Financial Pressures

Like many districts, we are facing increasing costs in areas such as:

• Substitute coverage

• Transportation (fuel, driver shortages, maintenance)

• Utilities

• Operational expenses

A 4-day structure may help reduce:

• Substitute costs (fewer school days requiring coverage)

• Transportation runs

• Utility usage

• Some operational expenses

• Wear and tear on facilities and bus/vehicles

This is not a financial cure-all, but it may create operational efficiencies that help us preserve classroom programs.

Recruitment & Retention

Recruiting and retaining high-quality staff is increasingly competitive.

• Neighboring districts — including Pe Ell — have moved to a 4-day week and report positive results.

• Many educators actively seek districts with flexible calendars.

• Retention improves when staff morale and work-life balance improve.

• 4-day week may allow more time for staff appointments leading to reduced absences

Community Interest

There has been expressed interest from segments of our staff and community in exploring this model.

This process is about:

• Listening

• Providing information

• Evaluating impacts carefully

• Making an informed decision together

Better for Kids?

Supporters of 4-day weeks are often seeking:

• Longer, uninterrupted instructional blocks

• Fewer weekly transitions

• Reduced burnout

• Improved attendance

• Flexibility for appointments without missing class time

The question we are asking is:
Can we deliver the same, or better, educational outcomes in a different structure?

What this would look like here...

To prevent confusion, clarity is important.

• Minimal change to overall instructional seat time

• State-required instructional minutes would still be met

• School days would be slightly longer

• Wednesdays would change to full instructional days

• The week would shift to four full instructional days

• One "enrichment day" per month would be added for students to receive additional help.

 It is not a reduction in learning minutes, just a restructuring.

Myth #1: This means students will get less education.

Fact:
Students would still meet state-required instructional minutes. The total yearly seat time would remain nearly the same, with slightly longer school days to maintain required hours. We would also have one day a month earmarked for Enrichment, to offer more individualized help to students struggling.
This proposal is about restructuring time, not reducing learning.

Myth #2: This is just a cost-cutting move.

Fact:
Financial sustainability is one reason we are exploring this option. A 4-day week may reduce substitute costs, transportation expenses, and utilities.
However, this is not a financial “fix-all.” Recruitment, retention, and long-term sustainability are also major considerations.

Myth #3: Teachers would lose planning and professional development time?

Fact:
Staff contracts and responsibilities would still meet state and district requirements. Many 4-day districts structure schedules to include planning, collaboration, or professional development time.
This is not about reducing professional expectations.

Myth #4: Students will fall behind academically.

Fact:
Research nationally is mixed. Academic outcomes depend far more on instructional quality and support systems than on the number of days in a week.
Districts like Pe Ell have reported positive experiences under a 4-day model. If implemented, student performance data would be closely monitored.

Myth #5: Wednesdays would remain early release days.

Fact:
Wednesdays would change to full instructional days. The goal is minimal change to overall seat time while shifting to four slightly longer days.

Myth #6: This will save huge amounts of money.

Fact:
Savings are typically modest but meaningful. Districts often see reductions in:

• Substitute costs

• Transportation costs

• Fuel and utility usage

It is one strategy among several to operate responsibly while protecting student programs.

Myth #7: Working families won’t be considered.

Fact:
Childcare and family schedules are a top consideration. Community input, surveys, and partnership exploration would be part of any decision-making process.

No final decision would be made without evaluating family impact.

Myth #8: Extracurricular activities will disappear.

Fact:
Athletics, clubs, and activities typically continue under a 4-day model. Competitions and practices often still occur on the non-student day, just as they do now on weekends.

Myth #9: This lowers expectations for students.

Fact:
Academic standards, graduation requirements, and expectations would not change. This is a calendar structure discussion — not a reduction in rigor or expectations.

Myth #10: The decision has already been made.

Fact:
No decision has been finalized. This process is about gathering information, listening to the community, and carefully evaluating impacts before any action is taken.

What This Conversation Is Really About?

• Financial responsibility

• Recruitment and retention of quality staff

• Community input

• Maintaining strong educational outcomes

• Exploring whether a different structure can serve students well

This is not about doing less. It is about examining whether we can do the same, or better,  in a different way.

Q: Are we cutting learning time?

No. We would still meet or exceed required annual instructional minutes. Students would attend slightly longer days to maintain total seat time. 

Q: Is this just about money?

Financial sustainability is one factor. However, recruitment, retention, and overall student and family experience are equally important considerations.

Q: Will this save a lot of money?

Savings are typically modest, but meaningful. Most districts see reductions in:

• Substitute costs

• Transportation costs

• Utilities

It is one strategy among several to remain financially responsible while protecting student programs.

Q: Will students be in school fewer hours?

Total annual instructional time would remain nearly the same. The schedule shifts,  it does not shrink. Wednesdays would become full days.

Q: What about academic performance?

Research is mixed nationally. Outcomes largely depend on:

• Quality of instruction

• How the schedule is structured

• Use of instructional time

• Intervention supports

Districts like Pe Ell report positive experiences under a 4-day model.

Q: How would this impact staff?

• May improve recruitment and retention

• Reduce burnout

• Allows additional day for appointments, leading to staff absence reduction

• May provide more flexibility for professional planning and collaboration

Details would be negotiated and structured carefully to avoid unintended impacts.

Q: What about childcare?

This is a significant consideration. Before any implementation:

• We are surveying stakeholders

• Exploring community partnerships

• Evaluating possible solutions

Community input is critical.

Q: We just passed a levy, now you are cutting days. Do you not need the levy dollars?

In the first two failed levy attempts, our voters would not support the higher levy dollar amount that was needed to maintain programs and staffing levels. In our most recent levy attempts we heard and honored our voters. We reduced the levy ask and committed to seeking more ways to operate more efficiently while maintaining programs and increasing positive student outcomes. Exploring a 4 day school week is on way in which we are continuing that commitment.

What this is not:

• Not a reduction in educational expectations

• Not eliminating instructional rigor

• Not a short school week in terms of minutes

• Not a decision that’s already been made

In Closing:

This conversation is about sustainability, opportunity, and innovation. Our responsibility is to ensure students receive a high-quality education while we remain financially responsible and competitive in recruiting strong staff. A 4-day week is not about doing less, it is about examining whether we can do the same or better in a different way.