Unscientific Research : Four-day School Weeks

UPDATED:
   Last month, the Oklahoma State Department of Education published results of a study which examined school expenditures for those schools using a four-day week calendar compared with expenditures while in a five-day week. The researchers involved (presumably SDE employees) claimed the results were obtained utilizing methodologies deemed both valid and reliable. An examination of obtained results and the methods utilized, however, reveal that the conclusions reached were "hully-gully" at best. While I realize the term "hully-gully" is wholly unscientific, I believe the conclusions of the study are also "unscientific", so we utilize terminology easily understood by those not accustomed to valid and reliable methodologies.
   Of the 97 school districts currently using a four-day week schedule, 81 started this school year while 16 have been on it for 6 years. The SDE only studied the 16 schools which have been on the four-day week. Those schools are among the smallest in the state, and it is unknown why they went to the shortened schedule in the first place (six years ago), as that question was not asked. The reason may not have been "to save money". I believe the other 81 schools have stated they went to a four-day week "to save money", so the study would have been more relevant if those schools had been examined. The sixteen small schools in the study does not constitute a "random sample" representing all schools on the four-day week, as they weren't chosen at random. This one attribute of the study means that we can't generalize to all schools (many of the 81 schools were medium sized), which renders the conclusions meaningless. The methodology utilized means the study is possibly invalid and unreliable. Research results are deemed "reliable" if the same study conducted later obtains similar results. Studies are deemed "unreliable" which if conducted at a later date, result in different conclusions. For example, if the same analysis is conducted on 16 medium sized schools a year from now, and the results are different from 16 small schools - the SDE conclusion that "four-day weeks does not save money" is blown out of the water. The evidence of "no savings" must be considered anecdotal at best, and unreliable at worst. SDE officials made at least one accurate statement accompanying the unreliable report - after analyzing each district's expenditures, we can find no conclusive evidence to support the theory that four-day school weeks save districts money. I must add to this obvious SDE assertion: after analyzing each district's expenditures, I can find no conclusive evidence to support the theory that four-day school weeks do not save districts money. One must bear in mind "they found no conclusive evidence" because the analysis results were unreliable. For instance, if 16 different schools were studied, the results may have been completely different (schools may have saved boo-koos of money). Also, no factors were accounted for in the SDE analysis which may have caused the schools to increase expenditures. For example, a school may have added a teacher when it went to a four-day week, negating any cost savings. Other factors which could have prevented expenditure reductions for the 16 schools are increases in utility costs, increased insurance costs, increased maintenance costs, increased instruction costs, and inflation. None of these mitigating factors were considered in the SDE report. My complaint concerning the SDE report is not that it conducted unreliable research, but that the SDE and print media disparages those schools on a four-day week. The school which employs me (Blanchard) is one of those 40 schools which will study the data (valid and reliable) and make an informed decision next year as to whether or not to go to a four-day week. We (the Blanchard board of education and superintendent) will not rely on a "hully-gully" analysis of data to make our decision, but rely on our own analysis.
   I've had the opportunity to examine two anecdotal examples of medium sized schools not examined by the SDE. One school will have saved $50,000 to $75,000 by the end of the present fiscal year, and the other school will have saved about $10,000. The school which will save only $10,000, however, also saved a teacher's job, which was one of its stated objectives.