A new study from the Ifo Institute is prompting renewed scrutiny of Germany’s expanding all-day primary school program, revealing both significant benefits and limitations in its impact on student development. The research, released Thursday, indicates a clear correlation between attending all-day schooling and a heightened probability of students progressing to Gymnasium, the academically rigorous secondary school track.
Beyond this tracking advantage, the study highlights positive ripple effects on student wellbeing and academic performance. Researchers observed improvements in German language grades and a more favorable school climate among students participating in all-day programs. “Children in all-day care are less likely to experience bullying and report greater satisfaction with their schooling” stated Larissa Zierow, Ifo research professor and professor at the University of Reutlingen. Notably, the study indicates a shift in how children utilize their time, with increased engagement in reading and a reduction in the pressure to complete homework. Critically, the findings also suggest that all-day schooling reduces dependence on parental assistance for learning.
However, the research also cautions against an overly enthusiastic interpretation of the program’s transformative potential. A key observation by Arnim Seidlitz from the Institute for Employment and Vocational Training was the lack of demonstrable impact on social equity. “We couldn’t establish reliable differences concerning social inequalities” Seidlitz explained. “Children from less privileged backgrounds do not systematically benefit more or less from all-day schooling compared to their peers”. Furthermore, the study found no significant effect on mathematics grades, suggesting the program’s impact remains focused on specific areas of development.
The findings are likely to fuel ongoing debates surrounding the allocation of resources and the efficacy of Germany’s push for greater all-day schooling provision. While demonstrating clear advantages in student tracking and wellbeing, the lack of substantial impact on social inequality raises concerns about whether the program is truly leveling the playing field or simply reinforcing existing advantages. The absence of a positive effect on mathematical performance also necessitates a more targeted approach to curriculum development and teacher training within all-day programs.