in a normal school year.
Firstmost in ratione, year round schools cost astronomically more than regular schools per year. In Albuquerque, if all schools operated year round, it would cost the taxpayers an estimated eleven million dollars more (Albuquerque Tribune October 3 1992). In Baltimore County, each school would cost approximately four hundred and twenty-eight thousand dollars beyond that of traditional schools (Baltimore Sun April 30 1992). In Orange county, an extra four hundred and one dollars per student would be savagely misused by taxpayers (Orange County Cost Analysis 1991).
Year round schools do not increase retention rates (as shown by test scores) in students at all. In fact, some studies show that retention rates decrease at slightly above negligible amounts. According to McMullen and Rouse, a pair of reputable researchers, “YRS has essentially no impact on the academic achievement of the average student” (7). "Most studies found no significant differences between the two types of schedules with two actually showing negative effects for year-round schooling" (Merino 18). "...year round schooling has not raised test scores..." (O’neil and Solomon 39-41). More quotes from reputable sources are extremely readily available.
To be truly effective, a year round school must become year round and stay year round, as the massive conglomeration of confusion, frustration, and anger caused by switching (school year) calendar construction should not be experienced twice by anyone involved with and...