United Group Insurance

Central Iowa school district to conduct a survey on implementing a 4-day school week

News

January 4th, 2024 by Ric Hanson

SAYDEL, Iowa (WHO-TV & KJAN) — Battling issues ranging from sagging student attendance to an inability to hire and retain teachers, the Saydel School District is considering a move to a four-day school week for 2024-2025. WHO-TV in Des Moines reports the district has been speaking openly on the subject for two years but talks accelerated in late 2023. Following a district-wide survey last month, district officials held an open forum with parents Wednesday night (Jan 3, 2024).

The session began with an explanation of why Saydel is considering a four-day week. It’s been losing teachers and having trouble replacing them. It’s also been losing students and thus also the state money that comes with them. That means simply raising salaries is not an option in Saydel. The district explained this to parents, then broke up into small groups to have a conversation and answer questions.

The district will then send out another survey to parents to ask whether they approve or disapprove of the plan. Superintendent Todd Martin says while this is a popular solution right now in Iowa (it’s used in five districts so far), it’s no gimmick.

Teacher Molly Fritz said the subject has been the talk of the district all year. Some 92% of teachers surveyed in the district said they approved of the idea. Students would be off either Monday or Friday, and then an extra 30 minutes would be added to the four remaining school days. That would meet the state requirements for class time. It would also shorten the school year for students by 15 days and for teachers by 20. The proposal could be sent to the Saydel School Board by the middle of next month with an ultimate decision soon to follow.

Last September, the Griswold School Board discussed the possibility of a four-day school week and future calendar considerations, but after a survey of District staff was conducted and returned for input, the Board voted 5-to-1 not to pursue the matter at that point in time.