“We have standards and students have to meet those standards and that should be the determinant,” Anderson said.

Money is another factor.

A longer calendar year comes with a steep price tag. Just one full extra day of student instruction across Minnesota would cost the state about $31 million.

“That would become a very expensive proposal,” Anderson said. “It has a very slim chance (to occur) given the slim resources out there.”

Longer year?

A longer school year is expensive, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth exploring, said Chalie Kyte, executive director for the Minnesota Association of School Administrators.

Kyte is in favor of an 180-day school year with 20 more non-instructional days devoted to parent-teacher conferences, teacher workshops and other staff development.

“The students going forward have to compete globally,” Kyte said. “Most of the developed nations have their schools in session more than we do.”

Thirty-two states require at least 180 days of student instruction. Other nations such as China have students in class for about 230 days.

About 15 years ago, the number of Minnesota school days began to slowly drop for reasons that include increasing educational operating costs and a switch in how teacher-conference days are counted, Kyte said.

As a result, a law requiring 175 days of student instruction was repealed in 1997.

While a move toward more school days would likely meet resistance — even if money were readily available — it would be well worth it, Kyte said.

“This is a little bit like taking your medicine,” he said.

Sen. Chuck Wiger, DFL-St. Paul, the chairman of the Senate Education Committee, took the idea pitched by Kyte and is sponsoring a bill to increase the number of Minnesota schools days to 180.

It passed in the Senate Education Committee and is being referred to the Senate Finance Committee. Wiger admitted the bill will be a tough sell because of its hefty price tag, but said it’s worth discussion.