Shrinking the school week may sound like a clever way to save money, ease burnout, or boost recruitment, but the reality is far messier.
A recent review of the research on four-day school weeks by the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) finds that transitioning to this model is not a silver bullet for the challenges it aims to solve.
Modest financial savings, but not a windfall
According to NCTQ, one reason districts are increasingly turning to four-day school weeks is to ease budget pressures. But based on NCTQ’s analysis of available research, districts that adopt this model tend to save only about 1 to 2 percent of their total expenditures. These savings typically come from reduced costs in transportation, food services, building operations, and administrative staffing.
While appealing, especially during tight budget years, these savings are relatively small in the context of a school district’s overall budget, particularly given the risks involved with the four-day school week approach. Moreover, there is concern that the money “saved” isn’t always reinvested in ways that support core academic goals — for example, hiring reading coaches or instructional specialists. NCTQ cautions that savings should ideally be redirected to strengthen learning, not just paper over financial gaps.
Questionable impact on teacher retention
Another cited motivation for four-day school weeks is to help with teacher recruitment and retention. The idea is that an extra day off per week could make the job more attractive.
But NCTQ’s review of the evidence finds mixed or even null effects: In places like Colorado or Missouri, there is no statistically significant reduction in teacher turnover after switching to a four-day week. Research on Oregon school districts that use the four-day week model (which is about 40 percent) found that teacher turnover actually increased in those districts. Turnover among non-teaching staff was largely unaffected.
Some exceptions exist: For instance, in Arkansas, teacher attrition to other districts dropped slightly (approximately 1.4 percentage points), though this did not translate into fewer teachers leaving the profession entirely. Because Arkansas’ history with four-day school weeks is relatively short, the policy may still feel more novel and appealing to these educators, according to NCTQ.
So while teachers and administrators generally feel positive about the four-day week, as NCTQ points out, positive perceptions don’t necessarily drive actual behavioral change (i.e., staying in or leaving a district).
Risks to student achievement
Perhaps the biggest concern is the impact four-day school weeks have on student learning. Cutting a school day may jeopardize instructional time, and several rigorous studies show that four-day school weeks can be associated with declines in achievement.
Research in Oregon found that third through eighth grade achievement in both math and reading declined following 4DSW [four-day school week] adoption. Further, high school math achievement fell after the first year under the shortened schedule. Another study examined the impacts of a 4DSW on student achievement and within-year growth across six states, finding statistically significant decreases in reading achievement, along with declines in both reading and math fall-to-spring achievement growth. Another study examining 4DSW adoption in 12 states found that district-level reading achievement decreased significantly after districts adopted a 4DSW.
Some districts have mitigated these effects by extending the remaining school days, but such adjustments are not consistently made, and success varies widely by local context.
That said, the data isn’t uniform: Some studies found no significant effect, and in very specific contexts — such as a study of small, rural Colorado schools — certain cohorts of students experienced positive gains.
Weigh the trade-offs
Overall, NCTQ concludes the evidence on four-day school weeks “suggests that the policy offers modest financial relief while failing to address teacher retention challenges and risking harm to student achievement.”
The transition to a four-day school week, therefore, is a cautionary tale. If districts are pursuing it as a cost-cutting move, they should seriously consider the implications the switch is likely to have beyond just cost savings. Are the realistic financial gains (1-2 percent) against potential academic risks worth it?
The mixed results underscore that a four-day week is not a one-size-fits-all solution — much depends on which districts are using it, how they implement it, and whether they compensate for lost instructional time. The challenges schools face demand substantive, long-term reform, and the four-day school week appears to be less of that and more of a short-term workaround with new risks while leaving core structural issues untouched.
_____________
Here are the Minnesota school districts with an approved four-day school week.
- Atwater Cosmos Grove City (A.C.G.C.)
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 40.8% reading proficiency; 50% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 44.6% reading proficiency; 46.9% math proficiency
–> Spring 2019 MCA results: 56.4% reading proficiency; 47.4% math proficiency
–> Spring 2014 MCA results: 67.9% reading proficiency; 63.5% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2010 - Belgrade-Brooten-Elrosa
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 49.8% reading proficiency; 34.8% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 46.7% reading proficiency; 33.7% math proficiency
–> Spring 2019 MCA results: 64.2% reading proficiency; 55.1% math proficiency
–> Spring 2014 MCA results: 62.4% reading proficiency; 68.7% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2011 - Blackduck
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 39.4% reading proficiency; 30.2% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 33.5% reading proficiency; 30.1% math proficiency
–> Spring 2019 MCA results: 47.8% reading proficiency; 45.6% math proficiency
–> Spring 2014 MCA results: 62.3% reading proficiency; 64.1% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2009 - Buffalo Lake-Hector-Stewart
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 54.8% reading proficiency; 50.5% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2025 - Carlton
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 32.5% reading proficiency; 28.6% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 38.2% reading proficiency; 31.1% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2024 - Lake Superior
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 43.0% reading proficiency; 34.5% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 44.2% reading proficiency; 35.8% math proficiency
–> Spring 2019 MCA results: 61.6% reading proficiency; 57.6% math proficiency
–> Spring 2014 MCA results: 60.1% reading proficiency; 51% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2010 - MacCray
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 44.0% reading proficiency; 41.2% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 47.8% reading proficiency; 39.3% math proficiency
–> Spring 2019 MCA results: 52.9% reading proficiency; 51.2% math proficiency
–> Spring 2014 MCA results: 55.4% reading proficiency; 62.5% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2007 - Ogilvie
–> Spring 2025 MCA results: 35.6% reading proficiency; 33.5% math proficiency
–> Spring 2024 MCA results: 37.3% reading proficiency; 33.9% math proficiency
–> Spring 2019 MCA results: 44.6% reading proficiency; 52.4% math proficiency
–> Spring 2014 MCA results: 55.4% reading proficiency; 51.4% math proficiency
–> First started four-day school week in 2009
