Even Voluntary Summer Programs Can Be Beneficial

Our View

Although many of us nationwide are still in the throes of winter, it is not too soon to think about the long summer break from school. Summer is a time when low-income students face the “summer slide,” losing academic ground relative to their wealthier peers. Summer is also a time when the opportunity gap grows as low-income students have fewer opportunities for cultural and outdoor activities than their more affluent peers. Summer learning programs can help mitigate the academic gaps between low-income and more well-off students, and programs that also offer enrichment can narrow the opportunity gap.

The Wallace Foundation is funding a multiyear study in five urban school districts — Boston, Dallas, Duval County, Fla., Pittsburgh and Rochester, N.Y. — to determine whether voluntary summer learning programs are effective and what factors are associated with success. These districts have been pioneers in offering full-day voluntary programs for five to six weeks free of charge to large numbers of low-income elementary students, not just those facing grade retention. Although the districts take different approaches, all provide at least three hours of academic instruction per day by certified teachers, along with a range of enrichment activities such as art, music, tennis and swimming.

The most recent report from this longitudinal study, “Learning from Summer” (available at www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1557.html), concludes these programs are promising interventions. Students with high attendance in the program (20 or more days) benefited substantially in both mathematics and reading. However, not all students attended at high rates. About 20 percent of students who were accepted were “no shows,” failing to attend even one day. Across the five districts, about 60 percent of the students who did show up attended at least 20 days.

Maximize Impact

Findings from the study suggest key practices for effective summer programming.

• Run the programs for at least five weeks. Longer exposure to instruction is linked to greater benefits. Programs preferably should operate six or more weeks — with at least three hours of academics per day. Shorter-term programs may not be worth the investment.
• Track and maximize attendance. Based on study findings on the barriers to consistent attendance, district leaders should consider offering programs to multiple age levels to reduce the possibility that students will have to stay home to care for younger siblings; creating engaging academic and enrichment opportunities that excite students; employing adults who can focus on student behavior to minimize bullying and fighting; making personal connections with families of students who are less likely to attend regularly; and establishing mandatory programs for the lowest-performing students, who are less likely to attend voluntary programs.
• Create schedules that protect instructional time. Avoid scheduling meal breaks during academic blocks or dismissing students early from academic classes.
• Invest in quality instruction. This means recruiting the district’s most effective teachers; prioritizing summer teachers with relevant subject and grade-level experience; encouraging teachers to ensure each student understands the material; and providing teachers with a curriculum that aligns to the school year and state standards and meets the needs of all participating students.
• Minimize costs by considering probable no-show and attendance. Districts without historical data can use the study’s estimated 20 percent no-show rate and 75 percent average daily attendance when deciding how many teachers to hire, how much space is needed and other matters affected by participation numbers.