Time for a Change: Rethinking Canada’s Outdated School Calendar

For generations, Canadian schools have followed a familiar rhythm: two long semesters separated by a ten-week summer break. This model, which mirrors the American academic calendar, has been treated as a given, but as family structures, work patterns, and educational needs evolve, cracks are beginning to show in this once-stable system. Increasingly, educators, parents, and community leaders are asking whether it still serves students well, or whether Canada should adopt a more balanced approach to the school year, such as the three-term model used in the United Kingdom.

The long summer break is a historical holdover from an agrarian society. At a time when most families worked the land, it made sense to release children from classrooms during planting and harvest seasons. In modern Canada, where the vast majority of children live in urban or suburban areas and are no longer expected to work the land, that rationale has faded. What remains is a tradition that no longer aligns with today’s educational or social realities.

One of the most significant drawbacks of the extended summer holiday is the well-documented problem of “summer slide”, a regression in academic achievement that occurs when students are away from structured learning for too long. This effect is especially pronounced among students from low-income families, who may have fewer opportunities for summer enrichment such as camps, travel, or private tutoring. Research by the Brookings Institution and other educational bodies has shown that summer learning loss can account for up to two-thirds of the achievement gap between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds by the time they reach high school. Compressing the summer break and redistributing time off across the year could help mitigate this decline and promote more equitable learning outcomes.

This is where the UK model offers a compelling alternative. British schools typically divide the academic year into three terms: the Autumn term, the Spring term, and the Summer term. Each term lasts roughly 12 to 13 weeks and is separated by a one- or two-week “half-term” break in the middle, as well as a longer holiday between terms. Specifically, the Autumn term runs from early September to mid-December, with a one-week break in late October and a two-week Christmas holiday. The Spring term resumes in early January and runs to Easter, with a mid-February break. The Summer term begins after Easter and ends in mid- to late July, with a break in late May and then a final six-week summer holiday.

This structure creates a school calendar that is more evenly distributed across the year. The frequent breaks reduce the mental and emotional fatigue that can accumulate over long semesters. Students benefit from regular intervals of rest and reset, which helps maintain focus and engagement. Teachers, too, report reduced burnout, and a greater ability to manage workloads and lesson planning. The predictability of this system also makes it easier for families to plan holidays, arrange childcare, and balance work obligations.

In Canada, there are already signs of a shift. Some schools have experimented with balanced-year calendars, particularly in Ontario and British Columbia. These models usually feature a shortened summer break, typically five to six weeks, and more frequent breaks during the school year. Feedback from these pilot programs has been largely positive. Students return from breaks more refreshed and are better able to retain information across the academic year. Educators note a smoother teaching rhythm with fewer interruptions caused by fatigue or disengagement. Families appreciate the greater flexibility in scheduling vacations and the reduced pressure to fill an entire summer with costly activities.

Beyond the educational and practical benefits, rethinking the school year is also a matter of social equity. When only a portion of the population can afford enriching summer experiences, gaps in learning and personal development inevitably widen. A more evenly spaced calendar can create more frequent and accessible opportunities for intervention, support, and enrichment that are available to all students, not just the most privileged.

Of course, change will not be without challenges. Teachers’ unions, school boards, and provincial ministries would need to collaborate closely to implement new calendars. Working parents would require advance notice to plan around a revised schedule. But these challenges are not insurmountable. Other countries, including Australia and Germany, have successfully adopted modified calendars that better suit modern life while preserving high educational standards.

Canada has a proud tradition of public education that adapts to meet the needs of its citizens. The time has come to revisit the structure of the academic year. Updating the calendar to reflect 21st-century realities would not mean abandoning heritage, but rather honoring the purpose of education itself: to provide all students with the best possible chance to learn, grow, and succeed. A shift toward a term-based calendar, inspired by models like that of the UK, could be a transformative and forward-looking step in that direction.

Sources
• Brookings Institution: “Summer learning loss – what is it, and what can we do about it?” (2020) — https://www.brookings.edu/articles/summer-learning-loss-what-is-it-and-what-can-we-do-about-it/
• EdCan Network (Canadian Education Association): “Rethinking the School Calendar” (2014) — https://www.edcan.ca/articles/rethinking-the-school-calendar/
• Public Health Ontario: “Balanced School Day: Literature Review” (2015) — https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/b/2015/balanced-school-day.pdf

Policing the Halls: Why Officers Don’t Belong in Ontario Schools

The integration of police officers into Ontario schools, primarily through School Resource Officer (SRO) programs, has been a contentious issue for decades. Initially introduced in the early 1990s, these programs aimed to foster positive relationships between students and law enforcement, deter criminal behavior, and enhance school safety. Over time, however, concerns about their effectiveness and impact on marginalized communities have led to widespread reevaluation and, in many cases, the termination of such programs.

One of the most comprehensive evaluations of an SRO program in Ontario was conducted by Carleton University, focusing on Peel Region’s initiative. The study reported several benefits, including reduced crime and bullying, improved mental health among students, and a significant return on investment, estimating $11.13 in social and economic benefits for every dollar spent. Notably, students who had experienced bullying or violence reported feeling significantly safer after five months of the program. School staff also benefited, spending less time on disciplinary matters due to the support of SROs.  

Despite these findings, the presence of police in schools has faced mounting criticism. Critics argue that SRO programs disproportionately affect racialized and marginalized students, contributing to a school-to-prison pipeline. For instance, the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) implemented its SRO program in 2008, but terminated it in 2017 after a review revealed that some students felt intimidated by the presence of officers, particularly Black students who expressed fear related to armed officers in schools.    

Similarly, the Peel District School Board ended its SRO program in 2020, acknowledging that it had a negative impact on segments of the student population and citing concerns about systemic racism and the disproportionately punitive effects of such programming.  The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board followed suit in 2021, with trustees voting to end participation in the SRO program and issuing a formal apology for any harm experienced by students or community members.   

The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) has also weighed in, emphasizing the need to consider terminating SRO programs in light of existing research and meaningful community consultation. The OHRC highlighted that while some students may feel safer with police presence, others, particularly those from marginalized communities, may feel unsafe or targeted, which can negatively impact their educational experience.  

Given this historical context, reintroducing police into Ontario schools raises significant concerns. While studies like the one conducted in Peel Region suggest potential benefits, they often fail to adequately address the experiences of marginalized students who may feel alienated or criminalized by police presence. The risk of exacerbating systemic inequalities and undermining the educational environment for these students outweighs the purported advantages. 

Instead of reinstating SRO programs, resources should be allocated to initiatives that promote equity and inclusivity within schools. This includes investing in mental health services, hiring more guidance counselors, and implementing restorative justice practices that address behavioral issues without resorting to punitive measures. By focusing on these alternatives, Ontario can create a safer and more supportive educational environment for all students, particularly those who have historically been marginalized. 

While the intention behind placing police officers in schools may be to enhance safety and build community relations, the evidence suggests that such programs can have detrimental effects on marginalized student populations. Ontario’s educational institutions should prioritize inclusive and supportive measures that address the root causes of behavioral issues without contributing to systemic disparities.