shooooow me the money.

i think there are a lot of different things that go into making summer school effective.  in my hometown, the school district's summer school structure was very defined, and very successful.  the school district is composed of seven elementary schools, three middle schools, and one high school.  though the district seems fairly small because of the number of schools, the high school has over 4,200 students, making it one of the largest school districts in the state.  

the summer school program is vast in its offerings, and structured in its policies.  you can take classes to get ahead in your credits, or you can take summer school courses for remediation.  the problem in that composition is pretty easy to understand - you have an extremely bright ninth grader who wants to take chemistry early to get ahead in the same class where you have a senior who just can't seem to understand the material.  this is the case every day in my classroom in jackson, but in a classroom that is OPTIONAL, it seems to be quite puzzling.

holly springs summer school, in my experience, had a little bit of this mixture.  in our classroom last summer, there were twelve students.  of those students, 10 were taking the english course to graduate early, one had just transferred into the marshall county schools system, and one was taking it for remediation.  thought we didn't know this in the very beginning, there was some indicators that we had a strange composition in the classroom.  different work and study habits were immediately noticeable.  i don't think this situation was common at holly springs, but it could be one that appears in the future.  i would hope, for the benefit of the students, that the classrooms are composed of students who need remediation and extra help, rather than a mix of advanced and students that have failed the course.

i think success for summer school students means, at the most basic level, that they pass the course.  i think, though mastering the material is very important, it is also extremely important for the students to learn how to think correctly and understand why they didn't have success in the course in the first place, and hopefully to change their work and study habits.  i think success for summer school students means that you won't see them in summer school again.  i think future grades and progress of students help you know if you have been successful with their learning and mastery of material.

last summer, we spent a lot of time on not just going through the motions of the material and rote and recitation, but also showing them how their thinking patterns should be developing, how they should be taking themselves through the material, and how they can successfully end up at the proper endpoint.  we focused a lot on independent work, trying to shape their thinking processes.

i think some of the recommendations in the article are good, but i also have problems with a lot of them.  i do think that, in an attempt to help out students who have failed, summer school needs to be available.  i think the idea that "summer" school needs to be a year-round practice is something that is kind of strange.  i think that giving students extra practice, attention, and assistance in october with the foresight that they'll go to summer school is the same as tracking students by ability, which i am against.  i also think that, if students are monitored and tracked throughout the year, the possibility that you can meet them with techniques they weren't exposed to during the school year is slightly unrealistic.  using personal experience with my inclusion students, they receive the material in numerous ways throughout the year, and if they were to go to summer school,  i doubt you would be able to find a way to teach them material that they hadn't been exposed to yet.  i also think, tying into the idea of summer school, if you want teachers that are quality teachers, you're going to have a lot of information slip-ups.  if you recruit teachers from outside who don't know the students, they won't be familiar with the techniques used on the students.  i think that bringing in teachers with whom the students are not acquainted takes away some of effectiveness of summer school in general.  

i do think, that for students who have failed critical courses (math and reading) should be required.  in agreement with rudy crew, the former chancellor of new york schools, i think it should be compulsory attendance.  in an article found on the new york times from august 26, 2000, "two remedies for school failures" (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E0D91331F935A1575BC0A9669C8B63&sec=&spon=) the idea of compulsory attendance and the effect on summer school success is discussed.  i don't think it should be up for debate when it comes to courses such as reading and math, but i think other courses - science, social studies, physical education - should be offered, but not required for students who have failed the courses during the regular academic year.